Richard Murray said at the AGM apparently, that Murty has had a hugely positive influence on the dressing room, and both Parky and Murty himself are considering extending the loan, as there has already been agreed an option to do so.
My opinion - if Murty stays long enough to help generate belief and momentum within the team, that might be enough in itself to maintain any team progress even should he subsequently leave before the season ends.
Light hearted thought - Maybe on the training ground, Murty is grooming Moo2 defensively to eventually be the wonder full back we thought we'd originally signed.
I take your point Suzi, but not many of the short term loan players we've taken in the last season or so have been prospective permanent signings have they? Used in this way, the practice is just a distraction from the necessary task of long term team building. So 2 seasons after relegation from the prem we're still no nearer to establishing a settled squad which can compete properly at this level. Having said that, from what I've seen and heard of him, I'd be chuffed if we could sign Murty on a permanent deal. He reminds me, in his positive attitude and influence, of Mark Bowen in our play-off year.
[cite]Posted By: Graham R.[/cite]I thought he was mostly ok against Forest. But I still don't want short-term loans.
well ok, we'll buy everyone and they turn out to be crap!
the idea of 1 month loans are to see what you think of the player and what the player thinks of you, and most of them, if not all have an option to extend for a further month, or in fact a further 2 months. Waghorn's was extended for a further month, but he was injured and let go and it wasn't extended, same with McEaveley.
Unless you have these rules in place, if Murty is seriously injured we could be stuck with him for 3 months, or if he is massivly crap (which he is not) then we can send him back and we've only committed to a loan fee (probably minimal if he's getting back to fitness as it does the loaner club a favour) and wages or percentage of wages.
To a degree you are, of course, right Suzi but too many of these are NEVER going to be permanent signings. Usually because they are young and Premiership Clubs want to give them first team football (e.g. Sinclair, Waghorn etc) or to get them fit (e.g. Cook, Primus etc)
I would venture to suggest that there wasn't a single other Club that went into this season with just two established and permanent centre backs in their squad. The decision to do so was simply unbelievable given inevitable loss of form, injury or suspension. And two thirds of the way through the season this still hasn't been resolved. This has contributed in a major way to the stat that we have the worst defensive record of any team in the division.
So who's to blame? The Manager(s) or the Board or a combination of the two?
And before anyone suggests this is hindsight, it isn't. Many of us made the point 5 months ago.
I think to an extent - beggers can't be choosers and in the same way we may have had to compromise on our managers over the past few years, we're now having to take what we can with regard to the players too. the team is obviously going through a transition at the moment from Pardew's team to Parkinson's team, and if that meant we needed a few loans to guide the way then so be it.
I don't, and I'm sure others don't either, pay much attention to other championship clubs, and I have no idea who their starting 11 is let along their subs, I do know that blackpool were left in the doo when 8 of their loan players all left on one day when their loans ran out, which left them in a bit of bother. I'm not saying that it is right to play with only 2 known centre backs as that is a risk - but there is semedo who can play there if needed but sadly he got injured too. Gone are the days where we have 2 or 3 spare players for each position. We always used to complain a curbs buying 3 or 4 utility players just to cover when we were struggling, but everyone thought it would be better to buy one player for one job, perhaps he was right as we just can't probably afford to have the cover everywhere.
I would imagine at least half of the championship have as many loans as we do, have cover issues like we do (chelsea played essian as centre back last year), we just don't care or read about it cos it isn't our club.
[cite]Posted By: Graham R.[/cite]I take your point Suzi, but not many of the short term loan players we've taken in the last season or so have been prospective permanent signings have they? Used in this way, the practice is just a distraction from the necessary task of long term team building. So 2 seasons after relegation from the prem we're still no nearer to establishing a settled squad which can compete properly at this level. Having said that, from what I've seen and heard of him, I'd be chuffed if we could sign Murty on a permanent deal. He reminds me, in his positive attitude and influence, of Mark Bowen in our play-off year.
but if we can't afford a centre back of the calibre we need and we need one immediately, then we have to take what we can. ie half fit primus.
