Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
where exactly did Garner go wrong?
Comments
-
If he was more experienced he would have sussed TS out. I do think Garner is a bit naive...Manic_mania said:
But if you are hired SPECIFICALLY for your footballing philosophy? That was made very clear on his appointment. and was he sold the job (bearing in mind he was in the middle of a project, not unemployed) that this was he case. Doesn't that mean time is key?hoof_it_up_to_benty said:
Part of being a good manager is the ability to adapt and to recognise that your 'philosophy' may not work with the resources available.se9addick said:
I don’t think he’s a chancer, I actually think he has a lot of qualities that could make him a good manager in the future. I think however he has a philosophy that he wants to stick with regardless of the facts on the ground and the facts on the ground at Charlton are that we have a lopsided, fairly limited, squad.Manic_mania said:
That's what baffles me... so was that on him? or was he being a bit of a chancer? He comes across very well and very smart in interviews - did he just get found out?se9addick said:
He should have played a system that suited the players he had. I don’t really agree with his sacking, but watching us trying to get League One duffers playing like Manchester City was crazy.Manic_mania said:Its very clear that he was hired for us to play a certain way - he made it very clear (to us at least) that this would take time, a certain number of transfer windows - changing an entire football philosophy - He was given a transfer budget of zero, and signed players he was familiar with and had already bought into what he had been trying to do previously. It was a way of playing that was basically foreign to the players he was joining. There has already been question marks about the culture of the club, disciplinary and attitude wise (which he was still trying to combat even up to his last game based on his last interview)
It became increasingly clear that the players he inherited were not either good or suited enough to this philosophy. Injuries to probably the 3 or 4 players that bought into it and had the ability to do what he wanted made things even worse.
Can anybody explain what else he could have done based on his remit? I can't.
Sussing out the owner is also key.
Garner may be a coach and not a manager...1 -
I think Sandgaard wanting a specific type of football is a bit of a red herring. Sandgaard says it because it sounds good, which is his MO really, but I doubt he really believes it. If Charlton were top of the league but playing route one I doubt Garner would be out on his ear*.Manic_mania said:
But if you are hired SPECIFICALLY for your footballing philosophy? That was made very clear on his appointment. and was he sold the job (bearing in mind he was in the middle of a project, not unemployed) that this was he case. Doesn't that mean time is key?hoof_it_up_to_benty said:
Part of being a good manager is the ability to adapt and to recognise that your 'philosophy' may not work with the resources available.se9addick said:
I don’t think he’s a chancer, I actually think he has a lot of qualities that could make him a good manager in the future. I think however he has a philosophy that he wants to stick with regardless of the facts on the ground and the facts on the ground at Charlton are that we have a lopsided, fairly limited, squad.Manic_mania said:
That's what baffles me... so was that on him? or was he being a bit of a chancer? He comes across very well and very smart in interviews - did he just get found out?se9addick said:
He should have played a system that suited the players he had. I don’t really agree with his sacking, but watching us trying to get League One duffers playing like Manchester City was crazy.Manic_mania said:Its very clear that he was hired for us to play a certain way - he made it very clear (to us at least) that this would take time, a certain number of transfer windows - changing an entire football philosophy - He was given a transfer budget of zero, and signed players he was familiar with and had already bought into what he had been trying to do previously. It was a way of playing that was basically foreign to the players he was joining. There has already been question marks about the culture of the club, disciplinary and attitude wise (which he was still trying to combat even up to his last game based on his last interview)
It became increasingly clear that the players he inherited were not either good or suited enough to this philosophy. Injuries to probably the 3 or 4 players that bought into it and had the ability to do what he wanted made things even worse.
Can anybody explain what else he could have done based on his remit? I can't.
Sussing out the owner is also key.
Garner may be a coach and not a manager...
