Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Next manager - Ben Garner confirmed (p256)
Comments
-
I'd probably just about agree, although not sure what point you're making.The Red Robin said:
Not sure Man City need as much strengthening as our squad does. Might be wrong.cafcfan1990 said:
Another reminder that the window is pretty much completely irrelevant. Man City agreed a deal for Haaland before their season had even finished. In fairness, there hasn't been much official activity but I'd presume J Block and others are referring to the talking to players, agents etc. I think we're all guessing how much the lack of a manager is affecting us. We're no doubt making enquiries etc but we don't really know what impact having no manager is having for certain.LTKapal said:
Just another quick reminder that the window isn't open for another 8 daysJ BLOCK said:Was willing to give TS the summer, but nearly a month on and still no new manager is a joke. We are behind everyone else this summer AGAIN.1 -
It is a great stadium, albeit we don't own it so I don't see any expansion likely, even if we were filling the stadium. Plus, the land behind the east was sold off which I believe scuppers any expansion that side.JamesSeed said:
Great stadium with potential to expand, good supporter base (filled one half of Wembley at recent playoff final), decent history, London based, which appeals to some at least.Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:
Well, quite probably.J BLOCK said:
Or choice 1 and choice 2 have rejected ...Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:Can't really believe that Thomas is still interviewing, or if he is we must be down to the same group of losers, misfits and mentally unsound that respond to police appeals for information in major crime cases.
Stop farting around and announce Garner.
No idea whether he will make the step up, but I could get excited by the appointment provided he is given his head in respect of choice of assistants and recruitment.
If he has those foisted on him then he is already on the back foot.
I don't actually know what our appeal is now to anybody with any pedigree (unless they are unemployed and slightly desperate or past it)
It's not like we are some kind of sleeping giant.
More like a catatonic hunchback
Yes, we filled our end at Wembley, but unless we are challenging next season I foresee a lot of 4-figure attendances.
Of course we are a more attractive proposition than many if not most of our League One small town competitors, but I was thinking in terms of attracting anybody with real pedigree but I don't see we have any pulling power.
Beyond the above, which is really just wallpaper, we are now an established mid-table league one club with a pool of mostly mediocre players.
That is before we get to any concerns the potential recruit may have about choice of assistants or player recruitment.0 -
Or left due to racist abuse his players were getting from their own fans?The Red Robin said:Alan Pardew sacked…5 -
Told you he didn’t sound happy!The Red Robin said:Alan Pardew sacked…8 -
No idea. Didn’t know that had happenedCafc43v3r said:
Or left due to racist abuse his players were getting from their own fans?The Red Robin said:Alan Pardew sacked…1 -
That would tie in with what he was sayingCafc43v3r said:
Or left due to racist abuse his players were getting from their own fans?The Red Robin said:Alan Pardew sacked…0 -
So just made up the fact he got sacked then? Was a pretty bizarre appointment, just scrapped a month there.The Red Robin said:
No idea. Didn’t know that had happenedCafc43v3r said:
Or left due to racist abuse his players were getting from their own fans?The Red Robin said:Alan Pardew sacked…2 -
Saw he left. That’s literally it. With Pardew it’s always safe to assume he’s been sacked.cafcfan1990 said:
So just made up the fact he got sacked then? Was a pretty bizarre appointment, just scrapped a month there.The Red Robin said:
No idea. Didn’t know that had happenedCafc43v3r said:
Or left due to racist abuse his players were getting from their own fans?The Red Robin said:Alan Pardew sacked…Made it up? Do one.2 -
I think I've unravelled what you are trying to say.Cafc43v3r said:
The renewal was it the issue, it was how much it would cost to sack him. He was still under contract so Thomas still had to do something.Dave Rudd said:
Isn't this easily explained by the purported performance-related aspects to Jackson's contract?swordfish said:
Is it true that there was also dressing room disharmony as a result of some being anti vaxers?Airman Brown said:
I think motivation is a bit more complicated than that. They are people not robots. I’m not defending that performance or others during the season but if you don’t have everyone fully focused for whatever reason you are likely to fall short. I think the behind the scenes manoeuvring and the players’ perception of it is a big part of what happened last season.mendonca said:
Bless, the players' really chose when they wanted to play for Jacko or when they didn't fancy turning up.Airman Brown said:
More likely Ipswich was the outcome of TS’s intention than the cause of it. The players knew this was on the cards. I was told by a club contact on the way back from the game.swordfish said:
Did it though? Or was Thomas only considering sacking Jackson then, which MS knew when speaking to CW, only to later get an itchy trigger finger after the Ipswich debacle! Apologies if this has already been made clear.Airman Brown said:
Maybe, but I’m not applying the above to one candidate in isolation. It doesn’t take four weeks to run a process especially if the intention to sack Jackson predates the end of the season.Garrymanilow said:
That may well be part of it, but in terms of Beale, would it not just be that he got an offer we couldn't really match? QPR announced Warburton was leaving on 28th April. Charlton sacked Jackson on 2nd May. QPR are a league above us, have been in the Premier League more recently than us and are really a more attractive prospect all round. It's not like they sacked their manager yesterday and swooped in over us, they had a lot of time to plan this as well and they'll be hoping for a push towards the Premier League next season. What are we offering Beale that can match that even in the best possible scenario?Airman Brown said:
Likely problems: refusal to recognise the market rate, either in salary or on termination; for managers, the scope of the role.AFKABartram said:
Posted that on 16th May and suspect that is what’s proven the case, particularly with Beale.AFKABartram said:My concern is quite similar to what with seen in player recruitment the last couple of years. Doing a decent job in identifying good candidates, but failing to attract them hereWe are not an unattractive proposition relative to most other third tier or provincial clubs.Both obstacles are likely to lead to extended discussions. In fairness, this is the best time of year to accommodate delays, but at some point you have to compromise.The fact TS suggested it might take longer doesn’t make that necessary or ideal either.
