Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Options

Rob Elliot out for 6 weeks **2009/10 Season**

1235710

Comments

  • Options
    [cite]Posted By: Dazzler21[/cite]
    [cite]Posted By: Mortimerician[/cite]
    [cite]Posted By: Dazzler21[/cite]
    [cite]Posted By: BlackForestReds[/cite]Reading Parky's comments about Randolph, he's more or less told him he doesn't have a future at the club. How can Randolph get a chance to push Elliot out of the starting XI when he's not given a chance when Rob does get injured? .
    obviously Randolph is not impressing in the ressies or training!
    When Parky took over he reckoned there was very little difference between our two young keepers. If one of them has now become unplayable then it's not a great reflection on the coaching.
    Not really maybe one of the two knuckled down in training!

    As I keep saying Wolves would not have let a Keeper go in the knowledge that he was going to sit on the bench.

    And that simply isn't fair to our boys who have done nothing whatsoever wrong.
  • Options
    None of us are really in the position to assess whether Ikeme is better than Randolph, but surely the point is that we played Ikeme for one game, and he now can't play for the next 1 game (maybe two, I'm not sure of his status for JPT), which will surely put more instability into our defence, as well as ruining Randolph's confidence?

    As stated I've no issue with getting Ikeme in and playing him if he was to have a sustained run in the team but the fact he can't because of not being allowed to play in the cup, means to me it was a mistake to play him at Carlisle.
  • Options
    he's only here till we get Robbo back though isnt he?
  • Options
    [cite]Posted By: Dazzler21[/cite]he's only here till we get Robbo back though isnt he?

    From the OS:

    "Ikeme will initially stay with Charlton for 28 days, up to and including the home game with Bristol Rovers at The Valley on Tuesday, November, 24th."

    "Initially" with a view to an extension for the season?

    Parky on the OS last week:

    "We had to be confident that we got someone who could play at this level and Carl is a serious contender to play on Saturday. He's a big, physical presence in goal and we're obviously pleased to get him. Obviously Wolves want him to play but there's nothing in the contract that says we have to."

    I have never heard of that being put in any contract. Can you imagine how that would affect the rest of the squad if it was?
  • Options
    I would say it says initially because Elliott is out for at least six weeks and so it's bound to be extended to cover this period at least. Then if Randolph goes too it may well be extended to the end of the season.
  • Options
    [cite]Posted By: LargeAddick[/cite]I would say it says initially because Elliott is out for at least six weeks and so it's bound to be extended to cover this period at least. Then if Randolph goes too it may well be extended to the end of the season.

    But you don't announce that a player (especially in a position as important as Keeper) is free to go in the next Transfer Window unless you've already lined up his replacement.
  • Options
    edited November 2009
    Addick Addict said :-

    "As I've said on another thread the other person that should really be worried is Robbie.

    To my mind, in bringing in Ikeme and playing him, Parky has already made up his mind that he doesn't think Randolph is good enough. However, that is not to say that he hasn't already struck a gentleman's agreement with Wolves that Ikeme stays 'til the end of the season (subject to Wolves not having an outbreak of injured keepers) in which case the Wolves keeper will stay in goal and Robbie will be warming the bench.

    Would Robbie deserve that? "


    I'm sorry but you're just making things up aren't you ?
  • Options
    edited November 2009
    [cite]Posted By: Covered End[/cite]Addick Addict said :-

    "As I've said on another thread the other person that should really be worried is Robbie.

    To my mind, in bringing in Ikeme and playing him, Parky has already made up his mind that he doesn't think Randolph is good enough. However, that is not to say that he hasn't already struck a gentleman's agreement with Wolves that Ikeme stays 'til the end of the season (subject to Wolves not having an outbreak of injured keepers) in which case the Wolves keeper will stay in goal and Robbie will be warming the bench.

    Would Robbie deserve that? "


    I'm sorry but you're just making things up aren't you ?

    I'm not making up what Parky has said - it's on the OS. Check out the quotes above and tell me what you believe them to mean.

    Time will tell as to whether I'm right regarding the length of the Wolves' Keeper's stay.
  • Options
    [cite]Posted By: Addick Addict[/cite]
    [cite]Posted By: Covered End[/cite]Addick Addict said :-

    "As I've said on another thread the other person that should really be worried is Robbie.

