Nigel Pearson

[steviestevieneville]

1 hour ago, Boston Red said:

Nigel was asked whether there was anything in the fact that HNM is stuck on 99 league appearances. (20.33) As soon as he hears "99", he shoots the reporter a black look, and quickly looks away and starts fiddling with his cup. Then he acts all bluff and genial, saying he does not know anything about that, and he wouldn't know about contract details like that. Sorry, but that is nonsense. If a manager picks a player for the 100th time that triggers a payment to their former club, it would be the most appalling dereliction of duty on behalf of the club if the manager just did that by accident because he had not been told about that detail. Of course a manager knows whether there is such a clause in the contract, as he is the one picking the team. And considering how careful the club is about money, to pretend he knows nothing about whether the clause exists or not is nonsense. Then he pretends he does not even understand the relevance of the question, all the while being overly bluff and friendly and genial. It all looks as if he is dodging the issue, so I reckon there is such a clause. 

 

Wether there is or not . Do you seriously expect a manager to disclose details of a players contract ? 

[mozo]

Ben Brereton Diaz is letting his contract run out and has in fact found his new club. We can safely conclude that his agent has been busy touting his name around for some time.

Should Blackburn have kept him in the reserves for the past few months on principle? Should they play him now?

[Street red]

The only person that has put himself in the position he has and  that's Han Noah himself.

[steviestevieneville]

1 minute ago, mozo said:

Ben Brereton Diaz is letting his contract run out and has in fact found his new club. We can safely conclude that his agent has been busy touting his name around for some time.

Should Blackburn have kept him in the reserves for the past few months on principle? Should they play him now?

Completely different when he’s by far their best player. Massengo isn’t a starter for us and as a young lad would be standing in the way of other youngsters coming through like Omar who made his debut Tuesday . 

[Betty Swallocks]

5 minutes ago, mozo said:

Ben Brereton Diaz is letting his contract run out and has in fact found his new club. We can safely conclude that his agent has been busy touting his name around for some time.

Should Blackburn have kept him in the reserves for the past few months on principle? Should they play him now?

Totally depends on his attitude doesn’t it?

Zak Vyner’s contract is out at the end of the season and he’s played pretty much every minute this season. 

[Numero Uno]

14 minutes ago, mozo said:

Sounds like cutting your nose off to spite your face to me. 

Why, what the **** has HNM contributed when he has been picked this season? He’s had plenty of opportunities to make himself undroppable.

Edited January 20, 2023 by Numero Uno

[Numero Uno]

9 minutes ago, mozo said:

Ben Brereton Diaz is letting his contract run out and has in fact found his new club. We can safely conclude that his agent has been busy touting his name around for some time.

Should Blackburn have kept him in the reserves for the past few months on principle? Should they play him now?

Brereton Diaz is their best player something that HNM is nowhere near at our club.

[Merrick's Marvels]

36 minutes ago, mozo said:

Ben Brereton Diaz is letting his contract run out and has in fact found his new club. We can safely conclude that his agent has been busy touting his name around for some time.

Should Blackburn have kept him in the reserves for the past few months on principle? Should they play him now?

We play 3 in midfield.

Massengo isn't even our 5th best option in there. 

Plus if he doesn't want to stay, we're better off picking players who are committed to us long term. 

Simples. 

[frenchred]

54 minutes ago, GrahamC said:

He won’t sign a contract so we are excluding him from selection because frankly on current form he’s no better an option than Kadji or King.

Keep believing! :laugh:

[petehinton]

Fantastic presser, again, imo. Breath of fresh air compared to what we‘ve been used to over the years 

[italian dave]

59 minutes ago, Robbored said:

Nige has previously said that he’ll only use players that have committed to the club - para phrase “I don’t want to use players that may not be here next season.

It’s shitty position for HNM to allow himself to get into and I wonder who’s advising him. He’s not playing so isn’t ‘on display’ to attract buyers. 

Personally I think he’s making a mistake by not signing.