*Actually, I don’t think that the shocking results and league position are the main reason he’s been sacked - more likely other stuff going on behind the scenes are major contributing factors.2 -
Catch 22 though, you've been brought in by an owner who insists it's because he wants a certain style of play, but you then aren't backed to get players to play that way.hoof_it_up_to_benty said:
Part of being a good manager is the ability to adapt and to recognise that your 'philosophy' may not work with the resources available.se9addick said:
I don’t think he’s a chancer, I actually think he has a lot of qualities that could make him a good manager in the future. I think however he has a philosophy that he wants to stick with regardless of the facts on the ground and the facts on the ground at Charlton are that we have a lopsided, fairly limited, squad.Manic_mania said:
That's what baffles me... so was that on him? or was he being a bit of a chancer? He comes across very well and very smart in interviews - did he just get found out?se9addick said:
He should have played a system that suited the players he had. I don’t really agree with his sacking, but watching us trying to get League One duffers playing like Manchester City was crazy.Manic_mania said:Its very clear that he was hired for us to play a certain way - he made it very clear (to us at least) that this would take time, a certain number of transfer windows - changing an entire football philosophy - He was given a transfer budget of zero, and signed players he was familiar with and had already bought into what he had been trying to do previously. It was a way of playing that was basically foreign to the players he was joining. There has already been question marks about the culture of the club, disciplinary and attitude wise (which he was still trying to combat even up to his last game based on his last interview)
It became increasingly clear that the players he inherited were not either good or suited enough to this philosophy. Injuries to probably the 3 or 4 players that bought into it and had the ability to do what he wanted made things even worse.
Can anybody explain what else he could have done based on his remit? I can't.
Sussing out the owner is also key.
Garner may be a coach and not a manager...
Do you abandon it, be pragmatic and piss off the owner, or do you play it, struggle, and piss off the owner?
I think he's definitely got something about him and could do well at the right club, but agree a little bit that he might be best suited in the end to coaching a PL u23 team or something - teams will be happy he's looking to coach them in a passing style etc.1 -
if that was true JJ wouldn't have been binned IMO -se9addick said:Manic_mania said:
But if you are hired SPECIFICALLY for your footballing philosophy? That was made very clear on his appointment. and was he sold the job (bearing in mind he was in the middle of a project, not unemployed) that this was he case. Doesn't that mean time is key?hoof_it_up_to_benty said:
Part of being a good manager is the ability to adapt and to recognise that your 'philosophy' may not work with the resources available.se9addick said:
I don’t think he’s a chancer, I actually think he has a lot of qualities that could make him a good manager in the future. I think however he has a philosophy that he wants to stick with regardless of the facts on the ground and the facts on the ground at Charlton are that we have a lopsided, fairly limited, squad.Manic_mania said:
That's what baffles me... so was that on him? or was he being a bit of a chancer? He comes across very well and very smart in interviews - did he just get found out?se9addick said:
He should have played a system that suited the players he had. I don’t really agree with his sacking, but watching us trying to get League One duffers playing like Manchester City was crazy.Manic_mania said:Its very clear that he was hired for us to play a certain way - he made it very clear (to us at least) that this would take time, a certain number of transfer windows - changing an entire football philosophy - He was given a transfer budget of zero, and signed players he was familiar with and had already bought into what he had been trying to do previously. It was a way of playing that was basically foreign to the players he was joining. There has already been question marks about the culture of the club, disciplinary and attitude wise (which he was still trying to combat even up to his last game based on his last interview)
It became increasingly clear that the players he inherited were not either good or suited enough to this philosophy. Injuries to probably the 3 or 4 players that bought into it and had the ability to do what he wanted made things even worse.
Can anybody explain what else he could have done based on his remit? I can't.
Sussing out the owner is also key.
Garner may be a coach and not a manager...
. Sandgaard says it because it sounds good, which is his MO really, but I doubt he really believes it. If Charlton were top of the league but playing route one I doubt Garner would be out on his ear*.
*Actually, I don’t think that the shocking results and league position are the main reason he’s been sacked - more likely other stuff going on behind the scenes are major contributing factors.
edit to clarify; i think TS had a dose of the Duchatlets; lots of people telling him how football should be played who don't really know anything about lower league football - bad advisors yet again
* i bloody hope you are right0 -
5
-
Again, just to bring it back to JG - am i the only one that finds it incredibly concerning regarding his comments about discipline and professionalism and the culture of the club? I've only been a fan for 25 years ish but i've never heard consecutive managers discussing this in my time here.0
-
Because Sandgaard wasn’t the owner for many of those 25 years. Culture starts at the top.Manic_mania said:Again, just to bring it back to JG - am i the only one that finds it incredibly concerning regarding his comments about discipline and professionalism and the culture of the club? I've only been a fan for 25 years ish but i've never heard consecutive managers discussing this in my time here.
2 -
Did I warm to Garner? No
Did I think tippy-tappy football from the back was going to be successful in the 3rd division? No
Would I have sacked him today like a c*** as soon as I got back to Ohio or wherever stupid I lived? No
I’d have given the boy these two cup games, what fucking harm can that have done? It’s been the only non-shite part of the season.
