Is it correct that any money RD puts in in league one can't be a loan? Makes sense that RD wont want to be funding any losses this year then if he can't make any interest off of them
Apparently Millwall have threatened to report us regarding the ongoing efforts to sign Shaun Williams.
Good player but surprised we have gone for him. Centre back/holding midfield player isn't the priority if we are only getting one more in..
Dunno... If we play 4-2-3-1 that Robinson favours then we've got Konsa and Crofts to play the two positions in front of the Defence yet if one of those mentioned gets injured then we've got to rely on Jackson... Ulvestad | JFC | Aribo appear to be more attack minded and part of the Midfield three supporting the Striker so wouldnt want them
JFC can play as a 10 or as an 8/4. I actually think a true defensive midfielder wouldn't be a bad shout--assuming we can get two players in, another one an attacker. Right now, for that "double 6" position (2 in front of the defense) we have: Crofts, Konsa, JFC, Ulvestad, JJ*
None of them, except for maybe Konsa who hasn't played much at senior level in that position, are a true defensive midfielder designed to break up play. As we saw with Darren Potter at MK Dons, KR does like that type of player. That said, I don't think a 30 year old who has spent most of his career in the Irish league and lower leagues is the answer.
I think a #10 or genuine winger is the top need. Heard we've been linked with a move for Ali Crawford up at Hamilton for £1m. Anyone seen this anywhere else?
When did we start using numbers to describe positions? I know they do it on the continent, but it still seems arbitrary to me.
Numbering for positions was first introduced in the Football League in 1928. Teams lined up numbered 1 to 11.
Each number represented the position on the field of play:
1 Goalkeeper 2 Right full back 3 Left full back 4 Right half back 5 Centre half back 6 Left half back 7 Outside right 8 Inside right 9 Centre forward 10 Inside left 11 Outside left
Apart from the wingers at 7 and 11, the creative players were usually 8 and 10 who played just behind the 9, linking up play from the defensive midfielders (half backs) feeding the wingers, and with their silky skills unlocking defences.
During 1965 a substitute was introduced, numbered 12. (Charlton's very own Keith Peacock was the first ever sub to actually play).
As the years passed, team formations changed (4-2-4 become popular after England won the World Cup in 1966, etc), but teams still lined up 1 to 11.
It wasn't until 1993 that the system began to change and players were given a squad number. Charlton numbered shirts according to alphabetical order.
Centre back Stuart Balmer being first on the list, wore the number 1 shirt outfield - which seemed really incongruous. But the next season, Charlton reverted back to the previous 1 to 11 numbering.
By 1999 it was compulsory to adopt the squad numbering system. All in all, a relatively recent change.
Apparently Millwall have threatened to report us regarding the ongoing efforts to sign Shaun Williams.
Good player but surprised we have gone for him. Centre back/holding midfield player isn't the priority if we are only getting one more in..
Dunno... If we play 4-2-3-1 that Robinson favours then we've got Konsa and Crofts to play the two positions in front of the Defence yet if one of those mentioned gets injured then we've got to rely on Jackson... Ulvestad | JFC | Aribo appear to be more attack minded and part of the Midfield three supporting the Striker so wouldnt want them
JFC can play as a 10 or as an 8/4. I actually think a true defensive midfielder wouldn't be a bad shout--assuming we can get two players in, another one an attacker. Right now, for that "double 6" position (2 in front of the defense) we have: Crofts, Konsa, JFC, Ulvestad, JJ*
None of them, except for maybe Konsa who hasn't played much at senior level in that position, are a true defensive midfielder designed to break up play. As we saw with Darren Potter at MK Dons, KR does like that type of player. That said, I don't think a 30 year old who has spent most of his career in the Irish league and lower leagues is the answer.
I think a #10 or genuine winger is the top need. Heard we've been linked with a move for Ali Crawford up at Hamilton for £1m. Anyone seen this anywhere else?
When did we start using numbers to describe positions? I know they do it on the continent, but it still seems arbitrary to me.
Numbering for positions was first introduced in the Football League in 1928. Teams lined up numbered 1 to 11.
Each number represented the position on the field of play:
1 Goalkeeper 2 Right full back 3 Left full back 4 Right half back 5 Centre half back 6 Left half back 7 Outside right 8 Inside right 9 Centre forward 10 Inside left 11 Outside left
Apart from the wingers at 7 and 11, the creative players were usually 8 and 10 who played just behind the 9, linking up play from the defensive midfielders (half backs) feeding the wingers, and with their silky skills unlocking defences.
During 1965 a substitute was introduced, numbered 12. (Charlton's very own Keith Peacock was the first ever sub to actually play).
As the years passed, team formations changed (4-2-4 become popular after England won the World Cup in 1966, etc), but teams still lined up 1 to 11.
