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

Looks like Ben Alnwick will be signing for Riga...

...been on trial at Blackpool all week, playing for them today.

Good luck to him.
«13

Comments

  • edited July 2014
    did he not play for Bradford last week
    assume it did not work out for him
  • wish him well for 44 games next year.
  • edited July 2014
    Wish we had him alongside Pope he's on a free why are we not in for him he knows us were near home what more can he want...
  • Wish we had him alongside Pope he's on a free why are we not in for him he knows us were near home what more can he want...

    We're waiting to swoop for Thuram. He's a French international!
  • Good luck to Ben. He did well for us, does seem a shame not to try for him.
  • Any update on the west ham keeper rumour?
  • Kap10 said:

    Any update on the west ham keeper rumour?

    Brighton have offered £1m for Stockdale at Fulham, so lost interest in Henderson, could it be we have agreed a deal for him?
  • Wouldn't want Henderson. Would of took Alnwick every day of the week. Good luck to him at Blackpool with Riga, deserves a fair crack of the whip, very good keeper.
  • Sponsored links:


  • A very good keeper and would have him back tomorrow if he is well. Wish him well wherever he goes.
  • Wish we could get stockdale. Then I would be very excited.

  • Do not think the club knew about Ben Alnwick's personal matters when he was sold. All things considered, in the absence of hard evidence to the contrary, I would suggest it is unfair to say they did know at the point of sale of BA.

    From a business perspective it seemed reasonable to sell one of BA and Ben Hamer if agreement of a new contract with either did not appear viable. Especially if the board were being told by people they trust that they had two good goalkeepers at The Valley plus the availability of another (Thuram).
  • I don't think BA was sold, although we don't know.

    In any event, it's a bizarre way to deal with the risk of him leaving - which actually expired within 24/48 hours with the deadline - to allow or encourage him to leave. The point is that he was our first-choice and current goalkeeper, because Hamer was injured.

    Thuram had already demonstrated his issues at Middlesbrough - I got a text from behind the goal after 45 minutes calling him a clown - and Pope was out on loan. By all accounts even the directors were laughing about Thuram at the VIP meeting, so why would you leave yourself with him as your only senior goalkeeper for the Wigan and Birmingham games already knowing that he was a liability. Only because the owner had insisted.
  • All of which might stack up, if it wasn't common knowledge at the time that there was a big row about the fact that Powell played Alnwick over Thuram at Doncaster and more generally that RD had told Thuram he would play at Charlton.

    I don't know why Alnwick dropped out of the Boro game so maybe there is something in the prior knowledge argument relating to that. My assumption has always been that Powell picked Thuram under pressure and Alnwick developed a diplomatic injury because he wasn't prepared to sit on the bench in that situation. But perhaps that is unfair.

    However, Alnwick then returned for the two cup games before Doncaster. This may have been acceptable to RD because of the traditionally lower status of cup games on the continent and to some extent here now as well? Around the Doncaster game in transfer week, however, there was chaos and this was reflected in the very poor performance and attitude of the players. I was there and I know what I saw.

    I was surprised, talking to my TG source, at the stress placed on the departure of Alnwick as a factor in the breakdown in relations between CP and RD. Further, I think Alnwick only signed to the end of the season at Orient anyway, which makes no sense of the two-year argument. My understanding has been that he was removed by RD to force Powell to play Thuram, which initially he did, even when Hamer was on the bench against QPR.

    As time went on, however, it became clear that he couldn't accommodate RD's team selection preferences without compromising himself, as well as the team, hence the SUFC showdown.


    I saw it slightly differently

    As I said on the other thread Murray never explicitly said anything inappropriate at the Counting House. It was more an impression he gave when telling the story about Alnwick's unexpected absence on the day of the Middlesbrough game. Given the subsequent departure from Orient this takes on a bigger significance and appears more credible in my view . Remember that Hamer was also injured at this point and Phillips was on the bench at the Riverside . If Alnwick 'wasn't prepared' to sit on the bench why did he return for the next three games? Thuram was not eligible to play in the Oxford game as he hadn't been signed in time for the Third round.