    To my mind, in bringing in Ikeme and playing him, Parky has already made up his mind that he doesn't think Randolph is good enough. However, that is not to say that he hasn't already struck a gentleman's agreement with Wolves that Ikeme stays 'til the end of the season (subject to Wolves not having an outbreak of injured keepers) in which case the Wolves keeper will stay in goal and Robbie will be warming the bench.

    Would Robbie deserve that? "


    I'm sorry but you're just making things up aren't you ?

    I'm not making up what Parky has said - it's on the OS. Check out the quotes above and tell me what you believe them to mean.

    Time will tell as to whether I'm right regarding the length of the Wolves' Keeper's stay.

    You might not be making it up, but you are making a very big assumption..........

    Parky brought Elliot in at a time when he had Weaver & Randolph at his disposal.

    He stayed with him this season and other than the odd bout of non-calling he hasn't done anything wrong. No reason to believe Elliot won't get back in the side once he's fit.

    Parky is accused on other threads of being ill-prepared for injuries etc, I'm guessing his comments regarding Ikeme joining for an "initial" period refer to nothing more than Parky discussing the option of keeping him for longer if he does ok and Robbie's recovery takes longer than expected.

    Clearly Parky has made his mind up that Randolph isn't going to do it for us, the comments on Sky Sports suggest he will be moving on, he sees him everyday in training so I respect that decision - if Randolph had done the business over a number of first team games and then been left out for a loanee then I'd agree that he has been hard done by. As harsh as it may seem, Parky clearly feels Ikeme is a better keeper than Randolph.

    Don't be surprised if Ikeme plays in the FA Cup. Hennessey, Murray & Hahnemman are all in front of him in the queue. I believe Murray is coming back to fitness.
  • Options
    [cite]Posted By: Clem_Snide[/cite]
    [cite]Posted By: Addick Addict[/cite]
    [cite]Posted By: Covered End[/cite]Addick Addict said :-

    "As I've said on another thread the other person that should really be worried is Robbie.

    To my mind, in bringing in Ikeme and playing him, Parky has already made up his mind that he doesn't think Randolph is good enough. However, that is not to say that he hasn't already struck a gentleman's agreement with Wolves that Ikeme stays 'til the end of the season (subject to Wolves not having an outbreak of injured keepers) in which case the Wolves keeper will stay in goal and Robbie will be warming the bench.

    Would Robbie deserve that? "


    I'm sorry but you're just making things up aren't you ?

    I'm not making up what Parky has said - it's on the OS. Check out the quotes above and tell me what you believe them to mean.

    Time will tell as to whether I'm right regarding the length of the Wolves' Keeper's stay.

    You might not be making it up, but you are making a very big assumption..........

    Parky brought Elliot in at a time when he had Weaver & Randolph at his disposal.

    He stayed with him this season and other than the odd bout of non-calling he hasn't done anything wrong. No reason to believe Elliot won't get back in the side once he's fit.

    Parky is accused on other threads of being ill-prepared for injuries etc, I'm guessing his comments regarding Ikeme joining for an "initial" period refer to nothing more than Parky discussing the option of keeping him for longer if he does ok and Robbie's recovery takes longer than expected.

    Clearly Parky has made his mind up that Randolph isn't going to do it for us, the comments on Sky Sports suggest he will be moving on, he sees him everyday in training so I respect that decision - if Randolph had done the business over a number of first team games and then been left out for a loanee then I'd agree that he has been hard done by. As harsh as it may seem, Parky clearly feels Ikeme is a better keeper than Randolph.

    Don't be surprised if Ikeme plays in the FA Cup. Hennessey, Murray & Hahnemman are all in front of him in the queue. I believe Murray is coming back to fitness.

    From the OS:

    "Carl is a good goalkeeper. He offers a big, physical presence and we're looking forward to working with him. He won't be able to play for us in the FA Cup, but he will be available for league games and the Johnstone's Paint Trophy."

