Other than the lack of LB cover we have enough players. You can argue about the quality and age profile, but the numbers are fine
Whether our squad is physically tough and resilient enough is another matter, though the major injuries likes the ones for Clarke, JFC, Cullen and Igor have to be considered more bad luck than anything else
Someone explain to me what getting players injured every game has to do with Roland?
Our squad is nowhere near as small as people make out. If some other L1 teams had the injuries we’ve had they would have been close to not fulfilling fixtures
Bringing players back from injury too soon because of inadequate cover Page being a case in point which has been a recurrent theme throughout the Douchbag's reign. Bauer, Pearce. Reeves, Bielik, Fosu, Ward are others that have had to be used sooner than ideal following injury. And let's not forget Vetokele's career was nearly ended.
From what I've seen of him so far this season I thought it had!
Mind you, if Taylor and Karlan are out, he may well start Saturday.
It seems to me that the lack of longer term first team ambition has meant we are constantly looking to sign older players or players that have had previous injury problems that can’t get long term deals. I’ve got no evidence to back this up though, it’s just my overall feeling.
All our players are re furbished stock from EBay, that's why they keep breaking down. Been clocked and well used by one careful owner !
Really? Because I would argue that Roland doesn’t have much impact on this, if at all. This season we have been incredibly unlucky with injuries.
Cullen isn’t refurbished, Forster-Caskey neither, Grant hasn’t suffered with injuries previously, Taylor has played 65 games since the start of last season, Pratley has played regularly throughout his career.
I can probably name some more but the point is, Roland is to blame and the reason for a lot of what has happened to us recently, but injuries to our squad this season just isn’t one of them.
A lot of injuries are sheer bad luck but there are a lot of cloggers in League 1. How did Thompson get away with so much last night and then Jackett had the temerity to complain
Someone explain to me what getting players injured every game has to do with Roland?
Our squad is nowhere near as small as people make out. If some other L1 teams had the injuries we’ve had they would have been close to not fulfilling fixtures
This 100%, Roland getting blamed for absolutely everything is getting so boring.
He’s the only reason we are in League One, from which everything else flows.
I’ve lost count of the number of times in the last 50 years we’ve had an “unprecedented” injury crisis. People just don’t remember them year on year.
Not everything flows from Roland and being in League one is completely irrelevant to getting an injury crisis. It could happen to any team in any league.
Roland is a wanker who is ruining the club, but suggesting everything stems from his ownership is ridiculous.
25 different players have played league football for Charlton this season.
Lack of experience yes. Small squad, no.
Some of those 25 are nowhere near ready and have been used in desperation.
They are U18 or U23 players not first team squad players who are 'fit for purpose.'
If you are talking about players 'fit for purpose' then it is a small squad.
But is that any different to most clubs in this division?
I doubt there are too many league one sides with 25 seasoned pros in their squad. Clubs at this level cannot afford huge squads, so i'd guess the vast majority have quite a few academy kids in there.
Portsmouth for example have used 8 players who are 23 and under this season and it isn't hurting them.
25 different players have played league football for Charlton this season.
Lack of experience yes. Small squad, no.
Some of those 25 are nowhere near ready and have been used in desperation.
They are U18 or U23 players not first team squad players who are 'fit for purpose.'
If you are talking about players 'fit for purpose' then it is a small squad.
But is that any different to most clubs in this division?
I doubt there are too many league one sides with 25 seasoned pros in their squad. Clubs at this level cannot afford huge squads, so i'd guess the vast majority have quite a few academy kids in there.
Portsmouth for example have used 8 players who are 23 and under this season and it isn't hurting them.
Our squad is reliant on kids simply because so many of the older pros are injury prone and have come to us with a history of being so and/or lacking match fitness. Luton (31 out of their last 33 points) have 11 players who have played in at least 20 of their 24 League games. By comparison, we have just 5 that have done so.
25 different players have played league football for Charlton this season.
Lack of experience yes. Small squad, no.