    At the VIP meeting a couple of weeks later Murray spoke about the reasons that Thuram was signed and told us Alnwick's agent didn't give Charlton much time in deciding to offer a two year contract because his client had other options . I didn't take notes at these meetings so I am working from memory.

    From Orient contacts I have I understand that although his contract for Orient was only for the end of the season there was a trigger clause of a second year in the event of him playing a certain amount of games.
  • from another thread:

    Richard J said:

    thenewbie said:

    Wages would seem the most likely complication. If we are signing a player who has been on PL wages it seems unlikely it will be to sit on the bench. But I agree we need to sign an experienced keeper. Alnwick might have been ideal, except that I can't imagine he would get back involved with RD.

    Why would he have any beef with RD? Genuine question. Seems that he was out of the game very shortly afterwards (for whatever reason) so he can hardly claim to have been frozen out. He was sold but that has to be better than Thuram coming in and being frozen out and not given a chance elsewhere - and Riga proved that if our players were the better option over loanees, it would be them playing. Swings and roundabouts as far as I'm concerned - if Alnwick has a grudge against RD then more fool him, frankly.
    It's not really about a grudge though, is it? RD wanted him replaced in goal by Thuram, who in the general view was not very good but had been told he would play. Alnwick was shipped out in short order after the Doncaster game very much against the manager's wishes - I'm told by a member of the management that they regarded him as the club's best goalkeeper at the time. There was a view within the playing side of the club at that point that it had degenerated into a circus.

    Leaving aside who said what to whom and why, and the rights and wrongs, you just wouldn't think it prudent to put yourself back under that authority, would you, if you had other choices? And I doubt if RD would want to reverse himself either.

    What happened after he went to Orient was personal, unpredicted and is nothing to do with the background to his departure from Charlton.
    Unpredicted? Not according to RM
    I don't think we can have that discussion, but if RM is suggesting for a moment that he was unloaded because of that it would be despicable behaviour by the club, wouldn't it?

    It was certainly the impression Murray gave at the Trust meeting at the Counting House. He didn't explicitly say that.

    At the VIP meeting a couple of weeks later both RM and KM spoke of Alnwick's agent demanding a two year contract or he would pursue other options , so the club allowed him to join the O's . Powell was alongside RM when he said this. Murray said that the reason Thuram was signed was because both Alnwick and Hamer could be out of contract during the transfer window and could leave at short notice.

    Absolutely typical Murray these days - two versions depending on who he thought was listening. How could the keepers have been out of contract during the January transfer window? Why loan out Pope then? Why didn't the same issue apply to Morrison/Dervite/Cort?

    Did he tell the one about Powell having no transfer targets of his own in January as well at the Counting House or was he still on the "no money" available line at that point? No targets, despite the long article Prothero had recently published about all the lists he kept, and despite the names Powell put forward and RD rejected . . .
    I have no desire to get involved with the discussions about Alnwick's personal issues but I would suggest that with two keepers having less than a year left on their contracts it made sense to get someone else in - I'm also not going to argue that Thuram was any good, but this was not known at the time.

    Thuram could have become permanent in the summer when the two Bens left and if that was a possibility then having his for a few months before was sensible.

    Either or both if the two Bens could have left in the January, The same logic as Kermorgant and Stephens could have been applied - they leave for nothing in a few months or we get a fee for them now. In fact, I assumed that it would have been the clubs intention to sell at least one of them to avoid them both leaving on a free. I assumed that would be Hamer (but he was injured) as he has the higher profile and, like others on here, I though Alnwick was the better goalkeeper. I was disappointed that we sold Alnwick, as I had hoped that he would have stayed even if Hamer had moved on.

    I am inclined to believe that the club knew something about his personal issues, or the player's agent was asking for way too much money, otherwise why wouldn't they have given him a two year contract and let Hamer move on if felt the desire to do so?
    For clarification, the above post, that was moved over to here from another thread, was written by me.

