I really don’t see what the problem is with the club statement? They’ve been forced into responding because of all the wild speculation that’s going around and not put out by the club, which seems perfectly understandable to me.
Yes, we all wish a new manager, coaching staff and players were all in place but the reason they ain’t is presumably stuff going on behind the scenes that very few if any, know about.
I imagine Sandgaard and all would’ve liked the same but it is what it is and why add to the furore by creating and kicking up such a fuss over things unknown?
Wild speculation? There is a stand-off between media and Charlton because reporters at both ends of the transaction do not believe the club and won't accept its version based on their own sources. In the end there are at least three parties with first-hand information and only one of them is responsible for the club's statement.
Do the club not have a right to handle their affairs as they see fit, even if the majority of us don't like that stance?
Indeed, but if they deliberately mislead fans in the process then they should expect damage to the credibility of those responsible.
The media also have a right to report on the club's affairs as they see fit within the law regardless of what the current owner thinks about that.
Let's see how it plays out, shall we? The media view is that Garner has the job - I doubt if a qualification over job title, contract length, etc, would seem to most people a proportionate reason to rubbish the stories that are out there.
If the media have it substantively wrong then they will get the reputational hit. That's the nature of the business.
A deal is not done until it’s done - I’d have thought u of all people would have learnt that by now
I really don’t see what the problem is with the club statement? They’ve been forced into responding because of all the wild speculation that’s going around and not put out by the club, which seems perfectly understandable to me.
Yes, we all wish a new manager, coaching staff and players were all in place but the reason they ain’t is presumably stuff going on behind the scenes that very few if any, know about.
I imagine Sandgaard and all would’ve liked the same but it is what it is and why add to the furore by creating and kicking up such a fuss over things unknown?
Wild speculation? There is a stand-off between media and Charlton because reporters at both ends of the transaction do not believe the club and won't accept its version based on their own sources. In the end there are at least three parties with first-hand information and only one of them is responsible for the club's statement.
Do the club not have a right to handle their affairs as they see fit, even if the majority of us don't like that stance?
Indeed, but if they deliberately mislead fans in the process then they should expect damage to the credibility of those responsible.
The media also have a right to report on the club's affairs as they see fit within the law regardless of what the current owner thinks about that.
Let's see how it plays out, shall we? The media view is that Garner has the job - I doubt if a qualification over job title, contract length, etc, would seem to most people a proportionate reason to rubbish the stories that are out there.
If the media have it substantively wrong then they will get the reputational hit. That's the nature of the business.
A deal is not done until it’s done - I’d have thought u of all people would have learnt that by now
I have no idea what is going on at the moment,but one thing for sure,if I was TS and had committed the money he had to saving this club,I would look on this site at some of the piss taking remarks and say to myself"Fuck this for a game of soldiers,I am out".
exactly my thoughts - i hope it works out for him this year i really do coz however people view his decision making, there's no doubt he's trying and spending
Well said .. the comments about him and his family are shocking he saved the club when no else had the bollocks for the fight … he started a long journey of undoing years and years going back to Richard Murray of neglect and cost cutting .. this is not going to sorted in 18 months ….I did see a vote on one site that asked if you still have confidence in TS and pleased to say the no’s were below 30% ….remember how long it’s taken a club with the financial clout of Man Utd to get the right manager and there still trying puts it into perspective
Agreeed I just wish he wasn’t so arrogant about things , i think what he has done for club just should not be overlooked but he really isn’t making things easy for himself
Mmmmm…….I’m not sure it’s arrogance, more likely a bit of naivety if you ask me.
Anyone else thinking of transferring their allegiance to Swindon?
If we did, we'd only complain that we have no clarity about who the manager is, then complain when we let him move to Charlton and set up a whole thread bemoaning that despite this rumbling on for weeks there wasn't a replacement ready to be announced at the same time as the Garner departure.
Oh and we would all fall in love with Jonny Williams again, then find out he had been sold to Forest Green Rovers or injured or both.
I really don’t see what the problem is with the club statement? They’ve been forced into responding because of all the wild speculation that’s going around and not put out by the club, which seems perfectly understandable to me.
Yes, we all wish a new manager, coaching staff and players were all in place but the reason they ain’t is presumably stuff going on behind the scenes that very few if any, know about.
