The idea that there was no one better available during the summer window I find very difficult to believe.
Tell us who was better &available for no fee?
In fairness I'm surprised we didn't go in for one on loan. If U21, they wouldn't have counted towards the squad cap plus we've only got 4 loanees so no issues with matchday squads. Wouldn't have been my first choice with injury record but clearly got some talent and has been training with us. Minor question marks over keeper and striker but this was the one position I think we should really have got during the window so very pleased to see the deal done.
Think under 21 loanees do count towards the squad cap but I could be wrong.
You are. I thought the same but when I did some research it was only for Champ clubs where that applied.
The idea that there was no one better available during the summer window I find very difficult to believe.
Tell us who was better &available for no fee?
In fairness I'm surprised we didn't go in for one on loan. If U21, they wouldn't have counted towards the squad cap plus we've only got 4 loanees so no issues with matchday squads. Wouldn't have been my first choice with injury record but clearly got some talent and has been training with us. Minor question marks over keeper and striker but this was the one position I think we should really have got during the window so very pleased to see the deal done.
I'd be staggered if within Chelsea, Spurs, Arsenal etc there wasn't an U21 we could have signed in July/August before the season started on loan. After all we didn't do badly with DaSilva or Maatsen.
Well Spurs had Cirkin who was sold to Sunderland and then Omoloe who we were linked with. Longelo was the one I wanted but at least with Souare we are getting an experienced player who on paper has more than enough quality for this level.
1) The parent club will expect th to play whilst it looks like NA is keen on Purrington being first choice when fit
2) The club is clearly changing tact and doesn't want to fill the team with prem loans and have to rebuild every summer. Most of the loans we have look like they would be signable next year (though some only if we go up obviously). The clear plan going forward is loans will be used for cover or to fill out the last squad places, not as first choice players who then need replacing every year.
There's also the aim of developing and adding value to our own players rather than doing it for other clubs every season.
I still say Aneke is one of the most over rated players I’ve seen in a Charlton shirt, particularly from the fans perspective, for the record I was saying this whilst he was scoring goals off the bench etc., so not sour grapes, in fact I was chuffed he went!!😂.maybe an unpopular opinion but hey🤷🏻♂️. ( I genuinely didn’t get any joy in watching him play).
Me neither, it used to really piss me off when he came on and scored most games.
I did mention I didn’t enjoy to watch him play, which is my prerogative, but thanks for the smartarse reply.very sorry if my view isn’t the same as yours.
Maybe we didn’t go for a young Prem player on loan as we didn’t want to be tied down to agreeing to a certain number of performances as we would perhaps have had to have done.
1) The parent club will expect th to play whilst it looks like NA is keen on Purrington being first choice when fit
2) The club is clearly changing tact and doesn't want to fill the team with prem loans and have to rebuild every summer. Most of the loans we have look like they would be signable next year (though some only if we go up obviously). The clear plan going forward is loans will be used for cover or to fill out the last squad places, not as first choice players who then need replacing every year.
There's also the aim of developing and adding value to our own players rather than doing it for other clubs every season.
I certainly think the first one is a very valid point. However, Leko will compete for a spot and Famewo, Arter and Lee are players you'd expect to play regularly (appreciate we're looking at a perm deal for Famewo). Arter, like Souare is 31 so I'm not sure signing Souare over a prem loan deal really fits with that.
I think it's just probable that no suitable left back was available when we've got one for free. If we had the opportunity to sign Maatsen again, I think we'd have taken it. Can't argue with that and completely back the management team.
We were always going to get a left back on loan, we didn't because we got Lee instead. The reason we only have 4 loans is so we can get an emergency loan keeper, if we need one.
I have been told we had a premier league left back loan lined up but it depended on Ater signing or not.
No idea what the free transfer market is like for center mids but I think we went the right way?
We were always going to get a left back on loan, we didn't because we got Lee instead. The reason we only have 4 loans is so we can get an emergency loan keeper, if we need one.
I have been told we had a premier league left back loan lined up but it depended on Ater signing or not.
No idea what the free transfer market is like for center mids but I think we went the right way?
I would tend to agree with this. Left back was a blindingly obvious hole but the way the season started and with Gilbey's health midfield became a much more fundamental hole. I think we prioritised using both the loan system and available funds to address the midfield over a left back. Perhaps if we had signed better than Dobson and Clare earlier in the summer that might have been avoidable but guess that will come out in the analysis of what was clearly a sub-par summer.
I also suspect that Souare's wages are less than even a Premier U21 player is on and we'd be responsible for.
