[cite]Posted By: nth london addick[/cite]Bings post says it all yes we should aim for it and I believe we will get it but it is no longer the be all and end all .
I agree. Not going up pre-takeover would have been a disaster financially. Now it will be, IMHO, a major disappointment and setback.
At the same time people were fretting last week, you included NLA, that the appointment of Powell was taking too long and that we were running out of time in the transfer market despite there being 3 weeks left. Now we are being asked to wait 18 months for promotion. Sorry, but that doesn't add up.
We do need to think long term by which I mean 5 to 10 years but at the same time we need to see progress. Progress this year will be being better off in May than we are now. That is not about comparing old manager with new. That is about the Club moving forward which has to be the aim for all of us. If we reach the play-offs and lose then so be it, that's life but we should at least be aiming for that if not more. We certainly shouldn't be writing off automatic promotion, tough as that will be, with half the games to go.
Prague Addick makes a good point about Slater, for all his impressive words, still needing to prove himself as a Chairman. So far, so good. I've been impressed but, as I'm sure he himself realises knows, it has to be backed up by deeds.
Have to agree this has been the most reassuring statement made by the club.
The way i see it from previous statements made over the course of the season the squad we have was built to compete for a playoff spot. We are doing that. For a new inexperienced manager to then turn that squad into a side where automatic promotion is expected is seriously unrealistic.
I also think a lot of people underestimate how long it takes a manager to assess a squad, then to build a side which can apply their particular footballing philosophy within a sensible financial approach. Glad Powell is going to be given that time.
I do expect improvement otherwise there was no reason to have sacked Parky, Kins and Breacker. As Bing said the change of atmosphere from despair to one of renewal and hope, is a very positive thing. But IMO, it is also quite fragile. It was quite noticeable at the Sheffield game how quickly we, as supporters, fell rather quiet when Wednesday upped their game. We have become conditioned to expecting things to go wrong and that underlying fear will take time to fade. It's fair to assume that those who went to Sheffield are committed supporters, but, as I discovered, there were quite a few who hadn't bought into the idea of the new board and CP. Improvement for some equates to promotion, Slater will indeed need to do quite a bit more than talk the talk.
But you could also allow for the fact that he might actually have modified his own expectations since he first spoke. He may well have listened to Richard Murray and Peter Varney, and realised that putting pressure on CP to deliver promotion this season would be counter-productive.
I was also uneasy about sacking a manager when we are in 5th place and when he hasnt had money to spend. However Slater has been there to see the evident fragility of the team, and the way that communicates itself to the supporters. I respect their belief that Parky may not have been able to deliver even if he's had money in the window.Everything then depended on how they replaced him. If it had been Wise, then I would have said, automatic promotion or I will personally lead the campaign to get Wise out. But it wasnt Wise, it was somebody who is the polar opposite of Wise.
We should remember that when Michael Slater speaks, he is representing the collective views and decisions of the new Board. And that Board includes Peter Varney. I suspect Varney is comfortable with the decisions both to get rid of Parky and appoint CP..
Entirely logical. Although not everyone will agree. Obviously the aim this year is to go up. That hardly needs repeating, it's such a given. But there are already voices saying if we don't make the play-offs, then Powell's appointment will have been a ''failure''. Don't think such talk helps and it isn't true, IMO. Not getting promoted will be a dissapointment. But if we're playing good football, doing the right things on and off the pitch and building for the future,it will not mean owners, manangement or players will have ''failed''.
The decision of the owners to come out with a statement that tells the fans (and manager) that if we miss promotion this season they will not deem Powell to have ''failed'' is well-timed ,I think, and is presumbaly intended to head-off those who are waiting to shout the 'f' word should we still be sitting in seventh place next May.
I think given everyone's respect for Chris Powell, most wil take the point Slater is making. But there will be a few who don't. If we don't go up, we will simply have to make sure that the voices of those cheering the manager come the last match are louder than those jeering that he has ''failed''.
Thing is it is Parkinson's players and team that CP has inherited in the same way it was mooted that Parkinson inherited Pardew's.
Whilst I agree that promotion, and at very least play offs, are an expected target it is worth remembering that for the remaining 3.5 months CP will be doing so with a largely inherited squad (and obviously new singings in the next fortnight hopefully) in the same way Parkinson did during his caretaker period.
Whilst we were fifth as correctly pointed out I think PP was under immense pressure to achieve promotion this year at all costs and at various points this season Im not sure it appeared realistic from some of our performances.
I think and hope that CP's arrival and the apparent lifting of the clouds of gloom from above the Valley will spark the current squad into confidence and self belief that they can achieve promotion come May and I hope this transfers into their performances on the pitch but at the same time wont be starting CP out threads if we fail at his first time of asking and I hope the board are equally as patient in that situation and give him summer and next season to build "his" own squad next year, which going by their comments seems like they will.
