Trickyfox Posted 16 July 2012 Posted 16 July 2012 It would appear that it wasn't only Mills who had a run in with Pearson.... Maybe run in is the wrong word, but however you look at it various players it would appear were left to rot in the reserves. Howard has know made it clear that he was buried... Strange affairs, maybe personnel issues got inbetween player and manager but I thought howard was respected by Pearson. How many more players still at the club feel that they are being left behind. Howards comments Howard told BBC Tees: "I didn't leave on the best of terms. I wanted to go on loan and play but he wouldn't let me. "I felt as though I was getting buried. It's nice to get my enthusiasm back." Mills and Howard have now both had a little stab at Pearson....
Jimmy Posted 16 July 2012 Posted 16 July 2012 He kept Howard around as he was the only Target man we had, plus Schlupp Vassell and Waghorn were all injured up until the penultimate game when Waggy & Vassell came back so why would we let 1 of our only 3 fit senior strikers leave?
Carter The Boss Posted 16 July 2012 Posted 16 July 2012 Players get stroppy when they don't get played, simple as that. Nothing strange about it NP doesn't have to let people go on loan if he doesn't think we have the depth to cover, and we didn't. Schlupp and Waggy were both injured, Hopper very young, Nugent was tired by the end of the season and Beckford was hit and miss so I'm not surprised he didn't let him go. I remember Fenton having a dig at MON and his style when he wasn't getting played.
Corky Posted 16 July 2012 Posted 16 July 2012 He kept Howard around as he was the only Target man we had, plus Schlupp Vassell and Waghorn were all injured up until the penultimate game when Waggy & Vassell came back so why would we let 1 of our only 3 fit senior strikers leave? Makes perfect sense.
Jace Posted 16 July 2012 Posted 16 July 2012 No suprise really when Pearson has been trying to cut down the squad and wage bill that Pearson would prefer to release him instead. Howard was a great servant to Pearson and the Club but he shouldn't take it personally as Pearsons got a tough job balancing this squad this season especially with the ammount of strikers we have
Jimmy Posted 16 July 2012 Posted 16 July 2012 he was talking about going on loan last season not this coming season
Dan Posted 16 July 2012 Posted 16 July 2012 Shouldn't have been here last season anyway IMO, released a year too late. He was our only target man so I can see why he wasn't loaned out, but I do sympathise with the bloke really, was made promises that went unfulfilled. And whilst I'm trying to avoid blaming Sven, I'm struggling, he handed him a new deal which seriously wasn't needed.
Babylon Posted 16 July 2012 Posted 16 July 2012 Player not happy at not playing shocker... exactly why Pearson said we need to reduce numbers.
cc_star Posted 16 July 2012 Posted 16 July 2012 Do people think howard should have started? I doubt it Do people think we should loaned our only 'plan b' out on the cheap & not had the 'benefit' of being able to bring him on? I doubt it Chalk one up in the Pearson got this right column
Ric Flair Posted 16 July 2012 Posted 16 July 2012 I seem to recall Howard having a moan under Pearson the first time around. I'm more encouraged by the likes of De Laet saying how they talked at length with the manager and it was he who made them feel wanted. Nigel doesn't suffer fools gladly, rightly or wrongly.
Dr The Singh Posted 16 July 2012 Posted 16 July 2012 Meh, Pearson has do what he believes is best for the team not the individual........and unfortunately circumstances like this cannot be avoided
Captain... Posted 16 July 2012 Posted 16 July 2012 I wonder if Delfouneso was plan B, and Howard would be allowed to go on loan if he was successful, but he got injured, due to other injuries we had no other options apart from kids. A shame Howard has come out and said this especially after they had such a good relationship first time round, but I agree with the other posters, he should never have been given a new contract by Sven (Vieri of the Championship )
Trav Le Bleu Posted 16 July 2012 Posted 16 July 2012 Sod 'em. At the end of the day, it's their perogative to play well enough that the manager can't not pick them. In Howard's case, his not going out on loan should have made him feel valued - if he's too stupid that he thinks that's being excluded, then shame on him. I've always defended Howard, but this has disappointed me, though of course the press will make it sound how they want it to sound.