Maybe their political stance is being given too much credit. They're simply shite apart from a few.
I'm astonished to see you relate that the players knew Jackson was out before Ipswich, but he didn't. You can understand that, to an outsider, that sounds scarcely credible, but, if it's one of the known knowns now, I must say it sounds an unprofessional way of doing things.
Plenty of room for improvement and must do better. Hopefully we will next season.
Let's say, for example, that the renewal was dependent on finishing in the top six. At the time of the Ipswich game, this was not possible, so everyone (including Jackson) 'knew' that his time was over ... although Sandgaard had not formally 'let him go' at that point.
My understanding is that Jackson was not sacked ... it was that Sandgaard chose not to extend his contract (presumably due to failing to meet the agreed performance criteria).
Here's my source:
Jackson out as Charlton boss as Addicks opt against contract extension | Evening Standard
Now, if you know differently ... fair enough.
Do you?1 -
"Johnnie Jackson’s initial contract at Charlton Athletic is for 18 months – with their league finish only affecting the amount of compensation paid if Thomas Sandgaard opts to dispense with his services."Dave Rudd said:
I think I've unravelled what you are trying to say.Cafc43v3r said:
The renewal was it the issue, it was how much it would cost to sack him. He was still under contract so Thomas still had to do something.Dave Rudd said:
Isn't this easily explained by the purported performance-related aspects to Jackson's contract?swordfish said:
Is it true that there was also dressing room disharmony as a result of some being anti vaxers?Airman Brown said:
I think motivation is a bit more complicated than that. They are people not robots. I’m not defending that performance or others during the season but if you don’t have everyone fully focused for whatever reason you are likely to fall short. I think the behind the scenes manoeuvring and the players’ perception of it is a big part of what happened last season.mendonca said:
Bless, the players' really chose when they wanted to play for Jacko or when they didn't fancy turning up.Airman Brown said:
More likely Ipswich was the outcome of TS’s intention than the cause of it. The players knew this was on the cards. I was told by a club contact on the way back from the game.swordfish said:
Did it though? Or was Thomas only considering sacking Jackson then, which MS knew when speaking to CW, only to later get an itchy trigger finger after the Ipswich debacle! Apologies if this has already been made clear.Airman Brown said:
Maybe, but I’m not applying the above to one candidate in isolation. It doesn’t take four weeks to run a process especially if the intention to sack Jackson predates the end of the season.Garrymanilow said:
That may well be part of it, but in terms of Beale, would it not just be that he got an offer we couldn't really match? QPR announced Warburton was leaving on 28th April. Charlton sacked Jackson on 2nd May. QPR are a league above us, have been in the Premier League more recently than us and are really a more attractive prospect all round. It's not like they sacked their manager yesterday and swooped in over us, they had a lot of time to plan this as well and they'll be hoping for a push towards the Premier League next season. What are we offering Beale that can match that even in the best possible scenario?Airman Brown said:
Likely problems: refusal to recognise the market rate, either in salary or on termination; for managers, the scope of the role.AFKABartram said:
Posted that on 16th May and suspect that is what’s proven the case, particularly with Beale.AFKABartram said:My concern is quite similar to what with seen in player recruitment the last couple of years. Doing a decent job in identifying good candidates, but failing to attract them hereWe are not an unattractive proposition relative to most other third tier or provincial clubs.Both obstacles are likely to lead to extended discussions. In fairness, this is the best time of year to accommodate delays, but at some point you have to compromise.The fact TS suggested it might take longer doesn’t make that necessary or ideal either.
