Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Next manager - Ben Garner confirmed (p256)
Comments
-
Agreed. He also wasn’t allowed to bring any coaching staff with him. Mark Robson and Mark Kinsella forced on him wasn’t it?Cafc43v3r said:
The reason that Dowie was doomed before he started........The Red Robin said:What was Andrew Mills’ role? Probably the closest we’ve had to a DoF. Gallen kind of is or has been I suppose.3 -
Nothing in that Many City skills profile about needing to have a really hard shot.6
-
That’s why they haven’t won the Champion’s League.EugenesAxe said:Nothing in that Many City skills profile about needing to have a really hard shot.7 -
But that’s more or less exactly what it is. He’s dad owns the club and Martin has shares. Unless Sandgaard decides to cash out it’s quite possible MS will become the owner. He might anyway. He’s learning the business and good on him for it.NomadicAddick said:Martin Sandgaard just isn't qualified to work for Charlton Athletic and I am baffled that anybody would think he is.
For what it's worth a mate of mine works for the club and says Martin is actually a really nice guy but gives the vibe of a kid on work experience and is way out of his depth.9 -
Bizarre as it may seem, I actually agree with most of this!!🤣 however Stanley wouldn’t have been able to rely on Google back then!!, so maybe it was an easier job.all joking apart the human ability to make good decisions aswell as bad shouldn’t be underestimated, maybe the reliance on computers can be a hindrance .🤷🏻♂️🙄1
-
Bloke who has likely made something up confirms it's not made up. That's me convinced.shirty5 said:
And now confirmed by the man on twitter that it was from AM.Belv said:
Look who the text message is from lolScoham said:Twitter rumour that Powell’s being interviewed and has a good chance of coming back 👀
Daniel Sturridge got banned by the FA back in 2019 as per below
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/49031533
0 -
This is such a fascinating thread. I reckon myself that if my sons or daughters were football mad and loved the detail and I was minted enough to buy and bankroll the club I would actually behave in the same way as the Sandgaard's to some degree. The only difference I would certainly not talk direct online to knobs like me.17
-
Or he might simply have been there learning and seeing more of what goes on at professional football club on a day to day basis.The Red Robin said:
Is he right to question training at all if he’s just turned up without a clue what the coaches and staff have asked the players to do that day or how close to a previous or upcoming game it is? Martin Sandgaard is nowhere near qualified to even be near a first team coaching session, let alone questioning experienced and qualified coaches.Bolderhumphreyreid said:
This needs context.Airman Brown said:
MS certainly tried at least once last season.Jac_52 said:MuttleyCAFC said:I haven't got an issue with the owner suggesting the style of football he wants to see us play and promising to back the manager in getting the players needed to achieve it. It becomes more worrying when it gets like Roland explaining football tactics to a manager who is an ex England international. If Sandgaard thinks he has discovered the secret of success in terms of a playing style it is worrying in the extreme. There are many different paths but his backing is needed. With limited resources the approach has to always be a pragmatic one based on what you have and how your best players play.
The problem is, I don't know which of these is correct and I doubt many of us do. There are lingering doubts about Sandgaard based on genuine clues. I would say not yet definitive but that in itself is worrying. And we should be open to this possibility.
I agree with this. The turning point for me would be if Sandgaard is issuing Roland-esque emails or trying to dictate how training sessions should go.
Currently I have no reason to think that this is the case and if anyone knows differently then they should be making it public very very quickly. Until then we have to accept that there is nothing wrong with an owner wanting a certain type of football and finding the staff to implement it.
If he was at the training ground and saw a lacklustre group of players who were not putting a shift in then he’s more than got a right to ask for more surely?If he was there to effectively ask JJ to try something different in training then that wouldn’t be on.
Context please.
Getting a flavour of what goes on at the training ground the vibe, dressing room banter maybe, just the feel of the place.
If I was in his position I would most certainly want to know more about everything that goes on at the club (within reason), including attending some training sessions and the day to day running of Sparrows Lane.
Just another way of looking at it, which excludes any conspiracy theories.