And then I’d have sacked him.
-Just to prove to the doubters that me, my wife and my son were all stupid and bald. That’s what I’d have done if I’d been a Saandgaaard…,.3 -
I'd never call you and your wife and kid stupid and bald xxFumbluff said:Did I warm to Garner? No
Did I think tippy-tappy football from the back was going to be successful in the 3rd division? No
Would I have sacked him today like a c*** as soon as I got back to Ohio or wherever stupid I lived? No
I’d have given the boy these two cup games, what fucking harm can that have done? It’s been the only non-shite part of the season.
And then I’d have sacked him.
-Just to prove to the doubters that me, my wife and my son were all stupid and bald. That’s what I’d have done if I’d been a Saandgaaard…,.0 -
The "culture" problem is a Martin issue.LoOkOuT said:
Because Sandgaard wasn’t the owner for many of those 25 years. Culture starts at the top.Manic_mania said:Again, just to bring it back to JG - am i the only one that finds it incredibly concerning regarding his comments about discipline and professionalism and the culture of the club? I've only been a fan for 25 years ish but i've never heard consecutive managers discussing this in my time here.
On the playing side.0 -
Sponsored links:
-
@DOUCHER may be on to something, a while ago I heard third hand that Gallen had said about the urgent need for a forward and Garner said he could get by with what we had 🤷♂️
On a side note Gallen and MS are in each others pockets0 -
was this before or after the transfer window out of interest?oohaahmortimer said:@DOUCHER may be on to something, a while ago I heard third hand that Gallen had said about the urgent need for a forward and Garner said he could get by with what we had 🤷♂️
On a side note Gallen and MS are in each others pockets0 -
Before it slammed shut1
-
that's fairly damning and probably renders this thread redundant if it's true. thanksoohaahmortimer said:Before it slammed shut1 -
Because he was bemoaning the situation now, in early December, to me that shows that he don't push hard enough when it mattered, otherwise surely he would have said "as I've said before" "like I said to TS at the start of the season" etc. etc.Cafc43v3r said:
How do you know he didnt?sam3110 said:
Where Garner went wrong is not pushing hard enough early enough for players IMO. If you have a budget and you have maxed it out, and are still 2 or 3 players short, you push as hard as possible to shift those unwanted players, to sign youngsters on loan where the parent club don't ask for the wages to be paid, and you do everything you can to make sure you have a left footed left back and a left sided midfielder and more than one fit senior striker on the books.Manic_mania said:
I get what you are saying, but i'm trying to look at this from a different POV - there is enough threads to criticise TS on here (and I agree) my question is where did JG go wrong with what he had.sam3110 said:Whoever was in charge of the squad and it's overall make-up is to blame primarily.
Is that Garner for being the manager of the squad and ultimately not pushing for certain players?
Is that Gallen for being the person responsible for the negotiations, and therefore the lack of quality coming through the door?
Is it Sandgaard Jr. for being part of the scouting team and being able to have a say despite having no real credentials for the role?
Is it Sandgaard Sr. for being the head honcho and pulling the purse strings tight when it's obvious to everyone that we need to spend more to get better players and a better squad
Let's be honest here, the squad themselves aren't devoid of blame either, as they, and the squads before them too, have been absolutely fucking pathetic.
My view is that it's a combination of all of the above, but the main blame lays at the door of Thomas, and unfortunately unless he gives up and fucks off, it's only downhill from here
He seemed pretty unfussed at the time when we missed out on Bonne, and when we were speaking about not utilising all our loan spots. Maybe he was pushing that hard in the background, but he certainly didn't convey that to the public and the fans at the time0 -
Sounds like nonsense. Funny how it only turns up once the guy gets sacked.oohaahmortimer said:@DOUCHER may be on to something, a while ago I heard third hand that Gallen had said about the urgent need for a forward and Garner said he could get by with what we had 🤷♂️
On a side note Gallen and MS are in each others pockets
Pushing all the bad decisions onto the ex-manager like people did with Adkins and then Jackson. Boring old record.
Blaming Garner for not wheeling and dealing when that's clearly not his job? Madness.0 -
Well I heard it ages ago and didn’t want to stir it but now our own Pep has gone (there were some who worried he’d get poached 😂) I thought I’d add it to the mix, I’d 85% believe it0
-
It again just sounds like nonsense.
Blaming Garner for not signing a striker shows a child-like level of knowing how football clubs operate in the transfer window in 2022.0 -
Ineffective football, defensively an absolute shambles. He didn't do well at Bristol Rovers, did okay at Swindon and did bad for us.