davieG Posted 16 July 2012 Posted 16 July 2012 I wonder if Delfouneso was plan B, and Howard would be allowed to go on loan if he was successful, but he got injured, due to other injuries we had no other options apart from kids. A shame Howard has come out and said this especially after they had such a good relationship first time round, but I agree with the other posters, he should never have been given a new contract by Sven (Vieri of the Championship ) Sven had no choice re Howard & Oakley as they both had extra year options on their previous contract, I'd be amazed if Howard didn't know that if he took it up under Sven's management he wasn't going to get many games so if he was that bothered he should have declined the extra year but that would have meant a new club probably on less money.
Corky Posted 16 July 2012 Posted 16 July 2012 Player not happy at not playing shocker... exactly why Pearson said we need to reduce numbers. I wouldn't worry about it Babs, these balanced posters will come out and show the players comments that are positive about Pearson's style of management, obviously. Because they don't have an agenda.
Bert Posted 16 July 2012 Posted 16 July 2012 Oh well. One good season from Steve. Plenty of effort and heart but gave away too many fouls. Good for a 15 minute spell when chasing the game but he's not good enough for the championship anymore. Big earner off the wage bill too.
Carter The Boss Posted 16 July 2012 Posted 16 July 2012 Any ideas what sort of mega contract he was on?
Bob Weasel Fox Posted 16 July 2012 Posted 16 July 2012 Player not happy at not playing shocker... exactly why Pearson said we need to reduce numbers. This
Grewks Posted 16 July 2012 Posted 16 July 2012 A club is always greater than a player. Pearson needed another senior striker, considering we only had beckford and nugent, and as a result howard needed to stay as back-up.
Bettsj2 Posted 16 July 2012 Posted 16 July 2012 Diddums. He picked up his fat wage packet for doing nothing. My heart bleeds Steve it really does. I for one would have given you more opportunities to come off the bench, abuse a linesman and get sent off. Once respected him for giving his all, now he just looks like yet another spoilt idiot. Doesnt get his own way so cries like a little girl to whoever will fan the flames of his ego. Bye Steve you big div. Hope you ****ed yourself on your way out.
Miquel The Work Geordie Posted 16 July 2012 Posted 16 July 2012 He's gone now, they both have. Let them say what they like.
Vlad the Fox Posted 16 July 2012 Posted 16 July 2012 Not seen any interviews with mills, what did he have to say?
The Doctor Posted 16 July 2012 Posted 16 July 2012 Diddums. He picked up his fat wage packet for doing nothing. My heart bleeds Steve it really does. I for one would have given you more opportunities to come off the bench, abuse a linesman and get sent off. Once respected him for giving his all, now he just looks like yet another spoilt idiot. Doesnt get his own way so cries like a little girl to whoever will fan the flames of his ego. Bye Steve you big div. Hope you ****ed yourself on your way out. No need to be such a twat is there really? Pretty much all he's said is he wanted to be either playing or go out on loan so he could play - more a stance that should be applauded, rather than being happy to just get paid for sitting on the bench or in the reserves.
Guest Col city fan Posted 16 July 2012 Posted 16 July 2012 No need to be such a twat is there really? Pretty much all he's said is he wanted to be either playing or go out on loan so he could play - more a stance that should be applauded, rather than being happy to just get paid for sitting on the bench or in the reserves. This this and this again...
Bettsj2 Posted 16 July 2012 Posted 16 July 2012 No need to be such a twat is there really? Pretty much all he's said is he wanted to be either playing or go out on loan so he could play - more a stance that should be applauded, rather than being happy to just get paid for sitting on the bench or in the reserves.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.