We know the answer to this training thing, don't we? Sandgaard said that the club planned to increase the intensity of the training because they believed firstly that the players aren't fit enough (many on here have felt this for a good few seasons), and secondly that the lack of intensity was causing our constant plight of injuries. So does it not follow that MS's suggestion to JJ would be the same?
On the search for a new manager, TS again mentioned that we'd be looking for a manager who brought more intensity to training.
I haven't got an issue with the owner suggesting the style of football he wants to see us play and promising to back the manager in getting the players needed to achieve it. It becomes more worrying when it gets like Roland explaining football tactics to a manager who is an ex England international. If Sandgaard thinks he has discovered the secret of success in terms of a playing style it is worrying in the extreme. There are many different paths but his backing is needed. With limited resources the approach has to always be a pragmatic one based on what you have and how your best players play.
The problem is, I don't know which of these is correct and I doubt many of us do. There are lingering doubts about Sandgaard based on genuine clues. I would say not yet definitive but that in itself is worrying. And we should be open to this possibility.
I agree with this. The turning point for me would be if Sandgaard is issuing Roland-esque emails or trying to dictate how training sessions should go.
Currently I have no reason to think that this is the case and if anyone knows differently then they should be making it public very very quickly. Until then we have to accept that there is nothing wrong with an owner wanting a certain type of football and finding the staff to implement it.
MS certainly tried at least once last season.
This needs context.
If he was at the training ground and saw a lacklustre group of players who were not putting a shift in then he’s more than got a right to ask for more surely?
If he was there to effectively ask JJ to try something different in training then that wouldn’t be on.
Context please.
Exactly. I reckon some people think he turned up with his boots, Clipboard and whistle expecting to take a full on training session.
Questioning coaches in training is bad enough
Whilst I broadly agree with you, we had posters aplenty questioning what went on in training when Jackson was in charge, if anything. We all have an opinion and the real difference is of course is that Martin is a shareholder and has a role on the football side of the club. He should though have the common sense to keep schtum though and if he wasn’t happy then tell the big dog which I suspect is what he did.
I haven't got an issue with the owner suggesting the style of football he wants to see us play and promising to back the manager in getting the players needed to achieve it. It becomes more worrying when it gets like Roland explaining football tactics to a manager who is an ex England international. If Sandgaard thinks he has discovered the secret of success in terms of a playing style it is worrying in the extreme. There are many different paths but his backing is needed. With limited resources the approach has to always be a pragmatic one based on what you have and how your best players play.
The problem is, I don't know which of these is correct and I doubt many of us do. There are lingering doubts about Sandgaard based on genuine clues. I would say not yet definitive but that in itself is worrying. And we should be open to this possibility.
I agree with this. The turning point for me would be if Sandgaard is issuing Roland-esque emails or trying to dictate how training sessions should go.
Currently I have no reason to think that this is the case and if anyone knows differently then they should be making it public very very quickly. Until then we have to accept that there is nothing wrong with an owner wanting a certain type of football and finding the staff to implement it.
MS certainly tried at least once last season.
To be fair, we were so shit last year, I think I would have done the same!!
The comment has had the desired effect of raising awareness. I doubt we'll learn more, unless the final Voice fleshes it out. Personally, can't see how MS ruling the roost on recruitment overseeing some 'black box' jiggery pokery necessitates him being there at all. However, insofar as he has attended any training sessions, I'd need to know exactly what he was doing there before jumping to conclusions. I suspect that this has been left deliberately vague here knowing it would spark a 'how very dare you!" type reaction.
As stated before by me and others, the context of this is all important.
I haven't got an issue with the owner suggesting the style of football he wants to see us play and promising to back the manager in getting the players needed to achieve it. It becomes more worrying when it gets like Roland explaining football tactics to a manager who is an ex England international. If Sandgaard thinks he has discovered the secret of success in terms of a playing style it is worrying in the extreme. There are many different paths but his backing is needed. With limited resources the approach has to always be a pragmatic one based on what you have and how your best players play.
The problem is, I don't know which of these is correct and I doubt many of us do. There are lingering doubts about Sandgaard based on genuine clues. I would say not yet definitive but that in itself is worrying. And we should be open to this possibility.
I agree with this. The turning point for me would be if Sandgaard is issuing Roland-esque emails or trying to dictate how training sessions should go.