Weve not only been in the championship 2 years, we've also changed managers and therefore there is a lot more to establishing a settled squad with the changes, balancing books etc. I'm sure if we could buy who we think is the best then we'd be the best, but we can't, so we're not.
[cite]Posted By: Addick Addict[/cite]But Suzi we 14 players on our books who have all played in midfield for us:
Of this at least 10 of them are available for selection in our next game
So where's the balance?
Ambrose - went out on loan due to high wages and there was a possibility that ipswich could take him permanantly
Sam - was struggling to last 60 minutes until the last few weeks
Spring -brought in 3 weeks ago
Soares - brought in 2 weeks ago
Bailey - erm...personally i don't think he's that consistent but parky seems to think he's worth sticking with and he has got better
Racon - injured, still struggling but hopefully back soon
Holland - not as good as he used to be
Moutu - erm...isn't he a right back?
Wright - not deemed good enough for the team - yet
Wagstaff - ditto
Basey - left back or left midfield - showed inconsistency so far hence chopping and changing with youga
Shelvey - very young, but gets in the side if we play 4-5-1 but probably not good enough to play in 4-4-2
ZZ - injured
Semedo - injured
I don't really see what you are saying? are you saying we shouldn't get loans in? or that why get loans?
I'm sure the management thinking regarding loan players - is that they feel they can get a better quality of player for the budget available.
Pards' thinking was no doubt - we can get Prem experienced players in for low cost. Compare to the often extravagent prices demanded for average players from the CCC clubs.
And we've only got to look at CCC incoming transfers this January window - most have been loans.
There's very little money about in our league.
And to be fair to Pardew (perish the thought, lol), he brought Bouazza in for the season; Crainie and Primus in to be part of the team for a lengthy period, to at least get him through to the January transfer window - and there may well have been an option to extend/renew those loans to the end of the season.
I'm trying to highlight the folly of starting the season with just two permanent centre backs. The comparison of having 14 players who CAN play in midfield on our books was in reply to the assertion that the likes of Semedo can play at centre back. They can but you shouldn't be relying on them doing so before a ball is even kicked especially when they've never done so before for us (apart from in friendlies against the likes of Welling when he had to because we didn't have anyone else to do so).
Of the 14 mentioned, 12 were with us at the start of the season plus Thomas, Sinclair, Bouazza and Varney (who has been used wide in a 5 man midfield). So that's 16 players in total of which only Thomas left early on.
The argument is simply that, if we had to cut our cloth, then we should have done it in a balanced way and not leave ourselves in a situation that, should Hudson or Fortune have got injured (as Fortune did) we would struggle to stay up let alone get promoted. And as I've said already this isn't hindsight it's basic common sense.
We seem to have gone off-thread here and left Murty but AA's last post is all too right. Thinking he could start the season with just two centre backs was folly bordering on negligence on Pardew's part. We're talking about probably the most physical position on the park, with a consequent higher risk of injuries and suspensions than just about anywhere else in the team - and yet we had (and still have) no cover whatsoever.
The folly/negligence of this was proved when Fortune got injured. That's when it all started to go wrong. 10 pts from seven games until he got sidelined. Six points from the next 12, which he missed. By the time he was fit to return, we were bottom.
This fundamental imbalance in the squad remains, although I am sure Parky is trying to put it right because, although he isn't my choice as manager, his attitude is at least a lot more logical and methodical than Pardew's seemingly random approach to squad building.
I guess it was careless yes, although i don't think the Primus deal worked out as it should, and I do think Wright and some of the other kids were perhaps thought they were going to be called upon until after the season started so to say there were 16 at the beginning is a bit strong, as some were injured then anyway, and also if you're going to count anyone you could go into the youth squad for any other player to bump up the numbers and realistically they were not going to start the first game of the season.
I agree its probably been an issue, but you didn't consider my other point about other clubs? there is always a reference that "things like this only happen at charlton" not that you yourself have said that in this thread, but i'm sure there are other clubs that had sparse cover in areas - my example of chelsea still stands up.
