The club's deep enough in the mire as it is, without us all falling out over some carefully expressed opinions on here ...lighten up, people, please...
Well, I must thank you for seeting me right. Seriously. It seems that the pro-board fudgers and revisionists are still alive and well and so my comment in the opening paragraph of my opening post is wrong. I guess it will take more than Charlton's current malaise to stop you either insulting or attacking someone who doesn't share your view.
As for my comment in my second paragraph that Mr Murray's gopher will keep his head down. Well, in typical style, he gets his class bullies to do it for him.
Len, your defence of free speech is admirable and I know it is helped by the fact you share a lot of my views - you have expressed them yourself over the years. But I'm sure you have work and many other things to be getting on with so let it lie. Sadly I have seen this kind of tag team response on CL many times before and I think it is sad that putting one's own opinion out there can engender such vitriolic responses.
I know there are a few people out there shaking their heads at this and that means a lot to me.
BFR - one thing - I ALWAYS back up what I say. I stand by my words about RM acting 'like' Peter Ridsdale in recent times and I backed that up with several examples from our salary/turover ratios to the ridiculous situation with Martin Christensen to our inability to sack arguably the worst manager we have ever had.
That makes us a laughing stock, as were Leeds several years ago, and hence my comparison.
You know as well as I do that I also acknowledge Murray's achievements but, like your mate Addickted, you are only interested in putting across skewed views merely to undermine me and confuse neutral observers.
And unlike you I don't need to resort to infantile direct personal insults to justify or support my opinion.
Anyone intersted in the debate go to the Martin Simons/Richard Murray thread started by NSS I believe. You'll find opinion there mixed with some cursing from BFR.
Guess our moderators must have missed that.
Well, I too have things to do and people to see...
[cite]Posted By: BlackForestReds[/cite]So where is Sailor Brown-eye now??!!
A few moments ago he was posting merrily away, he gets called out and disappears...
Come back mate, Len Glover is missing you...
I'm not saying I necessarily agree with everything SB posts but I find the eagerness to condemn /witchunt on personality grounds rather than by addressing the issues in debate distasteful.
[quote][cite]Posted By: AFKABartram[/cite][quote][cite]Posted By: BlackForestReds[/cite] Nope...I am capable of backing up any argument with facts pal...[/quote]
BFR, you are also equally capable of being rude to people with opposing views to you. By doing so, it discourages those holding the differing views to reason their argument, or bother posting at all.
Please, just take a step back at times and think of the implications before verbally bashing into someone. As soon as that happens, that's the end of the decent debate and it shortly descends into squabbling. Addickted held a different view to Sailor, but showed he can make a point without being rude or argumentative.
It makes healthy debate that people hold differing views. To maintain that balance, it needs people to be a bit respectful when disagreeing.
That actually goes for every one of us.[/quote]
I'm still waiting for sailor to explain why/how Richard Murray has acted in his words like "Peter Risdale".
Yep, I use a bit of vitriol, but I find it works in combatting arrant nonsense. He chucks a bit around, rather than be cowed I respond with like.
I don't know who this guy is, but his agenda stinks like a week old kipper that's been left out in the sun.
[cite]Posted By: Addickted[/cite]Sailor has every right to post his synopsis and take on the situation at Charlton, whether he's Nick Gray or Uncle Tom Cobbly.
He post sensible, well though out (and well written) pieces, many of which have proved to be as accurate as they are depressing to Charlton fans.
Just leave out the vitriol please.
Cheers - I appreciate that sentiment. I agree with you that we are all hurting one way or another.
Well, I must thank you for seeting me right. Seriously. It seems that the pro-board fudgers and revisionists are still alive and well and so my comment in the opening paragraph of my opening post is wrong. I guess it will take more than Charlton's current malaise to stop you either insulting or attacking someone who doesn't share your view.
........
So what does this mean, do you know yourself or is this something you've cut and pasted from elsewhere? As I say above when I ask for facts or logic from you you can't offer it except (as predicted) to slag off anyone who disagrees with you, while naturally hypocritically trying to claim the moral high ground in the debate.
[cite]Posted By: Red_in_SE8[/cite]Nick Gray, if that is his real name has been waging a war with Richard Murray and the board for several years now on the OS and other message boards. Which he is entitled to do. He has an identity and an agenda. Many people on here have expressed the view that he is been unreasobale and vindictive. If people knew that the posting that started this thread was written by Nick Gray it would have triggered a very different response. Because we all know Nick Gray has an agenda.
