Playing Devils advocate here, but we are all customers of Charlton Athletic, like footballers ARE commodities, like it or not thats the reality. The bottom line is if you don't like it and all your 'IFS' are not fulfilled and it upsets you so much take your custom (support) elsewhere.
It’s not about ticking boxes, no one on here said they’d walk away if certain players went or others didn’t arrive. Unfortunately though, yes I do agree that we are seen as commodities – that is modern football. However, we have been here far longer than him and are likely to be here long afterwards. It’s the fans that make a club and sadly not many ‘businessmen’ appreciate that as much as they should.
The noises coming out of the camp haven’t been the most promising. Our target is to finish fourth bottom? We don’t need many players? Maybe there’s a false perception after our run of form under Riga..? Although he is obviously entitled to such views, I also strongly suspect that RD does not want Poyet to stay for the team’s benefit, but because he’s potentially our most valuable asset.
I’d also like clarification on why we’re handing out long-term contracts to untested players yet the person who’s supposed to guide us, or manager/coach, is given 12 months. I’d guess it’s because of market value for the players, then when a bust up with Peeters happens he receives a relatively small pay-off – that I base on RD’s previous.
At the moment it feels to me like the Valley is leased to a Belgian football youth academy. The ground and the history of the name are there but it doesnt feel like CHARLTON
I disagree and don't feel that way about it but that is how you feel so that is fine.
My point is that better comms and PR might make you and others change that view. Maybe not but it might.
There's a recording of the interview on the bbc website for anyone interested. Slightly dissapointed peeters says he wants to take us up but not next season . Why not??
So why exactly has @insollywetrust flagged my comment above? I could have flagged all sorts of things yesterday...
Don't get more wrong , I thought the majority of your post was excellent and I couldn't have put much of it better myself , however , I've flagged the post because although , like yourself I am slightly sceptical of RD, I didn't like the way you discounted other members opinions , referring to them as muppets etc. at the end of the day we are all Here for the same reason , we support Charlton , sometimes I feel like that isn't the case... Sorry if any offence was taken from the flag , but I just wanted to express my discontent with a certain part of what was a , on the whole , an excellent post
you agree that it was an excellent post (which it was) then flagged it? I flagged you but then decided that was completely childish and reverting to low levels. She discounted other peoples opinions.?.. did you actually read the whole thread? Everyone discounted hers from the start.
Yes I don't see the Issue , at the end of the day it is a flag on an Internet forum , I don't think that is something to get particularly upset over ... I've stated my reason for flagging the post and I dont think that was unfair , so I can't see for the life of me why you'd even have flagged my post in the first place, I agree with you in the sense that other people are just as bad , but really I can't go and flag every post , I will reiterate , we are all Charlton fans , I don't see the point of needless arguments ...
There's a recording of the interview on the bbc website for anyone interested. Slightly dissapointed peeters says he wants to take us up but not next season . Why not??
He's never going to come out and say he wants us to get promoted next season even if he truly believes we will - same as Mourinho saying he didn't believe Chelsea were good enough for the title last season, do you think all their fans were going crazy at that statement - no they wait to see how things pan out on the pitch!
I just wish everyone on here would keep a lid on the negativity at least until a ball is kicked!! (& I'm not talking about friendlies!)
So why exactly has @insollywetrust flagged my comment above? I could have flagged all sorts of things yesterday...
Don't get more wrong , I thought the majority of your post was excellent and I couldn't have put much of it better myself , however , I've flagged the post because although , like yourself I am slightly sceptical of RD, I didn't like the way you discounted other members opinions , referring to them as muppets etc. at the end of the day we are all Here for the same reason , we support Charlton , sometimes I feel like that isn't the case... Sorry if any offence was taken from the flag , but I just wanted to express my discontent with a certain part of what was a , on the whole , an excellent post
you agree that it was an excellent post (which it was) then flagged it? I flagged you but then decided that was completely childish and reverting to low levels. She discounted other peoples opinions.?.. did you actually read the whole thread? Everyone discounted hers from the start.
