Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Next manager - Ben Garner confirmed (p256)
Comments
-
Okay, I think I've got it. TS is working on commission for @AFKABartram and @LoOkOuT. TS is using deliberate obfuscation merely to get more clicks and thus more revenue for Charlton Life.4
-
Cawley didn't just get it from the Swindon end and run with it.CAFCsayer said:Id be pretty confident in the fact that Cawley and Nixon were fed the information from the Swindon end at the same time, Rich went to check the facts and Nixon just put it out and the SLP followed suit once it was in the public domain3 -
Well, if you don't know the difference by now, I'd question your potty training.letthegoodtimesroll said:so, trying to work this out, basically it’s now all about whether it’s a number one or it’s a number two…7 -
This guy better be good after all this.2
-
I think you’ll find it was the sausage who broke the reports early doorsRichard J said:Iirc it was Nixon who originally broke the story two weeks ago. Cawley only repeated it, but because Rich has credibility and Nixon doesn't it only gained currency when Cawley tweeted it.
I just hope of it is Garner then it happens this week.2 -
Fair enough.Braziliance said:
I think you’ll find it was the sausage who broke the reports early doorsRichard J said:Iirc it was Nixon who originally broke the story two weeks ago. Cawley only repeated it, but because Rich has credibility and Nixon doesn't it only gained currency when Cawley tweeted it.
I just hope of it is Garner then it happens this week.0 -
More chance of finally getting a decent tune out of rock on Tommyseth plum said:I might be the only one who doesn’t care that much how this has unfolded, I simply now want a manager announced.
If it is Ben Garner then that would be a kind of positive neutral from me, and I will be interested (especially if he gets tunes out of Kirk, Gilbey and Morgan) in how it all goes.
But above all I want the focus to be on doing everything possible to win the first game of the season, then the one after that, then the one after…….3 -
Sandgaard has already created unnecessary pressure for Garner.BigRedEvil said:This guy better be good after all this.0 -
You’d be wrong then.CAFCsayer said:Id be pretty confident in the fact that Cawley and Nixon were fed the information from the Swindon end at the same time, Rich went to check the facts and Nixon just put it out and the SLP followed suit once it was in the public domain5 -
I’ve been clear already that I believe the stories from Rich Cawley and the Swindon local reporter are properly sourced and accurate.valleynick66 said:
You do talk in riddles sometimes ! I like the drama though 🙂Airman Brown said:
Or Cawley had it first but only put it out when he saw Nixon had. As I recall Nixon had been teasing it for a while. People need to get over the idea that a Charlton local reporter would 1) be fed a story by Swindon and 2) just take it at face value and put it straight out - it doesn’t work like that.Callumcafc said:Alan Nixon posted re: Garner on 25/5 at 9:45pm
Rich Cawley posted re: Garner on 25/5 at 9:52pm
Either Cawley can copy really fast or the story broke to both him and Nixon from the Swindon end at the same time.
I don’t believe that Cawley uses Alan Nixon’s patreon subscription as a source.
Can’t you just tell us what you understand to be the case ? And not leave questions hanging.I don’t understand why from what you suggest Cawley only put it out after Nixon and not before for example.
The reality is that as a local reporter you don’t put out everything you know as soon as you know it, because that isn’t always the best thing to do. But if someone else breaks a story you already have there is no merit in holding on to it any further.The other stuff is something I’ve heard and believe may be true but I’m not able to confirm it myself.9 - Sponsored links:
-
People need to understand that Cawley has so much information that we don’t have that he either cannot put out or has to fact check and ask other sources before just running a story in the way a journalist from The Sun would do.
He’s very well informed and would have had this information for at least a good few days before we heard about it.
To then confidently state he believes it remains true, he does not do those things without being very sure.