As I said after the Swindon game - promotion should be regarded as a "nice to have" this season. Lets give CP 6 months and a summer to shape the team to his way of playing and amend the squad accordingly ready for a proper assault next season
Thanks for the summary of the interview on here. If anyone finds a link to "listen again", please post it,as I'd like to hear it.
I understand where Ormy and co are coming from, as it still all seems very harsh on Parky. However, I also think what Slater is saying is sensible - we need to get rid of the panic and desperation of needing to win/ needing to get promotion now. The new approach could have the opposite effect, and make it more likely that we actually are in the mix at the season end.
Splashing loads of cash in the last two weeks of the transfer window is not a recipe for success - if we do bring in a new GK, new CH, new creative midfield, and new striker, they will all take time to settle and the team will take time to "gel" (as Parky would have warned us). I'd prefer a more balanced approach: one or two long-term prospect signings (IF we can find the right players at the right price) and a couple of additional loans, plus CP aiming to get more of the current players to perform consistently to the best of their ability. It may or may not bring success this season, but the rebuilding will be underway. Let's remember this will be CP's first venture into the transfer market - he will learn from it.
The bottom line on all of this is that football is about one thing and one thing only in the modern era: Results.
There is a lot of goodwill towards Powell right now - I seem to remember Pardew had a reservoir full of goodwill around Boxing Day 2006 that we could never have imagined would start to decrease rapidly not more than 12 months later as we were getting battered at The Valley by a Kevin Lisbie inspired Colchester.
At the moment people are in love with "the idea" of Chris Powell being manager, nobody has the first clue what his custodianship of the club will be like because he has never been a manager before.
I hope with all my heart and soul that he brings back the good times, nobody wants him to succeed more than I do.
However, reality bites you on the arse very quickly in professional football and if we get some bad results and start to flounder then there is no reason to expect many Charlton supporters to sit there mute simply because they used to love Chris Powell as a player.
Remember how we all (including me, I was defending Pardew to the death) thought we had pulled the coup of the century in getting the old silver fox to the club? How we laughed when we beat Curbs' West Ham 4-0.....except the ending turned out rather sour.
All I am saying is, and putting the Parkinson issue to one side, is that if Powell does not get promotion this season, or at the very least get us to the Play Offs, then a big chunk of the shine will come off and he'll start the 2011/12 season under a truck load of pressure.
We are now a club, whether we like it or not, that is just like any other in that we now have a culture of sacking the manager, if Powell is struggling in the job at Christmas 2011 - and God I hope he is not - then would we back him or sack him then?
There is a reason that the average Football League manager lasts less than a year in the job, its called expectation.
I am very confused about the need to get promoted this season. When Parky was Manager supporters were saying that if he didnt get us promoted this season he would be a failure and he should be sacked.Parky assembled a squad on a shoestring. Now he has been sacked when the team were lying in 5th place and Powell put in charge, Slater now says promotion is not vital. It seems to me that Parky was sacked as a knee jerk reaction to the Swindon result and Powell was put in charge to give the new Board some breathing space with the fans. This is not a pop at Chris Powell as i am warming to the idea of him as a Manager.I would disagree with Slater, to me promotion is vital and as soon as possible ie this season.
[cite]Posted By: dickplumb[/cite]I am very confused about the need to get promoted this season. When Parky was Manager supporters were saying that if he didnt get us promoted this season he would be a failure and he should be sacked.Parky assembled a squad on a shoestring. Now he has been sacked when the team were lying in 5th place and Powell put in charge, Slater now says promotion is not vital.
I really think we need to move on. We don't need the ghost of Parkinson walking the battlements at the Valley on Saturday, like Hamlet's father.
Of course Parkinson had to deliver us promotion if he had stayed. Aaprt from our early days as a league club in the 1920s, every Charlton manager since who has done two seasons in div three has either got us promoted - or been sacked before that second season was out. Had Parkinson stayed until May and we had not achieved promotion, it would have been a special achievement. You can argue that he should have been given the chance either to enter the history books in that unfortunate way, or get us promoted. A perfectly reasonable position to take. But the new owners took a different position and we now work with what we have got and the changed circumstances.
Parkinson built his own team and had two seasons to get it right. Powell has half a season, with an inherited team. So the owners have downscaled their expectations.
Can't wait for Saturday and a convincing win (the first since Nov 20), because I'm confident that will go a long way to putting these arguments and the ghost of the last manager to rest.
Back to the interview, i thought Slater came across relatively well and said all the right things.
However, a few general things that that have me scratching my brains a little:
1. We had over 40 applicants for the job yet gave it someone (with no managerial experience) who didn't even apply.
2.Powell was contacted the night before his interview, and offered the job within 30 minutes of his interview, which suggests to me it was slightly pre-meditated and his character / personality back that up, rather than evaluating all the elements. Powell had no No 2 identified at that stage, or it seems player targets, which said to me there is no defined plan for the transfer window.
