McGeady on disagreement with Parkinson


Status
Not open for further replies.

Ghfd

Striker
Speaking exclusively to the South London Press, last year’s player of the year McGeady said: “There was nothing more or nothing less than me and the manager not seeing eye to eye.

“He felt it better that I train away from the group, for whatever reason.

“I didn’t do anything which saw me be fined, disciplined, sacked or banned from the training ground – just me and the manager had a disagreement. I was told to follow the schedule of the U23s from that point on.
“These things happen in football and you have to get on with it. It wasn’t anything personal or a fallout between myself and him.


“It’s nothing more than the manager felt he was better without me and that he didn’t need me. We didn’t see eye to eye.”

Speaking in mid-December after the decision was taken, Parkinson said: “We have spoken to Aidy about January and moving on, I feel it is fair to him to tell him now to sort something out.
“It gives me the opportunity to concentrate on the team moving forward.
“I feel it is the best thing for the team moving forward.”


Parkinson added: “It is not one particular incident, It is a decision I have made
“I wanted to tell Aidy and his agent early enough so we can put plans in place for January as well.
“It is a big decision, not one we have taken lightly, I have given things a lot of thought and I am confident it is the right thing for the club.
 
I often wonder why we put negative players with the under 23s though rather than say train on your own and you‘re expected to come in for fitness tests to prove you are. It just seems barmy that clubs (they all do it) would put this type of player amongst such a young, easily influenced group of talent.
 
I often wonder why we put negative players with the under 23s though rather than say train on your own and you‘re expected to come in for fitness tests to prove you are. It just seems barmy that clubs (they all do it) would put this type of player amongst such a young, easily influenced group of talent.

Good point that I'd never thought of it like that before. It's obviously to knock the player down a peg or two.
 
I often wonder why we put negative players with the under 23s though rather than say train on your own and you‘re expected to come in for fitness tests to prove you are. It just seems barmy that clubs (they all do it) would put this type of player amongst such a young, easily influenced group of talent.
Maybe put a bully amongst young strong players full of testosterone and he may longer fancy being the bully.
 
I often wonder why we put negative players with the under 23s though rather than say train on your own and you‘re expected to come in for fitness tests to prove you are. It just seems barmy that clubs (they all do it) would put this type of player amongst such a young, easily influenced group of talent.
Maybe they think it's more humiliating for the player and will prompt him to move on rather than hang about on the wage bill .Why did Mcgeady have a bad reputation ? I really don't know .
 
Doubt if it was that innocent and simple.
New managers must come in all the time and have conversations about how they want to take a different approach and how they want to try a different style and personnel - the conversation ending with the affected pro stating how they will win back their place and prove everyone wrong.
If the manager then ostracizes the player to the U23s and gets rid as quickly as possible - then there is something else going on.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top