Saw a post from Oggy earlier saying how it's well known that Murty has a huge dressing room prescence....I am very very big on this feature in a player.
I've said this a number of times before (as in fairness have others) ..."I'ts not always the best eleven players out on the pitch that wins the day but the best team."
Suzi - I'm not in any way saying we're unique in being short in certain positions. I do firmly believe, however, that there wouldn't have been another team in the Championship who started the season with just two established centre backs. It's just crazy to think that any sort of pro Club would contemplate it.
All teams need to build from the back and we fundamentally failed to do so from the outset. The fact that we've let in more goals than any other team in the division is a testament to that. Even ignoring the fact that Fortune got injured so early, centre backs by virtue of their position are the most likely players to be suspended. And all of that doesn't take into account any loss of form - are we really saying that Pards believed that there was never going to be a time when one of them was going to need to be "rested"?
Sadly for me once I've got a gripe I can't let go until proven otherwise and this is one of two I've had all season. Don't want to upset anyone doing so and would hate to think I've offended anyone (unless it's Chirpy but then he's a mate and he's so thick skinned it doesn't even register when I do). The other is, as most people know, Dickson but let's not get me started on that one again eh?
[cite]Posted By: Addick Addict[/cite]Suzi - I'm not in any way saying we're unique in being short in certain positions. I do firmly believe, however, that there wouldn't have been another team in the Championship who started the season with just two established centre backs. It's just crazy to think that any sort of pro Club would contemplate it.
All teams need to build from the back and we fundamentally failed to do so from the outset. The fact that we've let in more goals than any other team in the division is a testament to that. Even ignoring the fact that Fortune got injured so early, centre backs by virtue of their position are the most likely players to be suspended. And all of that doesn't take into account any loss of form - are we really saying that Pards believed that there was never going to be a time when one of them was going to need to be "rested"?
Sadly for me once I've got a gripe I can't let go until proven otherwise and this is one of two I've had all season. Don't want to upset anyone doing so and would hate to think I've offended anyone (unless it's Chirpy but then he's a mate and he's so thick skinned it doesn't even register when I do). The other is, as most people know, Dickson but let's not get me started on that one again eh?
The best way to annoy Chirpy is either to post about what a good manager Curbs was or what a good player Kish was.
[cite]Posted By: Addick Addict[/cite]Suzi - I'm not in any way saying we're unique in being short in certain positions. I do firmly believe, however, that there wouldn't have been another team in the Championship who started the season with just two established centre backs. It's just crazy to think that any sort of pro Club would contemplate it.
All teams need to build from the back and we fundamentally failed to do so from the outset. The fact that we've let in more goals than any other team in the division is a testament to that. Even ignoring the fact that Fortune got injured so early, centre backs by virtue of their position are the most likely players to be suspended. And all of that doesn't take into account any loss of form - are we really saying that Pards believed that there was never going to be a time when one of them was going to need to be "rested"?
Sadly for me once I've got a gripe I can't let go until proven otherwise and this is one of two I've had all season. Don't want to upset anyone doing so and would hate to think I've offended anyone (unless it's Chirpy but then he's a mate and he's so thick skinned it doesn't even register when I do). The other is, as most people know, Dickson but let's not get me started on that one again eh?
The best way to annoy Chirpy is either to post about what a good manager Curbs was or what a good player Kish was.
This is only about my 5th post on here so go easy on me :-)
On Murty:
He's got a testimonial lined up at Reading at the end of the season so there is no way he's signing permenently in this window, hopefully we'll keep him on loan for as long as possible. However prehaps there is a longer term plan (it would be nice to think that we have a board and manager that think over a longer time period than the next few matches :-)) to get him to sign permenently for next season. He sounds like the sort of character that nomally has a future in football beyond his playing career, is obviously trusted by Parky and seems to be well liked by the board. Perfect for a player coach role I'd say
On our midfield:
Why are we complaining about having strength in depth in our midfield :-).