Some of those 25 are nowhere near ready and have been used in desperation.
They are U18 or U23 players not first team squad players who are 'fit for purpose.'
If you are talking about players 'fit for purpose' then it is a small squad.
But is that any different to most clubs in this division?
I doubt there are too many league one sides with 25 seasoned pros in their squad. Clubs at this level cannot afford huge squads, so i'd guess the vast majority have quite a few academy kids in there.
Portsmouth for example have used 8 players who are 23 and under this season and it isn't hurting them.
Our squad is reliant on kids simply because so many of the older pros are injury prone and have come to us with a history of being so and/or lacking match fitness. Luton (31 out of their last 33 points) have 11 players who have played in at least 20 of their 24 League games. By comparison, we have just 5 that have done so.
Agreed, it's not the size of our squad but the lack of physical resilience which has been the biggest issue in recent years. At this level you expect to have players who CAN cope with playing twice a week
25 different players have played league football for Charlton this season.
Lack of experience yes. Small squad, no.
Some of those 25 are nowhere near ready and have been used in desperation.
They are U18 or U23 players not first team squad players who are 'fit for purpose.'
If you are talking about players 'fit for purpose' then it is a small squad.
But is that any different to most clubs in this division?
I doubt there are too many league one sides with 25 seasoned pros in their squad. Clubs at this level cannot afford huge squads, so i'd guess the vast majority have quite a few academy kids in there.
Portsmouth for example have used 8 players who are 23 and under this season and it isn't hurting them.
Our squad is reliant on kids simply because so many of the older pros are injury prone and have come to us with a history of being so and/or lacking match fitness. Luton (31 out of their last 33 points) have 11 players who have played in at least 20 of their 24 League games. By comparison, we have just 5 that have done so.
Yes we've had a million injuries but what 'kids' are we heavily relying on this season?
Grant, Aribo and Dijksteel are the ones who've featured regularly but they have over 200 appearances between them so i wouldn't consider them to be kids. Then we have Lapslie who yes fair play is new (and young) but has been in and out of the side.
Then we have Bielik and Cullen also U23 but they would probably walk into most sides in this division.
It's not as if we're playing 5-6 teenagers each week.
25 different players have played league football for Charlton this season.
Lack of experience yes. Small squad, no.
Some of those 25 are nowhere near ready and have been used in desperation.
They are U18 or U23 players not first team squad players who are 'fit for purpose.'
If you are talking about players 'fit for purpose' then it is a small squad.
By the 1st September, we had a bigger squad than Shrewsbury who played 9 games in a row last season with the same starting 11. The Shitweasel Douchebag is a nightmare but other than Ward and Bielik have any of the other players brought to the club in the last two years had injuries prior to signing ?
Roland Duchatelet is the reason we are in League 1 But can't see how he is to blame for the injuries other than he has the Flemish/ Walloon curse like the Midas touch but the polar opposite, which means that we can't get through matches without at least 2 injuries per match.
Morgan Fox may of been bang average but I can only remember him missing one game through sickness in his last 2 seasons at the valley.
I think the fact that JFC, Reeves, Page, Clarke, Cullen and Ward are all five nineish and not natural athletes, means they are playing on the edge in a fairly brutal league with precious little protection from poor refs. Other sides get extra protection by getting us carded and acting hurt when clearly not. We need to recruit bigger more athletic players and be more cynical in 50/50s.
I think the fact that JFC, Reeves, Page, Clarke, Cullen and Ward are all five nineish and not natural athletes, means they are playing on the edge in a fairly brutal league with precious little protection from poor refs. Other sides get extra protection by getting us carded and acting hurt when clearly not. We need to recruit bigger more athletic players and be more cynical in 50/50s.
We’re also missing the presence that the mighty Nabby Sarr brings to the table.
I think the fact that JFC, Reeves, Page, Clarke, Cullen and Ward are all five nineish and not natural athletes, means they are playing on the edge in a fairly brutal league with precious little protection from poor refs. Other sides get extra protection by getting us carded and acting hurt when clearly not. We need to recruit bigger more athletic players and be more cynical in 50/50s.
