There's punching and there's left handed girls floppy limp wristed waving at the ball punching and at Wigan he did a couple of them that were awful and got away with them but that sort of crap leads to panic in defenders
The Lyon keeper last night was brilliant, saved them from meltdown. He caught everything, although to be fair sticking it in the mixer isn't the Plzen style. But he turns out to be Portuguese. What does this say about French keepers generally? probably nothing, I suppose...
The Lyon keeper last night was brilliant, saved them from meltdown. He caught everything, although to be fair sticking it in the mixer isn't the Plzen style. But he turns out to be Portuguese. What does this say about French keepers generally? probably nothing, I suppose...
That to dominate your box and put your defenders at ease you HAVE to be able to catch the ball and take them out of pressure, if you punch it the defenders still have a job on their hands, they are not superhuman.
For example I give you the Bournemouth corner vs us in the 93rd minute, we are 1-0 up.. Hamer catches it, holds onto it for circa 8 seconds total then boots it as far as possible, almost 20 seconds taken out of the game.. Had Thuram been there and punched it, which watching his youtube vid and what I've seen of him in the 3 games so far, he probably will have, the ball is still inplay, there's a crowd of 20 around the box, the back four will be all over the shop marking individuals, there will be midfielders breaking the offside trap, there is a huge chance of a problem occuring, safety is required and generally if a keeper goes to catch it, they know if they can or not, Hamer is very good at this. It puts our defence at ease, without Hamer there is no chance we'd have as many clean sheets in a row as we do.
Those challenges for the network mentioned by Mundell Fleming surely come back to who makes the decisions re potential player movements and how? Remember, the whole network thing is nearly as new for RD as it is for us - he only had two clubs (three if you count Sint Truiden) until Nov 2013, and since then has added Carl Zeiss Jena, us and Alcorcon in quick succession.
So in RD's shoes, how do you get the network model to be beneficial all round? All very well to say the clubs are individual, but clearly the economies of scale of the network only come to fruition if there is a career path/ experience path for players where appropriate, and that this is financially beneficial overall.
What kind of infrastructure might this need? Something along these lines, I'd imagine:
- a really strong, pan-European scouting network (could be based on collaboration between the scouts at each club, each responsible for their own country plus one or two others?) - trusted feedback and reports from the managers/ head coaches of each network team on strengths and weaknesses of their squad players, particularly any which may be available for loan/ transfer within the network - similar feedback on positions where they need new bodies and want to know what is available across the network - then the tricky bit - this needs someone overseeing it all to make sure it is fair/ for the common good of the network and not just about "who shouts loudest". Back to that "Network Director of Football" role - or do we simply leave all the juggling to RD, who seemingly is more into money and stats than football? The January experiment between SL and CAFC might make him think that there is a bit more to it than he imagined... - then, critically, what about the money and balancing the books of each club? How will the trading work in practice between Katrien and her peers at the other clubs?
In theory, I can see some advantages (most obvious being minimising agent fees) - but in practice, it is one hell of an experiment...
I agree entirely that in practice it's going to be very difficult to derive benefits from the network.
On an earlier thread (not sure which) I copied the abstract from an article entitled "Desperately seeking synergy" which appeared in the September/October 1998 edition of the Harvard Business Review.
The thrust of the article is very apposite to the Duchatelet experiment. It argues that many CEOs overestimate the value of synergies (Roland could well be doing this) and make the mistake of assuming that simply encouraging sister companies (Clubs in the network) to cooperate will realise the hoped for benefits. It goes on to explain that this often doesn't work because the level of difficulty is high and can require new skills (moving players from Standard Liege to Charlton in January was well intended, but not well executed) and concludes by saying that what's needed is a structured and disciplined approach.
It remains to be seen how Duchatelet will develop his operating model, but having initially expected him to appoint a European wide Director of Football with overall responsibity for player recruitment, development and deployment (structure and discipline) I'm now inclined to believe that this is not what he currently has in mind. There is a risk that he'll continue to desperately search for synergies without finding many.
The key to Charlton's success under Duchatelet will be our own Academy and ability to continue to develop players, homegrown and otherwise, once they've made the first team squad. Jose Riga fits the management profile given that aspiration.
AB why though are you more concerned about RD than TJ and MS and why was there not the need to rally a group as strong as the G21 back then
Firstly, I think there's an assumption that I brought the group together. In fact, I was asked by some other names on the list to take a lead. I said I would only be involved if there was a broad-based group that was so wide it could not reasonably be accused of pursuing a narrow agenda, wanting to damage the club
Rick, do you not in hindsight think that advocating a boycott on season tickets is a direct way of damaging the club?
