Being a close relative of the owner is actually a very good thing in this instance. I will explain why I think this.
If you break down the most crucial aspects of the businesses that operate in any given industry you find where the real, tangible value is. For example, in the airline industry, the most important assets of a airline operator, many people think, are the aircraft and the crew. This isn't the case. For an airline to operate profitably, the most important pieces of the jigsaw are the computer booking system that the airline works with and the sustainability of its forward fuel purchases. Planes are easy to get hold of - purchase, dry-lease, wet-lease. There's a never-ending supply of crew, ready, willing and able to be trained to work for airlines. So, for any airline, from low-cost carrier to full-service, legacy airline, the most important value-adds to the business are the computer reservation system that gets - and keeps - bums on seats and the appropriateness or otherwise of its deals to buy fuel.
Translate this into football. On the surface, the most important aspects are the first team playing staff and the manager. That's true in the present sense. But, in order to ensure that the playing staff is constantly and efficiently refreshed, the scouting, training, recruitment and development of players is far more crucial. Put it another way: you can look at any team's squad and manager guess at how well they will perform this season. But the quality of current playing and coaching staff isn't the determining factor as to how well the team - and the club - will be performing in ten years' time. These elements are crucial - perhaps beyond all others - to the performance of the team in seasons to come.
So far, so obvious.
So, why is hiring a member of your family "better" than hiring someone with experience in the industry gained at other clubs? After all, if you can steal another club's analyst, that's good right?
In Victorian Britain, hiring staff to do anything but manual work was very different to how it is now. Often, when bright young men came down from Oxford or Cambridge, then would arrive in London with a recommendation from a parent to work for an Uncle or similar relative, who owned a business. Partnerships were very popular and business owners would trust, implicitly, a young nephew more than they would a graduate whom they'd never met before. Because the most important aspect of the business was its trajectory being sustained: a nephew is more likely to work hard, long and diligently for his uncle's business than would someone completely foreign to that company. "Interviews" in the way we now know them were non-existant. What's the point of asking a young man silly questions when judging his character, when, instead, you already know everything about him and probably toasted his birth with your brother, 25 years ago? The risk of bringing shame onto the family was significant and sufficient to ensure that "nepotistic" recruitment actually worked well. And, in fact, the "risk" to the business of hiring a mediocre relation, as opposed to a whizz-kid unknown, was minuscule.
I think Thomas Sandgaard has determined that the crucial aspect of the business to get right is the long-term, successful recruitment and development of players. And I think he's determined the best way to do that is to have someone in that role who, he is sure, will never be poached, never walk away from a job while he's doing well and will have the very long-term health of the club at the forefront of his mind at all times.
The future value of a football club is very closely aligned with the intellectual property vested in the analysts. It's the well-resourced, diligent analytical ability of a club that improves its medium- to long-term future better than even signing five great players and a great manager. Because the great players wither and the manager - like all managers - eventually fails.
I know the square-root of fuck-all about scouting, football analysis and training methods. But I am heartened that the owner is taking these things very seriously. And I think it's a smart move to get someone in who is unlikely ever to walk away.
Thanks, so he didn't make an attempt to change the training techniques, but to make the players train for longer. How long were they training for and how much longer did he want them to train for? Do you know how long Charlton trained last season in relation to similar clubs? Thanks.
Isn’t the point that it’s absolutely none of his business based on his role at the club?
If Keohane had told Jackson to make the players train longer would all the Sandgaard apologists be okay with that?
He’s to busy with “pitch maintenance” to get involved with training !
Thanks, so he didn't make an attempt to change the training techniques, but to make the players train for longer. How long were they training for and how much longer did he want them to train for? Do you know how long Charlton trained last season in relation to similar clubs? Thanks.
Thanks, so he didn't make an attempt to change the training techniques, but to make the players train for longer. How long were they training for and how much longer did he want them to train for? Do you know how long Charlton trained last season in relation to similar clubs? Thanks.
Isn’t the point that it’s absolutely none of his business based on his role at the club?
If Keohane had told Jackson to make the players train longer would all the Sandgaard apologists be okay with that?
He’s to busy with “pitch maintenance” to get involved with training !
Is anyone at the club doing a job for which they are qualified?
Being a close relative of the owner is actually a very good thing in this instance. I will explain why I think this.
