Liverpool is on sky isn't it? Should be a good atmosphere for this one. After Sheffield i was all doom and gloom but now i'm positive. COME ON YOU REDS!!
[cite]Posted By: BlackForestReds[/cite]From the OS:
He's playing one last game for the Saddlers this Saturday...
"He will officially hang up his boots after the match, and start his new role on Monday - with a first reserve fixture in charge the following day, at Gravesend & Northfleet FC against West Ham United."
I would love to see him play one last time...I guess his knees have finally given out and time to start the second part of his career.
Should be a good crowd at Stonebridge road to see him back in the fold. Gonna make damn sure I get there, might even try to get an interview.
[cite]Posted By: Henry Irving[/cite]I know that a lot of people have been slagging off the board about the backroom set up and the idea of stability and that's an opinion they are entiltled to but this is what stability and having a proper long term set up is all about. Having people who understand the club and it's history (who are part of its history!) and who want to be at Charlton because of who we are.
So the boards idea of bringing stability was to appoint the coaching staff before the manager, without having any idea of how they would get on? It was a recipe for disaster from day 1.
However, well done to the board for this appointment. It will be great to have Kinsella back at the club.
[cite]Posted By: Henry Irving[/cite]I know that a lot of people have been slagging off the board about the backroom set up and the idea of stability and that's an opinion they are entiltled to but this is what stability and having a proper long term set up is all about. Having people who understand the club and it's history (who are part of its history!) and who want to be at Charlton because of who we are.
So the boards idea of bringing stability was to appoint the coaching staff before the manager, without having any idea of how they would get on? It was a recipe for disaster from day 1.
However, well done to the board for this appointment. It will be great to have Kinsella back at the club.
No, it was about not having complete change if a manager left.
Dowie said he was happy to work with those staff and took the jon on that basis. Just like in most jobs where your team is already there and you work with them.
But surely you reduce the chances of getting the best man for the job because any top manager is going to want to have his own people around him.
If the club wanted this type of management structure then fine but the manager should have been the first person appointed, not the last, and should have had some say on his backroom staff. We should never have been in the position where perspective managers were told "this is your coaching team, take it or leave it"
Are you telling me that if you were opening a new office you would employ the staff before you found someone to run the office?
Still I suppose it's a mute point really because the fact that it went tits up after 12 games speaks volumes for how good an idea it was..
But surely you reduce the chances of getting the best man for the job because any top manager is going to want to have his own people around him.
On your first point - that depends on what "the best man" would be. By your logic Dowie then was not a top manager as he accepted that when he came. Ultimately all jobs have terms and conditions and we choose to take them or leave them depending on how they fit with our own needs. Football managers' jobs should be no different. Any managers will be told what he can or can't spend, have restrictions on who he can hire and fire and the way that he managers, in football or elsewhere.
If the club wanted this type of management structure then fine but the manager should have been the first person appointed, not the last, and should have had some say on his backroom staff. We should never have been in the position where perspective managers were told "this is your coaching team, take it or leave it"
You second point would be self-defeating as if the new manager appointed the back room staff then they would be his people and likely to be off when he was. So we start all over again, as many other clubs have done, more money spent, more unsettled players and staff. Then, if you are a Newcastle, Man City or Spurs you do it all again next year. in fact Spurs is a bad example as they have done with santini/Jol pretty much what Charlton have. We don't have a european model but our set up does have some similarities, IMHO, and it works well there.
What we would have had was Dowie and his backroom staff leaving, Glenn Hoddle coming (only joking!) for example and no Mark Kinsella as he wouldn't be part of Hoddle's team.
Are you telling me that if you were opening a new office you would employ the staff before you found someone to run the office?
You analogy with a new office is false as clearly the "office" eg CAFC is not new and is already up and running with staff in place. Yes, if we were starting a whole new club then that's what you would.
Still I suppose it's a mute point really because the fact that it went tits up after 12 games speaks volumes for how good an idea it was..[/quote]
That it went "tits up" doesn't mean that the structure was at fault. It could have been the structure or it could been a number of other factors that lead to Dowie going. But until it comes out in public we can't assume that it was any one factor.
"That it went "tits up" doesn't mean that the structure was at fault. It could have been the structure or it could been a number of other factors that lead to Dowie going. But until it comes out in public we can't assume that it was any one factor."
I suspect that there were a number of factors, but I'm getting the impression that ultimately Dowie didn't get on with the system and perhaps there was a personality clash with too many people ultimately identifying Dowie as the wrong piece in the jigsaw - the club have said "it's not just about the results" hinting that there was something fundamentally wrong with Dowie in the set-up. Perhaps also Dowie didn't like working with Reed and/or Robson and maybe wanted to make fundamental changes to the structure. The early season poor form, run of injuries and bad luck didn't help either and I'm guessing that Murray and co decided that it would be better/faster to replace Dowie than scrap the entire system than start again.
