I don’t think Cawley would have tweeted if he was wide of the mark, either TS is lying until it’s official or we have got someone better then Garner which has caused the delay, I don’t really mind either outcome but I expect it to be the first
TS not lying just cooling the talk before it’s signed and sealed … he being honourable to both Swindon and Garner
I am a big supporter of TS and been vocal about it, but if he has outright denied that Garner is our man and he becomes our manager then he has lied whichever way you wanna paint it.
The honourable thing to do would be to stay quiet until things official and not have a jolly chin wag with supporters on social media, no disrespect to the supporters who message him but it’s quite peculiar that he would share our important business like that with fans, as much as I like how vocal he is about us..
What has ts said? I saw that ronniemoore posted a comment so I took it with a massive pinch of salt
I don’t think Cawley would have tweeted if he was wide of the mark, either TS is lying until it’s official or we have got someone better then Garner which has caused the delay, I don’t really mind either outcome but I expect it to be the first
TS not lying just cooling the talk before it’s signed and sealed … he being honourable to both Swindon and Garner
I am a big supporter of TS and been vocal about it, but if he has outright denied that Garner is our man and he becomes our manager then he has lied whichever way you wanna paint it.
The honourable thing to do would be to stay quiet until things official and not have a jolly chin wag with supporters on social media, no disrespect to the supporters who message him but it’s quite peculiar that he would share our important business like that with fans, as much as I like how vocal he is about us..
What has ts said? I saw that ronniemoore posted a comment so I took it with a massive pinch of salt
ButtleJR on page 139 said that TS had denied the Ben Garner appointment. It’s in the thread title mate
not denied just said that interviews were still ongoing.
Except Buttle has outright posted that TS said ‘the reports are incorrect’. Which would dismiss what Cawley has said meaning we haven’t appointed Garner, so either Buttle has misread TS or TS said what he said. Take it whichever you like.
Being blunt I now see why so many posts get lost in translation on here. The thread title says what page this information was shared, the posters post is on said page, I’ve then relayed that information and I’ve now been quoted twice on this information when it could be checked itself quicker than quoting me?
Just noticed that one of these on the case writers just a few hours ago thinks that Washington C is still an Addick .. does he know something that we all don't ?
Loving the faux loyalty and enthusiasm for the new coach no one had never heard of until five minutes ago but suddenly everyone now acknowledges as the next Klopp.
Big and totally unnecessary gamble from our owner if true at a time when he can't afford many more mistakes.
who wouldnt have been a big gamble?
It wouldn't have been a big gamble to back Lee Bowyer in the first place.
He resigned and joined Birmingham. If you mean before that we were limited by the salary cap (which is no longer in place).
All the non-season ticket holders on threatening to return their season tickets on Twitter is making my skin crawl. We, as a fanbase serious need humbling
How does a non-season ticket holder return a season ticket they don't have?
Exactly - I think it was an ironic observation on the nature of empty gestures.
Clicked on this & actually got a different video that featured the owner amongst others. He said that he deals with the business side & leaves the football side of the club to the experts. I look forward to the day that we have an owner with the same outlook.
I haven't got an issue with the owner suggesting the style of football he wants to see us play and promising to back the manager in getting the players needed to achieve it. It becomes more worrying when it gets like Roland explaining football tactics to a manager who is an ex England international. If Sandgaard thinks he has discovered the secret of success in terms of a playing style it is worrying in the extreme. There are many different paths but his backing is needed. With limited resources the approach has to always be a pragmatic one based on what you have and how your best players play.
The problem is, I don't know which of these is correct and I doubt many of us do. There are lingering doubts about Sandgaard based on genuine clues. I would say not yet definitive but that in itself is worrying. And we should be open to this possibility.
I agree with this. The turning point for me would be if Sandgaard is issuing Roland-esque emails or trying to dictate how training sessions should go.
Currently I have no reason to think that this is the case and if anyone knows differently then they should be making it public very very quickly. Until then we have to accept that there is nothing wrong with an owner wanting a certain type of football and finding the staff to implement it.
I haven't got an issue with the owner suggesting the style of football he wants to see us play and promising to back the manager in getting the players needed to achieve it. It becomes more worrying when it gets like Roland explaining football tactics to a manager who is an ex England international. If Sandgaard thinks he has discovered the secret of success in terms of a playing style it is worrying in the extreme. There are many different paths but his backing is needed. With limited resources the approach has to always be a pragmatic one based on what you have and how your best players play.
