Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Post-Match Thread: CHARLTON ATHLETIC v CHELTENHAM TOWN / FRIDAY 2nd DECEMBER 2022 7.45pm KO
Comments
-
There won't be many left at this rate.Kap10 said:
Our fans need to understand this as well.cabbles said:
I hope that if we do get someone in via Varney, they understand how broken the club is and the size of the task at hand. We can’t have another owner or owners coming into this thinking a few quid on some players, a new manager and we go again. For want of a better analogy, given the house buying one has been done to death, realise you are taking on an old building that needs extensive work and it’s not going to be something you quickly do up and sell on. If you want any sort of success you need to be prepared to be in it for years, and I do mean yearsDOUCHER said:best we can hope for is varney's man comes in, invests in jan with a view to taking over at the end of the season and ts walks away with, a 'thanks for saving us but best for all parties if we say goodbye' - long drawn out transfer saga is not what we need although i guess its preferable to nothing0 -
Who of the injured players would definitely have played last night ?soapboxsam said:Having injuries to key players affected Bowyer, Adkins, Jackson and now Garner.
Not having certain positions covered for two years is ridiculous. Left back to name just one !
Ben Garner is trying to get Chas and Dave to perform classical music at the Albert hall when maybe a good old knees up at Albert Square would be more fitting for this Charlton squad bereft of quality and numbers in so many positions.
No I don't mean Hoof effing ball but quality diagonal balls with an ability to increase the tempo. Mix and bloody match.0 -
Yeah I don’t think we are a million miles off. If we had added a centre back, left back and a striker then I think we’d be up there in or around the top 6. But instead we are playing kids, players out of position and with no recognised strikerCafc43v3r said:
Wigan turned it round super quick. A really good center back, center mid and center foward would make a massive difference. A couple of other upgrades and 2 or 3 decent loans. Away you go.cabbles said:
I hope that if we do get someone in via Varney, they understand how broken the club is and the size of the task at hand. We can’t have another owner or owners coming into this thinking a few quid on some players, a new manager and we go again. For want of a better analogy, given the house buying one has been done to death, realise you are taking on an old building that needs extensive work and it’s not going to be something you quickly do up and sell on. If you want any sort of success you need to be prepared to be in it for years, and I do mean yearsDOUCHER said:best we can hope for is varney's man comes in, invests in jan with a view to taking over at the end of the season and ts walks away with, a 'thanks for saving us but best for all parties if we say goodbye' - long drawn out transfer saga is not what we need although i guess its preferable to nothing
That would involve spending some money and knowing what you’re doing though.1 -
I reckon it could be turned round with two strikers and a defender of the right type. Yes we could do with more but this is league one.1
-
The morning after the night before. I'm not angry or disappointed, just sad that a team I have supported for over 50 years is moving head long into oblivion.
Let's be honest, apart from the Curbs golden age and a few other seasons we've been struggling most of this time. But I had always thought the players we had were (mostly) good pros who may not have been the greatest but cared. (For example, think Bolder, Nelson, Walsh, Webster from our time at West ham). So the hope was always there that a good run could see us promoted.
That hope for me is now gone and last night just confirmed it. We have a squad of players who aren't good enough or just injury prone. The only two who would fetch a fee who played last night would surely be Dobson and Clare .
The really sad thing for me is if you have young kids, how on earth would you get them to support us now? And so hhe next generation of fans is disappearing before our eyes.
It's all been said about TS and Garner. No need for me to repeat it. All I would say is unless something changes quickly we are in a downward spiral. Who knows where that will finish. You only have to look at the great old names in the National league to see where it might end. And don't think unless something changes soon that can't happen to us.8 -
Wollacott, Egbo, O'Connell, CBT, Leaburn.wmcf123 said:
Who of the injured players would definitely have played last night ?soapboxsam said:Having injuries to key players affected Bowyer, Adkins, Jackson and now Garner.
Not having certain positions covered for two years is ridiculous. Left back to name just one !