I imagine Sandgaard and all would’ve liked the same but it is what it is and why add to the furore by creating and kicking up such a fuss over things unknown?
Wild speculation? There is a stand-off between media and Charlton because reporters at both ends of the transaction do not believe the club and won't accept its version based on their own sources. In the end there are at least three parties with first-hand information and only one of them is responsible for the club's statement.
Do the club not have a right to handle their affairs as they see fit, even if the majority of us don't like that stance?
Indeed, but if they deliberately mislead fans in the process then they should expect damage to the credibility of those responsible.
The media also have a right to report on the club's affairs as they see fit within the law regardless of what the current owner thinks about that.
Let's see how it plays out, shall we? The media view is that Garner has the job - I doubt if a qualification over job title, contract length, etc, would seem to most people a proportionate reason to rubbish the stories that are out there.
If the media have it substantively wrong then they will get the reputational hit. That's the nature of the business.
Are the club deliberately misleading or simply not wanting information out there that's either false or misleading?
If the folk at Swindon are holding out for more dosh they must have extremely short memories.
On the 11th March 2000 we were 12 points ahead in the division, Swindon were 6 points adrift at the bottom. Dean Kiely presented them with an own goal - and three points at the Valley. Not only that but we gave Willie Carson a cheque for 2 grand on the pitch at half time cos they were so hard up.
I mean, talk about ungrateful, tight sods they should gift us their management team.
If the folk at Swindon are holding out for more dosh they must have extremely short memories.
On the 11th March 2000 we were 12 points ahead in the division, Swindon were 6 points adrift at the bottom. Dean Kiely presented them with an own goal - and three points at the Valley. Not only that but we gave Willie Carson a cheque for 2 grand on the pitch at half time cos they were so hard up.
I mean, talk about ungrateful, tight sods they should gift us their management team.
If the folk at Swindon are holding out for more dosh they must have extremely short memories.
On the 11th March 2000 we were 12 points ahead in the division, Swindon were 6 points adrift at the bottom. Dean Kiely presented them with an own goal - and three points at the Valley. Not only that but we gave Willie Carson a cheque for 2 grand on the pitch at half time cos they were so hard up.
I mean, talk about ungrateful, tight sods they should gift us their management team.
I really don’t see what the problem is with the club statement? They’ve been forced into responding because of all the wild speculation that’s going around and not put out by the club, which seems perfectly understandable to me.
Yes, we all wish a new manager, coaching staff and players were all in place but the reason they ain’t is presumably stuff going on behind the scenes that very few if any, know about.
I imagine Sandgaard and all would’ve liked the same but it is what it is and why add to the furore by creating and kicking up such a fuss over things unknown?
Wild speculation? There is a stand-off between media and Charlton because reporters at both ends of the transaction do not believe the club and won't accept its version based on their own sources. In the end there are at least three parties with first-hand information and only one of them is responsible for the club's statement.
Do the club not have a right to handle their affairs as they see fit, even if the majority of us don't like that stance?
Indeed, but if they deliberately mislead fans in the process then they should expect damage to the credibility of those responsible.
The media also have a right to report on the club's affairs as they see fit within the law regardless of what the current owner thinks about that.
Let's see how it plays out, shall we? The media view is that Garner has the job - I doubt if a qualification over job title, contract length, etc, would seem to most people a proportionate reason to rubbish the stories that are out there.
If the media have it substantively wrong then they will get the reputational hit. That's the nature of the business.
Are the club deliberately misleading or simply not wanting information out there that's either false or misleading?
If Ben Garner isn’t JJ’s successor that would be fair. But the club hasn’t denied that. It’s just blowing smoke.
Don't forget that Swindon club and fans are in the same concern as us. Until we announce their manager is ours, they cannot bring in a new manager officially. I can imagine Swindon fans calling TS as many bad names as our fans
I really don’t see what the problem is with the club statement? They’ve been forced into responding because of all the wild speculation that’s going around and not put out by the club, which seems perfectly understandable to me.
Yes, we all wish a new manager, coaching staff and players were all in place but the reason they ain’t is presumably stuff going on behind the scenes that very few if any, know about.
I imagine Sandgaard and all would’ve liked the same but it is what it is and why add to the furore by creating and kicking up such a fuss over things unknown?