The problem is, I don't know which of these is correct and I doubt many of us do. There are lingering doubts about Sandgaard based on genuine clues. I would say not yet definitive but that in itself is worrying. And we should be open to this possibility.
I agree with this. The turning point for me would be if Sandgaard is issuing Roland-esque emails or trying to dictate how training sessions should go.
Currently I have no reason to think that this is the case and if anyone knows differently then they should be making it public very very quickly. Until then we have to accept that there is nothing wrong with an owner wanting a certain type of football and finding the staff to implement it.
Not sure if this is covered by what you say but on our POTY podcast he told me that he has set a target for “10% more intensity” in training
“There are better facilities now at the training ground. We already have our medical and sports science team and I’m demanding next season that our training has to have a minimum of 10 per cent more intensity so we train at a minimum level we see in the Championship. It’s all around we’re improving.“
No idea what's going on but having read too many posts have gone from feeling totally underwhelmed to believing Garner is the second coming of Christ. Finally settled for somewhere between the two.
I haven't got an issue with the owner suggesting the style of football he wants to see us play and promising to back the manager in getting the players needed to achieve it. It becomes more worrying when it gets like Roland explaining football tactics to a manager who is an ex England international. If Sandgaard thinks he has discovered the secret of success in terms of a playing style it is worrying in the extreme. There are many different paths but his backing is needed. With limited resources the approach has to always be a pragmatic one based on what you have and how your best players play.
The problem is, I don't know which of these is correct and I doubt many of us do. There are lingering doubts about Sandgaard based on genuine clues. I would say not yet definitive but that in itself is worrying. And we should be open to this possibility.
I agree with this. The turning point for me would be if Sandgaard is issuing Roland-esque emails or trying to dictate how training sessions should go.
Currently I have no reason to think that this is the case and if anyone knows differently then they should be making it public very very quickly. Until then we have to accept that there is nothing wrong with an owner wanting a certain type of football and finding the staff to implement it.
Not sure if this is covered by what you say but on our POTY podcast he told me that he has set a target for “10% more intensity” in training
“There are better facilities now at the training ground. We already have our medical and sports science team and I’m demanding next season that our training has to have a minimum of 10 per cent more intensity so we train at a minimum level we see in the Championship. It’s all around we’re improving.“
I haven't got an issue with the owner suggesting the style of football he wants to see us play and promising to back the manager in getting the players needed to achieve it. It becomes more worrying when it gets like Roland explaining football tactics to a manager who is an ex England international. If Sandgaard thinks he has discovered the secret of success in terms of a playing style it is worrying in the extreme. There are many different paths but his backing is needed. With limited resources the approach has to always be a pragmatic one based on what you have and how your best players play.
The problem is, I don't know which of these is correct and I doubt many of us do. There are lingering doubts about Sandgaard based on genuine clues. I would say not yet definitive but that in itself is worrying. And we should be open to this possibility.
I agree with this. The turning point for me would be if Sandgaard is issuing Roland-esque emails or trying to dictate how training sessions should go.
Currently I have no reason to think that this is the case and if anyone knows differently then they should be making it public very very quickly. Until then we have to accept that there is nothing wrong with an owner wanting a certain type of football and finding the staff to implement it.
Not sure if this is covered by what you say but on our POTY podcast he told me that he has set a target for “10% more intensity” in training
“There are better facilities now at the training ground. We already have our medical and sports science team and I’m demanding next season that our training has to have a minimum of 10 per cent more intensity“
Oh dear. I'll classify that as very borderline worrying. He may be right and our training under previous managers has been lacking, but I agree statements like that aren't encouraging and hopefully are based on some sort of data compared to other clubs rather than him just deciding to say something like that. How he is qualified to know this I concede is a bit of a red flag and let's hope it stops there...
When Airman ‘likes’ that post it scares me , we’ve got another nutbag , let’s hope he’s more useful than that goalkeeping coach from Swindon’s nutsack .
Yeah, I've called dibs on the Steve Mildenhall jokes thanks
I haven't got an issue with the owner suggesting the style of football he wants to see us play and promising to back the manager in getting the players needed to achieve it. It becomes more worrying when it gets like Roland explaining football tactics to a manager who is an ex England international. If Sandgaard thinks he has discovered the secret of success in terms of a playing style it is worrying in the extreme. There are many different paths but his backing is needed. With limited resources the approach has to always be a pragmatic one based on what you have and how your best players play.
The problem is, I don't know which of these is correct and I doubt many of us do. There are lingering doubts about Sandgaard based on genuine clues. I would say not yet definitive but that in itself is worrying. And we should be open to this possibility.
