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

Liars?

2

Comments

  • well he wasnt going to say after colchester and swindon i will decide if phil is up to the task in hand was he


    he said the right thing at the right time and now he has made the right decision at the right time


    popping corks in EN1 tonight and lighting upi a huge lardie da
  • The takeover took place finally on New Year's Eve with a match the next day, two things were obvious, that the new owners would be asked about Parky's future and buying players. You can hardly expect either Slater or Jimeniz on the eve of a match to tell the world's media that they were possibly, maybe thinking of sacking Parky, of course they were going to back him. Anything else undermines the manager and is a sure fire way to lose the next match. Furthermore if we did beat Brighton and Colchester and then they did sack Parky they risked undermining the promotion campaign and losing the fans before they'd settled in. A white lie, but understandable, this is the real world we are living in.
  • A clear out at the top is the best way forward - the earlier the better to give the new manager time to bring in players of their choosing. Bet that Martin will be sent back to Ipswich, a couple of new defenders, ditch the strategy of giving Dailly the free rein to go upfield - he showed he wasnt up to it yesterday! - check on the injury room and sack the physio if he could not come up with a good enough reason why Youga is still injured... - we need Jackson on the left midfield not left back and we need someone else to back Fry not JJ..
    AND a central midfielder who can spot opportunities and put the ball through.. There's nowt wrong with our strikers it is just that they are not being fed properly...
  • they were bold enough to change their minds and reacted to 2 or 3 further bad performances - i don't really care - change was needed and in an adult world you can't always avoid lying - do we want our club to be successful or is it more important for some to be well informed and in the know - all i care about is cafc and how well they do, not how in the know i am.
  • I agree with WSS. Who has ever heard of a Chairman backing the manager and then, unbelieveably (sp), sacking him shortly after.

    I don't think I've ever heard of the like of this happening before.

    I just hope he can live with himself as we get a manager in who can motivate players, use the correct tactics and play some entertaining football.
  • Once again, it was a question but good use of sarcasm. And of course we've heard it before but it doesn't mean it sits well with supporters.

    A fair few laughed at the treatment of Allardyce, Houghton and even Southgate. Looks like we're that type of club now though and the sooner a lot of us, including me, accept it then it seems we'll be for the better.
  • [quote][cite]Posted By: WSS[/cite]Once again, it was a question but good use of sarcasm. And of course we've heard it before but it doesn't mean it sits well with supporters.

    A fair few laughed at the treatment of Allardyce, Houghton and even Southgate. Looks like we're that type of club now though and the sooner a lot of us, including me, accept it then it seems we'll be for the better.[/quote]


    These guys are successful business people and they saw in business terms a manager unable to motivate or lead his team and knew he had to go and so did most if not all of us.

    Whether they were right to give Parky the "vote of confidence" or not is one thing, but I can't fault the decision. Unfortunately they were put in a position where they had to support Parky publically, anything less than a vote of confidence at that time would be undermining him.
  • Allardyce had rescued Blackburn from almost certain relegation, Hughton had brought Newcastle up from the Championship and stabilised them in mid table in the Premiership and Southgate had got relegated but was only 2 points from the play offs.

    Parkinson was temporary manager for our worst ever run of results and only got the job because we couldn't afford anybody else. He got us relegated whilst Billy Davies kept Forest (bottom when he joined them) up. Parkinson then failed to get the most expensively assembled League One squad automatic promotion or promotion through the play-offs.

    He then actually did not a bad job fashioning a side considering he lost star players from last season. However, the football was getting worse, crowds were dwindling and I don't think there is really one Charlton fan out there (really, if you're being honest) to say that we would finish in the top 2 this year or that we would win the play offs?...


    Therefore the sacking of Parkinson, now we have money (apparently) and time to spend it in the transfer window is completely different from Allardyce, Hughton or Southgate

    So the comparisons are completely different! Parkinson has been in charge for 2 years and all we were doing was getting gradually worse and worse ...
  • [cite]Posted By: Martomoto[/cite]It's a very disappointing way for our club to behave. I don't know if I can bring myself to call it a lie - but it's not far away is it? If Wise is appointed it's cleary been a stitch-up.

    ahem... we got destroyed 4-2 at home and it should have been 5 and we looked second best all game, and our tactics reduced us to looking like the under 11's... stitch up... your out of your mind mate..
  • I wasn't at the Valley Monday night but watched it on telly and PV & MS were watching the droves of fans leaving after the third goal
    That's when the plan changed
  • Sponsored links:


  • exactly....

    I mean he is right we have been loyal, we still have a 15k average attendence in league one... watching a team about as inspiring as headbutting a brick wall... he know there is massive potential... its not pie in the sky its fact... if we play good football, and we are competitive in Championship we can easily get 20k average...

