' Read the papers and not just the red tops' - it wasn't meant to be insulting, just making the point that papers that looked into the background in detail came to similar conclusions as those which preferred to sensationalise the entire matter.
"we live by the system of innocent until proven guilty" do we really. Prostitution is legal ( soliciting isn't) and people swear in the streets, verbally abuse others, deposit litter and commit a myriad of other offences (in the true meaning of the word i.e. they offend ethical norms rather than the law)) for which they are never prosecuted or likely to be prosecuted. But do you really think that these are all matters to which we should turn a blind eye as the perpetrators have not been proven guilty in a court of law. I am not arguing that we need to victimise Allardyce just that he is not the sort of person that a community based club such as Charlton should be doing any business with. I should also point out that when Allardyce was with Bolton and Blackburn they hardly played football in a style that most people would think is the way that the game should be played.
Your quite right the offences you mention should not have been ignored. If someone drops litter or any other myriad of offences then an on the spot fine can be issued to the person commiting the offence. If the person pays the fine they have accepted they are guilt and been punished. If the person protests their innocent they can then have the matter settled in court. No blind eye there are systems in place but the 'perpetrator' has the ability to defend their position. The crucial point being that the person committing the alleged offence can defend their innocence, so the principle of innocence until proven guilty is maintained. I watched a very interesting program about dog littering the other week. A warden issued someone with an on the spot fine for not clearing up after there dog but when challenged could not point to the mess in question, the warden never the less issued the fine and threatened the person with arrest. The person refused to pay and the case was dismissed from court. She activated her RIGHT to defend her innocence and the Council in question offered no evidence to support the fine.
I am missing something and we now want to live in a society where one person can be judge, jury and executioner, yeah theres a country that does that they are getting a lot of bad press at the moment.
In terms of Allardaye im happy to do business with any person who has a clean criminal record and quite frankly I believe in, in most circumstances, believe in redemption in any event.
In terms of his style of football, like my original post said not bothered by it, there are no bonus points for entertaining football and given that we concede, perhaps, more then we should a solid defensive workshop may well come in handy.,
Straw man I'm afraid - I don't want to be judge, jury and executioner, but I do want to be able to express my views. I wouldn't do business with Allardyce (and I wouldn't throw him in a prison cell without due process), you clearly would. I suspect that you like everyone else pick and chose to do business with people using all sorts of criteria other than whether they have a criminal record.
sooooooo.....defensive coaches eh?
If you look at my past comments you will see that I have made the point that we are no good at defending or taking corners and that this is an area where coaching is needed - just not by Allardyce however.
I'll share the blame with @Covered End who prompted my consoling response last night and lit the blue touch paper on this saga. As Henners keeps pointing out it's still a non event, let's move on to Saturday's top six clash with the Bantams.......... @ForeverAddickted where's that flaming match preview
I see in today's papers thay Big Sam is being linked with the US national team - I see our "story" as no more than him saying "someone give me a proper job otherwise I'm stuck taking crap gigs with 3rd tier clubs"
Only it wasn't Sam saying it, it was KR and it was just a "he may".
Other than that all correct.
well at least he got his name right, Big Sam as opposed to Fat Sam in the thread title
I'll stick my neck out and say neither big or fat are on his birth certificate
are you ok Henry, just that you said that at 10.45am too.
I see in today's papers thay Big Sam is being linked with the US national team - I see our "story" as no more than him saying "someone give me a proper job otherwise I'm stuck taking crap gigs with 3rd tier clubs"
Only it wasn't Sam saying it, it was KR and it was just a "he may".
Other than that all correct.
well at least he got his name right, Big Sam as opposed to Fat Sam in the thread title
I'll stick my neck out and say neither big or fat are on his birth certificate
are you ok Henry, just that you said that at 10.45am too.
he's coming in for a coaching 'clinic' so likely a one-off. If KR thinks there is a problem why not hire a permanent defensive coach?
Who say's he thinks he has a problem? He has one of the best english managers at his disposal, why wouldn't you use him to coach the team, always room for improvement.
