• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Danny Rose

Hmmm I think there's only so much we can realistically compare incidents like these because we don't know a thing about what has gone on behind the scenes - which is probably more important to the players future than the actual incidents themselves

I'm sure Pochettino is not beyond forgiving players for this type of behaviour as long as they suitably make up for it/apologise in the correct manner.

Well, by all accounts Townsend apologised and then played in the reserves without any fuss. Really got his head down, but was then sold. Obviously he was never as important to us as Rose has been, but that's what I mean. It will be interesting to see how Rose is handled.
 
Well, by all accounts Townsend apologised and then played in the reserves without any fuss. Really got his head down, but was then sold. Obviously he was never as important to us as Rose has been, but that's what I mean. It will be interesting to see how Rose is handled.

Townsend would likely have been sold anyway because he wasn't very good - were he good and had he done the right things off the pitch I'm sure he'd still be here
 
Townsend would likely have been sold anyway because he wasn't very good - were he good and had he done the right things off the pitch I'm sure he'd still be here

Again, this is precisely my point. I know Townsend was never as important as Rose was, and I'm not saying Poch isn't pragmatic with these things. I just think it's a fascinating managerial question to get right. Firstly, how much leeway do you give to someone to go against the plan because of how important they are - and the risk of alienating the rest of the squad. And secondly, how much sympathy do we / Poch have for Rose given his injury and again, does that sympathy risk alienating some players to adhere to the plan to the letter and saw someone like Townsend get punished for less.
 
Again, this is precisely my point. I know Townsend was never as important as Rose was, and I'm not saying Poch isn't pragmatic with these things. I just think it's a fascinating managerial question to get right. Firstly, how much leeway do you give to someone to go against the plan because of how important they are - and the risk of alienating the rest of the squad. And secondly, how much sympathy do we / Poch have for Rose given his injury and again, does that sympathy risk alienating some players to adhere to the plan to the letter and saw someone like Townsend get punished for less.
I think equality and morale should always take precedence in this kind of situation.

To give Rose preferential treatment now would just be storing up plenty more problems for the future. Playing with a marginally worse left back is by far the preferred option. But the sale has to happen in the summer so that Rose doesn't get a win here.
 
I hope he gets fit asap and is available for selection. He's a quality player who acted like a d1ck, but can be forgiven if he applies himself and plays well. And if he plays well, he's one of the best left-backs around.
 
I think equality and morale should always take precedence in this kind of situation.

To give Rose preferential treatment now would just be storing up plenty more problems for the future. Playing with a marginally worse left back is by far the preferred option. But the sale has to happen in the summer so that Rose doesn't get a win here.
Plus he's another misjudged interview waiting to happen.
 
Cmmz6rvW8AAFY4l.jpg
 
Back