Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Summer 2022 transfer rumours (Gilbey loan confirmed p513, a signing falls through last minute p541)
Comments
-
Are you able to elaborate?Cafc43v3r said:
There is an "issue" with his contract.Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:
How is it more complicated? Why aren't things equal?Cafc43v3r said:
I think it is a lot more complicated than that.Scoham said:
I don’t think that’s why, I think as a former POTY and someone JJ would have kept the club assumed any new manager would want him.supaclive said:The simplest point is why sign JFC. To get a transfer fee that is non existent? Madness.I expect the extension option be triggered after the season ended (I saw that mentioned somewhere relating to another player) and presumably had a deadline for it to be done by, which was probably before Garner could have his input.
Whatever it is there’s something about his game that Garner doesn’t rate or see fitting in the system. I can only think it’s related to a lack of mobility and/or his passing style, on paper I think most of our fans would say he could fit into this team. Some would still want him as a starter.
All things being equal Garner would be happy with JFC as one of his 6. They aren't equal.
The best thing for everyone is now for JFC to leave the club. The problem is where. He can only move downwards until he proves his fitness.
He's a decent player and it seems daft that we have boxed ourselves into some sort of corner with him2 -
TS is currently based in England until at least the end of this year, if he's gone to the US he will be back shortly._MrDick said:So, TS headed back to the US after the Cambridge game. I thought he would’ve waited until after the end of the window had closed unless the business is done? New signings lined up? Who’s in charge? Should we be worried?10 -
Far bigger problems for him are his pace and inability to score from open play with his feet.killerandflash said:
Stockley to me seems a good captain off the pitch, but is a bit moany and self centred on the pitch for a captainTEL said:
Remains to be seen if those at the club feel the same. I think they may have snookered themselves by making Stockley captain. Having said that Pearce was dropped fairly frequentlyDOUCHER said:
agreed - as has been said a million times - stockley is decent at what target men do - but he isn't ideal for what we are doing and is a definite position to be upgraded if we are to get promoted - regardless of all the guff about others scoring and wide forwards arriving at the back post and all that - if you don't have a striker playing on the shoulder, you've lost half your attacking optionsTEL said:
I think there is a great opportunity for someone to come in and make the CF position their own.Chris_from_Sidcup said:
Plus of course if a striker is coming on loan then you'd assume it's because he's got almost zero chance of playing at his own club. So playing a bit for us is obviously better than nothing at wherever he is.TEL said:I don't agree that a striker won't come to us as he won't play every week.... now there are five subs of course they will.... might spur Stockley on as well... still don't think he fits the system though.
Stockley comes across as a really nice bloke but whilst playing all he seems to do is give a thumbs up when acknowledging a good ball he failed to connect to or waving his arms about and whining. As good a target man he undoubtedly is, it doesn't suit this game plan.
Nothing against Stockley personally (seems a great bloke) but we simply need our main striker to be able to score more than 1-2 goals a season from open play with their feet.8 -
That’s unusual for him isn’t it? Could fuel the rumours he’s looking for investors or a sale…ButtleJR said:
TS is currently based in England until at least the end of this year, if he's gone to the US he will be back shortly._MrDick said:So, TS headed back to the US after the Cambridge game. I thought he would’ve waited until after the end of the window had closed unless the business is done? New signings lined up? Who’s in charge? Should we be worried?1 -
Or he realises he needs to be more hands on than he originally intentioned. that or appoint a CEO.Scoham said:
That’s unusual for him isn’t it? Could fuel the rumours he’s looking for investors or a sale…ButtleJR said:
TS is currently based in England until at least the end of this year, if he's gone to the US he will be back shortly._MrDick said:So, TS headed back to the US after the Cambridge game. I thought he would’ve waited until after the end of the window had closed unless the business is done? New signings lined up? Who’s in charge? Should we be worried?12 -
As I understand it (and it's possible/probable I am incorrect), there was a salary cut written into his contract if the additional year was triggered by the club. Basically the intention was to try to sell him on, but not have to keep paying him a large salary until he went.Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:
Are you able to elaborate?Cafc43v3r said:
There is an "issue" with his contract.Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:
How is it more complicated? Why aren't things equal?Cafc43v3r said:
I think it is a lot more complicated than that.Scoham said:
I don’t think that’s why, I think as a former POTY and someone JJ would have kept the club assumed any new manager would want him.supaclive said:The simplest point is why sign JFC. To get a transfer fee that is non existent? Madness.I expect the extension option be triggered after the season ended (I saw that mentioned somewhere relating to another player) and presumably had a deadline for it to be done by, which was probably before Garner could have his input.