Lets just say I (and others) don't like Allardyce and would prefer that he stays away from Charlton and football. Eni Aluko is a far better role model for football in general as she demonstrated so eloquently yesterday.
So are the Dalai Lama and Archbishop Desmond Tutu but doubt they would be able to shore up our back 4.
Looking at footballers as role models/ for moral guidance is akin to seeking tips from Donald Trump on international diplomacy and flattering hair dos.
' Read the papers and not just the red tops' - it wasn't meant to be insulting, just making the point that papers that looked into the background in detail came to similar conclusions as those which preferred to sensationalise the entire matter.
"we live by the system of innocent until proven guilty" do we really. Prostitution is legal ( soliciting isn't) and people swear in the streets, verbally abuse others, deposit litter and commit a myriad of other offences (in the true meaning of the word i.e. they offend ethical norms rather than the law)) for which they are never prosecuted or likely to be prosecuted. But do you really think that these are all matters to which we should turn a blind eye as the perpetrators have not been proven guilty in a court of law. I am not arguing that we need to victimise Allardyce just that he is not the sort of person that a community based club such as Charlton should be doing any business with. I should also point out that when Allardyce was with Bolton and Blackburn they hardly played football in a style that most people would think is the way that the game should be played.
I'd settle for promotion if it means the Belgian sells up.
I'd still settle for relegation if it means the Belgians selling up.
I seem to recall people saying 2 years ago that relegation from the Championship didn't matter, as it meant that Roland would be far more likely to sell. That worked out well...
' Read the papers and not just the red tops' - it wasn't meant to be insulting, just making the point that papers that looked into the background in detail came to similar conclusions as those which preferred to sensationalise the entire matter.
"we live by the system of innocent until proven guilty" do we really. Prostitution is legal ( soliciting isn't) and people swear in the streets, verbally abuse others, deposit litter and commit a myriad of other offences (in the true meaning of the word i.e. they offend ethical norms rather than the law)) for which they are never prosecuted or likely to be prosecuted. But do you really think that these are all matters to which we should turn a blind eye as the perpetrators have not been proven guilty in a court of law. I am not arguing that we need to victimise Allardyce just that he is not the sort of person that a community based club such as Charlton should be doing any business with. I should also point out that when Allardyce was with Bolton and Blackburn they hardly played football in a style that most people would think is the way that the game should be played.
Your quite right the offences you mention should not have been ignored. If someone drops litter or any other myriad of offences then an on the spot fine can be issued to the person commiting the offence. If the person pays the fine they have accepted they are guilt and been punished. If the person protests their innocent they can then have the matter settled in court. No blind eye there are systems in place but the 'perpetrator' has the ability to defend their position. The crucial point being that the person committing the alleged offence can defend their innocence, so the principle of innocence until proven guilty is maintained. I watched a very interesting program about dog littering the other week. A warden issued someone with an on the spot fine for not clearing up after there dog but when challenged could not point to the mess in question, the warden never the less issued the fine and threatened the person with arrest. The person refused to pay and the case was dismissed from court. She activated her RIGHT to defend her innocence and the Council in question offered no evidence to support the fine.
I am missing something and we now want to live in a society where one person can be judge, jury and executioner, yeah theres a country that does that they are getting a lot of bad press at the moment.
In terms of Allardaye im happy to do business with any person who has a clean criminal record and quite frankly I believe in, in most circumstances, believe in redemption in any event.
In terms of his style of football, like my original post said not bothered by it, there are no bonus points for entertaining football and given that we concede, perhaps, more then we should a solid defensive workshop may well come in handy.,
Straw man I'm afraid - I don't want to be judge, jury and executioner, but I do want to be able to express my views. I wouldn't do business with Allardyce (and I wouldn't throw him in a prison cell without due process), you clearly would. I suspect that you like everyone else pick and chose to do business with people using all sorts of criteria other than whether they have a criminal record.
sooooooo.....defensive coaches eh?
