Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Charlie Kirk (p67 - released by Crewe)

16264666768

Comments

  • Kirk wins the award for the most unfancy fancy dan. 
  • He almost scored on Saturday but for an amazing save from the Harrogate keeper 

    https://x.com/harrogatetown/status/1759171148732883368?s=46&t=mEmS51nyCqmemhJshcDkBA
  • Chunes said:
    I doubt anybody is surprised. The problem was never his ability, it was that he never wanted to be here. 
    That's just not true, what was Kirk good at as a footballer? Couldn't shoot, tackle, head it, wasn't fast or strong. Ok crosser/passer of the ball but that's it
    You don’t achieve his goal and assist stats even at L2 level over a 6 seasons without showing some ability. Two of those seasons were in L1.

    I don’t think it can be argued that Kirk truly wanted to be here, he never really looked like he put everything into his performances. We paid £500k and gave him a long contract because of the form he showed with Crewe, and despite his form here they brought him back.
  • edited February 20
    Going back to Crewe just about sums him up. Where is he supposed to go from there? Any other club would think twice before giving him that big opportunity again. At least if he went to another club e he could've proved he can make it somewhere else. 
  • My Crewe-supporting colleague told me today that Kirk was the best player on the pitch on Saturday, was causing havoc on the wing (with the full back overlapping) and very nearly scored the winner. 

    Just saying.
    Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't he start on the subs bench?
    Started the second half.
  • The £notes he was paid were perfect. 
    They didn’t not try or say we are down in London and don’t fancy it.
  • Sponsored links:


  • Chunes said:
    I doubt anybody is surprised. The problem was never his ability, it was that he never wanted to be here. 
    I doubted his ability, didn't see anything from him in a Charlton shirt. 
  • He was cack. Gave him a lot of allowances due to his father passing away but there came a moment where I thought well I know we come across as a charity with the amount of injured players we have but this is taking the piss. 

    That man city bloke Florina or whatever his name is reminds me of Kirk. Which is no compliment. 
  • We never played in a system that he played in at Crewe which prompted us to buy him in the first place & he showed no real willingness to adapt, neither side covered themselves in glory with the whole transfer

     He had a number of managers at cafc plus 2 loan stints in that time where he never shone despite playing in a variety of formations. They can't all have been wrong.

    So Kirk was solely the problem in my opinion.
  • Chunes said:
    I doubt anybody is surprised. The problem was never his ability, it was that he never wanted to be here. 
    That's just not true, what was Kirk good at as a footballer? Couldn't shoot, tackle, head it, wasn't fast or strong. Ok crosser/passer of the ball but that's it
    He played the equivalent of just under 22 games (admittedly spread across 35 appearances) last season between us and Burton. 

    He scored five goals and assisted four more. It's a "goal contribution" the equivalent of every 2.4 matches. Which is not terrible by any stretch.

    I do think Kirk is a brilliant player, and he's not someone I would build around. But I do think we sometimes go overboard in saying how bad he is. He's not Ben Watson in his second season with us, for example. But obviously him being here, from how he ended up here, to not recruiting players to help accommodate for him and get the best out of him, was an absolute mess. 

    Another example of the club spending money and spending it poorly.
  • I happened to be in Crewe a week ago. I spoke to some Crewe fans explaining I supported the other CAFC and they immediately thanked me (well Charlton) for letting them have Charlie Kirk back.

    One of the women must have been something to do with the club. She was apparently pleading with Kirk's girlfriend  to stop him joining Charlton because of the situation with his father, suggesting he left it until the next window but the money spoke. He was not in the right frame of mind for obvious reasons and she believed he simply never settled after that initial traumatic time.

    All makes sense. You can't blame him for leaving when the money offered was so much more but it was a disaster. 

    I'm sure he will do very well back at Crewe. Not sure he'll get another big money move though.


    Doubt he needs another big money move after rinsing Charlton for 3 years @ 300k per year. 
  • BalladMan said:
    I happened to be in Crewe a week ago. I spoke to some Crewe fans explaining I supported the other CAFC and they immediately thanked me (well Charlton) for letting them have Charlie Kirk back.

    One of the women must have been something to do with the club. She was apparently pleading with Kirk's girlfriend  to stop him joining Charlton because of the situation with his father, suggesting he left it until the next window but the money spoke. He was not in the right frame of mind for obvious reasons and she believed he simply never settled after that initial traumatic time.

    All makes sense. You can't blame him for leaving when the money offered was so much more but it was a disaster. 

    I'm sure he will do very well back at Crewe. Not sure he'll get another big money move though.


    Doubt he needs another big money move after rinsing Charlton for 3 years @ 300k per year. 
    He does if he wants to take it easy after packing it in.
  • Sponsored links:


  • BalladMan said:
    I happened to be in Crewe a week ago. I spoke to some Crewe fans explaining I supported the other CAFC and they immediately thanked me (well Charlton) for letting them have Charlie Kirk back.

    One of the women must have been something to do with the club. She was apparently pleading with Kirk's girlfriend  to stop him joining Charlton because of the situation with his father, suggesting he left it until the next window but the money spoke. He was not in the right frame of mind for obvious reasons and she believed he simply never settled after that initial traumatic time.

    All makes sense. You can't blame him for leaving when the money offered was so much more but it was a disaster. 

    I'm sure he will do very well back at Crewe. Not sure he'll get another big money move though.


    Doubt he needs another big money move after rinsing Charlton for 3 years @ 300k per year. 
    He didn't offer himself the contract. 

    I don't put much weight in what players are rumored online to make. But whatever it was, the club offered it. 

    I happened to be in Crewe a week ago. I spoke to some Crewe fans explaining I supported the other CAFC and they immediately thanked me (well Charlton) for letting them have Charlie Kirk back.

    One of the women must have been something to do with the club. She was apparently pleading with Kirk's girlfriend  to stop him joining Charlton because of the situation with his father, suggesting he left it until the next window but the money spoke. He was not in the right frame of mind for obvious reasons and she believed he simply never settled after that initial traumatic time.

    All makes sense. You can't blame him for leaving when the money offered was so much more but it was a disaster. 

    I'm sure he will do very well back at Crewe. Not sure he'll get another big money move though.


    That's sad but it makes sense. And in fairness to Kirk, what happens if he does his ACL between the summer and January windows and he's left a huge pay raise on the table?

    This is something where I would really like to know more about how the club evaluates players' personalities when lining up transfers. In Kirk's case, everything we've heard is that he never settled, and I want to know if the club considered this. Obviously it's hard because he lost his dad just before joining Charlton, so they may have evaluated him before that and then he had a major traumatic upheaval in his life that would change anyone. 

    But I think about how we've seen some leaks about "unprofessionalism" in the squads down the years and it makes me wonder how good the club is at evaluating players' attitudes off the pitch. 
  • I do think you can blame somebody if they move for money and it doesn't work out. 
  • edited February 21
    mendonca said:
    I do think you can blame somebody if they move for money and it doesn't work out. 
    In isolation with the Kirk signing, the guy has my 100% sympathy with the passing of his father and the emotions that go with it.

    As a Charlton fan, he signed a potentially life changing contract(I still understand Taylor f****** us over) with all this going on. 

     He was okay to uproot 180 miles for the dough so I am not agreeing with the emotional side.
  • So a player who was unhappy at the club, and felt unwanted having failed to live up to expectations, makes a remark about the managerial instability during his time there. My opinion of him isn't changed by that and I agree with him that he needed to leave.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!