3. A fortnight ago promotion appeared vital, now less so.
4. The inconsistency from their initial approach to how things then unfolded.
Read the opening couple of interviews again, everything in them talked about stability, minimal disruption, slow sustainable growth: In particular, "Its certainly not our intention to make any change. Phil's done a great job. We're third in the league and that speaks for itself, so we're going to sit down with Phil over the next few days and we'll give him every support. Our intention is to see the club promoted to the Championship as soon as possible, and making wholesale changes is not the right way to achieve those objectives."
Three days later wholesale changes were made, and a guy who did a 'great job' on a Friday was sacked on a Monday.
I'm not gonna drag the Parky debate up again because ultimately its not going to achieve anything. But its looking more and more to me like the Parky sacking was on the snap basis that they felt he had lost the crowd (he quite clearly hasn't lost the dressing room judging by snippets of info since), and equally the Powell appointment is increasingly looking to be built upon being a pre-meditated crowd-pleasing appointment.
I'm happy we've got Powell, its been a sad club for a number of years and we need to get it smiling again, and i think we have a chance with him. I'm just struggling to get my head around their approach and what their angle is, because although i broadly agree with their couple of big decisions made so far, they are striking me as reactive spur of the moment decisions rather than considered decisions as part of a long-term plan.
Then again, perhaps we are analysing things too much.
Suppose players are interchangable whereas bums on seats are not Afka.
Better business sense to keep the (dwindling) crowds/ customers happy than the right back.
The feel good factor will no doubt bring more money through the gates on a matchday if only for the novelty and if we manage to do well and the atmosphere is good they may come more regularly.
Will be interesting to see the attendance on Saturday and if its a good atmosphere and buzz around the ground, and gawd help us, we even get a win then im sure the following game will see many of those whove stayed away for a while return to the next few home games.
A gamble by the board but shrewd from a business pov if it pays off.
All good points, AFKA, and you are probably right that we all analyse things far too much. But on the other hand, what else is there to do with the other six days and 22 and a half hours when we only get 90 mins of acutal football per week !!!
To be fair, I don't think we went that much off topic. We simply got a little fixated on the reasons behind your point three:
3. A fortnight ago promotion appeared vital, now less so.
On the surface, that is a flip-flop, so it is one that is worth analysing, I think.
Regards the snap decisions i think it boils down to the fact of the timing of the thing.
To takeover on the eve of the tranfer window was always going to be a dilemma.Remember, they'd hoped to get it done before christmas,thus giving them a chance to assess Parkinson for themselves.But that never happened.
They were never going to say that they were 'not really sure about Phil' straight after taking over the reigns.Remember also that they hadn't actually met him.He wasn't the most charismatic bloke.And perhaps after meeting him they didn't feel he fitted in with what they are trying to achieve.Bums on seats may be a big part of that.
Parkinson got Murray out of a very big hole during his time here.He took the flak in a very very testing time with very little resources.He was the fall guy and deserved better.
Unfortunately nowadays the football world doesn't reach out to those who deserve better.
[cite]Posted By: carly burn[/cite]Unfortunately nowadays the football world doesn't reach out to those who deserve better.
lets not kid ourselves. By and large, it never did.
I was listening to a brief radio thing on BBC WS about 50 years of freedom of contract for players. Before it came in, players wages were fixed at alevel "roughly the same as the majority of fans". The attendances were massive (e.g 75,000 at the Valley). Where did all the money go then? Not to the players nor the facilities for players and fans alike.
Football has always been a nasty crap business, run largely by nasty crap people.
AFKA, there is apparent inconsistency here and you've pointed this out.
I suggest there could be a number of explanations and here is my take
1. The 40 applicants issue - RM/PV and the previous Board will have had a list of candidates they would like to speak to in the event of a vacancy, I suspect Howe was on it, and also CP. S & J may have their own list. You don't actually start the process until the Board has removed the current manager (unless he works for West Ham :-) ). The process is going to involve honing down the list to get to available candidates, and ones you need permission. You then focus your attention on contacting those on the list. In the meantime every out of work manager's agent is on to you to talking up their clients.
2. Was CP their first choice &/or just a crowd pleaser? - clearly not first choice as their preferred candidate was Howe and they had to move very quickly to try an get him in, given that he appeared to be on his way to Palarse. Once he turned us down, then they interviewed those remaining on their shortlist. It doesn't worry me that CP didn't apply. It seems perfectly reasonable for them to have decided that he was the standout candidate of those they interviewed. Yes one of the considerations might have been his affect upon the fan base. I think that is just an additional positive issue in his favour.
