George Tucudean signs for Charlton
Comments
-
people on here are writing Pete off after 12 minutes, so 12 games is a lot lolForeverAddickted said:Cant believe that people are writing Joe Pigott off after just 12 (Twelve) Appearances... Harry Kane was a nobody himself after 12-appearances for Spurs, he'd struggled with loan spells before finally exploding on to the scene last season, no I'm not saying Joe is going to be THAT good but people need to pipe down and just let Joe develop, we all know that if Joe goes on to have a stellar career after being released by Charlton, the same fans that are saying he's crap will be the same fans moaning wanting to know why we sold him in the first place, so bloomin' hush, and give him a chance!!
2 -
But pigott was mentioned too, and whom I was suggesting should be given a chance instead of GeorgeElfsborgAddick said:
Erm, excuse me but Tucudean is being talked about.cafc4life said:
We are talking about Pigott not George ElfsborgElfsborgAddick said:
Wolves at home he had a nightmare.cafc4life said:
Millwall at home? A game in which he should never of been thrown in,in the first place,and a game in which all 11 other players on the pitch also didnt turn up.Slightly unfair to single him out for one game,especially as George played 20+ and only made an impression in what 4?SELR_addicks said:
Interesting that people would rather give a chance to a player who had the worst game in a Charlton shirt I've ever seen, than a player who was technically good (brilliant at times) but needed to make a few adaptions to his physical game.cafc4life said:Id rather see Pigott given a chance than have George back
Maybe Tucudean should rename himself Davies or Smith in order to win favour with the fans.
He had three glorious chances in the first half, one chance square on goal from about twelve yards out and he missed kicking the bloody ball!0 -
Much has been made of the similarities between Joe and Kane, but after his poor debut season Harry worked hard on weights in close season and this year possibly played beneath himself in U21s rather than holiday. Joe, whose family I read are quite well off, tweeted about enjoying his vacation. It's about application and commitment.ForeverAddickted said:Cant believe that people are writing Joe Pigott off after just 12 (Twelve) Appearances... Harry Kane was a nobody himself after 12-appearances for Spurs, he'd struggled with loan spells before finally exploding on to the scene last season, no I'm not saying Joe is going to be THAT good but people need to pipe down and just let Joe develop, we all know that if Joe goes on to have a stellar career after being released by Charlton, the same fans that are saying he's crap will be the same fans moaning wanting to know why we sold him in the first place, so bloomin' hush, and give him a chance!!
2 -
Harry Kane did spend a bit of his Holiday in Dubai / Sydney though didnt he...?harveys gardener said:
Much has been made of the similarities between Joe and Kane, but after his poor debut season Harry worked hard on weights in close season and this year possibly played beneath himself in U21s rather than holiday. Joe, whose family I read are quite well off, tweeted about enjoying his vacation. It's about application and commitment.ForeverAddickted said:Cant believe that people are writing Joe Pigott off after just 12 (Twelve) Appearances... Harry Kane was a nobody himself after 12-appearances for Spurs, he'd struggled with loan spells before finally exploding on to the scene last season, no I'm not saying Joe is going to be THAT good but people need to pipe down and just let Joe develop, we all know that if Joe goes on to have a stellar career after being released by Charlton, the same fans that are saying he's crap will be the same fans moaning wanting to know why we sold him in the first place, so bloomin' hush, and give him a chance!!
