Jump to content
IGNORED

joe Morrell


Hampshire reds

Recommended Posts

Morrell is a solid, disciplined, defensive midfielder who executes his managers instructions to the letter. Consequently in a team with players around him that are also playing their part (as the Welsh did last night) then he will always look a good, tidy player. However he lacks the flair to lift a team from mediocrity.

Therefore in a team where the players around him are failing to perform (as we did last year) then he will also look poor. 

In simple terms, Morrell will only be as good as the team around him. Therein lies the conundrum that is Joe Morrell. City recognised that, Luton recognised that. The irony is that for a premier side, with better all round footballers, he might appear a better player than in our team that is full of weak points! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, The Dolman Pragmatist said:

Was he released?  I thought he wanted to go and was sold.

Yes, a better phrase would be got rid of.

Reportedly Holden told him he wasn't going to get games so off he went.

Meanwhile none of the players we tried in that position was any good. Still, we had the honour of seeing Brunt and Lansbury so swings and roundabouts I suppose.

Quite when LJ is supposed to have released him remains a mystery.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 13/06/2021 at 12:56, JonDolman said:

If LJ really wanted Morrell back in January to be in our side then I'm sure he would have got him rather than the club having to pay for Henriksen.

I wouldn't be surprised if he wanted him back as emergency back up like he had been the season before. And maybe LJ had been convinced to keep him where he will get game time.

Would make no sense keeping a player in a lower league if LJ wanted him to play in the first team. Not any sense for City or Morrell himself.

He didn't start him in the league even after decent Huddersfield and Bolton cup performances. LJ brought him off at half time in the Wolves cup game and we never saw him again.

 

On 13/06/2021 at 13:19, Davefevs said:

You’re applying logic….versus the scattergun, love the thrill of a signing, ego boost recruitment pairing of LJ and MA. ???

Why use someone we already own when we can bring in a higher profile shiny object.  LJ has never had to work with what he’s got at City.  Git everything he wanted.

TBF IIRC - at the time Henrikson came to us in the effort to fill a role that was missing in the team.

A quote from LJ: “He will be a strong and physical presence for us as we kick-on in this second half of the season” - I remember at the time people referring to his height from a defensive point of view too.

Yes it didn’t work out with MH but to say LJ chose him over Morrell at the time is slightly misleading IMO as Morrell potentially didn’t have the physical attributes Henrikson offered and that the team was looking for at that point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, chinapig said:

Yes, a better phrase would be got rid of.

Reportedly Holden told him he wasn't going to get games so off he went.

Meanwhile none of the players we tried in that position was any good. Still, we had the honour of seeing Brunt and Lansbury so swings and roundabouts I suppose.

Quite when LJ is supposed to have released him remains a mystery.

Didn’t release him but told him he wasn’t sure he was going to have a career after the Margate loan. Went on trial with Tampa Bay nothing came of it came back. Loan to Yeovil fell through and he went to Cheltenham. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 13/06/2021 at 11:28, GrahamC said:

The sliding doors moment for me was when he was doing well at Lincoln & yet we decided to bring in Marcus Henriksen instead rather than to recall him.

 

On 13/06/2021 at 12:02, JonDolman said:

He didn't play him except one league sub appearance and 3 cup starts. He loaned him out. He preferred others who he kept here. 

 

On 13/06/2021 at 12:07, Lrrr said:

And wanted him back January 2020, was 'convinced' otherwise to leave him at Lincoln and was sacked before he could get Joe back at the club.

 

On 13/06/2021 at 12:56, JonDolman said:

If LJ really wanted Morrell back in January to be in our side then I'm sure he would have got him rather than the club having to pay for Henriksen. 

 

On 13/06/2021 at 13:19, Davefevs said:

You’re applying logic….versus the scattergun, love the thrill of a signing, ego boost recruitment pairing of LJ and MA. ???

Why use someone we already own when we can bring in a higher profile shiny object.  LJ has never had to work with what he’s got at City.  Git everything he wanted.