I agree with this. The turning point for me would be if Sandgaard is issuing Roland-esque emails or trying to dictate how training sessions should go.
Currently I have no reason to think that this is the case and if anyone knows differently then they should be making it public very very quickly. Until then we have to accept that there is nothing wrong with an owner wanting a certain type of football and finding the staff to implement it.
Not sure if this is covered by what you say but on our POTY podcast he told me that he has set a target for “10% more intensity” in training
“There are better facilities now at the training ground. We already have our medical and sports science team and I’m demanding next season that our training has to have a minimum of 10 per cent more intensity“
Oh dear. I'll classify that as very borderline worrying. He may be right and our training under previous managers has been lacking, but I agree statements like that aren't encouraging and hopefully are based on some sort of data compared to other clubs rather than him just deciding to say something like that. How he is qualified to know this I concede is a bit of a red flag and let's hope it stops there...
How did he get to a nice clean number like 10? And how is it measured?
Thinking about it Cawley covers all the other South London and Surrey sides so has contacts within the selhurst club
So he may well know Garner already or have a very good link to him.
So his source may not be Swindon or Charlton but the horse itself.
I have heard, as have others, that Garner has left Swindon today. That may not be right, but let's assume it is. That leaves 3 other possible scenarios.
It's a coincidence Cawley is wrong, or at least premature Thomas is lying
I think the first is so remote it's safe to rule it out. The other two options are a massive credibility issue, especially as they have both doubled down on it today. The most worrying thing imo is if Thomas has changed his mind because of a leak, or fan reaction. Neither are good.
If I was filthy rich and bought a football club, I suspect I'd have a say in how we played. Lets face it we all fancy ourselves a bit as football geniuses, it would be really hard when you're coughing up millions every year to keep quiet.
Certainly at the manager recruitment stage, if I say liked attacking football or tiki-taka, I'd make sure that I appointed someone who played that way, and not someone who played a physical style and relied on set pieces.
If I was filthy rich and bought a football club, I suspect I'd have a say in how we played. Lets face it we all fancy ourselves a bit as football geniuses, it would be really hard when you're coughing up millions every year to keep quiet.
Certainly at the manager recruitment stage, if I say liked attacking football or tiki-taka, I'd make sure that I appointed someone who played that way, and not someone who played a physical style and relied on set pieces.
Yeah I totally agree with that.
What I find worrying is commentating on training being 10% more intense. I know we don’t have any context into his thinking, but how has he judged that, what has he compared it to, and what does 10% more intense look like to him.
It’s totally fine for him to say I don’t want a team to play one dimensional football, and putting a manager in place he thinks can achieve what he wants but then after that he can’t really talk to coaching processes etc.
I haven't got an issue with the owner suggesting the style of football he wants to see us play and promising to back the manager in getting the players needed to achieve it. It becomes more worrying when it gets like Roland explaining football tactics to a manager who is an ex England international. If Sandgaard thinks he has discovered the secret of success in terms of a playing style it is worrying in the extreme. There are many different paths but his backing is needed. With limited resources the approach has to always be a pragmatic one based on what you have and how your best players play.
The problem is, I don't know which of these is correct and I doubt many of us do. There are lingering doubts about Sandgaard based on genuine clues. I would say not yet definitive but that in itself is worrying. And we should be open to this possibility.
I agree with this. The turning point for me would be if Sandgaard is issuing Roland-esque emails or trying to dictate how training sessions should go.
Currently I have no reason to think that this is the case and if anyone knows differently then they should be making it public very very quickly. Until then we have to accept that there is nothing wrong with an owner wanting a certain type of football and finding the staff to implement it.
Not sure if this is covered by what you say but on our POTY podcast he told me that he has set a target for “10% more intensity” in training
“There are better facilities now at the training ground. We already have our medical and sports science team and I’m demanding next season that our training has to have a minimum of 10 per cent more intensity so we train at a minimum level we see in the Championship. It’s all around we’re improving.“
I'll give him the benefit of the doubt on that. It's completely unmessurable unless he wants them to do 110 meter sprints instead of 100 meter ones.
We still don't have a fitness and conditioning coach do we?
Lee Bowyer is leaving Brum after falling out with the board and is coming back to us .................. joke, stop panicking, I just wanted to give some contributors something else to get in a strop about, why we wait for the new manager to be appointed
So have we built up a coherent picture of what’ the hell is going on?