What I was suggesting, on the morning we learned Powell had been sacked, was a strike - not a boycott. That is, don't buy until we find out more. That would have had no immediate practical damage to the club, because most season tickets are sold in the week leading up to the initial deadline, in this case immediately prior to April 9th. Even if circumstances had meant it commanded widespread support - say Riga had fielded all the January signings and we'd been thrashed by Millwall - it would have done no damage, because people would have signed up later if they wished to buy.
While the season-ticket revenue is important, it only amounts to about £2m, which is less than a fifth of the turnover. Deferring part of that would make very little difference to someone with RD's resources, but it may have got his attention. However, we felt on reflection and as events moved on that it wasn't necessary or appropriate action.
The part of the jigsaw that you are missing is that as far as we were concerned the statement was drawn up in conjunction with the chair of the trust. He was at the meeting and at that stage our assumption was that the trust would sign up to it. In the event he withdrew his name 24 hours later because the trust board as a whole took a different view, which may have been right or wrong, but that's why the idea that it was an attempt to usurp the trust is not a valid one.
What was left was a position where the majority of the trust board, who did not attend the meeting, would have vetoed the views agreed by the group as a whole, including those who are not members of the trust. In my view that would have been daft.
@Airman Brown I'm wondering how this ties in with the Trust's own statement: "...we raised the question with the Oak group as to whether the attempt to get the required dialogue wouldn’t be best pursued under the Trust banner. To our regret, the majority of people at the meeting didn’t agree with that proposal."
It strikes me that the Trust were indeed sympathetic with the need for dialogue on the issues being raised, but felt that the conduit for communication with the owner would be most appropriate through them, rather than through a group 2% the size of its paid membership. Did your group expect the Trust to sign up to it without leading the initiative and/or the comms?
Those challenges for the network mentioned by Mundell Fleming surely come back to who makes the decisions re potential player movements and how? Remember, the whole network thing is nearly as new for RD as it is for us - he only had two clubs (three if you count Sint Truiden) until Nov 2013, and since then has added Carl Zeiss Jena, us and Alcorcon in quick succession.
So in RD's shoes, how do you get the network model to be beneficial all round? All very well to say the clubs are individual, but clearly the economies of scale of the network only come to fruition if there is a career path/ experience path for players where appropriate, and that this is financially beneficial overall.
What kind of infrastructure might this need? Something along these lines, I'd imagine:
- a really strong, pan-European scouting network (could be based on collaboration between the scouts at each club, each responsible for their own country plus one or two others?) - trusted feedback and reports from the managers/ head coaches of each network team on strengths and weaknesses of their squad players, particularly any which may be available for loan/ transfer within the network - similar feedback on positions where they need new bodies and want to know what is available across the network - then the tricky bit - this needs someone overseeing it all to make sure it is fair/ for the common good of the network and not just about "who shouts loudest". Back to that "Network Director of Football" role - or do we simply leave all the juggling to RD, who seemingly is more into money and stats than football? The January experiment between SL and CAFC might make him think that there is a bit more to it than he imagined... - then, critically, what about the money and balancing the books of each club? How will the trading work in practice between Katrien and her peers at the other clubs?
In theory, I can see some advantages (most obvious being minimising agent fees) - but in practice, it is one hell of an experiment...
I agree entirely that in practice it's going to be very difficult to derive benefits from the network.
On an earlier thread (not sure which) I copied the abstract from an article entitled "Desperately seeking synergy" which appeared in the September/October 1998 edition of the Harvard Business Review.
The thrust of the article is very apposite to the Duchatelet experiment. It argues that many CEOs overestimate the value of synergies (Roland could well be doing this) and make the mistake of assuming that simply encouraging sister companies (Clubs in the network) to cooperate will realise the hoped for benefits. It goes on to explain that this often doesn't work because the level of difficulty is high and can require new skills (moving players from Standard Liege to Charlton in January was well intended, but not well executed) and concludes by saying that what's needed is a structured and disciplined approach.
It remains to be seen how Duchatelet will develop his operating model, but having initially expected him to appoint a European wide Director of Football with overall responsibity for player recruitment, development and deployment (structure and discipline) I'm now inclined to believe that this is not what he currently has in mind. There is a risk that he'll continue to desperately search for synergies without finding many.
The key to Charlton's success under Duchatelet will be our own Academy and ability to continue to develop players, homegrown and otherwise, once they've made the first team squad. Jose Riga fits the management profile given that aspiration.
Personally I think it's a vision without a clear strategy, but he will be dependent on the will of his managers/head coaches to collaborate, share ideas and work up some flesh on a strategic plan in the close season(s). Even so, without a clear strategy on the acquisition of the clubs themselves, RD will struggle to find any consistency in delivering synergy across the breadth of combinations.