3. The change of stance on Parky and change from promotion "vital" issues. Well the club had a new Board but as an entity its the same company. I doubt if the new Board had met fully to discuss the managers position when Slater made his first comments. Slater as the Boards mouthpiece would, for legal reasons, not be at liberty to demur from the previous Boards decisions to keep Parky and make promotion this season "vital". The new Board met after the Swindon game, they decided to sack Parky and appoint a new manager. At that point they have defacto moved the goalposts and appointing "the right person" under the changed circumstances, with the new financial strength means they are able to redefine the promotion target from "vital" (for financial reasons) to "desireable" or words to that effect.
4. Was the sacking of Parky Premeditated? I don't think it was. I think they only decided collectively to do it after the Swindon game. On the other hand all of the new Board members might individually have ha their doubts about Parky. I heard from a pretty well-informed source last season that he was going to be sacked and then he wasn't. After the abject display against Swindon and when the new Board came together, that was the first official opportunity they had to decide.
I am not certain this is right but I suspect it is.
[cite]Posted By: AFKABartram[/cite]But its looking more and more to me like the Parky sacking was on the snap basis that they felt he had lost the crowd
The Swindon game wouldn't have been the first time the new directors had been to The Valley.
But it was the breaking point that something had to change.
The destructive atmosphere and hostility directed towards Parkinson and the team would have made a huge impression.
As AFKA says above, they would have felt they had lost the crowd.
And in all honesty, how could they carry out their plans in that environment?
Of course our objective should be go up this year. However the january transfer window id never the greatest time to do the right long term deals, particularly when the person responsible had only just started looking. It many ways it is better to keep the powder dry for the summer. Evolution rather than revolution now, which will also allow CP to have a good look at our current squad.
One further thought which I'm suprised hasn't been mentioned. I think it was henry who said that Slater has made a comment about comments on message boards. Interesting he is aware (and dare i suggest a good thing on the whole!)
Personally all I want to see is my team play some entertaining football, be well organised, win some games and have a visible plan of improvement. It would help if the style of play was something fans could recognise and sign up to, even if the line-up changed, say for a cup game, or with reserves and academy.
My ambitions may be different to Michael Slater, and I’m not sure how deep his pockets are but the above has the proviso that we are no longer in danger of administration. Promotion would see a better standard of football and more money in the coffers (hopefully to be spent on better players) but I’d rather Chris concentrated on building a side in his image, than going for promotion at all costs. The easy way out of this division is to send out a big physical side, but Scunthorpe and others have achieved it with a bit of organisation and panache, on a longer strategy.
Parky got the boot because we played dire football, and never made us defensively sound no matter which defensive line-up he tried in 2 years, so promotion was always going to be a lottery. His initial remit was to keep us up, then get us up. He failed. Therefore Chris should not inherit his targets.
But if the takeover delay was merely down to a tying up of loose ends, as appears to have been the case, then any assessements felt to be required could have been quietly carried out in the background, meetings with Parky etc. Slater was the PR guy, saying the things that were needed to maintain an aura of stability, wholesale panic at the time would have been counter-productive. I still can't really understand why the players were so unenthusiastic for the Swindon game. Theoretically, there was money to be made available to bolster the squad, I can understand why a couple of them might have felt nervous, but the whole squad was below par. It doesn't add up to me, unless Parky already knew that his days were numbered and the squad picked up clues from his demeanour. But that theory is shot to pieces by the manner of CP's appointment, as pointed out by AFKA, it all seemed a bit last minute. I give up!
[cite]Posted By: incorruptible addick[/cite]3. A fortnight ago promotion appeared vital, now less so.
On the surface, that is a flip-flop, so it is one that is worth analysing, I think.
Under Murray, promotion was indeed vital. The club was unable to pay it's way otherwise, and it's very existance could have been threatened.
Today, the financial situation appears to be totally covered, so the continuing existance of the club is no longer threatened.
There is no doubt in my mind that promotion this season is very much the aim ....... but hand in hand with the effort made to change the energy in and around the club, the effort is also being made to reduce the level of expectation and pressure on a brand new manager cutting his teeth.
What's wrong with that? IMO that is a very sensible and practical approach.
However, like most supporters ....... the Board will nevertheless expect a determined attempt at promotion.
But what is the point of publicly demanding promotion and fuelling supporter's expections, when the resulting pressure on results may prove counter productive?
I think the sacking of Parky was a necessary action. I also think that the Swindon game highlighted to the new owners that something was amiss.
Up until then they would have been focusing wholly on getting the deal seen through and sorted without considering the players and managers too much. Obviously they would have ideas but before the purchase went through it was pointless to dwell too much on it.
That Swindon game probably came as the wake-up call to the new owners and they opted to act swiftly.
