Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Deadline Day from Pg.641 - Summer 2025 Charlton Athletic Transfer Rumours
Comments
-
Sounds like a weird lie to be fair. I don't think he would make that up for no reason.king addick said:https://the72.co.uk/2025/07/04/charlton-athletic-failed-malik-mothersillle-bids-detailed/
That wally of a chairman at P'Boro spouting again.
That's now the 2nd player we have been quite publicly linked with that we didn't up our bid for.
I know people will say "sounds like the club aren't letting themselves be mugged off" etc but these players cost money. For the sake of 300-500k twice to lose out on a desired target, it just isn't worth it, unless you can find someone of better quality for cheaper.
It's ok to say we are on a tight budget, which if 5-10m is true, that makes it the very lower end of champ. It might be that our budget heavily leaned towards Goalkeeper and a forward as those are two positions we definitely needed a player.
Just don't get why it seems we have this view now of "looks like we didn't want to pay then rather than we couldn't" when most signs point towards us just having a low but competitive championship budget. We are going to miss out on players if that's the case, and that is part of football.4 -
Glad we're being sensible, setting a price we think players are worth and walking away if its not accepted.king addick said:https://the72.co.uk/2025/07/04/charlton-athletic-failed-malik-mothersillle-bids-detailed/
That wally of a chairman at P'Boro spouting again.
Quite like Darragh MacAnthony, at least he's transparent with the fans and clearly has the best interests of the club at heart.
But he does love to tell everyone how great a negotiator he is, doesn't he?6 -
Very mixed opinions online from Luton fans when he left Luton.charlton_hero said:Is he any good?
So he's probably alright but not amazing.
0 -
Not particularly excited about this one. It adds depth to the squad, which is useful, but I worry Bell might be on a downward trajectory based on last season’s performances. That said, a change of environment and reuniting with the manager who previously got the best out of him could help spark a revival.
Let’s just hope the Luton recruitment phase is behind us now.
Kudos RedRobo, bang on the money!4 -
No Famewo then?11
-
Exactly. I said before that we seem to be pretty clear on what we are willing to spend on any given player. If Posh or whoever can't/won't do that deal we move on.DOUCHER said:
we managed to get to the number required for tanto which i believe was higher than mothersille so suggests we didn't rate him as highlyking addick said:https://the72.co.uk/2025/07/04/charlton-athletic-failed-malik-mothersillle-bids-detailed/
That wally of a chairman at P'Boro spouting again.7 -
That was fun @LouisMend, can you make it a regular podcast feature?Scoham said:Rich Cawley and Louis Mendez both mentioned the word bell at the start of their latest podcast out this morning 👀0 -
That's the point though - if they're asking too much the money is better spent on someone else we think is as good but who isn't overpriced.Braziliance said:
Sounds like a weird lie to be fair. I don't think he would make that up for no reason.king addick said:https://the72.co.uk/2025/07/04/charlton-athletic-failed-malik-mothersillle-bids-detailed/
That wally of a chairman at P'Boro spouting again.
That's now the 2nd player we have been quite publicly linked with that we didn't up our bid for.
I know people will say "sounds like the club aren't letting themselves be mugged off" etc but these players cost money. For the sake of 300-500k twice to lose out on a desired target, it just isn't worth it, unless you can find someone of better quality for cheaper.
It's ok to say we are on a tight budget, which if 5-10m is true, that makes it the very lower end of champ. It might be that our budget heavily leaned towards Goalkeeper and a forward as those are two positions we definitely needed a player.
Just don't get why it seems we have this view now of "looks like we didn't want to pay then rather than we couldn't" when most signs point towards us just having a low but competitive championship budget. We are going to miss out on players if that's the case, and that is part of football.
Or if we're going to spend that much, we'd expect to do better.
Setting a limit for what a player is worth and not going above it is sensible, otherwise you end up paying £4m for Will Grigg.18 -
Kind of see your point but he's been signed as the replacement for Tanto at Stockport so either we wanted both or we decided that a higher fee for Tanto was better value for money. If Dmac only wanted 2-300k less for MM than Stockport did for Tanto for example then we maybe have decided to pay the extra insteadBraziliance said:
Sounds like a weird lie to be fair. I don't think he would make that up for no reason.king addick said:https://the72.co.uk/2025/07/04/charlton-athletic-failed-malik-mothersillle-bids-detailed/
That wally of a chairman at P'Boro spouting again.
That's now the 2nd player we have been quite publicly linked with that we didn't up our bid for.
I know people will say "sounds like the club aren't letting themselves be mugged off" etc but these players cost money. For the sake of 300-500k twice to lose out on a desired target, it just isn't worth it, unless you can find someone of better quality for cheaper.