If that genuinely is the case then it’s stupid. By that reckoning, every time we sign a player on a three year contract, we do so on the basis that we may only play them for two seasons and may end up paying them to sit in the reserves for half a season or more while we sulk.

Clubs treat players like a commodity and are happy to trade them, loan them out, release them, at will. Why should players be expected to go above and beyond their contract?

And, of course, there are plenty of benefits to him personally in not signing, not least the greater freedom to choose where he goes next.

[Numero Uno]

16 minutes ago, frenchred said:

Keep believing!

Tbf if he is a better option than King or Kadji he hasn’t shown this season he is that much better an option that he must be involved over contracted players. Nowhere near as good as Scott, doesn’t do the job Williams does and whilst an upgrade would be nice doesn’t give you a 6 or 7 every week like James. Why should he be picked?

[Numero Uno]

3 minutes ago, italian dave said:

If that genuinely is the case then it’s stupid. By that reckoning, every time we sign a player on a three year contract, we do so on the basis that we may only play them for two seasons and may end up paying them to sit in the reserves for half a season or more while we sulk.

Clubs treat players like a commodity and are happy to trade them, loan them out, release them, at will. Why should players be expected to go above and beyond their contract?

And, of course, there are plenty of benefits to him personally in not signing, not least the greater freedom to choose where he goes next.

Notwithstanding that he’s isn’t involved on merit. He’s had plenty of games and doesn’t string 2-3 good ones together. Nothing stupid about him being left out imo. Vyner is ooc at the end of the season, playing every single game because he’s our most consistent defender this season.

[italian dave]

42 minutes ago, Percy Pig said:

But we don't know the ins and outs, perhaps HNM isn't training well to protect himself from injury, perhaps he's just not motivated to play for us. 

We are also undertaking a major cultural shift and a major part of that is driven by having players who will fight for each other and the shirt. All those things are factors. 

I like HNM, I enjoy watching him play, but we've got to understand our squad players at championship level ahead of arguably the most important summer of transformation we've had in a generation. Playing the long game, learning more about players like Kadji etc. 

 

I don’t go to watch the U23s. But I’ve a mate who does. He says that Massengo puts in a decent shift every time he’s seen him play lately and seems entirely committed. 

I get what you’re saying about Kadji (and Taylor-Clarke now). I just think there’s a risk if - however much they may be future - playing them means we knowingly weaken the side and drop points. I don’t think we’ve done that yet - but it’s a risk. There was one game recently when we had no midfielder at all on the bench, Massengo sat in the stand - and Williams went down injured quite early on. 

[italian dave]

Just now, Numero Uno said:

Notwithstanding that he’s isn’t involved on merit. He’s had plenty of games and doesn’t string 2-3 good ones together. Nothing stupid about him being left out imo. Vyner is ooc at the end of the season, playing every single game because he’s our most consistent defender this season.

That’s a different argument. More subjective, but I fully accept that. The point I was making was in response to RRs suggestion that his omission was entirely down to a “lack of commitment”, ie not signing a new contract. 

[Numero Uno]

1 minute ago, italian dave said:

That’s a different argument. More subjective, but I fully accept that. The point I was making was in response to RRs suggestion that his omission was entirely down to a “lack of commitment”, ie not signing a new contract. 

Obviously we don’t know the ins and outs of the situation and everything is conjecture . He may have made it plain to everyone he’s off as soon as he can get out of here. If that’s the case you’ve got to be bloody good to get a place when there are players knocking about that want to be part of it. Scott and Semenyo are going to leave, we all know that, but they are in the side every week. Why them and not HNM? I think that part of the question is obvious.

[frenchred]

14 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

Tbf if he is a better option than King or Kadji he hasn’t shown this season he is that much better an option that he must be involved over contracted players. Nowhere near as good as Scott, doesn’t do the job Williams does and whilst an upgrade would be nice doesn’t give you a 6 or 7 every week like James. Why should he be picked?

He is 100% a better option than both at the moment, kings legs have gone and kadji not quite ready yet although I believe he will be by next season.

Give you the Scott argument but Williams? He has been the biggest disappointment since his signing. Fail to see what he offers currently.