Personally I think Parky did a very solid job with the resources he had and therewould have been plenty going on outside of the public eye that we'll never hear about. I also think it probably was time for a new direction.
For the first time in ages I am really excited about this Saturday's game and also have a feeling that we are heading in the right direction at last.
[cite]Posted By: AFKABartram[/cite]But its looking more and more to me like the Parky sacking was on the snap basis that they felt he had lost the crowd
The Swindon game wouldn't have been the first time the new directors had been to The Valley.
But it was the breaking point that something had to change.
Exactly, Oggy.
Most decsions are based on a breaking point/tipping point and so , on that basis, you can describe a huge number of key moments, in football and in other walks of life, as ''snap decisions''.
But breaking points are the result of a prolonged period of stress or pressure and so ''snap decisons'' are usually the culmination of a process that has been underway for some time. And as you regularly pointed out, our crowd had beeen displaying an ugly attitude towards the tripe being served up on the pitch for a long time prior to the ''last straw'' v Swindon.
Anyway, that's all in the past. Let's move on. I'm confident there will be no more ugliness at the Valley this season as we all get behind the new manager and his players and drown out anyone who doesn't.
The Swindon game came on top of the Colchester game, where we were crap, and on top of the Walsall game, where we were crap, and in between we didn't succeed against a 10-man Brighton...against whom earlier in the season we were crap. If Parkinson was not to go when he did the evidence suggested more crap to come, and if not then...when?
I don't think it was necessarily a total spur-of-the-moment snap decision. They may well have been in two minds, after all plenty on here were. You have the very reasonable 'no money' defence of Parky but on the other hand the crowd was as good as lost. Probably it was that that decided it for them- even if we did/do go up Parky's relationship with the fans was/is unlikely to be a fully happy one.
I think Slater comes across well and I am glad we have taken an 'educated risk' with Powell. Staying with PP had its own risks and I'm glad the new owners saw that and acted quickly. The players, I am sure, will quickly respond to CP better than PP and hopefully the feel good factor at The Valley will give the players a huge lift once again!!
The only way is up now. It's a fresh start. A line has firmly been drawn under Dowie, Pardew and parkinson and a new era begins.
I am pretty hopeful that we will all feel a lot better about our reservations come 5:00pm on Saturday.
[cite]Posted By: harveys gardener[/cite]Personally all I want to see is my team play some entertaining football, be well organised, win some games and have a visible plan of improvement. It would help if the style of play was something fans could recognise and sign up to, even if the line-up changed, say for a cup game, or with reserves and academy.
My ambitions may be different to Michael Slater, and I’m not sure how deep his pockets are but the above has the proviso that we are no longer in danger of administration. Promotion would see a better standard of football and more money in the coffers (hopefully to be spent on better players) but I’d rather Chris concentrated on building a side in his image, than going for promotion at all costs. The easy way out of this division is to send out a big physical side, but Scunthorpe and others have achieved it with a bit of organisation and panache, on a longer strategy.
Parky got the boot because we played dire football, and never made us defensively sound no matter which defensive line-up he tried in 2 years, so promotion was always going to be a lottery. His initial remit was to keep us up, then get us up. He failed. Therefore Chris should not inherit his targets.
If Chrissy's appointment was partly to bring some positivity back to the Valley, it shouldn't be a suprise that the board are seeking to play down the pressure of promotion. They may feel that expectation levels were affecting us and this approach is designed to address this and hopefully as a result improve our chances of success.
This is a) a close league and b) a poor league so with 2 or 3 of the right additions, automatic promotion shouldn't be seen as impossible. Whilst you can look at how many teams are in an around us- you can also see how close we are to the top places - We don't get beaten away much and we have played most of the better teams at their place. If we can sort out our home game then the sort of run we need to go on isn't impossible by any means. If we get off to a good start under Powell you can see it becoming a surge.
Comments
I agree. Not going up pre-takeover would have been a disaster financially. Now it will be, IMHO, a major disappointment and setback.
At the same time people were fretting last week, you included NLA, that the appointment of Powell was taking too long and that we were running out of time in the transfer market despite there being 3 weeks left. Now we are being asked to wait 18 months for promotion. Sorry, but that doesn't add up.
We do need to think long term by which I mean 5 to 10 years but at the same time we need to see progress. Progress this year will be being better off in May than we are now. That is not about comparing old manager with new. That is about the Club moving forward which has to be the aim for all of us. If we reach the play-offs and lose then so be it, that's life but we should at least be aiming for that if not more. We certainly shouldn't be writing off automatic promotion, tough as that will be, with half the games to go.
Prague Addick makes a good point about Slater, for all his impressive words, still needing to prove himself as a Chairman. So far, so good. I've been impressed but, as I'm sure he himself realises knows, it has to be backed up by deeds.
