Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Jones' press conference
Comments
-
I’m going to stop watching pressers or listening to post match interviews. It is the same nonsense each time and no one ever asks any challenging questions just tippy tappy stuff.2
-
The SMT has to tell him that hoofball is losing fans (me and other family members) and he has to change to a winning formula to keep his job.
NYD is judgement day. He doesn't deserve another window on current performances.1 -
So we are in League One
We have the fourth highest budget in the league
Jones had signed a number of the players we have in the current squad
All are players that have or should play at a higher level
And yet we are, 17 games in, ‘close to being a good side’
Ridiculous comment.
3 -
I gave up watching the video versions ages ago, I can’t stand listening to his wafflemattwils said:I’m going to stop watching pressers or listening to post match interviews. It is the same nonsense each time and no one ever asks any challenging questions just tippy tappy stuff.
I read some of them now and this last one is a corker2 -
I remember that Cambridge game very well - we were completely outplayed and outthought and I’d never seen football like it. The thing about Dublin & Taylor is that they were both great in the airCovered End said:
I’ve thought the same for a while.soapboxsam said:Nathan Jones is trying to be John Beck.
The difference with John Beck who took Cambridge United from League 2, to being 90 minutes away from the new Premier League was he played the Young Dion Dublin with John Taylor ( preferred over Steve Claridge in most games who came on as Sub*) he played a 'winger' to feed the two big men, Dublin and Taylor.
Lee Philpott was one of the wingers used on this Journey.
Those of you that were at Upton park(our temporary home) when Cambridge won 2-1 in a Championship/division 2 game were probably as discombobulated as the CAFC coaching staff, fans and players who saw the midfield by-passed with the ball in the air with Gillesphey type long balls from the back sometimes finding touch but which moved Cambridge 50 yards up the pitch; Think Rugby with a decent fly half.
John Beck like Nathan Jones was a few sandwiches short of a picnic BUT Beck knew just like anyone with an inkling about football that you can play two central forwards/central strikers with at least one wide forward; but playing 3 slow central striker like Jones has on two occasions with both Leaburn and Godden drifting wide to accommodate this insane line up but with zero success and Ahadme trying his best to get flick ons in the middle.
The difference now is pitches like the Valley, are created to play decent passing football on the deck; with hopefully some quality crosses from wide forwards or wing backs in advanced positions.
This only happens at times when CAFC are playing Cup ties against League 2 or U21'S in cup football when Small made two excellent crosses for Miles who was in the middle to bury the headers.
The Charlton Athletic journey into mediocrity continues and the only light at the end of the tunnel is a train.
90xx for you spotters.
*Only 2 subs allowed around 1990.
The other flaw in Jones’s gameplan is that Leaburn & Ahadme aren’t really that greet in the air - and of course we don’t play with wingers2 -
He gets a lot of flak but I would say Ahadme is good in the air.The issue he has is service. If we played wingers that regularly delivered crosses he would look like a very different player.10
-
I agree.SoundAsa£ said:
I very much doubt Warnock would be interested.Simonsen said:Yeah....he's not for me. Also...one has to question his assistants; they should have talked him out of that mental line up the other night.
We need a manager that keeps it simple but also keeps it logical. Get a bit of creativity into the side (T Campbell) and don't try to shoehorn three central strikers in, hoping they'd suddenly morph into a Champions League front three, who don't need crosses.
Plus, sign a right winger/right midfielder, who can at least offer a bit of drive on that side. T. Campbell can handle the left wing.
Not sure why people think Warnock is a bad shout. He'd keep it simple, as per the above, plus take zero shit but also know the team needs a spark. He did it at QPR and brought the very best out of Adel Taraabt, who otherwise would have soon found himself down the divisions. Some managers have "got it" and some haven't. Warnock is in the former camp and Jones is in the latter.0 -
Agreed. All those "long-ball teams" (Wimbledon, Cambridge, Sheff Weds & Watford) played with wingers or at least full-backs that got properly forward....not like the half-arsed effort these days.soapboxsam said:Nathan Jones is trying to be John Beck.
The difference with John Beck who took Cambridge United from League 2, to being 90 minutes away from the new Premier League was he played the Young Dion Dublin with John Taylor ( preferred over Steve Claridge in most games who came on as Sub*) he played a 'winger' to feed the two big men, Dublin and Taylor.
Lee Philpott was one of the wingers used on this Journey.
Those of you that were at Upton park(our temporary home) when Cambridge won 2-1 in a Championship/division 2 game were probably as discombobulated as the CAFC coaching staff, fans and players who saw the midfield by-passed with the ball in the air with Gillesphey type long balls from the back sometimes finding touch but which moved Cambridge 50 yards up the pitch; Think Rugby with a decent fly half.
John Beck like Nathan Jones was a few sandwiches short of a picnic BUT Beck knew just like anyone with an inkling about football that you can play two central forwards/central strikers with at least one wide forward; but playing 3 slow central striker like Jones has on two occasions with both Leaburn and Godden drifting wide to accommodate this insane line up but with zero success and Ahadme trying his best to get flick ons in the middle.