It's ok to say we are on a tight budget, which if 5-10m is true, that makes it the very lower end of champ. It might be that our budget heavily leaned towards Goalkeeper and a forward as those are two positions we definitely needed a player.
Just don't get why it seems we have this view now of "looks like we didn't want to pay then rather than we couldn't" when most signs point towards us just having a low but competitive championship budget. We are going to miss out on players if that's the case, and that is part of football.8 -
Sponsored links:
-
Think you can cross that one off the list now. Probably a bit of a complicated one now it's come out Norwich are still owed his original transfer fee.I-SAW-POUSO-PLAY said:No Famewo then?1 -
Think you're right about crossing him off but his Norwich fee is totally irrelevant to us, that's between Norwich and Sheff WedMarcusH26 said:
Think you can cross that one off the list now. Probably a bit of a complicated one now it's come out Norwich are still owed his original transfer fee.I-SAW-POUSO-PLAY said:No Famewo then?1 -
thenewbie said:
Exactly. I said before that we seem to be pretty clear on what we are willing to spend on any given player. If Posh or whoever can't/won't do that deal we move on.DOUCHER said:
we managed to get to the number required for tanto which i believe was higher than mothersille so suggests we didn't rate him as highlyking addick said:https://the72.co.uk/2025/07/04/charlton-athletic-failed-malik-mothersillle-bids-detailed/
That wally of a chairman at P'Boro spouting again.Just to add to this. Mothersille and Tanto offer different profiles, so I don’t think it was a case of choosing one over the other. Tanto's signing had been in the works for some time. That makes me fairly confident we’ll still see another winger or forward come in. Cawley hinted at the same in his latest podcast.
2 -
Which might be because no one was actually in for Tanto at that price other than one other mystery club someone said?DOUCHER said:
we managed to get to the number required for tanto which i believe was higher than mothersille so suggests we didn't rate him as highlyking addick said:https://the72.co.uk/2025/07/04/charlton-athletic-failed-malik-mothersillle-bids-detailed/
That wally of a chairman at P'Boro spouting again.
Two signings for fees, Kaminski where our competition was a club offering half of the wages and Tanto who we had a clear shot at (based on the rumour mills)
The two targets we missed (3 if you include Small) Galbraith & Mothersille. Both times we had genuine competition.
Fair play we have spent fees, but the consistent pattern is, when we are in a bidding war of sorts, we withdraw. Hopefully that theme changes as all your signings can't be hidden gems, good players are on multiple clubs radars and you have to meet clubs demands if you want them. It's not about 'not getting mugged off', players have prices.9 -
Ding Dong Dell...
We've got Amari'i bell...🙄0 -
Yeah fair point , I guess now he's officially out of contract it's no one else's business bar Sheffield Wednesday to sort it.fenaddick said:
Think you're right about crossing him off but his Norwich fee is totally irrelevant to us, that's between Norwich and Sheff WedMarcusH26 said:
Think you can cross that one off the list now. Probably a bit of a complicated one now it's come out Norwich are still owed his original transfer fee.I-SAW-POUSO-PLAY said:No Famewo then?0 -
Penny is out agsinfenaddick said:0 -
He only cover …. It’s a squad game we need back up players as well as first team onesJohn_Fitzpatrick1 said:Not particularly excited about this one. It adds depth to the squad, which is useful, but I worry Bell might be on a downward trajectory based on last season’s performances. That said, a change of environment and reuniting with the manager who previously got the best out of him could help spark a revival.
Let’s just hope the Luton recruitment phase is behind us now.
Kudos RedRobo, bang on the money!
