I suspect it would have been really easy to say sod it when you had all the production difficulties but I'm really glad you didn't and greatly appreciate you pursuing this matter through to completion". Rick replied simply "I guess that’s the difference between me being a fan and “just” being an employee!"
And I think quite a few of the staff have shown that attitude in the past, and perhaps why so many of us think that this is just not another football club. Like all business's the financial aspect is crucial, but not the only criteria... as your example shows. If the directors of the club are just concerned with the bottom line, then they do not understand the business they have bought into. We need a long term financial investment, which has proper regard to it's fan's who are the lifeblood of the business. Yes, there may well be financially difficult decisions to make, but if they are taken for the long term benefit of the club, and future financial well being of the whole club, then you will receive support and backing by most fans ( although of course people like me will always have a worry/concern/doubt, which of course is the Charlton way)
Particularly disappointed because I met one of the new owners right at the start of their tenure and he convinced me that they were the right people and had realisable ambitions to take the club forward.
As a result I stuck my neck out and defended them on here several times when their motives were being questioned.
Most of us don't know the full story and certainly haven't heard man agement's reasons for this unfortunate decision. But to throw away such valuable 'human capital' , as PA calls it, appears from here to be reckless.
Was there no room for a compromise - perhaps involving a clause in employees' contracts forbidding them from unauthorsied public comment on club affairs ? (If that is part of the charge against him.)
Perhaps RE would find such a 'gag' unaccceptable. But surely worth a try before matters reached destruction?
May be there were warnings and they went unheeded. Employment law (at least until this benighted government changes it) stipulates that there are procedures that have to be followed in such cases. Most of us aren't in a position to know any of the details and I don't really want to speculate because it isn't going to help the employee concerned. But one thing is damned certain: CAFC is clearly the loser as a result of whatever has happened.
Another pointless anecdote but nonetheless. I have had two decent conversations with the man. The first was almost a shock to me. It was in a pub in Southampton before a game way way back in the VOTV yeas. For some reason we got chatting and at that time I thought I was a Charlton fan with CAFC running through me like a stick of rock. Ten minutes with this guy made me realise that he took being "Charlton" to an entirely different level. An opinion he has justified ever since. Second time was after the birh of my daughter who we gave the middle name of Valley. Not sure how RE got wind of it but he arranged for a picture and short piece to appear in the Mercury and later to my huge satisfaction the picture appeared in his book. The man is a true Charlton hero in my book.
And he'll be following everybody else out the exit door as soon as Kevin Cash finds somebody to take his investment off his hands. Realistically, Slater's tenure can only be short-term.
Rick and the many others have, through their tireless work, given us the one stick we could hold to the scum and palace when we were the poniest football team in South London and that is good home support numbers wise our attendances at home have been impressive since the target 10,000 initiative and all the other promotions to keep the numbers looking decent when the football was totally wank you can't replace someone like that who has genuine love for the club
There are plenty of football clubs with that would give their right arm for a person with Rick's passion and drive. If he chooses not to pursue a career in politics I am sure he will be offered a job at another club. Whether he would accept or not I have no idea.
There are plenty of football clubs with that would give their right arm for a person with Rick's passion and drive. If he chooses not to pursue a career in politics I am sure he will be offered a job at another club. Whether he would accept or not I have no idea.
Just as long as he doesn't go to Palace!! Seems unlikely, I know, but then Lennie did the dirty on us!
The question here is not if Rick played a key role with the Valley Party as that is not a reason to employ him.
Nor is it if he is a Charlton fan as that is not a reason to employ him. In any case Matt Wright, Mick Everett, Dave Archer, Chris Parkes and others are also fans and continue to work at the senior level for the Club.
The question is why are the owners apprantly keen to dismantle a strong management team and lose valuable human resources while at the same time not replacing them with anything like the same skill set.
Prothero for all his impressive CV works one day a week, he has never run a football club before but he replaces Peter Varney. Steve Kavanagh hasn't been replaced at all in this "planned" boardroon reshuffle.