If you break down the most crucial aspects of the businesses that operate in any given industry you find where the real, tangible value is. For example, in the airline industry, the most important assets of a airline operator, many people think, are the aircraft and the crew. This isn't the case. For an airline to operate profitably, the most important pieces of the jigsaw are the computer booking system that the airline works with and the sustainability of its forward fuel purchases. Planes are easy to get hold of - purchase, dry-lease, wet-lease. There's a never-ending supply of crew, ready, willing and able to be trained to work for airlines. So, for any airline, from low-cost carrier to full-service, legacy airline, the most important value-adds to the business are the computer reservation system that gets - and keeps - bums on seats and the appropriateness or otherwise of its deals to buy fuel.
Translate this into football. On the surface, the most important aspects are the first team playing staff and the manager. That's true in the present sense. But, in order to ensure that the playing staff is constantly and efficiently refreshed, the scouting, training, recruitment and development of players is far more crucial. Put it another way: you can look at any team's squad and manager guess at how well they will perform this season. But the quality of current playing and coaching staff isn't the determining factor as to how well the team - and the club - will be performing in ten years' time. These elements are crucial - perhaps beyond all others - to the performance of the team in seasons to come.
So far, so obvious.
So, why is hiring a member of your family "better" than hiring someone with experience in the industry gained at other clubs? After all, if you can steal another club's analyst, that's good right?
In Victorian Britain, hiring staff to do anything but manual work was very different to how it is now. Often, when bright young men came down from Oxford or Cambridge, then would arrive in London with a recommendation from a parent to work for an Uncle or similar relative, who owned a business. Partnerships were very popular and business owners would trust, implicitly, a young nephew more than they would a graduate whom they'd never met before. Because the most important aspect of the business was its trajectory being sustained: a nephew is more likely to work hard, long and diligently for his uncle's business than would someone completely foreign to that company. "Interviews" in the way we now know them were non-existant. What's the point of asking a young man silly questions when judging his character, when, instead, you already know everything about him and probably toasted his birth with your brother, 25 years ago? The risk of bringing shame onto the family was significant and sufficient to ensure that "nepotistic" recruitment actually worked well. And, in fact, the "risk" to the business of hiring a mediocre relation, as opposed to a whizz-kid unknown, was minuscule.
I think Thomas Sandgaard has determined that the crucial aspect of the business to get right is the long-term, successful recruitment and development of players. And I think he's determined the best way to do that is to have someone in that role who, he is sure, will never be poached, never walk away from a job while he's doing well and will have the very long-term health of the club at the forefront of his mind at all times.
The future value of a football club is very closely aligned with the intellectual property vested in the analysts. It's the well-resourced, diligent analytical ability of a club that improves its medium- to long-term future better than even signing five great players and a great manager. Because the great players wither and the manager - like all managers - eventually fails.
I know the square-root of fuck-all about scouting, football analysis and training methods. But I am heartened that the owner is taking these things very seriously. And I think it's a smart move to get someone in who is unlikely ever to walk away.
Or to use another airline industry analogy, would you let an unqualified member of the public pilot a 747 full of passengers just because he was the boss's son ?
I don’t think the detail of MS’s intervention(s) is the point. The original discussion was about the scope of his role. It’s fairly clear - and in my view inevitable - that it is at management level.
Thanks, so he didn't make an attempt to change the training techniques, but to make the players train for longer. How long were they training for and how much longer did he want them to train for? Do you know how long Charlton trained last season in relation to similar clubs? Thanks.
Isn’t the point that it’s absolutely none of his business based on his role at the club?
If Keohane had told Jackson to make the players train longer would all the Sandgaard apologists be okay with that?
He’s to busy with “pitch maintenance” to get involved with training !
Is anyone at the club doing a job for which they are qualified?
Thanks, so he didn't make an attempt to change the training techniques, but to make the players train for longer. How long were they training for and how much longer did he want them to train for? Do you know how long Charlton trained last season in relation to similar clubs? Thanks.
I would love to watch and listen to training sessions at Sparrows lane not only in the couple of hours in the morning but who stays for extra training in the afternoon because they want to be the best they can be ?
I have been lucky to watch training sessions at youth levels with pro coaches and they have to keep it light hearted at times but also let the academy players (independent academy* with good record of getting youngsters into pro clubs) know when to get to work with the various drills. You can spot the kids that really want the pro contracts and others that love playing matches but don't want to do the hard yards in training.
*Joe Aribo spent 3 years there and he played his 68th game of the season for Nigeria v Mexico last night in Arlington, Texas !
Well done for getting Kinetic into the conversation with out mention Romanias at Rangers
But that's the big difference isn't it. If you look at players like Beckham and the Neville brothers (as good examples), you hear the stories if them doing extra drills, extra running etc etc compare them to some of their peers who probably had more natural talent like Thornley and Gillespie.