The way i see it from previous statements made over the course of the season the squad we have was built to compete for a playoff spot. We are doing that. For a new inexperienced manager to then turn that squad into a side where automatic promotion is expected is seriously unrealistic.
I also think a lot of people underestimate how long it takes a manager to assess a squad, then to build a side which can apply their particular footballing philosophy within a sensible financial approach. Glad Powell is going to be given that time.
Entirely logical. Although not everyone will agree. Obviously the aim this year is to go up. That hardly needs repeating, it's such a given. But there are already voices saying if we don't make the play-offs, then Powell's appointment will have been a ''failure''. Don't think such talk helps and it isn't true, IMO. Not getting promoted will be a dissapointment. But if we're playing good football, doing the right things on and off the pitch and building for the future,it will not mean owners, manangement or players will have ''failed''.
The decision of the owners to come out with a statement that tells the fans (and manager) that if we miss promotion this season they will not deem Powell to have ''failed'' is well-timed ,I think, and is presumbaly intended to head-off those who are waiting to shout the 'f' word should we still be sitting in seventh place next May.
I think given everyone's respect for Chris Powell, most wil take the point Slater is making. But there will be a few who don't. If we don't go up, we will simply have to make sure that the voices of those cheering the manager come the last match are louder than those jeering that he has ''failed''.
Whilst I agree that promotion, and at very least play offs, are an expected target it is worth remembering that for the remaining 3.5 months CP will be doing so with a largely inherited squad (and obviously new singings in the next fortnight hopefully) in the same way Parkinson did during his caretaker period.
Whilst we were fifth as correctly pointed out I think PP was under immense pressure to achieve promotion this year at all costs and at various points this season Im not sure it appeared realistic from some of our performances.
I think and hope that CP's arrival and the apparent lifting of the clouds of gloom from above the Valley will spark the current squad into confidence and self belief that they can achieve promotion come May and I hope this transfers into their performances on the pitch but at the same time wont be starting CP out threads if we fail at his first time of asking and I hope the board are equally as patient in that situation and give him summer and next season to build "his" own squad next year, which going by their comments seems like they will.
I understand where Ormy and co are coming from, as it still all seems very harsh on Parky. However, I also think what Slater is saying is sensible - we need to get rid of the panic and desperation of needing to win/ needing to get promotion now. The new approach could have the opposite effect, and make it more likely that we actually are in the mix at the season end.
Splashing loads of cash in the last two weeks of the transfer window is not a recipe for success - if we do bring in a new GK, new CH, new creative midfield, and new striker, they will all take time to settle and the team will take time to "gel" (as Parky would have warned us). I'd prefer a more balanced approach: one or two long-term prospect signings (IF we can find the right players at the right price) and a couple of additional loans, plus CP aiming to get more of the current players to perform consistently to the best of their ability. It may or may not bring success this season, but the rebuilding will be underway. Let's remember this will be CP's first venture into the transfer market - he will learn from it.
There is a lot of goodwill towards Powell right now - I seem to remember Pardew had a reservoir full of goodwill around Boxing Day 2006 that we could never have imagined would start to decrease rapidly not more than 12 months later as we were getting battered at The Valley by a Kevin Lisbie inspired Colchester.
At the moment people are in love with "the idea" of Chris Powell being manager, nobody has the first clue what his custodianship of the club will be like because he has never been a manager before.
I hope with all my heart and soul that he brings back the good times, nobody wants him to succeed more than I do.
However, reality bites you on the arse very quickly in professional football and if we get some bad results and start to flounder then there is no reason to expect many Charlton supporters to sit there mute simply because they used to love Chris Powell as a player.
Remember how we all (including me, I was defending Pardew to the death) thought we had pulled the coup of the century in getting the old silver fox to the club? How we laughed when we beat Curbs' West Ham 4-0.....except the ending turned out rather sour.
All I am saying is, and putting the Parkinson issue to one side, is that if Powell does not get promotion this season, or at the very least get us to the Play Offs, then a big chunk of the shine will come off and he'll start the 2011/12 season under a truck load of pressure.
We are now a club, whether we like it or not, that is just like any other in that we now have a culture of sacking the manager, if Powell is struggling in the job at Christmas 2011 - and God I hope he is not - then would we back him or sack him then?
There is a reason that the average Football League manager lasts less than a year in the job, its called expectation.
I really think we need to move on. We don't need the ghost of Parkinson walking the battlements at the Valley on Saturday, like Hamlet's father.
Of course Parkinson had to deliver us promotion if he had stayed. Aaprt from our early days as a league club in the 1920s, every Charlton manager since who has done two seasons in div three has either got us promoted - or been sacked before that second season was out. Had Parkinson stayed until May and we had not achieved promotion, it would have been a special achievement. You can argue that he should have been given the chance either to enter the history books in that unfortunate way, or get us promoted. A perfectly reasonable position to take. But the new owners took a different position and we now work with what we have got and the changed circumstances.
