When he was appointed permanent manager, Parky told us that it was a confidence thing and promised us that once he got his first win, more would follow.
In fact, since that first win, our record has actually got worse !
Season's results up to and including Palace game : 22pts from 29 games - 0.76 pts per game
Results since beating Palace : 6pts from 9 games - 0.66 pts per game
Can those who claim that we have improved over the last couple of months please explain how?
0
Comments
Seasons results prior to the Palace game: 19pts from 28 games - .678 pts per game
Results since and including beating Palace: 9pts from 10 games - .900 pts per game
Lies, damned lies and
But still relegation form sadly.
May be it would be fairer to take the Palace game out of the equation completely and compare results pre- and post- that win. And our record is still worse SINCE Parky's first win than BEFORE it , I think (albeit by the smallest margin).
So I can only repeat : can those who claim we have improved over recent games show their workings?
So fate and poor refereeing have transpired to rob us of five points in five days?
I used to think like that when I was a star-struck kid watching the team in the 60s. I could never understand why my heroes ever lost a single game !
I'm not just having a go at you. There is a widesprerad shift in mood that is trying to claim that our problem has shifted from poor form to bad luck. Sorry. It's bull. Six points from our last nine games is not down to bad luck. Or bad refs. It's down to the fact that we are not good enough. As we all saw v Doncaster and Watford.
If we are going to have a chance of coming back up next season, we need to stop using bad luck and myopic refs as excuses for our plight!
We put in good performances at Swansea,Reading and Wolves. All either promotion candidates or playoffs.
The trouble is that they their recent home form has not been great so that kinda of overshadows our performance. In fact the current form team is Watford against whom we all felt angry about our recent performance and result.
But of course Iwelumo and Ebanks-Blake score for them and ZZ (who will be gone in the summer anyway) for us. We need a striker or 2 who score goals.
Parky is too little too late but I think he can do a reasonable job in League 1 and keep us in the top half of that division next year.
I agree with that, Imiss. Even though he's out of his depth in the championship, there's no reason why he can't do a decent job in the lower leagues, as he did with Colchester. Indeed, it's quite possible he can bring us straight back up - I've argued that consistently on here in recent weeks.
So I'm firmly not in the sack him camp. But I do feel that we do ourselves a disservice by refusing to face up to how poor we are. We can only build a smaller,leaner,fitter - and winning - squad for next season if we fully recognise our current failings. It's not just about a lack of goal-scoring strikers. It's everywhere on the pitch. Kandol got two v Watford - but , of course, we let in three at the other end.
Blaming God and the referee only delays that process of rigorous and honest self-analysis that is necessary before we can move forward again, even at a lower level.
he was part of the problem he isn't the cure
Personally I've seen some improvement in performance. I didn't go today but went to Reading in the week and we played with more control and co-hesion. It's fair to say that much of the improvement especially what I saw on Wednesday is down to players like Racon and ZZ now fit again, plus the growing talent of Bailey.
If they were going to appoint Parky on results alone, he would have been signing on at the Job Centre just after Christmas. Clearly the Board think that he needs to be given time to turn things around and that includes next season.
Don't hate it at all, Bing. Read my post above - it's there in black and white.
I wrote : "There's no reason why he can't do a decent job in the lower leagues, as he did with Colchester. Indeed, it's quite possible he can bring us straight back up - I've argued that consistently on here in recent weeks. . So I'm firmly not in the sack him camp.''
Large and Oohaah's posts above suggest they don't agree. But I thought my words couldn't have made my support for retaining Parkinson any clearer.
So we're shite. Big deal.
that's a bit out of order Pete. I didn't drive all the way to Swansea and go to the MadStad on Tuesday hoping we'd lose you know. It may amaze you but at both Swansea and Reading I applauded the team off with everyone else. I was delighted when Hudson equalised on Tuesday, a player much maligned by some on here but not me. The team on each occasion had given their all and maybe deserved more than they got. Where have I dissed the players, I havn't. I have questioned the managers tactics that's all. And before you have a dig at me, as you have with Nigel, for not going today I thought being with my wife who had a minor op on Thursday was a tad more important. Hope that is okay with you.