Yes I don't see the Issue , at the end of the day it is a flag on an Internet forum , I don't think that is something to get particularly upset over ... I've stated my reason for flagging the post and I dont think that was unfair , so I can't see for the life of me why you'd even have flagged my post in the first place, I agree with you in the sense that other people are just as bad , but really I can't go and flag every post , I will reiterate , we are all Charlton fans , I don't see the point of needless arguments ...
Except the flag is for "Abuse" - not just another version of "Like" or "Lol". I believe it is actually there to alert moderators to anything which may be offensive or outwith the terms of the forum, and could ultimately lead to a poster getting a warning or banned. I don't think what I said came anywhere close to meriting that, did it?
And as for @Greenie's post - it misses the fundamental point that I believe I am entitled to a critical opinion because of years of emotional investment, which for me carries as much, if not more, weight as Roland's recent financial investment. Or can we only be supporters if we have tons of cash to pour into the club? I did pay my £1 for Ronnie Moore, and have been in Valley Gold since the start, if that helps?!
At the moment it feels to me like the Valley is leased to a Belgian football youth academy. The ground and the history of the name are there but it doesnt feel like CHARLTON
We had a long period of stability up until relegation from the premiership. I can understand where 'our Charlton' came from because so many worked so hard to get us back to the valley, promote community and family values and we had a manager (curbs) who worked side by side with RM on a shared vision. Unfortunately, we got relegated, and since Curbs left, probably made a number of poor decisions.
Change is uncomfortable, I personally am very routine. We have had no choice but to change in recent times because Slater and Jimenez were no longer interested.
We have to accept football has changed a lot since our days in the prem, the Charlton you are talking about is still here. We have a good core fan base and we still have a status as a football league club where it could've gone drastically wrong up until 6 months ago.
I truly believe that we are heading in a decent direction. We have to get past this 'our Charlton' like we are some little village insulated in the English countryside and stuck in a period drama.
So why exactly has @insollywetrust flagged my comment above? I could have flagged all sorts of things yesterday...
Don't get more wrong , I thought the majority of your post was excellent and I couldn't have put much of it better myself , however , I've flagged the post because although , like yourself I am slightly sceptical of RD, I didn't like the way you discounted other members opinions , referring to them as muppets etc. at the end of the day we are all Here for the same reason , we support Charlton , sometimes I feel like that isn't the case... Sorry if any offence was taken from the flag , but I just wanted to express my discontent with a certain part of what was a , on the whole , an excellent post
you agree that it was an excellent post (which it was) then flagged it? I flagged you but then decided that was completely childish and reverting to low levels. She discounted other peoples opinions.?.. did you actually read the whole thread? Everyone discounted hers from the start.
Yes I don't see the Issue , at the end of the day it is a flag on an Internet forum , I don't think that is something to get particularly upset over ... I've stated my reason for flagging the post and I dont think that was unfair , so I can't see for the life of me why you'd even have flagged my post in the first place, I agree with you in the sense that other people are just as bad , but really I can't go and flag every post , I will reiterate , we are all Charlton fans , I don't see the point of needless arguments ...
Except the flag is for "Abuse" - not just another version of "Like" or "Lol". I believe it is actually there to alert moderators to anything which may be offensive or outwith the terms of the forum, and could ultimately lead to a poster getting a warning or banned. I don't think what I said came anywhere close to meriting that, did it?
And as for @Greenie's post - it misses the fundamental point that I believe I am entitled to a critical opinion because of years of emotional investment, which for me carries as much, if not more, weight as Roland's recent financial investment. Or can we only be supporters if we have tons of cash to pour into the club? I did pay my £1 for Ronnie Moore, and have been in Valley Gold since the start, if that helps?!
It is not a violent , threatening , or even rude post , so maybe a Flag for abuse is a bit extensive , however I feel you did discredit other posters , so I had to show my concern In some way. ???
Note: After being alerted to it, I remove any Flag that is treated as a "dislike", as I did in this case. It seems someone did find something they objected to, but the post was certainly not outside of our rules. The Flag is for content that is outside of the rules, or beyond the pale, as a means to help alert moderators to issues and give everyone a role in setting boundaries. Recently, it worked well on the Ian Wright thread, where a flippant comment that was in poor taste was Flagged by almost everyone almost immediately. The author made amends and everyone moved on. That is what it is for. The Flag is for objectionable content, not for things you disagree with.