Parkinson built his own team and had two seasons to get it right. Powell has half a season, with an inherited team. So the owners have downscaled their expectations.
Can't wait for Saturday and a convincing win (the first since Nov 20), because I'm confident that will go a long way to putting these arguments and the ghost of the last manager to rest.
However, a few general things that that have me scratching my brains a little:
1. We had over 40 applicants for the job yet gave it someone (with no managerial experience) who didn't even apply.
2.Powell was contacted the night before his interview, and offered the job within 30 minutes of his interview, which suggests to me it was slightly pre-meditated and his character / personality back that up, rather than evaluating all the elements. Powell had no No 2 identified at that stage, or it seems player targets, which said to me there is no defined plan for the transfer window.
3. A fortnight ago promotion appeared vital, now less so.
4. The inconsistency from their initial approach to how things then unfolded.
Read the opening couple of interviews again, everything in them talked about stability, minimal disruption, slow sustainable growth: In particular, "Its certainly not our intention to make any change. Phil's done a great job. We're third in the league and that speaks for itself, so we're going to sit down with Phil over the next few days and we'll give him every support. Our intention is to see the club promoted to the Championship as soon as possible, and making wholesale changes is not the right way to achieve those objectives."
Three days later wholesale changes were made, and a guy who did a 'great job' on a Friday was sacked on a Monday.
I'm not gonna drag the Parky debate up again because ultimately its not going to achieve anything. But its looking more and more to me like the Parky sacking was on the snap basis that they felt he had lost the crowd (he quite clearly hasn't lost the dressing room judging by snippets of info since), and equally the Powell appointment is increasingly looking to be built upon being a pre-meditated crowd-pleasing appointment.
I'm happy we've got Powell, its been a sad club for a number of years and we need to get it smiling again, and i think we have a chance with him. I'm just struggling to get my head around their approach and what their angle is, because although i broadly agree with their couple of big decisions made so far, they are striking me as reactive spur of the moment decisions rather than considered decisions as part of a long-term plan.
Then again, perhaps we are analysing things too much.
Better business sense to keep the (dwindling) crowds/ customers happy than the right back.
The feel good factor will no doubt bring more money through the gates on a matchday if only for the novelty and if we manage to do well and the atmosphere is good they may come more regularly.
Will be interesting to see the attendance on Saturday and if its a good atmosphere and buzz around the ground, and gawd help us, we even get a win then im sure the following game will see many of those whove stayed away for a while return to the next few home games.
A gamble by the board but shrewd from a business pov if it pays off.
To be fair, I don't think we went that much off topic. We simply got a little fixated on the reasons behind your point three:
3. A fortnight ago promotion appeared vital, now less so.
On the surface, that is a flip-flop, so it is one that is worth analysing, I think.
To takeover on the eve of the tranfer window was always going to be a dilemma.Remember, they'd hoped to get it done before christmas,thus giving them a chance to assess Parkinson for themselves.But that never happened.
They were never going to say that they were 'not really sure about Phil' straight after taking over the reigns.Remember also that they hadn't actually met him.He wasn't the most charismatic bloke.And perhaps after meeting him they didn't feel he fitted in with what they are trying to achieve.Bums on seats may be a big part of that.
Parkinson got Murray out of a very big hole during his time here.He took the flak in a very very testing time with very little resources.He was the fall guy and deserved better.
Unfortunately nowadays the football world doesn't reach out to those who deserve better.
lets not kid ourselves. By and large, it never did.
I was listening to a brief radio thing on BBC WS about 50 years of freedom of contract for players. Before it came in, players wages were fixed at alevel "roughly the same as the majority of fans". The attendances were massive (e.g 75,000 at the Valley). Where did all the money go then? Not to the players nor the facilities for players and fans alike.
Football has always been a nasty crap business, run largely by nasty crap people.
I suggest there could be a number of explanations and here is my take
1. The 40 applicants issue - RM/PV and the previous Board will have had a list of candidates they would like to speak to in the event of a vacancy, I suspect Howe was on it, and also CP. S & J may have their own list. You don't actually start the process until the Board has removed the current manager (unless he works for West Ham :-) ). The process is going to involve honing down the list to get to available candidates, and ones you need permission. You then focus your attention on contacting those on the list. In the meantime every out of work manager's agent is on to you to talking up their clients.
2. Was CP their first choice &/or just a crowd pleaser? - clearly not first choice as their preferred candidate was Howe and they had to move very quickly to try an get him in, given that he appeared to be on his way to Palarse. Once he turned us down, then they interviewed those remaining on their shortlist. It doesn't worry me that CP didn't apply. It seems perfectly reasonable for them to have decided that he was the standout candidate of those they interviewed. Yes one of the considerations might have been his affect upon the fan base. I think that is just an additional positive issue in his favour.
