I don't know the exact numbers of Liege players on loan throughout the network but I don't hear of any other Duchatelet managers getting the chop within a couple of months of the club being purchased. I fully understand why Riga was brought in. I await the clubs explanations of why not Riga for next season and why Peeters. As many have noted Ajdarevic made a key contribution to us staying up. The other network players appear to have been overvalued and the championship underestimated.
Didn't he sack the Liege manager pretty early on?
The Liege manager "early on" was Riga who joined when Duchatelet took over in July 2011but left after one season with a year left on his contract for a short term 9 month contract at the Aspire Youth Academy in Qatar (now there's a question...?)....
I don't know the exact numbers of Liege players on loan throughout the network but I don't hear of any other Duchatelet managers getting the chop within a couple of months of the club being purchased. I fully understand why Riga was brought in. I await the clubs explanations of why not Riga for next season and why Peeters. As many have noted Ajdarevic made a key contribution to us staying up. The other network players appear to have been overvalued and the championship underestimated.
Didn't he sack the Liege manager pretty early on?
The Liege manager "early on" was Riga who joined when Duchatelet took over in July 2011but left after one season with a year left on his contract for a short term 9 month contract at the Aspire Youth Academy in Qatar (now there's a question...?)....
But was happy to drop everything at a moments notice to come and help out Roland at Charlton and has a good relationship with RD. On top of that wanted to work full time for Duchatelet again but don't let any of the facts get in the way of your agenda.
I don't know the exact numbers of Liege players on loan throughout the network but I don't hear of any other Duchatelet managers getting the chop within a couple of months of the club being purchased. I fully understand why Riga was brought in. I await the clubs explanations of why not Riga for next season and why Peeters. As many have noted Ajdarevic made a key contribution to us staying up. The other network players appear to have been overvalued and the championship underestimated.
Didn't he sack the Liege manager pretty early on?
Yes and then brought in Riga...think Liege have had a new coach every season and Luzon is the first coach to last more than one season. What are the odds on Peeters being head coach in August 2015?!
I don't know the exact numbers of Liege players on loan throughout the network but I don't hear of any other Duchatelet managers getting the chop within a couple of months of the club being purchased. I fully understand why Riga was brought in. I await the clubs explanations of why not Riga for next season and why Peeters. As many have noted Ajdarevic made a key contribution to us staying up. The other network players appear to have been overvalued and the championship underestimated.
Didn't he sack the Liege manager pretty early on?
What are the odds on Peeters being head coach in August 2015?!
I don't know the exact numbers of Liege players on loan throughout the network but I don't hear of any other Duchatelet managers getting the chop within a couple of months of the club being purchased. I fully understand why Riga was brought in. I await the clubs explanations of why not Riga for next season and why Peeters. As many have noted Ajdarevic made a key contribution to us staying up. The other network players appear to have been overvalued and the championship underestimated.
Didn't he sack the Liege manager pretty early on?
The Liege manager "early on" was Riga who joined when Duchatelet took over in July 2011but left after one season with a year left on his contract for a short term 9 month contract at the Aspire Youth Academy in Qatar (now there's a question...?)....
But was happy to drop everything at a moments notice to come and help out Roland at Charlton and has a good relationship with RD. On top of that wanted to work full time for Duchatelet again but don't let any of the facts get in the way of your agenda.
I said "there's a question" i.e why he left Liege with a year left on his contract? Now you've added a second - why was he willing "to come and help out Roland at Charlton" which you've speculated is because he "has a good relationship with RD"...
I think you'll find that my posts on here are usually based on evidence and more often that not also provide a link to it (unlike most other posters).
So sorry there's no 'agenda' - just a concerned supporter looking for answers. But if you're happy with things, fine.....
I don't know the exact numbers of Liege players on loan throughout the network but I don't hear of any other Duchatelet managers getting the chop within a couple of months of the club being purchased. I fully understand why Riga was brought in. I await the clubs explanations of why not Riga for next season and why Peeters. As many have noted Ajdarevic made a key contribution to us staying up. The other network players appear to have been overvalued and the championship underestimated.
Didn't he sack the Liege manager pretty early on?
The Liege manager "early on" was Riga who joined when Duchatelet took over in July 2011but left after one season with a year left on his contract for a short term 9 month contract at the Aspire Youth Academy in Qatar (now there's a question...?)....