It wasn't until 1993 that the system began to change and players were given a squad number. Charlton numbered shirts according to alphabetical order.
Centre back Stuart Balmer being first on the list, wore the number 1 shirt outfield - which seemed really incongruous. But the next season, Charlton reverted back to the previous 1 to 11 numbering.
By 1999 it was compulsory to adopt the squad numbering system. All in all, a relatively recent change.
To add to your geekiness, as the years went on, the Center Half Back and Left Half Back slowly dropped into the center of defense, giving us the 5 and 6 as center back numbers that you see today (note, this and pretty much all squad numbers except for goalkeeper are different in other countries).
The right half back was joined in midfield by the inside right (4/8). The outside right and left (7/11) moved back to wingers (in a 4-4-2). That left the 9 and 10 still up front.
It's sensible to try and dampen down the expectations of any selling club but the article smells of regime double talk - trying to dress up the fact that the money is going into Duchatelet's pocket. It also rather confirms our fears that reinvestment in the team is likely to be very modest. We clearly do need reinforcements, including in midfield, not least because Crofts, Ulvestad and Jackson are unlikely to be treading the boards next season. Konsa is playing out of position and Aribo only has a few games under his belt. Let's hope we can get one or two players in later this month.
The article also makes you wonder again why Duchatelet and Meire allowed a substantial multi-million pound grant award for the redevelopment of Sparrow's Lane to lapse (the details of which Airman posted some time ago). Roland probably wanted complete control, rather than being subject to any conditions.
In reality, the £12-13million of transfer fees received in the last six months will simply be absorbed by the huge operating losses incurred (and to be incurred) by the regime.
This quote made me laugh:
“I was going to bring in another midfield player but Ezri [Konsa] and Joe [Aribo] basically said to go and shut up – you don’t need one. Not verbally – but by physically what they have shown me on the pitch. ...“I think every fan of ours will look and say ‘that’s an area that looks very comfortable’.
Spin, bullshit and bollocks from a second rate chancer. Probably still the best we can hope for at the moment though.
Second rate chancer maybe but don't call him Gobshite unless you want to get an abuse flag from his faithful disciples.
Apparently Millwall have threatened to report us regarding the ongoing efforts to sign Shaun Williams.
Good player but surprised we have gone for him. Centre back/holding midfield player isn't the priority if we are only getting one more in..
Dunno... If we play 4-2-3-1 that Robinson favours then we've got Konsa and Crofts to play the two positions in front of the Defence yet if one of those mentioned gets injured then we've got to rely on Jackson... Ulvestad | JFC | Aribo appear to be more attack minded and part of the Midfield three supporting the Striker so wouldnt want them
JFC can play as a 10 or as an 8/4. I actually think a true defensive midfielder wouldn't be a bad shout--assuming we can get two players in, another one an attacker. Right now, for that "double 6" position (2 in front of the defense) we have: Crofts, Konsa, JFC, Ulvestad, JJ*
None of them, except for maybe Konsa who hasn't played much at senior level in that position, are a true defensive midfielder designed to break up play. As we saw with Darren Potter at MK Dons, KR does like that type of player. That said, I don't think a 30 year old who has spent most of his career in the Irish league and lower leagues is the answer.
I think a #10 or genuine winger is the top need. Heard we've been linked with a move for Ali Crawford up at Hamilton for £1m. Anyone seen this anywhere else?
When did we start using numbers to describe positions? I know they do it on the continent, but it still seems arbitrary to me.
Numbering for positions was first introduced in the Football League in 1928. Teams lined up numbered 1 to 11.
Each number represented the position on the field of play:
1 Goalkeeper 2 Right full back 3 Left full back 4 Right half back 5 Centre half back 6 Left half back 7 Outside right 8 Inside right 9 Centre forward 10 Inside left 11 Outside left
Apart from the wingers at 7 and 11, the creative players were usually 8 and 10 who played just behind the 9, linking up play from the defensive midfielders (half backs) feeding the wingers, and with their silky skills unlocking defences.
During 1965 a substitute was introduced, numbered 12. (Charlton's very own Keith Peacock was the first ever sub to actually play).
As the years passed, team formations changed (4-2-4 become popular after England won the World Cup in 1966, etc), but teams still lined up 1 to 11.
It wasn't until 1993 that the system began to change and players were given a squad number. Charlton numbered shirts according to alphabetical order.
Centre back Stuart Balmer being first on the list, wore the number 1 shirt outfield - which seemed really incongruous. But the next season, Charlton reverted back to the previous 1 to 11 numbering.
By 1999 it was compulsory to adopt the squad numbering system. All in all, a relatively recent change.