Ben Garner is trying to get Chas and Dave to perform classical music at the Albert hall when maybe a good old knees up at Albert Square would be more fitting for this Charlton squad bereft of quality and numbers in so many positions.
No I don't mean Hoof effing ball but quality diagonal balls with an ability to increase the tempo. Mix and bloody match.
Add in the suspended Stockley (whether he fits the style of play or not), and that's more than half the first team missing.
4 -
A lot of growing dissent against Garner.
But what tactics WOULD work WITH THESE PLAYERS? At least we put on a sustained performance in the second half and looked comfortable, even threatening at times (until calamity struck). At least he has a system of playing. The players look like they buy into it. Throw it in the bin and what then? Two banks of four, play direct? With what strikers, I ask?6 -
Exactly. The alternative is playing how we did under Jackson, which was certainly no better.Leuth said:A lot of growing dissent against Garner.
But what tactics WOULD work WITH THESE PLAYERS? At least we put on a sustained performance in the second half and looked comfortable, even threatening at times (until calamity struck). At least he has a system of playing. The players look like they buy into it. Throw it in the bin and what then? Two banks of four, play direct? With what strikers, I ask?2 -
Just watched the highlights. What a mess and I don’t mean the abject defending and lack of desire. It’s the general treacle that’s seeped into every corner of the club and ground it to a halt.
This is the lowest I’ve felt in 35 years of supporting CAFC.
0 -
No manager is going to turn around this team before January with the current injuries etc.
I don't think sacking Ben will change our fortunes. Or that Ben is entirely the problem.
Like any manager , he needs the chance to be backed. Able to add 3-4 quality players of his choosing then be judged after 4-5 games.
I think Ben did the right thing by giving the youngsters a chance. SL hasn't been good enough and I thought Ness and Mitchell did well. They weren't part of the issue last night.4 - Sponsored links:
-
We were well on top for about fifteen minutes early in the second half but were never going to actually score - partly because we had a winger playing at centre forward and contributing nothing. (Not really his fault though!)
Is there some strange rule I don't know about which prevents substitutions before 65 minutes of the game have passed?
Why not bring on Chucks at half time - give it a go for thirty minutes and then bring him off again when he's had enough. Instead, we bring on our only potential scorer for the last fifteen minutes to run around with a patched-up team of substitutes who don't really know what they're supposed to be doing.
Five substitutes means five substitutes. You don't have to wait for the last five minutes to use them!3 -
our goalie should not take all the blame for the goal, he did misjudge it but he should not have been left one on one outside his area, where were the 3 CDs? As for goal scoring we had nobody, Chuks included, who had the ability to score against a packed defence, we deserved nothing and got nothing.
right I'll do the stats now - joy of joys0 -
The highlights don't remotely tell the story of the game. With a cutting edge up front we'd have won that easilyValley11 said:Just watched the highlights. What a mess and I don’t mean the abject defending and lack of desire. It’s the general treacle that’s seeped into every corner of the club and ground it to a halt.
This is the lowest I’ve felt in 35 years of supporting CAFC.2 -
Just looking up, Garner has a 31% win ratio and Jackson had 37% when he was made permanent, even better record if you include his caretaker spell. So you could say Jackson was more effectiveSmithy said:
Exactly. The alternative is playing how we did under Jackson, which was certainly no better.Leuth said:A lot of growing dissent against Garner.
But what tactics WOULD work WITH THESE PLAYERS? At least we put on a sustained performance in the second half and looked comfortable, even threatening at times (until calamity struck). At least he has a system of playing. The players look like they buy into it. Throw it in the bin and what then? Two banks of four, play direct? With what strikers, I ask?2 -
Also, a lot of people praising Ness and Mitchell and damning Garner in the same breath. Who, I ask, had the foresight to pick both of those players and deploy them like that?4
-
You mean, "If we'd remotely looked like scoring we might not have lost"?Leuth said:
The highlights don't remotely tell the story of the game. With a cutting edge up front we'd have won that easilyValley11 said:Just watched the highlights. What a mess and I don’t mean the abject defending and lack of desire. It’s the general treacle that’s seeped into every corner of the club and ground it to a halt.