But was happy to drop everything at a moments notice to come and help out Roland at Charlton and has a good relationship with RD. On top of that wanted to work full time for Duchatelet again but don't let any of the facts get in the way of your agenda.
I said "there's a question" i.e why he left Liege with a year left on his contract? Now you've added a second - why was he willing "to come and help out Roland at Charlton" which you've speculated is because he "has a good relationship with RD"...
I think you'll find that my posts on here are usually based on evidence and more often that not also provide a link to it (unlike most other posters).
So sorry there's no 'agenda' - just a concerned supporter looking for answers. But if you're happy with things, fine.....
I'm quoting Katrien. Of course you may know Jose better ?
We're all looking for answers but I don't look for a conspiracy in everything that's presented. Am I happy with things ? Not completely no but I'm of the opinion that we must wait and see how things work out next season before we man the barricades.
I don't know the exact numbers of Liege players on loan throughout the network but I don't hear of any other Duchatelet managers getting the chop within a couple of months of the club being purchased. I fully understand why Riga was brought in. I await the clubs explanations of why not Riga for next season and why Peeters. As many have noted Ajdarevic made a key contribution to us staying up. The other network players appear to have been overvalued and the championship underestimated.
Didn't he sack the Liege manager pretty early on?
The Liege manager "early on" was Riga who joined when Duchatelet took over in July 2011but left after one season with a year left on his contract for a short term 9 month contract at the Aspire Youth Academy in Qatar (now there's a question...?)....
But was happy to drop everything at a moments notice to come and help out Roland at Charlton and has a good relationship with RD. On top of that wanted to work full time for Duchatelet again but don't let any of the facts get in the way of your agenda.
I said "there's a question" i.e why he left Liege with a year left on his contract? Now you've added a second - why was he willing "to come and help out Roland at Charlton" which you've speculated is because he "has a good relationship with RD"...
I think you'll find that my posts on here are usually based on evidence and more often that not also provide a link to it (unlike most other posters).
So sorry there's no 'agenda' - just a concerned supporter looking for answers. But if you're happy with things, fine.....
I'm quoting Katrien. Of course you may know Jose better ?
We're all looking for answers but I don't look for a conspiracy in everything that's presented. Am I happy with things ? Not completely no but I'm of the opinion that we must wait and see how things work out next season before we man the barricades.
I assume you're suggesting that I'm looking for a 'conspiracy' in wondering why Riga left after one season at Liege under Duchatelet with a year left on his contract to take up a short term 9 month contract at the Aspire Youth Academy in Qatar?
But a conspiracy requires at least 2 people planning/plotting together to achieve some aim - I'm simply curious why Riga (on his own) apparently voluntarily left a job with one of his country's top teams (and the highest placed coaching job he'd had) for a short term contract elsewhere....?
mIck - The reason M.Riga left Standard Liege is fairly common knowledge. He asked to be allowed to break his contract because the offer from the middle east was financially too good to turn down.
The reason JR rearranged his existing commitments to take the job with us was he felt he owed RD for allowing him to take up the Aspire initiative. I doubt at that time either anticipated things would go quite so well for JR in South London or he would consider extending the arrangement quite so readily.
In terms of succession planning it is entirely reasonable to consider alternatives - and after the friction with Chris Powell the search would have been focused on someone who like Riga was familiar with the Head Coach role as operated in mainland Europe, preferably at a Jupiler Pro League level.
An additional criteria will have arisen, following the under estimation of the quality of the Championship, for the future coach to have some background experience of Championship football. The more recent the experience the better.
It should be noted that M.Peeters was at Millwall - Aug 2003 to Aug 2005 - played with and for Denis Wise (obnoxious specimen but do not doubt his football knowledge or contacts). Marvin Elliott (Bristol C) Darren Ward (Swindon) were also team mates. Unlike a short term coaching initiative where coaching excellence was paramount, squad building also needs local market knowledge and contacts. Probably longer than just 3 months.
I have little doubt M. Hasselbaink (who is now unattached) was also in the frame.
The matter of availability and /or compensation will have also been factor. Which makes the suggestion that Peeters was the cheapest option at the very least questionable. I suspect there will have been cheaper candidates out there.