Maybe their political stance is being given too much credit. They're simply shite apart from a few.
I'm astonished to see you relate that the players knew Jackson was out before Ipswich, but he didn't. You can understand that, to an outsider, that sounds scarcely credible, but, if it's one of the known knowns now, I must say it sounds an unprofessional way of doing things.
Plenty of room for improvement and must do better. Hopefully we will next season.
Let's say, for example, that the renewal was dependent on finishing in the top six. At the time of the Ipswich game, this was not possible, so everyone (including Jackson) 'knew' that his time was over ... although Sandgaard had not formally 'let him go' at that point.
My understanding is that Jackson was not sacked ... it was that Sandgaard chose not to extend his contract (presumably due to failing to meet the agreed performance criteria).
Here's my source:
Jackson out as Charlton boss as Addicks opt against contract extension | Evening Standard
Now, if you know differently ... fair enough.
Do you?
https://londonnewsonline.co.uk/more-detail-emerges-on-charlton-manager-johnnie-jacksons-contractual-situation/
🤷♂️🤷♂️6 - Sponsored links:
-
https://londonnewsonline.co.uk/charlton-athletic-boss-needs-clarity-on-his-future-so-that-squad-plans-can-take-shape-for-longer-term/
He knew at this point he wouldn't be here past the summer1 -
Maybe my fault for using “on the cards” imprecisely - they knew there was a good chance he would be sacked, as I assume did Jackson. I assume it was fuelled by MS’s conversation with Washington.swordfish said:
Is it true that there was also dressing room disharmony as a result of some being anti vaxers?Airman Brown said:
I think motivation is a bit more complicated than that. They are people not robots. I’m not defending that performance or others during the season but if you don’t have everyone fully focused for whatever reason you are likely to fall short. I think the behind the scenes manoeuvring and the players’ perception of it is a big part of what happened last season.mendonca said:
Bless, the players' really chose when they wanted to play for Jacko or when they didn't fancy turning up.Airman Brown said:
More likely Ipswich was the outcome of TS’s intention than the cause of it. The players knew this was on the cards. I was told by a club contact on the way back from the game.swordfish said:
Did it though? Or was Thomas only considering sacking Jackson then, which MS knew when speaking to CW, only to later get an itchy trigger finger after the Ipswich debacle! Apologies if this has already been made clear.Airman Brown said:
Maybe, but I’m not applying the above to one candidate in isolation. It doesn’t take four weeks to run a process especially if the intention to sack Jackson predates the end of the season.Garrymanilow said:
That may well be part of it, but in terms of Beale, would it not just be that he got an offer we couldn't really match? QPR announced Warburton was leaving on 28th April. Charlton sacked Jackson on 2nd May. QPR are a league above us, have been in the Premier League more recently than us and are really a more attractive prospect all round. It's not like they sacked their manager yesterday and swooped in over us, they had a lot of time to plan this as well and they'll be hoping for a push towards the Premier League next season. What are we offering Beale that can match that even in the best possible scenario?Airman Brown said:
Likely problems: refusal to recognise the market rate, either in salary or on termination; for managers, the scope of the role.AFKABartram said:
Posted that on 16th May and suspect that is what’s proven the case, particularly with Beale.AFKABartram said:My concern is quite similar to what with seen in player recruitment the last couple of years. Doing a decent job in identifying good candidates, but failing to attract them hereWe are not an unattractive proposition relative to most other third tier or provincial clubs.Both obstacles are likely to lead to extended discussions. In fairness, this is the best time of year to accommodate delays, but at some point you have to compromise.The fact TS suggested it might take longer doesn’t make that necessary or ideal either.
Maybe their political stance is being given too much credit. They're simply shite apart from a few.
I'm astonished to see you relate that the players knew Jackson was out before Ipswich, but he didn't. You can understand that, to an outsider, that sounds scarcely credible, but, if it's one of the known knowns now, I must say it sounds an unprofessional way of doing things.
Plenty of room for improvement and must do better. Hopefully we will next season.6 -
Why do you deduce that…..or is that just another unjustified swipe at TS with no real foundation? There’s been a lot of that going on here lately just for the sake of it Billy.Billy_Mix said:Next manager - TS says final decision not yet made
closer to the truth to say decision making process not yet started in any meaningful fashion
TS is certainly very different from what one might expect but the truth of the matter is he’s all we’ve got. I 100% believe he genuinely wants the project to succeed so what’s with all the OTT negativity.If I was TS and reading this forum (which I suspect he does), I would be pretty disappointed and think why bother if that’s how I’m thought of. Yes, he’s a bit of an odd ball but he’s our odd ball…..let’s give him a bit of an easier ride, he’s not the devil incarnate FFS and hopefully will learn from his mistakes.