Currently I have no reason to think that this is the case and if anyone knows differently then they should be making it public very very quickly. Until then we have to accept that there is nothing wrong with an owner wanting a certain type of football and finding the staff to implement it.
MS certainly tried at least once last season.
This needs context.
If he was at the training ground and saw a lacklustre group of players who were not putting a shift in then he’s more than got a right to ask for more surely?
If he was there to effectively ask JJ to try something different in training then that wouldn’t be on.
Context please.
What right does he have to involve himself on training effort, or lack of? He’s an analyst, not his remit
He’s barely an analyst. He’s only an analyst because daddy said so. I manage a team of data analysts. He wouldn’t even get an interview anywhere else.
I am a really good data analyst. I can look at the number of points we have in a league table and make a judgement from that. I can watch a match and look at the number of goals scored by each team, and then reach a conclusion as to the result.
Cawley has been clearly told a deal has been agreed, but that's if Charlton go down the Garner route.. I think TS wants 2 or 3 options agreed before picking.. Clearly that could piss people off!
I think we will hear a lot more today, potenially announcement, if not early next week! That's my hunch!
It would be amusing if Garner told us to stuff it .
I suppose it would be amusing if you hated the club.
I haven't got an issue with the owner suggesting the style of football he wants to see us play and promising to back the manager in getting the players needed to achieve it. It becomes more worrying when it gets like Roland explaining football tactics to a manager who is an ex England international. If Sandgaard thinks he has discovered the secret of success in terms of a playing style it is worrying in the extreme. There are many different paths but his backing is needed. With limited resources the approach has to always be a pragmatic one based on what you have and how your best players play.
The problem is, I don't know which of these is correct and I doubt many of us do. There are lingering doubts about Sandgaard based on genuine clues. I would say not yet definitive but that in itself is worrying. And we should be open to this possibility.
I agree with this. The turning point for me would be if Sandgaard is issuing Roland-esque emails or trying to dictate how training sessions should go.
Currently I have no reason to think that this is the case and if anyone knows differently then they should be making it public very very quickly. Until then we have to accept that there is nothing wrong with an owner wanting a certain type of football and finding the staff to implement it.
MS certainly tried at least once last season.
This needs context.
If he was at the training ground and saw a lacklustre group of players who were not putting a shift in then he’s more than got a right to ask for more surely?
If he was there to effectively ask JJ to try something different in training then that wouldn’t be on.
Context please.
What right does he have to involve himself on training effort, or lack of? He’s an analyst, not his remit
He’s barely an analyst. He’s only an analyst because daddy said so. I manage a team of data analysts. He wouldn’t even get an interview anywhere else.
When Airman ‘likes’ that post it scares me , we’ve got another nutbag , let’s hope he’s more useful than that goalkeeping coach from Swindon’s nutsack .
We have "known" that Martin is in charge of recruitment and many of us have raised it as a massive red flag. The proof of the pudding will of course be in the eating (happy with that @Henry Irving) but it is a big concern.
With the back ground of that there is little point employing a "manager", be it Adkins, Taylor, Warburton or Duff.
Whilst I don't buy into the buzz word bingo that is a young, hungry, progressive coach, thatnis exactly what we need, because of the way the club is run.
Mmmmmm……"I have my doubts that Martin is actually “in charge” of recruitment. On paper it may read that way but I don’t buy that.
I haven't got an issue with the owner suggesting the style of football he wants to see us play and promising to back the manager in getting the players needed to achieve it. It becomes more worrying when it gets like Roland explaining football tactics to a manager who is an ex England international. If Sandgaard thinks he has discovered the secret of success in terms of a playing style it is worrying in the extreme. There are many different paths but his backing is needed. With limited resources the approach has to always be a pragmatic one based on what you have and how your best players play.
The problem is, I don't know which of these is correct and I doubt many of us do. There are lingering doubts about Sandgaard based on genuine clues. I would say not yet definitive but that in itself is worrying. And we should be open to this possibility.
I agree with this. The turning point for me would be if Sandgaard is issuing Roland-esque emails or trying to dictate how training sessions should go.
Currently I have no reason to think that this is the case and if anyone knows differently then they should be making it public very very quickly. Until then we have to accept that there is nothing wrong with an owner wanting a certain type of football and finding the staff to implement it.
