Curnishley said: ‘Definitely the Parker deal, because we were fourth in the Premier League, we beat Chelsea 4-1 at The Valley and the next week Chelsea made a bid for him and it was impossible to keep him.
"Curbishley, who has been out of management since leaving West Ham in 2008, was in charge of the Addicks in two spells between 1984-87 and 1990-93"
it's too early to deal with such poor research....
and in the next paragraph it states:
And, asked what the hardest sale of his managerial career had been at an event run by Budweiser, he told players of non-league Dorking, it was the transfer of midfielder Parker, a firm favourite at The Valley, in 2004.
"Curbishley, who has been out of management since leaving West Ham in 2008, was in charge of the Addicks in two spells between 1984-87 and 1990-93"
it's too early to deal with such poor research....
The muppet has gone into Wikipedia to do his research and just looked at his playing career stats (under "senior career") rather than his managerial stats, shocking.
I still don't buy the "we didn't have time to get in a replacement" The saga went on for a long long time during January. He could've got a replacement in that time lined up but never. Matt Holland was a good player but not in the parker bracket.
Curnishley said: ‘Definitely the Parker deal, because we were fourth in the Premier League, we beat Chelsea 4-1 at The Valley and the next week Chelsea made a bid for him and it was impossible to keep him.
When I interviewed Martin Simons which you can read in the last trust news he talks about the Parker deal, or what was his refusal to play. Parker had no agreement to talk to another club, above us, which is what I had heard from 'rumour' In fact he walked out of the training ground 'refusing to play', according to Martin.
Curnishley said: ‘Definitely the Parker deal, because we were fourth in the Premier League, we beat Chelsea 4-1 at The Valley and the next week Chelsea made a bid for him and it was impossible to keep him.
When I interviewed Martin Simons which you can read in the last trust news he talks about the Parker deal, or what was his refusal to play. Parker had no agreement to talk to another club, above us, which is what I had heard from 'rumour' In fact he walked out of the training ground 'refusing to play', according to Martin.
And Parker claims he had a verbal agreement with Murray, who knows. Its water under the bridge, we failed to use the money well, even the following summer and eventually sunk, Parker became a richer man, but probably did not fulfill his career potential. From a footballing perspective it did not work out for either party.
Charlton have almost always sold their best players , selling Parker was the start of terminal decline , if you're going to shift players on for good money , you should at least make sure you have decent players to replace them with , hindsight is a wonderful thing though.
Curnishley said: ‘Definitely the Parker deal, because we were fourth in the Premier League, we beat Chelsea 4-1 at The Valley and the next week Chelsea made a bid for him and it was impossible to keep him.
When I interviewed Martin Simons which you can read in the last trust news he talks about the Parker deal, or what was his refusal to play. Parker had no agreement to talk to another club, above us, which is what I had heard from 'rumour' In fact he walked out of the training ground 'refusing to play', according to Martin.
And Parker claims he had a verbal agreement with Murray, who knows. Its water under the bridge, we failed to use the money well, even the following summer and eventually sunk
Was that when Murray thought Cahill would never leave London and fucked up the negotiations or when Arsenal nicked Flamini from us?
Some of the comments above are unfair. I'm absolutely sure that every single person from RM down was determined that he would not be sold. Furthermore I know for a fact there was dirty work going on, not least by the Sun newspaper. I complained to the PCC about it.
There is only one person to blame for this event, which was in retrospect the end of an ascent which started in 1991. That person is Roman Abramovic. I hate him with a passion and wish him to be returned ASAP to Mother Russia, preferably to a gulag.
Charlton have almost always sold their best players , selling Parker was the start of terminal decline , if you're going to shift players on for good money , you should at least make sure you have decent players to replace them with , hindsight is a wonderful thing though.
2004, 2006 and 2008 january transfer deadline days we sold our best player in each.
There is only one person to blame for this event, which was in retrospect the end of an ascent which started in 1991. That person is Roman Abramovic. I hate him with a passion and wish him to be returned ASAP to Mother Russia, preferably to a gulag.
Charlton have almost always sold their best players , selling Parker was the start of terminal decline , if you're going to shift players on for good money , you should at least make sure you have decent players to replace them with , hindsight is a wonderful thing though.
2004, 2006 and 2008 january transfer deadline days we sold our best player in each.
Charlton have almost always sold their best players , selling Parker was the start of terminal decline , if you're going to shift players on for good money , you should at least make sure you have decent players to replace them with , hindsight is a wonderful thing though.
2004, 2006 and 2008 january transfer deadline days we sold our best player in each.
Charlton have almost always sold their best players , selling Parker was the start of terminal decline , if you're going to shift players on for good money , you should at least make sure you have decent players to replace them with , hindsight is a wonderful thing though.
2004, 2006 and 2008 january transfer deadline days we sold our best player in each.
Charlton have almost always sold their best players , selling Parker was the start of terminal decline , if you're going to shift players on for good money , you should at least make sure you have decent players to replace them with , hindsight is a wonderful thing though.
2004, 2006 and 2008 january transfer deadline days we sold our best player in each.
Cabaye refused to play for Newcastle. Newcastle said Nah mate you ain't going no where. A couple of weeks later he comes out and apologises.
Think that had more to do with Arsenal not following up their interest after the initial piss poor 10m bid. If they'd gone back for him at say 15-16m, then he'd have probably gone.
Some of the comments above are unfair. I'm absolutely sure that every single person from RM down was determined that he would not be sold. Furthermore I know for a fact there was dirty work going on, not least by the Sun newspaper. I complained to the PCC about it.