Whatever it is there’s something about his game that Garner doesn’t rate or see fitting in the system. I can only think it’s related to a lack of mobility and/or his passing style, on paper I think most of our fans would say he could fit into this team. Some would still want him as a starter.
All things being equal Garner would be happy with JFC as one of his 6. They aren't equal.
The best thing for everyone is now for JFC to leave the club. The problem is where. He can only move downwards until he proves his fitness.
He's a decent player and it seems daft that we have boxed ourselves into some sort of corner with him
Not sure if there was a salary increase based on performance numbers written into it also.
0 -
As custodian of the Club, he has a duty to try and minimise losses. No one wants to see the losses increase. RD ran up huge debts and we are now effectively indebted to him for them as he still wants to recover them in his asking price for the Valley & SL.charltonbob said:
Well sandgaard wants to cut losses from 8 mill to 4 mill this season. How long before staff are banned from eating crisps at their desks ?SheedyCAFC said:Are we really that strapped for cash we can’t afford paying 500k for McKirdy, or is it just downplaying it so that clubs/agents don’t try think we’ve got money to burn?
I would say having debts lessens the prospects of another buyer appearing who might be prepared to take us on, but we all know football's a funny old game and we are just an insane multi billionaire with no respect for the FFP rules or financial prudence away from the big time. I can't for the life of me understand why they're not queuing up.
On thread, I predict at least one player transfer to happen today, either way to keep it vague.2 -
You are undoubtedly right. The problem is, until that insane multi billionaire comes along to buy Charlton it is almost inevitable they will just keep bob, bob, bobbing along as a lower level league club. It's either that or we land on a manager who can produce miracles with relatively slim financial resources. Over the past few years we seem to have managed to work our way through a long list of candidates who have tried to do that. We will soon see if Ben Garner is that man.swordfish said:
As custodian of the Club, he has a duty to try and minimise losses. No one wants to see the losses increase. RD ran up huge debts and we are now effectively indebted to him for them as he still wants to recover them in his asking price for the Valley & SL.charltonbob said:
Well sandgaard wants to cut losses from 8 mill to 4 mill this season. How long before staff are banned from eating crisps at their desks ?SheedyCAFC said:Are we really that strapped for cash we can’t afford paying 500k for McKirdy, or is it just downplaying it so that clubs/agents don’t try think we’ve got money to burn?
I would say having debts lessens the prospects of another buyer appearing who might be prepared to take us on, but we all know football's a funny old game and we are just an insane multi billionaire with no respect for the FFP rules or financial prudence away from the big time. I can't for the life of me understand why they're not queuing up.