    AFKA, I started writing it before you asked for us to take this discussion away from the Henderson signing thread - otherwise I would have heeded your request. I would also have edited the typos had you not moved it. ;-)
  • edited July 2014
    Richard J said:

    All of which might stack up, if it wasn't common knowledge at the time that there was a big row about the fact that Powell played Alnwick over Thuram at Doncaster and more generally that RD had told Thuram he would play at Charlton.

    I don't know why Alnwick dropped out of the Boro game so maybe there is something in the prior knowledge argument relating to that. My assumption has always been that Powell picked Thuram under pressure and Alnwick developed a diplomatic injury because he wasn't prepared to sit on the bench in that situation. But perhaps that is unfair.

    However, Alnwick then returned for the two cup games before Doncaster. This may have been acceptable to RD because of the traditionally lower status of cup games on the continent and to some extent here now as well? Around the Doncaster game in transfer week, however, there was chaos and this was reflected in the very poor performance and attitude of the players. I was there and I know what I saw.

    I was surprised, talking to my TG source, at the stress placed on the departure of Alnwick as a factor in the breakdown in relations between CP and RD. Further, I think Alnwick only signed to the end of the season at Orient anyway, which makes no sense of the two-year argument. My understanding has been that he was removed by RD to force Powell to play Thuram, which initially he did, even when Hamer was on the bench against QPR.

    As time went on, however, it became clear that he couldn't accommodate RD's team selection preferences without compromising himself, as well as the team, hence the SUFC showdown.


    I saw it slightly differently

    As I said on the other thread Murray never explicitly said anything inappropriate at the Counting House. It was more an impression he gave when telling the story about Alnwick's unexpected absence on the day of the Middlesbrough game. Given the subsequent departure from Orient this takes on a bigger significance and appears more credible in my view . Remember that Hamer was also injured at this point and Phillips was on the bench at the Riverside . If Alnwick 'wasn't prepared' to sit on the bench why did he return for the next three games? Thuram was not eligible to play in the Oxford game as he hadn't been signed in time for the Third round.

    At the VIP meeting a couple of weeks later Murray spoke about the reasons that Thuram was signed and told us Alnwick's agent didn't give Charlton much time in deciding to offer a two year contract because his client had other options . I didn't take notes at these meetings so I am working from memory.

    From Orient contacts I have I understand that although his contract for Orient was only for the end of the season there was a trigger clause of a second year in the event of him playing a certain amount of games.
    Good point about Oxford. I'd forgotten that. It also served to make BA the incumbent again, which was useful all round. Alnwick wasn't asked to sit on the bench for the three games after Boro, so I don't get your point.

    However, I do believe there was a confrontation between RD/Powell over Alnwick's selection at Doncaster and this was point at which the relationship became untenable. As someone close to events said to me: "Alex Ferguson couldn't have managed his way out of the situation with RD."
  • Was Doncaster the game when Yann refused to play - certainly a lot of turmoil in Powell's camp at that time
  • Sponsored links:


  • Debatable whether he played, but he was on the pitch all right.
  • Funny how no other network clubs sacked their managers / coaches mid season a couple of months after being taken over. Not researched it but I haven't heard of any other network club "turning into a circus" or coaches refusing to play network loan players on a point of principle?! Alcorcun were in danger of relegation to the Spanish third tier in January / February but put together a run that left them only a few points short of the play-offs! And the Hungarian side won their cup.
    North London addick shared a very comprehensive and well sourced view of the chaos created by Kermorgant which some choose to challenge or ignore.
    Bottom line is the club was in a relegation fight and key players wanted out. Duchatelet pulled in Riga who secured results with the squad and kept us up. Around twenty players (loan and out of contract) have left the club and we are in a very different place with a squad made up of academy players and network signings.
    This latest signing shows that budget is not an issue now and that the clear objective is to put together a squad with no obvious weak positions (on paper) even though only one player has been signed with a fee involved.
  • PL54 said:

    Was Doncaster the game when Yann refused to play - certainly a lot of turmoil in Powell's camp at that time

    No. He played that night at Doncaster.
  • We stayed up... All the rest is noise!
  • edited July 2014

    We stayed up... All the rest is noise!

