Kennedy is only a year older than fish, he was taken in the same draft as weitering etcWell, the rebuild is over.
Silvagni and Bolton owned and drove the rebuild and they are obviously now gone.
Lloyd and Teague have no stake in the rebuild and they have clearly laid their cards on the table.
They are generally selecting the most experienced team they can, there can be no more references to a “young team”.
The discussion now is :
Is this experienced team our best team for the now let alone going forward.
Newnes over Philp ?
Murphy over Dow ?
Kennedy over Fisher ?
Simpson over O’Brien ?
Curnow over Stocker ?
Pittonet/Casboult over TDK ?
They also originally preferred Newman over Williamson.
Teague also demanded Betts, who must be replaced for next season.
Some will roll out the old “we can’t gift games to youngsters” line, and i largely agree.
Equally, why should experienced players be gifted games if their performance is no better than that of the youth ?
A birth certificate is no guarantee of quality performance.
It’s all very well for Teague and his football department to set and demand standards from the younger players, that’s as it should be.
The problem is when these standards are compromised by the proffered experienced players in their conditional performance.
Fisher was selected for last week’s game, only to subsequently miss through gastro at the last minute.
Why then, after very poor performances last week from a number of the anointed birth certificates was Fisher not included this week ?
Double standards are a very dangerous thing in a football club ...
On CPH1877 using BigFooty.com mobile app