He has every right to be there as long as he doesn’t interfere, which I can only assume he hasn’t.9 -
The entire point and discussion is that that’s exactly what he tried to do.SoundAsa£ said:
Or he might simply have been there learning and seeing more of what goes on at professional football club on a day to day basis.The Red Robin said:
Is he right to question training at all if he’s just turned up without a clue what the coaches and staff have asked the players to do that day or how close to a previous or upcoming game it is? Martin Sandgaard is nowhere near qualified to even be near a first team coaching session, let alone questioning experienced and qualified coaches.Bolderhumphreyreid said:
This needs context.Airman Brown said:
MS certainly tried at least once last season.Jac_52 said:MuttleyCAFC said:I haven't got an issue with the owner suggesting the style of football he wants to see us play and promising to back the manager in getting the players needed to achieve it. It becomes more worrying when it gets like Roland explaining football tactics to a manager who is an ex England international. If Sandgaard thinks he has discovered the secret of success in terms of a playing style it is worrying in the extreme. There are many different paths but his backing is needed. With limited resources the approach has to always be a pragmatic one based on what you have and how your best players play.
The problem is, I don't know which of these is correct and I doubt many of us do. There are lingering doubts about Sandgaard based on genuine clues. I would say not yet definitive but that in itself is worrying. And we should be open to this possibility.
I agree with this. The turning point for me would be if Sandgaard is issuing Roland-esque emails or trying to dictate how training sessions should go.
Currently I have no reason to think that this is the case and if anyone knows differently then they should be making it public very very quickly. Until then we have to accept that there is nothing wrong with an owner wanting a certain type of football and finding the staff to implement it.
If he was at the training ground and saw a lacklustre group of players who were not putting a shift in then he’s more than got a right to ask for more surely?If he was there to effectively ask JJ to try something different in training then that wouldn’t be on.
Context please.
Getting a flavour of what goes on at the training ground the vibe, dressing room banter maybe, just the feel of the place.
If I was in his position I would most certainly want to know more about everything that goes on at the club (within reason), including attending some training sessions and the day to day running of Sparrows Lane.
Just another way of looking at it, which excludes any conspiracy theories.
He has every right to be there as long as he doesn’t interfere, which I can only assume he hasn’t.2 -
I think you've changed your argument here though. I don't think anybody would have an issue with Martin working around the place and "learning the business". But you've questioned others claiming he doesn't have the expertise for the role he is undertaking, but he doesn't does he. For what it's worth, I don't think that doesn't mean he won't do a good job, just that he's not qualified for it. I think this is another example of double standards, Roland would be crucified for putting his son in a position like this. Martin isn't just doing a little bit of analyst work is he, he's got a huge role to play in all our recruitment.ShootersHillGuru said:
But that’s more or less exactly what it is. He’s dad owns the club and Martin has shares. Unless Sandgaard decides to cash out it’s quite possible MS will become the owner. He might anyway. He’s learning the business and good on him for it.NomadicAddick said:Martin Sandgaard just isn't qualified to work for Charlton Athletic and I am baffled that anybody would think he is.
For what it's worth a mate of mine works for the club and says Martin is actually a really nice guy but gives the vibe of a kid on work experience and is way out of his depth.
6 -
Sponsored links:
-
Well…..I have only seen/heard him described as head of player recruitment analytics, which is a very different thing.Cafc43v3r said:
Why does Thomas keep saying he is?SSoundAsa£ said:
Mmmmmm……"I have my doubts that Martin is actually “in charge” of recruitment.Cafc43v3r said:w
We have "known" that Martin is in charge of recruitment and many of us have raised it as a massive red flag. The proof of the pudding will of course be in the eating (happy with that @Henry Irving) but it is a big concern.oohaahmortimer said:
When Airman ‘likes’ that post it scares me , we’ve got another nutbag , let’s hope he’s more useful than that goalkeeping coach from Swindon’s nutsack .
With the back ground of that there is little point employing a "manager", be it Adkins, Taylor, Warburton or Duff.
Whilst I don't buy into the buzz word bingo that is a young, hungry, progressive coach, thatnis exactly what we need, because of the way the club is run.
On paper it may read that way but I don’t buy that.
Do you know better?
0 -
Sandgaard has pretty much said so, yes. He's the head of the analytics, then does the scouting with Steve Gallen (who is the primary negotiator). If Martin isn't in charge of the recruitment, who is?SoundAsa£ said:
Well…..I have only seen/heard him described as head of player recruitment analytics, which is a very different thing.Cafc43v3r said:
Why does Thomas keep saying he is?SSoundAsa£ said:
Mmmmmm……"I have my doubts that Martin is actually “in charge” of recruitment.Cafc43v3r said:w
We have "known" that Martin is in charge of recruitment and many of us have raised it as a massive red flag. The proof of the pudding will of course be in the eating (happy with that @Henry Irving) but it is a big concern.oohaahmortimer said:When Airman ‘likes’ that post it scares me , we’ve got another nutbag , let’s hope he’s more useful than that goalkeeping coach from Swindon’s nutsack .
