Id rather see Pigott given a chance than have George back
Interesting that people would rather give a chance to a player who had the worst game in a Charlton shirt I've ever seen, than a player who was technically good (brilliant at times) but needed to make a few adaptions to his physical game.
Maybe Tucudean should rename himself Davies or Smith in order to win favour with the fans.
Millwall at home? A game in which he should never of been thrown in,in the first place,and a game in which all 11 other players on the pitch also didnt turn up.Slightly unfair to single him out for one game,especially as George played 20+ and only made an impression in what 4?
Wolves at home he had a nightmare.
He had three glorious chances in the first half, one chance square on goal from about twelve yards out and he missed kicking the bloody ball!
We are talking about Pigott not George Elfsborg
Erm, excuse me but Tucudean is being talked about.
Cant believe that people are writing Joe Pigott off after just 12 (Twelve) Appearances... Harry Kane was a nobody himself after 12-appearances for Spurs, he'd struggled with loan spells before finally exploding on to the scene last season, no I'm not saying Joe is going to be THAT good but people need to pipe down and just let Joe develop, we all know that if Joe goes on to have a stellar career after being released by Charlton, the same fans that are saying he's crap will be the same fans moaning wanting to know why we sold him in the first place, so bloomin' hush, and give him a chance!!
people on here are writing Pete off after 12 minutes, so 12 games is a lot lol
Id rather see Pigott given a chance than have George back
Interesting that people would rather give a chance to a player who had the worst game in a Charlton shirt I've ever seen, than a player who was technically good (brilliant at times) but needed to make a few adaptions to his physical game.
Maybe Tucudean should rename himself Davies or Smith in order to win favour with the fans.
Millwall at home? A game in which he should never of been thrown in,in the first place,and a game in which all 11 other players on the pitch also didnt turn up.Slightly unfair to single him out for one game,especially as George played 20+ and only made an impression in what 4?
Wolves at home he had a nightmare.
He had three glorious chances in the first half, one chance square on goal from about twelve yards out and he missed kicking the bloody ball!
We are talking about Pigott not George Elfsborg
Erm, excuse me but Tucudean is being talked about.
But pigott was mentioned too, and whom I was suggesting should be given a chance instead of George
Cant believe that people are writing Joe Pigott off after just 12 (Twelve) Appearances... Harry Kane was a nobody himself after 12-appearances for Spurs, he'd struggled with loan spells before finally exploding on to the scene last season, no I'm not saying Joe is going to be THAT good but people need to pipe down and just let Joe develop, we all know that if Joe goes on to have a stellar career after being released by Charlton, the same fans that are saying he's crap will be the same fans moaning wanting to know why we sold him in the first place, so bloomin' hush, and give him a chance!!
Much has been made of the similarities between Joe and Kane, but after his poor debut season Harry worked hard on weights in close season and this year possibly played beneath himself in U21s rather than holiday. Joe, whose family I read are quite well off, tweeted about enjoying his vacation. It's about application and commitment.
Cant believe that people are writing Joe Pigott off after just 12 (Twelve) Appearances... Harry Kane was a nobody himself after 12-appearances for Spurs, he'd struggled with loan spells before finally exploding on to the scene last season, no I'm not saying Joe is going to be THAT good but people need to pipe down and just let Joe develop, we all know that if Joe goes on to have a stellar career after being released by Charlton, the same fans that are saying he's crap will be the same fans moaning wanting to know why we sold him in the first place, so bloomin' hush, and give him a chance!!
Much has been made of the similarities between Joe and Kane, but after his poor debut season Harry worked hard on weights in close season and this year possibly played beneath himself in U21s rather than holiday. Joe, whose family I read are quite well off, tweeted about enjoying his vacation. It's about application and commitment.
Harry Kane did spend a bit of his Holiday in Dubai / Sydney though didnt he...?
Joe Pigott's family might be well off but it doesnt mean that he's spent his whole pre-season on holiday forgetting about what is going on, are we 100% sure that there has been zero application and commitment from Joe this summer, after all he's had to work hard just to get to First Team Level even at Charlton, in todays Footballing day and age, kids get released from clubs every summer in their droves, for Pigott to have survived (and to have received a new Contract only the other year) must mean that he's showing the application and commitment to become a pro-Footballer
Id rather see Pigott given a chance than have George back
Interesting that people would rather give a chance to a player who had the worst game in a Charlton shirt I've ever seen, than a player who was technically good (brilliant at times) but needed to make a few adaptions to his physical game.
Maybe Tucudean should rename himself Davies or Smith in order to win favour with the fans.
Millwall at home? A game in which he should never of been thrown in,in the first place,and a game in which all 11 other players on the pitch also didnt turn up.Slightly unfair to single him out for one game,especially as George played 20+ and only made an impression in what 4?
Wolves at home he had a nightmare.
He had three glorious chances in the first half, one chance square on goal from about twelve yards out and he missed kicking the bloody ball!
We are talking about Pigott not George Elfsborg
Erm, excuse me but Tucudean is being talked about.