On thread, I predict at least one player transfer to happen today, either way to keep it vague.1 -
Age is just a number...can you pass the height test, if so you're in..Mendonca In Asdas said:
I think there’s more chance of me signing for. Charlton, and I’m in my 50’s!!!RonnieMoore said:Lyle Taylor can leave on a free according to Forest today
1 -
Or just sorting the shit out?Scoham said:
That’s unusual for him isn’t it? Could fuel the rumours he’s looking for investors or a sale…ButtleJR said:
TS is currently based in England until at least the end of this year, if he's gone to the US he will be back shortly._MrDick said:So, TS headed back to the US after the Cambridge game. I thought he would’ve waited until after the end of the window had closed unless the business is done? New signings lined up? Who’s in charge? Should we be worried?0 -
Sponsored links:
-
I think it was more of the case the whole contract was a massive salary cut, which was fair enough as he was injured.Dazzler21 said:
As I understand it (and it's possible/probable I am incorrect), there was a salary cut written into his contract if the additional year was triggered by the club. Basically the intention was to try to sell him on, but not have to keep paying him a large salary until he went.Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:
Are you able to elaborate?Cafc43v3r said:
There is an "issue" with his contract.Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:
How is it more complicated? Why aren't things equal?Cafc43v3r said:
I think it is a lot more complicated than that.Scoham said:
I don’t think that’s why, I think as a former POTY and someone JJ would have kept the club assumed any new manager would want him.supaclive said:The simplest point is why sign JFC. To get a transfer fee that is non existent? Madness.I expect the extension option be triggered after the season ended (I saw that mentioned somewhere relating to another player) and presumably had a deadline for it to be done by, which was probably before Garner could have his input.
Whatever it is there’s something about his game that Garner doesn’t rate or see fitting in the system. I can only think it’s related to a lack of mobility and/or his passing style, on paper I think most of our fans would say he could fit into this team. Some would still want him as a starter.
All things being equal Garner would be happy with JFC as one of his 6. They aren't equal.
The best thing for everyone is now for JFC to leave the club. The problem is where. He can only move downwards until he proves his fitness.
He's a decent player and it seems daft that we have boxed ourselves into some sort of corner with him
Not sure if there was a salary increase based on performance numbers written into it also.
The original issue, again I could be wrong, is he couldn’t, or the club won't let him, prove his recovery. I suspect that's both true, from a certain POV.
Now no one who can afford him, will buy him until/unless he proves his recovery.
We are now in a situation where we might end up paying him to play for someone else, that he doesn't want to play for, just to get out of a situation that was avoidable by both sides. At a number of points.
I still don't believe that it's JFC being here that has prevented us signing a striker.2 -
No doubt JFC will get a run out tonight. Hopefully prospective suitors will be watching.1
-
If he’s taken a massive salary cut then why can no one afford him? Wouldn’t that make a move a lot easier, as a new contract should at least be equal to what he’s now earning?Cafc43v3r said:
I think it was more of the case the whole contract was a massive salary cut, which was fair enough as he was injured.Dazzler21 said:
As I understand it (and it's possible/probable I am incorrect), there was a salary cut written into his contract if the additional year was triggered by the club. Basically the intention was to try to sell him on, but not have to keep paying him a large salary until he went.Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:
Are you able to elaborate?Cafc43v3r said:
There is an "issue" with his contract.Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:
How is it more complicated? Why aren't things equal?Cafc43v3r said:
I think it is a lot more complicated than that.Scoham said:
I don’t think that’s why, I think as a former POTY and someone JJ would have kept the club assumed any new manager would want him.supaclive said:The simplest point is why sign JFC. To get a transfer fee that is non existent? Madness.I expect the extension option be triggered after the season ended (I saw that mentioned somewhere relating to another player) and presumably had a deadline for it to be done by, which was probably before Garner could have his input.
Whatever it is there’s something about his game that Garner doesn’t rate or see fitting in the system. I can only think it’s related to a lack of mobility and/or his passing style, on paper I think most of our fans would say he could fit into this team. Some would still want him as a starter.
All things being equal Garner would be happy with JFC as one of his 6. They aren't equal.
The best thing for everyone is now for JFC to leave the club. The problem is where. He can only move downwards until he proves his fitness.
He's a decent player and it seems daft that we have boxed ourselves into some sort of corner with him
Not sure if there was a salary increase based on performance numbers written into it also.
The original issue, again I could be wrong, is he couldn’t, or the club won't let him, prove his recovery. I suspect that's both true, from a certain POV.
Now no one who can afford him, will buy him until/unless he proves his recovery.