I'm coming to the mind that RD is well-meaning, that he doesn't intend to neglect us or do us harm, but that he hugely underestimated the Championship. Of the players that arrived, I imagine only [a fit] Ajdarevic would have been on the list of a manager more familiar with its demands. Poyet, for example, at the age of 18 is streets ahead of all but AA, and I'd say the same for Cousins too.
Unless RD is being particularly Machiavellian and has roped Riga into a conspiracy to pretend Powell wasn't demanded of in regards to team selection, I think perhaps there's some justification for Powell in the sides that have been picked by Riga, scant consolation I'm sure. Still, if we do make the most of our games in hand and stay up, it's hopefully a lesson learned that SL and Charlton might be in for similar quality of players, not something that would warm the cockles of RD's heart I'm sure.
Those challenges for the network mentioned by Mundell Fleming surely come back to who makes the decisions re potential player movements and how? Remember, the whole network thing is nearly as new for RD as it is for us - he only had two clubs (three if you count Sint Truiden) until Nov 2013, and since then has added Carl Zeiss Jena, us and Alcorcon in quick succession.
So in RD's shoes, how do you get the network model to be beneficial all round? All very well to say the clubs are individual, but clearly the economies of scale of the network only come to fruition if there is a career path/ experience path for players where appropriate, and that this is financially beneficial overall.
What kind of infrastructure might this need? Something along these lines, I'd imagine:
- a really strong, pan-European scouting network (could be based on collaboration between the scouts at each club, each responsible for their own country plus one or two others?) - trusted feedback and reports from the managers/ head coaches of each network team on strengths and weaknesses of their squad players, particularly any which may be available for loan/ transfer within the network - similar feedback on positions where they need new bodies and want to know what is available across the network - then the tricky bit - this needs someone overseeing it all to make sure it is fair/ for the common good of the network and not just about "who shouts loudest". Back to that "Network Director of Football" role - or do we simply leave all the juggling to RD, who seemingly is more into money and stats than football? The January experiment between SL and CAFC might make him think that there is a bit more to it than he imagined... - then, critically, what about the money and balancing the books of each club? How will the trading work in practice between Katrien and her peers at the other clubs?
In theory, I can see some advantages (most obvious being minimising agent fees) - but in practice, it is one hell of an experiment...
I agree entirely that in practice it's going to be very difficult to derive benefits from the network.
On an earlier thread (not sure which) I copied the abstract from an article entitled "Desperately seeking synergy" which appeared in the September/October 1998 edition of the Harvard Business Review.
The thrust of the article is very apposite to the Duchatelet experiment. It argues that many CEOs overestimate the value of synergies (Roland could well be doing this) and make the mistake of assuming that simply encouraging sister companies (Clubs in the network) to cooperate will realise the hoped for benefits. It goes on to explain that this often doesn't work because the level of difficulty is high and can require new skills (moving players from Standard Liege to Charlton in January was well intended, but not well executed) and concludes by saying that what's needed is a structured and disciplined approach.
It remains to be seen how Duchatelet will develop his operating model, but having initially expected him to appoint a European wide Director of Football with overall responsibity for player recruitment, development and deployment (structure and discipline) I'm now inclined to believe that this is not what he currently has in mind. There is a risk that he'll continue to desperately search for synergies without finding many.
The key to Charlton's success under Duchatelet will be our own Academy and ability to continue to develop players, homegrown and otherwise, once they've made the first team squad. Jose Riga fits the management profile given that aspiration.
Personally I think it's a vision without a clear strategy, but he will be dependent on the will of his managers/head coaches to collaborate, share ideas and work up some flesh on a strategic plan in the close season(s). Even so, without a clear strategy on the acquisition of the clubs themselves, RD will struggle to find any consistency in delivering synergy across the breadth of combinations.
I'm coming to the mind that RD is well-meaning, that he doesn't intend to neglect us or do us harm, but that he hugely underestimated the Championship. Of the players that arrived, I imagine only [a fit] Ajdarevic would have been on the list of a manager more familiar with its demands. Poyet, for example, at the age of 18 is streets ahead of all but AA, and I'd say the same for Cousins too.
Unless RD is being particularly Machiavellian and has roped Riga into a conspiracy to pretend Powell wasn't demanded of in regards to team selection, I think perhaps there's some justification for Powell in the sides that have been picked by Riga, scant consolation I'm sure. Still, if we do make the most of our games in hand and stay up, it's hopefully a lesson learned that SL and Charlton might be in for similar quality of players, not something that would warm the cockles of RD's heart I'm sure.
