Getting To Know The Network (4 Part Radio Documentary) (31/1 Part 3, pg. 17)

Clicked the link but getting a message that I blew up the Internet. Is that how Roly strikes back?

Interesting review of what happened at the time.

Weegie Addick said:

Got it working now. Main revelation for me is that Peeters was told to have an easy season - just make sure we didn't get relegated. So much for Premier League ambition.

Can't wait to listen to this, saving it pre gym to fire me up!

Nice to hear Peeters say "young guns" again

Powell came off as pure class in the last two episodes. I must say, Riga has also came off quite well. I didn't like the fact he was there so quickly, literally within hours of Powell going.

Despite this, Damien Matthew clearly felt he was respectful and understanding of the situation. I'm not sure why, but as soon as Karel Fraeye's voice came on I felt angry.

It's clear that the real architects of our survival in that first season were Powell's backroom staff, and the core team (and mindset) that he'd instilled in them. Fair play to Riga for fostering that, albeit with a different (more risky) playing style.

Was interesting to hear confirmation that Riga was prepared to clash with Roland; this is something I felt was quite obvious during his second stint with us last season.

We all knew that Jose Riga wanted to stay, and lets be honest - many of us wanted him to stay too. It's downright infuriating that even Katrien thought Riga should've stayed on permanently, but Roland decided that he wasn't enough of a yes-man. There lies Roland's priorities.

Good to hear from Cousins; sums up how confused the players must've been when Riga didn't stay. Not to mention, Fraeye was confused too - but didn't want to stay beyond 3 months himself?!

Very good breakdown of Roland's nonsensical claims after the email release. Interesting to see that - for a man who rates statistical and numerical methods so highly - he got both Riga's points average incorrectly, and the amount of appearances of the network players. Bizarre to say the least..

Always good to hear Corty again, I've got a lot of time for Leon. Especially after his appearance on here that time - he seemed like a cracking guy.

Gutted to hear that Ben Hamer had wanted to stay, and tried to push the new contract through. Genuinely sad to hear him say that he felt unwanted, really liked the club and enjoyed living in Chislehurst.

Confirmation of Michael Morrison's treatment is depressing too. We've clearly treated our players absolutely shockingly since 2014, in every single way. Churchy hints that Morrison was also spoken too very harshly.

Poor bloody Piotr too, told the day before the pre-season flight? His treatment has been absolutely shocking too, and he wasn't even a "historic player" - Roland bought him FFS!

I'm not entirely sure why Peeters was trusted more with recruitment than Powell, so entirely peculiar considering Powell's recruitment in League One. (The thought of Peeters being an international striker still cracks me up..)

Suddenly Peeters peetering out makes a lot of sense, sounds like he was well and truly strung along - he knew full well the players were "knackered" and the squad too thin. I don't doubt he was abrasive to the players, but it sounds like he really wanted success and a top-six finish.

I'm pretty surprised by the positivity attached to Katrien, she seems to be widely understood as a likable character who just happens to be a useful idiot for Roland. Not entirely surprising, and it does make you ponder whether she was genuine when she gave Peeters the vote of confidence. This just begs the question why the feck does she put up with this?

At least we finally know that Guy Luzon was the one who got the team ready for Watford during the week. Also confirmation that he'd spent the week working illegally without the work permit..

Covered End said:

So Riga thought the network players weren't good enough and played them even less than Powell.

No one knows why Riga didn't retain the job after keeping Charlton up, but the best guess is see above.

Peeters brought in some decent players like Buyens & Vetokele, but he knew the squad wasn't good enough & RD wouldn't let him strengthen, other than inadequate network players.

Peeters brief was to keep Charlton up. Charlton have no Premiership ambition.

Peeters was a different type of character to Powell and Riga and some players and staff didn't get on with him. Presumably, he is an abrasive character.

Peeters was presumably sacked because the results went pear shaped, he wanted to strengthen, wasn't allowed and was possibly at loggerheads with the regime. Peeters didn't rate Meire.