We are now in a situation where we might end up paying him to play for someone else, that he doesn't want to play for, just to get out of a situation that was avoidable by both sides. At a number of points.
I still don't believe that it's JFC being here that has prevented us signing a striker.
If he’s expecting a new club to pay him what he was earning a few years ago then is he being unrealistic?3 -
I think if he had had a chance to prove his fitness then that may not be an issue. IMO the issue is that another club would be taking a risk in signing him now - without a run of games behind him , and therefore would be reluctant to sign him on a contract apart from a pay as you play. from JFC's point of view , no matter if he is earning less than he was a few years ago , a Pay as you play contract is not the way he wants to go. So either the club loans him out and pays his wages or they find someone to take a chance.Scoham said:
If he’s taken a massive salary cut then why can no one afford him? Wouldn’t that make a move a lot easier, as a new contract should at least be equal to what he’s now earning?Cafc43v3r said:
I think it was more of the case the whole contract was a massive salary cut, which was fair enough as he was injured.Dazzler21 said:
As I understand it (and it's possible/probable I am incorrect), there was a salary cut written into his contract if the additional year was triggered by the club. Basically the intention was to try to sell him on, but not have to keep paying him a large salary until he went.Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:
Are you able to elaborate?Cafc43v3r said:
There is an "issue" with his contract.Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:
How is it more complicated? Why aren't things equal?Cafc43v3r said:
I think it is a lot more complicated than that.Scoham said:
I don’t think that’s why, I think as a former POTY and someone JJ would have kept the club assumed any new manager would want him.supaclive said:The simplest point is why sign JFC. To get a transfer fee that is non existent? Madness.I expect the extension option be triggered after the season ended (I saw that mentioned somewhere relating to another player) and presumably had a deadline for it to be done by, which was probably before Garner could have his input.
Whatever it is there’s something about his game that Garner doesn’t rate or see fitting in the system. I can only think it’s related to a lack of mobility and/or his passing style, on paper I think most of our fans would say he could fit into this team. Some would still want him as a starter.
All things being equal Garner would be happy with JFC as one of his 6. They aren't equal.
The best thing for everyone is now for JFC to leave the club. The problem is where. He can only move downwards until he proves his fitness.
He's a decent player and it seems daft that we have boxed ourselves into some sort of corner with him
Not sure if there was a salary increase based on performance numbers written into it also.
The original issue, again I could be wrong, is he couldn’t, or the club won't let him, prove his recovery. I suspect that's both true, from a certain POV.
Now no one who can afford him, will buy him until/unless he proves his recovery.
We are now in a situation where we might end up paying him to play for someone else, that he doesn't want to play for, just to get out of a situation that was avoidable by both sides. At a number of points.
I still don't believe that it's JFC being here that has prevented us signing a striker.
If he’s expecting a new club to pay him what he was earning a few years ago then is he being unrealistic?0 -
I reckon we’ll be fortunate to bob along because we’re only a step away from falling into the hands of crooks again. Until we get the Valley and TG from Roland we’re still a hamstrung club.robinofottershaw said:
You are undoubtedly right. The problem is, until that insane multi billionaire comes along to buy Charlton it is almost inevitable they will just keep bob, bob, bobbing along as a lower level league club. It's either that or we land on a manager who can produce miracles with relatively slim financial resources. Over the past few years we seem to have managed to work our way through a long list of candidates who have tried to do that. We will soon see if Ben Garner is that man.swordfish said:
As custodian of the Club, he has a duty to try and minimise losses. No one wants to see the losses increase. RD ran up huge debts and we are now effectively indebted to him for them as he still wants to recover them in his asking price for the Valley & SL.charltonbob said:
Well sandgaard wants to cut losses from 8 mill to 4 mill this season. How long before staff are banned from eating crisps at their desks ?SheedyCAFC said:Are we really that strapped for cash we can’t afford paying 500k for McKirdy, or is it just downplaying it so that clubs/agents don’t try think we’ve got money to burn?