I don't agree with the "Not natural athletes" part. The amount of athleticism required in the modern game is higher than it has ever been. Height is not necessarily a factor in that.
That being said, trade offs are made for good technical players versus big, imposing lumps. And we have decided to go for the former constantly (which I think is the right choice in the long term). To get smaller, more technical players to play in League One you need something to give, either they're injury prone, lacking first team football, not fully developed physically (Lapslie), or they're on the smaller side, or a combination thereof.
I think what we're seeing is the result of some bad luck and some trade-offs. I don't think our injury list is any worse than it was this time last year, when, if memory serves, we had something like 12 senior players out at once.
I think the fact that JFC, Reeves, Page, Clarke, Cullen and Ward are all five nineish and not natural athletes, means they are playing on the edge in a fairly brutal league with precious little protection from poor refs. Other sides get extra protection by getting us carded and acting hurt when clearly not. We need to recruit bigger more athletic players and be more cynical in 50/50s.
I don't agree with the "Not natural athletes" part. The amount of athleticism required in the modern game is higher than it has ever been. Height is not necessarily a factor in that.
That being said, trade offs are made for good technical players versus big, imposing lumps. And we have decided to go for the former constantly (which I think is the right choice in the long term). To get smaller, more technical players to play in League One you need something to give, either they're injury prone, lacking first team football, not fully developed physically (Lapslie), or they're on the smaller side, or a combination thereof.
I think what we're seeing is the result of some bad luck and some trade-offs. I don't think our injury list is any worse than it was this time last year, when, if memory serves, we had something like 12 senior players out at once.
Sorry to disagree but can you advise another sport they might be suited to? Apart from Page none are particularly quick, so are vulnerable to clumsy challenges or avoidance that might stretch their physicality. I am their size and my sport was rowing, not a great fit for a relative midget but none show the mental toughness to win a regatta. Unlike, say Duracell bunny Lapslie, who declared himself fit when clearly wasn't.
I think the fact that JFC, Reeves, Page, Clarke, Cullen and Ward are all five nineish and not natural athletes, means they are playing on the edge in a fairly brutal league with precious little protection from poor refs. Other sides get extra protection by getting us carded and acting hurt when clearly not. We need to recruit bigger more athletic players and be more cynical in 50/50s.
I don't agree with the "Not natural athletes" part. The amount of athleticism required in the modern game is higher than it has ever been. Height is not necessarily a factor in that.
That being said, trade offs are made for good technical players versus big, imposing lumps. And we have decided to go for the former constantly (which I think is the right choice in the long term). To get smaller, more technical players to play in League One you need something to give, either they're injury prone, lacking first team football, not fully developed physically (Lapslie), or they're on the smaller side, or a combination thereof.
I think what we're seeing is the result of some bad luck and some trade-offs. I don't think our injury list is any worse than it was this time last year, when, if memory serves, we had something like 12 senior players out at once.
Sorry to disagree but can you advise another sport they might be suited to? Apart from Page none are particularly quick, so are vulnerable to clumsy challenges or avoidance that might stretch their physicality. I am their size and my sport was rowing, not a great fit for a relative midget but none show the mental toughness to win a regatta. Unlike, say Duracell bunny Lapslie, who declared himself fit when clearly wasn't.
Actually this is the one I would challenge @Sage on, knowing that you literally do this shit for a living, and respecting your opinion as such.
The boy suffered a concussion and was seemingly back in training a few days later, where he felt dizzy and had to stop, then was in a matchday squad a few days after that, suffered a head-to-head collision, and is now showing concussive symptoms again. It seems to me like he was allowed back too soon. No, they couldn't predict a head-to-head collision but surely they should be aware that contact with the head, be it heading the ball or a stray arm or a collision are all part of the game and a risk.