Who knows what the hold up has been but it has been dealt with very poorly, whatever way you want to dress it up.12 -
Well he'll be here in a day or two won't he ? He'll have his moment of glory & announce it in much the same way as Pinocchio did. We had a large amount of top quality applications who we've only just finished interviewing & considering but Ben Garner & his team blew us out of the water with his plans & knowledge of the lower leagues & together with my son & his black box we are confident that we can attract young exciting talent to this soccer club.The Red Robin said:Well if Swindon have made an approach for Wellens then Garner has gone one way or another. Sandgaard can’t let this drag on much longer.4 -
All I've got to say is.......
Does Jeff know..?0 -
You can't believe anything Jeff tells you. He's Unbelievable Jeff.golfaddick said:All I've got to say is.......
Does Jeff know..?8 -
I’m still not sure if you knew before I knew that you knew.Covered End said:I knew before he knew, but I didn't want to say I knew before he knew, because Charlton didn't want me to know what I knew, so I waited until the other guy said that he knew, before I revealed that I knew as well.0 -
I know nothing about football management or club ownership, but I'm still hopeful that TS is putting us on the right track. When he took over all I wanted was a saviour. Now the dust has settled I want the success to flow, but can't help remembering that the shitshow before he arrived almost resulted in oblivion. I'm still in the TS is a good guy camp, however recognise that his style pisses some people off. I remain grateful though for his investment so far and believe that he wants to get it right, but running the club right and being successful aren't always the same thing.
8 -
I hope i am wrong but the recent announcement on Charlton official site, seems 'code' to me, that there is nothing doing, and that an instant announcement ,with great fanfare, wont happen on T Ss return.The part about pure speculation, with very little fact, on social media (so to CL) is mostly B S , seems very profound to me,Again hoping i am wrong, and this is a distraction, for reasons unknown .I am sure that under the present circumstances the switchboard will be running hot, for sign ups, for Charlton T V mmm.And then there is Memberships. T S Is learning the hard way .Expect another season of struggle0
-
I beg to differ.The Red Robin said:
Sandgaard has already created unnecessary pressure for Garner.BigRedEvil said:This guy better be good after all this.
The way i see it is that when it was first announced that it was likely to be Garner there was almost unanimous disapproval. Who's he? Never heard of him. Couldn't get promoted out of league 2. Cheap option. Fucking Swindon blah blah blah.
Now as this saga has dragged on and on and on, pretty much everyone would now be disappointed if it ISN'T Garner.18 -
100%, although I fear things could go wrong this season and the s*** will hit the fan.The Prince-e-Paul said:I know nothing about football management or club ownership, but I'm still hopeful that TS is putting us on the right track. When he took over all I wanted was a saviour. Now the dust has settled I want the success to flow, but can't help remembering that the shitshow before he arrived almost resulted in oblivion. I'm still in the TS is a good guy camp, however recognise that his style pisses some people off. I remain grateful though for his investment so far and believe that he wants to get it right, but running the club right and being successful aren't always the same thing.