Billy, you may well be right but equally you may be totally wrong.9 -
Pardew is now available….EugenesAxe said:
Think he was referring to the new song Thomas had played him at the interviewGribbo said:
Had you just dropped your guts?EugenesAxe said:Pardew just walked past me on the phone, by London Bridge, overheard him saying “it was horrible, really nasty…”
It’s a sign.0 -
It would take an owner of breathtaking arrogance to think he knows better than the fanbase…Mendonca In Asdas said:
Pardew is now available….EugenesAxe said:
Think he was referring to the new song Thomas had played him at the interviewGribbo said:
Had you just dropped your guts?EugenesAxe said:Pardew just walked past me on the phone, by London Bridge, overheard him saying “it was horrible, really nasty…”
It’s a sign.
*hang on, what’s the new song called again?…2 -
MS was certainly extremely naive in saying anything to Conor Washington, but it really should have come as no surprise to anyone that after a failure of a season that TS would want to review what went wrong, and obviously that would include "is the current manager the man to take us forward".
To suggest the players played poorly because Jackson's future was in doubt is simply to deny any responsibility players have to perform. The vast majority of managers' position are in doubt to one degree or another. The players can't just not turn up because there's a chance in how ever many days, weeks or months, the manager may lose their job.3 -
...Fair play to Pardew if the reason he left CSKA was racial abuse towards his own black players, reports showing bananas being thrown is disgusting,..he may have a chequered past and divided opinions on his managerial background, but can't fault his actions this time..fair play Alan..
2 -
There’s a difference between absolving the players of responsibility and recognising that it may have had an effect on their performance.randy andy said:MS was certainly naive in saying anything to Conor Washington, but it really should have come as no surprise to anyone that after a failure of a season that TS would want to review what went wrong, and obviously that would include "is the current manager the man to take us forward".
To suggest the players played poorly because Jackson's future was in doubt is simply to deny any responsibility players have to perform. The vast majority of managers' position are in doubt to one degree or another. The players can't just not turn up because there's a chance in how ever many days, weeks or months, the manager may lose their job.6 -
Mendonca In Asdas said:
Pardew is now available….EugenesAxe said:
Think he was referring to the new song Thomas had played him at the interviewGribbo said:
Had you just dropped your guts?EugenesAxe said:Pardew just walked past me on the phone, by London Bridge, overheard him saying “it was horrible, really nasty…”
It’s a sign.
5 -
randy andy said:MS was certainly extremely naive in saying anything to Conor Washington, but it really should have come as no surprise to anyone that after a failure of a season that TS would want to review what went wrong, and obviously that would include "is the current manager the man to take us forward".
To suggest the players played poorly because Jackson's future was in doubt is simply to deny any responsibility players have to perform. The vast majority of managers' position are in doubt to one degree or another. The players can't just not turn up because there's a chance in how ever many days, weeks or months, the manager may lose their job.
The conversation wasnt initially about Jackson though, Washington was told that any contract for him wouldnt happen as of then as a/the new man might not want him.
"Hey lads, MS just said any contract talks for us OOC players wont happen unitl they maybe sack Jacko....the man who´s been calling for contract talks for some of us....Anyway, 110% on Saturday boys lets do thissssssssssssssssssssssssssss A2V"1 - Sponsored links:
-
@Airman Brown I won't quote the whole conversation again, but it's my fault I misconstrued your words.1
-
-
So, we have three versions:Cafc43v3r said:
"Johnnie Jackson’s initial contract at Charlton Athletic is for 18 months – with their league finish only affecting the amount of compensation paid if Thomas Sandgaard opts to dispense with his services."Dave Rudd said:
I think I've unravelled what you are trying to say.Cafc43v3r said:
The renewal was it the issue, it was how much it would cost to sack him. He was still under contract so Thomas still had to do something.Dave Rudd said:
Isn't this easily explained by the purported performance-related aspects to Jackson's contract?swordfish said:
Is it true that there was also dressing room disharmony as a result of some being anti vaxers?Airman Brown said:
I think motivation is a bit more complicated than that. They are people not robots. I’m not defending that performance or others during the season but if you don’t have everyone fully focused for whatever reason you are likely to fall short. I think the behind the scenes manoeuvring and the players’ perception of it is a big part of what happened last season.mendonca said:
Bless, the players' really chose when they wanted to play for Jacko or when they didn't fancy turning up.Airman Brown said:
More likely Ipswich was the outcome of TS’s intention than the cause of it. The players knew this was on the cards. I was told by a club contact on the way back from the game.swordfish said:
Did it though? Or was Thomas only considering sacking Jackson then, which MS knew when speaking to CW, only to later get an itchy trigger finger after the Ipswich debacle! Apologies if this has already been made clear.Airman Brown said:
Maybe, but I’m not applying the above to one candidate in isolation. It doesn’t take four weeks to run a process especially if the intention to sack Jackson predates the end of the season.Garrymanilow said:
That may well be part of it, but in terms of Beale, would it not just be that he got an offer we couldn't really match? QPR announced Warburton was leaving on 28th April. Charlton sacked Jackson on 2nd May. QPR are a league above us, have been in the Premier League more recently than us and are really a more attractive prospect all round. It's not like they sacked their manager yesterday and swooped in over us, they had a lot of time to plan this as well and they'll be hoping for a push towards the Premier League next season. What are we offering Beale that can match that even in the best possible scenario?Airman Brown said:
Likely problems: refusal to recognise the market rate, either in salary or on termination; for managers, the scope of the role.AFKABartram said:
Posted that on 16th May and suspect that is what’s proven the case, particularly with Beale.AFKABartram said:My concern is quite similar to what with seen in player recruitment the last couple of years. Doing a decent job in identifying good candidates, but failing to attract them hereWe are not an unattractive proposition relative to most other third tier or provincial clubs.Both obstacles are likely to lead to extended discussions. In fairness, this is the best time of year to accommodate delays, but at some point you have to compromise.The fact TS suggested it might take longer doesn’t make that necessary or ideal either.