One interesting aspect of the way forward is, when there were indications Patrick Van Houdt (KV Mechelen ) was destined to be the T2, Damien Matthew is still in the mix with the opportunity to gain further experience of the continental hierarchy though Van Houdt (Peeters brother in law) may well still appear in some capacity.
mIck - The reason M.Riga left Standard Liege is fairly common knowledge. He asked to be allowed to break his contract because the offer from the middle east was financially too good to turn down.
Thanks for that. Although I'd still be interested in a source - as I have (genuinely) looked, having been interested in his background and record when he joined us....?
Oh and this link seems to suggest that Peeters was only at Millwall for i season from Jul 1 2005 to Jul 1 2006.....?
mIck - The reason M.Riga left Standard Liege is fairly common knowledge. He asked to be allowed to break his contract because the offer from the middle east was financially too good to turn down.
Thanks for that. Although I'd still be interested in a source - as I have (genuinely) looked, having been interested in his background and record when he joined us....?
mIck - The reason M.Riga left Standard Liege is fairly common knowledge. He asked to be allowed to break his contract because the offer from the middle east was financially too good to turn down.
Thanks for that. Although I'd still be interested in a source - as I have (genuinely) looked, having been interested in his background and record when he joined us....?
The source was Jose Riga.
'Source' - by which I meant when and where and have you got a link to it.....?
The sort of thing, as I said, that I usually try to include when I post something....
This thread is boring, it includes far too much attributed sensible comments and not enough rumour, supposition and doom and gloom, come on guys, get with the program.
mIck - The reason M.Riga left Standard Liege is fairly common knowledge. He asked to be allowed to break his contract because the offer from the middle east was financially too good to turn down.
Thanks for that. Although I'd still be interested in a source - as I have (genuinely) looked, having been interested in his background and record when he joined us....?
The source was Jose Riga.
'Source' - by which I meant when and where and have you got a link to it.....?
The sort of thing, as I said, that I usually try to include when I post something....
Sorry Mick. It was posted on CL in one of the several million threads on this subject and I'm not going to trawl through to satisfy your sceptism. Perhaps someone with either more time or knowledge might be able to help. All I can say is that Riga was quoted as saying and I paraphrase. " I came because I thought I owed Mr. Duchatelet for not fulfilling my contract at Liege by leaving halfway through a season"
mIck - The reason M.Riga left Standard Liege is fairly common knowledge. He asked to be allowed to break his contract because the offer from the middle east was financially too good to turn down.
Thanks for that. Although I'd still be interested in a source - as I have (genuinely) looked, having been interested in his background and record when he joined us....?
Oh and this link seems to suggest that Peeters was only at Millwall for i season from Jul 1 2005 to Jul 1 2006.....?
mIck - The reason M.Riga left Standard Liege is fairly common knowledge. He asked to be allowed to break his contract because the offer from the middle east was financially too good to turn down.
Thanks for that. Although I'd still be interested in a source - as I have (genuinely) looked, having been interested in his background and record when he joined us....?
Oh and this link seems to suggest that Peeters was only at Millwall for i season from Jul 1 2005 to Jul 1 2006.....?
Katrien is a lawyer. Not a chance in hell that she has anything to do with player acquisition other than finance nd contract.
And furthermore she's on holiday. Quite a lot to come back to.
Most lawyers work while on holiday if they have to and the client is paying properly . Time waits for no man ( or woman ) and the courts don't either if you read the recent judgments in Mitchell and Durrant.
at the end of the season she said she would be away for two weeks and we know who we wanted on the playing side and ALL deals would be done by the end of June----who is actually signing these players (assuming we are in fact trying to). Now some are saying she wont have anything to do with signings and some saying nothing will happen because she is away ??????????????????
i still think its 12 Standard leige "neverWillBes and a few other "whoTheFeckIsHe" to be signed.
I don't know the exact numbers of Liege players on loan throughout the network but I don't hear of any other Duchatelet managers getting the chop within a couple of months of the club being purchased. I fully understand why Riga was brought in. I await the clubs explanations of why not Riga for next season and why Peeters. As many have noted Ajdarevic made a key contribution to us staying up. The other network players appear to have been overvalued and the championship underestimated.