If you look at my past comments you will see that I have made the point that we are no good at defending or taking corners and that this is an area where coaching is needed - just not by Allardyce however.
and you didn't come up with any viable alternatives (bar a 3 year old list of coaches who's availability and morale standards we have very little info on).....instead just sounded off about how terrible the world is and how terrific your morale compass is.
do you have any viable alternatives to put forward? then we can have a discussion about football.
' Read the papers and not just the red tops' - it wasn't meant to be insulting, just making the point that papers that looked into the background in detail came to similar conclusions as those which preferred to sensationalise the entire matter.
"we live by the system of innocent until proven guilty" do we really. Prostitution is legal ( soliciting isn't) and people swear in the streets, verbally abuse others, deposit litter and commit a myriad of other offences (in the true meaning of the word i.e. they offend ethical norms rather than the law)) for which they are never prosecuted or likely to be prosecuted. But do you really think that these are all matters to which we should turn a blind eye as the perpetrators have not been proven guilty in a court of law. I am not arguing that we need to victimise Allardyce just that he is not the sort of person that a community based club such as Charlton should be doing any business with. I should also point out that when Allardyce was with Bolton and Blackburn they hardly played football in a style that most people would think is the way that the game should be played.
Your quite right the offences you mention should not have been ignored. If someone drops litter or any other myriad of offences then an on the spot fine can be issued to the person commiting the offence. If the person pays the fine they have accepted they are guilt and been punished. If the person protests their innocent they can then have the matter settled in court. No blind eye there are systems in place but the 'perpetrator' has the ability to defend their position. The crucial point being that the person committing the alleged offence can defend their innocence, so the principle of innocence until proven guilty is maintained. I watched a very interesting program about dog littering the other week. A warden issued someone with an on the spot fine for not clearing up after there dog but when challenged could not point to the mess in question, the warden never the less issued the fine and threatened the person with arrest. The person refused to pay and the case was dismissed from court. She activated her RIGHT to defend her innocence and the Council in question offered no evidence to support the fine.
I am missing something and we now want to live in a society where one person can be judge, jury and executioner, yeah theres a country that does that they are getting a lot of bad press at the moment.
In terms of Allardaye im happy to do business with any person who has a clean criminal record and quite frankly I believe in, in most circumstances, believe in redemption in any event.
In terms of his style of football, like my original post said not bothered by it, there are no bonus points for entertaining football and given that we concede, perhaps, more then we should a solid defensive workshop may well come in handy.,
Straw man I'm afraid - I don't want to be judge, jury and executioner, but I do want to be able to express my views. I wouldn't do business with Allardyce (and I wouldn't throw him in a prison cell without due process), you clearly would. I suspect that you like everyone else pick and chose to do business with people using all sorts of criteria other than whether they have a criminal record.
Ive never asked you to stop expressing your views but simply gave a response to your view on something I said. We shall leave it there me thinks.
It appears to me that those who don’t want him around have based it upon their opinion of him as a person rather than his obvious highly successful coaching abilities. I find that quite ridiculous to be honest......let’s give it a go and see where his involvement takes us, after all, come on what harm can it do!
I'd settle for promotion if it means the Belgian sells up.
I'd still settle for relegation if it means the Belgians selling up.
Right on cue!
Apologist.
Head in sand.
Relegation.
You carry on with your blinkered cobblers.
"Just sell the club".
As much as it is a scenario that you would love, we do happen to be 5th in the table. I respectfully suggest my little friend that the only one of us spouting blinkered cobblers is yourself whilst living in your time warp!
I'd settle for promotion if it means the Belgian sells up.
I'd still settle for relegation if it means the Belgians selling up.
Right on cue!
Apologist.
Head in sand.
Relegation.
You carry on with your blinkered cobblers.
"Just sell the club".
As much as it is a scenario that you would love, we do happen to be 5th in the table. I respectfully suggest my little friend that the only one of us spouting blinkered cobblers is yourself whilst living in your time warp!
Love
Al x
Allardyce is not suitable for the job, bring back the master tactician Karel.
' Read the papers and not just the red tops' - it wasn't meant to be insulting, just making the point that papers that looked into the background in detail came to similar conclusions as those which preferred to sensationalise the entire matter.
