Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Andy Scott Appointed Technical Director - Gone Feb 2025 (p35)
Comments
-
Scrutiny and holding to account are healthy. However, since the days of (justified) protests against Roland and the ESIs, a certain amount of our fan base seems to have become addicted to the idea of hounding people out of their jobs. I don’t think more upheaval of the management structure is what is needed at all.Henry Irving said:
The UK directors all have backgrounds in football.PragueAddick said:@fenaddick thanks for your coherent reply. I have some questions, which should not be taken as arguing with you, just trying to make sure I, and everyone else understand better.
Re Lenegan your remarks imply that he is *not* on the club payroll and that his correct title is *Group* Sporting Director. Is that how you understand it?
Rodwell’s role may be misunderstood in part because he was the one who presented the hapless 8-8-8 thing to us. Admittedly he didnt seem to fully understand it himself, but that is not our fault, is it. I wonder who you think was involved in developing that?If your perspective is accurate, then Scott is very exposed and deserves all the criticism coming his way. Are you quite sure he deserves it all and none of the others I name, do?
Finally I certainly ask myself what the total wage bill of that lot chargeable to CAFC is (Lenegan may or may not be included). As a % of CAFC revenue, I suspect that figure may be very high regardless of any positive things any of them lay claim to. If I were a “hedgie” type businessman, or any typical hard-nosed Yank for that matter, I’d be looking at that line on the P&L with a very baleful eye.
I do think it is fair to challenge their performance and competence based on the outcomes they have achieved.
The counter argument, ably expressed by Gavin Carter who is both a fan and an investor, is that is takes time to turn around a failing organisation.
I agree. It will take time and we won't become a well run, well structured, high performing club again overnight.
It will take years but so far we seem to be going backwards, not forwards.
I have no inside scoop what so ever, so can only go off what I see happening, but to my eyes this current lot are trying to make a proper fist of it. Major structural and cultural change in an organization takes time and sometimes things appear to get worse before they get better. I think things now need to be given some space to breath and really settle in, and everyone involved needs to allowed to focus on avoiding an unthinkable relegation to League 2.
4 -
CAFCDAZ said:Anyone seen the championship level players he keeps harping on about that we've signed? 🤔
He have sold one game changer, X factor potential championship player in Corey Blackett-Taylor.
TBF a new contract was offered but after our start CBT wanted to go to a team on the up.
Maybe if Nathan Jones can find his Luton Mojo we will find out what players we have signed as it's difficult to tell when there is a lack of cohesive and new players are coming into a dispirited team.
1 -
Charlton are on the brink of L2. Strategy, recruitment & squad depth, timing of decision making is so far terrible & inept. The SMT, I am guessing are getting paid decent money. Why should they be exempt from scrutiny or accountability?Exiled_Addick said:
Scrutiny and holding to account are healthy. However, since the days of (justified) protests against Roland and the ESIs, a certain amount of our fan base seems to have become addicted to the idea of hounding people out of their jobs. I don’t think more upheaval of the management structure is what is needed at all.Henry Irving said:
The UK directors all have backgrounds in football.PragueAddick said:@fenaddick thanks for your coherent reply. I have some questions, which should not be taken as arguing with you, just trying to make sure I, and everyone else understand better.
Re Lenegan your remarks imply that he is *not* on the club payroll and that his correct title is *Group* Sporting Director. Is that how you understand it?
Rodwell’s role may be misunderstood in part because he was the one who presented the hapless 8-8-8 thing to us. Admittedly he didnt seem to fully understand it himself, but that is not our fault, is it. I wonder who you think was involved in developing that?If your perspective is accurate, then Scott is very exposed and deserves all the criticism coming his way. Are you quite sure he deserves it all and none of the others I name, do?
Finally I certainly ask myself what the total wage bill of that lot chargeable to CAFC is (Lenegan may or may not be included). As a % of CAFC revenue, I suspect that figure may be very high regardless of any positive things any of them lay claim to. If I were a “hedgie” type businessman, or any typical hard-nosed Yank for that matter, I’d be looking at that line on the P&L with a very baleful eye.