If we get off to a bad start people will immediately point to Garner's lack of experience and coming in from a division below ours.2 -
Oh memories.Fanny Fanackapan said:
Well, if you don't know the difference by now, I'd question your potty training.letthegoodtimesroll said:so, trying to work this out, basically it’s now all about whether it’s a number one or it’s a number two…0 - Sponsored links:
-
Fair enough haha, how did it go down then?Airman Brown said:
You’d be wrong then.CAFCsayer said:Id be pretty confident in the fact that Cawley and Nixon were fed the information from the Swindon end at the same time, Rich went to check the facts and Nixon just put it out and the SLP followed suit once it was in the public domain0 -
I wonder why some people trusting TS over Cawley (someone that has for years provided consistently accurate information) on this one . All of a sudden, for some, Cawley is a chancer that doesn’t check his sources and goes with whatever he reads on Twitter . The blind faith in TS is absolutely baffling .33
-
I am in that camp too but have a nagging concern that in terms of running a football club, he hasn't got a clue. I am longing for the evidence to bin that concern but am still waiting for it. I think the spivs did know but clearly didn't have the funds. It isn't about the detail but understanding what the basics are then seeing them ticked off. And not to allow wishful thinking to cloud what you see.The Prince-e-Paul said:I know nothing about football management or club ownership, but I'm still hopeful that TS is putting us on the right track. When he took over all I wanted was a saviour. Now the dust has settled I want the success to flow, but can't help remembering that the shitshow before he arrived almost resulted in oblivion. I'm still in the TS is a good guy camp, however recognise that his style pisses some people off. I remain grateful though for his investment so far and believe that he wants to get it right, but running the club right and being successful aren't always the same thing.1 -
That doesn’t (for me) explain why Cawley didn’t publish ASAP and only after Nixon.Airman Brown said:
I’ve been clear already that I believe the stories from Rich Cawley and the Swindon local reporter are properly sourced and accurate.valleynick66 said:
You do talk in riddles sometimes ! I like the drama though 🙂Airman Brown said:
Or Cawley had it first but only put it out when he saw Nixon had. As I recall Nixon had been teasing it for a while. People need to get over the idea that a Charlton local reporter would 1) be fed a story by Swindon and 2) just take it at face value and put it straight out - it doesn’t work like that.Callumcafc said:Alan Nixon posted re: Garner on 25/5 at 9:45pm
Rich Cawley posted re: Garner on 25/5 at 9:52pm
Either Cawley can copy really fast or the story broke to both him and Nixon from the Swindon end at the same time.
I don’t believe that Cawley uses Alan Nixon’s patreon subscription as a source.
Can’t you just tell us what you understand to be the case ? And not leave questions hanging.I don’t understand why from what you suggest Cawley only put it out after Nixon and not before for example.
The reality is that as a local reporter you don’t put out everything you know as soon as you know it, because that isn’t always the best thing to do. But if someone else breaks a story you already have there is no merit in holding on to it any further.The other stuff is something I’ve heard and believe may be true but I’m not able to confirm it myself.If properly sourced it was (relative for us) newsworthy and not obvious why it would need to wait.0 -
Because he would have needed to validate the information before putting it out there, if he immediately put out everything he heard he would very quickly lose all credibility when some of those things turn out to be wrong.valleynick66 said:
That doesn’t (for me) explain why Cawley didn’t publish ASAP and only after Nixon.Airman Brown said:
I’ve been clear already that I believe the stories from Rich Cawley and the Swindon local reporter are properly sourced and accurate.valleynick66 said:
You do talk in riddles sometimes ! I like the drama though 🙂Airman Brown said:
Or Cawley had it first but only put it out when he saw Nixon had. As I recall Nixon had been teasing it for a while. People need to get over the idea that a Charlton local reporter would 1) be fed a story by Swindon and 2) just take it at face value and put it straight out - it doesn’t work like that.Callumcafc said:Alan Nixon posted re: Garner on 25/5 at 9:45pm
Rich Cawley posted re: Garner on 25/5 at 9:52pm
Either Cawley can copy really fast or the story broke to both him and Nixon from the Swindon end at the same time.
I don’t believe that Cawley uses Alan Nixon’s patreon subscription as a source.
Can’t you just tell us what you understand to be the case ? And not leave questions hanging.I don’t understand why from what you suggest Cawley only put it out after Nixon and not before for example.
The reality is that as a local reporter you don’t put out everything you know as soon as you know it, because that isn’t always the best thing to do. But if someone else breaks a story you already have there is no merit in holding on to it any further.The other stuff is something I’ve heard and believe may be true but I’m not able to confirm it myself.If properly sourced it was (relative for us) newsworthy and not obvious why it would need to wait.1 -
Who has said Cawley is a chancer?!wmcf123 said:I wonder why some people trusting TS over Cawley (someone that has for years provided consistently accurate information) on this one . All of a sudden, for some, Cawley is a chancer that doesn’t check his sources and goes with whatever he reads on Twitter . The blind faith in TS is absolutely baffling .3 -
I won’t believe it until its a #DoneDeal1
-
I've read, with interest, the last 246 pages of this thread on a regular basis. All the different rumours, some people reading twitter etal and making up their minds it must be true. TS gets hammered for not moving to OUR timescale, then he gets hammered when Garner was first mentioned that we are shopping in Aldi when it should be Waitrose, then as people read up on Garner they then think, oh, this could be a good appt, followed by why are we haggling over compo, why is he not here yet...so on and so forth.