Maybe their political stance is being given too much credit. They're simply shite apart from a few.
I'm astonished to see you relate that the players knew Jackson was out before Ipswich, but he didn't. You can understand that, to an outsider, that sounds scarcely credible, but, if it's one of the known knowns now, I must say it sounds an unprofessional way of doing things.
Plenty of room for improvement and must do better. Hopefully we will next season.
Let's say, for example, that the renewal was dependent on finishing in the top six. At the time of the Ipswich game, this was not possible, so everyone (including Jackson) 'knew' that his time was over ... although Sandgaard had not formally 'let him go' at that point.
My understanding is that Jackson was not sacked ... it was that Sandgaard chose not to extend his contract (presumably due to failing to meet the agreed performance criteria).
Here's my source:
Jackson out as Charlton boss as Addicks opt against contract extension | Evening Standard
Now, if you know differently ... fair enough.
Do you?
https://londonnewsonline.co.uk/more-detail-emerges-on-charlton-manager-johnnie-jacksons-contractual-situation/
🤷♂️🤷♂️
1) Cawley (18 Feb 2022) Johnnie Jackson’s initial contract at Charlton Athletic is for 18 months – with their league finish only affecting the amount of compensation paid if Thomas Sandgaard opts to dispense with his services.
2) Cawley (11 Feb 2022) The Addicks boss could be out of contract this summer with a guaranteed 12-month extension only triggered based on the club’s final finish in League One.
3) Evening Standard (3 May 2022) Johnnie Jackson's 12-year association with Charlton Athletic is over after the club elected not to extend his contract as manager beyond the summer.
Anyone know the truth?
One interpretation might be that all are correct ... ie, the 12-month extension is only triggered if we make (eg) the top six, but Jackson gets more of a payout if we finish 7th compared to 9th etc.0 -
Option number 1 is the correct one.Dave Rudd said:
So, we have three versions:Cafc43v3r said:
"Johnnie Jackson’s initial contract at Charlton Athletic is for 18 months – with their league finish only affecting the amount of compensation paid if Thomas Sandgaard opts to dispense with his services."Dave Rudd said:
I think I've unravelled what you are trying to say.Cafc43v3r said:
The renewal was it the issue, it was how much it would cost to sack him. He was still under contract so Thomas still had to do something.Dave Rudd said:
Isn't this easily explained by the purported performance-related aspects to Jackson's contract?swordfish said:
Is it true that there was also dressing room disharmony as a result of some being anti vaxers?Airman Brown said:
I think motivation is a bit more complicated than that. They are people not robots. I’m not defending that performance or others during the season but if you don’t have everyone fully focused for whatever reason you are likely to fall short. I think the behind the scenes manoeuvring and the players’ perception of it is a big part of what happened last season.mendonca said:
Bless, the players' really chose when they wanted to play for Jacko or when they didn't fancy turning up.Airman Brown said:
More likely Ipswich was the outcome of TS’s intention than the cause of it. The players knew this was on the cards. I was told by a club contact on the way back from the game.swordfish said:
Did it though? Or was Thomas only considering sacking Jackson then, which MS knew when speaking to CW, only to later get an itchy trigger finger after the Ipswich debacle! Apologies if this has already been made clear.Airman Brown said:
Maybe, but I’m not applying the above to one candidate in isolation. It doesn’t take four weeks to run a process especially if the intention to sack Jackson predates the end of the season.Garrymanilow said:
That may well be part of it, but in terms of Beale, would it not just be that he got an offer we couldn't really match? QPR announced Warburton was leaving on 28th April. Charlton sacked Jackson on 2nd May. QPR are a league above us, have been in the Premier League more recently than us and are really a more attractive prospect all round. It's not like they sacked their manager yesterday and swooped in over us, they had a lot of time to plan this as well and they'll be hoping for a push towards the Premier League next season. What are we offering Beale that can match that even in the best possible scenario?Airman Brown said:
Likely problems: refusal to recognise the market rate, either in salary or on termination; for managers, the scope of the role.AFKABartram said:
Posted that on 16th May and suspect that is what’s proven the case, particularly with Beale.AFKABartram said:My concern is quite similar to what with seen in player recruitment the last couple of years. Doing a decent job in identifying good candidates, but failing to attract them hereWe are not an unattractive proposition relative to most other third tier or provincial clubs.Both obstacles are likely to lead to extended discussions. In fairness, this is the best time of year to accommodate delays, but at some point you have to compromise.The fact TS suggested it might take longer doesn’t make that necessary or ideal either.
