Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
POST-MATCH THREAD: PORT VALE V CHARLTON ATHLETIC / SATURDAY 19th NOVEMBER 2022 3.00pm KO
Comments
-
Maybe playing it out with Inniss and Lavelle maybe isn't the way to go.5
-
Agreed. We have become quite predictable to play against, and sticking to a rigid system (which we do for around 75 minutes every match) only works on a regular basis if you have much better players than the opposition, or are so well coached that even though the opposition know what you're going to do, they still can't stop it.Oakster2 said:Garner needs a plan B, (which involves aggression & a much more direct approach) every game it's Innis to Lavelle to Innis to Clare to Lavelle to Innis to Sessegnon to Lavelle to Dobson to Innis to hoof up to whoever is marking Stockley.....this methodical, keep ball stuff might work for Liverpool or Real Madrid but at Vale Park on a blustery Saturday in November, it's boring, dull, rubbish. Yes - we usually go a bit more direct in the 85th minute now but that's because we are desperately chasing a game in which we failed to make any kind of mark on.2 -
18
-
We’re always abysmal against Port Vale.0
-
Stop making excuses…at least in public, and play the hand dealt.
A thin squad maybe but those starting were lacklustre from the off.
A manager is supposed to manage not moan.7 -
Rubbish from Garner that.3
-
First things first the pitch was awful the grass was long and the ball did not move across it perhaps they did that on purpose to stop our passing game .. second no one deserved to win that game Port Vale played like an away team with 11 men behind the ball but what they did do well was not give us an inch of space to create ..
I think at HT was when it all went wrong the manager and his team should have seen what was happening and changed the way we played .. why take Stockley off ? We needed both Aneke and Stockley on with a more direct approach a plan B sorry but BG don’t seem to have a plan B for these types of games … to many of our key players had very poor games mainly CBT and Raki who were awful in fact the whole middle 4 were very poor and your not going to win games when the engine room now firing .. Dobson last two games now has been awful and today was at fault for the goal .
Subs were to late ..it was poor on the pitch but today I think we lost if of the pitch poor from the management team . That side today was more then good enough to win that game no excuses our planning for this game and decisions made in the dugout through the game lost us the game today.4 -
To me that sort of commentLouisMend said:
a) makes Garner look a bit of a whiner - "it's not fair, the opposition not playing in the right way, boo hoo"
b) is massively motivating for future opponents, especially the smaller teams in this division.
13 -
No skill, no passion, no effort, no idea. The most abject performance I have seen for a long time. The only saving grace for me personally was that my journey home wasn't too bad but I feel so sorry for those that traveled from London for that absolute crock of shit.Charlton Athletic Football Club - just fuck off, I'm done.
9 - Sponsored links:
-
Garner is right though anout the issue. The most effective way to play against us is to get numbers behind the ball. It is perfectly fair though, we have to find the solutuion to the problem.0
-
Almost purchased the £70 package earlier … so pleased I decided to waitRedmidland said:
Am I buying a stream for Tuesday....NO! Glad I didn't buy the £70 package...,0 -
Post Match comments from Port Vale's Assistant Manager, and goalscorer
Ironically Andy Crosby was the Assistant that Nigel Adkins wasn't able to bring to Charlton with him...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MhgyrjKBbwg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQLotW1O15Y
0 -
Sandgaard in promising much more than he can deliver shocker!1
-
Just seen Garner's after match comments and he's echoed everything that's been said on here since the end of the transfer window. He was obviously sold a pup with regards to his transfer budget and clearly there are players who are not up to it in this division let alone the one above. I sometimes look at the benchmark of their ability to perform in the championship as to whether they are good enough to get us out of this division. The back five, A good goalkeeper and full back in Egbo, nothing else.
The midfield, Fraser and Dobson nothing else. The forward line, only Miles Leaburn, please don't tell me Chuks Aneke would be an asset in that division, or that by the time we get there Corey Blackwell Taylor would have learnt how to deliver a cross, they are simply not good enough or fit enough for that division. Our most consistent players this season, are the ones who would handle the championship, every other senior player in this squad is simply passing through.2 -
Spot on RonnieRonnieMoore said:First things first the pitch was awful the grass was long and the ball did not move across it perhaps they did that on purpose to stop our passing game .. second no one deserved to win that game Port Vale played like an away team with 11 men behind the ball but what they did do well was not give us an inch of space to create ..
I think at HT was when it all went wrong the manager and his team should have seen what was happening and changed the way we played .. why take Stockley off ? We needed both Aneke and Stockley on with a more direct approach a plan B sorry but BG don’t seem to have a plan B for these types of games … to many of our key players had very poor games mainly CBT and Raki who were awful in fact the whole middle 4 were very poor and your not going to win games when the engine room now firing .. Dobson last two games now has been awful and today was at fault for the goal .
Subs were to late ..it was poor on the pitch but today I think we lost if of the pitch poor from the management team . That side today was more then good enough to win that game no excuses our planning for this game and decisions made in the dugout through the game lost us the game today.0 -
Comments like that from Klopp and Guardiola about other teams playing styles really annoy me and just looks petulant, but at least they can say they play pretty football.killerandflash said:
To me that sort of commentLouisMend said:
a) makes Garner look a bit of a whiner - "it's not fair, the opposition not playing in the right way, boo hoo"
b) is massively motivating for future opponents, especially the smaller teams in this division.