Not everyone can be Lionel Messi but the number of professional footballs that can't hit a dead ball, let alone a moving one, is shocking really.
Martin Sandgaard (MS) is not qualified either technically or by experience to be our Head of data analysis.
MS is not qualified either technically or by experience to tell our coaches to run longer training sessions.
These are not opinions. They are facts.
If you feel CAFC can only improve with MS heading up data analysis or trying to change our coaching and training sessions then so be it.
But the facts are simple. And unavoidable.
And we finished 13th last year. We have no manager. We have significantly less players than last year.
It isn't going to be easier this season to get out of this division.
I prey for a miracle, but don't believe we have the right people heading up vital positions within the club for this to change in time for the season to be successful.
Being a close relative of the owner is actually a very good thing in this instance. I will explain why I think this.
If you break down the most crucial aspects of the businesses that operate in any given industry you find where the real, tangible value is. For example, in the airline industry, the most important assets of a airline operator, many people think, are the aircraft and the crew. This isn't the case. For an airline to operate profitably, the most important pieces of the jigsaw are the computer booking system that the airline works with and the sustainability of its forward fuel purchases. Planes are easy to get hold of - purchase, dry-lease, wet-lease. There's a never-ending supply of crew, ready, willing and able to be trained to work for airlines.
Not right now there isn’t, as shown with all of the EasyJet cancellations on Friday.
For all the talk of low levels of unemployment, what we actually have is a severe labour shortage in quite a few areas.
Being a close relative of the owner is actually a very good thing in this instance. I will explain why I think this.
If you break down the most crucial aspects of the businesses that operate in any given industry you find where the real, tangible value is. For example, in the airline industry, the most important assets of a airline operator, many people think, are the aircraft and the crew. This isn't the case. For an airline to operate profitably, the most important pieces of the jigsaw are the computer booking system that the airline works with and the sustainability of its forward fuel purchases. Planes are easy to get hold of - purchase, dry-lease, wet-lease. There's a never-ending supply of crew, ready, willing and able to be trained to work for airlines. So, for any airline, from low-cost carrier to full-service, legacy airline, the most important value-adds to the business are the computer reservation system that gets - and keeps - bums on seats and the appropriateness or otherwise of its deals to buy fuel.
Translate this into football. On the surface, the most important aspects are the first team playing staff and the manager. That's true in the present sense. But, in order to ensure that the playing staff is constantly and efficiently refreshed, the scouting, training, recruitment and development of players is far more crucial. Put it another way: you can look at any team's squad and manager guess at how well they will perform this season. But the quality of current playing and coaching staff isn't the determining factor as to how well the team - and the club - will be performing in ten years' time. These elements are crucial - perhaps beyond all others - to the performance of the team in seasons to come.
So far, so obvious.
So, why is hiring a member of your family "better" than hiring someone with experience in the industry gained at other clubs? After all, if you can steal another club's analyst, that's good right?
In Victorian Britain, hiring staff to do anything but manual work was very different to how it is now. Often, when bright young men came down from Oxford or Cambridge, then would arrive in London with a recommendation from a parent to work for an Uncle or similar relative, who owned a business. Partnerships were very popular and business owners would trust, implicitly, a young nephew more than they would a graduate whom they'd never met before. Because the most important aspect of the business was its trajectory being sustained: a nephew is more likely to work hard, long and diligently for his uncle's business than would someone completely foreign to that company. "Interviews" in the way we now know them were non-existant. What's the point of asking a young man silly questions when judging his character, when, instead, you already know everything about him and probably toasted his birth with your brother, 25 years ago? The risk of bringing shame onto the family was significant and sufficient to ensure that "nepotistic" recruitment actually worked well. And, in fact, the "risk" to the business of hiring a mediocre relation, as opposed to a whizz-kid unknown, was minuscule.
I think Thomas Sandgaard has determined that the crucial aspect of the business to get right is the long-term, successful recruitment and development of players. And I think he's determined the best way to do that is to have someone in that role who, he is sure, will never be poached, never walk away from a job while he's doing well and will have the very long-term health of the club at the forefront of his mind at all times.
The future value of a football club is very closely aligned with the intellectual property vested in the analysts. It's the well-resourced, diligent analytical ability of a club that improves its medium- to long-term future better than even signing five great players and a great manager. Because the great players wither and the manager - like all managers - eventually fails.
I know the square-root of fuck-all about scouting, football analysis and training methods. But I am heartened that the owner is taking these things very seriously. And I think it's a smart move to get someone in who is unlikely ever to walk away.