Next its about Cawley and he has said this and that about Garner.....Club says not agreed.....people asking for a statement of some kind on OS (or from the club), they get one and then say...better to say nothing at all!! Whichever way this cuts, it doesn't seem to matter what TS does, he is dammed if he does and dammed if he doesn't. On a football forum there will always be difference of opinions and that is healthy, but what, in my opinion, is not healthy is the amount of 'vitriol' that TS and his family seem to be getting across social media.
Yes TS has made mistakes, quite a few tbh, but he has sunk a considerable amount of his own dosh into the club and surely has the right to take his time to get this next appt right?
However leaving all the above to one-side, I would like to offer a potential reason for the different takes on the Garner situation-:
Could it be that, as we are taking a manager from another club, the current club, Swindon, have asked for and got an official NDA in place? This would stop TS being able to confirm anything as fact. This NDA could also cover Swindon's ex - DoF and Garners coaches? A local journo from Swindon and Cawley did some digging and announced what they did, but CAFC, and indeed, Swindon Town FC have not confirmed any of it....publicly.
Swindon may even want to announce themselves, first, that Garner is leaving and at the same time give the name of their new Manager?
Broken NDA's can be expensive and TS may just be thinking that this money could be spent better than paying out for a breach of an NDA?
No-one knows, me included, if the above is right or wrong, but it would explain certain actions. It's no-ones fault, my guess is the Swindon journo and Cawley wanted to get a 99.9% true story out there in the public domain, but all CAFC can do is deny a deal is done, and that could be factual, if we haven't signed up Garners coaches yet.
Do I think it will be Garner - Yes - do I think he could be a good choice - absolutely - do I think it will be announced this week - Yes, along with his coaches and maybe the DoF.
As for us supporters, we just need to sit back and see what transpires, BUT biting the hand of the person who feeds you could be a very dangerous course to take.
Whether you like it or not, TS owns the club, is trying to sort out the mess that was left by RD, ESI and co. That is not going to happen overnight or 18 months in my opinion, however TS has a BIG season coming up, if he gets it wrong it'll cost him another £8m, get it right and 'happy days' for all.
The above will not sit well with many on here, but, only time will tell and time is something we all have to wait for.
72 -
So, does TS have an agenda that is opposite to what the fans want? Why would he waste all his time going through a legal battle to gain control of the club, not to mention his money, just to piss off the fans! What purpose would that serve?wmcf123 said:I wonder why some people trusting TS over Cawley (someone that has for years provided consistently accurate information) on this one . All of a sudden, for some, Cawley is a chancer that doesn’t check his sources and goes with whatever he reads on Twitter . The blind faith in TS is absolutely baffling .
The conspiracy theorists on here are verging on the ridiculous?
Should we get Mulder and Scully in?9 -
Are they both into a low block the 2 you mention?sillav nitram said:
So, does TS have an agenda that is opposite to what the fans want? Why would he waste all his time going through a legal battle to gain control of the club, not to mention his money, just to piss off the fans! What purpose would that serve?wmcf123 said:I wonder why some people trusting TS over Cawley (someone that has for years provided consistently accurate information) on this one . All of a sudden, for some, Cawley is a chancer that doesn’t check his sources and goes with whatever he reads on Twitter . The blind faith in TS is absolutely baffling .
The conspiracy theorists on here are verging on the ridiculous?
Should we get Mulder and Scully in?2