I would say having debts lessens the prospects of another buyer appearing who might be prepared to take us on, but we all know football's a funny old game and we are just an insane multi billionaire with no respect for the FFP rules or financial prudence away from the big time. I can't for the life of me understand why they're not queuing up.
On thread, I predict at least one player transfer to happen today, either way to keep it vague.
7 -
He’s probably gone to get some clean underwearButtleJR said:
TS is currently based in England until at least the end of this year, if he's gone to the US he will be back shortly._MrDick said:So, TS headed back to the US after the Cambridge game. I thought he would’ve waited until after the end of the window had closed unless the business is done? New signings lined up? Who’s in charge? Should we be worried?5 -
Maybe but can you see the potential flaw there?JamesSeed said:What happens before the famous slamming shut will potentially be massive for the club.No signings, and I think we struggle to make the play offs.
The right signings and we’ll be in with a decent shout.Peterborough, Ipswich, Wednesday and Portsmouth look to have very strong squads, and will probably finish above us. Then there’s Bolton and Derby.Sandgaard would be crazy not to invest right now.1 -
It's unrealistic if he hasn't recovered. When he did the injury in the first place there was championship offers on the table.Scoham said:
If he’s taken a massive salary cut then why can no one afford him? Wouldn’t that make a move a lot easier, as a new contract should at least be equal to what he’s now earning?Cafc43v3r said:
I think it was more of the case the whole contract was a massive salary cut, which was fair enough as he was injured.Dazzler21 said:
As I understand it (and it's possible/probable I am incorrect), there was a salary cut written into his contract if the additional year was triggered by the club. Basically the intention was to try to sell him on, but not have to keep paying him a large salary until he went.Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:
Are you able to elaborate?Cafc43v3r said:
There is an "issue" with his contract.Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:
How is it more complicated? Why aren't things equal?Cafc43v3r said:
I think it is a lot more complicated than that.Scoham said:
I don’t think that’s why, I think as a former POTY and someone JJ would have kept the club assumed any new manager would want him.supaclive said:The simplest point is why sign JFC. To get a transfer fee that is non existent? Madness.I expect the extension option be triggered after the season ended (I saw that mentioned somewhere relating to another player) and presumably had a deadline for it to be done by, which was probably before Garner could have his input.
Whatever it is there’s something about his game that Garner doesn’t rate or see fitting in the system. I can only think it’s related to a lack of mobility and/or his passing style, on paper I think most of our fans would say he could fit into this team. Some would still want him as a starter.
All things being equal Garner would be happy with JFC as one of his 6. They aren't equal.
The best thing for everyone is now for JFC to leave the club. The problem is where. He can only move downwards until he proves his fitness.
He's a decent player and it seems daft that we have boxed ourselves into some sort of corner with him
Not sure if there was a salary increase based on performance numbers written into it also.
The original issue, again I could be wrong, is he couldn’t, or the club won't let him, prove his recovery. I suspect that's both true, from a certain POV.
Now no one who can afford him, will buy him until/unless he proves his recovery.
We are now in a situation where we might end up paying him to play for someone else, that he doesn't want to play for, just to get out of a situation that was avoidable by both sides. At a number of points.
I still don't believe that it's JFC being here that has prevented us signing a striker.
If he’s expecting a new club to pay him what he was earning a few years ago then is he being unrealistic?