3. The change of stance on Parky and change from promotion "vital" issues. Well the club had a new Board but as an entity its the same company. I doubt if the new Board had met fully to discuss the managers position when Slater made his first comments. Slater as the Boards mouthpiece would, for legal reasons, not be at liberty to demur from the previous Boards decisions to keep Parky and make promotion this season "vital". The new Board met after the Swindon game, they decided to sack Parky and appoint a new manager. At that point they have defacto moved the goalposts and appointing "the right person" under the changed circumstances, with the new financial strength means they are able to redefine the promotion target from "vital" (for financial reasons) to "desireable" or words to that effect.
4. Was the sacking of Parky Premeditated? I don't think it was. I think they only decided collectively to do it after the Swindon game. On the other hand all of the new Board members might individually have ha their doubts about Parky. I heard from a pretty well-informed source last season that he was going to be sacked and then he wasn't. After the abject display against Swindon and when the new Board came together, that was the first official opportunity they had to decide.
I am not certain this is right but I suspect it is.
The Swindon game wouldn't have been the first time the new directors had been to The Valley.
But it was the breaking point that something had to change.
The destructive atmosphere and hostility directed towards Parkinson and the team would have made a huge impression.
As AFKA says above, they would have felt they had lost the crowd.
And in all honesty, how could they carry out their plans in that environment?
One further thought which I'm suprised hasn't been mentioned. I think it was henry who said that Slater has made a comment about comments on message boards. Interesting he is aware (and dare i suggest a good thing on the whole!)
Looking forward to saturday COYR
My ambitions may be different to Michael Slater, and I’m not sure how deep his pockets are but the above has the proviso that we are no longer in danger of administration. Promotion would see a better standard of football and more money in the coffers (hopefully to be spent on better players) but I’d rather Chris concentrated on building a side in his image, than going for promotion at all costs. The easy way out of this division is to send out a big physical side, but Scunthorpe and others have achieved it with a bit of organisation and panache, on a longer strategy.
Parky got the boot because we played dire football, and never made us defensively sound no matter which defensive line-up he tried in 2 years, so promotion was always going to be a lottery. His initial remit was to keep us up, then get us up. He failed. Therefore Chris should not inherit his targets.
Under Murray, promotion was indeed vital. The club was unable to pay it's way otherwise, and it's very existance could have been threatened.
Today, the financial situation appears to be totally covered, so the continuing existance of the club is no longer threatened.
There is no doubt in my mind that promotion this season is very much the aim ....... but hand in hand with the effort made to change the energy in and around the club, the effort is also being made to reduce the level of expectation and pressure on a brand new manager cutting his teeth.
What's wrong with that? IMO that is a very sensible and practical approach.
However, like most supporters ....... the Board will nevertheless expect a determined attempt at promotion.
But what is the point of publicly demanding promotion and fuelling supporter's expections, when the resulting pressure on results may prove counter productive?
Up until then they would have been focusing wholly on getting the deal seen through and sorted without considering the players and managers too much. Obviously they would have ideas but before the purchase went through it was pointless to dwell too much on it.
That Swindon game probably came as the wake-up call to the new owners and they opted to act swiftly.
Personally I think Parky did a very solid job with the resources he had and therewould have been plenty going on outside of the public eye that we'll never hear about. I also think it probably was time for a new direction.
For the first time in ages I am really excited about this Saturday's game and also have a feeling that we are heading in the right direction at last.
Exactly, Oggy.
Most decsions are based on a breaking point/tipping point and so , on that basis, you can describe a huge number of key moments, in football and in other walks of life, as ''snap decisions''.
But breaking points are the result of a prolonged period of stress or pressure and so ''snap decisons'' are usually the culmination of a process that has been underway for some time. And as you regularly pointed out, our crowd had beeen displaying an ugly attitude towards the tripe being served up on the pitch for a long time prior to the ''last straw'' v Swindon.
Anyway, that's all in the past. Let's move on. I'm confident there will be no more ugliness at the Valley this season as we all get behind the new manager and his players and drown out anyone who doesn't.
The only way is up now. It's a fresh start. A line has firmly been drawn under Dowie, Pardew and parkinson and a new era begins.
I am pretty hopeful that we will all feel a lot better about our reservations come 5:00pm on Saturday.
agree entirely.
This is a) a close league and b) a poor league so with 2 or 3 of the right additions, automatic promotion shouldn't be seen as impossible. Whilst you can look at how many teams are in an around us- you can also see how close we are to the top places - We don't get beaten away much and we have played most of the better teams at their place. If we can sort out our home game then the sort of run we need to go on isn't impossible by any means. If we get off to a good start under Powell you can see it becoming a surge.