Sarr a no-show for Watford but has Pozzo created a poor culture?

When Ismaïla Sarr’s name didn’t appear on the Watford teamsheet yesterday, it was pretty obvious that Slaven Bilic would be facing some questions in his post-match press conference about the absence of the Senegal international, regardless of what transpired on the pitch.

A number of journalists who heard Bilic say on Friday morning he “hoped” the forward would be involved in the game with Hull were also at the match. Understandably, at 2pm when the teams were announced, Sarr was the hot topic in the press room.

Had his Senegal teammate Iliman Ndiaye not played for Sheffield United 24 hours earlier, Sarr’s non-appearance at Vicarage Road might have been more easy to understand.

READ MORE: Bilic on his January transfer priorities

However, Ndiaye played all but nine minutes of the Blades’ 1-0 win over Huddersfield less than a week after Senegal had lost to England in Qatar.

You can make some allowance for the fact Sarr played 344 minutes of World Cup football compared to Ndiaye’s 136, but that is largely negated because the Sheffield United man played on Saturday whereas, had he turned up, Sarr would have benefitted from an extra day.

Let’s not forget that Sarr was apparently given some extra time off to spend with his family after the World Cup was over. I am told Ndiaye was back training with his teammates in Sheffield on Tuesday. You can spin that either way: Watford are more compassionate, or they are too soft – it depends on your personal preference.

I thought it was very telling that Bilic used the word ‘hope’ when talking about whether Sarr would be involved in Sunday’s game. That didn’t give off the vibe of someone who was brimming with confidence that his joint top scorer would be back to attack a Hull side that has the worst defensive record in the Championship (yesterday was only their third clean sheet in the league this season).

But it was after the game that was even more interesting, though not for what Bilic actually said.

Yesterday, when he was asked about Sarr he leant back in his chair, then leant forward and said “I said what I had to say on Friday, and that’s enough. I don’t really want to say much more. We expected him back yesterday and I hoped he would be involved today.”

It was said with the body language and tone of a man who wasn’t happy. He stopped short of appearing angry – but there was no mention of sanctions, fines, recriminations. And there was certainly no defence offered for Sarr.

When asked if he expected Sarr back this week Bilic said “I expected him back even earlier.”

The assembled media tried a few times to squeeze a little more out of the Watford head coach, but he wasn’t going to be shifted. However, all those in the press conference came out with the same opinion: Sarr should have been back, he should have been training before the Hull game and he should have been playing.

Any extra time at home with his family was supposed to be over well before yesterday.

In other words, he went AWOL. The player had taken the goodwill apparently extended to him in allowing him some extra time with his family, and bolted on a few more days of his own choosing.

That is, of course, if permission for time with the family was actually given in the first place. I’ve nothing to base that on, and I certainly wouldn’t accuse Bilic of lying about it.

But Sarr does have previous for not being back at Watford on time after being away with Senegal on international duty. That much I do know, for certain.

It’s not happened every time (he played in the home game with Brighton in February 2021, six days after Senegal had won AFCON), but this is far from the first time the striker has left the man holding the ‘Mr Sarr’ card standing at the airport arrivals area.

So, those who think Watford are mean in not allowing Sarr these extra days he’s taken without permission, might want to consider if the ‘family time’ he was reportedly given initially wasn’t actually a case of the club not hanging him out to dry on Friday when they could have.

Which brings us to the question of why the club haven’t stepped forward and talked about any punishment they have handed out to Sarr. After all, there is precedent across football of players being fined for not reporting back on time. I think two weeks wages is the standard, though I’ve seen harsher sanctions handed out.

Quite clearly, Sarr is an asset – to me and most fans, Sarr is an asset in footballing terms. Ok, his body language on the pitch can often be described as languid but he’s not the first or last to appear that way. He’s scored and created goals this season, and there’s no doubt his name on the teamsheet scares the life out of opponents (I’ve heard countless managers this season talk about how they have tried to prepare for facing him).

However, what I’m not sure about is what sort of asset the Watford owner, Gino Pozzo, sees in Sarr. Is he thought of as the player who could be the difference between seventh and sixth, or even third and second? Or when Pozzo thinks of Sarr do his eyes open wide and are replaced by spinning pound signs (as per countless cartoons)?

It’s no secret Sarr would have been on his way to Aston Villa in August but for the then manager Steven Gerrard deciding he wanted to go in a different direction.