To add to your geekiness, as the years went on, the Center Half Back and Left Half Back slowly dropped into the center of defense, giving us the 5 and 6 as center back numbers that you see today (note, this and pretty much all squad numbers except for goalkeeper are different in other countries).
The right half back was joined in midfield by the inside right (4/8). The outside right and left (7/11) moved back to wingers (in a 4-4-2). That left the 9 and 10 still up front.
Apparently Millwall have threatened to report us regarding the ongoing efforts to sign Shaun Williams.
Good player but surprised we have gone for him. Centre back/holding midfield player isn't the priority if we are only getting one more in..
Dunno... If we play 4-2-3-1 that Robinson favours then we've got Konsa and Crofts to play the two positions in front of the Defence yet if one of those mentioned gets injured then we've got to rely on Jackson... Ulvestad | JFC | Aribo appear to be more attack minded and part of the Midfield three supporting the Striker so wouldnt want them
JFC can play as a 10 or as an 8/4. I actually think a true defensive midfielder wouldn't be a bad shout--assuming we can get two players in, another one an attacker. Right now, for that "double 6" position (2 in front of the defense) we have: Crofts, Konsa, JFC, Ulvestad, JJ*
None of them, except for maybe Konsa who hasn't played much at senior level in that position, are a true defensive midfielder designed to break up play. As we saw with Darren Potter at MK Dons, KR does like that type of player. That said, I don't think a 30 year old who has spent most of his career in the Irish league and lower leagues is the answer.
I think a #10 or genuine winger is the top need. Heard we've been linked with a move for Ali Crawford up at Hamilton for £1m. Anyone seen this anywhere else?
When did we start using numbers to describe positions? I know they do it on the continent, but it still seems arbitrary to me.
Numbering for positions was first introduced in the Football League in 1928. Teams lined up numbered 1 to 11.
Each number represented the position on the field of play:
1 Goalkeeper 2 Right full back 3 Left full back 4 Right half back 5 Centre half back 6 Left half back 7 Outside right 8 Inside right 9 Centre forward 10 Inside left 11 Outside left
Apart from the wingers at 7 and 11, the creative players were usually 8 and 10 who played just behind the 9, linking up play from the defensive midfielders (half backs) feeding the wingers, and with their silky skills unlocking defences.
During 1965 a substitute was introduced, numbered 12. (Charlton's very own Keith Peacock was the first ever sub to actually play).
As the years passed, team formations changed (4-2-4 become popular after England won the World Cup in 1966, etc), but teams still lined up 1 to 11.
It wasn't until 1993 that the system began to change and players were given a squad number. Charlton numbered shirts according to alphabetical order.
Centre back Stuart Balmer being first on the list, wore the number 1 shirt outfield - which seemed really incongruous. But the next season, Charlton reverted back to the previous 1 to 11 numbering.
By 1999 it was compulsory to adopt the squad numbering system. All in all, a relatively recent change.
To add to your geekiness, as the years went on, the Center Half Back and Left Half Back slowly dropped into the center of defense, giving us the 5 and 6 as center back numbers that you see today (note, this and pretty much all squad numbers except for goalkeeper are different in other countries).
The right half back was joined in midfield by the inside right (4/8). The outside right and left (7/11) moved back to wingers (in a 4-4-2). That left the 9 and 10 still up front.
I don't know about my "geekiness" SD, but I was just answering wmcf123's question, and elaborating a little with a few of my own observations - mostly based on my experiences of actually watching Charlton since 1964.
It's sensible to try and dampen down the expectations of any selling club but the article smells of regime double talk - trying to dress up the fact that the money is going into Duchatelet's pocket. It also rather confirms our fears that reinvestment in the team is likely to be very modest. We clearly do need reinforcements, including in midfield, not least because Crofts, Ulvestad and Jackson are unlikely to be treading the boards next season. Konsa is playing out of position and Aribo only has a few games under his belt. Let's hope we can get one or two players in later this month.
The article also makes you wonder again why Duchatelet and Meire allowed a substantial multi-million pound grant award for the redevelopment of Sparrow's Lane to lapse (the details of which Airman posted some time ago). Roland probably wanted complete control, rather than being subject to any conditions.
In reality, the £12-13million of transfer fees received in the last six months will simply be absorbed by the huge operating losses incurred (and to be incurred) by the regime.
I bet it isn't taken off his 'investment' figure that they like to quote to the media either.
It's sensible to try and dampen down the expectations of any selling club but the article smells of regime double talk - trying to dress up the fact that the money is going into Duchatelet's pocket. It also rather confirms our fears that reinvestment in the team is likely to be very modest. We clearly do need reinforcements, including in midfield, not least because Crofts, Ulvestad and Jackson are unlikely to be treading the boards next season. Konsa is playing out of position and Aribo only has a few games under his belt. Let's hope we can get one or two players in later this month.