With the back ground of that there is little point employing a "manager", be it Adkins, Taylor, Warburton or Duff.
Whilst I don't buy into the buzz word bingo that is a young, hungry, progressive coach, thatnis exactly what we need, because of the way the club is run.
On paper it may read that way but I don’t buy that.
Do you know better?1 -
Its a very weird obsession about what MS does or doesnt do. Honestly, it really is.35
-
You are right, Roland would have got a lot of shit for the same thing. But there are huge differences between Sandgaard and Roland that mean they shouldn't be treated the same.cafcfan1990 said:
I think you've changed your argument here though. I don't think anybody would have an issue with Martin working around the place and "learning the business". But you've questioned others claiming he doesn't have the expertise for the role he is undertaking, but he doesn't does he. For what it's worth, I don't think that doesn't mean he won't do a good job, just that he's not qualified for it. I think this is another example of double standards, Roland would be crucified for putting his son in a position like this. Martin isn't just doing a little bit of analyst work is he, he's got a huge role to play in all our recruitment.ShootersHillGuru said:
But that’s more or less exactly what it is. He’s dad owns the club and Martin has shares. Unless Sandgaard decides to cash out it’s quite possible MS will become the owner. He might anyway. He’s learning the business and good on him for it.NomadicAddick said:Martin Sandgaard just isn't qualified to work for Charlton Athletic and I am baffled that anybody would think he is.
For what it's worth a mate of mine works for the club and says Martin is actually a really nice guy but gives the vibe of a kid on work experience and is way out of his depth.
When you look at what Charlton means to them, they are completely different animals. Sandgaard actually cares about charlton, both in terms of it being his passion and how much of his wealth he's tied up in it.
To Roland we were just another network link, which he couldn't be bothered to watch and financially it was pocket money to him.
Intention is key when you judge anyone's actions.4 -
Is it any more or less of an ‘obsession’ with what Katrien or Thomas Driesen’s roles were? Or how qualified for the manager’s job Karel Fraeye was?king addick said:Its a very weird obsession about what MS does or doesnt do. Honestly, it really is.6 -
why is it? I don't mean to be rude but I think that's nonsense. I think it would be unfair to personally attack him, call him useless etc, but I don't think anyone is doing that. But I don't see why we shouldn't debate his role at the club. The fact it he wouldn't get this role at any other club, he's got it because his dad is the owner. We've now got someone very inexperienced and unqualified in a position which massively contributes to how we do on the pitch this season. We all want the best for the club and we all want promotion, debating whether Martin is right to lead on this isn't unfair IMO.king addick said:Its a very weird obsession about what MS does or doesnt do. Honestly, it really is.10 -
Ah, yeah, but…they say people learn by their mistakes.
0 -
Steve Gallencafcfan1990 said:
Sandgaard has pretty much said so, yes. He's the head of the analytics, then does the scouting with Steve Gallen (who is the primary negotiator). If Martin isn't in charge of the recruitment, who is?SoundAsa£ said:
Well…..I have only seen/heard him described as head of player recruitment analytics, which is a very different thing.Cafc43v3r said:
Why does Thomas keep saying he is?SSoundAsa£ said:
Mmmmmm……"I have my doubts that Martin is actually “in charge” of recruitment.Cafc43v3r said:w
We have "known" that Martin is in charge of recruitment and many of us have raised it as a massive red flag. The proof of the pudding will of course be in the eating (happy with that @Henry Irving) but it is a big concern.oohaahmortimer said:When Airman ‘likes’ that post it scares me , we’ve got another nutbag , let’s hope he’s more useful than that goalkeeping coach from Swindon’s nutsack .
With the back ground of that there is little point employing a "manager", be it Adkins, Taylor, Warburton or Duff.
Whilst I don't buy into the buzz word bingo that is a young, hungry, progressive coach, thatnis exactly what we need, because of the way the club is run.
On paper it may read that way but I don’t buy that.
