Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Parky Poll

edited September 2009 in General Charlton
His performance thus far has surely exceeded all expectations - which of the following would you say best currently sums up your view of his tenure?

[ I assume there is no need for an option (d) to get rid of him now ]
«1

Comments

  • a)

    The performances last season were better by and large under Parky than they had been under Pardew but any bad luck there was we attracted. Hence we didn't improve resultswise.
  • C for me.

    What happened when he was at Hull for such a short time ?
    His replacement took them to the Prem, so the infrastructure must have been in good order.

    I don't want any changes though. Team morale is vital and his contract is up in June anyway so plenty of time to review things.
  • b for me........happy to be proved wrong.
  • b) and long may it continue and hopefully in a higher league than the dog and duck league we're currently in
  • [cite]Posted By: Valiantphil[/cite]C for me.

    What happened when he was at Hull for such a short time ?
    His replacement took them to the Prem, so the infrastructure must have been in good order.

    I don't want any changes though. Team morale is vital and his contract is up in June anyway so plenty of time to review things.

    Or maybe the Chairman was over hasty in sacking him.
  • A
    Whilst last season he didn't get the results there were signs of improvement in play and spirit, now with his changes to the squad we now have our Charlton back. We won't win every game but at least it is worth watching and they do look as if they want to play for the club and to win.
  • [cite]Posted By: Valiantphil[/cite]His replacement took them to the Prem, so the infrastructure must have been in good order..
    I don't know what happened, I guess sometimes you can get off on the wrong foot and like you say he wasn't given much of a chance. He seems to have bought some good players in his short time there though.

    Maybe he needs a bit of time to get bedded in, who knows.
  • A bit of B and C.

    I thought tht he should have gone at the end of last season but the start he has made has been excellent however I do still have some doubts and the jury is still out as far as I'm concerned.

    Where we are at christmas will be a much better indicator but credit for the way we have started.
  • Voted B) but also a bit of me has a niggly feeling that when/if things aren't quite going our way we (potentially) could fall away quite quickly.The longer we continue winning is great, obviously, but I still think our confidence is quite fragile as a club and it wouldn't take too much for things to turn around and for him to be up against it again.
  • voted C. Still got a lot of convincing to do. Concerned he can't hack it in the Championship.
  • Sponsored links:


  • Voted C

    but I am delighted with the start and hope it continues, just do still have doubts regards to a plan b or c, will know this when we get injuries/suspensions and are forced to change things
  • [cite]Posted By: LargeAddick[/cite]voted C. Still got a lot of convincing to do. Concerned he can't hack it in the Championship.

    but we're not in the championship


    B
  • B, Parky is lucky that the takeover didn't go through, if it had I think the new owners may have wanted their man in, and that the board didn't have the money to pay him off and have any idea of who to replace him with.

    Sometimes though it isn't how far you fall, but how far you bounce back and Parky is doing ok with the latter, and long may it continue. There's still a long way to go and we have a thin squad so there may be more testing times ahead and probably will be, but we've managed to get a load of points in the bag and are around 25% or so of the way towards automatic promotion.
  • C for me.

    Fair play to Parkinson for what he has done so far, especially under very trying circumstances, but I remain worried that there is no clear evidence of Plan B and Plan C. Heaven forbid, but if Sam gets a long-term injury or suffers a dip in form, we are in trouble.

    I also like to think of the one year, three year and five year scenarios and I can't see that he is the man to get us back into the Premier League over that sort of timescale, much as I'd love to be wrong. But the club obviously had to go with what it had at the time, and Parkinson has done well during 2009, aided significantly, though, by the availability of Racon and Semedo and other players finding League 1 much more to their liking than the Championship.
  • "worried that there is noclear evidence of Plan B or Plan C" ... why make change for the sake of it?

    "if our best player gets a long term injury, we are in trouble" ... doesn't this apply to other clubs ?
  • [cite]Posted By: Valiantphil[/cite]C for me.

    What happened when he was at Hull for such a short time ?
    His replacement took them to the Prem, so the infrastructure must have been in good order.

    Or he was putting the infrastructure in place and was sacked before he could benefit from his efforts.

    B for me
  • 49% voted A. Haha.

    Surely that many weren't in favour of him at the end of last season?
  • [cite]Posted By: Fish, Costa, Fortune[/cite]49% voted A. Haha.

    Surely that many weren't in favour of him at the end of last season?

    I clocked that to. My biggest concern last season was that he had signed a lot of duffers and that would be a problem. So far proved wrong
  • I think those of us in favour weren't posting much, if at all - I think AFKA ran a poll at the end of the season which surprised many by the level of support on here for him
  • [cite]Posted By: Salad[/cite]"worried that there is noclear evidence of Plan B or Plan C" ... why make change for the sake of it?

    "if our best player gets a long term injury, we are in trouble" ... doesn't this apply to other clubs ?

    Ah, a member of the 'if it ain't broke don't fix it' club. You always need an alternative for those occasions when the preferred approach doesn't work. You can't expect things to go our way all the time and opponents will work us out quickly enough. That's when you need to change the approach. And mixing it up during games is a good idea too, if only for a brief spell here and there.

    As far as long-term injuries go, of course that applies to other clubs. My point is that, if Sam gets injured, do you see Wagstaff just slotting into his role and continuing the good work to the same level? Or, if Burton is unavailable, that we play the same way with McLeod?