    I agree that Parky had already made his mind up about Randolph so why give us the cock and bull story that Friday's training session would decide whether Randolph or Ikeme was going to play?
  • Sponsored links:


  • Options
    Parky knew that Randolph would have to play in the cup match. So with his decision of who to start in goal against Carlisle 'up in the air', he goes with the loanee and p*sses off Randolph.
    So what did the brilliant mind of our Parky want to sacrifice?
    The Carlisle match, the cup match and/or Randolph's psyche and his career at Charlton.

    Poor, poor man management.

    He should have started Randolph against Carlisle, he has to start him in the FA Cup. If Randolph didn't do the job, then he could have turned to Wolf No. 3 and there wouldn't have been anything to debate.
    And if Randolph came through with strong performances, that could only be seen as a good thing.

    Parky could have avoided a conflict, and decided to pour gasoline on it.
  • Options
    [cite]Posted By: American_Addick[/cite]Parky knew that Randolph would have to play in the cup match. So with his decision of who to start in goal against Carlisle 'up in the air', he goes with the loanee and p*sses off Randolph.
    So what did the brilliant mind of our Parky want to sacrifice?
    The Carlisle match, the cup match and/or Randolph's psyche and his career at Charlton.

    Poor, poor man management.

    He should have started Randolph against Carlisle, he has to start him in the FA Cup. If Randolph didn't do the job, then he could have turned to Wolf No. 3 and there wouldn't have been anything to debate.
    And if Randolph came through with strong performances, that could only be seen as a good thing.

    Parky could have avoided a conflict, and decided to pour gasoline on it.

    Whoever you choose to play by definition you p*ss off someone else. You can only play 11 and leave out say 11.

    Why are you saying Parky wanted to sacrifice The Carlisle match, the cup match and / or Randolph's psyche ?

    On that basis you could say the same thing about every game / every team /every manager, when they select their team ?

    There isn't anything to debate. Parky sees Randolph day in day out and he has made the decision to play someone he considers better. That's what he's paid to do.

    How many times have you seen Ikeme play ? How do you know that Randolph is better ? I know I don't.

    This is just Parky bashing because we lost a game and you don't like him.

    If you are a Manager at work I would presume by your logic ,that you decide who is the best man for the job and then select the worst man as you do not want to upset his psyche.

    Now that would be poor poor man management.
  • Options
    Covered End,
    Parky made a poor man-management decision. Here is why ...
    Randolph is a Charlton player who has been waiting his turn, which he assumed was going to happen because Elliot was injured. The next two matches were Carlisle and the Cup match. He knows he is going to play in the Cup match. Parky brings in a loan player from Wolves and announces that either could play.
    Randolph believes it should be him, he gets a league game and then the cup game. He's not unsettled. He's ready for his chance.
    Wolf No. 3 comes in before right before the Carlisle match. Does he expect to play immediately? If he doesn't, it isn't going to unsettle him for Carlisle, or the FA Cup match that he isn't going to play. He may expect to play against MK Dons, but would understand if he doesn't if Randolph plays two blinders. If he doesn't play, it may upset Wolves, it may upset him, but he isn't a Charlton player at this point.
    Instead, Parky throws Wolf No. 3 into the Carlisle match, upsetting and unsettling his own keeper who must play the following match.
    He now has a upset and unsettled keeper before a match that he is going to play in, and it was all unnecessary.
    All Parky had to do was start Randolph at Carlisle, and then the FA Cup, and then he could have made a decision of which keeper he wanted to play against MK Dons. The decision then would have been more understable at that time, and he wouldn't have unsettled anyone against Carlisle and going into the FA Cup match.
  • Options
    edited November 2009
    [cite]Posted By: American_Addick[/cite]Covered End,
    Parky made a poor man-management decision. Here is why ...
    Randolph is a Charlton player who has been waiting his turn, which he assumed was going to happen because Elliot was injured. The next two matches were Carlisle and the Cup match. He knows he is going to play in the Cup match. Parky brings in a loan player from Wolves and announces that either could play.
    Randolph believes it should be him, he gets a league game and then the cup game. He's not unsettled. He's ready for his chance.
    Wolf No. 3 comes in before right before the Carlisle match. Does he expect to play immediately? If he doesn't, it isn't going to unsettle him for Carlisle, or the FA Cup match that he isn't going to play. He may expect to play against MK Dons, but would understand if he doesn't if Randolph plays two blinders. If he doesn't play, it may upset Wolves, it may upset him, but he isn't a Charlton player at this point.
    Instead, Parky throws Wolf No. 3 into the Carlisle match, upsetting and unsettling his own keeper who must play the following match.
    He now has a upset and unsettled keeper before a match that he is going to play in, and it was all unnecessary.
    All Parky had to do was start Randolph at Carlisle, and then the FA Cup, and then he could have made a decision of which keeper he wanted to play against MK Dons. The decision then would have been more understable at that time, and he wouldn't have unsettled anyone against Carlisle and going into the FA Cup match.