MS certainly tried at least once last season.
This needs context.
If he was at the training ground and saw a lacklustre group of players who were not putting a shift in then he’s more than got a right to ask for more surely?
If he was there to effectively ask JJ to try something different in training then that wouldn’t be on.
Context please.
What right does he have to involve himself on training effort, or lack of? He’s an analyst, not his remit
He’s barely an analyst. He’s only an analyst because daddy said so. I manage a team of data analysts. He wouldn’t even get an interview anywhere else.
I haven't got an issue with the owner suggesting the style of football he wants to see us play and promising to back the manager in getting the players needed to achieve it. It becomes more worrying when it gets like Roland explaining football tactics to a manager who is an ex England international. If Sandgaard thinks he has discovered the secret of success in terms of a playing style it is worrying in the extreme. There are many different paths but his backing is needed. With limited resources the approach has to always be a pragmatic one based on what you have and how your best players play.
The problem is, I don't know which of these is correct and I doubt many of us do. There are lingering doubts about Sandgaard based on genuine clues. I would say not yet definitive but that in itself is worrying. And we should be open to this possibility.
I agree with this. The turning point for me would be if Sandgaard is issuing Roland-esque emails or trying to dictate how training sessions should go.
Currently I have no reason to think that this is the case and if anyone knows differently then they should be making it public very very quickly. Until then we have to accept that there is nothing wrong with an owner wanting a certain type of football and finding the staff to implement it.
MS certainly tried at least once last season.
This needs context.
If he was at the training ground and saw a lacklustre group of players who were not putting a shift in then he’s more than got a right to ask for more surely?
If he was there to effectively ask JJ to try something different in training then that wouldn’t be on.
Context please.
What right does he have to involve himself on training effort, or lack of? He’s an analyst, not his remit
He’s barely an analyst. He’s only an analyst because daddy said so. I manage a team of data analysts. He wouldn’t even get an interview anywhere else.
How do you know this? Sounds like sour grapes to me.
I haven't got an issue with the owner suggesting the style of football he wants to see us play and promising to back the manager in getting the players needed to achieve it. It becomes more worrying when it gets like Roland explaining football tactics to a manager who is an ex England international. If Sandgaard thinks he has discovered the secret of success in terms of a playing style it is worrying in the extreme. There are many different paths but his backing is needed. With limited resources the approach has to always be a pragmatic one based on what you have and how your best players play.
The problem is, I don't know which of these is correct and I doubt many of us do. There are lingering doubts about Sandgaard based on genuine clues. I would say not yet definitive but that in itself is worrying. And we should be open to this possibility.
I agree with this. The turning point for me would be if Sandgaard is issuing Roland-esque emails or trying to dictate how training sessions should go.
Currently I have no reason to think that this is the case and if anyone knows differently then they should be making it public very very quickly. Until then we have to accept that there is nothing wrong with an owner wanting a certain type of football and finding the staff to implement it.
MS certainly tried at least once last season.
This needs context.
If he was at the training ground and saw a lacklustre group of players who were not putting a shift in then he’s more than got a right to ask for more surely?
If he was there to effectively ask JJ to try something different in training then that wouldn’t be on.
Context please.
What right does he have to involve himself on training effort, or lack of? He’s an analyst, not his remit
He’s barely an analyst. He’s only an analyst because daddy said so. I manage a team of data analysts. He wouldn’t even get an interview anywhere else.
You know this how ?
Presumably his LinkedIn profile.
He might say he used data in his last role but he’s never had a pure analytics position.
I haven't got an issue with the owner suggesting the style of football he wants to see us play and promising to back the manager in getting the players needed to achieve it. It becomes more worrying when it gets like Roland explaining football tactics to a manager who is an ex England international. If Sandgaard thinks he has discovered the secret of success in terms of a playing style it is worrying in the extreme. There are many different paths but his backing is needed. With limited resources the approach has to always be a pragmatic one based on what you have and how your best players play.
The problem is, I don't know which of these is correct and I doubt many of us do. There are lingering doubts about Sandgaard based on genuine clues. I would say not yet definitive but that in itself is worrying. And we should be open to this possibility.
I agree with this. The turning point for me would be if Sandgaard is issuing Roland-esque emails or trying to dictate how training sessions should go.