1 -
I’m ready for the peters but the £5 - 10 million pound budget is a concern for me. Sounds like that’ll be bottom five in The Championship and we’re also playing catch up with our squad in terms of Championship quality. I think we’ve all been excited by actually spending some money for once and got carried away with this and not focused on the fact that we’re newly promoted and need a massive squad upgrade. Good the owners are finding some cash for Jones, of course it is, but ambition other than survival is something I can’t see I’m afraid. Squad building not over yet but at this point I still feel like it’s going to be a long hard season.5
-
It could be tricky if Wednesday have not finished paying for him does that mean he still belongs to Norwich ??MarcusH26 said:
Yeah fair point , I guess now he's officially out of contract it's no one else's business bar Sheffield Wednesday to sort it.fenaddick said:
Think you're right about crossing him off but his Norwich fee is totally irrelevant to us, that's between Norwich and Sheff WedMarcusH26 said:
Think you can cross that one off the list now. Probably a bit of a complicated one now it's come out Norwich are still owed his original transfer fee.I-SAW-POUSO-PLAY said:No Famewo then?0 -
Sponsored links:
-
No, just means Sheffield Wednesday are in debt. Famewo is a free agent not owned by anyone and can move wherever he likesRonnieMoore said:
It could be tricky if Wednesday have not finished paying for him does that mean he still belongs to Norwich ??MarcusH26 said:
Yeah fair point , I guess now he's officially out of contract it's no one else's business bar Sheffield Wednesday to sort it.fenaddick said:
Think you're right about crossing him off but his Norwich fee is totally irrelevant to us, that's between Norwich and Sheff WedMarcusH26 said:
Think you can cross that one off the list now. Probably a bit of a complicated one now it's come out Norwich are still owed his original transfer fee.I-SAW-POUSO-PLAY said:No Famewo then?1 -
No. He’s out of contract. A free agent. Any financial dispute over payments between the two clubs is nothing to do with the player.RonnieMoore said:
It could be tricky if Wednesday have not finished paying for him does that mean he still belongs to Norwich ??MarcusH26 said:
Yeah fair point , I guess now he's officially out of contract it's no one else's business bar Sheffield Wednesday to sort it.fenaddick said:
Think you're right about crossing him off but his Norwich fee is totally irrelevant to us, that's between Norwich and Sheff WedMarcusH26 said:
Think you can cross that one off the list now. Probably a bit of a complicated one now it's come out Norwich are still owed his original transfer fee.I-SAW-POUSO-PLAY said:No Famewo then?0 -
Going off what we know I agree, but we don’t know what we don’t know, e.g. when this hasn’t been the case, the actual reasons for us withdrawing were etc.Braziliance said:
Which might be because no one was actually in for Tanto at that price other than one other mystery club someone said?DOUCHER said:
we managed to get to the number required for tanto which i believe was higher than mothersille so suggests we didn't rate him as highlyking addick said:https://the72.co.uk/2025/07/04/charlton-athletic-failed-malik-mothersillle-bids-detailed/
That wally of a chairman at P'Boro spouting again.
Two signings for fees, Kaminski where our competition was a club offering half of the wages and Tanto who we had a clear shot at (based on the rumour mills)
The two targets we missed (3 if you include Small) Galbraith & Mothersille. Both times we had genuine competition.
Fair play we have spent fees, but the consistent pattern is, when we are in a bidding war of sorts, we withdraw. Hopefully that theme changes as all your signings can't be hidden gems, good players are on multiple clubs radars and you have to meet clubs demands if you want them. It's not about 'not getting mugged off', players have prices.
We appear to have beaten other clubs to Kaminski, and there was talk of late interest in Tanto. Mothersille might have been 2nd choice to Tanto.
With Galbraith it’s going to happen sometimes, but the same will happen to Swansea. Most clubs don’t get every first choice target and beat all competition to signings.After 5 years in L1 I get why some players would prefer a more established Championship team, but at least we’re giving it a good go on fees and wages. I think you’d agree it looks like our budget for fees could realistically be £5-10m, which is far bigger than most were expecting a few months ago assuming we got promoted. I got the impression the feeling was we’d continue looking for frees and paying small fees, whatever division we were in.7 -
Charlie Barker joining Rotherham from Crawley… he done well re-building his career38
-
i can't see that he has come in as cover - a 31 year old, recently in the prem, will be on the upper end of our wage bracket. I've no idea how quick he is but he looks a bit like Usain bolt to me so on that basis i reckon he'll go straight into Gillesphey's spot.RonnieMoore said:
He only cover …. It’s a squad game we need back up players as well as first team onesJohn_Fitzpatrick1 said:Not particularly excited about this one. It adds depth to the squad, which is useful, but I worry Bell might be on a downward trajectory based on last season’s performances. That said, a change of environment and reuniting with the manager who previously got the best out of him could help spark a revival.
Let’s just hope the Luton recruitment phase is behind us now.
Kudos RedRobo, bang on the money!ButtleJR said:Jones describes him as a left sided centre half.0 -
His dad played 140 times for them too.RonnieMoore said:Charlie Barker joining Rotherham from Crawley… he done well re-building his career4 -
Think it’s more the point we think a certain player is worth x amount and won’t pay over the odds. If you take what DMac says as being true where are all the other Championship sides queuing up for Mothersille if you believe he’s that good and available at a fair price? The lack of other interest suggests Championship clubs thinks he’s either not that good or they can do better elsewhere. You do seem fixated in seeing the negative in everything.Braziliance said:
Sounds like a weird lie to be fair. I don't think he would make that up for no reason.king addick said:https://the72.co.uk/2025/07/04/charlton-athletic-failed-malik-mothersillle-bids-detailed/
That wally of a chairman at P'Boro spouting again.
That's now the 2nd player we have been quite publicly linked with that we didn't up our bid for.