The scenario that Rikofolf describes is broadly the way I see it.
A vision but no thought out strategy for the hastily bought clubs unearthing unexpected problems (the pitch costs here, far worse tax problems at Ujpest)
No malice or ill intent from RD but an gross underestimation of the Championship and an over estimation of the network players leading, in part, to the dispute with CP over control of "football issues".
Inexperienced, in football terms, ownership alongside non-football management making hasty and badly thought out decisions (the crossbars fiasco being the most public).
On the plus side though;
Much needed investment at Sparrows Lane. Possibly long term stability with an owner able to fund losses until we break-even if we assume he is here for the long haul. A big assumption until RD says how long the plan is.
But in the short term, in the words of the song "there may be trouble ahead, so face the music and dance"
Hard to disagree with anything he says, he knows the background to our club more than anyone else we know. Powell will succeed, let's just hope Riga does too for our sake of a championship place.
It doesn't make sense to me, especially as RD wrote a lot about new tax systems for Europe. Why didn't he do the full on due diligence? But I basically agree with HI above.
Comments
For example I give you the Bournemouth corner vs us in the 93rd minute, we are 1-0 up.. Hamer catches it, holds onto it for circa 8 seconds total then boots it as far as possible, almost 20 seconds taken out of the game.. Had Thuram been there and punched it, which watching his youtube vid and what I've seen of him in the 3 games so far, he probably will have, the ball is still inplay, there's a crowd of 20 around the box, the back four will be all over the shop marking individuals, there will be midfielders breaking the offside trap, there is a huge chance of a problem occuring, safety is required and generally if a keeper goes to catch it, they know if they can or not, Hamer is very good at this. It puts our defence at ease, without Hamer there is no chance we'd have as many clean sheets in a row as we do.
On an earlier thread (not sure which) I copied the abstract from an article entitled "Desperately seeking synergy" which appeared in the September/October 1998 edition of the Harvard Business Review.
The thrust of the article is very apposite to the Duchatelet experiment. It argues that many CEOs overestimate the value of synergies (Roland could well be doing this) and make the mistake of assuming that simply encouraging sister companies (Clubs in the network) to cooperate will realise the hoped for benefits. It goes on to explain that this often doesn't work because the level of difficulty is high and can require new skills (moving players from Standard Liege to Charlton in January was well intended, but not well executed) and concludes by saying that what's needed is a structured and disciplined approach.
It remains to be seen how Duchatelet will develop his operating model, but having initially expected him to appoint a European wide Director of Football with overall responsibity for player recruitment, development and deployment (structure and discipline) I'm now inclined to believe that this is not what he currently has in mind. There is a risk that he'll continue to desperately search for synergies without finding many.
The key to Charlton's success under Duchatelet will be our own Academy and ability to continue to develop players, homegrown and otherwise, once they've made the first team squad. Jose Riga fits the management profile given that aspiration.
You've nailed the network questions I think. Have you seen the Budapest thread? Highly recommended, if not.
It strikes me that the Trust were indeed sympathetic with the need for dialogue on the issues being raised, but felt that the conduit for communication with the owner would be most appropriate through them, rather than through a group 2% the size of its paid membership. Did your group expect the Trust to sign up to it without leading the initiative and/or the comms?
I'm coming to the mind that RD is well-meaning, that he doesn't intend to neglect us or do us harm, but that he hugely underestimated the Championship. Of the players that arrived, I imagine only [a fit] Ajdarevic would have been on the list of a manager more familiar with its demands. Poyet, for example, at the age of 18 is streets ahead of all but AA, and I'd say the same for Cousins too.
Unless RD is being particularly Machiavellian and has roped Riga into a conspiracy to pretend Powell wasn't demanded of in regards to team selection, I think perhaps there's some justification for Powell in the sides that have been picked by Riga, scant consolation I'm sure. Still, if we do make the most of our games in hand and stay up, it's hopefully a lesson learned that SL and Charlton might be in for similar quality of players, not something that would warm the cockles of RD's heart I'm sure.
A vision but no thought out strategy for the hastily bought clubs unearthing unexpected problems (the pitch costs here, far worse tax problems at Ujpest)
No malice or ill intent from RD but an gross underestimation of the Championship and an over estimation of the network players leading, in part, to the dispute with CP over control of "football issues".
Inexperienced, in football terms, ownership alongside non-football management making hasty and badly thought out decisions (the crossbars fiasco being the most public).
On the plus side though;
Much needed investment at Sparrows Lane. Possibly long term stability with an owner able to fund losses until we break-even if we assume he is here for the long haul. A big assumption until RD says how long the plan is.
But in the short term, in the words of the song "there may be trouble ahead, so face the music and dance"