Pierre's punishment
I feel we need to write to the club and point out that punishing Aaron Pierre by forcing him to sit out the game against Newport was not really a punishment of Aaron Pierre, but a punishment of the rest of the team and every Wycombe supporter who wants to see their side win games. Surely there's better ways of punishing a player that don't affect everybody else too.
Suggestions?
0
Comments
The obvious thing to do would be to fine him.
I fully agree. Make him stay behind for extra training, sure. Make him pay a fine or buy the rest of the squad a meal or bake them a low-fat cake or something. Make him take on O'Nien in one of his spectacular training ground challenges.
But taking out our best player, with all the knock-on re-positioning and confusion in defence, is a total own-goal by Ainsworth. It was probably made worse by his naming-and-shaming, and will probably hurt morale across the whole squad.
I'd be amazed if this was the first time Aaron Pierre was late for something club related. I've also been concerned in his form since his international break.
Hopefully last night will be a turning point. We need him back playing well and he is a big player for us.
Are you saying that his no appearance was the reason for the loss? That's a pretty damning enditement on the rest of the squad.
I think the naming and shaming showed a massive weakness on Ainsworth's part. Seemed like he was desperate to apportion blame elsewhere. A strong manager would have kept quiet.
Don't forget the super service Pierre has given the club to the point of his mistake this week. OK, rules are rules but discretion costs nothing. I have lost a bit of respect for Ainsworth after his handling of this scenario.
Then you are with respect a fool. Without knowing the full facts, you are in no position to judge. GA, who has the full facts, concluded that Pierre needed a public kick up the backside. You have no facts at all have a choice of whether you trust the manager or not. Given his record over the last 18 months, IMHO he has earnt that trust.
Sorry all - I know I'm a pillock but I've missed the "naming and shaming" (not on club web site as far as I can see) - can anyone tell me where this has come from? This is an important issue because I should have thought that this sort of thing goes to the heart of squad discipline and team spirit and, in my judgement, punishments of this type should be kept "in house". If it has caused a morale problem then it clearly undoes some, or all, of the good achieved with those squad days out at the Somme and race tracks, etc.
Straight from the WWFC Twitter Feed last night -
Wycombe Wanderers FC @wwfcofficial 16 hours ago
GA explains why Aaron Pierre was left on the bench: "Aaron was late for the team meeting. We pride ourselves on discipline & I stand by it"
There are some very shortsighted comments about this incident. We have seen the effects that ill discipline has on team morale and team performance in the squad that Ainsworth inherited and it took a long time and a goal-difference escape before we turned the corner.
Surely if he was late for the team meeting, he would have been in no position to know what GA's specific instructions were for the game, so how could he realistically have played? Gareth would have had to modify the contents of his meeting, and possibly issue different instructions based on the players who were present. As for the naming and shaming, Gareth was asked a direct question on 3CR by Phil Catchpole about Pierre's non-appearance, and he answered truthfully and honestly. Surely that's all you can ask for?
My thoughts exactly @Ed_ & @NewburyWanderer. Gareth has to be seen to be in control of the team and discipline - it's a slippery slope once the first indiscretion is pardoned without enforcing the rules.
And surely honesty is the best policy when asked why Pierre was on the bench? If he'd come up with some cock & bull story to 'protect' Pierre's feelings then it would only have been a matter of time before the truth came out and the same people would be complaining about Gareth's lack of honesty. Damned if you do and damned if you don't...
He could have said he had a cold/flu.....
DevC let us debate respectfully without silly name calling. My personal view is that irrespective of the forum in which I was asked a similar question as Ainsworth, I would have dealt with things privately. You may think that the current trend amongst managers to name and shame is acceptable but I obviously have higher standards.
Accept other people's views as this is what this forum is about.
I like the way that you first call for respect and an end to name calling, go on to insinuate that people with a contrary position to you have lower standards than you and then preach about accepting other people's point of view.
Maybe an unwarranted reaction I agree.
And what were the precise circumstances? Has this happened before? Has he been disciplined privately before? What was the reason for him being late - held up in an accident on the motorway or stayed a bit too long in the bookies? What was his attitude when he arrived, apologetic or cocky?
Without that information, which you dont have but GA does, do you not think its a little foolish to immediately conclude that GA is being weak or desperate to apportion blame. Could it be that with the appropriate information what you see as "higher standards" may be seen to be inappropriate. Cant help thinking that if we had won the game, you would now be lauding GA on being tough and building discipline.
You plainly don't have the information on which to make a judgement so your choice was to either trust GA (who has a record of getting the best out of players) or immediately slag him off just becuase we have lost a couple of games. To do so in my view is to say the least foolish.
That is your view but I am far from foolish. I would still deal with such events privately irrespective of the result.
It is my view that to say with such certainty how you would deal with events when you have no knowledge of the precise nature of the events is with the greatest possible respect to say the least foolish.
I strongly believe in keeping such matters out of the public domain whatever the cause. That way of dealing with club matters is not foolish.
So what would you have said to the press in answer to the direct question @Blue_since_1990 ?
Would you have simply not answered it (thus fuelling more rumours) or lied, thus leaving yourself at risk of being proven to be dishonest should the truth come out?
Oh come on - do you not think Ainsworth gets asked about how long Hayes / Wood / whoever will be out for on a regular basis? And do we ever get the answer? Do you think he was ever asked about what happened between him and Matt Spring? Hogan Ephraim? Dean Morgan? And did we ever get the answer?
It's not difficult to not answer a direct question, no-one should be allowed to go before the press if you haven't developed that skill.
Ainsworth's policy has always been to keep disagreements in-house up to now, something I admired in him. I am surprised he's changed policy now and, like @Blue_since_1990 I tend to agree it's not a sensible decision.
An internal matter. Come on there are many things that go on at our club that are not made public. I think leaving the young lad out of the team was punishment enough.
Ainsworth has lost the plot sadly, and this is just another issue he now has to deal with and he is now losing football matches and shows no sign of being able to correct that.
Started with the wrong team AGAIN and then when were losing makes like for like changes or plays people out of position, what the hell was Wood supposed to do, the only plus point was Hayes but that Achilles is clearly being felt if anybody saw him hobbling about at one point soon after he came onto the field.
leaving Pierre is basically to show who is boss as Banton has questioned him and ended up out the door which is fine but he hasn't been replaced. If Cowan Hall comes back on loan I hope he isn't going to be injured the whole time.
Where has all this Banton questioning Gaz nonsense come from?
Never mind, just spotted who posted it...
@Blue_since_1990 it isn't an internal matter when it affects the result. What it does is show a blatant disregard for the fans who pay their money to see our best team play.
His job isn't to pander to fans, it's to manage the team. If it's a standard punishment for missing a team meeting, then GA is right.
@FrijidPink top post.he should of been fined end of....we all got hit in the pocket...the timing of the punishment was insane when we are in bad form and have to shuffle the team!
This is all very speculative. Team meetings are for discussing tactics and how to deal with the threat of the opposition. If he turned up so late that he missed the majority of this then he was ill-prepared for the game as well as in need of a slap on the wrist. I think it is as simple as that. What happened to Rowe though ? Missed that
He should have had more than just a fine. And tbf, what sort of message does it send to a player on the fringes if they turn up to every training session and every meeting and see a guy that doesn't do these basics but STILL get in the team ahead of him?
I don't necessarily agree with publicly shaming Pierre, but dropping him was 100% the correct decision.