Nick Gray has every right to post his agenda on this forum. But if he does, without identifying himself as the same person who has been very public about his views on Murray and the board for the last few years, he is being disingenuous to say the least. We have every right to ask whether or not he is Nick Gray.
You have no 'right' to ask me any such thing actually. As AFKA said, people can remain anonymous if they wish to.
A lot of people know me from way back when and I can categorically say I am NOT Nick Gray.
But that's as far as it goes.
Sadly, it might serve you better if you realise that there is more than one person unhappy with the way the club is being run. It isn't only Nich Gray!!!
Take the names off who posts things and debate the points not who made them. I thought it was a brilliant thought provoking post some bits I agreed with and some I didn't. No idea who sailor is - nor do I care and ilm sure he doesn't mind - I would like to think hed post more to provide debate but why should he when it all gets personal!
Sailor, If you mention other people on CL you should expect a response. Please do not throw the first punch (not literally) and then claim the victim. It only cheapens (is that a word?) your argument.
[quote][cite]Posted By: LenGlover[/cite][quote][cite]Posted By: BlackForestReds[/cite]So where is Sailor Brown-eye now??!!
A few moments ago he was posting merrily away, he gets called out and disappears...
Come back mate, Len Glover is missing you...[/quote]
I'm not saying I necessarily agree with everything SB posts but I find the eagerness to condemn /witchunt on personality grounds rather than by addressing the issues in debate distasteful.
You and I have had this discussion before.[/quote]
Where to start...
This idiot likened Richard Murray to Peter Risdale yesterday, he clearly has an anti-board agenda, something that is evident in every post and yet I'm at fault.
And if I'm guilty of "witch-hunting" isn't that an acusation you could chuck at him? Maybe I'm an easier target and perhaps I simply don't wrap my every utterance in a load of mind-bafflingly boring twaddle...
[cite]Posted By: suzisausage[/cite]Take the names off who posts things and debate the points not who made them. I thought it was a brilliant thought provoking post some bits I agreed with and some I didn't. No idea who sailor is - nor do I care and ilm sure he doesn't mind - I would like to think hed post more to provide debate but why should he when it all gets personal!
Thank you Suzi - think the fact you have been impacted by how CAFC has been run more than most and yet you still try to keep an impartial view does you credit.
I, like you am putting MY opinions across - and if you consider some of those posts, perhaps you will realise that. They are not 'spin', they are not trying to 'confuse neutral observers' and they are not insulting or attacking another persons views. Just questioning them. It's called debate.
I am not a 'pro board fudger' - indeed look at some of my previous posts, particularly with regard to the situation on the execs on the Board.
I'm not a class bully, but will stand up for someone who I respect when they get slagged off from behind a keyboard by an anonymous poster.
I do not know BFR
Most importantly, I care about what is happening at Charlton and I feel impotent to do anything about it. However, I'm not sure the constant 'we're doomed' post achieve anything.
BFR - one thing - I ALWAYS back up what I say. I stand by my words about RM acting 'like' Peter Ridsdale in recent times and I backed that up with several examples from our salary/turover ratios to the ridiculous situation with Martin Christensen to our inability to sack arguably the worst manager we have ever had.
That makes us a laughing stock, as were Leeds several years ago, and hence my comparison.
For feck sake will you lot calm down. I picture heart palpatations and veins exploding out of foreheads........I am pretty sure that Dan doesn't hold any insurance to cover any stress related claims.
Trolling is posting deliberating vitriolic, ridiculous, inflammatory or derogatory posts in order to garner a response and therefore inflate the ego of the troll.
[quote][cite]Posted By: oohaahmortimer[/cite]BFR - one thing - I ALWAYS back up what I say. I stand by my words about RM acting 'like' Peter Ridsdale in recent times and I backed that up with several examples from our salary/turover ratios to the ridiculous situation with Martin Christensen to our inability to sack arguably the worst manager we have ever had.
That makes us a laughing stock, as were Leeds several years ago, and hence my comparison.[/quote]
No you don't, every other post from you is a lament that if only Curbs had stayed...
That is not "backing up a opinion with facts" but a definition of conjecture.
However, the floor is yours, tell me how Curbs would have rescued the slowly sinking ship?
Or are we going to get another...curbs should have stayed auto-post?
A tallish, bulky figure in the shadows next to the delightful little shrine of St Richard the Spinner. He had lit a candle and was holding a tiny effigy in his big hands sobbing, ’How could you do this to me! How could you do this to me!’