Do you know better?0 -
So why hasn't Sandgaard ever said that then?RonnieMoore said:
Steve Gallencafcfan1990 said:
Sandgaard has pretty much said so, yes. He's the head of the analytics, then does the scouting with Steve Gallen (who is the primary negotiator). If Martin isn't in charge of the recruitment, who is?SoundAsa£ said:
Well…..I have only seen/heard him described as head of player recruitment analytics, which is a very different thing.Cafc43v3r said:
Why does Thomas keep saying he is?SSoundAsa£ said:
Mmmmmm……"I have my doubts that Martin is actually “in charge” of recruitment.Cafc43v3r said:w
We have "known" that Martin is in charge of recruitment and many of us have raised it as a massive red flag. The proof of the pudding will of course be in the eating (happy with that @Henry Irving) but it is a big concern.oohaahmortimer said:When Airman ‘likes’ that post it scares me , we’ve got another nutbag , let’s hope he’s more useful than that goalkeeping coach from Swindon’s nutsack .
With the back ground of that there is little point employing a "manager", be it Adkins, Taylor, Warburton or Duff.
Whilst I don't buy into the buzz word bingo that is a young, hungry, progressive coach, thatnis exactly what we need, because of the way the club is run.
On paper it may read that way but I don’t buy that.
Do you know better?2 -
Did he ask questions or did he try to influence forcibly or just in passing. We all know there are so many ways of a conversation being processed, through tone of voice or brevity. Once the conversation is then passed on word for word to a third party but with an entirely different vocal inflection it can have varying interpretation.The Red Robin said:
The entire point and discussion is that that’s exactly what he tried to do.SoundAsa£ said:
Or he might simply have been there learning and seeing more of what goes on at professional football club on a day to day basis.The Red Robin said:
Is he right to question training at all if he’s just turned up without a clue what the coaches and staff have asked the players to do that day or how close to a previous or upcoming game it is? Martin Sandgaard is nowhere near qualified to even be near a first team coaching session, let alone questioning experienced and qualified coaches.Bolderhumphreyreid said:
This needs context.Airman Brown said:
MS certainly tried at least once last season.Jac_52 said:MuttleyCAFC said:I haven't got an issue with the owner suggesting the style of football he wants to see us play and promising to back the manager in getting the players needed to achieve it. It becomes more worrying when it gets like Roland explaining football tactics to a manager who is an ex England international. If Sandgaard thinks he has discovered the secret of success in terms of a playing style it is worrying in the extreme. There are many different paths but his backing is needed. With limited resources the approach has to always be a pragmatic one based on what you have and how your best players play.
The problem is, I don't know which of these is correct and I doubt many of us do. There are lingering doubts about Sandgaard based on genuine clues. I would say not yet definitive but that in itself is worrying. And we should be open to this possibility.
I agree with this. The turning point for me would be if Sandgaard is issuing Roland-esque emails or trying to dictate how training sessions should go.
Currently I have no reason to think that this is the case and if anyone knows differently then they should be making it public very very quickly. Until then we have to accept that there is nothing wrong with an owner wanting a certain type of football and finding the staff to implement it.
If he was at the training ground and saw a lacklustre group of players who were not putting a shift in then he’s more than got a right to ask for more surely?If he was there to effectively ask JJ to try something different in training then that wouldn’t be on.
Context please.
Getting a flavour of what goes on at the training ground the vibe, dressing room banter maybe, just the feel of the place.
If I was in his position I would most certainly want to know more about everything that goes on at the club (within reason), including attending some training sessions and the day to day running of Sparrows Lane.
Just another way of looking at it, which excludes any conspiracy theories.
He has every right to be there as long as he doesn’t interfere, which I can only assume he hasn’t.
I realise I’m being a bit anal here but it’s quite possibly the case that some comment’s have been taken too literally.
A touch of Chinees whispers perhaps?
3 -
Sponsored links:
-
We’ve all got to start somewhere , part of the 5 year plan I guess, if he makes things better then I really don’t care, this club has been run into the ground for years and is going to take ages to put processes and building blocks in place, Charlton Athletic is not a quick fix problem unfortunately.NomadicAddick said:Martin Sandgaard just isn't qualified to work for Charlton Athletic and I am baffled that anybody would think he is.