Posted this a few days ago on another thread;
Ujpest and Alcorcon have, between them, some seven players on loan from the network (one from SInt-Truiden and six from Standard). As far as I can tell only four of those have made first team appearances and only one seems to play anything like regularly.
It seems Charlton is not the only Club in Roland's network that didn't play their loanees from sister Clubs last season. I can confirm that Chris Powell was the only Manager sacked.
I also posted this earlier in this thread;
If you were trying to solve a crime one of the things you'd want to understand is motive.
What nobody has explained is what Duchatelet would be seeking to achieve if he forced his Coaches and/or Managers to play network signings who simply aren't good enough for the team they've joined.
How does such an approach add value, exactly? Why would he do it?
because there is not one, all we have is supposition based on a vague statement from a bitter ex employee sticking up for his mate, who is unable to say the same thing himself to explain that it was not his fault that he was sacked, but has a non disclosure agreement, so cannot say as much as AD can.
I don't know the exact numbers of Liege players on loan throughout the network but I don't hear of any other Duchatelet managers getting the chop within a couple of months of the club being purchased. I fully understand why Riga was brought in. I await the clubs explanations of why not Riga for next season and why Peeters. As many have noted Ajdarevic made a key contribution to us staying up. The other network players appear to have been overvalued and the championship underestimated.
Posted this a few days ago on another thread;
Ujpest and Alcorcon have, between them, some seven players on loan from the network (one from SInt-Truiden and six from Standard). As far as I can tell only four of those have made first team appearances and only one seems to play anything like regularly.
It seems Charlton is not the only Club in Roland's network that didn't play their loanees from sister Clubs last season. I can confirm that Chris Powell was the only Manager sacked.
I also posted this earlier in this thread;
If you were trying to solve a crime one of the things you'd want to understand is motive.
What nobody has explained is what Duchatelet would be seeking to achieve if he forced his Coaches and/or Managers to play network signings who simply aren't good enough for the team they've joined.
How does such an approach add value, exactly? Why would he do it?
I have still not seen a satisfactory explanation.
Many thanks Mundell. I don't see explanations either let alone alternative strategies with complete analysis of alternatives. The staying up bonus for Jiminez and Slater was leaked and some fans were genuine in their belief that Duchatelet might be trying to avoid the bill by getting us relegated. I even joked that if this were the case then Chris Powell would have been sacked after we beat QPR.
Perhaps someone might go through and collate the more sensational claims made since the takeover. I have to say the only doubt I have is not the intentions of the board but the ability to execute the correct mix of signings to improve the squad.
I think it will take time for many fans to trust the new owner and management team. Equally I expect the usual suspects to be spinning their conspiracies even if we rise above the 18th place we finished in last time.
I don't know the exact numbers of Liege players on loan throughout the network but I don't hear of any other Duchatelet managers getting the chop within a couple of months of the club being purchased. I fully understand why Riga was brought in. I await the clubs explanations of why not Riga for next season and why Peeters. As many have noted Ajdarevic made a key contribution to us staying up. The other network players appear to have been overvalued and the championship underestimated.
If you were trying to solve a crime one of the things you'd want to understand is motive.
What nobody has explained is what Duchatelet would be seeking to achieve if he forced his Coaches and/or Managers to play network signings who simply aren't good enough for the team they've joined.
How does such an approach add value, exactly? Why would he do it?
I have still not seen a satisfactory explanation.
This explanation may not rate as "satisfactory", but I'd still be interested in how you'd punch holes in it :-)
Well, while I basically agree with your overall scepticism, there is one rational business answer, at least as to why they were sent. They were removed from Standard's wage bill. They were added to our wage bill, but were probably cheaper than targets CP had, or wished to keep. That is an assumption about how The Network organises its cost of labour, but its a reasonable one (and of course you identified that other Standard players are out on loan in the network). If they then had playing time, and CAFC had improved their results with them playing, it would have been an early vindication of his - unproven - network strategy.
No digging out people about 'sources' please. People are adding to the debate with what they are told, don't grill them for that. It is down to you to determine whether you think the rumour or the individual telling the rumour is believable. But lets be a bit softer with our approach to fellow posters, please.