Also no loan fee.
Exactly this. Maatsen was on 8k a week and you would expect most top U21 players at the likes of Chelsea, Arsenal, Spurs etc to all be on way more than your average league one player.
We were always going to get a left back on loan, we didn't because we got Lee instead. The reason we only have 4 loans is so we can get an emergency loan keeper, if we need one.
I have been told we had a premier league left back loan lined up but it depended on Ater signing or not.
No idea what the free transfer market is like for center mids but I think we went the right way?
Interesting that Lee was chosen over a LB. Im assuming if you know you would say, but any idea who we were in for mate?
Maybe we didn’t go for a young Prem player on loan as we didn’t want to be tied down to agreeing to a certain number of performances as we would perhaps have had to have done.
If it was a left back we could have guaranteed he would play most games
The idea that there was no one better available during the summer window I find very difficult to believe.
Tell us who was better &available for no fee?
You could literally walk up to any Premier League side and ask for an 18-21 year old LB on loan that would be better than what we have.
Maatsen, Dasilva for example.
Available & better for no fee I said. You've replied with 2 players who play in The Championship.
Maatsen is on loan at Coventry and DaSilva is a Bristol C player. Plus most Premier loans will involve us having to pay a loan fee and quite likely a larger slice of the salary than Souare is on.
We were always going to get a left back on loan, we didn't because we got Lee instead. The reason we only have 4 loans is so we can get an emergency loan keeper, if we need one.
I have been told we had a premier league left back loan lined up but it depended on Ater signing or not.
No idea what the free transfer market is like for center mids but I think we went the right way?
Interesting that Lee was chosen over a LB. Im assuming if you know you would say, but any idea who we were in for mate?
No, no name, but Lee was signed because Morgan didn't deliver and Gilbey's sickness. As I understand it and happened within about 24 hours of the post match debrief.
The Arter deal was first approached in early August apparently. Which goes against my thoughts that they didn't budget to replace JFC.
The idea that there was no one better available during the summer window I find very difficult to believe.
Tell us who was better &available for no fee?
You could literally walk up to any Premier League side and ask for an 18-21 year old LB on loan that would be better than what we have.
Maatsen, Dasilva for example.
What rubbish. Not only is Purrington a very decent league one left back, but as this selection of results from last week’s EFL trophy prove, just because someone is on the books of a premier league club, it doesn’t mean they’re better than a senior player on the books of a lower league club…
We were always going to get a left back on loan, we didn't because we got Lee instead. The reason we only have 4 loans is so we can get an emergency loan keeper, if we need one.
I have been told we had a premier league left back loan lined up but it depended on Ater signing or not.
No idea what the free transfer market is like for center mids but I think we went the right way?
Interesting that Lee was chosen over a LB. Im assuming if you know you would say, but any idea who we were in for mate?
No, no name, but Lee was signed because Morgan didn't deliver and Gilbey's sickness. As I understand it and happened within about 24 hours of the post match debrief.
The Arter deal was first approached in early August apparently. Which goes against my thoughts that they didn't budget to replace JFC.
Cheers, makes sense I guess however a bit unfair on Albie. It's not his position and never has been so was a gamble.
We were always going to get a left back on loan, we didn't because we got Lee instead. The reason we only have 4 loans is so we can get an emergency loan keeper, if we need one.
I have been told we had a premier league left back loan lined up but it depended on Ater signing or not.
No idea what the free transfer market is like for center mids but I think we went the right way?
Interesting that Lee was chosen over a LB. Im assuming if you know you would say, but any idea who we were in for mate?
No, no name, but Lee was signed because Morgan didn't deliver and Gilbey's sickness. As I understand it and happened within about 24 hours of the post match debrief.
The Arter deal was first approached in early August apparently. Which goes against my thoughts that they didn't budget to replace JFC.
Cheers, makes sense I guess however a bit unfair on Albie. It's not his position and never has been so was a gamble.
I don’t think signing Lee is unfair on Morgan because we clearly lacked an AM. Arter is the weird one because we signed Clare and Dobson on top of Morgan and Watson (with Vennings and Dempsey too).
We were always going to get a left back on loan, we didn't because we got Lee instead. The reason we only have 4 loans is so we can get an emergency loan keeper, if we need one.
I have been told we had a premier league left back loan lined up but it depended on Ater signing or not.
No idea what the free transfer market is like for center mids but I think we went the right way?
Interesting that Lee was chosen over a LB. Im assuming if you know you would say, but any idea who we were in for mate?