    Randolph may have been "unsettled" long before Elliot got injured. Why would he "assume" that his turn had come, IF let's say, he hadn't been putting it in on the training ground ? Maybe Parky gave him a last chance to show some desire on that Friday before the Carlisle game and the same old Randolph turned up at Sparrows Lane ? and finally "IF" Randolph is worth his salt, then he shouldn't be upset and unsettled on Saturday, as any decent manager would be challenging him to go and prove someone wrong ! and if Randolph is going to make it as a "professional" goalkeeper, then he should be well up for doing so.
  • Options
    No. 1,
    The responses from Randolph and Parky surrounding the decision for the Carlisle match would suggest otherwise.
    Until the day before, Randolph had no reason to think that he wouldn't be playing once Elliot was injured.
    Even "professionals" have personal feelings, and feelings - call it confidence if you prefer - effect performances.
    Parky chose to upset people when he didn't have to. Maybe that was his plan, to fire up Randolph. But if it wasn't, his decision was not very well thought out, and an example of bad man-management.
  • Options
    edited November 2009
    AA, fair enough, but you are very wrong to assume that "Randolph had no reason to think that he wouldn't be playing once Elliot was injured" as he would only be in that position IF in the words of most loyal fans, he had "earned the shirt". The fact that Parky decided that he hadn't is good enough for me, as that is what he is paid to do. Carlisle was an important match and sticking someone in who hadn't done enough to warrant inclusion could also be deemed as poor poor man mangement. Don't pay too much attention to what managers put out in the media, you wouldn't expect Parky to start slating an under-performing professional in public ??? bottom line is that Randolph hadn't done enough to convince the manager that he was the right person to have between the sticks for the important league fixture. The FA Cup is not as important in the overall scheme of things, so it matters little if Randolph is in a bad mood when his opportunity does come, but it's clear now that Parky doesn't rate him. I do know pre-season that Phil was trying to get another keeper in and let Randolph go out on loan, but the mess that was the "takeover" put paid to that.
  • Options
    [cite]Posted By: No.1 in South London[/cite]AA, fair enough, but you are very wrong to assume that "Randolph had no reason to think that he wouldn't be playing once Elliot was injured" as he would only be in that position IF in the words of most loyal fans, he had "earned the shirt". The fact that Parky decided that he hadn't is good enough for me, as that is what he is paid to do. Carlisle was an important match and sticking someone in who hadn't done enough to warrant inclusion could also be deemed as poor poor man mangement. Don't pay too much attention to what managers put out in the media, you wouldn't expect Parky to start slating an under-performing professional in public ??? bottom line is that Randolph hadn't done enough to convince the manager that he was the right person to have between the sticks for the important league fixture. The FA Cup is not as important in the overall scheme of things, so it matters little if Randolph is in a bad mood when his opprtunity does come, but it's clear now that Parky doesn't rate him. I do know pre-season that Phil was trying to get another keeper in and let Randolph go out on loan, but the mess that was the "takeover" put paid to that.

    Would you change your mind about Parky if Robbie didn't get back in?
  • Options
    [cite]Posted By: Addick Addict[/cite]
    [cite]Posted By: No.1 in South London[/cite]AA, fair enough, but you are very wrong to assume that "Randolph had no reason to think that he wouldn't be playing once Elliot was injured" as he would only be in that position IF in the words of most loyal fans, he had "earned the shirt". The fact that Parky decided that he hadn't is good enough for me, as that is what he is paid to do. Carlisle was an important match and sticking someone in who hadn't done enough to warrant inclusion could also be deemed as poor poor man mangement. Don't pay too much attention to what managers put out in the media, you wouldn't expect Parky to start slating an under-performing professional in public ??? bottom line is that Randolph hadn't done enough to convince the manager that he was the right person to have between the sticks for the important league fixture. The FA Cup is not as important in the overall scheme of things, so it matters little if Randolph is in a bad mood when his opprtunity does come, but it's clear now that Parky doesn't rate him. I do know pre-season that Phil was trying to get another keeper in and let Randolph go out on loan, but the mess that was the "takeover" put paid to that.