The European method works, but the big difference is that coaches, general managers and players etc are brought up with the system - they know how it works. I'm sure if say Bayern Munich decided to axe their General manager Uli Hoeness and give head coach Felix Magath the powers and responsibilities of a British manager that there would be confusuion all round and more so if like Charlton that changeover co-incided with a run of losses. I'm guessing again, but maybe Dowie having signed on to the European system wanted to start changing it after the first few games and losses and perhaps felt that the system frustrated him from making the changes he wanted. I've been told (it's a rumour so take it as such) that he threw a major strop over something that didn't go his way, and refused to take coaching at all for several days, if true maybe that is what caused it?
In hindsight the head coach should bring his own senior coaching team with him, even if it means displacing those in place. He needs to have the reserve teams etc playing to his style (he is ultimately responsible for results so this isn't out of order) and it doesn't make sense if Reed and Robson are in favour of coaching one method, while Dowie wants to play another way - again more so if results are not forthcoiming on the pitch.
Comments
I'll ask. No guarantee that it will happen.
:)
Nonetheless, if Mr Irving can make this absolutely clear by pointing it out to them then all the better!!
Should be a good crowd at Stonebridge road to see him back in the fold. Gonna make damn sure I get there, might even try to get an interview.
So the boards idea of bringing stability was to appoint the coaching staff before the manager, without having any idea of how they would get on? It was a recipe for disaster from day 1.
However, well done to the board for this appointment. It will be great to have Kinsella back at the club.
KIN KIN KINSELLA - What an absolute f******/ LEGEND.
No, it was about not having complete change if a manager left.
Dowie said he was happy to work with those staff and took the jon on that basis. Just like in most jobs where your team is already there and you work with them.
But they know how I feel about Charlton, which is my club. It's difficult to leave, but I'm very excited about coming back to Charlton.”
love it
If the club wanted this type of management structure then fine but the manager should have been the first person appointed, not the last, and should have had some say on his backroom staff. We should never have been in the position where perspective managers were told "this is your coaching team, take it or leave it"
Are you telling me that if you were opening a new office you would employ the staff before you found someone to run the office?
Still I suppose it's a mute point really because the fact that it went tits up after 12 games speaks volumes for how good an idea it was..
On your first point - that depends on what "the best man" would be. By your logic Dowie then was not a top manager as he accepted that when he came. Ultimately all jobs have terms and conditions and we choose to take them or leave them depending on how they fit with our own needs. Football managers' jobs should be no different. Any managers will be told what he can or can't spend, have restrictions on who he can hire and fire and the way that he managers, in football or elsewhere.
If the club wanted this type of management structure then fine but the manager should have been the first person appointed, not the last, and should have had some say on his backroom staff. We should never have been in the position where perspective managers were told "this is your coaching team, take it or leave it"
You second point would be self-defeating as if the new manager appointed the back room staff then they would be his people and likely to be off when he was. So we start all over again, as many other clubs have done, more money spent, more unsettled players and staff. Then, if you are a Newcastle, Man City or Spurs you do it all again next year. in fact Spurs is a bad example as they have done with santini/Jol pretty much what Charlton have. We don't have a european model but our set up does have some similarities, IMHO, and it works well there.
What we would have had was Dowie and his backroom staff leaving, Glenn Hoddle coming (only joking!) for example and no Mark Kinsella as he wouldn't be part of Hoddle's team.
Are you telling me that if you were opening a new office you would employ the staff before you found someone to run the office?
You analogy with a new office is false as clearly the "office" eg CAFC is not new and is already up and running with staff in place. Yes, if we were starting a whole new club then that's what you would.
Still I suppose it's a mute point really because the fact that it went tits up after 12 games speaks volumes for how good an idea it was..[/quote]
That it went "tits up" doesn't mean that the structure was at fault. It could have been the structure or it could been a number of other factors that lead to Dowie going. But until it comes out in public we can't assume that it was any one factor.
I suspect that there were a number of factors, but I'm getting the impression that ultimately Dowie didn't get on with the system and perhaps there was a personality clash with too many people ultimately identifying Dowie as the wrong piece in the jigsaw - the club have said "it's not just about the results" hinting that there was something fundamentally wrong with Dowie in the set-up. Perhaps also Dowie didn't like working with Reed and/or Robson and maybe wanted to make fundamental changes to the structure. The early season poor form, run of injuries and bad luck didn't help either and I'm guessing that Murray and co decided that it would be better/faster to replace Dowie than scrap the entire system than start again.
The European method works, but the big difference is that coaches, general managers and players etc are brought up with the system - they know how it works. I'm sure if say Bayern Munich decided to axe their General manager Uli Hoeness and give head coach Felix Magath the powers and responsibilities of a British manager that there would be confusuion all round and more so if like Charlton that changeover co-incided with a run of losses. I'm guessing again, but maybe Dowie having signed on to the European system wanted to start changing it after the first few games and losses and perhaps felt that the system frustrated him from making the changes he wanted. I've been told (it's a rumour so take it as such) that he threw a major strop over something that didn't go his way, and refused to take coaching at all for several days, if true maybe that is what caused it?
In hindsight the head coach should bring his own senior coaching team with him, even if it means displacing those in place. He needs to have the reserve teams etc playing to his style (he is ultimately responsible for results so this isn't out of order) and it doesn't make sense if Reed and Robson are in favour of coaching one method, while Dowie wants to play another way - again more so if results are not forthcoiming on the pitch.
As Henry says, the full story is yet to come out.