    To see us turned over comprehensively and soo easily picked apart by Swindon and people voting with their feet and then booing ... Id have changed plans too..

    BUT the danger is that it actually goes backwards, but for me this league is sooooooo poor, a decent solid spine, would get us up..
  • I liked Parky too but I feel the man was too soft at least now with the change the players will be fighting for their place otherwise they will be shown the door also.

    Please get rid of Alan McCormack the man was running around like a kid in a playground on Monday, useless.
  • Am I the only one who finds it curious that Charlton's form went from a lengthy undefeated run featuring several great victories to losing at home to the likes of Walsall and being outplayed by ten men at Brighton.... pretty much around the announcement of the takeover and due dilligence?
  • What is sad is that we live in times when peoples words stand for nothing, lying and scams in business are so prevalent they are seen as the norm.
  • http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/jan/05/charlton-athletic-owners

    This is actually rather alarming ............ I'm really beginning to start to question the integrity of the people involved here .... throw Wise into the mix and serious question marks for me are raised! I'll just have to trust Varney here i presume.

    Article - Guardian

    "Charlton Athletic's new owners are decisive: they sacked the manager Phil Parkinson yesterday within 24 hours of taking control. What else do we know about them?

    Well, Charlton's website yesterday described Tony Jimenez and Michael Slater respectively as "an international property developer" and "a lawyer and businessman". The pair hold their interest in Charlton through CAFC Holdings Limited, "a company managed and controlled in Switzerland", though its registration is held in the offshore tax haven of the British Virgin Islands.

    Charlton's chairman, Slater, as the club's website explains, began work as a solicitor. Indeed, a Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal in August 2007, although clearing him of the primary allegations, found "the way in which [Slater] conducted himself could well be detrimental to the good reputation of the solicitors' profession as a whole". A spokesman for Slater said yesterday: "Allegations were made and these were 100% rejected by the SDT."

    As for Jimenez, the former vice‑president (player recruitment) at Newcastle United, Digger hopes his international property development interests have more life to them than those UK businesses on whose board he has served. Of the 17 UK companies where has been a director, 16 have been dissolved. The 17th is also set to be, either this month or next. "Tony has been a successful businessman in international property over the last 20 years," the spokesman added
  • That is a very weak article with little evidence.

    This is not a knee jerk reaction. Wise has been watching us since last season.
  • [cite]Posted By: The Red Robin[/cite]That is a very weak article with little evidence.

    This is not a knee jerk reaction. Wise has been watching us since last season.

    Read it again and pay attention this time.

    There are two very serious facts in there that should have people on here - provided their heads are not up their arseholes - very worried indeed.

    We will know one way or the other by the end of January when the window closes and they bring the new manager in.
  • Ormiston - what two very serious facts??!!
  • I assume its these ones:

    1.) Of the 17 UK companies where has been a director, 16 have been dissolved. The 17th is also set to be, either this month or next

    2.) Indeed, a Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal in August 2007, although clearing him of the primary allegations, found "the way in which [Slater] conducted himself could well be detrimental to the good reputation of the solicitors' profession as a whole"
  • so can we counteract that with the hugely succesful businesses that Mr Slater runs in the UK and abroad?

    only NYE people were happy with these two. Now a very loose article and what i see as a necessary sacking and people are shitting the bed.
  • Sponsored links:


  • [cite]Posted By: WSS[/cite]I assume its these ones:

    1.) Of the 17 UK companies where has been a director, 16 have been dissolved. The 17th is also set to be, either this month or next

    2.) Indeed, a Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal in August 2007, although clearing him of the primary allegations, found "the way in which [Slater] conducted himself could well be detrimental to the good reputation of the solicitors' profession as a whole"

    Yes, they are the two. Stick out like dogs balls if your head is not up your arse believing that we are on the verge of a "New Charlton" because these two muppets buy the club in the hope of a quick buck if they can get us into the Premiership.

    I have NEVER been "very happy" with the new owners, the whole thing is murkier than the JFK assasination!
  • Supaclive has already given a pretty good explanation for point 1.
    [cite]Posted By:Supavlice on another thread[/cite]Jiminez is in property. It is very usual to have a trading company that owns one or two properties and once those properties are developed and sold on, you close the company down - it is tax efficient and restricts losses etc if things go badly (and in property investment they do occassionally).

    The same happens in film production - each film is produced and owned by an SPV (special purpose vehicle), formed for that specific film. That way again, each film is treated separately, because again, in film production, something can go wrong and only that film suffers.

    Nothing dangerous or nasty about it - very prudent and it's just the norm!.
  • He's not in property with us though.

    Or is he.....?
  • Can I just point out that everyone is being very quick to blame the new owners, fuly and soley for this decsion.