Now one more person has been ousted and again we can expect nothing from the Club in terms of explanation or even thanks for a job well done.
If true then this is bad news - I firmly believe that we would not be back at the Valley were it not for RE and VoTV as that set the whole ball rolling. People mention the part that Alwen etc played and that was important, but they were hard headed businessmen who recognised that returning to the Valley would be rewarded financially. As a fan in that era watching the club almost die with the eviction I was quite sure that our fate was a slow lingering death instead.
You started going when we were at Selhurst, you say? That would explain why, in my opinion, you don't have a good grasp of the unique nature of a football club as a business.
I don't think you mean this, but I hope you're not implying that fans that were too young to go to The Valley pre-Selhurst can't have a "good grasp" of the situation...
No that is not what I meant at all, although I can see why it was taken that way and regret that.
What I mean is that a football club is a part of and a symbol of a community. It gives people a sense of where they come from. That is extremely important in a big place like London. And that is why the move to Selhurst was doomed to failure. To those of us going to Charlton at the time, Croydon was an alien place that wasn't part of our daily life.
If Bangkok Dave was recruited in the Selhurst years I take it - and if I am wrong he will doubtless put me right - that he didnt have the same strong ties to the Charlton manor/tribe which at the time would have been Greenwich, Bexley and out towards Kent, and/or whose family (father/grandfather) were themselves Charlton. In which case that would explain why he sees no big problem in losing those at Charlton who have always deeply understood what our roots actually are, and how they can be developed to optimise attendances.
PA a great deal of what you say on this site is interesting and I have enjoyed many of your contributions over recent times. However in recent times you seem to be quite condescending towards other posters opinions of Charlton if they differ to yours. My grandad and dad were south london through and through both born a stones throw from the ground, and both have their bricks placed outside the main entrance. Just so happens that my introduction to Charlton came through Selhurst Park. I was too young to be involved in the valley return campaign. Your belittling of my Charlton experience is not uncommon on Charlton Life. But my view and my passion is just as valid as yours - it is part of my families history as well. Losing someone who had given their all for out club is sad on a personal level, but I believe that the club is bigger. I believe that thanks to those who helped us return to the valley that we have a club ready for the modern era of football. It is a business, for right or wrong, and the longer we think otherwise the more detremental it'll be for our team. Football is a sport, sport is competitive, and if we need to lose some of the old preconceptions about what is football is to be competitive then I'd rather that than years of losing and languishing in the lower leagues. I doubt if any of the most successful teams in the country have the same ownership or managerial structure as they did in 1992. The game has moved on, the financial burdens are different. If, and it is an if, the upheavels of the summer secure our future, our competitiveness then I am all for it.
If Henry is right and Mr Protheroe is working one day a week, it means he has worked, what, four days so far...which begs the question who is in day to day charge? Also would such a paltry number of working days be reasonable enough to investigate matters, go through due process, and sack Airman for what has been reported as gross misconduct? When Mr Protheroe was approached to work at Charlton (I assume he was just given the job...whatever it is...without adverts and interviews and the like) I wonder if it was on the premis that he would be in charge of any slashing and burning?
You started going when we were at Selhurst, you say? That would explain why, in my opinion, you don't have a good grasp of the unique nature of a football club as a business.
I don't think you mean this, but I hope you're not implying that fans that were too young to go to The Valley pre-Selhurst can't have a "good grasp" of the situation...
No that is not what I meant at all, although I can see why it was taken that way and regret that.
What I mean is that a football club is a part of and a symbol of a community. It gives people a sense of where they come from. That is extremely important in a big place like London. And that is why the move to Selhurst was doomed to failure. To those of us going to Charlton at the time, Croydon was an alien place that wasn't part of our daily life.
If Bangkok Dave was recruited in the Selhurst years I take it - and if I am wrong he will doubtless put me right - that he didnt have the same strong ties to the Charlton manor/tribe which at the time would have been Greenwich, Bexley and out towards Kent, and/or whose family (father/grandfather) were themselves Charlton. In which case that would explain why he sees no big problem in losing those at Charlton who have always deeply understood what our roots actually are, and how they can be developed to optimise attendances.