    I'm sure the junior employees who were made redundant to save money this summer will be glad to hear it, especially as "budget is not an issue now". But haven't you been telling us all year that it is the major issue because of FFP?

    We move on in hope, because that is the nature of football fans, but we don't forget the past and we particularly shouldn't allow Richard Murray to rewrite history.

    Why is Murray so scared of Katrien Meire meeting Peter Varney, do you think? Probably because he knows his revisionist history of the last six years will collapse like a house of cards.
  • Richard J said:

    All of which might stack up, if it wasn't common knowledge at the time that there was a big row about the fact that Powell played Alnwick over Thuram at Doncaster and more generally that RD had told Thuram he would play at Charlton.

    I don't know why Alnwick dropped out of the Boro game so maybe there is something in the prior knowledge argument relating to that. My assumption has always been that Powell picked Thuram under pressure and Alnwick developed a diplomatic injury because he wasn't prepared to sit on the bench in that situation. But perhaps that is unfair.

    However, Alnwick then returned for the two cup games before Doncaster. This may have been acceptable to RD because of the traditionally lower status of cup games on the continent and to some extent here now as well? Around the Doncaster game in transfer week, however, there was chaos and this was reflected in the very poor performance and attitude of the players. I was there and I know what I saw.

    I was surprised, talking to my TG source, at the stress placed on the departure of Alnwick as a factor in the breakdown in relations between CP and RD. Further, I think Alnwick only signed to the end of the season at Orient anyway, which makes no sense of the two-year argument. My understanding has been that he was removed by RD to force Powell to play Thuram, which initially he did, even when Hamer was on the bench against QPR.

    As time went on, however, it became clear that he couldn't accommodate RD's team selection preferences without compromising himself, as well as the team, hence the SUFC showdown.


    I saw it slightly differently

    As I said on the other thread Murray never explicitly said anything inappropriate at the Counting House. It was more an impression he gave when telling the story about Alnwick's unexpected absence on the day of the Middlesbrough game. Given the subsequent departure from Orient this takes on a bigger significance and appears more credible in my view . Remember that Hamer was also injured at this point and Phillips was on the bench at the Riverside . If Alnwick 'wasn't prepared' to sit on the bench why did he return for the next three games? Thuram was not eligible to play in the Oxford game as he hadn't been signed in time for the Third round.

    At the VIP meeting a couple of weeks later Murray spoke about the reasons that Thuram was signed and told us Alnwick's agent didn't give Charlton much time in deciding to offer a two year contract because his client had other options . I didn't take notes at these meetings so I am working from memory.

    From Orient contacts I have I understand that although his contract for Orient was only for the end of the season there was a trigger clause of a second year in the event of him playing a certain amount of games.
    Good point about Oxford. I'd forgotten that. It also served to make BA the incumbent again, which was useful all round. Alnwick wasn't asked to sit on the bench for the three games after Boro, so I don't get your point.

    However, I do believe there was a confrontation between RD/Powell over Alnwick's selection at Doncaster and this was point at which the relationship became untenable. As someone close to events said to me: "Alex Ferguson couldn't have managed his way out of the situation with RD."


    My point is that Alnwick didn't refuse to sit on the bench at Boro because he genuinely was indisposed for whatever reason and then returned to the team for the next three matches. I do not claim to be in the know and can only speculate about what happened at or in the aftermath of the Doncaster game , but I do believe that Thuram's first appearance was unavoidable.