His stats and reputation in the Championship mean he is an attractive January proposition, and he did nothing to reduce his perceived value at the World Cup – indeed the pundits in the coverage I watched were fairly effusive in their praise for him, so any valuation may actually have crept up.

With that in mind, it’s quite conceivable that the owner may decide January is the time to cash in his Sarr chips, especially as his contract is running down and, unlike Joao Pedro and Imran Louza, Sarr hasn’t signed a new one (even if that was purely to add a bit to their values as well).

It’s obviously a balancing act for Pozzo: whatever you think about his running of the club, it’s clear that everything is healthier if the club returns to the Premier League. Having Sarr in the team makes that prospect more likely.

On the other hand, if Sarr stays and Watford don’t go up then in the summer Pozzo will be left with a player who probably won’t fancy another season in the Championship (and to be fair to Sarr, he’s stuck with the club through a season and a half outside the top-flight so far).

His value will drop as he will remain a Championship player, and one who could leave for nothing once his contract ends – potential suitors will factor that into offers they make.

So selling Sarr in January is far from out of the question, especially with the imminent arrival of Matheus Martins from Fluminese (though whether he signs for Watford, or signs for Udinese and is loaned to Watford, is far from cut and dried, I’m led to believe).

If that is on the cards, then it begs the question of whether Sarr’s absence from training and then the Hull game have been approved – not by Bilic, not by chairman Scott Duxbury, but by Pozzo himself.

After all, if you want to sell a player for the best price possible, you want him onside – and not injured. You certainly don’t want to be fining him for helping himself to a few extra days with the family.

I understand Sarr has not arrived for one flight that was booked for his return. That indicates the football arm of the club are doing all they can to get him home, and supports Bilic’s comments about expecting him back.

If Sarr hasn’t flown home and missed a flight, either he’s showing staggering levels of naivety and arrogance, or he’s got an indication that he’s okay to do so.

He may well be back at the training ground today – I’m trying to find out. But while the dressing room is a far happier place than it was 12 months ago, it surely can’t be a good thing to have a key player not turning up?

What does it say about Sarr’s feelings and thoughts towards the club, his teammates and the Watford supporters? And if the owner is somehow approving his antics, then that same question has to apply to him as well.

Someone in the press room asked me yesterday what Graham Taylor would have done if he were in charge. My first reaction was that football has changed so much from the days when the likes of GT managed every aspect of club operations, either directly or indirectly, that it’s impossible to know.

However, I doubt very much any player would have tried it on with Taylor, and he certainly wouldn’t have had a situation where there was anyone above him in the club who might overrule him should he decide to hand out a fine and/or a public tongue-lashing via the media.

And I’m pretty sure if a player did go AWOL once on GT, they wouldn’t have been around long enough to do it twice.

But, like I said, football has changed. The way the club is run has changed, and it’s taken me the six or so months back covering Watford to realise that I really am wistfully hankering for the good old days when I expect things to be like they were 20 years ago.

Nonetheless, while Watford may be a very different football club in 2022, I firmly believe that things like being a professional, respecting your employer and doing as you’re told in return for a handsome salary are the same as they’ve always been.

This episode doesn’t reflect well on Sarr, and on those who advise him. It has possibly been an eye-opening few days for Bilic, who clearly expected Sarr to be playing yesterday. And it begs the question about that much-used word of the summer – culture.

If there is a culture at Watford that leads certain players to believe they can do as they like because they are valuable in financial terms, then it hasn’t been a culture laid out by any of the umpteen head coaches that have been and gone in the last decade.

No, this is something that permeates down from the top.

I’ve seen some fans on social media suggesting there’s no harm in a player being late back. Sarr should, they feel, be shown respect if he decides he needs a bit more time at home.

If that’s the case, where does it stop? Players not turning up for medical treatment because they think it would be more useful for them to do the school run? Refusing to play for the Under-23s to get some game time because they’d rather not risk getting a knock?

While football is largely detached morally from any other sort of industry, some things are consistent, and not allowing potentially mutinous behaviour to pervade is one of them.

I think Ismaïla Sarr is a tremendous talent who has given some exceptional performances for Watford and will undoubtedly be remembered long after he has gone.

Sadly, for me at least, those memories have been tarnished by this episode – though I am left wondering what (or who) led him to believe it was acceptable in the first place.