Or to use another airline industry analogy, would you let an unqualified member of the public pilot a 747 full of passengers just because he was the boss's son ?
Thanks, so he didn't make an attempt to change the training techniques, but to make the players train for longer. How long were they training for and how much longer did he want them to train for? Do you know how long Charlton trained last season in relation to similar clubs? Thanks.
Thanks, so he didn't make an attempt to change the training techniques, but to make the players train for longer. How long were they training for and how much longer did he want them to train for? Do you know how long Charlton trained last season in relation to similar clubs? Thanks.
I expect that our training levels were lower than the league benchmark, hence the intervention. Hardly surprising, every game I wondered what the hell they were doing in training cos it sure wasn't translating to the pitch.
Sometime ago I said if I was manager I would tell/suggest that if Morgan can spend a certain amount of time in the afternoon not only practicing his set pieces (decent) but his shooting with a moving ball (poor) it would make him hard to drop where with his inability to hit the target he is easy to drop. The same with Alex Gilbey who has the template to be a good player at this level ( Ipswich home match MOM) but goes walk about and disengages his brain at times ( Lincoln home match as well as an away game where he was on a yellow card and he kicked the ball away, but he was lucky as he was given a final warning not a 2nd yellow unlike the Lincoln game and I predicted after his first yellow he wouldn't survive the 90 minutes; he didn't survive 45!
I just assumed that players would realize that the more dedicated you are the more you get out of your career. I guess that's the difference with the top players and the also ran's.
Why wouldn't you hone your skills even if you had to have lunch at Sparrows and then practice and Practice for a couple of hours in the afternoon for even just one day a week ? Most of us would've given our right arms to be professional footballers ( not if we were keepers !)
Of course it shouldn't take the Owners son to suggest longer training sessions but players wanting to be better should always be the goal; Shouldn't it ?
The way the players celebrated being given a day off with Jacko was amusing but could be interpreted as players that see football just as a job ?
The excellent Undr the Cosh podcast is a real eye opener in this respect and worth a listen.
Thanks, so he didn't make an attempt to change the training techniques, but to make the players train for longer. How long were they training for and how much longer did he want them to train for? Do you know how long Charlton trained last season in relation to similar clubs? Thanks.
No idea but it’s exactly what you’d expect a layperson with no football background to put forward.
Sometime ago I said if I was manager I would tell/suggest that if Morgan can spend a certain amount of time in the afternoon not only practicing his set pieces (decent) but his shooting with a moving ball (poor) it would make him hard to drop where with his inability to hit the target he is easy to drop. The same with Alex Gilbey who has the template to be a good player at this level ( Ipswich home match MOM) but goes walk about and disengages his brain at times ( Lincoln home match as well as an away game where he was on a yellow card and he kicked the ball away, but he was lucky as he was given a final warning not a 2nd yellow unlike the Lincoln game and I predicted after his first yellow he wouldn't survive the 90 minutes; he didn't survive 45!
I just assumed that players would realize that the more dedicated you are the more you get out of your career. I guess that's the difference with the top players and the also ran's.
Why wouldn't you hone your skills even if you had to have lunch at Sparrows and then practice and Practice for a couple of hours in the afternoon for even just one day a week ? Most of us would've given our right arms to be professional footballers ( not if we were keepers !)
Of course it shouldn't take the Owners son to suggest longer training sessions but players wanting to be better should always be the goal; Shouldn't it ?
The way the players celebrated being given a day off with Jacko was amusing but could be interpreted as players that see football just as a job ?
The excellent Undr the Cosh podcast is a real eye opener in this respect and worth a listen.
Agreed.
Players getting a surprise day off training is often treated like Christmas has come early.
Neil Warnock was known to use wins as a way of incentivising time off, and it having a massive effect on player performance as they were more motivated to get the three points.
So by the same token if a terrible performance takes place, have players in on a Sunday Morning to do a debrief ? Can teams even do that now in law ?
I know Brian Clough wouldn't be able to punch Keane now or Ferguson kick a table so hard that a boot hits Beckham in the face. Beckham was making a commercial on the Monday and the kids and parents were told not to mention it as the make up artist was working to try to cover up the scar.
Comments
If you break down the most crucial aspects of the businesses that operate in any given industry you find where the real, tangible value is. For example, in the airline industry, the most important assets of a airline operator, many people think, are the aircraft and the crew. This isn't the case. For an airline to operate profitably, the most important pieces of the jigsaw are the computer booking system that the airline works with and the sustainability of its forward fuel purchases. Planes are easy to get hold of - purchase, dry-lease, wet-lease. There's a never-ending supply of crew, ready, willing and able to be trained to work for airlines. So, for any airline, from low-cost carrier to full-service, legacy airline, the most important value-adds to the business are the computer reservation system that gets - and keeps - bums on seats and the appropriateness or otherwise of its deals to buy fuel.