Joe Pigott's family might be well off but it doesnt mean that he's spent his whole pre-season on holiday forgetting about what is going on, are we 100% sure that there has been zero application and commitment from Joe this summer, after all he's had to work hard just to get to First Team Level even at Charlton, in todays Footballing day and age, kids get released from clubs every summer in their droves, for Pigott to have survived (and to have received a new Contract only the other year) must mean that he's showing the application and commitment to become a pro-Footballer0 -
Oh, okay.cafc4life said:
But pigott was mentioned too, and whom I was suggesting should be given a chance instead of GeorgeElfsborgAddick said:
Erm, excuse me but Tucudean is being talked about.cafc4life said:
We are talking about Pigott not George ElfsborgElfsborgAddick said:
Wolves at home he had a nightmare.cafc4life said:
Millwall at home? A game in which he should never of been thrown in,in the first place,and a game in which all 11 other players on the pitch also didnt turn up.Slightly unfair to single him out for one game,especially as George played 20+ and only made an impression in what 4?SELR_addicks said:
Interesting that people would rather give a chance to a player who had the worst game in a Charlton shirt I've ever seen, than a player who was technically good (brilliant at times) but needed to make a few adaptions to his physical game.cafc4life said:Id rather see Pigott given a chance than have George back
Maybe Tucudean should rename himself Davies or Smith in order to win favour with the fans.
He had three glorious chances in the first half, one chance square on goal from about twelve yards out and he missed kicking the bloody ball!0 -
cafc4life said:
Id rather see Pigott given a chance than have George back
I can't believe people are still mentioning Pigott and Harry Kane in the same threads. I'd love Zak Ansah to be the new Romario toopaulie8290 said:
people on here are writing Pete off after 12 minutes, so 12 games is a lot lolForeverAddickted said:Cant believe that people are writing Joe Pigott off after just 12 (Twelve) Appearances... Harry Kane was a nobody himself after 12-appearances for Spurs, he'd struggled with loan spells before finally exploding on to the scene last season, no I'm not saying Joe is going to be THAT good but people need to pipe down and just let Joe develop, we all know that if Joe goes on to have a stellar career after being released by Charlton, the same fans that are saying he's crap will be the same fans moaning wanting to know why we sold him in the first place, so bloomin' hush, and give him a chance!!
1 -
What is going on with George? Is he with the club? With the current injury crisis up top got a chance of getting into the team. Personally would welcome him back as think we could do a lot worse than him. Also, if I'm not wrong is still relatively young3
-
As far as i am aware he is still on loan at Steau, but has not even been on the bench recently(could be injured)cafc4ever said:What is going on with George? Is he with the club? With the current injury crisis up top got a chance of getting into the team. Personally would welcome him back as think we could do a lot worse than him. Also, if I'm not wrong is still relatively young
0 -
Was sent back because he wouldn't take a wage cut.0
-
Was that confirmed anywhere?0
-
Sponsored links:
-
Of course not, but someone who may or may not have been Colin once said it on Charlton Life therefore it isScoham said:Was that confirmed anywhere?
1 -
Tucudean is starting tomorrow
#FAKT0 -
Is he back at CAFC now? He is according to that ever trustworthy and reliable source that is wikipedia. Maybe hes the answer to our goalscoring problems whilst Mak, Vetokele and Watt rediscover their fitness and form respectively.3
-
Didnt Sue Parkes say that because he completed an International Loan his Contract with Charlton became null and void whilst that loan was ongoing because he's now registered under the Romanian FA (means at he'll have to stay on loan @ another club out there until the summer if he wants to play)
Guess it was the same with Reza... His first loan ended for some reason and we all thought he was coming back, he then joined another Kuwaiti (?) and he was hated even more but by the looks of things, he came back when he did because it was the earliest he could come back0 -
I think the issue relates to the transfer window as well as the contract. Contracts can be changed, but he can't sign for Charlton (in effect what he'd need to do) outside of a transfer window.ForeverAddickted said:Didnt Sue Parkes say that because he completed an International Loan his Contract with Charlton became null and void whilst that loan was ongoing because he's now registered under the Romanian FA (means at he'll have to stay on loan @ another club out there until the summer if he wants to play)
Guess it was the same with Reza... His first loan ended for some reason and we all thought he was coming back, he then joined another Kuwaiti (?) and he was hated even more but by the looks of things, he came back when he did because it was the earliest he could come back0 -
I still don't get how you can own a players contract and pay his wage but not be able to play him because he has not 'signed' for you?1
-
Are we paying his wages ?