Personally, i don't know what to 'believe' where RD and squad selection is concerned. When Powell was manager, i do believe there was some form of pressure to feature certain players he was'given'. To what extent, and the fall out of that, i don't know. I do know though that in hindsight, that performance at Sheffield United was one from a squad that were clearly having internal wrangles.
As for Riga, was he similarly lent on to feature certain network players? I don't know, i'd guess that if he wasn it was less so than Powell was. The fact is there that Riga clearly didn't favour the 'network players' over the 'Charlton players'.
Which leads us to why Riga is no longer here.
No one logically can explain it. It appears to me one of the most bizarre situations i've ever seen in football where a manager has done brilliantly, positively taken to by club, players, supporters, goes public expressing his desire to want the job. Yet gets completely ignored as a less-proven, less experienced individual replaces him.
No one can explain that. I'd guess its down to cost saving, but i can see with no clear explaination why some might feel it was down to Riga, like Powell, not towing the line.
Excellent post - I think we would all like somebody to explain it to us. It would possibly suggest RD knows what he is doing if we could understand the logic of some of his actions. Can anybody explain?
because there is not one, all we have is supposition based on a vague statement from a bitter ex employee sticking up for his mate, who is unable to say the same thing himself to explain that it was not his fault that he was sacked, but has a non disclosure agreement, so cannot say as much as AD can.
I've just reread the Alex Dyer interview in the SLP before posting - and while you can choose not to believe it or attribute it to "a bitter ex employee sticking up for his mate", the one thing it is not is "vague" - it is specific and detailed - and, to me at least, it reads like an honest account by someone, who as others have suggested, may not be doing his own future employment prospects any good by being so candid.
I don't know the exact numbers of Liege players on loan throughout the network but I don't hear of any other Duchatelet managers getting the chop within a couple of months of the club being purchased. I fully understand why Riga was brought in. I await the clubs explanations of why not Riga for next season and why Peeters. As many have noted Ajdarevic made a key contribution to us staying up. The other network players appear to have been overvalued and the championship underestimated.
If you were trying to solve a crime one of the things you'd want to understand is motive.
What nobody has explained is what Duchatelet would be seeking to achieve if he forced his Coaches and/or Managers to play network signings who simply aren't good enough for the team they've joined.
How does such an approach add value, exactly? Why would he do it?
I have still not seen a satisfactory explanation.
This explanation may not rate as "satisfactory", but I'd still be interested in how you'd punch holes in it :-)
Well, while I basically agree with your overall scepticism, there is one rational business answer, at least as to why they were sent. They were removed from Standard's wage bill. They were added to our wage bill, but were probably cheaper than targets CP had, or wished to keep. That is an assumption about how The Network organises its cost of labour, but its a reasonable one (and of course you identified that other Standard players are out on loan in the network). If they then had playing time, and CAFC had improved their results with them playing, it would have been an early vindication of his - unproven - network strategy.
I could say that I hadn't seen your explanation, but I have to confess that I had. It may be right, of course, but I wasn't convinced.
1) I guess we don't know how the arrangements are organised when players move from one Club within the network to another, but clearly if they stay within the network there is no cost saving, simply a right pocket, left pocket transfer of cost. Contrast this with the loan of a player to a Club outside the network. Here there is a net cost saving and this is the logical thing to do with a player who is surplus to requirements, if that player can't be sold or is needed long-term.
2) There is, however, an obvious potential synergy to share back up players. Let's use goalkeepers as an example. Each Club in the network needs two GK for each match, one to start and one for the bench. Operating independently each Club may decide to have three competent keepers on the books, a clear inefficiency. Within the network, however, that third goalkeeper might be shared between, say, three or more Clubs. For example, Charlton take Thuram on loan because the alternative to sit on the bench is a kid. However, in this situation there would be no pressure to play the loanee. The objective is satisfied simply by providing somebody to sit on the bench in an emergency without incurring incremental cost. There might well be some logic in this though it wouldn't be much fun for the player shipped around and requires the player to be of the required standard.
Note: This is just an example. I'm sure Duchatelet expected Thuram to be good enough to play.
