I really don’t see what the problem is with the club statement? They’ve been forced into responding because of all the wild speculation that’s going around and not put out by the club, which seems perfectly understandable to me.
Yes, we all wish a new manager, coaching staff and players were all in place but the reason they ain’t is presumably stuff going on behind the scenes that very few if any, know about.
I imagine Sandgaard and all would’ve liked the same but it is what it is and why add to the furore by creating and kicking up such a fuss over things unknown?
Wild speculation? There is a stand-off between media and Charlton because reporters at both ends of the transaction do not believe the club and won't accept its version based on their own sources. In the end there are at least three parties with first-hand information and only one of them is responsible for the club's statement.
So what is the complete first hand information?
I believe the information Rich put out a fortnight ago was accurate and still stands, it just doesn't suit the club to have it out there for whatever reason. There may be some hairsplitting behind the club's position (such as job title, for example), but in terms of who succeeds Johnnie Jackson it is a done deal and has been since the story broke.
Still can't believe so many are taken in with sandgaard's crap
It’s OK to be grateful for him ‘saving’ the club and criticising his mistakes. The blind defence of him and his family (solely in relation to Charlton) is baffling.
I really don’t see what the problem is with the club statement? They’ve been forced into responding because of all the wild speculation that’s going around and not put out by the club, which seems perfectly understandable to me.
Yes, we all wish a new manager, coaching staff and players were all in place but the reason they ain’t is presumably stuff going on behind the scenes that very few if any, know about.
I imagine Sandgaard and all would’ve liked the same but it is what it is and why add to the furore by creating and kicking up such a fuss over things unknown?
No they haven't been forced to respond, fans and respected journo's talking about the appointment is standard practice.
Well they have, because if the club are saying that the reports aren't accurate, then they are being forced into responding, understandably, to correct that.
Im not disputing the standard practise, the club, for whatever reasons, believe that the reports are incorrect.
Scoham is slightly mistaken, he was Head Recruitment Analyst at Wigan. So although no doubt played a major role for Wigan, this is a role with much greater responsibilities.
I really don’t see what the problem is with the club statement? They’ve been forced into responding because of all the wild speculation that’s going around and not put out by the club, which seems perfectly understandable to me.
Yes, we all wish a new manager, coaching staff and players were all in place but the reason they ain’t is presumably stuff going on behind the scenes that very few if any, know about.
I imagine Sandgaard and all would’ve liked the same but it is what it is and why add to the furore by creating and kicking up such a fuss over things unknown?
Wild speculation? There is a stand-off between media and Charlton because reporters at both ends of the transaction do not believe the club and won't accept its version based on their own sources. In the end there are at least three parties with first-hand information and only one of them is responsible for the club's statement.
Do the club not have a right to handle their affairs as they see fit, even if the majority of us don't like that stance?
I really don’t see what the problem is with the club statement? They’ve been forced into responding because of all the wild speculation that’s going around and not put out by the club, which seems perfectly understandable to me.
Yes, we all wish a new manager, coaching staff and players were all in place but the reason they ain’t is presumably stuff going on behind the scenes that very few if any, know about.
I imagine Sandgaard and all would’ve liked the same but it is what it is and why add to the furore by creating and kicking up such a fuss over things unknown?
Wild speculation? There is a stand-off between media and Charlton because reporters at both ends of the transaction do not believe the club and won't accept its version based on their own sources. In the end there are at least three parties with first-hand information and only one of them is responsible for the club's statement.
Do the club not have a right to handle their affairs as they see fit, even if the majority of us don't like that stance?
Indeed, but if they deliberately mislead fans in the process then they should expect damage to the credibility of those responsible.
The media also have a right to report on the club's affairs as they see fit within the law regardless of what the current owner thinks about that.
Let's see how it plays out, shall we? The media view is that Garner has the job - I doubt if a qualification over job title, contract length, etc, would seem to most people a proportionate reason to rubbish the stories that are out there.
If the media have it substantively wrong then they will get the reputational hit. That's the nature of the business.
I really don’t see what the problem is with the club statement? They’ve been forced into responding because of all the wild speculation that’s going around and not put out by the club, which seems perfectly understandable to me.
Yes, we all wish a new manager, coaching staff and players were all in place but the reason they ain’t is presumably stuff going on behind the scenes that very few if any, know about.
I imagine Sandgaard and all would’ve liked the same but it is what it is and why add to the furore by creating and kicking up such a fuss over things unknown?