For what it's worth a mate of mine works for the club and says Martin is actually a really nice guy but gives the vibe of a kid on work experience and is way out of his depth.4 -
Especially on a next manager threadking addick said:Its a very weird obsession about what MS does or doesnt do. Honestly, it really is.0 -
There are dozens of interviews with Thomas saying different. Even one where he talks about Martin getting in the car and going out scouting players.SoundAsa£ said:
Well…..I have only seen/heard him described as head of player recruitment analytics, which is a very different thing.Cafc43v3r said:
Why does Thomas keep saying he is?SSoundAsa£ said:
Mmmmmm……"I have my doubts that Martin is actually “in charge” of recruitment.Cafc43v3r said:w
We have "known" that Martin is in charge of recruitment and many of us have raised it as a massive red flag. The proof of the pudding will of course be in the eating (happy with that @Henry Irving) but it is a big concern.oohaahmortimer said:When Airman ‘likes’ that post it scares me , we’ve got another nutbag , let’s hope he’s more useful than that goalkeeping coach from Swindon’s nutsack .
With the back ground of that there is little point employing a "manager", be it Adkins, Taylor, Warburton or Duff.
Whilst I don't buy into the buzz word bingo that is a young, hungry, progressive coach, thatnis exactly what we need, because of the way the club is run.
On paper it may read that way but I don’t buy that.
Do you know better?
I have no idea what Martin actually does do but I know what Thomas says, in public, that he does. He says different to what your suggesting.2 -
Agreed, he does obviously care and there's no doubt he wants to be successful. But I'm sorry, you can make mistakes or bad decisions even with good intentions. Ultimately, Sandgaard will be measured on the clubs success, not on whether he cared or not.balham red said:
You are right, Roland would have got a lot of shit for the same thing. But there are huge differences between Sandgaard and Roland that mean they shouldn't be treated the same.cafcfan1990 said:
I think you've changed your argument here though. I don't think anybody would have an issue with Martin working around the place and "learning the business". But you've questioned others claiming he doesn't have the expertise for the role he is undertaking, but he doesn't does he. For what it's worth, I don't think that doesn't mean he won't do a good job, just that he's not qualified for it. I think this is another example of double standards, Roland would be crucified for putting his son in a position like this. Martin isn't just doing a little bit of analyst work is he, he's got a huge role to play in all our recruitment.ShootersHillGuru said:
But that’s more or less exactly what it is. He’s dad owns the club and Martin has shares. Unless Sandgaard decides to cash out it’s quite possible MS will become the owner. He might anyway. He’s learning the business and good on him for it.NomadicAddick said:Martin Sandgaard just isn't qualified to work for Charlton Athletic and I am baffled that anybody would think he is.
For what it's worth a mate of mine works for the club and says Martin is actually a really nice guy but gives the vibe of a kid on work experience and is way out of his depth.
When you look at what Charlton means to them, they are completely different animals. Sandgaard actually cares about charlton, both in terms of it being his passion and how much of his wealth he's tied up in it.
To Roland we were just another network link, which he couldn't be bothered to watch and financially it was pocket money to him.
Intention is key when you judge anyone's actions.1 -
But its the same debate isnt it? TS said this but MS Linkedin says this...I agree that it is a risk but at the same time some people seem so very sure that it will fail regardless.cafcfan1990 said:
why is it? I don't mean to be rude but I think that's nonsense. I think it would be unfair to personally attack him, call him useless etc, but I don't think anyone is doing that. But I don't see why we shouldn't debate his role at the club. The fact it he wouldn't get this role at any other club, he's got it because his dad is the owner. We've now got someone very inexperienced and unqualified in a position which massively contributes to how we do on the pitch this season. We all want the best for the club and we all want promotion, debating whether Martin is right to lead on this isn't unfair IMO.king addick said:Its a very weird obsession about what MS does or doesnt do. Honestly, it really is.
We just need someone to dig out I think.1 -
We need to a "day in the life of Martin Sandgaard" feature @Ollywozere. Thanks6
-
It was Roddy before that was getting pelters now he’s gone, the focus is on Martin Sandgaard. Give it a rest, so boring!29
-
So, news on new manager?10
-
As the anti-climax fast approaches, long suffering Addicks grasp desperately at straws of hope while knowing instinctively that more heartbreak is in store as manager/coach/black box operator number four of the Sandgaard rock & roll era enters the building with zero evidence to suggest that he will offer any improvement on the previous three.2 -
0