No, no name, but Lee was signed because Morgan didn't deliver and Gilbey's sickness. As I understand it and happened within about 24 hours of the post match debrief.
The Arter deal was first approached in early August apparently. Which goes against my thoughts that they didn't budget to replace JFC.
Cheers, makes sense I guess however a bit unfair on Albie. It's not his position and never has been so was a gamble.
I don’t think signing Lee is unfair on Morgan because we clearly lacked an AM. Arter is the weird one because we signed Clare and Dobson on top of Morgan and Watson (with Vennings and Dempsey too).
Clare and Dobson were the squad replacements for Pratley and Shinnie.
We were always going to get a left back on loan, we didn't because we got Lee instead. The reason we only have 4 loans is so we can get an emergency loan keeper, if we need one.
I have been told we had a premier league left back loan lined up but it depended on Ater signing or not.
No idea what the free transfer market is like for center mids but I think we went the right way?
No disrespect intended but I don’t believe this. Lee was the second loan signing and Arter the third so we could easily still have signed the LB as the 4th loan signing. Leko came about late so not convinced we cancelled the loan of a LB for Leko. I believe we’d have gone for the LB and then maybe targeted an attacking player on a free if necessary. If the LB was dependant on Arter I struggle to see why we were happy with 3 loan signings on deadline day afternoon and still short a left back.
We were always going to get a left back on loan, we didn't because we got Lee instead. The reason we only have 4 loans is so we can get an emergency loan keeper, if we need one.
I have been told we had a premier league left back loan lined up but it depended on Ater signing or not.
No idea what the free transfer market is like for center mids but I think we went the right way?
Interesting that Lee was chosen over a LB. Im assuming if you know you would say, but any idea who we were in for mate?
No, no name, but Lee was signed because Morgan didn't deliver and Gilbey's sickness. As I understand it and happened within about 24 hours of the post match debrief.
The Arter deal was first approached in early August apparently. Which goes against my thoughts that they didn't budget to replace JFC.
Cheers, makes sense I guess however a bit unfair on Albie. It's not his position and never has been so was a gamble.
I don’t think signing Lee is unfair on Morgan because we clearly lacked an AM. Arter is the weird one because we signed Clare and Dobson on top of Morgan and Watson (with Vennings and Dempsey too).
Clare and Dobson were the squad replacements for Pratley and Shinnie.
Exactly so you have Dobson fighting it out with Watson and Morgan and Clare for the other spot. Find it hard to believe we were going for 7 CMs with JFC and Dempsey on top. I guess Adkins could have seen Morgan and Gilbey as the AM’s but if so that’s a shocking call.
We were always going to get a left back on loan, we didn't because we got Lee instead. The reason we only have 4 loans is so we can get an emergency loan keeper, if we need one.
I have been told we had a premier league left back loan lined up but it depended on Ater signing or not.
No idea what the free transfer market is like for center mids but I think we went the right way?
No disrespect intended but I don’t believe this. Lee was the second loan signing and Arter the third so we could easily still have signed the LB as the 4th loan signing. Leko came about late so not convinced we cancelled the loan of a LB for Leko. I believe we’d have gone for the LB and then maybe targeted an attacking player on a free if necessary. If the LB was dependant on Arter I struggle to see why we were happy with 3 loan signings on deadline day afternoon and still short a left back.
We really needed 3 wingers plus a gamble on CBT. It's not about when you get them completed, in that sense, it's when you start the process. Some happen quicker than others. Arter took weeks, as Gallen said himself. Lee took days, or less, as Lee said himself.
We were always going to get a left back on loan, we didn't because we got Lee instead. The reason we only have 4 loans is so we can get an emergency loan keeper, if we need one.
I have been told we had a premier league left back loan lined up but it depended on Ater signing or not.
No idea what the free transfer market is like for center mids but I think we went the right way?
No disrespect intended but I don’t believe this. Lee was the second loan signing and Arter the third so we could easily still have signed the LB as the 4th loan signing. Leko came about late so not convinced we cancelled the loan of a LB for Leko. I believe we’d have gone for the LB and then maybe targeted an attacking player on a free if necessary. If the LB was dependant on Arter I struggle to see why we were happy with 3 loan signings on deadline day afternoon and still short a left back.
We really needed 3 wingers plus a gamble on CBT. It's not about when you get them completed, in that sense, it's when you start the process. Some happen quicker than others. Arter took weeks, as Gallen said himself. Lee took days, or less, as Lee said himself.