He's as good as james

[GTFABM]

1 hour ago, GrahamC said:

He won’t sign a contract so we are excluding him from selection because frankly on current form he’s no better an option than Kadji or King.

Current form?

[Engvall’s Splinter]

12 minutes ago, italian dave said:

I don’t go to watch the U23s. But I’ve a mate who does. He says that Massengo puts in a decent shift every time he’s seen him play lately and seems entirely committed. 

I get what you’re saying about Kadji (and Taylor-Clarke now). I just think there’s a risk if - however much they may be future - playing them means we knowingly weaken the side and drop points. I don’t think we’ve done that yet - but it’s a risk. There was one game recently when we had no midfielder at all on the bench, Massengo sat in the stand - and Williams went down injured quite early on. 

The minimum requirement we expect. Perhaps Pearson expects a little more than we have been used too for a number of years. 
 

Massengo gets better the more he doesn’t play for the first team. At this rate he’ll be up there with Messi by the time we wave him off. 

[italian dave]

1 minute ago, Numero Uno said:

Obviously we don’t know the ins and outs of the situation and everything is conjecture . He may have made it plain to everyone he’s off as soon as he can get out of here. If that’s the case you’ve got to be bloody good to get a place when there are players knocking about that want to be part of it. Scott and Semenyo are going to leave, we all know that, but they are in the side every week. Why them and not HNM? I think that part of the question is obvious.

Conjecture as you say. It’s just harder than most to figure this one!

I don’t actually think it’s the ooc issue alone as RR suggests. As I’ve mentioned above, I’m told he seems committed when he plays for the U23s. He’s no Scott, but he’s an experienced Championship midfielder yet not even on a bench with no other midfielders.

Frankly, the 99 games one might seem like a conspiracy theory but seems more convincing than the others! (Mind you, I thought he was on 100 anyway?!)

[Robbored]

22 minutes ago, italian dave said:

If that genuinely is the case then it’s stupid. By that reckoning, every time we sign a player on a three year contract, we do so on the basis that we may only play them for two seasons and may end up paying them to sit in the reserves for half a season or more while we sulk.

Clubs treat players like a commodity and are happy to trade them, loan them out, release them, at will. Why should players be expected to go above and beyond their contract?

And, of course, there are plenty of benefits to him personally in not signing, not least the greater freedom to choose where he goes next.

That’s the shitty bit……he’s not featured for ages, no other club is likely to want him on that basis. With no serious interest HNM could well up back in France second division.

I can only guess that he’s being  badly advised by his agent or his dad………..

Edited January 20, 2023 by Robbored

[Numero Uno]

2 minutes ago, frenchred said:

He is 100% a better option than both at the moment, kings legs have gone and kadji not quite ready yet although I believe he will be by next season.

Give you the Scott argument but Williams? He has been the biggest disappointment since his signing. Fail to see what he offers currently.

He's as good as james

He’s as good as James. Ok, but you have two players of equal ability, one wants to be here the other doesn’t. Who do you pick? He doesn’t play the same game as Williams or Naismith and if you played him and James not one of them that weakens us.

[italian dave]

1 minute ago, Numero Uno said:

He’s as good as James. Ok, but you have two players of equal ability, one wants to be here the other doesn’t. Who do you pick? He doesn’t play the same game as Williams or Naismith and if you played him and James not one of them that weakens us.

My view is that’s the nub of it NU. Not just the same game as Naismith and Williams, but not the same game as we’re set up for. Horses for courses, square pegs and all that. The set up and the game plan that suits him isn’t what we do. 

[Numero Uno]

Just now, italian dave said:

My view is that’s the nub of it NU. Not just the same game as Naismith and Williams, but not the same game as we’re set up for. Horses for courses, square pegs and all that. The set up and the game plan that suits him isn’t what we do. 

Totally. He never should have signed for us in the first place tbh. In a different style of play that is more possession based he will be a better player imo. The way we play we need players who produce more directly when we do have the ball. He’s not that player. He would be be a better player at Swansea for example.