Maybe their political stance is being given too much credit. They're simply shite apart from a few.
I'm astonished to see you relate that the players knew Jackson was out before Ipswich, but he didn't. You can understand that, to an outsider, that sounds scarcely credible, but, if it's one of the known knowns now, I must say it sounds an unprofessional way of doing things.
Plenty of room for improvement and must do better. Hopefully we will next season.
Let's say, for example, that the renewal was dependent on finishing in the top six. At the time of the Ipswich game, this was not possible, so everyone (including Jackson) 'knew' that his time was over ... although Sandgaard had not formally 'let him go' at that point.
My understanding is that Jackson was not sacked ... it was that Sandgaard chose not to extend his contract (presumably due to failing to meet the agreed performance criteria).
Here's my source:
Jackson out as Charlton boss as Addicks opt against contract extension | Evening Standard
Now, if you know differently ... fair enough.
Do you?
https://londonnewsonline.co.uk/more-detail-emerges-on-charlton-manager-johnnie-jacksons-contractual-situation/
🤷♂️🤷♂️
1) Cawley (18 Feb 2022) Johnnie Jackson’s initial contract at Charlton Athletic is for 18 months – with their league finish only affecting the amount of compensation paid if Thomas Sandgaard opts to dispense with his services.
2) Cawley (11 Feb 2022) The Addicks boss could be out of contract this summer with a guaranteed 12-month extension only triggered based on the club’s final finish in League One.
3) Evening Standard (3 May 2022) Johnnie Jackson's 12-year association with Charlton Athletic is over after the club elected not to extend his contract as manager beyond the summer.
Anyone know the truth?
One interpretation might be that all are correct ... ie, the 12-month extension is only triggered if we make (eg) the top six, but Jackson gets more of a payout if we finish 7th compared to 9th etc.0 -
Cheers. Can you send me a copy?Covered_End_Lad said:
Option number 1 is the correct one.Dave Rudd said:
So, we have three versions:Cafc43v3r said:
"Johnnie Jackson’s initial contract at Charlton Athletic is for 18 months – with their league finish only affecting the amount of compensation paid if Thomas Sandgaard opts to dispense with his services."Dave Rudd said:
I think I've unravelled what you are trying to say.Cafc43v3r said:
The renewal was it the issue, it was how much it would cost to sack him. He was still under contract so Thomas still had to do something.Dave Rudd said:
Isn't this easily explained by the purported performance-related aspects to Jackson's contract?swordfish said:
Is it true that there was also dressing room disharmony as a result of some being anti vaxers?Airman Brown said:
I think motivation is a bit more complicated than that. They are people not robots. I’m not defending that performance or others during the season but if you don’t have everyone fully focused for whatever reason you are likely to fall short. I think the behind the scenes manoeuvring and the players’ perception of it is a big part of what happened last season.mendonca said:
Bless, the players' really chose when they wanted to play for Jacko or when they didn't fancy turning up.Airman Brown said:
More likely Ipswich was the outcome of TS’s intention than the cause of it. The players knew this was on the cards. I was told by a club contact on the way back from the game.swordfish said:
Did it though? Or was Thomas only considering sacking Jackson then, which MS knew when speaking to CW, only to later get an itchy trigger finger after the Ipswich debacle! Apologies if this has already been made clear.Airman Brown said:
Maybe, but I’m not applying the above to one candidate in isolation. It doesn’t take four weeks to run a process especially if the intention to sack Jackson predates the end of the season.Garrymanilow said:
That may well be part of it, but in terms of Beale, would it not just be that he got an offer we couldn't really match? QPR announced Warburton was leaving on 28th April. Charlton sacked Jackson on 2nd May. QPR are a league above us, have been in the Premier League more recently than us and are really a more attractive prospect all round. It's not like they sacked their manager yesterday and swooped in over us, they had a lot of time to plan this as well and they'll be hoping for a push towards the Premier League next season. What are we offering Beale that can match that even in the best possible scenario?Airman Brown said:
Likely problems: refusal to recognise the market rate, either in salary or on termination; for managers, the scope of the role.AFKABartram said:
Posted that on 16th May and suspect that is what’s proven the case, particularly with Beale.AFKABartram said:My concern is quite similar to what with seen in player recruitment the last couple of years. Doing a decent job in identifying good candidates, but failing to attract them hereWe are not an unattractive proposition relative to most other third tier or provincial clubs.Both obstacles are likely to lead to extended discussions. In fairness, this is the best time of year to accommodate delays, but at some point you have to compromise.The fact TS suggested it might take longer doesn’t make that necessary or ideal either.