Luzon was brought in within 24 hours, even though Meire led Matthew to believe him & Roberts were to be in charge for a while, whilst a new manager was sought.

Polish Pete thought he was doing ok, was getting ready for the pre season tour and was told he wasn't going the next day, but had to go to St Truiden instead, no discussion.

Nothing really new to Charlton geeks like me, but still a good programme.

Pretty good summary. Left me a little disappointed but maybe I was expecting a bit too much after the first two episodes.
Felt really sorry for Polish Pete again. What a terrible way to treat a young player.
Confirms that this regime is poison and without ambition for the club.

Forcing players to leave must happen at other clubs but the way its handled is important. Its terrible to listen and find out what happened to Morrision, Church and Polish Pete. This should never happen and surprised the PFA don't do more to combat this sort of behavoiur. More evidence of RD interferring and lack of investment which ruined championship football.

I love that Peeters was told his only remit was to keep us up and there was no pressure on him then got the sack in January!

And who knew that George Tucudean wasn't good enough?

Although I'm sure he earnt decent money from it all, Polish Pete really suffered unfairly.....

Good work.

Major said:

Obviously appeals to some, judging by the comments and a couple of opportunities to have yet another 'dig' for others but I don't get the point of the regurgitation. The aim being what, exactly?

Perhaps it clarified one thing, at least a previous poster thinks so - and that was Peeters getting sacked 'because he had a backbone'. I thought he was sacked because, among other failures, he was a bully and was caught making disparaging remarks about certain players during training. In fact, being a bully, I felt that was the reason he wanted Morrison out because Morrison was 'Charlton' and he really DID have a backbone and so stood up to Peeters. Depends who is writing the history, I guess.

I'd guess what you say is also true. However, if RD wanted Peeters to stay he would have.

Major said:

Obviously appeals to some, judging by the comments and a couple of opportunities to have yet another 'dig' for others but I don't get the point of the regurgitation. The aim being what, exactly?

Perhaps it clarified one thing, at least a previous poster thinks so - and that was Peeters getting sacked 'because he had a backbone'. I thought he was sacked because, among other failures, he was a bully and was caught making disparaging remarks about certain players during training. In fact, being a bully, I felt that was the reason he wanted Morrison out because Morrison was 'Charlton' and he really DID have a backbone and so stood up to Peeters. Depends who is writing the history, I guess.

I can't find too much fault in the second paragraph, you're welcome to your interpretation - and to be fair I think there's some merit in what you're saying. I suspect his bullying antics were a big concern for the club, especially if his objective was solely to keep us up.

However I think you're being a bit unfair saying that there's little to be gained from what is essentially "regurgitation". As someone who clearly feels there's an agenda behind most of the posters, surely you can understand the real value that comes from having these events explained first hand? After all, there is very little question over the credibility of what is mentioned.

As for the aim, surely you can see the aim is simply to gain an understanding in to how our club is currently being ran. Nothing more, nothing less. If things were being done sensibly and correctly then there would be very little to complain about would there? Unfortunately, as per the first hand accounts, the majority of the fears and rumours are indeed correct.

I can't help but like Riga. Seems a thoroughly nice geezer and a decent manager

Covered End said:

Major said:

Obviously appeals to some, judging by the comments and a couple of opportunities to have yet another 'dig' for others but I don't get the point of the regurgitation. The aim being what, exactly?

Perhaps it clarified one thing, at least a previous poster thinks so - and that was Peeters getting sacked 'because he had a backbone'. I thought he was sacked because, among other failures, he was a bully and was caught making disparaging remarks about certain players during training. In fact, being a bully, I felt that was the reason he wanted Morrison out because Morrison was 'Charlton' and he really DID have a backbone and so stood up to Peeters. Depends who is writing the history, I guess.

I'd guess what you say is also true. However, if RD wanted Peeters to stay he would have.

Good point.

Improvement?!

Clearly after this transfer window, our "ambition" is now League One mid table mediocrity.

Some people really do inhabit an alternative reality.

Just listened.

What is clearer by the minute is that Roland Duchatelets brain is like an egg shell filled with manure.