"we live by the system of innocent until proven guilty" do we really. Prostitution is legal ( soliciting isn't) and people swear in the streets, verbally abuse others, deposit litter and commit a myriad of other offences (in the true meaning of the word i.e. they offend ethical norms rather than the law)) for which they are never prosecuted or likely to be prosecuted. But do you really think that these are all matters to which we should turn a blind eye as the perpetrators have not been proven guilty in a court of law. I am not arguing that we need to victimise Allardyce just that he is not the sort of person that a community based club such as Charlton should be doing any business with. I should also point out that when Allardyce was with Bolton and Blackburn they hardly played football in a style that most people would think is the way that the game should be played.
Your quite right the offences you mention should not have been ignored. If someone drops litter or any other myriad of offences then an on the spot fine can be issued to the person commiting the offence. If the person pays the fine they have accepted they are guilt and been punished. If the person protests their innocent they can then have the matter settled in court. No blind eye there are systems in place but the 'perpetrator' has the ability to defend their position. The crucial point being that the person committing the alleged offence can defend their innocence, so the principle of innocence until proven guilty is maintained. I watched a very interesting program about dog littering the other week. A warden issued someone with an on the spot fine for not clearing up after there dog but when challenged could not point to the mess in question, the warden never the less issued the fine and threatened the person with arrest. The person refused to pay and the case was dismissed from court. She activated her RIGHT to defend her innocence and the Council in question offered no evidence to support the fine.
I am missing something and we now want to live in a society where one person can be judge, jury and executioner, yeah theres a country that does that they are getting a lot of bad press at the moment.
In terms of Allardaye im happy to do business with any person who has a clean criminal record and quite frankly I believe in, in most circumstances, believe in redemption in any event.
In terms of his style of football, like my original post said not bothered by it, there are no bonus points for entertaining football and given that we concede, perhaps, more then we should a solid defensive workshop may well come in handy.,
Straw man I'm afraid - I don't want to be judge, jury and executioner, but I do want to be able to express my views. I wouldn't do business with Allardyce (and I wouldn't throw him in a prison cell without due process), you clearly would. I suspect that you like everyone else pick and chose to do business with people using all sorts of criteria other than whether they have a criminal record.
Ive never asked you to stop expressing your views but simply gave a response to your view on something I said. We shall leave it there me thinks.
No you didn't - but you did suggest I was wanting to "be judge, jury and executioner". Should also have said I rather than we in your last sentence.
Lets just say I (and others) don't like Allardyce and would prefer that he stays away from Charlton and football. Eni Aluko is a far better role model for football in general as she demonstrated so eloquently yesterday.
So are the Dalai Lama and Archbishop Desmond Tutu but doubt they would be able to shore up our back 4.
Looking at footballers as role models/ for moral guidance is akin to seeking tips from Donald Trump on international diplomacy and flattering hair dos.
Just a guess but there is rather a lot in the moral compass between the Dalai Lama/Tutu/the Pope and Allardyce - and some will be in Football and know a little about defence (or be called Chrissy Powell for that matter).
' Read the papers and not just the red tops' - it wasn't meant to be insulting, just making the point that papers that looked into the background in detail came to similar conclusions as those which preferred to sensationalise the entire matter.
"we live by the system of innocent until proven guilty" do we really. Prostitution is legal ( soliciting isn't) and people swear in the streets, verbally abuse others, deposit litter and commit a myriad of other offences (in the true meaning of the word i.e. they offend ethical norms rather than the law)) for which they are never prosecuted or likely to be prosecuted. But do you really think that these are all matters to which we should turn a blind eye as the perpetrators have not been proven guilty in a court of law. I am not arguing that we need to victimise Allardyce just that he is not the sort of person that a community based club such as Charlton should be doing any business with. I should also point out that when Allardyce was with Bolton and Blackburn they hardly played football in a style that most people would think is the way that the game should be played.