It seems to me that there are several reasons we have so many players in this position i.e.
a) the relative strength of our youth products (Shelvey, Wagstaff, Basey and Wright ) b) I think we were planning to move on the likes of Zi Zi & Ambrose in the summer and in this window to generate funds and reduce the wage bill c) percieved need for a replacement to an aging Holland (also probably on a decent wage) d) Racon seems to be injury prone e) Parky wants more defensively from his wide men (hence Soares and possibly Spring) f) Unfortunatley Shelvey may go
Take away the 4 youth team products and our midfield starts to look thin. We've not got the equivalent strength coming out of the youth in either attack or defence (no blame approtioned here you understand, you can only work with what you are given and players develop at different rates (also Wright is an Arsenal youth team product :-))
I agree we should have more cover in defence, but Semedo plays CB and Pardew wanted both Primus and Craine on season long deals, hopefully we've not got all our eggs in one basket in who we are chasing for CB (i.e. Wayne Brown) and we can sign someone before the weekend, but do remember the loan window opens again in mid Feb, as loans are all we seem to be able to afford (or is it attract given our current league position), we can still strenghten the squad after this window closes
Now I've got that lot off my chest I can go back to work now - Up the Addicks!
All very good points, Imnot. Hope we hear lots more of that kind of common sense from you...
I must say, I didn't know about Murty having a testimonial at Reading but it confirms the view I've held all along that he will back there well before the end of the season.
[cite]Posted By: Addick Addict[/cite]Suzi - I'm not in any way saying we're unique in being short in certain positions. I do firmly believe, however, that there wouldn't have been another team in the Championship who started the season with just two established centre backs. It's just crazy to think that any sort of pro Club would contemplate it.
All teams need to build from the back and we fundamentally failed to do so from the outset. The fact that we've let in more goals than any other team in the division is a testament to that. Even ignoring the fact that Fortune got injured so early, centre backs by virtue of their position are the most likely players to be suspended. And all of that doesn't take into account any loss of form - are we really saying that Pards believed that there was never going to be a time when one of them was going to need to be "rested"?
Sadly for me once I've got a gripe I can't let go until proven otherwise and this is one of two I've had all season. Don't want to upset anyone doing so and would hate to think I've offended anyone (unless it's Chirpy but then he's a mate and he's so thick skinned it doesn't even register when I do). The other is, as most people know, Dickson but let's not get me started on that one again eh?
no probs, I understand your gripe and agree that it was a bad move to start the season like that, but i'm not convinced that we were the only club that were stretched and didn't do anything about it this season. I'm not sure how i can investigate if we were, but I will try when I have a bit more time, I would like to see if other clubs were in the same situation. I'm not saying you're wrong - just that I dont know if we were unique in that stance.
Murty sounds like a larger than life character, which is why he's been long term skipper and legend at Reading.
It must have killed him to have been out injured for so long, and then on the outside looking in on his team playing well.
Here at Charlton, he's evidently regained the importance and influence he once held in the Reading dressing room.
And if he feels his chances of making a cuntribution at Reading are small, he may prefer to stay and be emotionally involved here, and once again a big fish in the pond.
If the loan is extended, Reading will of course always have the option to recall him.
But Steve Coppell is a mature and reasonable man, and will probably let the player make that decision.
As far as his testimonial season - Reading supporters won't hold it against him if he stays here to the end of the season.
They think he's an absolute legend for skippering them that first time to the promised land - none of them thought they'd ever see Reading play in the Prem in their lifetime. My Reading mate Trev said so.
And they'll still turn out in droves for his testimonial match, even if he plays out the rest of the season for Charlton.
Trev said so.
Comments
My opinion - if Murty stays long enough to help generate belief and momentum within the team, that might be enough in itself to maintain any team progress even should he subsequently leave before the season ends.
Light hearted thought - Maybe on the training ground, Murty is grooming Moo2 defensively to eventually be the wonder full back we thought we'd originally signed.
I think to an extent - beggers can't be choosers and in the same way we may have had to compromise on our managers over the past few years, we're now having to take what we can with regard to the players too. the team is obviously going through a transition at the moment from Pardew's team to Parkinson's team, and if that meant we needed a few loans to guide the way then so be it.