3) Intra network loans make the most sense when a player surplus to short-term requirements at a "senior" Club moves to a "junior" Club where he is good enough to play and improve the side. Astrit Ajdarevic might be a good example. Or perhaps Joe Gomez to Sint-Truiden where there may be a win-win if he gets the chance to play. As you suggest, an additional benefit here is that the receiving Club is improved without incurring additional cost at the network level. Its not hard to imagine Duchatelet seeing this as a very attractive proposition. However, he may now have realised that it's not going to be easy to make this work. Since an important part of the objective in this case is to improve the receiving Club it would not make any sense to insist that players "not good enough" play.
4) Another potential use of intra network loans may be more focused on the player than the receiving Club and there might be two variants of this. The first is the so-called "shop window" strategy. There's certainly some merit in this idea and the perceived value of Astrit Ajdarevic is probably higher today than it might have been had he been stuck in Standard's B Team, but that's because he showed his quality. I wonder, however, what's happened to Thuram's transfer value, at least in England? Being in the shop window is a double edged sword. The second possibility is player development. It makes sense to move young players around in order to assist their development, though they're not likely to develop if they are out of their depth. In any event, the controversy appears to have been about Thuram, and perhaps Reza, rather than Koc, for example.
Even where the primary focus of a loan is the player rather than the receiving Club, we shouldn't forget that Duchatelet has an important stake in the latter. In our case, it's hard to understand how the benefits, whatever they might be, of "forcing" sub-standard players into Charlton's first team could outweigh the financial consequences of relegation.
All in all, while I can see that Duchatelet may see intra network loans as a key part of his strategy, especially under 3) above perhaps, I really can't see the net value in insisting that players not good enough for the receiving team play anyway.
Finally, I'd need a lot of convincing that the explanation for the "noise" around all of this isn't a very simple one. Duchatelet thought, wrongly, that the players moved to Charlton in January were good enough and would improve the side. When they weren't picked he then assumed, again wrongly, that Chris Powell was simply being difficult or making a point. It really isn't hard to imagine how this might have happened and it has nothing to do with Yes Men, X Men or Mr Men.
Mundell, I think the 'simple explanation for the noise' is one that I agree with. But then we come to Riga who tells RD the same things. Why did RD not sign him? Is that another error because, if so, he is beginning to appear rather accident prone? I still don't understand why the spread sheet man decided to move into football. This whole experiment just doesn't seem to be about a rich man wanting more money. There is another dimension to this and it is somehow bound up with his political ideas. He is a complex man and I see him as Aspergic. The notion that you can just move people around Europe without any thought whatever that human beings, unlike electronic components, might have feelings and emotions is deeply concerning to me. Quite apart from the fact that it's dehumanising, I can't see it working to our benefit. There are a lot of questions that need asking, and simply accepting the wisdom of economic spreadsheets is not doing it for me.
Finally, I'd need a lot of convincing that the explanation for the "noise" around all of this isn't a very simple one. Duchatelet thought, wrongly, that the players moved to Charlton in January were good enough and would improve the side. When they weren't picked he then assumed, again wrongly, that Chris Powell was simply being difficult or making a point. It really isn't hard to imagine how this might have happened and it has nothing to do with Yes Men, X Men or Mr Men
It's struck me reading this that it's quite within the bounds of imagination that Powell simply told RD he wasn't going to play them as he was the manager rather than indulge RD with a full explanation. Or possibly that a lot was getting lost in translation. Certainly that will be less of an issue if you bring in head coaches who understand the European way and, ahem, come from the same country as you. I can see Riga giving RD a much fuller explanation of why those players aren't making the squad.
Re the network, my understanding is that Powell was put under a lot of pressure to play Nego and Reza in order to increase their value in the market. Now obviously that's not going to happen if they're crap but if that's their primary reason for being at the club then Charlton's footballing success is a secondary one might say incidental priority.
It might also reasonably be observed that the network's success is best aided by a Premier League Charlton - but if so, why aren't we seeing an experienced manager knowledgeable about promotion from this League - Neil Warnock for example - brought in and given the right tools for the job?
To me RD's motivation, vision and strategy remain unknowns, and until theyre out in the open we're all just discussing conjecture.
If any Trust members or G21 guys and guyesses are reading this, please please please can we ask RD to a) elaborate on why he decided to buy football clubs b) ask why his political party failed to gain ground. I know that some people will yawn at this, U Kip if you want to, this woman's up for learning!
Comments
What are the odds on Peeters being head coach in August 2015?!