Wild speculation? There is a stand-off between media and Charlton because reporters at both ends of the transaction do not believe the club and won't accept its version based on their own sources. In the end there are at least three parties with first-hand information and only one of them is responsible for the club's statement.
Do the club not have a right to handle their affairs as they see fit, even if the majority of us don't like that stance?
Indeed, but if they deliberately mislead fans in the process then they should expect damage to the credibility of those responsible.
The media also have a right to report on the club's affairs as they see fit within the law regardless of what the current owner thinks about that.
Let's see how it plays out, shall we? The media view is that Garner has the job - I doubt if a qualification over job title, contract length, etc, would seem to most people a proportionate reason to rubbish the stories that are out there.
If the media have it substantively wrong then they will get the reputational hit. That's the nature of the business.
The media frequently "get it wrong", that's one of the reasons why news paper circulation is dropping. Remember the saying. "Don't believe all you read newspapers". Garner may well have been offered the job but until its signed, settled, sealed and announced on the clubs site, he's not manager of Charlton Athletic, whatever Crawley or any other Journo's speculate.
I really don’t see what the problem is with the club statement? They’ve been forced into responding because of all the wild speculation that’s going around and not put out by the club, which seems perfectly understandable to me.
Yes, we all wish a new manager, coaching staff and players were all in place but the reason they ain’t is presumably stuff going on behind the scenes that very few if any, know about.
I imagine Sandgaard and all would’ve liked the same but it is what it is and why add to the furore by creating and kicking up such a fuss over things unknown?
Wild speculation? There is a stand-off between media and Charlton because reporters at both ends of the transaction do not believe the club and won't accept its version based on their own sources. In the end there are at least three parties with first-hand information and only one of them is responsible for the club's statement.
Do the club not have a right to handle their affairs as they see fit, even if the majority of us don't like that stance?
Indeed, but if they deliberately mislead fans in the process then they should expect damage to the credibility of those responsible.
The media also have a right to report on the club's affairs as they see fit within the law regardless of what the current owner thinks about that.
Let's see how it plays out, shall we? The media view is that Garner has the job - I doubt if a qualification over job title, contract length, etc, would seem to most people a proportionate reason to rubbish the stories that are out there.
If the media have it substantively wrong then they will get the reputational hit. That's the nature of the business.
The media frequently "get it wrong", that's one of the reasons why news paper circulation is dropping. Remember the saying. "Don't believe all you read newspapers". Garner may well have been offered the job but until its signed, settled, sealed and announced on the clubs site, he's not manager of Charlton Athletic, whatever Crawley or any other Journo's speculate.
1) It’s really not. There are all sorts of reasons print sales are falling but a decline in the quality of (football) reporting isn’t one of them.
2) What if he’s actually signed a contract and been at the training ground for talks with staff?
I really don’t see what the problem is with the club statement? They’ve been forced into responding because of all the wild speculation that’s going around and not put out by the club, which seems perfectly understandable to me.
Yes, we all wish a new manager, coaching staff and players were all in place but the reason they ain’t is presumably stuff going on behind the scenes that very few if any, know about.
I imagine Sandgaard and all would’ve liked the same but it is what it is and why add to the furore by creating and kicking up such a fuss over things unknown?
Wild speculation? There is a stand-off between media and Charlton because reporters at both ends of the transaction do not believe the club and won't accept its version based on their own sources. In the end there are at least three parties with first-hand information and only one of them is responsible for the club's statement.
Do the club not have a right to handle their affairs as they see fit, even if the majority of us don't like that stance?
Indeed, but if they deliberately mislead fans in the process then they should expect damage to the credibility of those responsible.
The media also have a right to report on the club's affairs as they see fit within the law regardless of what the current owner thinks about that.
Let's see how it plays out, shall we? The media view is that Garner has the job - I doubt if a qualification over job title, contract length, etc, would seem to most people a proportionate reason to rubbish the stories that are out there.
If the media have it substantively wrong then they will get the reputational hit. That's the nature of the business.
The media frequently "get it wrong", that's one of the reasons why news paper circulation is dropping. Remember the saying. "Don't believe all you read newspapers". Garner may well have been offered the job but until its signed, settled, sealed and announced on the clubs site, he's not manager of Charlton Athletic, whatever Crawley or any other Journo's speculate.
1) It’s really not. There are all sorts of reasons print sales are falling but a decline in the quality of (football) reporting isn’t one of them.