I don't, and I'm sure others don't either, pay much attention to other championship clubs, and I have no idea who their starting 11 is let along their subs, I do know that blackpool were left in the doo when 8 of their loan players all left on one day when their loans ran out, which left them in a bit of bother. I'm not saying that it is right to play with only 2 known centre backs as that is a risk - but there is semedo who can play there if needed but sadly he got injured too. Gone are the days where we have 2 or 3 spare players for each position. We always used to complain a curbs buying 3 or 4 utility players just to cover when we were struggling, but everyone thought it would be better to buy one player for one job, perhaps he was right as we just can't probably afford to have the cover everywhere.
I would imagine at least half of the championship have as many loans as we do, have cover issues like we do (chelsea played essian as centre back last year), we just don't care or read about it cos it isn't our club.
but if we can't afford a centre back of the calibre we need and we need one immediately, then we have to take what we can. ie half fit primus.
Weve not only been in the championship 2 years, we've also changed managers and therefore there is a lot more to establishing a settled squad with the changes, balancing books etc. I'm sure if we could buy who we think is the best then we'd be the best, but we can't, so we're not.
Ambrose
Sam
Spring
Soares
Bailey
Racon
Holland
Moutu
Wright
Wagstaff
Basey
Shelvey
ZZ
Semedo
Of this at least 10 of them are available for selection in our next game
So where's the balance?
Ambrose - went out on loan due to high wages and there was a possibility that ipswich could take him permanantly
Sam - was struggling to last 60 minutes until the last few weeks
Spring -brought in 3 weeks ago
Soares - brought in 2 weeks ago
Bailey - erm...personally i don't think he's that consistent but parky seems to think he's worth sticking with and he has got better
Racon - injured, still struggling but hopefully back soon
Holland - not as good as he used to be
Moutu - erm...isn't he a right back?
Wright - not deemed good enough for the team - yet
Wagstaff - ditto
Basey - left back or left midfield - showed inconsistency so far hence chopping and changing with youga
Shelvey - very young, but gets in the side if we play 4-5-1 but probably not good enough to play in 4-4-2
ZZ - injured
Semedo - injured
I don't really see what you are saying? are you saying we shouldn't get loans in? or that why get loans?
Pards' thinking was no doubt - we can get Prem experienced players in for low cost. Compare to the often extravagent prices demanded for average players from the CCC clubs.
And we've only got to look at CCC incoming transfers this January window - most have been loans.
There's very little money about in our league.
And to be fair to Pardew (perish the thought, lol), he brought Bouazza in for the season; Crainie and Primus in to be part of the team for a lengthy period, to at least get him through to the January transfer window - and there may well have been an option to extend/renew those loans to the end of the season.
Of the 14 mentioned, 12 were with us at the start of the season plus Thomas, Sinclair, Bouazza and Varney (who has been used wide in a 5 man midfield). So that's 16 players in total of which only Thomas left early on.
The argument is simply that, if we had to cut our cloth, then we should have done it in a balanced way and not leave ourselves in a situation that, should Hudson or Fortune have got injured (as Fortune did) we would struggle to stay up let alone get promoted. And as I've said already this isn't hindsight it's basic common sense.
The folly/negligence of this was proved when Fortune got injured. That's when it all started to go wrong. 10 pts from seven games until he got sidelined. Six points from the next 12, which he missed. By the time he was fit to return, we were bottom.
This fundamental imbalance in the squad remains, although I am sure Parky is trying to put it right because, although he isn't my choice as manager, his attitude is at least a lot more logical and methodical than Pardew's seemingly random approach to squad building.
I agree its probably been an issue, but you didn't consider my other point about other clubs? there is always a reference that "things like this only happen at charlton" not that you yourself have said that in this thread, but i'm sure there are other clubs that had sparse cover in areas - my example of chelsea still stands up.
I've said this a number of times before (as in fairness have others) ..."I'ts not always the best eleven players out on the pitch that wins the day but the best team."
