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.
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.
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 .🤷🏻♂️🙄
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.
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.
MS certainly tried at least once last season.
This needs context.
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.
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.
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. 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 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.
MS certainly tried at least once last season.
This needs context.
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.
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.
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. 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.
The entire point and discussion is that that’s exactly what he tried to do.
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.
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.
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.
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 .
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.
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.
Mmmmmm……"I have my doubts that Martin is actually “in charge” of recruitment. On paper it may read that way but I don’t buy that.
Why does Thomas keep saying he is?
Well…..I have only seen/heard him described as head of player recruitment analytics, which is a very different thing. Do you know better?
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 .
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.
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.
Mmmmmm……"I have my doubts that Martin is actually “in charge” of recruitment. On paper it may read that way but I don’t buy that.
Why does Thomas keep saying he is?
Well…..I have only seen/heard him described as head of player recruitment analytics, which is a very different thing. Do you know better?
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Its a very weird obsession about what MS does or doesnt do. Honestly, it really is.
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.
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 .
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.
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.
Mmmmmm……"I have my doubts that Martin is actually “in charge” of recruitment. On paper it may read that way but I don’t buy that.
Why does Thomas keep saying he is?
Well…..I have only seen/heard him described as head of player recruitment analytics, which is a very different thing. Do you know better?
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?
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 .
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.
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.
Mmmmmm……"I have my doubts that Martin is actually “in charge” of recruitment. On paper it may read that way but I don’t buy that.
Why does Thomas keep saying he is?
Well…..I have only seen/heard him described as head of player recruitment analytics, which is a very different thing. Do you know better?
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?
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.
MS certainly tried at least once last season.
This needs context.
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.
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.
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. 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.
The entire point and discussion is that that’s exactly what he tried to do.
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. 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?
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.
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.
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 .
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.
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.
Mmmmmm……"I have my doubts that Martin is actually “in charge” of recruitment. On paper it may read that way but I don’t buy that.
Why does Thomas keep saying he is?
Well…..I have only seen/heard him described as head of player recruitment analytics, which is a very different thing. Do you know better?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Its a very weird obsession about what MS does or doesnt do. Honestly, it really is.
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.
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.
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.
Comments
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.
Do you know better?
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.
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?
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.
We just need someone to dig out I think.
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.