Currently I have no reason to think that this is the case and if anyone knows differently then they should be making it public very very quickly. Until then we have to accept that there is nothing wrong with an owner wanting a certain type of football and finding the staff to implement it.
MS certainly tried at least once last season.
This needs context.
If he was at the training ground and saw a lacklustre group of players who were not putting a shift in then he’s more than got a right to ask for more surely?
If he was there to effectively ask JJ to try something different in training then that wouldn’t be on.
Context please.
What right does he have to involve himself on training effort, or lack of? He’s an analyst, not his remit
He’s barely an analyst. He’s only an analyst because daddy said so. I manage a team of data analysts. He wouldn’t even get an interview anywhere else.
You know this how ?
How do I know that the owner’s son has been parachuted in to lead data analysis? Because Thomas Sandgaard literally said so. Was the job advertised?
How do I know he’s not remotely qualified as a specialist data analysts in elite sports? Looking at his CV perhaps.
I haven't got an issue with the owner suggesting the style of football he wants to see us play and promising to back the manager in getting the players needed to achieve it. It becomes more worrying when it gets like Roland explaining football tactics to a manager who is an ex England international. If Sandgaard thinks he has discovered the secret of success in terms of a playing style it is worrying in the extreme. There are many different paths but his backing is needed. With limited resources the approach has to always be a pragmatic one based on what you have and how your best players play.
The problem is, I don't know which of these is correct and I doubt many of us do. There are lingering doubts about Sandgaard based on genuine clues. I would say not yet definitive but that in itself is worrying. And we should be open to this possibility.
I agree with this. The turning point for me would be if Sandgaard is issuing Roland-esque emails or trying to dictate how training sessions should go.
Currently I have no reason to think that this is the case and if anyone knows differently then they should be making it public very very quickly. Until then we have to accept that there is nothing wrong with an owner wanting a certain type of football and finding the staff to implement it.
MS certainly tried at least once last season.
This needs context.
If he was at the training ground and saw a lacklustre group of players who were not putting a shift in then he’s more than got a right to ask for more surely?
If he was there to effectively ask JJ to try something different in training then that wouldn’t be on.
Context please.
What right does he have to involve himself on training effort, or lack of? He’s an analyst, not his remit
He’s barely an analyst. He’s only an analyst because daddy said so. I manage a team of data analysts. He wouldn’t even get an interview anywhere else.
Did he send you his cv personally?
OK, let’s play this game. Where on his cv does he have a history of data analysis? Or data analysis in elite sport?
I haven't got an issue with the owner suggesting the style of football he wants to see us play and promising to back the manager in getting the players needed to achieve it. It becomes more worrying when it gets like Roland explaining football tactics to a manager who is an ex England international. If Sandgaard thinks he has discovered the secret of success in terms of a playing style it is worrying in the extreme. There are many different paths but his backing is needed. With limited resources the approach has to always be a pragmatic one based on what you have and how your best players play.
The problem is, I don't know which of these is correct and I doubt many of us do. There are lingering doubts about Sandgaard based on genuine clues. I would say not yet definitive but that in itself is worrying. And we should be open to this possibility.
I agree with this. The turning point for me would be if Sandgaard is issuing Roland-esque emails or trying to dictate how training sessions should go.
Currently I have no reason to think that this is the case and if anyone knows differently then they should be making it public very very quickly. Until then we have to accept that there is nothing wrong with an owner wanting a certain type of football and finding the staff to implement it.
MS certainly tried at least once last season.
This needs context.
If he was at the training ground and saw a lacklustre group of players who were not putting a shift in then he’s more than got a right to ask for more surely?
If he was there to effectively ask JJ to try something different in training then that wouldn’t be on.
Context please.
What right does he have to involve himself on training effort, or lack of? He’s an analyst, not his remit
He’s barely an analyst. He’s only an analyst because daddy said so. I manage a team of data analysts. He wouldn’t even get an interview anywhere else.
You know this how ?
Presumably his LinkedIn profile.
He might say he used data in his last role but he’s never had a pure analytics position.
I cannot believe we’re legitimately arguing over whether this is a person qualified to not just be a data analyst, but to lead data analysis at a professional football club. I wouldn’t even give him an entry level job.
For some context, the entry level data analysts on my team have published work, PhDs, skills across multiple platforms and coding languages. Minimum.