Translate this into football. On the surface, the most important aspects are the first team playing staff and the manager. That's true in the present sense. But, in order to ensure that the playing staff is constantly and efficiently refreshed, the scouting, training, recruitment and development of players is far more crucial. Put it another way: you can look at any team's squad and manager guess at how well they will perform this season. But the quality of current playing and coaching staff isn't the determining factor as to how well the team - and the club - will be performing in ten years' time. These elements are crucial - perhaps beyond all others - to the performance of the team in seasons to come.
So far, so obvious.
So, why is hiring a member of your family "better" than hiring someone with experience in the industry gained at other clubs? After all, if you can steal another club's analyst, that's good right?
In Victorian Britain, hiring staff to do anything but manual work was very different to how it is now. Often, when bright young men came down from Oxford or Cambridge, then would arrive in London with a recommendation from a parent to work for an Uncle or similar relative, who owned a business. Partnerships were very popular and business owners would trust, implicitly, a young nephew more than they would a graduate whom they'd never met before. Because the most important aspect of the business was its trajectory being sustained: a nephew is more likely to work hard, long and diligently for his uncle's business than would someone completely foreign to that company. "Interviews" in the way we now know them were non-existant. What's the point of asking a young man silly questions when judging his character, when, instead, you already know everything about him and probably toasted his birth with your brother, 25 years ago? The risk of bringing shame onto the family was significant and sufficient to ensure that "nepotistic" recruitment actually worked well. And, in fact, the "risk" to the business of hiring a mediocre relation, as opposed to a whizz-kid unknown, was minuscule.
I think Thomas Sandgaard has determined that the crucial aspect of the business to get right is the long-term, successful recruitment and development of players. And I think he's determined the best way to do that is to have someone in that role who, he is sure, will never be poached, never walk away from a job while he's doing well and will have the very long-term health of the club at the forefront of his mind at all times.
The future value of a football club is very closely aligned with the intellectual property vested in the analysts. It's the well-resourced, diligent analytical ability of a club that improves its medium- to long-term future better than even signing five great players and a great manager. Because the great players wither and the manager - like all managers - eventually fails.
I know the square-root of fuck-all about scouting, football analysis and training methods. But I am heartened that the owner is taking these things very seriously. And I think it's a smart move to get someone in who is unlikely ever to walk away.
But that's the big difference isn't it. If you look at players like Beckham and the Neville brothers (as good examples), you hear the stories if them doing extra drills, extra running etc etc compare them to some of their peers who probably had more natural talent like Thornley and Gillespie.
Not everyone can be Lionel Messi but the number of professional footballs that can't hit a dead ball, let alone a moving one, is shocking really.
MS is not qualified either technically or by experience to tell our coaches to run longer training sessions.
These are not opinions. They are facts.
If you feel CAFC can only improve with MS heading up data analysis or trying to change our coaching and training sessions then so be it.
But the facts are simple. And unavoidable.
And we finished 13th last year.
We have no manager.
We have significantly less players than last year.
It isn't going to be easier this season to get out of this division.
I prey for a miracle, but don't believe we have the right people heading up vital positions within the club for this to change in time for the season to be successful.
I hope to be proven wrong.
Edit;, well I thought it was a good idea...🤷♂️
What are you trying to say?
Hmmm.
But isn't it also difficult to relieve a family member of their duties if it was clear they were failing ?
And consider the scenario that a valued, experienced member of staff is relieved of their duties in order to make room for family.
We've learned that more than a few have left recently whilst not being made aware of their reasons.
Maybe nepotism is alive & "well" in SE7 !
Oh, nearly forgot...
It must surely be cheaper.
Thank you for your application Mr Chizz and I'm happy to inform you that that you have made the short list for head of recruitment.
.
Neil Warnock was known to use wins as a way of incentivising time off, and it having a massive effect on player performance as they were more motivated to get the three points.
Can teams even do that now in law ?
I know Brian Clough wouldn't be able to punch Keane now or Ferguson kick a table so hard that a boot hits Beckham in the face. Beckham was making a commercial on the Monday and the kids and parents were told not to mention it as the make up artist was working to try to cover up the scar.
https://www.millwallfc.co.uk/news/2022/may/the-lions-hiring-first-team-data-analyst/
Charles Reep: The military accountant who brought data analysis to English game
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/61648608Connor Washington is prolific.