The difference now is pitches like the Valley, are created to play decent passing football on the deck; with hopefully some quality crosses from wide forwards or wing backs in advanced positions.
This only happens at times when CAFC are playing Cup ties against League 2 or U21'S in cup football when Small made two excellent crosses for Miles who was in the middle to bury the headers.
The Charlton Athletic journey into mediocrity continues and the only light at the end of the tunnel is a train.
90xx for you spotters.
*Only 2 subs allowed around 1990.
They also all had people in midfield that could get stuck in. To play like that with a powder-puff midfield of Taylor and Coventry was mental...as was the no wingers thing. Looked like a Sunday morning team.....the first XI that turn up start and we'll shoehorn them into a formation.3 -
Post match interview
unfortunately the wind stopped us playing our game it was difficult out there !
it’s not like it should come as a surprise that it’s windy0 - Sponsored links:
-
its very interesting that people have stopped listening to his press conferences. I also stopped a while ago. I gave up when it became clear that what he was saying bore no semblance of what I was actually watching on the pitch. He is either bullshitting or deluded no idea which one4
-
I’d say they’re good in the air if we get crosses in, but not so much as traditional target men winning headers from long balls and finding a team mate.alburyaddick said:
I remember that Cambridge game very well - we were completely outplayed and outthought and I’d never seen football like it. The thing about Dublin & Taylor is that they were both great in the airCovered End said:
I’ve thought the same for a while.soapboxsam said:Nathan Jones is trying to be John Beck.
The difference with John Beck who took Cambridge United from League 2, to being 90 minutes away from the new Premier League was he played the Young Dion Dublin with John Taylor ( preferred over Steve Claridge in most games who came on as Sub*) he played a 'winger' to feed the two big men, Dublin and Taylor.
Lee Philpott was one of the wingers used on this Journey.
Those of you that were at Upton park(our temporary home) when Cambridge won 2-1 in a Championship/division 2 game were probably as discombobulated as the CAFC coaching staff, fans and players who saw the midfield by-passed with the ball in the air with Gillesphey type long balls from the back sometimes finding touch but which moved Cambridge 50 yards up the pitch; Think Rugby with a decent fly half.
John Beck like Nathan Jones was a few sandwiches short of a picnic BUT Beck knew just like anyone with an inkling about football that you can play two central forwards/central strikers with at least one wide forward; but playing 3 slow central striker like Jones has on two occasions with both Leaburn and Godden drifting wide to accommodate this insane line up but with zero success and Ahadme trying his best to get flick ons in the middle.
The difference now is pitches like the Valley, are created to play decent passing football on the deck; with hopefully some quality crosses from wide forwards or wing backs in advanced positions.
This only happens at times when CAFC are playing Cup ties against League 2 or U21'S in cup football when Small made two excellent crosses for Miles who was in the middle to bury the headers.
The Charlton Athletic journey into mediocrity continues and the only light at the end of the tunnel is a train.
90xx for you spotters.
*Only 2 subs allowed around 1990.
The other flaw in Jones’s gameplan is that Leaburn & Ahadme aren’t really that greet in the air - and of course we don’t play with wingers0 -
Does Jones actually finish any sentences?
He says a few words very excitably and then just seems to babble some unintelligible nonsensical blatherings.5 -
Wish he would stop starting every sentence with “look”.2
-
He's full of bull saying long ball isn't a tactic and it's a choice of the players. So they just went from pumping it long all the time to suddenly dropping it yesterday without any instruction? Alright.12
-
It's a Welsh thingSillybilly said:Wish he would stop starting every sentence with “look”.0 -
Gerrard used to start every answer with “listen”. I always wanted an interviewee to say, “I’m f***g listening you twat. That’s why I’m standing in front of you asking questions”. It never happened sadly.lolwray said:
It's a Welsh thingSillybilly said:Wish he would stop starting every sentence with “look”.4 -
I thought that was Leeklolwray said:
It's a Welsh thingSillybilly said:Wish he would stop starting every sentence with “look”.2 -
Okay I Will bite, Its sheep.blackpool72 said:
I thought that was Leeklolwray said:
It's a Welsh thingSillybilly said:Wish he would stop starting every sentence with “look”.0 -
lolwray said:
It's a Welsh thingSillybilly said:Wish he would stop starting every sentence with “look”.
Look, was just the opening gambit of Aussie's everywhere until about a decade ago when I noticed 'Look' started creeping into interviews when people wanted to sound more on the front foot and in control.
Example of an Australian:
"Look mate, what do you call a Charlton Athletic class footballer" 🤔
"Retired" ☹️
0 - Sponsored links:
-
soapboxsam said:lolwray said:
It's a Welsh thingSillybilly said:Wish he would stop starting every sentence with “look”.
Look, was just the opening gambit of Aussie's everywhere until about a decade ago when I noticed 'Look' started creeping into interviews when people wanted to sound more on the front foot and in control.