To be honest I actually make you right but you said the LB was dependant on Arter and we had one ready to go. Given Arter was the third loan signing I’d be surprised if it was true because if we pulled out we ran the risk of only having 3 loan players.
We were always going to get a left back on loan, we didn't because we got Lee instead. The reason we only have 4 loans is so we can get an emergency loan keeper, if we need one.
I have been told we had a premier league left back loan lined up but it depended on Ater signing or not.
No idea what the free transfer market is like for center mids but I think we went the right way?
Interesting that Lee was chosen over a LB. Im assuming if you know you would say, but any idea who we were in for mate?
No, no name, but Lee was signed because Morgan didn't deliver and Gilbey's sickness. As I understand it and happened within about 24 hours of the post match debrief.
The Arter deal was first approached in early August apparently. Which goes against my thoughts that they didn't budget to replace JFC.
Cheers, makes sense I guess however a bit unfair on Albie. It's not his position and never has been so was a gamble.
I don’t think signing Lee is unfair on Morgan because we clearly lacked an AM. Arter is the weird one because we signed Clare and Dobson on top of Morgan and Watson (with Vennings and Dempsey too).
Clare and Dobson were the squad replacements for Pratley and Shinnie.
Exactly so you have Dobson fighting it out with Watson and Morgan and Clare for the other spot. Find it hard to believe we were going for 7 CMs with JFC and Dempsey on top. I guess Adkins could have seen Morgan and Gilbey as the AM’s but if so that’s a shocking call.
Gilbey was good to very good there last season, once we signed Kirk it gave us the option of playing Washington slightly behind Stockley as well.
We were always going to get a left back on loan, we didn't because we got Lee instead. The reason we only have 4 loans is so we can get an emergency loan keeper, if we need one.
I have been told we had a premier league left back loan lined up but it depended on Ater signing or not.
No idea what the free transfer market is like for center mids but I think we went the right way?
Interesting that Lee was chosen over a LB. Im assuming if you know you would say, but any idea who we were in for mate?
No, no name, but Lee was signed because Morgan didn't deliver and Gilbey's sickness. As I understand it and happened within about 24 hours of the post match debrief.
The Arter deal was first approached in early August apparently. Which goes against my thoughts that they didn't budget to replace JFC.
Cheers, makes sense I guess however a bit unfair on Albie. It's not his position and never has been so was a gamble.
I don’t think signing Lee is unfair on Morgan because we clearly lacked an AM. Arter is the weird one because we signed Clare and Dobson on top of Morgan and Watson (with Vennings and Dempsey too).
I mean it was a bit unfair on Morgan to say he didn't deliver. It's obviously not his best position to play but the choice was made to try him and then the idea was ditched after a few games. That's the managers fault not Albie's in my opinion. The signing of Lee was needed as the position needed addressing and I'm pleased it was.
Comments
1) The parent club will expect th to play whilst it looks like NA is keen on Purrington being first choice when fit
2) The club is clearly changing tact and doesn't want to fill the team with prem loans and have to rebuild every summer. Most of the loans we have look like they would be signable next year (though some only if we go up obviously). The clear plan going forward is loans will be used for cover or to fill out the last squad places, not as first choice players who then need replacing every year.
There's also the aim of developing and adding value to our own players rather than doing it for other clubs every season.
I think it's just probable that no suitable left back was available when we've got one for free. If we had the opportunity to sign Maatsen again, I think we'd have taken it. Can't argue with that and completely back the management team.
Also no loan fee.
I have been told we had a premier league left back loan lined up but it depended on Ater signing or not.
No idea what the free transfer market is like for center mids but I think we went the right way?
Maatsen, Dasilva for example.
But Maatsen was auguably no more effective than Purrington last year, and certainly not as good as Da Silva. More exciting then Ben, sure!
Also we need to consider budget. They've obviously decided that left back, or reserve left back, isn't the area to dedicate the funds to get promoted.
Im assuming if you know you would say, but any idea who we were in for mate?
But, only time……will tell.
You've replied with 2 players who play in The Championship.
Maatsen is on loan at Coventry and DaSilva is a Bristol C player.
Plus most Premier loans will involve us having to pay a loan fee and quite likely a larger slice of the salary than Souare is on.
maatsen, for example.
The Arter deal was first approached in early August apparently. Which goes against my thoughts that they didn't budget to replace JFC.
It's obviously not his best position to play but the choice was made to try him and then the idea was ditched after a few games. That's the managers fault not Albie's in my opinion.
The signing of Lee was needed as the position needed addressing and I'm pleased it was.