Just been down to the Valley, as I had been taking some photos , and thought I would collect a season ticket application form from the box office..... The place seemed very quiet, I know the ground is like that on non match days but the shop was closed ( I think they were stock taking) and even the security people were not around.No one at the box office till I approached, got a form and went into Bartrams.... Two bar staff, looking pretty vacant,( the place was empty) I got a drink and left. I have never seen the Valley looking so quiet, ( and I used to live in Coxmount road for a time). Took some photos, and left. You realise how big the place is and what a commitment it is financially just to keep the place running over it must be, which just added to the atmosphere.....( I think I will go down on a sunny day next week!)
It has never been easy being a Charlton fan, at present I think everyone could do with a bit of good news though to get us through these gloomy days.
I am probably as guilty as the next person for being Naïve, and just as unrealistic as other club supporters still does not make me feel any better though!. Strange how Richardson leaving has had so many fan's become 'concerned'......
I dont think its a case of being naive, I think it comes down to being realistic. Football in general looks to be imploding, even the once untouchable Prem teams are stuggling, Portsmouth is a case in point, it is endemic of the financial situation around the world. Football clubs have historically spent beyond their means. Teams like Man u are stuggling, clubs do not make money and the TV money they do get they have to spend just to stay in the top flight. It just get compounded the further down the league we go, professional football clubs and associations around the world need to take a good look at themselves now before a lot of clubs simply disappear. Its no coincidence that 3 of the 4 semi finalists in the world cup have great national academys and spend more on youth football than any other countries in the world. Thats where the money should be spent and one would feel the best return will be recouped. Hands up those who at the time thought Pardew as a good appointment, I was one. I was prepared to give the Elephant man a fair crack of the whip too. The board make decisons that they think are in the clubs best interest at the time, hindsight is a wonderful thing. Its still not as bad as the 70's though, our gate was averaging 5,000, the standard of football was appaling and even the Valley was falling down. As fans we cannot do much about it except enjoy going to the games and bitching like phuck when we lose on penalties!!!
Afraid that I have to agree 100% bibble - looking back, there are many of the decisions made that are routinely described as being 'bad' or 'wrong' that were simply unavoidable, or at least seemed perfectly rational at the time.
Did the board really want to half force a manager (even such a great one as Curbs) to stay in place even though his heart may not have been in it as it had once been, rather than appoint someone who at the time was one of the brighter young managers around? Could they really appoint two new managers without giving them money to spend when they realised what being relegated would mean financially? Sadly, I think that in most cases even if they had made the very opposite decisions, we still would have ended up in the same place. Just look at the many other teams that got relegated from the Premiership at the same kind of time (I come from Bradford where they did not have half a roof on the main stand for the best part of a decade!).
As i say, it does not make it right, just means there was no alternative, or at least not one that would have necessarily left us in a better position.
On the plus side, things can turn around in a hurry as well - just a couple of years ago I am sure that fans on the Notts Forest and Leeds forums would have been having the very same discussions.
[cite]Posted By: The Red Robin[/cite]The board were not naive in letting Curbs go, he wanted to leave (although I think he could have been have been persuaded to stay had he had Dowie's tarnsfer budget). They were also fully aware it wouldn't be easy for Dowie to keep us up as they made it quite clear from day one how important it was that he kept the club in the Premier League that year. I think most of us thought Dowie wasn't a bad appointment at the time. Even more so with Pardew...who was naive in terms of the signings he made here
We were as good as relegated when Parkinson took control, although I think the board should have sacked Pardew a lot earlier, probably at the end of our first season in the Championship.
Curbishley wanted to leave at the end of his contract, which was a year after he actually left. The board should've given him that money, irrespective of him only staying that 1 year.
Jebus, hindsight, good for some things, f***ing awful for others. We could all go round the houses forever analalysing this, but I think we'll drive ourselves nuts.