I saw another poster describe our style as 'pass, pass, pass, pass, hoof' which is a pretty accurate description. With respect to Garner he should perhaps keep comments like that to himself until we start playing the total football we've all been promised.2 -
Garner now seems to be trying to limit the damage to his reputation, and future employment prospects, that his time at Charlton may create. Plenty of managers get misled by boards/owners around the budget and infrastructure that will be made available to them, no idea of it’s the case here but it’s a useful card to play.Things seem to be unravelling quickly and the last of that little run of league game wins against Shrewsbury already feels like a long time ago.4
-
I went out and missed it all. Checked in on BBC a couple of times.
My boy was asked who he supported by a shop keeper this afternoon and for the first time in his life he was too embarrassed to answer. That should be Garners next pre match speech.
As for his post match waffle about anti football small teams..all big charlie bollox you heard from Mourinho. We are L1 ffs and not even good there.8 -
They are on the pitch playing the game. If they aint winning, it's because they aint good enough. Garner is doing the best with what little he has got.000__Jaaaaay__000 said:
Why exactly do you feel sorry for him ? Who do you think tells these players to pass it aimlessly round the back? Despite how poor these players are, they should still be beating port vale comfortablyLeuth said:I feel sorry for Garner, saddled with this bunch. You can see what he wants from them but they just can't deliver it0 - Sponsored links:
-
CorrectionMuttleyCAFC said:Garner is right though about the issue. The most effective way to play against us is to get numbers behind the ball. It is perfectly fair though, we have he has to find the solution to the problem.0 -
TS, MS, all the shite players…….
4 -
Re: investment in Jan, it’ll be take whatever someone offers for Leaburn and a couple of loans5
-
Garner could have vetoed the McGrandles deal, that's different to actively wanting him. Honestly I think "the club" expected Gilbey, JFC and Dobson to be gone by the end of August. For multiple reasons.ForeverAddickted said:My only criticism of Garner, is why the fuck did he want McGrandles when we had Forster-Caskey, we even had Alex Gilbey as an option - Given the nature of nearly all our signings, you're not telling me that he didnt have a say into who we signed!!
Why didnt that go into signing the missing Striker piece of the puzzle?2 -
We were abysmal from start to finish. Excruciatingly so and summed up by our sub Sunday league standard defending for their goal.1
-
Sounds like Garner has just realised what we found out last season - that Sandgarrd is all talk but no action.LouisMend said:
However, I dont think in League 1 you would expect to "rotate" players. We've had less than half the season & the players didnt play mid week. Cant remember Killer, Paddy Powell or Dick Tydeman needing a "rest" in mid November.3 -
Are you blaming NA and JJ for the contracts the current players are on?SELR_addicks said:
I think you're really overestimating how much McGrandles is on.ForeverAddickted said:
Well it clearly helped take wages away from one position, to accommodate anotherSELR_addicks said:
You really think the budget signing of McGrandles is why we don't have a striker?ForeverAddickted said:
Garner made JFC captain in a friendly days after McGrandles signedSELR_addicks said:
Because JFC was leaving and had been out for a year?ForeverAddickted said:My only criticism of Garner, is why the fuck did he want McGrandles when we had Forster-Caskey - Given the nature of nearly all our signings, you're not telling me that he didnt have a say into who we signed... Why didnt that go into signing the missing Striker piece of the puzzle?
Fairly simple.
The fact we couldn't move him on isn't Garner's problem. That's again TS/Gallen/whoever in charge of transfers.
We also had Gilbey as an option, who whilst not great in the past for us, has been no worse than Conor
It was a pointless signing, and took the budget away from areas we needed strengthening
The main reason we couldn't have the turnover of player we would have liked is because no one wants our deadwood on the wages they are on. That is the hangover from the previous two failures under NA and JJ.3 -
Hate always reading Garner's woes. Sure he talks about the frailties of this very average side - we could all say the same. But he's paid a brilliant wage to deliver. He never to my knowledge criticised his limitations or his responsibility as manager to be a MANAGER and organise the team to overcome opposition's tactics. He may get sacked or quit. I think many would love to be in that position with a guaranteed contract as protection. I very much doubt Sandgaard had any idea about recruitment, and never will.2
-
The wage bill is massive but he had little wiggle room as most of it was already taken up by the current squad?Chunes said:"I only had a little amount of the budget available to me."
I could understand him saying there was only a small budget, but I can't understand him saying that he was only given a limited amount of a larger budget...?1 -
Read my other posts.Cafc43v3r said:
Are you blaming NA and JJ for the contracts the current players are on?SELR_addicks said:
I think you're really overestimating how much McGrandles is on.ForeverAddickted said:
Well it clearly helped take wages away from one position, to accommodate anotherSELR_addicks said:
You really think the budget signing of McGrandles is why we don't have a striker?ForeverAddickted said:
Garner made JFC captain in a friendly days after McGrandles signedSELR_addicks said:
Because JFC was leaving and had been out for a year?ForeverAddickted said:My only criticism of Garner, is why the fuck did he want McGrandles when we had Forster-Caskey - Given the nature of nearly all our signings, you're not telling me that he didnt have a say into who we signed... Why didnt that go into signing the missing Striker piece of the puzzle?
Fairly simple.
The fact we couldn't move him on isn't Garner's problem. That's again TS/Gallen/whoever in charge of transfers.
We also had Gilbey as an option, who whilst not great in the past for us, has been no worse than Conor
It was a pointless signing, and took the budget away from areas we needed strengthening
The main reason we couldn't have the turnover of player we would have liked is because no one wants our deadwood on the wages they are on. That is the hangover from the previous two failures under NA and JJ.
I blame TS/Gallen and the scouting committee.
If they wanted to play the style we currently have, why did they allow Stockley to be signed? Why did we sign Lavelle in the first place? Why did we give contracts to players like Gilbey, Jaiyesimi and others?
We can't shift players on because of the bad contracts they came in with.0
