Think this thread shows most of us don't really have a clue. Hardly anyone gave Guy a hope.
Much as I love Powell, it's almost refreshing that we can just judge a manager based on the football he gives us, rather then personal affection for the individual colliding with reality.
Think this thread shows most of us don't really have a clue. Hardly anyone gave Guy a hope.
Much as I love Powell, it's almost refreshing that we can just judge a manager based on the football he gives us, rather then personal affection for the individual colliding with reality.
Really? Surely we have the opposite with GL. Because he's a network man he has to do extra well to be taken seriously.
Think this thread shows most of us don't really have a clue. Hardly anyone gave Guy a hope.
Much as I love Powell, it's almost refreshing that we can just judge a manager based on the football he gives us, rather then personal affection for the individual colliding with reality.
Really? Surely we have the opposite with GL. Because he's a network man he has to do extra well to be taken seriously.
For some. Others, like me, just look at the football he serves up and believe he can't be a bad coach if he's involved with the network in the first place.
I know I've been joking around that our recent upturn in results has been due to Johnnie Jackson picking the team.
We've seen much improved organisation of the team and tactical awareness - yet the players have the freedom to be creative and seem to be really enjoying playing!
Something has really changed behind the scenes; it now seems to be a positive and happy camp - and surely a manager/head coach plays a big part in this?
Think this thread shows most of us don't really have a clue. Hardly anyone gave Guy a hope.
Much as I love Powell, it's almost refreshing that we can just judge a manager based on the football he gives us, rather then personal affection for the individual colliding with reality.
Really? Surely we have the opposite with GL. Because he's a network man he has to do extra well to be taken seriously.
For some. Others, like me, just look at the football he serves up and believe he can't be a bad coach if he's involved with the network in the first place.
I don't think we're disagreeing. I'm just saying it's not exactly a blank canvas where we look at the football and make our minds up. There is context, just like there was with Powell.
Think this thread shows most of us don't really have a clue. Hardly anyone gave Guy a hope.
Much as I love Powell, it's almost refreshing that we can just judge a manager based on the football he gives us, rather then personal affection for the individual colliding with reality.
Really? Surely we have the opposite with GL. Because he's a network man he has to do extra well to be taken seriously.
Not what I was referring to. I mean it's easier to just dis-like the man unless he is getting the results.
With Powell, even if we lost and played badly, I was always on his side regardless, because it was Chris Powell, Charlton legend.
Guy Luzon, from what I've heard appears to be a hard worker just gets on with it and embraces the pressure.
Comments
We've seen much improved organisation of the team and tactical awareness - yet the players have the freedom to be creative and seem to be really enjoying playing!
Something has really changed behind the scenes; it now seems to be a positive and happy camp - and surely a manager/head coach plays a big part in this?
If so, then huge credit to Luzon.
With Powell, even if we lost and played badly, I was always on his side regardless, because it was Chris Powell, Charlton legend.
Guy Luzon, from what I've heard appears to be a hard worker just gets on with it and embraces the pressure.