[cite]Posted By: The Red Robin[/cite]The board were not naive in letting Curbs go, he wanted to leave (although I think he could have been have been persuaded to stay had he had Dowie's tarnsfer budget). They were also fully aware it wouldn't be easy for Dowie to keep us up as they made it quite clear from day one how important it was that he kept the club in the Premier League that year. I think most of us thought Dowie wasn't a bad appointment at the time. Even more so with Pardew...who was naive in terms of the signings he made here
We were as good as relegated when Parkinson took control, although I think the board should have sacked Pardew a lot earlier, probably at the end of our first season in the Championship.
Curbishley wanted to leave at the end of his contract, which was a year after he actually left. The board should've given him that money, irrespective of him only staying that 1 year.
Jebus, hindsight, good for some things, f***ing awful for others. We could all go round the houses forever analalysing this, but I think we'll drive ourselves nuts.
The board wanted him to commit to a contract extension, he didn't want to, but said he'd see out his contract. The board didn't want that because they felt he would not be able to attract any decent players to the club if there was a certainty that the manager would change after a year. The rest is history and can't be changed.
[cite]Posted By: The Red Robin[/cite]We were as good as relegated when Parkinson took control, although I think the board should have sacked Pardew a lot earlier, probably at the end of our first season in the Championship.
Other teams were in the same position, and pulled out of it. Most notably Nottingham Forest, who hired Billy Davies.
Parky never gave us a bounce, and then was hired "permanently" after eight winless matches.
Had we rolled the dice with a new manager then, we might have stayed up. Or not.
But with Parky, it only got worse and had no chance of staying up.
That is an area where the board were very naive, or too financially strapped to fund a real alternative.
thinking back to when we dropped down out of the prem. We would have been better off gambling and holding together a good team and going straight back up take the tv money job done. If the gamble had gone belly up we would be no worse than we are now, just would have got here quicker
Comments
It has never been easy being a Charlton fan, at present I think everyone could do with a bit of good news though to get us through these gloomy days.
I am probably as guilty as the next person for being Naïve, and just as unrealistic as other club supporters still does not make me feel any better though!.
Strange how Richardson leaving has had so many fan's become 'concerned'......
Its still not as bad as the 70's though, our gate was averaging 5,000, the standard of football was appaling and even the Valley was falling down. As fans we cannot do much about it except enjoy going to the games and bitching like phuck when we lose on penalties!!!
Did the board really want to half force a manager (even such a great one as Curbs) to stay in place even though his heart may not have been in it as it had once been, rather than appoint someone who at the time was one of the brighter young managers around? Could they really appoint two new managers without giving them money to spend when they realised what being relegated would mean financially? Sadly, I think that in most cases even if they had made the very opposite decisions, we still would have ended up in the same place. Just look at the many other teams that got relegated from the Premiership at the same kind of time (I come from Bradford where they did not have half a roof on the main stand for the best part of a decade!).
As i say, it does not make it right, just means there was no alternative, or at least not one that would have necessarily left us in a better position.
On the plus side, things can turn around in a hurry as well - just a couple of years ago I am sure that fans on the Notts Forest and Leeds forums would have been having the very same discussions.
Curbishley wanted to leave at the end of his contract, which was a year after he actually left. The board should've given him that money, irrespective of him only staying that 1 year.
Jebus, hindsight, good for some things, f***ing awful for others. We could all go round the houses forever analalysing this, but I think we'll drive ourselves nuts.
The board wanted him to commit to a contract extension, he didn't want to, but said he'd see out his contract. The board didn't want that because they felt he would not be able to attract any decent players to the club if there was a certainty that the manager would change after a year. The rest is history and can't be changed.
Other teams were in the same position, and pulled out of it. Most notably Nottingham Forest, who hired Billy Davies.
Parky never gave us a bounce, and then was hired "permanently" after eight winless matches.
Had we rolled the dice with a new manager then, we might have stayed up. Or not.
But with Parky, it only got worse and had no chance of staying up.
That is an area where the board were very naive, or too financially strapped to fund a real alternative.
charlton is like this oggy
all things pass even kidney stones but they hurt like feck
charlton are my kidney stones hurts like feck but i know it will pass
PMSL!!
"We're gripped by naivete
We're gripped by naivete
We're gripped by naivete
etc