PA a great deal of what you say on this site is interesting and I have enjoyed many of your contributions over recent times. However in recent times you seem to be quite condescending towards other posters opinions of Charlton if they differ to yours. My grandad and dad were south london through and through both born a stones throw from the ground, and both have their bricks placed outside the main entrance. Just so happens that my introduction to Charlton came through Selhurst Park. I was too young to be involved in the valley return campaign. Your belittling of my Charlton experience is not uncommon on Charlton Life. But my view and my passion is just as valid as yours - it is part of my families history as well. Losing someone who had given their all for out club is sad on a personal level, but I believe that the club is bigger. I believe that thanks to those who helped us return to the valley that we have a club ready for the modern era of football. It is a business, for right or wrong, and the longer we think otherwise the more detremental it'll be for our team. Football is a sport, sport is competitive, and if we need to lose some of the old preconceptions about what is football is to be competitive then I'd rather that than years of losing and languishing in the lower leagues. I doubt if any of the most successful teams in the country have the same ownership or managerial structure as they did in 1992. The game has moved on, the financial burdens are different. If, and it is an if, the upheavels of the summer secure our future, our competitiveness then I am all for it.
Dave I respect yr family history but I do not respect yr view of a modern football club. Today CAFC is secretly owned and the club management, not the team, is gradually retreating behind a wall of secrecy where the only thing they seem to want of us is our money. If that is the only way to have a successful club, I'd rather remain in the Championship or Div 1 with the old caring CAFC
Also would such a paltry number of working days be reasonable enough to investigate matters, go through due process, and sack Airman for what has been reported as gross misconduct?
I don't know the details of this case, but if the powers that be wanted RE out (for whatever reason) then they would have found one. Going on a forum such as this and maybe contributing something slightly critical of the club/his employer would be enough. Mike Flanagan got the tin-tack if you recall for criticising the decision to sign Stuart Balmer on a radio show heard by virtually no one and there are cases where people have been sacked for writing stuff on Facebook and other social media.
He eluded to the fact that the club would do well to see the season out amongst other things. I personally thought at the time that it was a stupid thing for a club employee of Ricks stature to say on an Internet forum. If he has been sacked for that statement, then I doubt he's got much of a leg to stand on. Real shame as Rick is a great Charlton man and was the conduit between club and fans which we've now lost. The only loser here is CAFC.
Doubt the wording of any disciplinary action would cite ''critical'' or ''slightly critical'' comments. The terminology invariably used in these cases is ''inappropriate''.
Which means whatever you want it to mean. And which, of course, is why it has become the phrase de nos jours.
To say that you would be happy to get to the end of the season with the same players and management, and be in the same division, is in no way critical of the club or it's owners...how can it be? And if there is 'other stuff' lets see it.
If Henry is right and Mr Protheroe is working one day a week, it means he has worked, what, four days so far...which begs the question who is in day to day charge? Also would such a paltry number of working days be reasonable enough to investigate matters, go through due process, and sack Airman for what has been reported as gross misconduct? When Mr Protheroe was approached to work at Charlton (I assume he was just given the job...whatever it is...without adverts and interviews and the like) I wonder if it was on the premis that he would be in charge of any slashing and burning?
Alternatively, maybe Mr. Prothero had no idea of what's going on any more than us poor s*ds and has been brought in merely to do the owners bidding ie he's the new fall guy. I know that MS found favour with a few of you but he lied about something to my face and he does not like being challenged. He's a PR man and maybe that is something we would do well to remember?
The question I pursued, and the conversation was witnessed, was initially about who owned the club. I felt there was a distinction to be made between paper ownership and off piste financial backers. MS said it was his and TJ's money and that was untrue.
The question I pursued, and the conversation was witnessed, was initially about who owned the club. I felt there was a distinction to be made between paper ownership and off piste financial backers. MS said it was his and TJ's money and that was untrue.
How do you know for certain that this is untrue?