2) What if he’s actually signed a contract and been at the training ground for talks with staff?
Iirc it was Nixon who originally broke the story two weeks ago. Cawley only repeated it, but because Rich has credibility and Nixon doesn't it only gained currency when Cawley tweeted it.
I just hope of it is Garner then it happens this week.
I reckon announcements by the end of the week - just a guess, but would imagine he wants it all sorted just as much as we do. Didn’t TS arrive or due to arrive today/tomorrow? Wouldn’t surprise me at all if he wants to announce new head coach and his team, together with a couple of signings in one or two hits. We all want this to happen yesterday of course, but the fact is that when Adkins was sacked he said a decision would be made by Christmas and then when JJ went he said a decision by pre-season. So he’s given timescales and we therefore shouldn’t be surprised appointments haven’t already happened.
Iirc it was Nixon who originally broke the story two weeks ago. Cawley only repeated it, but because Rich has credibility and Nixon doesn't it only gained currency when Cawley tweeted it.
I just hope of it is Garner then it happens this week.
Nixon didn’t have it first, but him putting it out triggered the story appearing elsewhere.
I really don’t see what the problem is with the club statement? They’ve been forced into responding because of all the wild speculation that’s going around and not put out by the club, which seems perfectly understandable to me.
Yes, we all wish a new manager, coaching staff and players were all in place but the reason they ain’t is presumably stuff going on behind the scenes that very few if any, know about.
I imagine Sandgaard and all would’ve liked the same but it is what it is and why add to the furore by creating and kicking up such a fuss over things unknown?
Wild speculation? There is a stand-off between media and Charlton because reporters at both ends of the transaction do not believe the club and won't accept its version based on their own sources. In the end there are at least three parties with first-hand information and only one of them is responsible for the club's statement.
Do the club not have a right to handle their affairs as they see fit, even if the majority of us don't like that stance?
Indeed, but if they deliberately mislead fans in the process then they should expect damage to the credibility of those responsible.
The media also have a right to report on the club's affairs as they see fit within the law regardless of what the current owner thinks about that.
Let's see how it plays out, shall we? The media view is that Garner has the job - I doubt if a qualification over job title, contract length, etc, would seem to most people a proportionate reason to rubbish the stories that are out there.
If the media have it substantively wrong then they will get the reputational hit. That's the nature of the business.
The media frequently "get it wrong", that's one of the reasons why news paper circulation is dropping. Remember the saying. "Don't believe all you read newspapers". Garner may well have been offered the job but until its signed, settled, sealed and announced on the clubs site, he's not manager of Charlton Athletic, whatever Crawley or any other Journo's speculate.
1) It’s really not. There are all sorts of reasons print sales are falling but a decline in the quality of (football) reporting isn’t one of them.
2) What if he’s actually signed a contract and been at the training ground for talks with staff?
Are you saying 2 has happened?
and even if 2 had happened, is it not beyond the realms of possibility that the outcome of those chats has lead to complications along the lines of i can't work with him, we don't see eye to eye, he believes in doing this, i'll need to bring x, y and z in etc etc ?
Comments
Everyone has a right to an opinion but why all the faux or real anger, it can't be good for them.
Oh and we would all fall in love with Jonny Williams again, then find out he had been sold to Forest Green Rovers or injured or both.
Are the club deliberately misleading or simply not wanting information out there that's either false or misleading?
I gather he does not like frankfurters.
On the 11th March 2000 we were 12 points ahead in the division, Swindon were 6 points adrift at the bottom. Dean Kiely presented them with an own goal - and three points at the Valley. Not only that but we gave Willie Carson a cheque for 2 grand on the pitch at half time cos they were so hard up.
I mean, talk about ungrateful, tight sods they should gift us their management team.
Remember the saying. "Don't believe all you read newspapers".
Garner may well have been offered the job but until its signed, settled, sealed and announced on the clubs site, he's not manager of Charlton Athletic, whatever Crawley or any other Journo's speculate.
2) What if he’s actually signed a contract and been at the training ground for talks with staff?
I just hope of it is Garner then it happens this week.
Rich Cawley posted re: Garner on 25/5 at 9:52pm
Either Cawley can copy really fast or the story broke to both him and Nixon from the Swindon end at the same time.
I don’t believe that Cawley uses Alan Nixon’s patreon subscription as a source.