This is the lowest I’ve felt in 35 years of supporting CAFC.
Genius.1 -
Garner evidently has a vision of how he wants his teams to play.Mr_invisible said:I’m not sure how some people can say Garner is a good manager and with right backing would do well. On what evidence?
no doubt he was stitched up by the chairman with thin squad but I’m sorry we should be preforming a lot better than this . I can’t even listen to his post match interviews anymore. Repetitive cringe.He has to go imo.
But that in itself doesn't make a good manager.
At this level, most clubs' squads are lacking in a couple of positions and of course, a run of injuries will decimate any team.
A good manager, however, will adapt his resources, formation and gameplan ..... we've rarely seen that with Garner though, generally persisting with his system even though he doesn't have sufficient specialist players to do the job.
First definition of madness: doing the same thing over and over again - yet expecting a different outcome.
It's a results business. A good manager sets up to get the results, however the style of football he wishes to play.
For example, look how Chris Powell set up to win the division title, by first making us difficult to beat.
Imagine a Curbishley type manager coming in, he'd set up straight away for the result first, jam and cream later.
Crikey, even Neil bloody Warnock would come in, grab the dressing room by the throat, and turn things round.
Come on, Ben Garner, for now put your Man City type vision of football on ice.
This is the Third Division, the reality.
You've only got the players you've got.
Get back to basics and just win games.
11 -
This is ludicrously unfair. He started out wanting us to play 4-3-3 but quickly found that a hybrid 4-4-2 suited us much better. With our defensive injuries he went 5-3-2 last night and it worked as a shape. He's shown plenty of adaptability.Oggy Red said:
Garner evidently has a vision of how he wants his teams to play.Mr_invisible said:I’m not sure how some people can say Garner is a good manager and with right backing would do well. On what evidence?
no doubt he was stitched up by the chairman with thin squad but I’m sorry we should be preforming a lot better than this . I can’t even listen to his post match interviews anymore. Repetitive cringe.He has to go imo.
But that in itself doesn't make a good manager.
At this level, most clubs' squads are lacking in a couple of positions and of course, a run of injuries will decimate any team.
A good manager, however, will adapt his resources, formation and gameplan ..... we've rarely seen that with Garner though, generally persisting with his system even though he doesn't have sufficient specialist players to do the job.
First definition of madness: doing the same thing over and over again - yet expecting a different outcome.
It's a results business. A good manager sets up to get the results, however the style of football he wishes to play.
For example, look how Chris Powell set up to win the division title, by first making us difficult to beat.
Imagine a Curbishley type manager coming in, he'd set up straight away for the result first, jam and cream later.
Crikey, even Neil bloody Warnock would come in, grab the dressing room by the throat, and turn things round.
Come on, Ben Garner, for now put your Man City type vision of football on ice.
This is the Third Division, the reality.
You've only got the players you've got.
Get back to basics and just win games.2 -
When Morgan failed to clear the jimmy Seed from 12 yards out, I knew it wasn’t going to be our night!
3 -
''Also, a lot of people praising Ness and Mitchell and damning Garner in the same breath. Who, I ask, had the foresight to pick both of those players and deploy them like that?''