Everbody and his dog has speculated where the money has come from but nobody has ever come up with any actual proof that Slater and Jiminez have not invested there own money.
I will have to fall back on the 'I can't reveal my sources' gambit which is, admittedly, highly unsatisfactory. . That's fine, you don't have to believe me, but you do need to ask, why would I lie? I am merely saying that I don't trust MS. If you do trust him, that's OK by me.
I will have to fall back on the 'I can't reveal my sources' gambit which is, admittedly, highly unsatisfactory. . That's fine, you don't have to believe me, but you do need to ask, why would I lie? I am merely saying that I don't trust MS. If you do trust him, that's OK by me.
Was it definately untrue at the time ? Did you ask if it was all their money or if they had just provided some of the funding ?
Comments
And I think quite a few of the staff have shown that attitude in the past, and perhaps why so many of us think that this is just not another football club. Like all business's the financial aspect is crucial, but not the only criteria... as your example shows.
If the directors of the club are just concerned with the bottom line, then they do not understand the business they have bought into. We need a long term financial investment, which has proper regard to it's fan's who are the lifeblood of the business. Yes, there may well be financially difficult decisions to make, but if they are taken for the long term benefit of the club, and future financial well being of the whole club, then you will receive support and backing by most fans
( although of course people like me will always have a worry/concern/doubt, which of course is the Charlton way)
As a result I stuck my neck out and defended them on here several times when their motives were being questioned.
Most of us don't know the full story and certainly haven't heard man agement's reasons for this unfortunate decision. But to throw away such valuable 'human capital' , as PA calls it, appears from here to be reckless.
Was there no room for a compromise - perhaps involving a clause in employees' contracts forbidding them from unauthorsied public comment on club affairs ? (If that is part of the charge against him.)
Perhaps RE would find such a 'gag' unaccceptable. But surely worth a try before matters reached destruction?
May be there were warnings and they went unheeded. Employment law (at least until this benighted government changes it) stipulates that there are procedures that have to be followed in such cases. Most of us aren't in a position to know any of the details and I don't really want to speculate because it isn't going to help the employee concerned. But one thing is damned certain: CAFC is clearly the loser as a result of whatever has happened.
Unfortunately, my impression is that he is just a puppet with the nous and words to be the most obvious and likeable 'public' face of the Board.
our attendances at home have been impressive since the target 10,000 initiative and all the other promotions to keep the numbers looking decent when the football was totally wank
you can't replace someone like that who has genuine love for the club
Nor is it if he is a Charlton fan as that is not a reason to employ him. In any case Matt Wright, Mick Everett, Dave Archer, Chris Parkes and others are also fans and continue to work at the senior level for the Club.
The question is why are the owners apprantly keen to dismantle a strong management team and lose valuable human resources while at the same time not replacing them with anything like the same skill set.
Prothero for all his impressive CV works one day a week, he has never run a football club before but he replaces Peter Varney. Steve Kavanagh hasn't been replaced at all in this "planned" boardroon reshuffle.
Now one more person has been ousted and again we can expect nothing from the Club in terms of explanation or even thanks for a job well done.
Also would such a paltry number of working days be reasonable enough to investigate matters, go through due process, and sack Airman for what has been reported as gross misconduct?
When Mr Protheroe was approached to work at Charlton (I assume he was just given the job...whatever it is...without adverts and interviews and the like) I wonder if it was on the premis that he would be in charge of any slashing and burning?
I don't know the details of this case, but if the powers that be wanted RE out (for whatever reason) then they would have found one. Going on a forum such as this and maybe contributing something slightly critical of the club/his employer would be enough. Mike Flanagan got the tin-tack if you recall for criticising the decision to sign Stuart Balmer on a radio show heard by virtually no one and there are cases where people have been sacked for writing stuff on Facebook and other social media.
Which means whatever you want it to mean. And which, of course, is why it has become the phrase de nos jours.
And if there is 'other stuff' lets see it.
;-)
Everbody and his dog has speculated where the money has come from but nobody has ever come up with any actual proof that Slater and Jiminez have not invested there own money.
If they have I haven't seen it.