Not remotely
I don’t think there is much doubt that Garner will soon be announced. Cawley doesn’t get too much wrong once he’s committed to tweeting something. I’d imagine the hold up is just some formalities at either CAFC, Swindon or with Ben Garner.
So have we built up a coherent picture of what’ the hell is going on?
Not remotely
I don’t think there is much doubt that Garner will soon be announced. Cawley doesn’t get too much wrong once he’s committed to tweeting something. I’d imagine the hold up is just some formalities at either CAFC, Swindon or with Ben Garner.
Yeah, this is where I’m at with it.
Which makes TS communications with @ButtleJR very strange indeed. I guess technically it could not be a lie as they could still be in the process of looking at candidates until it js all signed.
So have we built up a coherent picture of what’ the hell is going on?
Not remotely
I don’t think there is much doubt that Garner will soon be announced. Cawley doesn’t get too much wrong once he’s committed to tweeting something. I’d imagine the hold up is just some formalities at either CAFC, Swindon or with Ben Garner.
Who resigns before ironing out the details of employment
So have we built up a coherent picture of what’ the hell is going on?
Not remotely
I don’t think there is much doubt that Garner will soon be announced. Cawley doesn’t get too much wrong once he’s committed to tweeting something. I’d imagine the hold up is just some formalities at either CAFC, Swindon or with Ben Garner.
Who resigns before ironing out the details of employment
Especially when your resignation carries compensation issues either way.
I haven't got an issue with the owner suggesting the style of football he wants to see us play and promising to back the manager in getting the players needed to achieve it. It becomes more worrying when it gets like Roland explaining football tactics to a manager who is an ex England international. If Sandgaard thinks he has discovered the secret of success in terms of a playing style it is worrying in the extreme. There are many different paths but his backing is needed. With limited resources the approach has to always be a pragmatic one based on what you have and how your best players play.
The problem is, I don't know which of these is correct and I doubt many of us do. There are lingering doubts about Sandgaard based on genuine clues. I would say not yet definitive but that in itself is worrying. And we should be open to this possibility.
I agree with this. The turning point for me would be if Sandgaard is issuing Roland-esque emails or trying to dictate how training sessions should go.
Currently I have no reason to think that this is the case and if anyone knows differently then they should be making it public very very quickly. Until then we have to accept that there is nothing wrong with an owner wanting a certain type of football and finding the staff to implement it.
Not sure if this is covered by what you say but on our POTY podcast he told me that he has set a target for “10% more intensity” in training
“There are better facilities now at the training ground. We already have our medical and sports science team and I’m demanding next season that our training has to have a minimum of 10 per cent more intensity so we train at a minimum level we see in the Championship. It’s all around we’re improving.“
I'll give him the benefit of the doubt on that. It's completely unmessurable unless he wants them to do 110 meter sprints instead of 100 meter ones.
We still don't have a fitness and conditioning coach do we?
Seriously? How long has that been the case? Can't get my head round why a professional football club would not have such an integral role in place.
Comments
So he may well know Garner already or have a very good link to him.
So his source may not be Swindon or Charlton but the horse itself.
I agree with this. The turning point for me would be if Sandgaard is issuing Roland-esque emails or trying to dictate how training sessions should go.
Currently I have no reason to think that this is the case and if anyone knows differently then they should be making it public very very quickly. Until then we have to accept that there is nothing wrong with an owner wanting a certain type of football and finding the staff to implement it.
“There are better facilities now at the training ground. We already have our medical and sports science team and I’m demanding next season that our training has to have a minimum of 10 per cent more intensity so we train at a minimum level we see in the Championship. It’s all around we’re improving.“
It's a coincidence
Cawley is wrong, or at least premature
Thomas is lying
I think the first is so remote it's safe to rule it out. The other two options are a massive credibility issue, especially as they have both doubled down on it today. The most worrying thing imo is if Thomas has changed his mind because of a leak, or fan reaction. Neither are good.
Certainly at the manager recruitment stage, if I say liked attacking football or tiki-taka, I'd make sure that I appointed someone who played that way, and not someone who played a physical style and relied on set pieces.
What I find worrying is commentating on training being 10% more intense. I know we don’t have any context into his thinking, but how has he judged that, what has he compared it to, and what does 10% more intense look like to him.
We still don't have a fitness and conditioning coach do we?
Which makes TS communications with @ButtleJR very strange indeed. I guess technically it could not be a lie as they could still be in the process of looking at candidates until it js all signed.
Seriously? How long has that been the case? Can't get my head round why a professional football club would not have such an integral role in place.