I do think it is fair to challenge their performance and competence based on the outcomes they have achieved.
The counter argument, ably expressed by Gavin Carter who is both a fan and an investor, is that is takes time to turn around a failing organisation.
I agree. It will take time and we won't become a well run, well structured, high performing club again overnight.
It will take years but so far we seem to be going backwards, not forwards.
I have no inside scoop what so ever, so can only go off what I see happening, but to my eyes this current lot are trying to make a proper fist of it. Major structural and cultural change in an organization takes time and sometimes things appear to get worse before they get better. I think things now need to be given some space to breath and really settle in, and everyone involved needs to allowed to focus on avoiding an unthinkable relegation to League 2.5 -
Mates with methven.rememberbillybonds said:Why do we have a Finance Director who is not an Accountant?2 -
Where did I say they should be?vff said:
Charlton are on the brink of L2. Strategy, recruitment & squad depth, timing of decision making is so far terrible & inept. The SMT, I am guessing are getting paid decent money. Why should they be exempt from scrutiny or accountability?Exiled_Addick said:
Scrutiny and holding to account are healthy. However, since the days of (justified) protests against Roland and the ESIs, a certain amount of our fan base seems to have become addicted to the idea of hounding people out of their jobs. I don’t think more upheaval of the management structure is what is needed at all.Henry Irving said:
The UK directors all have backgrounds in football.PragueAddick said:@fenaddick thanks for your coherent reply. I have some questions, which should not be taken as arguing with you, just trying to make sure I, and everyone else understand better.
Re Lenegan your remarks imply that he is *not* on the club payroll and that his correct title is *Group* Sporting Director. Is that how you understand it?
Rodwell’s role may be misunderstood in part because he was the one who presented the hapless 8-8-8 thing to us. Admittedly he didnt seem to fully understand it himself, but that is not our fault, is it. I wonder who you think was involved in developing that?If your perspective is accurate, then Scott is very exposed and deserves all the criticism coming his way. Are you quite sure he deserves it all and none of the others I name, do?
Finally I certainly ask myself what the total wage bill of that lot chargeable to CAFC is (Lenegan may or may not be included). As a % of CAFC revenue, I suspect that figure may be very high regardless of any positive things any of them lay claim to. If I were a “hedgie” type businessman, or any typical hard-nosed Yank for that matter, I’d be looking at that line on the P&L with a very baleful eye.
I do think it is fair to challenge their performance and competence based on the outcomes they have achieved.
The counter argument, ably expressed by Gavin Carter who is both a fan and an investor, is that is takes time to turn around a failing organisation.
I agree. It will take time and we won't become a well run, well structured, high performing club again overnight.
It will take years but so far we seem to be going backwards, not forwards.
I have no inside scoop what so ever, so can only go off what I see happening, but to my eyes this current lot are trying to make a proper fist of it. Major structural and cultural change in an organization takes time and sometimes things appear to get worse before they get better. I think things now need to be given some space to breath and really settle in, and everyone involved needs to allowed to focus on avoiding an unthinkable relegation to League 2.0 -
I don't believe what Charlie says.PragueAddick said:Charlie Methven said in his interview with The Charlton Dossier that he is (or would be) investing his own money, and made quite a big deal of it (his answer to the first question) :
https://thecharltondossier.com/charlie-methven-exclusive-interview/I suppose it is possible that something changed when the deal was actually closed but unless anyone has anything concrete to disprove that, I’d be inclined to believe him. As I said, he would have some cash because he had a share in Sunderland which was bought out for a decent price. And he goes on to say that because its a relatively large proportion of his wealth compared to the other guys, he’s going to be active in safeguarding it. I’d be inclined to believe that too. How exactly that plays out in the daily drama, we don’t know.
He MAY have agreed that he'd take shares in Charlton rather than payment (therefore in theory it IS his investment)
He said you didn't need to be too clever to run Charlton better than previous owners.