He probably feels if he had either had a run of 10 odd games at the end of last season, or had been released at the end of his contract, allowing him to try and prove it else where, he would be able to get what he thinks he is worth, even if it was a new contract here.1 -
Can't afford the cost of the flights with the cost fuel going up!! Tough time!!Scoham said:
That’s unusual for him isn’t it? Could fuel the rumours he’s looking for investors or a sale…ButtleJR said:
TS is currently based in England until at least the end of this year, if he's gone to the US he will be back shortly._MrDick said:So, TS headed back to the US after the Cambridge game. I thought he would’ve waited until after the end of the window had closed unless the business is done? New signings lined up? Who’s in charge? Should we be worried?0 -
I agree, but getting back to Mckirdy for a fee, I'm not sure I wouldn't prefer to take another hungry Premier League wannabe on loan. After all, anyone who comes through the door is a gamble guaranteeing jack shit.SouthLincsAddick said:
I reckon we’ll be fortunate to bob along because we’re only a step away from falling into the hands of crooks again. Until we get the Valley and TG from Roland we’re still a hamstrung club.robinofottershaw said:
You are undoubtedly right. The problem is, until that insane multi billionaire comes along to buy Charlton it is almost inevitable they will just keep bob, bob, bobbing along as a lower level league club. It's either that or we land on a manager who can produce miracles with relatively slim financial resources. Over the past few years we seem to have managed to work our way through a long list of candidates who have tried to do that. We will soon see if Ben Garner is that man.swordfish said:
As custodian of the Club, he has a duty to try and minimise losses. No one wants to see the losses increase. RD ran up huge debts and we are now effectively indebted to him for them as he still wants to recover them in his asking price for the Valley & SL.charltonbob said:
Well sandgaard wants to cut losses from 8 mill to 4 mill this season. How long before staff are banned from eating crisps at their desks ?SheedyCAFC said:Are we really that strapped for cash we can’t afford paying 500k for McKirdy, or is it just downplaying it so that clubs/agents don’t try think we’ve got money to burn?
I would say having debts lessens the prospects of another buyer appearing who might be prepared to take us on, but we all know football's a funny old game and we are just an insane multi billionaire with no respect for the FFP rules or financial prudence away from the big time. I can't for the life of me understand why they're not queuing up.
On thread, I predict at least one player transfer to happen today, either way to keep it vague.
That said, "Can you hear me Mr Sandgaard. Your boys need help up front. If he's the one Garner wants, for goodness sake back him, buy him, and let the chips fall as they may."2 -
Sponsored links:
-
They’ve been over for 6 weeks and he’s coming back at the end of this week. Perhaps he’s gone to see his own family or one of his other businesses?_MrDick said:So, TS headed back to the US after the Cambridge game. I thought he would’ve waited until after the end of the window had closed unless the business is done? New signings lined up? Who’s in charge? Should we be worried?2 -
I've heard we're looking at Izzy Brown1
-
The sobbing you can hear is the distant sound of our Physios hearing that newsMrBurns said:I've heard we're looking at Izzy Brown21 -
I wonder what US investors in Zynex think. Yes they have professional managers to run the business, but I'd be concerned if the founder was spending most of the time either running a football club in another country (with no real Zynex presence) or playing in a rock band.ButtleJR said:
TS is currently based in England until at least the end of this year, if he's gone to the US he will be back shortly._MrDick said:So, TS headed back to the US after the Cambridge game. I thought he would’ve waited until after the end of the window had closed unless the business is done? New signings lined up? Who’s in charge? Should we be worried?2 -
That’s exactly what we don’t need right now.MrBurns said:I've heard we're looking at Izzy Brown1 -
I had to Google him. The bible that is Wiki says 1 goal in the last 58 game spread across playing for 5 clubs!ElliotCAFC said:
That’s exactly what we don’t need right now.MrBurns said:I've heard we're looking at Izzy Brown0 -
Izzy wizzy let’s get busy0
-
I'd have thought they'd be ecstatic- keeps them in a job !ForeverAddickted said:
The sobbing you can hear is the distant sound of our Physios hearing that newsMrBurns said:I've heard we're looking at Izzy Brown3 -
Guess which team was unlucky enough to concede that 1 goal! Scored the winner against us for Luton in our championship seasonrobinofottershaw said:
I had to Google him. The bible that is Wiki says 1 goal in the last 58 game spread across playing for 5 clubs!ElliotCAFC said:
That’s exactly what we don’t need right now.MrBurns said:I've heard we're looking at Izzy Brown18