Maybe their political stance is being given too much credit. They're simply shite apart from a few.
I'm astonished to see you relate that the players knew Jackson was out before Ipswich, but he didn't. You can understand that, to an outsider, that sounds scarcely credible, but, if it's one of the known knowns now, I must say it sounds an unprofessional way of doing things.
Plenty of room for improvement and must do better. Hopefully we will next season.
Let's say, for example, that the renewal was dependent on finishing in the top six. At the time of the Ipswich game, this was not possible, so everyone (including Jackson) 'knew' that his time was over ... although Sandgaard had not formally 'let him go' at that point.
My understanding is that Jackson was not sacked ... it was that Sandgaard chose not to extend his contract (presumably due to failing to meet the agreed performance criteria).
Here's my source:
Jackson out as Charlton boss as Addicks opt against contract extension | Evening Standard
Now, if you know differently ... fair enough.
Do you?
https://londonnewsonline.co.uk/more-detail-emerges-on-charlton-manager-johnnie-jacksons-contractual-situation/
🤷♂️🤷♂️
1) Cawley (18 Feb 2022) Johnnie Jackson’s initial contract at Charlton Athletic is for 18 months – with their league finish only affecting the amount of compensation paid if Thomas Sandgaard opts to dispense with his services.
2) Cawley (11 Feb 2022) The Addicks boss could be out of contract this summer with a guaranteed 12-month extension only triggered based on the club’s final finish in League One.
3) Evening Standard (3 May 2022) Johnnie Jackson's 12-year association with Charlton Athletic is over after the club elected not to extend his contract as manager beyond the summer.
Anyone know the truth?
One interpretation might be that all are correct ... ie, the 12-month extension is only triggered if we make (eg) the top six, but Jackson gets more of a payout if we finish 7th compared to 9th etc.2 -
He had a contract until the end of the 22/23 season already. So I can't believe he signed a shorter one with no compensation.Dave Rudd said:
So, we have three versions:Cafc43v3r said:
"Johnnie Jackson’s initial contract at Charlton Athletic is for 18 months – with their league finish only affecting the amount of compensation paid if Thomas Sandgaard opts to dispense with his services."Dave Rudd said:
I think I've unravelled what you are trying to say.Cafc43v3r said:
The renewal was it the issue, it was how much it would cost to sack him. He was still under contract so Thomas still had to do something.Dave Rudd said:
Isn't this easily explained by the purported performance-related aspects to Jackson's contract?swordfish said:
Is it true that there was also dressing room disharmony as a result of some being anti vaxers?Airman Brown said:
I think motivation is a bit more complicated than that. They are people not robots. I’m not defending that performance or others during the season but if you don’t have everyone fully focused for whatever reason you are likely to fall short. I think the behind the scenes manoeuvring and the players’ perception of it is a big part of what happened last season.mendonca said:
Bless, the players' really chose when they wanted to play for Jacko or when they didn't fancy turning up.Airman Brown said:
More likely Ipswich was the outcome of TS’s intention than the cause of it. The players knew this was on the cards. I was told by a club contact on the way back from the game.swordfish said:
Did it though? Or was Thomas only considering sacking Jackson then, which MS knew when speaking to CW, only to later get an itchy trigger finger after the Ipswich debacle! Apologies if this has already been made clear.Airman Brown said:
Maybe, but I’m not applying the above to one candidate in isolation. It doesn’t take four weeks to run a process especially if the intention to sack Jackson predates the end of the season.Garrymanilow said:
That may well be part of it, but in terms of Beale, would it not just be that he got an offer we couldn't really match? QPR announced Warburton was leaving on 28th April. Charlton sacked Jackson on 2nd May. QPR are a league above us, have been in the Premier League more recently than us and are really a more attractive prospect all round. It's not like they sacked their manager yesterday and swooped in over us, they had a lot of time to plan this as well and they'll be hoping for a push towards the Premier League next season. What are we offering Beale that can match that even in the best possible scenario?Airman Brown said:
Likely problems: refusal to recognise the market rate, either in salary or on termination; for managers, the scope of the role.AFKABartram said:
Posted that on 16th May and suspect that is what’s proven the case, particularly with Beale.AFKABartram said:My concern is quite similar to what with seen in player recruitment the last couple of years. Doing a decent job in identifying good candidates, but failing to attract them hereWe are not an unattractive proposition relative to most other third tier or provincial clubs.Both obstacles are likely to lead to extended discussions. In fairness, this is the best time of year to accommodate delays, but at some point you have to compromise.The fact TS suggested it might take longer doesn’t make that necessary or ideal either.