I know people will say "sounds like the club aren't letting themselves be mugged off" etc but these players cost money. For the sake of 300-500k twice to lose out on a desired target, it just isn't worth it, unless you can find someone of better quality for cheaper.
It's ok to say we are on a tight budget, which if 5-10m is true, that makes it the very lower end of champ. It might be that our budget heavily leaned towards Goalkeeper and a forward as those are two positions we definitely needed a player.
Just don't get why it seems we have this view now of "looks like we didn't want to pay then rather than we couldn't" when most signs point towards us just having a low but competitive championship budget. We are going to miss out on players if that's the case, and that is part of football.10 -
and being Golfie's brother, you know what that looks likeLargeAddick said:
Think it’s more the point we think a certain player is worth x amount and won’t pay over the odds. If you take what DMac says as being true where are all the other Championship sides queuing up for Mothersille if you believe he’s that good and available at a fair price? The lack of other interest suggests Championship clubs thinks he’s either not that good or they can do better elsewhere. You do seem fixated in seeing the negative in everything.Braziliance said:
Sounds like a weird lie to be fair. I don't think he would make that up for no reason.king addick said:https://the72.co.uk/2025/07/04/charlton-athletic-failed-malik-mothersillle-bids-detailed/
That wally of a chairman at P'Boro spouting again.
That's now the 2nd player we have been quite publicly linked with that we didn't up our bid for.
I know people will say "sounds like the club aren't letting themselves be mugged off" etc but these players cost money. For the sake of 300-500k twice to lose out on a desired target, it just isn't worth it, unless you can find someone of better quality for cheaper.
It's ok to say we are on a tight budget, which if 5-10m is true, that makes it the very lower end of champ. It might be that our budget heavily leaned towards Goalkeeper and a forward as those are two positions we definitely needed a player.
Just don't get why it seems we have this view now of "looks like we didn't want to pay then rather than we couldn't" when most signs point towards us just having a low but competitive championship budget. We are going to miss out on players if that's the case, and that is part of football.5 -
If 5m-10m is on actual transfer fees then I’mShootersHillGuru said:I’m ready for the peters but the £5 - 10 million pound budget is a concern for me. Sounds like that’ll be bottom five in The Championship and we’re also playing catch up with our squad in terms of Championship quality. I think we’ve all been excited by actually spending some money for once and got carried away with this and not focused on the fact that we’re newly promoted and need a massive squad upgrade. Good the owners are finding some cash for Jones, of course it is, but ambition other than survival is something I can’t see I’m afraid. Squad building not over yet but at this point I still feel like it’s going to be a long hard season.
happy with that as we’ve spent about 2.6m so far plus two free transfers, pretty happy with our business so far, Long may it continue.13 -
1.5-2 million for Galbraith though isn't too much money and neither is Mothersille for roughly 1 million. The only scenario in which you can say they are overpriced is if you aren't splashing the cash. Cause then you have to factor budget and where you are willing to invest that budget.North Lower Neil said:
That's the point though - if they're asking too much the money is better spent on someone else we think is as good but who isn't overpriced.Braziliance said:
Sounds like a weird lie to be fair. I don't think he would make that up for no reason.king addick said:https://the72.co.uk/2025/07/04/charlton-athletic-failed-malik-mothersillle-bids-detailed/
That wally of a chairman at P'Boro spouting again.
That's now the 2nd player we have been quite publicly linked with that we didn't up our bid for.
I know people will say "sounds like the club aren't letting themselves be mugged off" etc but these players cost money. For the sake of 300-500k twice to lose out on a desired target, it just isn't worth it, unless you can find someone of better quality for cheaper.
It's ok to say we are on a tight budget, which if 5-10m is true, that makes it the very lower end of champ. It might be that our budget heavily leaned towards Goalkeeper and a forward as those are two positions we definitely needed a player.
Just don't get why it seems we have this view now of "looks like we didn't want to pay then rather than we couldn't" when most signs point towards us just having a low but competitive championship budget. We are going to miss out on players if that's the case, and that is part of football.
Or if we're going to spend that much, we'd expect to do better.
Setting a limit for what a player is worth and not going above it is sensible, otherwise you end up paying £4m for Will Grigg.
The Will Grigg transfer for 4 million is becoming a bit of a false dilemma. Of course not every player does well you pay cash for, there are loads of other examples where clubs 'overpay' and it works out successfully.
We are talking on missing out on desired targets for hundreds of thousands here, if the reports are true, not millions.
I genuinely don't really mind we are missing out on targets cause that is football, and it isn't my money to spend. I just don't see why we can't just look at it for what it is. It's a shame we are missing out, but clubs aren't trying to mug us off, they're trying to make themselves sustainable and the fees being quoted for these players are very reasonable transfer fees.
4