I was going to comfort the poor creature but I had to rush off as on Monday mornings Ooh Aah, Len and I lay fresh flowers at the tomb of Llewellyn the Great.
Sailor Browneye, to help me fully understand all the nuances of your post, can you confirm who you mean when you refer to 'A tallish, bulky figure in the shadows next to a delightful little shrine of St Richard....' ? To some it seems a Nick Gray like insult aimed at a former supporters director.
[quote][cite]Posted By: ThreadKiller[/cite][quote][cite]Posted By: BlackForestReds[/cite] However, the floor is yours, tell me how Curbs would have rescued the slowly sinking ship?[/quote]
i think we have gone over this several thousand times how there was no slowly sinking ship until sir alan was asked to leave a year early.[/quote]
The squad needed urgent surgery, we had one decent striker in Darren Bent and played 4-5-1 in too many games and after a great first third to the season we never looked like winning away from home again.
By the time he left we needed at least five/six players of premiership quality - a keeper, a centre-back, a left-back, a couple of midfielders and a decent striker to help Darren Bent out. Curbs was a great manager, arguably the best we've ever had (a slim pool to be fair) but let's not pretend he left a squad brimming with confidence and quality.
[cite]Posted By: oohaahmortimer[/cite]BFR - one thing - I ALWAYS back up what I say. I stand by my words about RM acting 'like' Peter Ridsdale in recent times and I backed that up with several examples from our salary/turover ratios to the ridiculous situation with Martin Christensen to our inability to sack arguably the worst manager we have ever had.
That makes us a laughing stock, as were Leeds several years ago, and hence my comparison.
No you don't, every other post from you is a lament that if only Curbs had stayed...
That is not "backing up a opinion with facts" but a definition of conjecture.
However, the floor is yours, tell me how Curbs would have rescued the slowly sinking ship?
Or are we going to get another...curbs should have stayed auto-post?
i'm quoting what sailorbrown eye said in response to you questioning his peter risdale / murray comparison....
that's not my quote try reading through stuff rather than just reading your own post
Sailor Browneye, to help me fully understand all the nuances of your post, can you confirm who you mean when you refer to 'A tallish, bulky figure in the shadows next to a delightful little shrine of St Richard....' ? To some it seems a Nick Gray like insult aimed at a former supporters director.
....
Careful now - he's trying to claim the moral high ground, let's not remind him of the insults he throws around...
I think this has been a good thread, except perhaps the attempts to uncloak SB. I have been critical of the decisions which have led to where we are. I said them at the time as well. When most were falling overbackwards to praise Pardew, I raised some notes of caution.
Here is where I stand. I have great respect for Richard Murray in particular. He and few others bankrolled the club when the club couldn't pay it's wage bill etc in the early days. I believe that the vision to build the largest club south of the river was a good one and many, many things they have done in pursuit of this have been laudable. Yes have target 40,000 except that without alot of luck you are not going to get there without serious additional money.
But here comes the difficult bit. I believe that businesses run best (and the club is a business), when the ambitions are matched by the resources available. Fine push on the envelope but not beyond it with resources you don't have. A club punching above it's weight must recognise this and manage to it's natural level. Our clubs resources put it top half of the championship, bottom half of the premiership. Any achievement greater than that was a bonus. So plan for relegation and bounce back, don't over stretch.
It seems to me that for the early part of the Premiership years, that was exactly how the club approached things and justifiably recognised as being well run.
Then all of a sudden stars seem to appear in the eyes of the Board, they seemed to forget what had been the excellent plan and went off in pursuit of a dream. Actually I think it changed even before Curbs left but Curbs natural caution kept the lid on it. Once he'd gone the gamble, for thats what it was took hold.
I can forgive them the gamble because of what had gone before and also because they put the money up for it. I also think that they must have looked at a worst case scenario in the Dowie season, and how they could extracate themselves. I doubt that plan envisaged the credit crunch and a second relegation.
So I'm not smug. I think the Murray always knew he might have to write off his investment. (Indeed he said this on radio interview several years ago). I believe the club has enough about it to survive. I hope that we don't have to go into administration to force a conclusion. Given what now seems to be emerging with Southampton, neither sellers or buyers would want that.
Comments
He post sensible, well though out (and well written) pieces, many of which have proved to be as accurate as they are depressing to Charlton fans.
Just leave out the vitriol please.
