Next manager - Ben Garner confirmed (p256)

Seen Craig Fleming’s name mentioned. Let go by Southampton in the last couple of days when he was assistant Head Coach there. 

ShootersHillGuru said:

This Palace thing really irritates me. Yes I dislike them as a club and their fans intensely but for gods sake hating employees is ludicrous. Worth remembering that Palace as much as it hurts to say it are exactly what we should be trying to emulate. They are literally light years ahead of us. Garner worked for them during a successful spell. That’s a positive for us if he comes. Hate Garner for his Palace connection and I’d expect the same hatred for Chris Powell ? No. Thought not. 

It’s quite weird really, I don’t even really hate Palace at all, no point really seeing how many of their lot we have had over the years, Pardew, Dowie, Whyte etc.

To me Palace are like the annoying neighbour that mows his lawn at 5PM on a Sunday, it’s irritating but nothing more really.

For me, my hatred is saved for the New Cross branch of the EDL - AKA Millwall Football Club, just can’t put into words my hatred for that lot, the worst of the worst.

If we’d have appointed Neil Harris then that would have been my lot until he left.

CL_Phantom said:

For added context, and, because "hUr DuR wHy YOu hAtE MaRTiN tHoUGh" (because apparently that's the reason) a look at the job skills requirement for an U23 performance analyst at Man city (yes I know city are at the elite end of the footballing spectrum







And a job description for a recruitment analyst at spurs:

https://www.hub-soccer.com/2020/09/07/recruitment-analyst-tottenham-hotspur/

Or failing the above having a parent who owns the business should be enough to see you fall into the job

SoundAsa£ said:

The Red Robin said:

SoundAsa£ said:

The Red Robin said:

Bolderhumphreyreid said:

Airman Brown said:

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.

 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?

Apparently he took one look & said "Absolute Rubbish" Now what kind of idiot would say that without giving reasons why ?

ShootersHillGuru said:

The Red Robin said:

DA9 said:

Bolderhumphreyreid said:

Airman Brown said:

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.

 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.

What right does he have to involve himself on training effort, or lack of?
He’s an analyst, not his remit

He’s barely an analyst. He’s only an analyst because daddy said so. I manage a team of data analysts. He wouldn’t even get an interview anywhere else. 

You know this how ? 

Take a look at Martin Sandgaard’s Linked IN profile.

Its an absolute cringe feat, the guy has been working for his Daddy for 16 years.

He may know plenty about the medical instruments field but he knows nothing about football.

And just like that, Harris becomes a more attractive proposition for the job.....

alburyaddick said:

Ormiston_Addick said:

Airman Brown said:

Anyone who thinks that having the owner’s unqualified son in a position of authority in the football set-up is remotely sensible is clearly capable of any mental gymnastics necessary to believe what they want to believe. It’s the same delusional thinking which has sought to justify the spivs, Duchatelet and ESI. It doesn’t of itself make Thomas Sandgaard the same as any of those, but it’s unlikely to be a good thing.

We all want things to be better and to get out of this shitty division, but we are here because of a succession of toxic owners, not toxic fans. As long as the club continues to fail there will be people looking for explanations. They are not the problem.

Spot on the money as usual.

Guys- before Peter Varney took over his first role at the football club - had he ever worked at a football club before ? 
Before I became a CEO for the first time, I’d never been a CEO before.
Before I became a Company Chairman, I’d never been a Chairman before . 
Before I started a training company , I knew nothing about training. 
I have no idea about Martin Sandgaard’s capabilities and generally I agree that nepotism is a bad thing and I wouldn’t hire my son into any of my businesses.
However, just because he hasn’t got a football background, doesn’t mean he can’t be good at this job . 
I think he needs to be judged on the results and I’ll give you a more informed view at the end of this season. Let’s give the guy a break ! 

OK judge on results. Result one- one of our best players wasn't offered a contract and has today signed for a championship club after MS apparently leaked to him that he might not get a contract because new manager might not fancy him before incumbent manager even knew he was leaving.

Let me explain again why having the owners son involved in the management of the company is a really big problem.

A couple of years back I was working for a very big company.

The CEO thought it would be a really good idea, for reasons that escape me, to bring in his partner to an executive role in the marketing team, she wouldn’t have been reporting to him but would have been reporting to a GM who did.

He was told this would have to be approved by the board and they refused point blank, saying that this would create an extremely unfair situation for the GM and the entire marketing function.

The reality that no proper - certainly not a listed firm - would EVER appoint a senior executive that didn’t have relevant experience or qualifications, not least because the board of directors are ultimately responsible for staffing decisions and wouldn’t take that risk.

At Charlton though we have NO BOARD, it’s just Sandgaard and that’s a real problem because he has nobody to push back against his decisions.

king addick said:

Ormiston_Addick said:

king addick said:

Its a very weird obsession about what MS does or doesnt do. Honestly, it really is.

Er…no, it’s not weird at all.

Recruitment is THE most critical aspect of running a football club.

We have given a critical role to the owners son who has zero football experience or contacts.

If people can’t see a problem there it’s because they don’t want to see it.

Giving jobs to you kids is a really, really stupid idea, it does them no good and wreaks havoc across the organisation, not just because of their incompetence but because you are short circuiting the chain of command.

How many people will stand up to Martin Sandgaard knowing he will run straight to Daddy? That results in bad decisions.

Its a huge problem.

It is weird to constantly talk about it. It's the same conversation over and over again with no change in end result. Did you read the performance analyst role for spurs? You don't even need a coaching licence.
I said myself this could go wrong but let's face it, he could help identify players with our scouts and bring in some good players and people like you will find things to keep up the witch-hunt.

He's been doing the job for 18 months already.....

king addick said:

supaclive said:

king addick said:

Ormiston_Addick said:

king addick said:

Its a very weird obsession about what MS does or doesnt do. Honestly, it really is.

Er…no, it’s not weird at all.

Recruitment is THE most critical aspect of running a football club.

We have given a critical role to the owners son who has zero football experience or contacts.

If people can’t see a problem there it’s because they don’t want to see it.

Giving jobs to you kids is a really, really stupid idea, it does them no good and wreaks havoc across the organisation, not just because of their incompetence but because you are short circuiting the chain of command.

How many people will stand up to Martin Sandgaard knowing he will run straight to Daddy? That results in bad decisions.

Its a huge problem.

It is weird to constantly talk about it. It's the same conversation over and over again with no change in end result. Did you read the performance analyst role for spurs? You don't even need a coaching licence.
I said myself this could go wrong but let's face it, he could help identify players with our scouts and bring in some good players and people like you will find things to keep up the witch-hunt.

He's been doing the job for 18 months already.....

Then apart from mentioning a training change...what has he actually done that has pissed people off so much apart from his last name being Sandgaard?

The people that seem personally affronted by the criticism are more baffling that the serial moaners 

Scoham said:

That doesn’t fill me with confidence