Stockley form has been the biggest worry, this is a striker who scores goals at this level but Garner couldn't get anything out of him0 -
85% trueoohaahmortimer said:Well I heard it ages ago and didn’t want to stir it but now our own Pep has gone (there were some who worried he’d get poached 😂) I thought I’d add it to the mix, I’d 85% believe it
10% been sold a pup
5% just made it up for a laugh7 -
Sponsored links:
-
Yeah the sort of nonsense no one would bother making upSELR_addicks said:It again just sounds like nonsense.
Blaming Garner for not signing a striker shows a child-like level of knowing how football clubs operate in the transfer window in 2022.0 -
again - know where you're coming from - but sometimes you have to look at what actually happened - Washington left us very early in the window - at the time, we weren't sure about Miles - who else did he have? we made many reinforcements - all needed, but if we made it a priority we could have got SOMEONE in surely? The fact that we picked out defenders and at best attacking midfielders suggests that JG thought he could do a Man city of last year job. I don't know if that was JG's decision, but the players he chose were players he already knew at Swindon - he didn't pick a striker. it seems very plausible to me that he overestimated the ability of Fraser, Payne, CBT, DJ - these are league 2 standard players being asked to win league one games.SELR_addicks said:
Sounds like nonsense. Funny how it only turns up once the guy gets sacked.oohaahmortimer said:@DOUCHER may be on to something, a while ago I heard third hand that Gallen had said about the urgent need for a forward and Garner said he could get by with what we had 🤷♂️
On a side note Gallen and MS are in each others pockets
Pushing all the bad decisions onto the ex-manager like people did with Adkins and then Jackson. Boring old record.
0 -
You have no idea about the conversations held in private between the management team, the scouts, the transfer committee and Thomas/Martin.Manic_mania said:
again - know where you're coming from - but sometimes you have to look at what actually happened - Washington left us very early in the window - at the time, we weren't sure about Miles - who else did he have? we made many reinforcements - all needed, but if we made it a priority we could have got SOMEONE in surely? The fact that we picked out defenders and at best attacking midfielders suggests that JG thought he could do a Man city of last year job. I don't know if that was JG's decision, but the players he chose were players he already knew at Swindon - he didn't pick a striker. it seems very plausible to me that he overestimated the ability of Fraser, Payne, CBT, DJ - these are league 2 standard players being asked to win league one games.SELR_addicks said:
Sounds like nonsense. Funny how it only turns up once the guy gets sacked.oohaahmortimer said:@DOUCHER may be on to something, a while ago I heard third hand that Gallen had said about the urgent need for a forward and Garner said he could get by with what we had 🤷♂️
On a side note Gallen and MS are in each others pockets
Pushing all the bad decisions onto the ex-manager like people did with Adkins and then Jackson. Boring old record.
You are speculating based off our incomings with no awareness of what was happening behind the scenes.
Garner could have been pleading for a striker and the scouts/Martin said that they were trying. What else is a manager supposed to do? He's not in charge of transfers!
I do know that Thomas probably asked Garner who would be able to make the step up to League One from Swindon and Garner probably gave him 4/5 names. Whether we signed them all is up for speculation, perhaps Garner did suggest a striker and we didn't get them?0 -
you could be entirely right. I was responding to oohaa's point - could be speculation but I believe it more than most of the stuff i read elsewhere.0
-
They botched the bringing in of the desperately needed forward and got rid of Washington. So that's TWO forwards we needed. That said, I truly believe that managers such as Alex Neil could get THIS current squad promoted with games to spare. This current team is more than good enough. And an extra few players would make us formidable. Against the rubbish teams and the good. A sign the team is really exceptional is when it can rise to the challenge of playing better sides but also despatch lesser teams. The story of Garner is he could do the forrmer (because this relies on the opponents) but he couldn't do the latter (which relies on us)
So it is the right decision to let him go. I didn't see anything during his tenure that convinced me he would get this club topping the division let alone climbing the leagues. Yes he could get us beating teams that DO top the division but against the MK Dons' and the Cheltenhams ... not a clue.