    Over 46 games, we will need to adopt different approaches to maintain the current level of success. There is evidence in the last two home games that we might start to struggle to break resilient teams down. We need to be prepared to play a long ball here and there for a pacy forward to run on to, or have central midfielders who take on and go past opponents. We need to be brave enough to play three at the back for periods in games where we are struggling to dominate or to score the crucial goal.

    Mark my words, those times will come. Better that we are prepared for it and able to produce what is required rather than have the post mortem explaining where it all went wrong.
  • Sponsored links:


  • edited September 2009
    [cite]Posted By: Dave Rudd[/cite]Mark my words, those times will come. Better that we are prepared for it and able to produce what is required rather than have the post mortem explaining where it all went wrong.

    and in what evidence is there we are not prepared?

    Did not PP say that he and the other coaches constantly consider other options and which players could replace those that may be injured.

    Did not PP say that the 4 - 4 - 1 - 1 is working but that it is not set in stone and will be changed as and when it is necessary and appropriate.

    Facts are that we have broken down every league team we have played this season scoring two or more goals in every game (including Soton if you count the wrongly disallowed goal).

    Yes, there will be days it doesn't work or when it just doesnt click. That happens to all teams

    I get the feeling that just as Dickson two goals are loudly proclaimed of evidence of Parky being wrong while his being subbed off in the next game is almost ignored the first defeat will be held up as irrefutable evidence that all the previous wins are now invalid and that Parky and the team have been found out.

    IMHO all those doubting Parky would be wetting themselves with glee if another manager had come in during the summer and got the same results with the same players and no doubts or words of caution would be heard from them. It would be taken as proof that Parky was rubbish and that they were right all along.

    For me Parky has to prove himself over the WHOLE season. Not 10 games but also not after one defeat or even a 2 - 1 win against a decent team who came to do and job and us and did it well but failed.
  • 101101
    edited September 2009
    [cite]Posted By: LenGlover[/cite]a)

    The performances last season were better by and large under Parky than they had been under Pardew but any bad luck there was we attracted. Hence we didn't improve resultswise.

    Agree with this so ultimatly A for me
  • re: the "If it ain't broke don't fix it brigade" - surely six wins and two draws is a just a little better than "it ain't broke" ... would you truthfully applaud Parky for being a tinkerman ?

    I agree that we will need changes in personnel and formation at some point, but I don't understand why anyone would be so very worried that we haven't been chopping and changing already. It is part of the oppostion's job to make it difficult for us to break them down, we cannot to see them roll over very often.

    It is true we necessarily have a thin squad, but after the bloated squads of the last few years that isn't so bad. On the whole, I don't think the alternative players are are as goods as those that have been playing regularly - I would expect any manager to balance playing his best team with sticking by a successful settled team.

    Wagstaff looks a bit lightweight, but he has impressed overall when coming on - although I wouldn't expect him to play just for the sake of having a plan B up our sleeves. Sodje should well be a more than adequate replacement for Llera. Spring slotted very well into Semedo's role on Saturday, performed it differently but well enough. McLeod and McKenzie will get their chances up front soon enough I guess.

    I am not sure what you wish the manager had done differently.
  • [cite]Posted By: Henry Irving[/cite]IMHO all those doubting Parky would be wetting themselves with glee if another manager had come in during the summer and got the same results with the same players and no doubts or words of caution would be heard from them. It would be taken as proof that Parky was rubbish and that they were right all along.
    true but also those of us who backed Parky would be wetting ourselves too and eating humble pie (wash our hands first of course!)
  • Hope you are right, Henry.

    I don't claim any evidence that we are not prepared. In fact I claimed the opposite - that there is no clear evidence that we are prepared. Plan B to me is more than just replacing like-for-like personnel. It's about dealing with different opponents and different situations differently.

    Yes, I did hear that Parkinson claimed at the recent Q&A that he constantly considers other options. Might be nice to see them rather than hear about them, of course.
  • B for me.

    Very happy to be eating humble pie. Wouldn't mind a few more helpings, in fact.
  • C for me i am afraid i know he is doing a good job in league one and fair play to him for that, but i just harbour doubts he can properly manage in the championship based on past form with us and other clubs, I fear he will be an eternal league one manager. but who knows i maybe proved wrong
  • A.
    wanted him to stay (said so in of the parky out threads!), took over Pardew's mess and for me deserved a chance to sort things out. seems to be working so far.
  • [cite]Posted By: Dave Rudd[/cite]Hope you are right, Henry.

    I don't claim any evidence that we are not prepared. In fact I claimed the opposite - that there is no clear evidence that we are prepared. Plan B to me is more than just replacing like-for-like personnel. It's about dealing with different opponents and different situations differently.

    Yes, I did hear that Parkinson claimed at the recent Q&A that he constantly considers other options. Might be nice to see them rather than hear about them, of course.

    But surely you only want to see them if its going wrong? You dont want him to change everything just to show you he can, where is the point in that.
  • [cite]Posted By: Henry Irving[/cite]

    For me Parky has to prove himself over the WHOLE season. Not 10 games but also not after one defeat or even a 2 - 1 win against a decent team who came to do and job and us and did it well but failed.

    Ditto.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out!