I was once told by a CEO of a large multinational company that the worst decision he made was to promote a technically IT trained person into a management job. “He was brilliant at his job, but the skill sets he had made him an appalling manager”. Just saying.
I haven't got an issue with the owner suggesting the style of football he wants to see us play and promising to back the manager in getting the players needed to achieve it. It becomes more worrying when it gets like Roland explaining football tactics to a manager who is an ex England international. If Sandgaard thinks he has discovered the secret of success in terms of a playing style it is worrying in the extreme. There are many different paths but his backing is needed. With limited resources the approach has to always be a pragmatic one based on what you have and how your best players play.
The problem is, I don't know which of these is correct and I doubt many of us do. There are lingering doubts about Sandgaard based on genuine clues. I would say not yet definitive but that in itself is worrying. And we should be open to this possibility.
I agree with this. The turning point for me would be if Sandgaard is issuing Roland-esque emails or trying to dictate how training sessions should go.
Currently I have no reason to think that this is the case and if anyone knows differently then they should be making it public very very quickly. Until then we have to accept that there is nothing wrong with an owner wanting a certain type of football and finding the staff to implement it.
MS certainly tried at least once last season.
This needs context.
If he was at the training ground and saw a lacklustre group of players who were not putting a shift in then he’s more than got a right to ask for more surely?
If he was there to effectively ask JJ to try something different in training then that wouldn’t be on.
Context please.
What right does he have to involve himself on training effort, or lack of? He’s an analyst, not his remit
He’s barely an analyst. He’s only an analyst because daddy said so. I manage a team of data analysts. He wouldn’t even get an interview anywhere else.
How do you know this? Sounds like sour grapes to me.
I haven't got an issue with the owner suggesting the style of football he wants to see us play and promising to back the manager in getting the players needed to achieve it. It becomes more worrying when it gets like Roland explaining football tactics to a manager who is an ex England international. If Sandgaard thinks he has discovered the secret of success in terms of a playing style it is worrying in the extreme. There are many different paths but his backing is needed. With limited resources the approach has to always be a pragmatic one based on what you have and how your best players play.
The problem is, I don't know which of these is correct and I doubt many of us do. There are lingering doubts about Sandgaard based on genuine clues. I would say not yet definitive but that in itself is worrying. And we should be open to this possibility.
I agree with this. The turning point for me would be if Sandgaard is issuing Roland-esque emails or trying to dictate how training sessions should go.
Currently I have no reason to think that this is the case and if anyone knows differently then they should be making it public very very quickly. Until then we have to accept that there is nothing wrong with an owner wanting a certain type of football and finding the staff to implement it.
MS certainly tried at least once last season.
This needs context.
If he was at the training ground and saw a lacklustre group of players who were not putting a shift in then he’s more than got a right to ask for more surely?
If he was there to effectively ask JJ to try something different in training then that wouldn’t be on.
Context please.
What right does he have to involve himself on training effort, or lack of? He’s an analyst, not his remit
He’s barely an analyst. He’s only an analyst because daddy said so. I manage a team of data analysts. He wouldn’t even get an interview anywhere else.
You know this how ?
How do I know that the owner’s son has been parachuted in to lead data analysis? Because Thomas Sandgaard literally said so. Was the job advertised?
How do I know he’s not remotely qualified as a specialist data analysts in elite sports? Looking at his CV perhaps.
I haven't got an issue with the owner suggesting the style of football he wants to see us play and promising to back the manager in getting the players needed to achieve it. It becomes more worrying when it gets like Roland explaining football tactics to a manager who is an ex England international. If Sandgaard thinks he has discovered the secret of success in terms of a playing style it is worrying in the extreme. There are many different paths but his backing is needed. With limited resources the approach has to always be a pragmatic one based on what you have and how your best players play.
The problem is, I don't know which of these is correct and I doubt many of us do. There are lingering doubts about Sandgaard based on genuine clues. I would say not yet definitive but that in itself is worrying. And we should be open to this possibility.
I agree with this. The turning point for me would be if Sandgaard is issuing Roland-esque emails or trying to dictate how training sessions should go.
Currently I have no reason to think that this is the case and if anyone knows differently then they should be making it public very very quickly. Until then we have to accept that there is nothing wrong with an owner wanting a certain type of football and finding the staff to implement it.
MS certainly tried at least once last season.
This needs context.