I suspect Sandgaard will want to sell the club but a third tier team in a relegation dogfight is not very appealing. I reckon he will bring in a rottweiler to get these players fighting until May and climb the table.The Sandgaards will be gone by the summer.0 -
Why are you calling Ben Garner JG?Manic_mania said:
again - know where you're coming from - but sometimes you have to look at what actually happened - Washington left us very early in the window - at the time, we weren't sure about Miles - who else did he have? we made many reinforcements - all needed, but if we made it a priority we could have got SOMEONE in surely? The fact that we picked out defenders and at best attacking midfielders suggests that JG thought he could do a Man city of last year job. I don't know if that was JG's decision, but the players he chose were players he already knew at Swindon - he didn't pick a striker. it seems very plausible to me that he overestimated the ability of Fraser, Payne, CBT, DJ - these are league 2 standard players being asked to win league one games.SELR_addicks said:
Sounds like nonsense. Funny how it only turns up once the guy gets sacked.oohaahmortimer said:@DOUCHER may be on to something, a while ago I heard third hand that Gallen had said about the urgent need for a forward and Garner said he could get by with what we had 🤷♂️
On a side note Gallen and MS are in each others pockets
Pushing all the bad decisions onto the ex-manager like people did with Adkins and then Jackson. Boring old record.5 -
He looked at the club through the prism of past glories -
Not recognising that we are an utter shell of our former selves, run by maniacs - stripped by chancers and with no future unless an utter lunatic with more money than sense comes in and throws it all over the club.
He was sold a dream.
TS has now lost the fan base.
If we avoid going down then I'll be delighted - that is target number 1.
Longer term our only salvation is an utterly loaded guy who will accept a decade of mega loses as we claw ourselves back to the championship.
2 -
When he complained about the squad and ummer recruitment after Port Vale this felt all but inevitable.
I think pretty highly of Garner. He's clearly a bright young coach, thinks about the game, has a system and style he wants to implement, and works with his teams to do that. He had pretty decent success with Swindon.
Also, I do not think you should read too much into post match pressers baring something radical.
That being said, Garner's post match pressers felt like it was always someone else's fault. He got a two match touch line ban what, 12 games into the season for constantly whinging at referees. It was tiresome and it gave the impression that he was evading accountability and unwilling to learn. It's also incredibly lazy to just blame referees.
It felt like, in that knee jwrk response for a scape goat, he accidentally, or not so accidentally, told the truth. Was he wrong in his assessment? Almost certainly not. But can you come out and criticize the owner/CEO whose wife and son run the club and expect to keep your job? Extremely unlikely.
I have more thoughts on style of play and system. It's been noticeable how little we've pressed for a while now. Some of that I'm sure is down to dead slow CBs. And Stockley just isn't able to start the press.
But by the end he felt like a man with a group of players looking for a system. Not all his fault when you don't have the players to play exactly the way you want, but it also felt like he was throwing team selections out there to see what worked the last 2-3 months. Some of that down to injury, but not all of it.
I suspect one day we'll look at him and wonder how we had him and sacked him when he turns out successful. Or he'll turn into a Karl Robinson, a League One preacher of possession and pressing football without much success.4 -
you're right i'm very very sorry.Covered End said:
Why are you calling Ben Garner JG?Manic_mania said:
again - know where you're coming from - but sometimes you have to look at what actually happened - Washington left us very early in the window - at the time, we weren't sure about Miles - who else did he have? we made many reinforcements - all needed, but if we made it a priority we could have got SOMEONE in surely? The fact that we picked out defenders and at best attacking midfielders suggests that JG thought he could do a Man city of last year job. I don't know if that was JG's decision, but the players he chose were players he already knew at Swindon - he didn't pick a striker. it seems very plausible to me that he overestimated the ability of Fraser, Payne, CBT, DJ - these are league 2 standard players being asked to win league one games.SELR_addicks said:
Sounds like nonsense. Funny how it only turns up once the guy gets sacked.oohaahmortimer said:@DOUCHER may be on to something, a while ago I heard third hand that Gallen had said about the urgent need for a forward and Garner said he could get by with what we had 🤷♂️
On a side note Gallen and MS are in each others pockets
Pushing all the bad decisions onto the ex-manager like people did with Adkins and then Jackson. Boring old record.0 -
As a fan I absolve Garner of any responsibility.
There was no lack of effort from the players and he stuck to a slightly adapted version of his football philosophy. He needed time, decent players and support. He received none of these.
I thank him for his efforts and wish him every success in his future career.
I find it astonishing that after Bowyer (who led us to a play off final victory under Roland's ownership), Adkins (who has an impressive track record of success at this level), Jackson (a unifying club hero) and Garner (a widely respected, young progressive coach ) there are still some who think our constant failure has anything to do with managers.19
https://youtu.be/34xuHaAjsOE