I think we are more cautious with head injuries and concussions here in the States, both in footy itself as a result of players having to retire due to constant concussions, but also, I think, as a spill over from the problems with American Football/the NFL. But to me a concussion usually means two weeks out, full stop. It seems to me Lapslie was let back too soon.
Harvey, to your point, I want to reject the premise of "what other sport would they be good at?" as not relavent, but I actually think it's kind of an interesting thought exercise, pardon the pun. I suspect different track events, namely the medium to longer distance running. My experience with people who are athletic is that they tend to be good at most sports they take up, so it's kind of hard to tell without knowing the lads better than I do now (which is not at all).
Comments
Whether our squad is physically tough and resilient enough is another matter, though the major injuries likes the ones for Clarke, JFC, Cullen and Igor have to be considered more bad luck than anything else
Mind you, if Taylor and Karlan are out, he may well start Saturday.
I’ve got no evidence to back this up though, it’s just my overall feeling.
Cullen isn’t refurbished, Forster-Caskey neither, Grant hasn’t suffered with injuries previously, Taylor has played 65 games since the start of last season, Pratley has played regularly throughout his career.
I can probably name some more but the point is, Roland is to blame and the reason for a lot of what has happened to us recently, but injuries to our squad this season just isn’t one of them.
Roland is a wanker who is ruining the club, but suggesting everything stems from his ownership is ridiculous.
They are U18 or U23 players not first team squad players who are 'fit for purpose.'
If you are talking about players 'fit for purpose' then it is a small squad.
I doubt there are too many league one sides with 25 seasoned pros in their squad. Clubs at this level cannot afford huge squads, so i'd guess the vast majority have quite a few academy kids in there.
Portsmouth for example have used 8 players who are 23 and under this season and it isn't hurting them.
Grant, Aribo and Dijksteel are the ones who've featured regularly but they have over 200 appearances between them so i wouldn't consider them to be kids. Then we have Lapslie who yes fair play is new (and young) but has been in and out of the side.
Then we have Bielik and Cullen also U23 but they would probably walk into most sides in this division.
It's not as if we're playing 5-6 teenagers each week.
The Shitweasel Douchebag is a nightmare but other than Ward and Bielik have any of the other players brought to the club in the last two years had injuries prior to signing ?
Roland Duchatelet is the reason we are in League 1 But can't see how he is to blame for the injuries other than he has the Flemish/ Walloon curse like the Midas touch but the polar opposite, which means that we can't get through matches without at least 2 injuries per match.
Morgan Fox may of been bang average but I can only remember him missing one game through sickness in his last 2 seasons at the valley.
That being said, trade offs are made for good technical players versus big, imposing lumps. And we have decided to go for the former constantly (which I think is the right choice in the long term). To get smaller, more technical players to play in League One you need something to give, either they're injury prone, lacking first team football, not fully developed physically (Lapslie), or they're on the smaller side, or a combination thereof.
I think what we're seeing is the result of some bad luck and some trade-offs. I don't think our injury list is any worse than it was this time last year, when, if memory serves, we had something like 12 senior players out at once.
The boy suffered a concussion and was seemingly back in training a few days later, where he felt dizzy and had to stop, then was in a matchday squad a few days after that, suffered a head-to-head collision, and is now showing concussive symptoms again. It seems to me like he was allowed back too soon. No, they couldn't predict a head-to-head collision but surely they should be aware that contact with the head, be it heading the ball or a stray arm or a collision are all part of the game and a risk.
I think we are more cautious with head injuries and concussions here in the States, both in footy itself as a result of players having to retire due to constant concussions, but also, I think, as a spill over from the problems with American Football/the NFL. But to me a concussion usually means two weeks out, full stop. It seems to me Lapslie was let back too soon.
Harvey, to your point, I want to reject the premise of "what other sport would they be good at?" as not relavent, but I actually think it's kind of an interesting thought exercise, pardon the pun. I suspect different track events, namely the medium to longer distance running. My experience with people who are athletic is that they tend to be good at most sports they take up, so it's kind of hard to tell without knowing the lads better than I do now (which is not at all).