I woke up this morning .... and had that cold realisation that yesterday was real, not just a bad dream.
There are several threads which describe the aftermath. You will have read them all, I'm sure. But how about we try to bring it all together?
Here's how I see it:
1) Yesterday was embarrassing. Our all-time worst result? Maybe, maybe not ... but it's in the top few. More importantly, I was embarrassed by McLeod's behaviour. Sure, I don't rate him as a player (understatement), but that elbow was unforgivable - and, yes, I would be saying the same about any other player who had done it. National TV as well. I know footballers are not supposed to be intelligent, but for God's sake...
2) Do we recall the 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it' debate of a month or so ago? The signs were there ... but hey we are second and we would all have settled for that at the start of the season, right? Spare me, please. This is no blip.
3) Those who want Parkinson out are challenged with ..'so who would you replace him with?' And then each viable suggestion is beaten back. It's so easy, isn't it? So the pro-Parkinson brigade always wins because we need 'stability' ... and anyway we are second in the League, aren't we and we would all have settled for that etc etc.
How about this? How about Parkinson showing some tactical nous on Saturday by bringing Bailey back into the centre of midfield, by dropping Racon (although it pains me to say it) and putting Sam on the left and Wagstaff on the right? How about playing Mooney and McKenzie up front (not because I hold out any great hope, but simply that all other options look woeful, recognising that Burton's hernia problem has limited his effectiveness for some weeks now).
How about the Board (who I love for their commitment and continued investment in the Club, but who I ridicule for their lack of 'football' knowledge) recognise when they are out of their depth in football terms and get some help? Some serious help ... because the Parkinson, Breacker, Kinsella holy trinity is not doing it. A controversial idea .... why not Les Reed as Director of Football? Out of his depth at Premier League level maybe, although he did well enough at Fulham, but he would be a real asset at this level with his network of contacts and his eye for a player in the bargain basement.
It's obvious that goal scoring is our main problem. We are condemned to this League for a long time unless we address that. Funds have to be made available in January. If that means cashing in on any of our assets, so be it.
If you are a Manager, Mr Parkinson, this is the time to manage. And if you are a Director, Mr Murray, this is the time to gather people around you who know what is needed and direct them to deliver it.
0
Comments
Agree wholeheartedly about McLeod. Can't have people behaving like that, no matter how badly it's going for them.
Your point 3) is worth emphasising, I feel. I haven't really entered the ''Parky must go' debate as there seems little point when the bloke has just been given - admittedly with idiotic timing- another year on his contract. He's here for the rest of the season whatever happens, as far as I can see, and so I'm not calling for his head. But I have been immensely irritated by the stock response from his fan club to those who are, of ''if you can't produce the name of anyone better, you can't call for him to go.''
It is not the task of anyone on here to find the next manager! That's the board's job, even if they have made a right old mess of the last four appointments. To say supporters do not have the right tell the board 'this bloke's not up to the job' unless they can produce a ready-made perfect replacement is plain daft.
but you've just got to stick with it boys - as a palace fan i still have oodles more respect for you lot as fans than the armchair fools with their chelsea/manyoo nonsense
and if i can make my son a palace fan in hertfordshire, i'm sure you can make your kids support the clowns
And if by that you mean JonJo Shelvey, then bollocks to that I profoundly disagree with you
You're right; let's just sack him and flounder.
It's the board's problem ;-)
In the context of debate, I don't see that it's unreasonable to ask the "sack him" brigade to offer some idea at least as to what they would like to happen next.
Ought to provide a richer debate than just demanding he be replaced and saying don't irritate me by asking who with - it' the board's job.
I'm not calling for Parky to be sacked. The time for that was last summer and it didn't happen.
But if I was arguing that he should go - which I'm not - its not then up to me to advise the board who they should appoint, is it? Those who fancy the job apply in the usual way, the board interviews the best applicants and then comes to a decision on who it thinks is the best man for the job. What the blooming heck has that process got to do with me, you or anyone else on Charlton Life?
Do you really think Richard Murray is reading this board to see what disaffected Lifers ''would like to happen next'', as you put it ? We don't even know who would be interested in a vacancy that at present does not exist , anyway. So the point you are making is?
What a surrreal discussion!
.
I think I'll just leave this for people to read and make their own minds up.
Bizarre
That didn't take much doing...''
Well, quite. It's not hard when people chose to pick an argument over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin - I mean, how dare Large and Golfie and the rest of them call for Parky to be sacked when they haven't even lined up his replacement yet !
Bizarre, you say. Well I used the word surreal. But bizarre will serve equally well to describe an argument about a vacancy that does not even exist.
Does that make it easier for you?
Well I would guess what you brand as the ''sack him brigade'' ( of whom I am not one) want to happen next is that they would like those charged with running the club to exercise their executive function and find someone better qualified. Simples, eh?
Did the supporters who criticised Dowie tell the board to appoint Les Reid in his place ? Of course not. Did they call for Parky to get the job when Pardew was under attack ? Of course not. So why is it now all of a sudden incumbent on Parky's critics to nominate his successor? Especially as the man is clearly not going anywhere at the moment.