There is only one person to blame for this event, which was in retrospect the end of an ascent which started in 1991. That person is Roman Abramovic. I hate him with a passion and wish him to be returned ASAP to Mother Russia, preferably to a gulag.
Certainly Charlton had no intention of selling him, according to Simon's. In fact he was speaking to a journalist in the bar that he had rejected there offer, in shall we say in a robust way. Curbs walks in overhears the conversation and informs him " you might want to reconsider that, he has just walked off the training pitch, and claims he does not want to play. It was a pivotal moment, in the decline for CAFC, Simon's acknowledges that, and I do not think it was in hindsight. They had a very high regard for the player, but what can you do when he adopts a position like that! I think the club manage to get an improved deal, and he was gone. Yes it is water under the bridge, but still a key moment in CAFC history.
I like to think that I'm a fairly reasonable person but there is nothing anyone can either do or say to persuade me that Scott Parker isn't a complete c**t
Clubs in general, not just us, have made a rod for their own backs by giving into these player demands. If clubs told want-away players to rot in the reserves and stuck to their guns then these sorts of incidents would have died out almost immediately. But few if any clubs had the balls to do that and were more frightened of losing money on the player in the future.
From the club's perspective I guess they thought we have a £10M now or never offer for a player who has now refused to play for us. The galling thing is Chelsea didn't play him much when they got him. £10M obviously nothing to them.
We were fourth. We were breaking the mould. Curbs said we could have made top 5, but I think he's being modest. Fourth was not out of the equation. It felt, at the time, like the big clubs didn't like that, and removing the heart of our time slapped us back down.
Roman doesn't care enough about football for that to have been remotely a motivation, but the way we smashed them, then lost our best player to them only for him to sit on the sidelines, really made it feel that way.
We were fourth. We were breaking the mould. Curbs said we could have made top 5, but I think he's being modest. Fourth was not out of the equation. It felt, at the time, like the big clubs didn't like that, and removing the heart of our time slapped us back down.
Roman doesn't care enough about football for that to have been remotely a motivation, but the way we smashed them, then lost our best player to them only for him to sit on the sidelines, really made it feel that way.
Oh I think that was the motivation. Classic Russian gangster tactic, some pesky upstart invades your patch, so a bomb goes off under a car. Equivalent of that, I would say, and the fact he hardly played fro them is testimony to that.
Was it Simons or Varney who said at the time that we'd be a stronger club in the long term for the sale of Parker. I remember thinking at the time that it was complete BS, and sadly that's exactly how it turned out. That was the finest Charlton team I've ever seen and am ever likely to see again.
Was it Simons or Varney who said at the time that we'd be a stronger club in the long term for the sale of Parker. I remember thinking at the time that it was complete BS, and sadly that's exactly how it turned out. That was the finest Charlton team I've ever seen and am ever likely to see again.
I don't remember that and doubt they believed that. Brave face on things is the only explanation.
Agree with your final sentence. Parker-Jensen- di Canio....that was half a season of midfield magic
We were fourth. We were breaking the mould. Curbs said we could have made top 5, but I think he's being modest. Fourth was not out of the equation. It felt, at the time, like the big clubs didn't like that, and removing the heart of our time slapped us back down.
Roman doesn't care enough about football for that to have been remotely a motivation, but the way we smashed them, then lost our best player to them only for him to sit on the sidelines, really made it feel that way.
Oh I think that was the motivation. Classic Russian gangster tactic, some pesky upstart invades your patch, so a bomb goes off under a car. Equivalent of that, I would say, and the fact he hardly played fro them is testimony to that.
As well as we know how great we were playing at the time and upsetting the odds, I still find it hard to believe that Chelsea were frightened by our progress, even if we had just smashed them.
They went after Scott Parker because he was a quality, quality player.
Comments
it's too early to deal with such poor research....
And, asked what the hardest sale of his managerial career had been at an event run by Budweiser, he told players of non-league Dorking, it was the transfer of midfielder Parker, a firm favourite at The Valley, in 2004.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Curbishley
Parker had no agreement to talk to another club, above us, which is what I had heard from 'rumour'
In fact he walked out of the training ground 'refusing to play', according to Martin.
There is only one person to blame for this event, which was in retrospect the end of an ascent which started in 1991. That person is Roman Abramovic. I hate him with a passion and wish him to be returned ASAP to Mother Russia, preferably to a gulag.
2006 ?
2008 Andy Reid
Who am I missing?
Think that had more to do with Arsenal not following up their interest after the initial piss poor 10m bid. If they'd gone back for him at say 15-16m, then he'd have probably gone.
In fact he was speaking to a journalist in the bar that he had rejected there offer, in shall we say in a robust way.
Curbs walks in overhears the conversation and informs him " you might want to reconsider that, he has just walked off the training pitch, and claims he does not want to play.
It was a pivotal moment, in the decline for CAFC, Simon's acknowledges that, and I do not think it was in hindsight.
They had a very high regard for the player, but what can you do when he adopts a position like that!
I think the club manage to get an improved deal, and he was gone.
Yes it is water under the bridge, but still a key moment in CAFC history.
Roman doesn't care enough about football for that to have been remotely a motivation, but the way we smashed them, then lost our best player to them only for him to sit on the sidelines, really made it feel that way.
Agree with your final sentence. Parker-Jensen- di Canio....that was half a season of midfield magic
They went after Scott Parker because he was a quality, quality player.