Wild speculation? There is a stand-off between media and Charlton because reporters at both ends of the transaction do not believe the club and won't accept its version based on their own sources. In the end there are at least three parties with first-hand information and only one of them is responsible for the club's statement.
So what is the complete first hand information?
I believe the information Rich put out a fortnight ago was accurate and still stands, it just doesn't suit the club to have it out there for whatever reason. There may be some hairsplitting behind the club's position (such as job title, for example), but in terms of who succeeds Johnnie Jackson it is a done deal and has been since the story broke.
No way would Airman Brown say those words again if it wasn't a done deal. Smoke and mirrors from Tom + Rae and sorting out the back room staff as Thomas is worried we may end up with more coaches than National express.
I really don’t see what the problem is with the club statement? They’ve been forced into responding because of all the wild speculation that’s going around and not put out by the club, which seems perfectly understandable to me.
Yes, we all wish a new manager, coaching staff and players were all in place but the reason they ain’t is presumably stuff going on behind the scenes that very few if any, know about.
I imagine Sandgaard and all would’ve liked the same but it is what it is and why add to the furore by creating and kicking up such a fuss over things unknown?
Wild speculation? There is a stand-off between media and Charlton because reporters at both ends of the transaction do not believe the club and won't accept its version based on their own sources. In the end there are at least three parties with first-hand information and only one of them is responsible for the club's statement.
So what is the complete first hand information?
I believe the information Rich put out a fortnight ago was accurate and still stands, it just doesn't suit the club to have it out there for whatever reason. There may be some hairsplitting behind the club's position (such as job title, for example), but in terms of who succeeds Johnnie Jackson it is a done deal and has been since the story broke.
No way would Airman Brown say those words again if it wasn't a done deal. Smoke and mirrors from Tom + Rae and sorting out the back room staff as Thomas is worried we may end up with more coaches than National express.
No way would Cawley both publish it, then double down on it, if it wasn't true.
I really don’t see what the problem is with the club statement? They’ve been forced into responding because of all the wild speculation that’s going around and not put out by the club, which seems perfectly understandable to me.
Yes, we all wish a new manager, coaching staff and players were all in place but the reason they ain’t is presumably stuff going on behind the scenes that very few if any, know about.
I imagine Sandgaard and all would’ve liked the same but it is what it is and why add to the furore by creating and kicking up such a fuss over things unknown?
Wild speculation? There is a stand-off between media and Charlton because reporters at both ends of the transaction do not believe the club and won't accept its version based on their own sources. In the end there are at least three parties with first-hand information and only one of them is responsible for the club's statement.
Do the club not have a right to handle their affairs as they see fit, even if the majority of us don't like that stance?
Indeed, but if they deliberately mislead fans in the process then they should expect damage to the credibility of those responsible.
The media also have a right to report on the club's affairs as they see fit within the law regardless of what the current owner thinks about that.
Let's see how it plays out, shall we? The media view is that Garner has the job - I doubt if a qualification over job title, contract length, etc, would seem to most people a proportionate reason to rubbish the stories that are out there.
If the media have it substantively wrong then they will get the reputational hit. That's the nature of the business.
Media reports now that Swindon have approached Orient re Wellens. All rather odd.
It’s been a done deal for near on two weeks since Rich Cawley first reported it. The guy has a stellar reputation for all things Charlton and would not be as confident as he is in his story if it wasn’t a formality.
On the club’s part, to deny it so strongly just means that the little confidence some folks had in the ownership is likely to be wiped away as soon as Garner is unveiled. I’m saying this as someone who tends to defend TS.
In this situation, the best course of action would’ve been to say nothing at all. And certainly nothing on social media accounts. Being open with fans is welcome after what’s gone on before but there’s a balance to be struck that I don’t think should be difficult to find.
Some would be in a strop that the club is saying nothing but that’s far better than the hole that’s been dug.
Even a statement that says nothing on the OS (the process is not concluded and we will announce when it is etc.) is probably not the way to go about this. Far better to drip a steady stream of info through someone like Cawley instead.
That fans don’t get upset that they think nothing is happening. Meanwhile the club don’t get held to every small sentence they type on Twitter and LinkedIn.
This post came out a bit of a jumbled mess but the point is, please keep your head down for the time being. Anything you do say will only be used against you.
Scoham is slightly mistaken, he was Head Recruitment Analyst at Wigan. So although no doubt played a major role for Wigan, this is a role with much greater responsibilities.