I think you'll find that my posts on here are usually based on evidence and more often that not also provide a link to it (unlike most other posters).
So sorry there's no 'agenda' - just a concerned supporter looking for answers. But if you're happy with things, fine.....
We're all looking for answers but I don't look for a conspiracy in everything that's presented. Am I happy with things ? Not completely no but I'm of the opinion that we must wait and see how things work out next season before we man the barricades.
But a conspiracy requires at least 2 people planning/plotting together to achieve some aim - I'm simply curious why Riga (on his own) apparently voluntarily left a job with one of his country's top teams (and the highest placed coaching job he'd had) for a short term contract elsewhere....?
And who's manning the barricades....?
The reason JR rearranged his existing commitments to take the job with us was he felt he owed RD for allowing him to take up the Aspire initiative. I doubt at that time either anticipated things would go quite so well for JR in South London or he would consider extending the arrangement quite so readily.
In terms of succession planning it is entirely reasonable to consider alternatives - and after the friction with Chris Powell the search would have been focused on someone who like Riga was familiar with the Head Coach role as operated in mainland Europe, preferably at a Jupiler Pro League level.
An additional criteria will have arisen, following the under estimation of the quality of the Championship, for the future coach to have some background experience of Championship football. The more recent the experience the better.
It should be noted that M.Peeters was at Millwall - Aug 2003 to Aug 2005 - played with and for Denis Wise (obnoxious specimen but do not doubt his football knowledge or contacts). Marvin Elliott (Bristol C) Darren Ward (Swindon) were also team mates. Unlike a short term coaching initiative where coaching excellence was paramount, squad building also needs local market knowledge and contacts. Probably longer than just 3 months.
I have little doubt M. Hasselbaink (who is now unattached) was also in the frame.
The matter of availability and /or compensation will have also been factor. Which makes the suggestion that Peeters was the cheapest option at the very least questionable. I suspect there will have been cheaper candidates out there.
One interesting aspect of the way forward is, when there were indications Patrick Van Houdt (KV Mechelen ) was destined to be the T2, Damien Matthew is still in the mix with the opportunity to gain further experience of the continental hierarchy though Van Houdt (Peeters brother in law) may well still appear in some capacity.
Just a few thoughts wrapped around the statistics
Oh and this link seems to suggest that Peeters was only at Millwall for i season from Jul 1 2005 to Jul 1 2006.....?
http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/bob-peeters/profil/spieler/4434
The sort of thing, as I said, that I usually try to include when I post something....
http://www.soccerbase.com/players/player.sd?player_id=20518
i still think its 12 Standard leige "neverWillBes and a few other "whoTheFeckIsHe" to be signed.
Ujpest and Alcorcon have, between them, some seven players on loan from the network (one from SInt-Truiden and six from Standard). As far as I can tell only four of those have made first team appearances and only one seems to play anything like regularly.
It seems Charlton is not the only Club in Roland's network that didn't play their loanees from sister Clubs last season. I can confirm that Chris Powell was the only Manager sacked.
I also posted this earlier in this thread;
If you were trying to solve a crime one of the things you'd want to understand is motive.
What nobody has explained is what Duchatelet would be seeking to achieve if he forced his Coaches and/or Managers to play network signings who simply aren't good enough for the team they've joined.
How does such an approach add value, exactly? Why would he do it?
I have still not seen a satisfactory explanation.
Perhaps someone might go through and collate the more sensational claims made since the takeover. I have to say the only doubt I have is not the intentions of the board but the ability to execute the correct mix of signings to improve the squad.
I think it will take time for many fans to trust the new owner and management team. Equally I expect the usual suspects to be spinning their conspiracies even if we rise above the 18th place we finished in last time.
Well, while I basically agree with your overall scepticism, there is one rational business answer, at least as to why they were sent. They were removed from Standard's wage bill. They were added to our wage bill, but were probably cheaper than targets CP had, or wished to keep. That is an assumption about how The Network organises its cost of labour, but its a reasonable one (and of course you identified that other Standard players are out on loan in the network). If they then had playing time, and CAFC had improved their results with them playing, it would have been an early vindication of his - unproven - network strategy.