Maybe their political stance is being given too much credit. They're simply shite apart from a few.
I'm astonished to see you relate that the players knew Jackson was out before Ipswich, but he didn't. You can understand that, to an outsider, that sounds scarcely credible, but, if it's one of the known knowns now, I must say it sounds an unprofessional way of doing things.
Plenty of room for improvement and must do better. Hopefully we will next season.
Let's say, for example, that the renewal was dependent on finishing in the top six. At the time of the Ipswich game, this was not possible, so everyone (including Jackson) 'knew' that his time was over ... although Sandgaard had not formally 'let him go' at that point.
My understanding is that Jackson was not sacked ... it was that Sandgaard chose not to extend his contract (presumably due to failing to meet the agreed performance criteria).
Here's my source:
Jackson out as Charlton boss as Addicks opt against contract extension | Evening Standard
Now, if you know differently ... fair enough.
Do you?
https://londonnewsonline.co.uk/more-detail-emerges-on-charlton-manager-johnnie-jacksons-contractual-situation/
🤷♂️🤷♂️
1) Cawley (18 Feb 2022) Johnnie Jackson’s initial contract at Charlton Athletic is for 18 months – with their league finish only affecting the amount of compensation paid if Thomas Sandgaard opts to dispense with his services.
2) Cawley (11 Feb 2022) The Addicks boss could be out of contract this summer with a guaranteed 12-month extension only triggered based on the club’s final finish in League One.
3) Evening Standard (3 May 2022) Johnnie Jackson's 12-year association with Charlton Athletic is over after the club elected not to extend his contract as manager beyond the summer.
Anyone know the truth?
One interpretation might be that all are correct ... ie, the 12-month extension is only triggered if we make (eg) the top six, but Jackson gets more of a payout if we finish 7th compared to 9th etc.
All the interviews post dismissal use sacked, not that he just didn't get it renewed.
I think 1 is the truth but as you say you could interpreate them as all being technically correct.0 -
Alan Pardew chooses some strange places to go and Manage. If he had done some due diligence he wouldn't have gone there. Bulgaria and Hungary to name just two countries going towards eastern Europe as we know if you watch England games have some Racist supporters.
Perhaps it's getting more expensive to keep his harem going as I can't believe he couldn't get a job in the states if he is persona non Grata in the UK ?
Good on him for walking out as Alex Dyer is his assistant and he has Black players in his team. He really shouldn't be surprised.0 -
Always...The Red Robin said:
Saw he left. That’s literally it. With Pardew it’s always safe to assume he’s been sacked.cafcfan1990 said:
So just made up the fact he got sacked then? Was a pretty bizarre appointment, just scrapped a month there.The Red Robin said:
No idea. Didn’t know that had happenedCafc43v3r said:
Or left due to racist abuse his players were getting from their own fans?The Red Robin said:Alan Pardew sacked…Made it up? Do one.0 -
Sad to hear Swanley don't have a team, I played for Swanley Town, mid to late eighties in The Spartan League. Love to tell my sons that I am the only semi-pro in the family, we used to get £4 a match + fuel costs for away games. £4 probably got you 3 pints in the clubhouse after the match.Fumbluff said:
Alma Swanley? Or do you really mean Crockenhill?ricky_otto said:
You have missed a belter of a day.Fumbluff said:Been at a funeral today, what have I missed?
Did someone say Martin was actually Ro-lands son?
@RonnieMoore is a pilot, we are playing Swanley in a friendly,Mr largo has been advised to move his toilet seat closer to his front door, somebody is annoyed that Andy Carroll ended up in bed with 2 woman and AFKA has been roaming the streets of London singing God save the Queen.
I almost forgot amongst all the excitement , it seems the news of Ben Chorley leaving Swindon only filtered through to Finland 2 days after the event.1 -
Permission to panic, Mr Mainwaring.
2