He has said losses can be massively reduced through increased commercial activities.
He said on his podcast that Charlton were going to fail FFP in August which is why they didn't buy anybody.
Basically..... Charlie will say whatever his audience wants to hear.7 -
Partial to a whopper then.supaclive said:
I don't believe what Charlie says.PragueAddick said:Charlie Methven said in his interview with The Charlton Dossier that he is (or would be) investing his own money, and made quite a big deal of it (his answer to the first question) :
https://thecharltondossier.com/charlie-methven-exclusive-interview/I suppose it is possible that something changed when the deal was actually closed but unless anyone has anything concrete to disprove that, I’d be inclined to believe him. As I said, he would have some cash because he had a share in Sunderland which was bought out for a decent price. And he goes on to say that because its a relatively large proportion of his wealth compared to the other guys, he’s going to be active in safeguarding it. I’d be inclined to believe that too. How exactly that plays out in the daily drama, we don’t know.
He MAY have agreed that he'd take shares in Charlton rather than payment (therefore in theory it IS his investment)
He said you didn't need to be too clever to run Charlton better than previous owners.
He has said losses can be massively reduced through increased commercial activities.
He said on his podcast that Charlton were going to fail FFP in August which is why they didn't buy anybody.
Basically..... Charlie will say whatever his audience wants to hear.1 -
With large fries!ElfsborgAddick said:
Partial to a whopper then.supaclive said:
I don't believe what Charlie says.PragueAddick said:Charlie Methven said in his interview with The Charlton Dossier that he is (or would be) investing his own money, and made quite a big deal of it (his answer to the first question) :
https://thecharltondossier.com/charlie-methven-exclusive-interview/I suppose it is possible that something changed when the deal was actually closed but unless anyone has anything concrete to disprove that, I’d be inclined to believe him. As I said, he would have some cash because he had a share in Sunderland which was bought out for a decent price. And he goes on to say that because its a relatively large proportion of his wealth compared to the other guys, he’s going to be active in safeguarding it. I’d be inclined to believe that too. How exactly that plays out in the daily drama, we don’t know.
He MAY have agreed that he'd take shares in Charlton rather than payment (therefore in theory it IS his investment)
He said you didn't need to be too clever to run Charlton better than previous owners.
He has said losses can be massively reduced through increased commercial activities.
He said on his podcast that Charlton were going to fail FFP in August which is why they didn't buy anybody.
Basically..... Charlie will say whatever his audience wants to hear.2 -
4 -
That’s not quite right, I asked them if they were responsible for Jan 2023 and Summer 2023 transfers and they said yes they were.JohnnyH2 said:
They admitted at the Bromley Meeting all the summer signings before they took charge were the responbility of the previous recruitment teamGarrymanilow said:
He was the only one I intended to name because he was an example of someone the ownership apparently didn't want because of his low resale value, but signed him anyway after being convinced of his value. I was talking about the ownership's willingness to change their initial plan rather than the idiotic stubbornness we've seen with some of our last few ownersSELR_addicks said:
The fact you can only name one signing from the summer says it all really.Garrymanilow said:We do like to have a villain don't we. I suppose Scott is as good as anyone for that but it's a bit much sometimes. We don't actually know exactly who does what as has been said but I also think that as is often the case on the pitch, it takes time for a system for bed into place. Our signings on paper have been better this window. They were better in the summer than they were the window before that. We've seen with the signing of May, then with the January signings and now the appointment of Jones that this ownership will shift their preferences in the face of failure or convincing advice. It does make me think that all this talk of running Scott out of town could set us back more than help us. Does Jones want to come in and be faced with an inexperienced brand new setup bringing in players next season or a group that has its system in place and has learned from its mistakes? I dunno, maybe we should keep him just because ever since Roland came in we absolutely have to have someone to despise and it may as well be Scott in the background rather than the manager or a player.0 - Sponsored links:
-
Steve Gallen told me the last signing he made and had 100% influence on was Lloyd Jones.7
-
About a month ago mate, his exact words were Lloyd Jones was 100% him and him onlyDubaiCAFC said:
when did he tell you that? If it was earlier in the season? And if asked the same question now, would it be the same answer I wonder.CAFCDAZ said:Steve Gallen told me the last signing he made and had 100% influence on was Lloyd Jones.0 -
Fair enough mate.CAFCDAZ said:
About a month ago mate, his exact words were Lloyd Jones was 100% him and him onlyDubaiCAFC said:
when did he tell you that? If it was earlier in the season? And if asked the same question now, would it be the same answer I wonder.CAFCDAZ said:Steve Gallen told me the last signing he made and had 100% influence on was Lloyd Jones.0 -
I may be old fashioned but I think you get a good manager, especially at our level, and he looks at what he has, what he can do with them and what he needs in addition to be successful. Then maybe he could discuss with somebody like Scott and they work on getting them. Of course we have sacked managers so Appleton didn't have a window and nor has Jones but it still doesn't feel like the way we do things. There always seems to be gaps in our squad for a certain type of player and we plug one gap and another appears.