    Would you change your mind about Parky if Robbie didn't get back in?

    If Ikeme is a miles better keeper then no. We shouldn't be picking players for sentimentality reasons, we should be picking them for footballing reasons. All this stuff about how Randolph is unsettled is just a huge assumption that none of us can possibly know about for sure.
  • Options
    edited November 2009
    [cite]Posted By: dabos[/cite]
    [cite]Posted By: Addick Addict[/cite]
    [cite]Posted By: No.1 in South London[/cite]AA, fair enough, but you are very wrong to assume that "Randolph had no reason to think that he wouldn't be playing once Elliot was injured" as he would only be in that position IF in the words of most loyal fans, he had "earned the shirt". The fact that Parky decided that he hadn't is good enough for me, as that is what he is paid to do. Carlisle was an important match and sticking someone in who hadn't done enough to warrant inclusion could also be deemed as poor poor man mangement. Don't pay too much attention to what managers put out in the media, you wouldn't expect Parky to start slating an under-performing professional in public ??? bottom line is that Randolph hadn't done enough to convince the manager that he was the right person to have between the sticks for the important league fixture. The FA Cup is not as important in the overall scheme of things, so it matters little if Randolph is in a bad mood when his opprtunity does come, but it's clear now that Parky doesn't rate him. I do know pre-season that Phil was trying to get another keeper in and let Randolph go out on loan, but the mess that was the "takeover" put paid to that.

    Would you change your mind about Parky if Robbie didn't get back in?

    If Ikeme is a miles better keeper then no. We shouldn't be picking players for sentimentality reasons, we should be picking them for footballing reasons. All this stuff about how Randolph is unsettled is just a huge assumption that none of us can possibly know about for sure.

    If Randolph wasn't unsettled before then the fact that he has been told he can go is, I would suggest, enough to unsettle him.

    Put yourself in his shoes. You've been number two at work but been told to keep your head down and your time will come. Then your Boss hands his notice in and you think that's it I'm going to be promoted. But then you're told that someone from another department has applied and it's 50/50 between the two of you even though you have a suspicion that the Head of the other Department has said he'll only let his man go if he gets "your" job. He then gets the job and you're told that you're surplus to requirements anyway. How settled would you be?

    There is one other aspect to all of this. A number of us have been Valley Gold Members since the plan's inception. I pay to support our youngsters and when I say youngsters I don't necessarily mean the Jonjos of the world who would have made it soon enough at a higher level than he is playing at currently wherever he was at. I pay because I want to see the likes of Robbie in the Team (if they are good enough to play) and not have a player in his place who has no affinity with the Club and who will be here today and gone tomorrow.

    That really would do Robbie's confidence no good whatsoever and hardly pay him back for all the hard work he put in over the Summer.
  • Options
    I'm not a football player nor am I Darren Randolph, so it's pointless answering the unsettling question. Maybe he'll be even more determined to do well when he plays in the cup?

    The fact that Robbie is a Charlton fan is a bonus for me, not the reason why he is in the team. That alone is not a good enough reason to pick him in my book- it's his ability that counts.
  • Sponsored links:


  • Options
    Don't think you need to be a pro-footballer to have empathy in this situation, Dabos. It may be highly motivating for him. It may make him want to balance a fish on his head and belt out a range of Elkie Brookes songs. On balance though, I imagine that if I faced a similar situation in my place of work I'd find it demotivating.

    More to the point, I'd guess that other players in the same situation as Randolph would look at the situation and say that we have a manager who doesn't trust his back-ups.
  • Options
    I see what you're saying McLovin but our (my) places of work aren't like professional football clubs. If someone gets promoted ahead of me in the office, I don't have the chance to oust them the next week. For a footballer, they can be dropped one week and picked the next, so I'm not sure the analogy quite works.

