why would we want someone back who refused to play for Charlton and ended a run which could have led to our highest ever finish?
Either you think we'd have won the league if Parker had stayed or you don't know your history
I am not quite sure what point you are trying to make. Your point is a bit confused. You need to explain a bit more clearly.
In that season, Charlton were 4th and had played a lot of the top teams away. Charlton were in good form and 4th was a distinct possibility. Razil is not suggesting that Charlton would have won the league. Scott Parker leaving as he did on the last day of the transfer window undermined the second half of the season and Charlton then had a lower finish. Razil's recollection is accurate. That was the high point of the club and it was downward after that for some years.
Simon Church is on the verge of joining Chelsea on a 3 year deal, a bid of £8 million has been accepted and part of the deal is that he will be NOT BE loaned back to Charlton until January
What Henry was saying is that our best ever finish in the top division was 2nd. Some on here obviously do not know their history.
Finishing 7th that year was our highest Premier League finish and sure we could have finished higher. On that last day if we had lost to Southampton we could have finished 13th, the points gap between 6 clubs was that tight.
The main point is that Scott Parker leaving undermined a potential best finish in the modern era in the Premiership. I agree with Razil on that. Any opinion on that Henry ? (or you just wanted to be precise on the best league finish ?)
I wonder how many Addicks fans still around / reading CL watched a few games of that season ? It would be great to hear from them.
why would we want someone back who refused to play for Charlton and ended a run which could have led to our highest ever finish?
Either you think we'd have won the league if Parker had stayed or you don't know your history
I am not quite sure what point you are trying to make. Your point is a bit confused. You need to explain a bit more clearly.
In that season, Charlton were 4th and had played a lot of the top teams away. Charlton were in good form and 4th was a distinct possibility. Razil is not suggesting that Charlton would have won the league. Scott Parker leaving as he did on the last day of the transfer window undermined the second half of the season and Charlton then had a lower finish. Razil's recollection is accurate. That was the high point of the club and it was downward after that for some years.
No one denies that Parker's departure undermined the second half of the season.
The point I was making, and that Razil has already conceded, is that if we had finished 4th it WOULD NOT have been our best finish EVER.
We had already finished 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th in the top flight.
So no confusion at all thanks.
So it WASN'T the "high point" of the club as you claim, certainly not in terms of league position.
We have a proud history that stretches back before the portacabins and there was even a Charlton Athletic before the Premier League was created.
Fair enough Henry. You are correct on the precise point that you are making. No need to splutter any coffee. Not best drinking and bad for the keyboard - not that I am suggesting you are doing that ;-). You agree with Razil's post about Scott Parker and thats great.
We have established that Charlton was runners up and a force before the Second World War. Top team during the second world war as well. Scott Parker leaving fecked up a potential top 4 finish, best for 60 years or so.
I think it may be good not to good worked about this as this is supposed to be a rumours thread.
Flair enough Henry. You are correct on the precise point that you are making. No need to splutter your coffee. Not best drinking and bad for the keyboard. You agree with Razil's post about Scott Parker then Henry thats great. I think it may be good not to good worked about this as this is supposed to be a rumours thread.
You seemed to be the one getting hot under the collar and/or confused.
The main point is that Scott Parker leaving undermined a potential best finish in the modern era in the Premiership. I agree with Razil on that. Any opinion on that Henry ? (or you just wanted to be precise on the best league finish ?)
I wonder how many Addicks fans still around / reading CL watched a few games of that season ? It would be great to hear from them.
From 1936 to 1939, only 5 defeats, a truly remarkable record. This along with the two FA Cup finals immediately after the war only makes me think that we would have been a regular top four club if the war did not intervene...
The main point is that Scott Parker leaving undermined a potential best finish in the modern era in the Premiership. I agree with Razil on that. Any opinion on that Henry ? (or you just wanted to be precise on the best league finish ?)
I wonder how many Addicks fans still around / reading CL watched a few games of that season ? It would be great to hear from them.
From 1936 to 1939, only 5 defeats, a truly remarkable record. This along with the two FA Cup finals immediately after the war only makes me think that we would have been a regular top four club if the war did not intervene...
Unfortunately it was just our away form that seemed to let us down even back then
Comments
In that season, Charlton were 4th and had played a lot of the top teams away. Charlton were in good form and 4th was a distinct possibility. Razil is not suggesting that Charlton would have won the league. Scott Parker leaving as he did on the last day of the transfer window undermined the second half of the season and Charlton then had a lower finish. Razil's recollection is accurate. That was the high point of the club and it was downward after that for some years.
Finishing 7th that year was our highest Premier League finish and sure we could have finished higher. On that last day if we had lost to Southampton we could have finished 13th, the points gap between 6 clubs was that tight.
I wonder how many Addicks fans still around / reading CL watched a few games of that season ? It would be great to hear from them.
---------
http://www.statto.com/football/teams/charlton-athletic/history/post-ww1
Charlton Athletic : History 1918 to 1945
Charlton Athletic Information
English Division One (old)
Best finish 1936 / 37
Season L# Pos P W D L F A W D L F A Pt ±
1938-1939 1 3 42 16 3 2 49 24 6 3 12 26 35 50
1937-1938 1 4 42 14 5 2 43 14 2 9 10 22 37 46
1936-1937 1 2 42 15 5 1 37 13 6 7 8 21 36 54
The point I was making, and that Razil has already conceded, is that if we had finished 4th it WOULD NOT have been our best finish EVER.
We had already finished 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th in the top flight.
So no confusion at all thanks.
So it WASN'T the "high point" of the club as you claim, certainly not in terms of league position.
We have a proud history that stretches back before the portacabins and there was even a Charlton Athletic before the Premier League was created.
We have established that Charlton was runners up and a force before the Second World War. Top team during the second world war as well. Scott Parker leaving fecked up a potential top 4 finish, best for 60 years or so.
I think it may be good not to good worked about this as this is supposed to be a rumours thread.
You seemed to be the one getting hot under the collar and/or confused.
I already knew my history : - )
You know it's filled with everything but a proper rumour, right?
;o)