Just to clarify this situation, as I understood it from internal club sources at the time. 
 

LJ didn’t want to loan Morrell out. He also didn’t want Henriksen in January. 
LJ wanted Morrell and was keen to start integrating him more during the 19/20 season. 
 

Our genius ex-CEO was the one who opted to loan Morrell out. LJ just did his usual public agreement and didn’t rock the Ashton boat (which I personally believe is ultimately Lee’s detriment). 
 

As I’ve said many times but I know it’s hard for people to believe, Ashton was the man in control of ins and outs. LJ went along for the ride. I know Fevs has mentioned before and to an extent I agree, that LJ should’ve grown more balls and stood up to Ashton a bit more - but he knew him remit and played along for the most part. 
 

Summary - Ashton loaned out Morrell. LJ wanted to keep him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, TransferForum said:

Didn’t release him but told him he wasn’t sure he was going to have a career after the Margate loan. Went on trial with Tampa Bay nothing came of it came back. Loan to Yeovil fell through and he went to Cheltenham. 

Source? ???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Harry said:

 

 

 

 

Just to clarify this situation, as I understood it from internal club sources at the time. 
 

LJ didn’t want to loan Morrell out. He also didn’t want Henriksen in January. 
LJ wanted Morrell and was keen to start integrating him more during the 19/20 season. 
 

Our genius ex-CEO was the one who opted to loan Morrell out. LJ just did his usual public agreement and didn’t rock the Ashton boat (which I personally believe is ultimately Lee’s detriment). 
 

As I’ve said many times but I know it’s hard for people to believe, Ashton was the man in control of ins and outs. LJ went along for the ride. I know Fevs has mentioned before and to an extent I agree, that LJ should’ve grown more balls and stood up to Ashton a bit more - but he knew him remit and played along for the most part. 
 

Summary - Ashton loaned out Morrell. LJ wanted to keep him. 

Not true. Player wanted to go on loan. Lee Johnson happy for him to go. Given the amount of games he was playing Joe was also keen to stay on loan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, TransferForum said:

Not true. Player wanted to go on loan. Lee Johnson happy for him to go. Given the amount of games he was playing Joe was also keen to stay on loan.

Joe, I’m sure was happy to go on loan. But LJ didn’t initially want him to and Ashton pushed for it. 
 

Don’t get me wrong, I think ultimately the loan to Lincoln was excellent for Joe. 
But I’m just saying that the loan was not LJ’s idea. It was Ashton. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Harry said:

Joe, I’m sure was happy to go on loan. But LJ didn’t initially want him to and Ashton pushed for it. 
 

Don’t get me wrong, I think ultimately the loan to Lincoln was excellent for Joe. 
But I’m just saying that the loan was not LJ’s idea. It was Ashton. 

The loan to Lincoln was arranged by his Agent. He could have gone the year before in January but it was vetoed. As a result he missed out on a promotion 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, TransferForum said:

The loan to Lincoln was arranged by his Agent. He could have gone the year before in January but it was vetoed. As a result he missed out on a promotion 

I know you know the ins and outs of Joe’s comings and going’s and totally appreciate the scenario. All’s I’m trying to explain is that when the agreement is made to loan him out, the decision was made by Ashton, not by LJ. LJ just went along with Ashton’s decisions. Obviously the agent would’ve been arranging this from the players end, but from City’s end, it’s Ashton who makes the final call. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Harry said:

 

 

 

 

Just to clarify this situation, as I understood it from internal club sources at the time. 
 

LJ didn’t want to loan Morrell out. He also didn’t want Henriksen in January. 
LJ wanted Morrell and was keen to start integrating him more during the 19/20 season. 
 

Our genius ex-CEO was the one who opted to loan Morrell out. LJ just did his usual public agreement and didn’t rock the Ashton boat (which I personally believe is ultimately Lee’s detriment). 
 

As I’ve said many times but I know it’s hard for people to believe, Ashton was the man in control of ins and outs. LJ went along for the ride. I know Fevs has mentioned before and to an extent I agree, that LJ should’ve grown more balls and stood up to Ashton a bit more - but he knew him remit and played along for the most part. 
 