At the moment it feels to me like the Valley is leased to a Belgian football youth academy. The ground and the history of the name are there but it doesnt feel like CHARLTON
We had a long period of stability up until relegation from the premiership. I can understand where 'our Charlton' came from because so many worked so hard to get us back to the valley, promote community and family values and we had a manager (curbs) who worked side by side with RM on a shared vision. Unfortunately, we got relegated, and since Curbs left, probably made a number of poor decisions.
Change is uncomfortable, I personally am very routine. We have had no choice but to change in recent times because Slater and Jimenez were no longer interested.
We have to accept football has changed a lot since our days in the prem, the Charlton you are talking about is still here. We have a good core fan base and we still have a status as a football league club where it could've gone drastically wrong up until 6 months ago.
I truly believe that we are heading in a decent direction. We have to get past this 'our Charlton' like we are some little village insulated in the English countryside and stuck in a period drama.
Nice reply.
To me though change is not the problem but this change in particular.
In football we are used to owners having two main aims ... success on the pitch or making a name or money for themselves etc, but this new owner's aims appear to be different eg it can be argued using Charlton as footballer farm for the good of a network.
Thats where the identity goes... when the target is not for the club and owner but a network and theory.
Different rules for different members I guess , my last 3 flags were for saying Powell was taking us down , telling someone to do 1 and calling someone a moaner , Haha oh well I don't know why she would get upset about getting a flag anyway.
Different rules for different members I guess , my last 3 flags were for saying Powell was taking us down , telling someone to do 1 and calling someone a moaner , Haha oh well I don't know why she would get upset about getting a flag anyway.
Not upset - just puzzled - seeing as I refrained from flagging anyone earlier, when I could easily have done. Also think it gets out of hand for the mods if they have to keep checking flags when people are using them to dislike/disagree. Some of yours probably fall into that category too, as did the ones I got for agreeing with Powell's comment on his Talksport interview.
Because she hasn't said anything that warranted an abuse flag. Had she told someone 'to do one', Weegie would have deserved it, but she made a general observation and did not aim abuse at a particular person.
Has RD actually changed much other then the coach, we are still called Charlton, we still play in red(sort of), we still have our badge, we are clearly not planning to leave the Valley, the players still come out to the Red Red Robin, we have more youth players in the first team then i can ever remember since i have been a fan and we are still doing all that excellent community work.
The only change so far seems to be our owner also owns other clubs around Europe and rather then loaning players from any old random club, we might happen to get more loans from one of the other so called network clubs.
I can understand the wary attitude from some posters as its more unknown due to it being a foreign style/ownership and we might not have heard about many of our signings before they sign for us.
I just simply don't get why it is no longer feeling like Charlton, as everything i respect & that made me fall in love with the club is either still there or actually being strengthened under the new ownership.
Different rules for different members I guess , my last 3 flags were for saying Powell was taking us down , telling someone to do 1 and calling someone a moaner , Haha oh well I don't know why she would get upset about getting a flag anyway.
Not upset - just puzzled - seeing as I refrained from flagging anyone earlier, when I could easily have done. Also think it gets out of hand for the mods if they have to keep checking flags when people are using them to dislike/disagree. Some of yours probably fall into that category too, as did the ones I got for agreeing with Powell's comment on his Talksport interview.
Anyway being a Powell lover you think you would be saying thank you too Roland for saving Powell from having a relegation on he's cv .
Not really sure what the new 75 comments I have missed but I regarding Roland choosing Peeters - before the season ending there were rumours on here that an appointment may not be made until after the Belgian season had ended. So to me it looks like appointing Peeters was the plan all along no matter how well Riga did.
At the moment it feels to me like the Valley is leased to a Belgian football youth academy. The ground and the history of the name are there but it doesnt feel like CHARLTON
We had a long period of stability up until relegation from the premiership. I can understand where 'our Charlton' came from because so many worked so hard to get us back to the valley, promote community and family values and we had a manager (curbs) who worked side by side with RM on a shared vision. Unfortunately, we got relegated, and since Curbs left, probably made a number of poor decisions.
Change is uncomfortable, I personally am very routine. We have had no choice but to change in recent times because Slater and Jimenez were no longer interested.