1) I guess we don't know how the arrangements are organised when players move from one Club within the network to another, but clearly if they stay within the network there is no cost saving, simply a right pocket, left pocket transfer of cost. Contrast this with the loan of a player to a Club outside the network. Here there is a net cost saving and this is the logical thing to do with a player who is surplus to requirements, if that player can't be sold or is needed long-term.
2) There is, however, an obvious potential synergy to share back up players. Let's use goalkeepers as an example. Each Club in the network needs two GK for each match, one to start and one for the bench. Operating independently each Club may decide to have three competent keepers on the books, a clear inefficiency. Within the network, however, that third goalkeeper might be shared between, say, three or more Clubs. For example, Charlton take Thuram on loan because the alternative to sit on the bench is a kid. However, in this situation there would be no pressure to play the loanee. The objective is satisfied simply by providing somebody to sit on the bench in an emergency without incurring incremental cost. There might well be some logic in this though it wouldn't be much fun for the player shipped around and requires the player to be of the required standard.
Note: This is just an example. I'm sure Duchatelet expected Thuram to be good enough to play.
3) Intra network loans make the most sense when a player surplus to short-term requirements at a "senior" Club moves to a "junior" Club where he is good enough to play and improve the side. Astrit Ajdarevic might be a good example. Or perhaps Joe Gomez to Sint-Truiden where there may be a win-win if he gets the chance to play. As you suggest, an additional benefit here is that the receiving Club is improved without incurring additional cost at the network level. Its not hard to imagine Duchatelet seeing this as a very attractive proposition. However, he may now have realised that it's not going to be easy to make this work. Since an important part of the objective in this case is to improve the receiving Club it would not make any sense to insist that players "not good enough" play.
4) Another potential use of intra network loans may be more focused on the player than the receiving Club and there might be two variants of this. The first is the so-called "shop window" strategy. There's certainly some merit in this idea and the perceived value of Astrit Ajdarevic is probably higher today than it might have been had he been stuck in Standard's B Team, but that's because he showed his quality. I wonder, however, what's happened to Thuram's transfer value, at least in England? Being in the shop window is a double edged sword. The second possibility is player development. It makes sense to move young players around in order to assist their development, though they're not likely to develop if they are out of their depth. In any event, the controversy appears to have been about Thuram, and perhaps Reza, rather than Koc, for example.
Even where the primary focus of a loan is the player rather than the receiving Club, we shouldn't forget that Duchatelet has an important stake in the latter. In our case, it's hard to understand how the benefits, whatever they might be, of "forcing" sub-standard players into Charlton's first team could outweigh the financial consequences of relegation.
All in all, while I can see that Duchatelet may see intra network loans as a key part of his strategy, especially under 3) above perhaps, I really can't see the net value in insisting that players not good enough for the receiving team play anyway.
Finally, I'd need a lot of convincing that the explanation for the "noise" around all of this isn't a very simple one. Duchatelet thought, wrongly, that the players moved to Charlton in January were good enough and would improve the side. When they weren't picked he then assumed, again wrongly, that Chris Powell was simply being difficult or making a point. It really isn't hard to imagine how this might have happened and it has nothing to do with Yes Men, X Men or Mr Men.
Just my view.
I still don't understand why the spread sheet man decided to move into football. This whole experiment just doesn't seem to be about a rich man wanting more money. There is another dimension to this and it is somehow bound up with his political ideas.
He is a complex man and I see him as Aspergic. The notion that you can just move people around Europe without any thought whatever that human beings, unlike electronic components, might have feelings and emotions is deeply concerning to me. Quite apart from the fact that it's dehumanising, I can't see it working to our benefit.
There are a lot of questions that need asking, and simply accepting the wisdom of economic spreadsheets is not doing it for me.
Re the network, my understanding is that Powell was put under a lot of pressure to play Nego and Reza in order to increase their value in the market. Now obviously that's not going to happen if they're crap but if that's their primary reason for being at the club then Charlton's footballing success is a secondary one might say incidental priority.
It might also reasonably be observed that the network's success is best aided by a Premier League Charlton - but if so, why aren't we seeing an experienced manager knowledgeable about promotion from this League - Neil Warnock for example - brought in and given the right tools for the job?
To me RD's motivation, vision and strategy remain unknowns, and until theyre out in the open we're all just discussing conjecture.