[italian dave]

5 minutes ago, Robbored said:

That’s the shitty bit……he’s not featured for ages, no other club is likely to want him on that basis. With no serious interest HNM could well up back in France second division.

I can only guess that he’s being  badly advised by his agent or his dad………..

I think most clubs will look at but beyond the past 3 months and will know a little more about a player than that. 

He’s a player with 100 Championship appearances under his belt. That will mean at least as much.

what will be more significant for any suitor, for him, and for his Dad/agent is compatibility - finding a set up that suits his game and vice versa. 

[italian dave]

1 minute ago, Numero Uno said:

Totally. He never should have signed for us in the first place tbh. In a different style of play that is more possession based he will be a better player imo. The way we play we need players who produce more directly when we do have the ball. He’s not that player. He would be be a better player at Swansea for example.

Do you think he’d have worked in a 2016-2018 LJ side?

[Numero Uno]

2 minutes ago, italian dave said:

Do you think he’d have worked in a 2016-2018 LJ side?

He will go well in any team that actively looks to dominate possession imo, not so good in a counter attacking side that need to get every detail and every pass right. Some games we do have more of the ball but generally we hurt teams by countering because we don't have the personnel around Massengo to take charge of a game. As for LJ sides those four or five months where we really took the handbrake off, yes he would have fitted in.

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, steviestevieneville said:

Wether there is or not . Do you seriously expect a manager to disclose details of a players contract ? 

Nige is canny, but from watching the presser he gave the impression of general surprise that Monaco might have a clause based on 100 league appearances. 

1 hour ago, Numero Uno said:

Why, what the **** has HNM contributed when he has been picked this season? He’s had plenty of opportunities to make himself undroppable.

There’s a difference between undroppable and being a regular in the 18.  As Percy says below…

9 minutes ago, Percy Pig said:

Yep, bit of that too. 

He was outstanding against Luton and Cov back to back because we were playing a VERY progressive style of football. 

But we've had to sacrifice bits of that to be better defensively, we've had to find balance. HNM isn't a balancing player in the same way James is. James does SO much for the team structure. 

…he’s had some good games this season, Brum was awful.  All of our players have been inconsistent in the main, but don’t get accused so heavily as Han does.

 

 

Re other comments comparing to other players contract situations, especially using Vyner as the comparison.  Has Vyner said he intends to leave in the summer?  Nope.  Huge difference.

Interesting that the Anderlecht story came out today.  A few of us heard this a week or so ago.  Talk of another team in for him too.  

 

[Aipearcey]

57 minutes ago, italian dave said:

If that genuinely is the case then it’s stupid. By that reckoning, every time we sign a player on a three year contract, we do so on the basis that we may only play them for two seasons and may end up paying them to sit in the reserves for half a season or more while we sulk.

Clubs treat players like a commodity and are happy to trade them, loan them out, release them, at will. Why should players be expected to go above and beyond their contract?

And, of course, there are plenty of benefits to him personally in not signing, not least the greater freedom to choose where he goes next.

If I remember correctly, Pearson has previously said the issue with Massengo was he was offered a new contract and he turned it down. Him and his representatives said this is what we are asking for, which in turned city then offered. Once this new deal that they had asked for was on the table they then decided they no longer wanted to agree to it.

 

And to be honest for a player of his age, despite the glimpses he’s shown, to only produce 3 assists and 0 goals in 99 games and then think he can go messing the club about like that, I can understand the stance the club have taken with this one if true.

[italian dave]

6 minutes ago, Aipearcey said:

If I remember correctly, Pearson has previously said the issue with Massengo was he was offered a new contract and he turned it down. Him and his representatives said this is what we are asking for, which in turned city then offered. Once this new deal that they had asked for was on the table they then decided they no longer wanted to agree to it.

 

And to be honest for a player of his age, despite the glimpses he’s shown, to only produce 3 assists and 0 goals in 99 games and then think he can go messing the club about like that, I can understand the stance the club have taken with this one if true.

You may be right, but I honestly can't recall, and I'd be very surprised indeed, if NP went into that much detail in public about any player's contract situation.