But pigott was mentioned too, and whom I was suggesting should be given a chance instead of George
Cant believe that people are writing Joe Pigott off after just 12 (Twelve) Appearances... Harry Kane was a nobody himself after 12-appearances for Spurs, he'd struggled with loan spells before finally exploding on to the scene last season, no I'm not saying Joe is going to be THAT good but people need to pipe down and just let Joe develop, we all know that if Joe goes on to have a stellar career after being released by Charlton, the same fans that are saying he's crap will be the same fans moaning wanting to know why we sold him in the first place, so bloomin' hush, and give him a chance!!
people on here are writing Pete off after 12 minutes, so 12 games is a lot lol
I can't believe people are still mentioning Pigott and Harry Kane in the same threads. I'd love Zak Ansah to be the new Romario too
What is going on with George? Is he with the club? With the current injury crisis up top got a chance of getting into the team. Personally would welcome him back as think we could do a lot worse than him. Also, if I'm not wrong is still relatively young
What is going on with George? Is he with the club? With the current injury crisis up top got a chance of getting into the team. Personally would welcome him back as think we could do a lot worse than him. Also, if I'm not wrong is still relatively young
As far as i am aware he is still on loan at Steau, but has not even been on the bench recently(could be injured)
Is he back at CAFC now? He is according to that ever trustworthy and reliable source that is wikipedia. Maybe hes the answer to our goalscoring problems whilst Mak, Vetokele and Watt rediscover their fitness and form respectively.
Didnt Sue Parkes say that because he completed an International Loan his Contract with Charlton became null and void whilst that loan was ongoing because he's now registered under the Romanian FA (means at he'll have to stay on loan @ another club out there until the summer if he wants to play)
Guess it was the same with Reza... His first loan ended for some reason and we all thought he was coming back, he then joined another Kuwaiti (?) and he was hated even more but by the looks of things, he came back when he did because it was the earliest he could come back
Didnt Sue Parkes say that because he completed an International Loan his Contract with Charlton became null and void whilst that loan was ongoing because he's now registered under the Romanian FA (means at he'll have to stay on loan @ another club out there until the summer if he wants to play)
Guess it was the same with Reza... His first loan ended for some reason and we all thought he was coming back, he then joined another Kuwaiti (?) and he was hated even more but by the looks of things, he came back when he did because it was the earliest he could come back
I think the issue relates to the transfer window as well as the contract. Contracts can be changed, but he can't sign for Charlton (in effect what he'd need to do) outside of a transfer window.
Isn't this one of these stupid situations that will eventually cause a European Court ruling that this rule is in breach of human rights or employment law or something? That a club can pay wages and yet not be allowed to use someone for the purpose for which he was employed , or something like that...
Well like 'KillerandFlash' says, surely it is breaking European employment law to pay a chap in line with his contract as a professional football but stop him actually working?
Well like 'KillerandFlash' says, surely it is breaking European employment law to pay a chap in line with his contract as a professional football but stop him actually working?
No one's stopping him from working. it's got to be lawful for the football authorities to control player registrations that prevent particular players appearing for particular clubs at a given time, just as you can agree short-term non-compete clauses in any contract.
He's (presumably) being paid regardless according to his contract. He can play for such clubs as the rules allow - but it appears that excludes Charlton who have contracted to transfer his registration for a consideration (fee and/or wages). All this would mean is that you can't reverse such a deal outside of a transfer window.
Well like 'KillerandFlash' says, surely it is breaking European employment law to pay a chap in line with his contract as a professional football but stop him actually working?
No one's stopping him from working. it's got to be lawful for the football authorities to control player registrations that prevent particular players appearing for particular clubs at a given time, just as you can agree short-term non-compete clauses in any contract.
He's (presumably) being paid regardless according to his contract. He can play for such clubs as the rules allow - but it appears that excludes Charlton who have contracted to transfer his registration for a consideration (fee and/or wages). All this would mean is that you can't reverse such a deal outside of a transfer window.
The whole concepts of transfer windows or restricting the number of clubs you can play for during a season are bound to be challenged at some time, in no other field do you have these rules...
Comments
Joe Pigott's family might be well off but it doesnt mean that he's spent his whole pre-season on holiday forgetting about what is going on, are we 100% sure that there has been zero application and commitment from Joe this summer, after all he's had to work hard just to get to First Team Level even at Charlton, in todays Footballing day and age, kids get released from clubs every summer in their droves, for Pigott to have survived (and to have received a new Contract only the other year) must mean that he's showing the application and commitment to become a pro-Footballer
#FAKT
Guess it was the same with Reza... His first loan ended for some reason and we all thought he was coming back, he then joined another Kuwaiti (?) and he was hated even more but by the looks of things, he came back when he did because it was the earliest he could come back
Saw him at his debut ? At Brentford, two bob
He's (presumably) being paid regardless according to his contract. He can play for such clubs as the rules allow - but it appears that excludes Charlton who have contracted to transfer his registration for a consideration (fee and/or wages). All this would mean is that you can't reverse such a deal outside of a transfer window.