We have to accept football has changed a lot since our days in the prem, the Charlton you are talking about is still here. We have a good core fan base and we still have a status as a football league club where it could've gone drastically wrong up until 6 months ago.
I truly believe that we are heading in a decent direction. We have to get past this 'our Charlton' like we are some little village insulated in the English countryside and stuck in a period drama.
Nice reply.
To me though change is not the problem but this change in particular.
In football we are used to owners having two main aims ... success on the pitch or making a name or money for themselves etc, but this new owner's aims appear to be different eg it can be argued using Charlton as footballer farm for the good of a network.
Thats where the identity goes... when the target is not for the club and owner but a network and theory.
While I respect your opinion, I am afraid I can't agree. The theory that we would become a feeder club/glorified academy was widely discussed/promoted when RD first stepped in, and then when CP left many more twigs were thrown onto that fire, understandably enough. HOWEVER, since then there has been very little credible evidence that this is in fact the case in any plausible way. Buyens came in on loan only, but he was a mainstay until being displaced by a hotter prospect, that doesn't make him bad and his record is impressive. Vetokele is regarded as very promising, the fee is debated but general consensus is upwards of a million pounds - not small change in Championship terms.
I have said all along that any players who impress will move on from Charlton - but that has always been the case. The only change is where they might end up (and frankly, if a big team offers big money for a Charlton player, RD WILL take it - no cutting off noses to spite faces.) We are no more a farm than we ever were as far as I can see. If anything we are coming out better for the arrangement - Reza will be lethal if he can keep his WC form, Buyens is experienced and hardened, Vetokele is a good prospect, Ansah is a gamble but has good pedigree, so I am optimistic.
Note: After being alerted to it, I remove any Flag that is treated as a "dislike", as I did in this case. It seems someone did find something they objected to, but the post was certainly not outside of our rules. The Flag is for content that is outside of the rules, or beyond the pale, as a means to help alert moderators to issues and give everyone a role in setting boundaries. Recently, it worked well on the Ian Wright thread, where a flippant comment that was in poor taste was Flagged by almost everyone almost immediately. The author made amends and everyone moved on. That is what it is for. The Flag is for objectionable content, not for things you disagree with.
Different rules for different members I guess , my last 3 flags were for saying Powell was taking us down , telling someone to do 1 and calling someone a moaner , Haha oh well I don't know why she would get upset about getting a flag anyway.
Not upset - just puzzled - seeing as I refrained from flagging anyone earlier, when I could easily have done.
I nearly flagged you for saying you were half scottish.
At the moment it feels to me like the Valley is leased to a Belgian football youth academy. The ground and the history of the name are there but it doesnt feel like CHARLTON
We had a long period of stability up until relegation from the premiership. I can understand where 'our Charlton' came from because so many worked so hard to get us back to the valley, promote community and family values and we had a manager (curbs) who worked side by side with RM on a shared vision. Unfortunately, we got relegated, and since Curbs left, probably made a number of poor decisions.
Change is uncomfortable, I personally am very routine. We have had no choice but to change in recent times because Slater and Jimenez were no longer interested.
We have to accept football has changed a lot since our days in the prem, the Charlton you are talking about is still here. We have a good core fan base and we still have a status as a football league club where it could've gone drastically wrong up until 6 months ago.
I truly believe that we are heading in a decent direction. We have to get past this 'our Charlton' like we are some little village insulated in the English countryside and stuck in a period drama.
Nice reply.
To me though change is not the problem but this change in particular.
In football we are used to owners having two main aims ... success on the pitch or making a name or money for themselves etc, but this new owner's aims appear to be different eg it can be argued using Charlton as footballer farm for the good of a network.
Thats where the identity goes... when the target is not for the club and owner but a network and theory.
I agree. Being one of 6 in a network can lead to uncertainty and questions as to the true aims of the network's overall owner. But I believe we are underestimating our weight within that network. Commercially we are one level below the promised land. No disrespect to SL, even though they are a CL side, I think we could be bigger. I think RD also sees the potential hence the investment. I can also see in time some of the others dropping out. The 'our Charlton' wasn't a reference to you in particular as you rightly said it depends upon your definition of Charlton. I just think there are many on here who still think the club should be run to the ideals we had 10 years ago. I just think we need to learn to embrace it, because it might not be such a bad thing.