    If Randolph kept two clean sheets in the cup, I reckon he'd keep his place for the league game against MK Dons.
  • Options
    edited November 2009
    I still think the bottom line is Parky is the Manager and he sees the players on a daily basis, or gets advice from his team, if like Randolph they are in the reserves and perhaps he doesn't see them on a daily basis.

    The Manager is paid to make decisions and if he thinks after referring to his team that Ikeme is a better bet than Randolph, then I back him all the way.

    If parky felt Randolph should have played I would also back that decision.

    You can't choose your players such as Randolph and Elliot on sentiment and whether it upsets them to not be selected.
  • Options
    for me the key point is that randolf isnt good enough to either get, or hold down first choice. if he was he'd be there already. so if he wasn't good enough before robbie was injured why should he be good enough now. as any manager will say. they don't bring in new players that aren't better than what they have, so why would parky bring in a keeper that he didn't think was better than randolf? parky wants promotion and nothing less is good enough. the team are at a crossroads right now with only a couple of wins in last 7/8 games. this isnt good enough already and the last thing he needs is a keeper crisis. so i think he is trying the fill this position with the best he can get/afford. wenger and ferguson will only bring in players that are ready/good enough. egos are kicked into touch however big. im with parky on this one. he's going to get us promoted, FACT........fingers crossed!
  • Options
    [cite]Posted By: The Prince-e-Paul[/cite]for me the key point is that randolf isnt good enough to either get, or hold down first choice. if he was he'd be there already. so if he wasn't good enough before robbie was injured why should he be good enough now. as any manager will say. they don't bring in new players that aren't better than what they have, so why would parky bring in a keeper that he didn't think was better than randolf? parky wants promotion and nothing less is good enough. the team are at a crossroads right now with only a couple of wins in last 7/8 games. this isnt good enough already and the last thing he needs is a keeper crisis. so i think he is trying the fill this position with the best he can get/afford. wenger and ferguson will only bring in players that are ready/good enough. egos are kicked into touch however big. im with parky on this one. he's going to get us promoted, FACT........fingers crossed!

    Thanks. agreed, but not sure about the promotion.
  • Options
    I would lay money on Parky asking Andy Woodman who he would pick.

    Parky is there to win games for the Club, not to play a worse goalkeeper just in case he gets upset.
  • Options
    Sorry to keep banging on about this, but I'd like to say now before the game :-

    If Randolph plays well, his supporters/ Parky detractors, will be saying told you so, Parky should have played him last week.

    If Randolph doesn't play well the Parky bashers will blame him, because he had damaged Randolph's psyche.

    Anyway if you do, I will be quoting this.
  • Options
    [cite]Posted By: Covered End[/cite]Sorry to keep banging on about this, but I'd like to say now before the game :-

    If Randolph plays well, his supporters/ Parky detractors, will be saying told you so, Parky should have played him last week.

    If Randolph doesn't play well the Parky bashers will blame him, because he had damaged Randolph's psyche.

    Anyway if you do, I will be quoting this.

    And if he plays well but is then dropped?
  • Options
    [cite]Posted By: Covered End[/cite]Sorry to keep banging on about this, but I'd like to say now before the game :-

    If Randolph plays well, his supporters/ Parky detractors, will be saying told you so, Parky should have played him last week.

    If Randolph doesn't play well the Parky bashers will blame him, because he had damaged Randolph's psyche.

    Anyway if you do, I will be quoting this.

    If Parkinson is in a no win situation, then he only has himself to blame because it's a situation he has created.

    I agree with american addick. This is poor man management and suggests to me that the lessons of last season in respect of loan players simply hasn't been learned.
  • Options
    [cite]Posted By: Addick Addict[/cite]
    [cite]Posted By: Covered End[/cite]Sorry to keep banging on about this, but I'd like to say now before the game :-

    If Randolph plays well, his supporters/ Parky detractors, will be saying told you so, Parky should have played him last week.

    If Randolph doesn't play well the Parky bashers will blame him, because he had damaged Randolph's psyche.

    Anyway if you do, I will be quoting this.

    And if he plays well but is then dropped?

    I'd back Parky's judgement one way or the other.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!