The article also makes you wonder again why Duchatelet and Meire allowed a substantial multi-million pound grant award for the redevelopment of Sparrow's Lane to lapse (the details of which Airman posted some time ago). Roland probably wanted complete control, rather than being subject to any conditions.
In reality, the £12-13million of transfer fees received in the last six months will simply be absorbed by the huge operating losses incurred (and to be incurred) by the regime.
I bet it isn't taken off his 'investment' figure that they like to quote to the media either.
It's sensible to try and dampen down the expectations of any selling club but the article smells of regime double talk - trying to dress up the fact that the money is going into Duchatelet's pocket. It also rather confirms our fears that reinvestment in the team is likely to be very modest. We clearly do need reinforcements, including in midfield, not least because Crofts, Ulvestad and Jackson are unlikely to be treading the boards next season. Konsa is playing out of position and Aribo only has a few games under his belt. Let's hope we can get one or two players in later this month.
The article also makes you wonder again why Duchatelet and Meire allowed a substantial multi-million pound grant award for the redevelopment of Sparrow's Lane to lapse (the details of which Airman posted some time ago). Roland probably wanted complete control, rather than being subject to any conditions.
In reality, the £12-13million of transfer fees received in the last six months will simply be absorbed by the huge operating losses incurred (and to be incurred) by the regime.
I bet it isn't taken off his 'investment' figure that they like to quote to the media either.
Is it correct that any money RD puts in in league one can't be a loan? Makes sense that RD wont want to be funding any losses this year then if he can't make any interest off of them
Money can't be added as debt. Duchatelet can put in the money as investment but you know, he is not going to do that as he feels that all his business' need to stand alone. Given the strength of the league, a little bit of additional investment would see Charlton top 6, but that is unlikely to happen.
It's sensible to try and dampen down the expectations of any selling club but the article smells of regime double talk - trying to dress up the fact that the money is going into Duchatelet's pocket. It also rather confirms our fears that reinvestment in the team is likely to be very modest. We clearly do need reinforcements, including in midfield, not least because Crofts, Ulvestad and Jackson are unlikely to be treading the boards next season. Konsa is playing out of position and Aribo only has a few games under his belt. Let's hope we can get one or two players in later this month.
The article also makes you wonder again why Duchatelet and Meire allowed a substantial multi-million pound grant award for the redevelopment of Sparrow's Lane to lapse (the details of which Airman posted some time ago). Roland probably wanted complete control, rather than being subject to any conditions.
In reality, the £12-13million of transfer fees received in the last six months will simply be absorbed by the huge operating losses incurred (and to be incurred) by the regime.
I bet it isn't taken off his 'investment' figure that they like to quote to the media either.
Why would it be if it's not paid back to him?
I was referring specifically to the training ground. Several times it has been stated that he is investing 20m in the training ground. But when it is arranged as a loan and money used from a player sale to fund it, it is hardly an investment. It might be on his part due to the tax relief and the interest he charges, but for the club, with player sales not being reinvested, I'm not so sure.
Comments
Teams lined up numbered 1 to 11.
Each number represented the position on the field of play:
1 Goalkeeper
2 Right full back
3 Left full back
4 Right half back
5 Centre half back
6 Left half back
7 Outside right
8 Inside right
9 Centre forward
10 Inside left
11 Outside left
Apart from the wingers at 7 and 11, the creative players were usually 8 and 10 who played just behind the 9, linking up play from the defensive midfielders (half backs) feeding the wingers, and with their silky skills unlocking defences.
During 1965 a substitute was introduced, numbered 12.
(Charlton's very own Keith Peacock was the first ever sub to actually play).
As the years passed, team formations changed (4-2-4 become popular after England won the World Cup in 1966, etc),
but teams still lined up 1 to 11.
It wasn't until 1993 that the system began to change and players were given a squad number.
Charlton numbered shirts according to alphabetical order.
Centre back Stuart Balmer being first on the list, wore the number 1 shirt outfield - which seemed really incongruous.
But the next season, Charlton reverted back to the previous 1 to 11 numbering.
By 1999 it was compulsory to adopt the squad numbering system.
All in all, a relatively recent change.
To add to your geekiness, as the years went on, the Center Half Back and Left Half Back slowly dropped into the center of defense, giving us the 5 and 6 as center back numbers that you see today (note, this and pretty much all squad numbers except for goalkeeper are different in other countries).
The right half back was joined in midfield by the inside right (4/8). The outside right and left (7/11) moved back to wingers (in a 4-4-2). That left the 9 and 10 still up front.
For more: Inverting the Pyramid
You're banned for 2 weeks for being a big neeeerd
*goes off in a huff*
;o)