Saw him at his debut ? At Brentford, two bob0 -
After his performance in the last derby match he played in I can't believe he isn't being recalled for tomorrow nights game.4
-
Can't he do something else, seeing that we are paying his wages. Coach the youth or women's team, sell programmes on match day?Athletico Charlton said:I still don't get how you can own a players contract and pay his wage but not be able to play him because he has not 'signed' for you?
2 -
Could always use an extra pair of hands behind the bar on matchdays.killerandflash said:
Can't he do something else, seeing that we are paying his wages. Coach the youth or women's team, sell programmes on match day?Athletico Charlton said:I still don't get how you can own a players contract and pay his wage but not be able to play him because he has not 'signed' for you?
2 -
Sponsored links:
-
It's because there is no such thing as an international loan, as far as I understand it. He's technically not our player at present.Athletico Charlton said:I still don't get how you can own a players contract and pay his wage but not be able to play him because he has not 'signed' for you?
0 -
So who is paying his wages then AB?0
-
But we are still paying his wages? Or not?Airman Brown said:
It's because there is no such thing as an international loan, as far as I understand it. He's technically not our player at present.Athletico Charlton said:I still don't get how you can own a players contract and pay his wage but not be able to play him because he has not 'signed' for you?
0 -
Isn't this one of these stupid situations that will eventually cause a European Court ruling that this rule is in breach of human rights or employment law or something? That a club can pay wages and yet not be allowed to use someone for the purpose for which he was employed , or something like that...0
-
That'll depend on the agreement between Charlton and the Romanian club, I should imagine.stackitsteve said:
But we are still paying his wages? Or not?Airman Brown said:
It's because there is no such thing as an international loan, as far as I understand it. He's technically not our player at present.Athletico Charlton said:I still don't get how you can own a players contract and pay his wage but not be able to play him because he has not 'signed' for you?
0 -
If I had to take a wild guess...Airman Brown said:
That'll depend on the agreement between Charlton and the Romanian club, I should imagine.stackitsteve said:
But we are still paying his wages? Or not?Airman Brown said:
It's because there is no such thing as an international loan, as far as I understand it. He's technically not our player at present.Athletico Charlton said:I still don't get how you can own a players contract and pay his wage but not be able to play him because he has not 'signed' for you?
0 -
Well like 'KillerandFlash' says, surely it is breaking European employment law to pay a chap in line with his contract as a professional football but stop him actually working?0
-
No one's stopping him from working. it's got to be lawful for the football authorities to control player registrations that prevent particular players appearing for particular clubs at a given time, just as you can agree short-term non-compete clauses in any contract.Athletico Charlton said:Well like 'KillerandFlash' says, surely it is breaking European employment law to pay a chap in line with his contract as a professional football but stop him actually working?
He's (presumably) being paid regardless according to his contract. He can play for such clubs as the rules allow - but it appears that excludes Charlton who have contracted to transfer his registration for a consideration (fee and/or wages). All this would mean is that you can't reverse such a deal outside of a transfer window.0 -
The whole concepts of transfer windows or restricting the number of clubs you can play for during a season are bound to be challenged at some time, in no other field do you have these rules...Airman Brown said:
No one's stopping him from working. it's got to be lawful for the football authorities to control player registrations that prevent particular players appearing for particular clubs at a given time, just as you can agree short-term non-compete clauses in any contract.Athletico Charlton said:Well like 'KillerandFlash' says, surely it is breaking European employment law to pay a chap in line with his contract as a professional football but stop him actually working?
He's (presumably) being paid regardless according to his contract. He can play for such clubs as the rules allow - but it appears that excludes Charlton who have contracted to transfer his registration for a consideration (fee and/or wages). All this would mean is that you can't reverse such a deal outside of a transfer window.0 -
Surely as Steau cancelled the loan he is technically not contracted to anyone and can be signed by anyone as a free agent... Potentially by his previous employers?0