Example of an Australian:
"Look mate, what do you call a Charlton Athletic class footballer" 🤔
"Retired" ☹️
I remember 'Yeh' being a prefix - as in "Yeh, look ....."
0 -
Not as bad as ‘obviously’.
Personally I despise the use of ‘obviously’ which is a way of saying ‘I am totally right about this’.
Oh yeah?
Like saying ‘obviously immigration is a problem’, when it can easily be argued that immigration is a blessing.
A person saying ‘obviously’ is chasing the high ground of rightness, and so if it isn’t obvious to you, then you’re a lesser person compared to them.
I position ‘obviously’ in the same category as people who wear cravats and ties when it is not for work, in my mind they are very dubious pricks.9 -
I agree mate not a chance he isn’t setting the team up to play long he is verbose enough from the sideline that if they were doing anything that wasn’t his instruction we would all know ! Hopefully he has had a change of heart because although it was a dire game yesterday atleast at times we tried to play footballTalal said:He's full of bull saying long ball isn't a tactic and it's a choice of the players. So they just went from pumping it long all the time to suddenly dropping it yesterday without any instruction? Alright.2 -
seth plum said:Not as bad as ‘obviously’.
Personally I despise the use of ‘obviously’ which is a way of saying ‘I am totally right about this’.
Oh yeah?
Like saying ‘obviously immigration is a problem’, when it can easily be argued that immigration is a blessing.
A person saying ‘obviously’ is chasing the high ground of rightness, and so if it isn’t obvious to you, then you’re a lesser person compared to them.
I position ‘obviously’ in the same category as people who wear cravats and ties when it is not for work, in my mind they are very dubious pricks.For the vast majority, the overuse of the word 'obviously' is just a mannerism - it is rarely or consciously intended to chase the high ground. Jones' use of the word 'look' is just the same - a mannerism.Obviously, this is just my opinion as I'm not a linguistic expert ;-)2 -
Obviously you would know.seth plum said:Not as bad as ‘obviously’.
Personally I despise the use of ‘obviously’ which is a way of saying ‘I am totally right about this’.
Oh yeah?
Like saying ‘obviously immigration is a problem’, when it can easily be argued that immigration is a blessing.
A person saying ‘obviously’ is chasing the high ground of rightness, and so if it isn’t obvious to you, then you’re a lesser person compared to them.
I position ‘obviously’ in the same category as people who wear cravats and ties when it is not for work, in my mind they are very dubious pricks.0 -
Obviously.bobmunro said:seth plum said:Not as bad as ‘obviously’.
Personally I despise the use of ‘obviously’ which is a way of saying ‘I am totally right about this’.
Oh yeah?
Like saying ‘obviously immigration is a problem’, when it can easily be argued that immigration is a blessing.
A person saying ‘obviously’ is chasing the high ground of rightness, and so if it isn’t obvious to you, then you’re a lesser person compared to them.
I position ‘obviously’ in the same category as people who wear cravats and ties when it is not for work, in my mind they are very dubious pricks.For the vast majority, the overuse of the word 'obviously' is just a mannerism - it is rarely or consciously intended to chase the high ground. Jones' use of the word 'look' is just the same - a mannerism.Obviously, this is just my opinion as I'm not a linguistic expert ;-)0 -
Badenoch uses ‘obviously’ a lot, and in her case it isn’t a mannerism.2
-
I won't make a fuss, though it's obvious.seth plum said:Not as bad as ‘obviously’.
Personally I despise the use of ‘obviously’ which is a way of saying ‘I am totally right about this’.
Oh yeah?
Like saying ‘obviously immigration is a problem’, when it can easily be argued that immigration is a blessing.
A person saying ‘obviously’ is chasing the high ground of rightness, and so if it isn’t obvious to you, then you’re a lesser person compared to them.
I position ‘obviously’ in the same category as people who wear cravats and ties when it is not for work, in my mind they are very dubious pricks.2 -
Shurely "injured".soapboxsam said:lolwray said:
It's a Welsh thingSillybilly said:Wish he would stop starting every sentence with “look”.
Look, was just the opening gambit of Aussie's everywhere until about a decade ago when I noticed 'Look' started creeping into interviews when people wanted to sound more on the front foot and in control.
Example of an Australian:
"Look mate, what do you call a Charlton Athletic class footballer" 🤔
"Retired" ☹️1 -
Hal1x said:
Shurely "injured".soapboxsam said:lolwray said:
It's a Welsh thingSillybilly said:Wish he would stop starting every sentence with “look”.
Look, was just the opening gambit of Aussie's everywhere until about a decade ago when I noticed 'Look' started creeping into interviews when people wanted to sound more on the front foot and in control.
Example of an Australian:
"Look mate, what do you call a Charlton Athletic class footballer" 🤔
"Retired" ☹️
Class Charlton players are most certainly 'Retired' or in Ademola Lookman's case 'Transferred' long ago.
0