Who else did Garner have available to pick then in those positions, please don't mention Lavelle we all know how poor he is. Surely JFK to start instead of Morgan, and Chuks for the first 50 mins or so. Also if you're going to field youngsters what was the matter with Kanu. Was CBT injured or ill?1 - Sponsored links:
-
It’s all a variation on a theme mate, backwards sideways plenty of possession in our own half. Stats driven thinking. Don’t worry though he’ll stick with his principles and it’ll be sink or swim and if it’s the former he’ll get a one years salary pay off aparently 😏.Leuth said:
This is ludicrously unfair. He started out wanting us to play 4-3-3 but quickly found that a hybrid 4-4-2 suited us much better. With our defensive injuries he went 5-3-2 last night and it worked as a shape. He's shown plenty of adaptability.Oggy Red said:
Garner evidently has a vision of how he wants his teams to play.Mr_invisible said:I’m not sure how some people can say Garner is a good manager and with right backing would do well. On what evidence?
no doubt he was stitched up by the chairman with thin squad but I’m sorry we should be preforming a lot better than this . I can’t even listen to his post match interviews anymore. Repetitive cringe.He has to go imo.
But that in itself doesn't make a good manager.
At this level, most clubs' squads are lacking in a couple of positions and of course, a run of injuries will decimate any team.
A good manager, however, will adapt his resources, formation and gameplan ..... we've rarely seen that with Garner though, generally persisting with his system even though he doesn't have sufficient specialist players to do the job.
First definition of madness: doing the same thing over and over again - yet expecting a different outcome.
It's a results business. A good manager sets up to get the results, however the style of football he wishes to play.
For example, look how Chris Powell set up to win the division title, by first making us difficult to beat.
Imagine a Curbishley type manager coming in, he'd set up straight away for the result first, jam and cream later.
Crikey, even Neil bloody Warnock would come in, grab the dressing room by the throat, and turn things round.
Come on, Ben Garner, for now put your Man City type vision of football on ice.
This is the Third Division, the reality.
You've only got the players you've got.
Get back to basics and just win games.6 -
None.Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:Has anybody got any inside info about the actual through the door attendance figure?
We all went through a turnstile. Rob Lee was manning mine 😀2 -
I've been critical of Garner's approach ..... but I can understand his thinking here.BigRedEvil said:
LOL I suppose he can't really say he's recalled a youngster because he's been so awfulLouisMend said:
Sandgaard won't get rid of Garner, will cost him a fair bit of money and if he is looking to sell he will want to save as much money as possible
Obviously he wanted to inject some pace along the wings by pushing Clare and Sess further forward as wingbacks.
Three centre halves required as a back line - Innis central, okay ....... but Slowcoach Sam playing as a wide CB? He'd be ripped to shreds.
Bringing in the 2 youngsters for full debuts either side of Inniss was an idea worth trying, bringing energy, pace and quick reactions.
Okay, no experience - but Clare and Sess as wingbacks would offer the necessary defensive cover.
The 2 lads both did well. Clare and Sess covered effectively and still got forward.
Lavelle is an orthodox CB, where he's got cover.
Play him in that role or don't play him at all.
7 -
Leuth said:
This is ludicrously unfair. He started out wanting us to play 4-3-3 but quickly found that a hybrid 4-4-2 suited us much better. With our defensive injuries he went 5-3-2 last night and it worked as a shape. He's shown plenty of adaptability.Oggy Red said:
Garner evidently has a vision of how he wants his teams to play.Mr_invisible said:I’m not sure how some people can say Garner is a good manager and with right backing would do well. On what evidence?
no doubt he was stitched up by the chairman with thin squad but I’m sorry we should be preforming a lot better than this . I can’t even listen to his post match interviews anymore. Repetitive cringe.He has to go imo.
But that in itself doesn't make a good manager.
At this level, most clubs' squads are lacking in a couple of positions and of course, a run of injuries will decimate any team.
A good manager, however, will adapt his resources, formation and gameplan ..... we've rarely seen that with Garner though, generally persisting with his system even though he doesn't have sufficient specialist players to do the job.
First definition of madness: doing the same thing over and over again - yet expecting a different outcome.
It's a results business. A good manager sets up to get the results, however the style of football he wishes to play.
For example, look how Chris Powell set up to win the division title, by first making us difficult to beat.
Imagine a Curbishley type manager coming in, he'd set up straight away for the result first, jam and cream later.