Nigel, I'm sorry, I read this thread and your original post as being critical of the appointment of Parky and those who then tried to claim that there had been an improvement. I now see that by the foolproof use of highly selective statistics to make your point, you are taking issue with those who now say form has improved but luck hasn't.....:o)
I also see that from being implacably opposed to his appointment, you now think Parky could do a good job for us.
Frankly you can "prove" all you like with statistics, but the essentials as I see it are that we started the season in very average form, that fell off the cliff when the Zabeel deal was announced and since the Norwich Cup game, there has been a small improvement largely as a result of the return of key players. Parky took over in the middle of a terrible run and didn't get the results to improve very much. In my view that return to form could have been improved by not losing Fortune and having to play Holland and centre half for a number of games, not losing Murty and having to slot in yet another full back, not losing Kandol to "family" problems or having to leave out Ward today.
So yes I'm in the "no luck" category although frankly as others have said, the table doesn't lie and we haven't been good enough throughout the whole season and particularly in Pardews last 8 games and the remainder of the season under Parky.
I also think it's possible to say that overall performances have improved without that showing in the results. Under Pardew we got some serious gubbings, but in the main under Parky we have not been done over too often.
Interestingly he refused to comment on his ongoing position, but confirmed that he is only contracted for this season. I feel very, very sorry for him. A dignified and thoughtful man who doesn't deserve some of the abuse levelled at him, but the numbers are the numbers.
I feel sorry for Parky and would definitely give him a chance next season, with the summer to prepare. Don't see any consistency between that and opposing his appointment back in Nov/Dec. What we needed then was a large character to come in and throw his weight about and make an impact and keep us up. Parky wasn't that character and the board handed him a poisoned chalice.
He does, however, have other qualities, like being methodical and organised , which can now come into play as we prepare for division three.
And Bing, my use of statistics was hardly selective. We were told that once we got one win , others would follow like night follows day. So I looked at our total record since that win - 6pts from 9 games. If that is the sort of improvement that people want to get excited about, I can't join in.
As Morts says, we had good games under Dowie and Pardew, too (and won more games, too). So we played well against Reading last week? That's great. And we got a point. But you could just as easily turn round and say we played far better under Pardew against them in August. But that really would be selective use of statistics.
I agree Pete.
Was at both games too.
That's just the way it is. Cursing our luck and blasting the referee won't change the run. But facing reality and responding with even more determinaton and hard work might !
Pardew had 2 summers to prepare the squad in his own image and start the campaign with a clean slate.
Parky inherited a disaster zone and I question whether anybody could have come in and turned it around. Just my opinion.
By the end of Pardews reign he'd run out of ideas and had lost the plot.
Parky is trying to make a silk purse out of sows ear, and I'm in the camp that believes he is making progress.
But it's a results business and maybe that's the only progress that matters.
If Parky goes, I will feel sorry that his CV has been wrecked beyond repair by tenure at Charlton.
Personally I want him to stay. Call me nuts, but I've a feeling we've bottomed out and I'm already looking forward to a potentially exciting and competitive campaign in League One.
Yep. We look like we can compete with any team in this league now. Sometimes getting that first goal can make all the difference. Other team puts you under more pressure then you get them on the counter.
There's going to be more upheaval in the summer anyway with major changes in playing staff again. The last thing we need is more managerial turmoil. Parky is very capable of getting us playing well and competitively next season - he's already doing that in the Championship on very meagre resources. I struggle to see anyone else who could do any better.
If he is a bad manager in The Championship, he'll be a bad manager in League 1.
He is either a good manager, or he is not.
If it is all about "results," as Derek Chappell said, then the results speak for themselves. Loudly.
How often has Charlton been out-thought after halftime, with games lost because of adjustments made by the opposition manager and not countered by Parky? Or something new initiated by Charlton's manager?
Think about that, and see if you can still convince yourself that he is good enough?