The only reason I dragged up another person's cv is that you frequently refer to your own. I actually understand why you do it, and am guilty of it myself. I'm just offering the feedback that not everybody takes it in the way it is meant. As Stu of Kunming frequently reminds me.
Not for the first time your post started with an expression of contempt for those who don't see things as clearly as you do; "what planet" etc. Recently you started with "I truly despair". Again, I'm far from perfect but those phrases fuel the polarisation of people into camps, which most of us are not willing to be pushed into. In fact your summary of your current view of RD is pretty much mine. Yet because I understand Weegie's and others response to the PC, I'm apparently on a different planet.
@HenryIrving has already demonstrated how perhaps RD could have explained things better. However as you acknowledge, it isn't RD's strength. But what I find frustrating is that there is a better way to handle such communication, and sitting two seats down from RD was man who knows how to do it, and actually did it regularly during the period of our greatest success. I'm talking about what in politics is called the "off the record briefing", and that is what Richard Murray did regularly.
Take the sale of Danny Mills in 1999. It came soon after our relegation, and the rumbles started, "selling our bright young talent, same old Charlton". RM quickly started the off the record briefings. A lot of us on here will therefore know the 4 reasons why we sold him (actually I have forgotten one!). The point is, the three I remember were definitely not press conference material, and one is so incendiary I still would not repeat it here. The other two were:
1.£4m was full value for a full back 2. Curbs considered Mills to be a great athlete, but not necessarily going to be a great footballer.
You agree,I'm sure, you couldnt say those things in a press conference but the word quickly went out and there was very little noise about Mills as a result, including in the flourishing VOTV. Now, I suggest that if it is true that Riga did the dirty on RD at Liege and as a result RD does not fully trust him on a long term project, it would be a simple matter to use RM to quietly let it be known. That I believe is the kind of case where RM thinks he can still play a useful role.
You didn't address my "Peeters is cheap" remarks. The point is, that it may be a valid and smart reason. Most of us approve of the policy of developing our own young players; so long as, if we sell them, we get full value. Perhaps RD is extending that strategy to the manager. Get a young turk - who commands a lower salary. Allow him to build his reputation, and in the process take us forward. And - important, this - put a big transfer fee round his neck . So that when he takes us up, and then the PL clubs sniff around, we know that if we have to lose him (as Swansea lost Rodgers) at least RD has been smart enough to make sure we are properly compensated. I would applaud such an approach. And again all it takes is for RM to quietly let it be known that this is what has been put in place.
There is no such thing these days as 'quietly letting things be known'. Twitter, Facebook, SMS, Forums saw an end to that.
Generally a good point, but when you have someone like RM with long experience of the club and its fans, it can still work pretty much as before. Facebook/Twitter/forums simply accelerate the speed with which such content is spread. The Trust is an ideal vehicle for it (But not the only one, as I hasten to add, Henry :-))
But as a player, would you want to sign for a club when there is a possibility that when you leave you could have your name tarnished by an 'old school, non-exec Chairman' which has spread all over Twitter before the ink on your new contract at new club has dried? As much as we all remember the good old days - things change, as do (good?) practices and procedures
Again I take your general point. What worked tactically in 1999 might be more risky today.
However I hope you might in turn agree that the idea of fan communication being limited to the occasional press conference is even more archaic, and patently isn't working.
The only reason I dragged up another person's cv is that you frequently refer to your own. I actually understand why you do it, and am guilty of it myself. I'm just offering the feedback that not everybody takes it in the way it is meant. As Stu of Kunming frequently reminds me.
Not for the first time your post started with an expression of contempt for those who don't see things as clearly as you do; "what planet" etc. Recently you started with "I truly despair". Again, I'm far from perfect but those phrases fuel the polarisation of people into camps, which most of us are not willing to be pushed into. In fact your summary of your current view of RD is pretty much mine. Yet because I understand Weegie's and others response to the PC, I'm apparently on a different planet.