Well, I must thank you for seeting me right. Seriously. It seems that the pro-board fudgers and revisionists are still alive and well and so my comment in the opening paragraph of my opening post is wrong. I guess it will take more than Charlton's current malaise to stop you either insulting or attacking someone who doesn't share your view.
As for my comment in my second paragraph that Mr Murray's gopher will keep his head down. Well, in typical style, he gets his class bullies to do it for him.
Len, your defence of free speech is admirable and I know it is helped by the fact you share a lot of my views - you have expressed them yourself over the years. But I'm sure you have work and many other things to be getting on with so let it lie. Sadly I have seen this kind of tag team response on CL many times before and I think it is sad that putting one's own opinion out there can engender such vitriolic responses.
I know there are a few people out there shaking their heads at this and that means a lot to me.
BFR - one thing - I ALWAYS back up what I say. I stand by my words about RM acting 'like' Peter Ridsdale in recent times and I backed that up with several examples from our salary/turover ratios to the ridiculous situation with Martin Christensen to our inability to sack arguably the worst manager we have ever had.
That makes us a laughing stock, as were Leeds several years ago, and hence my comparison.
You know as well as I do that I also acknowledge Murray's achievements but, like your mate Addickted, you are only interested in putting across skewed views merely to undermine me and confuse neutral observers.
And unlike you I don't need to resort to infantile direct personal insults to justify or support my opinion.
Anyone intersted in the debate go to the Martin Simons/Richard Murray thread started by NSS I believe. You'll find opinion there mixed with some cursing from BFR.
Guess our moderators must have missed that.
Well, I too have things to do and people to see...
I'm not saying I necessarily agree with everything SB posts but I find the eagerness to condemn /witchunt on personality grounds rather than by addressing the issues in debate distasteful.
You and I have had this discussion before.
Nope...I am capable of backing up any argument with facts pal...[/quote]
BFR, you are also equally capable of being rude to people with opposing views to you. By doing so, it discourages those holding the differing views to reason their argument, or bother posting at all.
Please, just take a step back at times and think of the implications before verbally bashing into someone. As soon as that happens, that's the end of the decent debate and it shortly descends into squabbling. Addickted held a different view to Sailor, but showed he can make a point without being rude or argumentative.
It makes healthy debate that people hold differing views. To maintain that balance, it needs people to be a bit respectful when disagreeing.
That actually goes for every one of us.[/quote]
I'm still waiting for sailor to explain why/how Richard Murray has acted in his words like "Peter Risdale".
Yep, I use a bit of vitriol, but I find it works in combatting arrant nonsense. He chucks a bit around, rather than be cowed I respond with like.
I don't know who this guy is, but his agenda stinks like a week old kipper that's been left out in the sun.
The guy is trolling and badly.
Cheers - I appreciate that sentiment. I agree with you that we are all hurting one way or another.
sailor brown eye is bill curbishley........
Well, I must thank you for seeting me right. Seriously. It seems that the pro-board fudgers and revisionists are still alive and well and so my comment in the opening paragraph of my opening post is wrong. I guess it will take more than Charlton's current malaise to stop you either insulting or attacking someone who doesn't share your view.
........
So what does this mean, do you know yourself or is this something you've cut and pasted from elsewhere? As I say above when I ask for facts or logic from you you can't offer it except (as predicted) to slag off anyone who disagrees with you, while naturally hypocritically trying to claim the moral high ground in the debate.
Dude, you are a waste of space.
You have no 'right' to ask me any such thing actually. As AFKA said, people can remain anonymous if they wish to.
A lot of people know me from way back when and I can categorically say I am NOT Nick Gray.
But that's as far as it goes.
Sadly, it might serve you better if you realise that there is more than one person unhappy with the way the club is being run. It isn't only Nich Gray!!!
A few moments ago he was posting merrily away, he gets called out and disappears...
Come back mate, Len Glover is missing you...[/quote]
I'm not saying I necessarily agree with everything SB posts but I find the eagerness to condemn /witchunt on personality grounds rather than by addressing the issues in debate distasteful.
You and I have had this discussion before.[/quote]
Where to start...
This idiot likened Richard Murray to Peter Risdale yesterday, he clearly has an anti-board agenda, something that is evident in every post and yet I'm at fault.
And if I'm guilty of "witch-hunting" isn't that an acusation you could chuck at him? Maybe I'm an easier target and perhaps I simply don't wrap my every utterance in a load of mind-bafflingly boring twaddle...
Thank you Suzi - think the fact you have been impacted by how CAFC has been run more than most and yet you still try to keep an impartial view does you credit.