Scott should have a supportive role and not have any part in sackings. That creates a wall with the manager for starters. If they don't trust the manager, don't appoint him. Any manager who agrees to be a yes man is probably not the right manager. Hopefully Jones will want a bit more control.0 -
The relationship between the first team manager and the DoF or Head of Recruitment is a complex one, but it actually boils down to something fairly straightforward when it works well.The Process- The manager knows the gaps and the sort of players he wants to fit his system of play- The manager may know the exact players he wants- The manager has a budget for transfer fees and wages - that is set by the SMT acting on the instructions of the owners- The manager is restricted by that budget so cannot have any player he wants if it breaks the budget- The DoF working with the manager, Chief Scout, Academy Director etc... identifies possible targets- The DoF manages the discussions with current club, prospective target player and their agent, with the available budget at the forefront- The DoF informs the SMT and manager how much!- If it fits within the budget constraints and the manager is happy to proceed then the player is acquired- If it is outside the budget constraints then the player isn't acquired- If it fits with the budget but the manager on reflection doesn't believe it adds value or a better target is identified then the player isn't acquiredSo basically no player is forced onto the manager and the manager cannot overspend - simples.13
-
Good explanation but the key words there are in the first sentence "when it works well".bobmunro said:The relationship between the first team manager and the DoF or Head of Recruitment is a complex one, but it actually boils down to something fairly straightforward when it works well.The Process- The manager knows the gaps and the sort of players he wants to fit his system of play- The manager may know the exact players he wants- The manager has a budget for transfer fees and wages - that is set by the SMT acting on the instructions of the owners- The manager is restricted by that budget so cannot have any player he wants if it breaks the budget- The DoF working with the manager, Chief Scout, Academy Director etc... identifies possible targets- The DoF manages the discussions with current club, prospective target player and their agent, with the available budget at the forefront- The DoF informs the SMT and manager how much!- If it fits within the budget constraints and the manager is happy to proceed then the player is acquired- If it is outside the budget constraints then the player isn't acquired- If it fits with the budget but the manager on reflection doesn't believe it adds value or a better target is identified then the player isn't acquiredSo basically no player is forced onto the manager and the manager cannot overspend - simples.
The relationship between the DOF and the manager is key, the level of trust in each other and who has the final decision.
And then there is the relative competence of the DOF and the manager in selecting players and the size, spread and quality of the scouting network, both formal and informal, as well as the quality of the analysis used.2 -
Methven talked about Scott’s role more generally on his latest podcast. Talked about who gets final say on recruitment is a red herring - if the manager doesn’t play a signing then it’s a failed signing in the eyes of a the owners and fans. Said it would take a brave and foolish technical director to recruit players against the wishes of the head coach.
Also talked about the English game and the culture around managers doing all the recruitment. Klopp when he joined Liverpool found it strange when questioned as he said how busy he is, can’t watch hundreds of matches and needs other people to do it for him.