@HenryIrving has already demonstrated how perhaps RD could have explained things better. However as you acknowledge, it isn't RD's strength. But what I find frustrating is that there is a better way to handle such communication, and sitting two seats down from RD was man who knows how to do it, and actually did it regularly during the period of our greatest success. I'm talking about what in politics is called the "off the record briefing", and that is what Richard Murray did regularly.
Take the sale of Danny Mills in 1999. It came soon after our relegation, and the rumbles started, "selling our bright young talent, same old Charlton". RM quickly started the off the record briefings. A lot of us on here will therefore know the 4 reasons why we sold him (actually I have forgotten one!). The point is, the three I remember were definitely not press conference material, and one is so incendiary I still would not repeat it here. The other two were:
1.£4m was full value for a full back 2. Curbs considered Mills to be a great athlete, but not necessarily going to be a great footballer.
You agree,I'm sure, you couldnt say those things in a press conference but the word quickly went out and there was very little noise about Mills as a result, including in the flourishing VOTV. Now, I suggest that if it is true that Riga did the dirty on RD at Liege and as a result RD does not fully trust him on a long term project, it would be a simple matter to use RM to quietly let it be known. That I believe is the kind of case where RM thinks he can still play a useful role.
You didn't address my "Peeters is cheap" remarks. The point is, that it may be a valid and smart reason. Most of us approve of the policy of developing our own young players; so long as, if we sell them, we get full value. Perhaps RD is extending that strategy to the manager. Get a young turk - who commands a lower salary. Allow him to build his reputation, and in the process take us forward. And - important, this - put a big transfer fee round his neck . So that when he takes us up, and then the PL clubs sniff around, we know that if we have to lose him (as Swansea lost Rodgers) at least RD has been smart enough to make sure we are properly compensated. I would applaud such an approach. And again all it takes is for RM to quietly let it be known that this is what has been put in place.
There is no such thing these days as 'quietly letting things be known'. Twitter, Facebook, SMS, Forums saw an end to that.
Generally a good point, but when you have someone like RM with long experience of the club and its fans, it can still work pretty much as before. Facebook/Twitter/forums simply accelerate the speed with which such content is spread. The Trust is an ideal vehicle for it (But not the only one, as I hasten to add, Henry :-))
But as a player, would you want to sign for a club when there is a possibility that when you leave you could have your name tarnished by an 'old school, non-exec Chairman' which has spread all over Twitter before the ink on your new contract at new club has dried? As much as we all remember the good old days - things change, as do (good?) practices and procedures
Again I take your general point. What worked tactically in 1999 might be more risky today.
However I hope you might in turn agree that the idea of fan communication being limited to the occasional press conference is even more archaic, and patently isn't working.
I think this goes back to the old argument about us being fans or customers, and clubs being football clubs or businesses.
I would love to have a running commentary from behind the scenes....who did we try and buy / sign (and for how much), who is trying to get us to sell who, which player(s) spit-roasted an 'aspiring model' on Holiday in Marbs.
But realistically, it is a business - perhaps communication will improve once the season kicks off and we as a club/business no longer want to keep cards so close to chest. The summer is a key strategic time for all clubs, signing the right players at the right cost - why would you risk losing out on an unearthed gem because the G21 or Fan's forum were told a whisper
Don't get me wrong I'm as realistic as most on here and realise we haven't got half of what other clubs may have but saying the aim is to do better than last season? That's not hard is it? If he'd said top half finish then yeah great but just seems the standards are a tad low. I for one won't be happy if we finish 17th next season and yeah it's an improvement but really can't we want and be looking for more than that? Things are not gonna happen overnight I know and I'm looking forward to this new era. But to expect some one come in and say we want to finish top half isn't asking much .
what a load of complete inane rubbish is being talked by "the clever ones" on this thread, do take your heads out of your rear ends, smell the fresh air, enjoy the summer and thank our new owner for ensuring that cafc still exists.
now you lot can flag me, but at least it only took me 3 lines to make my point
what a load of complete inane rubbish is being talked by "the clever ones" on this thread, do take your heads out of your rear ends, smell the fresh air, enjoy the summer and thank our new owner for ensuring that cafc still exists.
now you lot can flag me, but at least it only took me 3 lines to make my point
Note: After being alerted to it, I remove any Flag that is treated as a "dislike", as I did in this case. It seems someone did find something they objected to, but the post was certainly not outside of our rules. The Flag is for content that is outside of the rules, or beyond the pale, as a means to help alert moderators to issues and give everyone a role in setting boundaries. Recently, it worked well on the Ian Wright thread, where a flippant comment that was in poor taste was Flagged by almost everyone almost immediately. The author made amends and everyone moved on. That is what it is for. The Flag is for objectionable content, not for things you disagree with.