If he was at the training ground and saw a lacklustre group of players who were not putting a shift in then he’s more than got a right to ask for more surely?
If he was there to effectively ask JJ to try something different in training then that wouldn’t be on.
Context please.
What right does he have to involve himself on training effort, or lack of? He’s an analyst, not his remit
He’s barely an analyst. He’s only an analyst because daddy said so. I manage a team of data analysts. He wouldn’t even get an interview anywhere else.
You know this how ?
How do I know that the owner’s son has been parachuted in to lead data analysis? Because Thomas Sandgaard literally said so. Was the job advertised?
How do I know he’s not remotely qualified as a specialist data analysts in elite sports? Looking at his CV perhaps.
He'll arrive next week, set up a live podcast from the Royal Oak, plug in his guitar and thunder out the new manager's name, two / three marquee signings and our intention to begin our assault on Europe - all in song!
When Airman ‘likes’ that post it scares me , we’ve got another nutbag , let’s hope he’s more useful than that goalkeeping coach from Swindon’s nutsack .
We have "known" that Martin is in charge of recruitment and many of us have raised it as a massive red flag. The proof of the pudding will of course be in the eating (happy with that @Henry Irving) but it is a big concern.
With the back ground of that there is little point employing a "manager", be it Adkins, Taylor, Warburton or Duff.
Whilst I don't buy into the buzz word bingo that is a young, hungry, progressive coach, thatnis exactly what we need, because of the way the club is run.
Mmmmmm……"I have my doubts that Martin is actually “in charge” of recruitment. On paper it may read that way but I don’t buy that.
I haven't got an issue with the owner suggesting the style of football he wants to see us play and promising to back the manager in getting the players needed to achieve it. It becomes more worrying when it gets like Roland explaining football tactics to a manager who is an ex England international. If Sandgaard thinks he has discovered the secret of success in terms of a playing style it is worrying in the extreme. There are many different paths but his backing is needed. With limited resources the approach has to always be a pragmatic one based on what you have and how your best players play.
The problem is, I don't know which of these is correct and I doubt many of us do. There are lingering doubts about Sandgaard based on genuine clues. I would say not yet definitive but that in itself is worrying. And we should be open to this possibility.
I agree with this. The turning point for me would be if Sandgaard is issuing Roland-esque emails or trying to dictate how training sessions should go.
Currently I have no reason to think that this is the case and if anyone knows differently then they should be making it public very very quickly. Until then we have to accept that there is nothing wrong with an owner wanting a certain type of football and finding the staff to implement it.
MS certainly tried at least once last season.
This needs context.
If he was at the training ground and saw a lacklustre group of players who were not putting a shift in then he’s more than got a right to ask for more surely?
If he was there to effectively ask JJ to try something different in training then that wouldn’t be on.
Context please.
What right does he have to involve himself on training effort, or lack of? He’s an analyst, not his remit
He’s barely an analyst. He’s only an analyst because daddy said so. I manage a team of data analysts. He wouldn’t even get an interview anywhere else.
You know this how ?
Presumably his LinkedIn profile.
He might say he used data in his last role but he’s never had a pure analytics position.
I cannot believe we’re legitimately arguing over whether this is a person qualified to not just be a data analyst, but to lead data analysis at a professional football club. I wouldn’t even give him an entry level job.
For some context, the entry level data analysts on my team have published work, PhDs, skills across multiple platforms and coding languages. Minimum.
Just out of interest, what management qualifications do you have?
Comments
On the search for a new manager, TS again mentioned that we'd be looking for a manager who brought more intensity to training.
As stated before by me and others, the context of this is all important.
I can look at the number of points we have in a league table and make a judgement from that.
I can watch a match and look at the number of goals scored by each team, and then reach a conclusion as to the result.
On paper it may read that way but I don’t buy that.
Daniel Sturridge got banned by the FA back in 2019 as per below
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/49031533
He might say he used data in his last role but he’s never had a pure analytics position.
Just saying.
*said for the purpose of a joke.
What more does he need to know!
If it was really from AM would his mate be so stupid as to put it on twitter?
He'll arrive next week, set up a live podcast from the Royal Oak, plug in his guitar and thunder out the new manager's name, two / three marquee signings and our intention to begin our assault on Europe - all in song!
The Charlton reboot is about to begin!
Blimey that coffees strong ...