Did add over a season there still can be one or two players the head coach/manager really wants to make their system work.
https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/wheres-the-money-gone/id1700607219?i=1000643623255
Was from last week so not specific to us but it seems like that’s possibly happened here already with the signings of Ramsay and Small. They add competition and pace to the wing back positions. Something very important for Jones who favours 3-5-2 or a 4-4-2 diamond.
2 -
The new burger boy, hated by the fans. Get rid before the next transfer window, if rumours about George going are true it has been a terrible window.4
-
I find the witch hunt is getting a little bit weird if I am being honest. I don’t fully understand it.
All of the new people coming into the club are talking about their working relationship with Scott so he clearly isn’t going anywhere.
He clearly signed a few last minute duds in September and Appleton was a ludicrous decision, but there seems to be some sensible club strategy going since then and hopefully we can start turning a corner.I get he hasn’t covered himself in glory, but I guess I just don’t quite understand the huge vitriol against him. (Admittedly I have no inside knowledge so he may be a horrible person and that is what is fuelling it, in which case fair enough)10 - Sponsored links:
-
We seem to need a Villain here at Charlton - The biggest question is, when Scott do leave... Who replaces him in that important role... I've heard Tea Lady Doris is stingy with the milkRC_CAFC said:I find the witch hunt is getting a little bit weird if I am being honest. I don’t fully understand it.
All of the new people coming into the club are talking about their working relationship with Scott so he clearly isn’t going anywhere.
He clearly signed a few last minute duds in September and Appleton was a ludicrous decision, but there seems to be some sensible club strategy going since then and hopefully we can start turning a corner.I get he hasn’t covered himself in glory, but I guess I just don’t quite understand the huge vitriol against him. (Admittedly I’m have no inside knowledge so he may be a horrible person and that is what is fuelling it, in which case fair enough)0 -
Must be the worst transfer window ever, bought a load of shit and let our best two players go in the midst of a relegation battle, clueless management.17
-
I’ve seen enough. Andy Scott has sent us down to the fourth tier.15
-
Took a midtable League One side, gutted it, and created a relegation worthy squad.
21 -
Along with his mates, Methven, Rodwell and Appleton.LoOkOuT said:I’ve seen enough. Andy Scott has sent us down to the fourth tier.15 -
He's sanctioned 2 of our best players in CBT and Dobson leaving in a relegation battle.RC_CAFC said:I find the witch hunt is getting a little bit weird if I am being honest. I don’t fully understand it.
All of the new people coming into the club are talking about their working relationship with Scott so he clearly isn’t going anywhere.
He clearly signed a few last minute duds in September and Appleton was a ludicrous decision, but there seems to be some sensible club strategy going since then and hopefully we can start turning a corner.I get he hasn’t covered himself in glory, but I guess I just don’t quite understand the huge vitriol against him. (Admittedly I have no inside knowledge so he may be a horrible person and that is what is fuelling it, in which case fair enough)
Gross incompetence.24 -
Was it his idea for our wing backs? Meaning we have no wingers and have 3 center backs who don't know who's marking who? With these players supposedly bombing down the wings attacking and defending. In league fucking 1?!2
-
Any of Methven’s mouth pieces still want to stick up for him?
12 -
"Judge him after the transfer window"
Verdict: Guilty53 -
3 transfer windows. Utter garbage each one. He has done what he did at Forest, scatter gun tons of signings. All this shit of wanting Championship ready players and 5 of the 9 bought in couldn't get a start in a team who started the day 6th bottom of L1.
Bakinson is a bit of muscle with no ability; Ladapo is a big slow lump which is exactly how he was described to me by a couple of stalwart Ipswich fans; Gillesphey is a total liability and Coventry is a non entity based on today's game and they are the pick of the bunch. It's extraordinary incompetence by Scott.
He promised to put his hands up if he got it wrong; instead he has gone into hiding much like Edun did in today's game.7
This discussion has been closed.