Crikey, even Neil bloody Warnock would come in, grab the dressing room by the throat, and turn things round.
Come on, Ben Garner, for now put your Man City type vision of football on ice.
This is the Third Division, the reality.
You've only got the players you've got.
Get back to basics and just win games.
Your opinion, @Leuth fair enough.
Even though Garner adapted the shape, he didn't adapt his methods. We didn't create sufficient chances and we rarely looked like scoring.
I'm not the manager, he is. I don't have to get results, he does.
0 -
The darkest hour is just before the dawn.
Hold onto that thought.5 -
Such is the unbalanced and threadbare quality in our squad, BG was forced to go with a fluid 5-3-2, 3-4-1-2 formation. The kids did ok, the front pair were ineffective and other than the kids only Dobbo and Claire came out of that game with a decent showing IMHO.I hold only one family name responsible for this underachieving pile of bull crap and am rapidly losing my patience to attend games at the Valley. The whole experience, other than staff in the hospitality side, who are really lovely, is really beginning to p*ss me off. I can only pray that we see the back of the current owners some time very soon!2
-
We are now seeing the results of the terrible transfer window and the fact that we failed to sign players for key areas. When the likes of @golfaddick were screaming I was pretty verbose in saying calm down TS will get them signed. As I said at the time I felt pretty stupid when the window closed and that was it for me ! TS is a smoke and mirrors merchant, talks a good talk but thinks he is clever enough to succeed on the cheap, buy cheap players improve them and sell for a big profit. That's ok if you know what your doing which it is very clear no he doesnt.
A new manager wont make any difference all we can hope for is if there is any serious interest from prospective new owners they are decent knowledgeable people or atleast ones prepared to employ people that are.1 -
Last night's team was an indictment of our recruitment as much as anything else. We had a patched up team with 2 rookie centre backs and no strikers starting, yet we still had a bench full of experience.
With the lack of strikers, I wonder whether he needs to change his tactics a bit and try and make us harder to beat. We've GOT to stop letting in soft goals, and that's not just down to the centre backs or keeper.3 -
I’m not sure of the exact goings on up there, but I thought I saw they were in financial trouble again. In the short term, I agree if you spend some decent money at this level and know what you are doing, it can be turned round quickly. My comment was more along the lines of the structural changes that need to be made for long term success. I’ve mentioned it before, but we need someone like John Berylson at Millwall. I appreciate they never hit the highs of the Prem under him (they may do at some point, although the money in football is obscene now), but they have steadily cemented themselves under his ownership and have been consistent in the long term. We need that sort of long term approach now. Whether it is possible given how football is now compared to when someone like him took over, I don’t know. Perhaps football club owners are the Sangaards of this world or unknown Middle Eastern money men now. No real understanding of how things work and all just short termists? Throw money at it and hope.Cafc43v3r said:
Wigan turned it round super quick. A really good center back, center mid and center foward would make a massive difference. A couple of other upgrades and 2 or 3 decent loans. Away you go.cabbles said:
I hope that if we do get someone in via Varney, they understand how broken the club is and the size of the task at hand. We can’t have another owner or owners coming into this thinking a few quid on some players, a new manager and we go again. For want of a better analogy, given the house buying one has been done to death, realise you are taking on an old building that needs extensive work and it’s not going to be something you quickly do up and sell on. If you want any sort of success you need to be prepared to be in it for years, and I do mean yearsDOUCHER said:best we can hope for is varney's man comes in, invests in jan with a view to taking over at the end of the season and ts walks away with, a 'thanks for saving us but best for all parties if we say goodbye' - long drawn out transfer saga is not what we need although i guess its preferable to nothing
That would involve spending some money and knowing what your doing though.1 -
another shocker, as becomes increasingly obvious as time goes on, we are shambolic from top to bottom, from owner, to management to team .. looking for a light in the bleak darkness ? .. a couple of promising youngsters were given games .. let's hope they are not too demoralised by the experience0