Ah fair enough, misread it. Makes sense given it’s a promotion for him.
I really don’t see what the problem is with the club statement? They’ve been forced into responding because of all the wild speculation that’s going around and not put out by the club, which seems perfectly understandable to me.
Yes, we all wish a new manager, coaching staff and players were all in place but the reason they ain’t is presumably stuff going on behind the scenes that very few if any, know about.
I imagine Sandgaard and all would’ve liked the same but it is what it is and why add to the furore by creating and kicking up such a fuss over things unknown?
Wild speculation? There is a stand-off between media and Charlton because reporters at both ends of the transaction do not believe the club and won't accept its version based on their own sources. In the end there are at least three parties with first-hand information and only one of them is responsible for the club's statement.
So what is the complete first hand information?
I believe the information Rich put out a fortnight ago was accurate and still stands, it just doesn't suit the club to have it out there for whatever reason. There may be some hairsplitting behind the club's position (such as job title, for example), but in terms of who succeeds Johnnie Jackson it is a done deal and has been since the story broke.
Excellent news.
A bit surprising that the deal has been done and his back room staff deal has not been completed as this could put him in an invidious position. Or have those deals also been done and compensation agreed?
In a crowd of 13 or 14 thousand at the first match of the season, how many of them will be regulars on CL? 4 or 5 hundred maybe? Most in the crowd won’t even be aware of the delays, the poor communication and the social media shenanigans, I would imagine.
Not that the debate hasn’t been quite interesting on here, but I do think we get a bit het up sometimes.
If anyone has an interest in Charlton Athletic regardless if they don’t have access to the internet (Not many in this days and age plus the ones that don’t would have made aware by friends and family) will be aware that they don’t have a manager in charge and has been the case for nearly 5 weeks.
Nothing wrong with debate otherwise what’s the point of any forum.
Nothing wrong with debating except spouting contrary views on the formed from worthless opinions is not a debate,
I really don’t see what the problem is with the club statement? They’ve been forced into responding because of all the wild speculation that’s going around and not put out by the club, which seems perfectly understandable to me.
Yes, we all wish a new manager, coaching staff and players were all in place but the reason they ain’t is presumably stuff going on behind the scenes that very few if any, know about.
I imagine Sandgaard and all would’ve liked the same but it is what it is and why add to the furore by creating and kicking up such a fuss over things unknown?
Wild speculation? There is a stand-off between media and Charlton because reporters at both ends of the transaction do not believe the club and won't accept its version based on their own sources. In the end there are at least three parties with first-hand information and only one of them is responsible for the club's statement.
So what is the complete first hand information?
I believe the information Rich put out a fortnight ago was accurate and still stands, it just doesn't suit the club to have it out there for whatever reason. There may be some hairsplitting behind the club's position (such as job title, for example), but in terms of who succeeds Johnnie Jackson it is a done deal and has been since the story broke.
Excellent news.
A bit surprising that the deal has been done and his back room staff deal has not been completed as this could put him in an invidious position. Or have those deals also been done and compensation agreed?
It’s obvious it’s a done deal but some negotiations are still ongoing. That’s my take. And if Thomas wants to do things that way I’m fine with that. Why should he tow the line and do things the way the journos want him to, for example. He’s a big boy and will do it his own way. It will be officially announced when he’s ready and that’s his prerogative in my opinion.
Comments
Whatever it is, you can be sure that Jokat (Robo-Sandgaard) will sing the same tune.
Im not disputing the standard practise, the club, for whatever reasons, believe that the reports are incorrect.
He bloody loves roundabouts.
The media also have a right to report on the club's affairs as they see fit within the law regardless of what the current owner thinks about that.
Let's see how it plays out, shall we? The media view is that Garner has the job - I doubt if a qualification over job title, contract length, etc, would seem to most people a proportionate reason to rubbish the stories that are out there.
If the media have it substantively wrong then they will get the reputational hit. That's the nature of the business.
No way would Airman Brown say those words again if it wasn't a done deal. Smoke and mirrors from Tom + Rae and sorting out the back room staff as Thomas is worried we may end up with more coaches than National express.
That fans don’t get upset that they think nothing is happening. Meanwhile the club don’t get held to every small sentence they type on Twitter and LinkedIn.
This post came out a bit of a jumbled mess but the point is, please keep your head down for the time being. Anything you do say will only be used against you.
Raelynn,
Raelynn,
Raelynn,
Raelynn........
I'm beggin' of you,
Please don't tweet again.
🎵