    Remember Hamer had played in the original Cup game against Oxford the previous Tuesday and then got injured again in training .Interestingly Pope was on the bench that night but had departed for York before the weekend. Surely Powell would have delayed his loan if both Alnwick and Hamer were unavailable .
  • Richard J said:

    Richard J said:

    All of which might stack up, if it wasn't common knowledge at the time that there was a big row about the fact that Powell played Alnwick over Thuram at Doncaster and more generally that RD had told Thuram he would play at Charlton.

    I don't know why Alnwick dropped out of the Boro game so maybe there is something in the prior knowledge argument relating to that. My assumption has always been that Powell picked Thuram under pressure and Alnwick developed a diplomatic injury because he wasn't prepared to sit on the bench in that situation. But perhaps that is unfair.

    However, Alnwick then returned for the two cup games before Doncaster. This may have been acceptable to RD because of the traditionally lower status of cup games on the continent and to some extent here now as well? Around the Doncaster game in transfer week, however, there was chaos and this was reflected in the very poor performance and attitude of the players. I was there and I know what I saw.

    I was surprised, talking to my TG source, at the stress placed on the departure of Alnwick as a factor in the breakdown in relations between CP and RD. Further, I think Alnwick only signed to the end of the season at Orient anyway, which makes no sense of the two-year argument. My understanding has been that he was removed by RD to force Powell to play Thuram, which initially he did, even when Hamer was on the bench against QPR.

    As time went on, however, it became clear that he couldn't accommodate RD's team selection preferences without compromising himself, as well as the team, hence the SUFC showdown.


    I saw it slightly differently

    As I said on the other thread Murray never explicitly said anything inappropriate at the Counting House. It was more an impression he gave when telling the story about Alnwick's unexpected absence on the day of the Middlesbrough game. Given the subsequent departure from Orient this takes on a bigger significance and appears more credible in my view . Remember that Hamer was also injured at this point and Phillips was on the bench at the Riverside . If Alnwick 'wasn't prepared' to sit on the bench why did he return for the next three games? Thuram was not eligible to play in the Oxford game as he hadn't been signed in time for the Third round.

    At the VIP meeting a couple of weeks later Murray spoke about the reasons that Thuram was signed and told us Alnwick's agent didn't give Charlton much time in deciding to offer a two year contract because his client had other options . I didn't take notes at these meetings so I am working from memory.

    From Orient contacts I have I understand that although his contract for Orient was only for the end of the season there was a trigger clause of a second year in the event of him playing a certain amount of games.
    Good point about Oxford. I'd forgotten that. It also served to make BA the incumbent again, which was useful all round. Alnwick wasn't asked to sit on the bench for the three games after Boro, so I don't get your point.

    However, I do believe there was a confrontation between RD/Powell over Alnwick's selection at Doncaster and this was point at which the relationship became untenable. As someone close to events said to me: "Alex Ferguson couldn't have managed his way out of the situation with RD."


    My point is that Alnwick didn't refuse to sit on the bench at Boro because he genuinely was indisposed for whatever reason and then returned to the team for the next three matches. I do not claim to be in the know and can only speculate about what happened at or in the aftermath of the Doncaster game , but I do believe that Thuram's first appearance was unavoidable.

    Remember Hamer had played in the original Cup game against Oxford the previous Tuesday and then got injured again in training .Interestingly Pope was on the bench that night but had departed for York before the weekend. Surely Powell would have delayed his loan if both Alnwick and Hamer were unavailable .
    Or if he had concerns about either or both leaving during the transfer window.
  • We stayed up... All the rest is noise!

    I'm sure the junior employees who were made redundant to save money this summer will be glad to hear it, especially as "budget is not an issue now". But haven't you been telling us all year that it is the major issue because of FFP?

    We move on in hope, because that is the nature of football fans, but we don't forget the past and we particularly shouldn't allow Richard Murray to rewrite history.

    Why is Murray so scared of Katrien Meire meeting Peter Varney, do you think? Probably because he knows his revisionist history of the last six years will collapse like a house of cards.
    Hmmm.

    Wednesday evening around the Directors' Box area could be interesting ( If Ebbsfleet has a DB !)

Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out!