So yes, I still fail to understand what point you are trying to argue here - unless it is simply that this so-called ''brigade'' should shut up unless they have a better candidate ready to parachute in, even though it's a process in which they have no say.
Which, to turn Stanley Baldwin's famous comment on its head, is a bizarre kind of responsibility without power...
I actually don't think you are reading what I'm saying - the points are all there.
Worse, you are deliberately subverting what I said.
I'm still fairly new to this forum, so maybe it's your thing to be cantankerous?
If anybody else thinks I'm being surreal or doesn't get my point please tell me.
We've been there done that and got the t shirt in a manner of speaking. Curbs was prepared to see out the final year of his contract but the Board decided to let him go without a coherent succession policy. We got Dowie and the rest is history.
For that reason if no other It is a valid question given our recent history to ask whether those demanding the sacking of Parky have a credible succession plan in my opinion.
you may as well ask who is going to apply at the moment for the job that parkys has secured.
I did not have that specifically in mind ... and personally I would hate that to happen. But we do need to address the goal scoring problem (and that includes creating chances as much as having someone to take them). If that requires cash in January, we have to find it from somewhere. Otherwise we have to get lucky and stumble across a cheap solution.
Did you have something else in mind, PragueAddick, or are you OK with the way things stand at the moment?
Playing Mooney was my suggestion for the forthcoming match with MK Dons. Hence the phrase "How about Parkinson showing some tactical nous on Saturday ... etc". I was fully aware that he was not available for yesterday's game.
Dave, you're obviously livid, as many are and rightfully so. I can't see much of the club, save "highlights" (that's what a plummet down the leagues will do!), but your playing personnel ideas sound like they ought to be given a shot, especially about Bailey.
The part of this thread thatI'm having trouble understanding is why the Board that is being criticised for its lack of football knowledge is hypothetically being entrusted carte Blanche to find an appropriate successor from an unknown pool of applicants. I understand that that's thx Board's job, but player selection is the manager's and manager sacking is the Board's and no one hesitates to weigh in with their opinions on both of those topics. I for one recognize that it's unlikely that an actual candidate would actually be successfully identified by anyone on here, but in the unlikely and, I think, unfortunate event that there were to be a vacancy, I'd want to know that there was a qualifed and available pool from which to choose...is there? I don't know, but I am certain that it's a reasonable question to ask and isn't necessarily indicative of someone asking it sticking their head in the sand.
He has proved himself to be tactically naive, and the team changes that you suggested would have been the obvious way of trying to address the lack of creativity problem. Playing wingers on the wing, and midfielders in midfield is not a bad idea against non league opposition or any other team. But where Parky has really screwed up badly is not finding a front two who operate well together. That hasn't been helped by him sending two senior forwards out on loan at the same team and relying almost completely on one player up front, Dion Burton. What we saw on Sunday was a team that has forgotten how to play football. They have forgotten how to move into space, how to pick a pass, how to shoot at goal. And the reason they have forgotten is because they haven't done it for so long. They became stale and ran out of ideas and confidence. But Parky couldn't see it and rather than change things before the results started to turn negative, he stuck with it until we started losing.
Your point about the board lacking football knowledge is spot on IMO and the reason we find ourselves where we are.
I have long advocated the appointment of someone like KP as a director of football. The mistakes in terms of bad signings, and the release of valuable players has been almost relentless since Curbs departure.
Offloading our best players is not the answer. We need to get a balanced squad, find a front two and start playing football again, like we did when we thrashed West Ham. That was a long time ago and quite honestly I haven't seen us, or heard of us having a decent 90 minutes since.
As for his eventual successor then I'd look no further than Nigel Adkins. So, I don't want Parky sacked AND I have given a name to his eventual successor. Happy everyone ??
Apart from somehow getting Bailey back into the middle,i don't see how wholesale changes are going to help the situation with such a weak squad.The problems apppear to be psycological and it's up to Parkinson to get a bit of belief back in the side.
The movement off the ball, support and enthusiasm has disappeared - Youga is the only one making runs but apart from that, generally speaking, the whole midfield has gone to sleep. Going through the motions will not win you matches.
Okay, we've lost the thrust of Richardson on the overlap, Burton is a shadow of himself (surely it's better to get his hernia mended straightaway while Mooney is here, than perservere with a half fit player - rocket science?) But we no longer retain the ball and we're not creating chances.
And if you're not capable of taking the game to the opposition, you'll create very few chances.
If you create few chances, don't expect many goals.
Something is wrong.....I can fully understand one or two players having "off days" but the whole team? I didnt recognise Semedo and Racon from that 6 game winning start.....Shelvey seemed uniterested (and I rate him highly) Bailey...well he isnt living up to expectations and Sam since wining player of the month has been marked off the pitch by 2 and sometimes three players......which in itself should open up things for a creative midfielder like Racon....but no, things have gone very stale. McLeod...well I was happy to see him get a chance, but I think he is actually behind Fleetwood and Dixon and as for the elbow....that was plain cynical and the club should act idependently. Personally, we should have played Youga or basey at right back, as the new fella has brought nothing to the table...loanees dont seem to work for us....and thats down to the management to either motivate or pick the right candidates in the first place....we seem incapable of doing either.