"You can't flag a Moderators post"
Need a new thumbs down icon as an expression of dislike to be added here, perhaps?
Comments
The noises coming out of the camp haven’t been the most promising. Our target is to finish fourth bottom? We don’t need many players? Maybe there’s a false perception after our run of form under Riga..? Although he is obviously entitled to such views, I also strongly suspect that RD does not want Poyet to stay for the team’s benefit, but because he’s potentially our most valuable asset.
I’d also like clarification on why we’re handing out long-term contracts to untested players yet the person who’s supposed to guide us, or manager/coach, is given 12 months. I’d guess it’s because of market value for the players, then when a bust up with Peeters happens he receives a relatively small pay-off – that I base on RD’s previous.
My point is that better comms and PR might make you and others change that view. Maybe not but it might.
I just wish everyone on here would keep a lid on the negativity at least until a ball is kicked!! (& I'm not talking about friendlies!)
And as for @Greenie's post - it misses the fundamental point that I believe I am entitled to a critical opinion because of years of emotional investment, which for me carries as much, if not more, weight as Roland's recent financial investment. Or can we only be supporters if we have tons of cash to pour into the club? I did pay my £1 for Ronnie Moore, and have been in Valley Gold since the start, if that helps?!
Change is uncomfortable, I personally am very routine. We have had no choice but to change in recent times because Slater and Jimenez were no longer interested.
We have to accept football has changed a lot since our days in the prem, the Charlton you are talking about is still here. We have a good core fan base and we still have a status as a football league club where it could've gone drastically wrong up until 6 months ago.
I truly believe that we are heading in a decent direction. We have to get past this 'our Charlton' like we are some little village insulated in the English countryside and stuck in a period drama.
Nice reply.
To me though change is not the problem but this change in particular.
In football we are used to owners having two main aims ... success on the pitch or making a name or money for themselves etc, but this new owner's aims appear to be different eg it can be argued using Charlton as footballer farm for the good of a network.
Thats where the identity goes... when the target is not for the club and owner but a network and theory.
Haha oh well I don't know why she would get upset about getting a flag anyway.
You'll find they are largely from Henry and Curb It - sensitive souls clearly.
The only change so far seems to be our owner also owns other clubs around Europe and rather then loaning players from any old random club, we might happen to get more loans from one of the other so called network clubs.
I can understand the wary attitude from some posters as its more unknown due to it being a foreign style/ownership and we might not have heard about many of our signings before they sign for us.
I just simply don't get why it is no longer feeling like Charlton, as everything i respect & that made me fall in love with the club is either still there or actually being strengthened under the new ownership.
I have said all along that any players who impress will move on from Charlton - but that has always been the case. The only change is where they might end up (and frankly, if a big team offers big money for a Charlton player, RD WILL take it - no cutting off noses to spite faces.) We are no more a farm than we ever were as far as I can see. If anything we are coming out better for the arrangement - Reza will be lethal if he can keep his WC form, Buyens is experienced and hardened, Vetokele is a good prospect, Ansah is a gamble but has good pedigree, so I am optimistic.
However I hope you might in turn agree that the idea of fan communication being limited to the occasional press conference is even more archaic, and patently isn't working.
I would love to have a running commentary from behind the scenes....who did we try and buy / sign (and for how much), who is trying to get us to sell who, which player(s) spit-roasted an 'aspiring model' on Holiday in Marbs.
But realistically, it is a business - perhaps communication will improve once the season kicks off and we as a club/business no longer want to keep cards so close to chest. The summer is a key strategic time for all clubs, signing the right players at the right cost - why would you risk losing out on an unearthed gem because the G21 or Fan's forum were told a whisper
now you lot can flag me, but at least it only took me 3 lines to make my point