    The fact is, it was a BOARD decision, therefore Murray and the memebrs who were therefore before the takeover, would also have to have at least agreed to the proposal. If all those older board memebrs have vetoed the idea, he would not have been sacked.
  • Why the surprise? Parky's job has been under threat pending a takeover since the first takeover thread started on CL, over 18 months ago. We all knew that when a takeover finally happened he would be at risk. He knew it himself and said so last summer (2009). The only reason he has stayed so long is the Richard Murray could afford to sack him.

    Nothing against Parky, he's a nice bloke. It's just the club was going nowhere and something needed to change.

    The thing is we don't know what was said in that meeting. For all we know Slater asked him "how are you going to improve the teams performances?", and did not like the response he got prompting the sudden change of support for him to stay on. Unlikely but you never know.
  • [cite]Posted By: DRF[/cite]Can I just point out that everyone is being very quick to blame the new owners, fuly and soley for this decsion.

    The fact is, it was a BOARD decision, therefore Murray and the memebrs who were therefore before the takeover, would also have to have at least agreed to the proposal. If all those older board memebrs have vetoed the idea, he would not have been sacked.

    doesn't say that it was a unanimous decision does it? personally can't see Murray after eulogising about Parky for so long will suddenly 4 days later decide that he deserves the sack.
  • The new owners are liars! Seriously?

    Or how about: WE just brought a football club and reserve the right to change our minds about the manager as we see fit if the situation arises, which it did.

    And by the way, a lot of fans agree that a change IS necessary NOW to give us at least a chance of promotion this season, not almost rans - like last season.

    I for one am happy that, at the very least, the new owners obviously will not accept mediocrity and have a little ambition and the ability to make quick, logical, decisive moves.
  • [cite]Posted By: allez les addicks[/cite]
    [cite]Posted By: DRF[/cite]Can I just point out that everyone is being very quick to blame the new owners, fuly and soley for this decsion.

    The fact is, it was a BOARD decision, therefore Murray and the memebrs who were therefore before the takeover, would also have to have at least agreed to the proposal. If all those older board memebrs have vetoed the idea, he would not have been sacked.

    doesn't say that it was a unanimous decision does it? personally can't see Murray after eulogising about Parky for so long will suddenly 4 days later decide that he deserves the sack.

    Why not ? He sacked him in the summer of 2009, well he told over a 100 people at a meeting he was going to, and then changed his mind. The reason why ? Money.
  • [cite]Posted By: Bubble[/cite]http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/jan/05/charlton-athletic-owners

    This is actually rather alarming ............ I'm really beginning to start to question the integrity of the people involved here .... throw Wise into the mix and serious question marks for me are raised! I'll just have to trust Varney here i presume.

    Article - Guardian

    "Charlton Athletic's new owners are decisive: they sacked the manager Phil Parkinson yesterday within 24 hours of taking control. What else do we know about them?

    Well, Charlton's website yesterday described Tony Jimenez and Michael Slater respectively as "an international property developer" and "a lawyer and businessman". The pair hold their interest in Charlton through CAFC Holdings Limited, "a company managed and controlled in Switzerland", though its registration is held in the offshore tax haven of the British Virgin Islands.

    Charlton's chairman, Slater, as the club's website explains, began work as a solicitor. Indeed, a Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal in August 2007, although clearing him of the primary allegations, found "the way in which [Slater] conducted himself could well be detrimental to the good reputation of the solicitors' profession as a whole". A spokesman for Slater said yesterday: "Allegations were made and these were 100% rejected by the SDT."

    As for Jimenez, the former vice‑president (player recruitment) at Newcastle United, Digger hopes his international property development interests have more life to them than those UK businesses on whose board he has served. Of the 17 UK companies where has been a director, 16 have been dissolved. The 17th is also set to be, either this month or next. "Tony has been a successful businessman in international property over the last 20 years," the spokesman added

    If you think that's bad, take a look at THIS!
  • edited January 2011
    [cite]Posted By: LargeAddick[/cite]
    [cite]Posted By: allez les addicks[/cite]
    [cite]Posted By: DRF[/cite]Can I just point out that everyone is being very quick to blame the new owners, fuly and soley for this decsion.

    The fact is, it was a BOARD decision, therefore Murray and the memebrs who were therefore before the takeover, would also have to have at least agreed to the proposal. If all those older board memebrs have vetoed the idea, he would not have been sacked.

    doesn't say that it was a unanimous decision does it?personally can't see Murray after eulogising about Parky for so long will suddenly 4 days later decide that he deserves the sack.

    Why not ? He sacked him in the summer of 2009, well he told over a 100 people at a meeting he was going to, and then changed his mind. The reason why ? Money.

    Can't possibly be true, Jiminez and Slater are the only people who have ever been dishonest in football. FACT.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!