I mean that and thank you for what you said.
I, like you am putting MY opinions across - and if you consider some of those posts, perhaps you will realise that. They are not 'spin', they are not trying to 'confuse neutral observers' and they are not insulting or attacking another persons views. Just questioning them. It's called debate.
I am not a 'pro board fudger' - indeed look at some of my previous posts, particularly with regard to the situation on the execs on the Board.
I'm not a class bully, but will stand up for someone who I respect when they get slagged off from behind a keyboard by an anonymous poster.
I do not know BFR
Most importantly, I care about what is happening at Charlton and I feel impotent to do anything about it. However, I'm not sure the constant 'we're doomed' post achieve anything.
That makes us a laughing stock, as were Leeds several years ago, and hence my comparison.
in fact if any posts make one bit of difference to the way charlton is run or play football i'll happily join that particular brand of posting!!
Trolling is posting deliberating vitriolic, ridiculous, inflammatory or derogatory posts in order to garner a response and therefore inflate the ego of the troll.
As the saying goes; don't feed the trolls!
That makes us a laughing stock, as were Leeds several years ago, and hence my comparison.[/quote]
No you don't, every other post from you is a lament that if only Curbs had stayed...
That is not "backing up a opinion with facts" but a definition of conjecture.
However, the floor is yours, tell me how Curbs would have rescued the slowly sinking ship?
Or are we going to get another...curbs should have stayed auto-post?
i think we have gone over this several thousand times how there was no slowly sinking ship until sir alan was asked to leave a year early.
Sailor Browneye, to help me fully understand all the nuances of your post, can you confirm who you mean when you refer to 'A tallish, bulky figure in the shadows next to a delightful little shrine of St Richard....' ? To some it seems a Nick Gray like insult aimed at a former supporters director.
However, the floor is yours, tell me how Curbs would have rescued the slowly sinking ship?[/quote]
i think we have gone over this several thousand times how there was no slowly sinking ship until sir alan was asked to leave a year early.[/quote]
The squad needed urgent surgery, we had one decent striker in Darren Bent and played 4-5-1 in too many games and after a great first third to the season we never looked like winning away from home again.
By the time he left we needed at least five/six players of premiership quality - a keeper, a centre-back, a left-back, a couple of midfielders and a decent striker to help Darren Bent out. Curbs was a great manager, arguably the best we've ever had (a slim pool to be fair) but let's not pretend he left a squad brimming with confidence and quality.
i'm quoting what sailorbrown eye said in response to you questioning his peter risdale / murray comparison....
that's not my quote try reading through stuff rather than just reading your own post
2004-5 ...46 points
2005-6...47 points
that isn't a sinking ship IMHO
....
Careful now - he's trying to claim the moral high ground, let's not remind him of the insults he throws around...
Here is where I stand. I have great respect for Richard Murray in particular. He and few others bankrolled the club when the club couldn't pay it's wage bill etc in the early days. I believe that the vision to build the largest club south of the river was a good one and many, many things they have done in pursuit of this have been laudable. Yes have target 40,000 except that without alot of luck you are not going to get there without serious additional money.
But here comes the difficult bit. I believe that businesses run best (and the club is a business), when the ambitions are matched by the resources available. Fine push on the envelope but not beyond it with resources you don't have. A club punching above it's weight must recognise this and manage to it's natural level. Our clubs resources put it top half of the championship, bottom half of the premiership. Any achievement greater than that was a bonus. So plan for relegation and bounce back, don't over stretch.
It seems to me that for the early part of the Premiership years, that was exactly how the club approached things and justifiably recognised as being well run.
Then all of a sudden stars seem to appear in the eyes of the Board, they seemed to forget what had been the excellent plan and went off in pursuit of a dream. Actually I think it changed even before Curbs left but Curbs natural caution kept the lid on it. Once he'd gone the gamble, for thats what it was took hold.
I can forgive them the gamble because of what had gone before and also because they put the money up for it. I also think that they must have looked at a worst case scenario in the Dowie season, and how they could extracate themselves. I doubt that plan envisaged the credit crunch and a second relegation.
So I'm not smug. I think the Murray always knew he might have to write off his investment. (Indeed he said this on radio interview several years ago). I believe the club has enough about it to survive. I hope that we don't have to go into administration to force a conclusion. Given what now seems to be emerging with Southampton, neither sellers or buyers would want that.
When was the last time BFR posted without throwing in an insult?