Summary - Ashton loaned out Morrell. LJ wanted to keep him. 

 

3 hours ago, TransferForum said:

Not true. Player wanted to go on loan. Lee Johnson happy for him to go. Given the amount of games he was playing Joe was also keen to stay on loan.

 

2 hours ago, Harry said:

Joe, I’m sure was happy to go on loan. But LJ didn’t initially want him to and Ashton pushed for it. 
 

Don’t get me wrong, I think ultimately the loan to Lincoln was excellent for Joe. 
But I’m just saying that the loan was not LJ’s idea. It was Ashton. 

 

1 hour ago, TransferForum said:

The loan to Lincoln was arranged by his Agent. He could have gone the year before in January but it was vetoed. As a result he missed out on a promotion 

Not sure what to think. Ashton was picking the team or LJ is a whimp. 
 

I suppose SL sacked LJ and defended Ashton after the Ipswich deal was announced which says a lot about who he blamed/listened to for our inability to be anything other than terrible  

 It’s as if you both think there was no board of directors and the entire club was an Adhton Johnson shitfest funded by Steve L? 
 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, REDOXO said:

 

 

 

Not sure what to think. Ashton was picking the team or LJ is a whimp. 
 

I suppose SL sacked LJ and defended Ashton after the Ipswich deal was announced which says a lot about who he blamed/listened to for our inability to be anything other than terrible  

 It’s as if you both think there was no board of directors and the entire club was an Adhton Johnson shitfest funded by Steve L? 
 

 

 

I think LJ is insecure because of his dad.  I think MA is too in terms of being in the world of football without being good enough as a player. Together they were a bad combo, boosting each other’s egos.

I wonder what SL really thinks about MA.  I reckon Maggie would have him strung up by his testicles!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 17/06/2021 at 23:25, Davefevs said:

I think LJ is insecure because of his dad.  I think MA is too in terms of being in the world of football without being good enough as a player. Together they were a bad combo, boosting each other’s egos.

I wonder what SL really thinks about MA.  I reckon Maggie would have him strung up by his testicles!

I did find it odd, after Ashton had left, for SL in his speech at the Training Ground to thank Ashton for his input. 
 

If there was any bitterness that he’d been led up the garden path and then some by Ashton, surely he wouldn’t have mentioned him. 
 

Still find LJs and Ashton’s tenures bizarre in the extreme and hold them responsible for the biggest opportunity lost in the Club’s history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, RedRock said:

I did find it odd, after Ashton had left, for SL in his speech at the Training Ground to thank Ashton for his input. 
 

If there was any bitterness that he’d been led up the garden path and then some by Ashton, surely he wouldn’t have mentioned him. 
 

Still find LJs and Ashton’s tenures bizarre in the extreme and hold them responsible for the biggest opportunity lost in the Club’s history.

It’s about his pride….can’t let it show that he allowed Ashton to dupe him….and his interview on Saturday starts to have some messages in it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Hampshire reds said:

good move for Joe. good club pompey and a big fan base. Did we have a sell on for him does anyone know. 

If we did it’s highly unlikely it’s been triggered. Notwithstanding Joe playing in the Euros he’s basically sat on his arse for a season, Covid has affected finances and he’s dropping a division.

I’d be amazed if Luton had made any profit on him to trigger a sell on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, And Its Smith said:

He probably did 

…and he almost did last week, but things fall through.

1 hour ago, Hampshire reds said:

good move for Joe. good club pompey and a big fan base. Did we have a sell on for him does anyone know. 

If we did get £500k, as suggested below, then yes, we will get a small cut…about one month of Mark Ashton’s wages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect he's been told by Wales he needs to be playing in order to be in contention. He probably played his career best football under Cowley at Lincoln so could be a very sensible decision to move there.

He's 24 now so probably at the stage of his career where he should be starting as many games as possible. Hope he does well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...