Your quite right the offences you mention should not have been ignored. If someone drops litter or any other myriad of offences then an on the spot fine can be issued to the person commiting the offence. If the person pays the fine they have accepted they are guilt and been punished. If the person protests their innocent they can then have the matter settled in court. No blind eye there are systems in place but the 'perpetrator' has the ability to defend their position. The crucial point being that the person committing the alleged offence can defend their innocence, so the principle of innocence until proven guilty is maintained. I watched a very interesting program about dog littering the other week. A warden issued someone with an on the spot fine for not clearing up after there dog but when challenged could not point to the mess in question, the warden never the less issued the fine and threatened the person with arrest. The person refused to pay and the case was dismissed from court. She activated her RIGHT to defend her innocence and the Council in question offered no evidence to support the fine.
I am missing something and we now want to live in a society where one person can be judge, jury and executioner, yeah theres a country that does that they are getting a lot of bad press at the moment.
In terms of Allardaye im happy to do business with any person who has a clean criminal record and quite frankly I believe in, in most circumstances, believe in redemption in any event.
In terms of his style of football, like my original post said not bothered by it, there are no bonus points for entertaining football and given that we concede, perhaps, more then we should a solid defensive workshop may well come in handy.,
Straw man I'm afraid - I don't want to be judge, jury and executioner, but I do want to be able to express my views. I wouldn't do business with Allardyce (and I wouldn't throw him in a prison cell without due process), you clearly would. I suspect that you like everyone else pick and chose to do business with people using all sorts of criteria other than whether they have a criminal record.
Ive never asked you to stop expressing your views but simply gave a response to your view on something I said. We shall leave it there me thinks.
No you didn't - but you did suggest I was wanting to "be judge, jury and executioner". Should also have said I rather than we in your last sentence.
No I did not suggest you wanted to be judge jury and executioner. The sentence I wrote was 'am missing something and we now want to live in a society where one person can be judge, jury and executioner, yeah theres a country that does that they are getting a lot of bad press at the moment.'
This is quite clearly a question not a suggestion or accusation about yourself. Thank you for correcting my bad grammar, porof readings is a major weakness of mine and one ive accepted will never fully be eliminated from my game.
Lets just say I (and others) don't like Allardyce and would prefer that he stays away from Charlton and football. Eni Aluko is a far better role model for football in general as she demonstrated so eloquently yesterday.
So are the Dalai Lama and Archbishop Desmond Tutu but doubt they would be able to shore up our back 4.
Looking at footballers as role models/ for moral guidance is akin to seeking tips from Donald Trump on international diplomacy and flattering hair dos.
Just a guess but there is rather a lot in the moral compass between the Dalai Lama/Tutu/the Pope and Allardyce - and some will be in Football and know a little about defence (or be called Chrissy Powell for that matter).
Don't know about the Pope. Many of them have covered up noncing in the church for years. I would put Big Sam 1-0 up in the morality stakes there.
Chris Powell has gone and unlikely to return under this ownership and even less likely for an additional hoc coaching clinic.
More wishful thinking from Robinson as far as I am concerned. As someone has already said, the word 'clinic' was mentioned. Maybe Allardyce has agreed to do a training session with the defence (big deal). I'd take him as permanent manager though just to piss Palace off and to stop having to listen to Robinson's hogwash.
Comments
Looking at footballers as role models/ for moral guidance is akin to seeking tips from Donald Trump on international diplomacy and flattering hair dos.
Head in sand.
Relegation.
You carry on with your blinkered cobblers.
"Just sell the club".
do you have any viable alternatives to put forward? then we can have a discussion about football.
I find that quite ridiculous to be honest......let’s give it a go and see where his involvement takes us, after all, come on what harm can it do!
Love
Al x
Will certainly make the players listen!
Cables and Katrien sitting in a tree, K I S S I N G.
For a definition of rimming, please feel free to consult Wikipedia or pornhub.
This is quite clearly a question not a suggestion or accusation about yourself. Thank you for correcting my bad grammar, porof readings is a major weakness of mine and one ive accepted will never fully be eliminated from my game.
Chris Powell has gone and unlikely to return under this ownership and even less likely for an additional hoc coaching clinic.
You're ugly!