All teams need to build from the back and we fundamentally failed to do so from the outset. The fact that we've let in more goals than any other team in the division is a testament to that. Even ignoring the fact that Fortune got injured so early, centre backs by virtue of their position are the most likely players to be suspended. And all of that doesn't take into account any loss of form - are we really saying that Pards believed that there was never going to be a time when one of them was going to need to be "rested"?
Sadly for me once I've got a gripe I can't let go until proven otherwise and this is one of two I've had all season. Don't want to upset anyone doing so and would hate to think I've offended anyone (unless it's Chirpy but then he's a mate and he's so thick skinned it doesn't even register when I do). The other is, as most people know, Dickson but let's not get me started on that one again eh?
The best way to annoy Chirpy is either to post about what a good manager Curbs was or what a good player Kish was.
He misses Kish especially.
:-)
Thanks for the tip Len.
On Murty:
He's got a testimonial lined up at Reading at the end of the season so there is no way he's signing permenently in this window, hopefully we'll keep him on loan for as long as possible. However prehaps there is a longer term plan (it would be nice to think that we have a board and manager that think over a longer time period than the next few matches :-)) to get him to sign permenently for next season. He sounds like the sort of character that nomally has a future in football beyond his playing career, is obviously trusted by Parky and seems to be well liked by the board. Perfect for a player coach role I'd say
On our midfield:
Why are we complaining about having strength in depth in our midfield :-).
It seems to me that there are several reasons we have so many players in this position i.e.
a) the relative strength of our youth products (Shelvey, Wagstaff, Basey and Wright )
b) I think we were planning to move on the likes of Zi Zi & Ambrose in the summer and in this window to generate funds and reduce the wage bill
c) percieved need for a replacement to an aging Holland (also probably on a decent wage)
d) Racon seems to be injury prone
e) Parky wants more defensively from his wide men (hence Soares and possibly Spring)
f) Unfortunatley Shelvey may go
Take away the 4 youth team products and our midfield starts to look thin. We've not got the equivalent strength coming out of the youth in either attack or defence (no blame approtioned here you understand, you can only work with what you are given and players develop at different rates (also Wright is an Arsenal youth team product :-))
I agree we should have more cover in defence, but Semedo plays CB and Pardew wanted both Primus and Craine on season long deals, hopefully we've not got all our eggs in one basket in who we are chasing for CB (i.e. Wayne Brown) and we can sign someone before the weekend, but do remember the loan window opens again in mid Feb, as loans are all we seem to be able to afford (or is it attract given our current league position), we can still strenghten the squad after this window closes
Now I've got that lot off my chest I can go back to work now - Up the Addicks!
How many of us had forgotten that the loan window opens again, one week after the January transfer shuts....?
I must say, I didn't know about Murty having a testimonial at Reading but it confirms the view I've held all along that he will back there well before the end of the season.
no probs, I understand your gripe and agree that it was a bad move to start the season like that, but i'm not convinced that we were the only club that were stretched and didn't do anything about it this season. I'm not sure how i can investigate if we were, but I will try when I have a bit more time, I would like to see if other clubs were in the same situation. I'm not saying you're wrong - just that I dont know if we were unique in that stance.
It must have killed him to have been out injured for so long, and then on the outside looking in on his team playing well.
Here at Charlton, he's evidently regained the importance and influence he once held in the Reading dressing room.
And if he feels his chances of making a cuntribution at Reading are small, he may prefer to stay and be emotionally involved here, and once again a big fish in the pond.
If the loan is extended, Reading will of course always have the option to recall him.
But Steve Coppell is a mature and reasonable man, and will probably let the player make that decision.
As far as his testimonial season - Reading supporters won't hold it against him if he stays here to the end of the season.
They think he's an absolute legend for skippering them that first time to the promised land - none of them thought they'd ever see Reading play in the Prem in their lifetime. My Reading mate Trev said so.
And they'll still turn out in droves for his testimonial match, even if he plays out the rest of the season for Charlton.
Trev said so.