Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Charlie Kirk (p68 - released by Barrow)
Comments
-
Can we swap them? I reckon our Charlie is probably better with politics and this one can’t be any worse playing football? Might have to play him on the right wing thoughChizz said:He may not be a very good footballer. But his football's way better than his politics.6 -
I think last night burned any bridges Kirk had with Appleton too. He hinted as much and included a few others. I feel for Kirk. Somethings gone horribly wrong for him and I’m sure his life is pretty miserable as far as his football goes. Even if we have to pay all his wages I think it makes sense to loan him out in January. I really don’t see the club paying up his contract. He’s floundering at Charlton and for his sake needs to get away. I know I keep saying it but who scouted him and thought paying serious money for league one.3
-
The crazy thing with Kirk is that I honestly thought he'd enjoy himself out there a bit. He's got some skill, he's going to be quicker than his opposite number. I thought he'd go out there, do some annoying skill stuff, beat his full back a few times and show off a bit to stick it to all the people who say he's shit and get a move in January. At the very least I thought he'd be overall not good enough but would still manage to score, which is what we saw him do in pre-season. I think he tried one clever little pass early on, it didn't come off and he hid after that. He's a real coward5
-
Honestly not sure he'd mind that. It's not like when he's picked he's trying really hard to impress. Picks up his wages for 18 months with minimal effort.Fortune 82nd Minute said:To all those wondering how we can get rid of him, it's easy. Just tell him straight he is never going to play another game for the first team.
Let him train by himself in the afternoon.
Call his agent in and tell him to find a move for his player in January otherwise he will literally rot for the next 18 months.
That's not nice I know, because at the end of the day it's not nice to treat people like that, but Kirk has taken the mickey for too long now and it's time to play hardball with him.0 -
I finally gave up on Charlie last night, and he's the prime example of the Sandgaard era, loads spent badly16
-
I have dug him out but when he came off last night, I didn't think he looked like he didn't give a shit, I thought he looked dazed and absent. I have never rated him but last night he looked like he just didn't have it in him and I wonder about his mental health. I wonder if he has ever truly recovered from losing his father and moving away from home at the same time.
When this new ownership bought us, if they had a plan and a pocket deep enough to get us up, they would have paid up the likes of Kirk (from equity knocked off the asking price) and moved on. Instead we hide behind players like this saying our budget in FFP is full.4 -
Charlie Shirk0
-
Rothko said:I finally gave up on Charlie last night, and he's the prime example of the Sandgaard era, loads spent badly
...🤔🙄0 -
Mike Small no longer has the “worst performance by a Charlton player” title.2
-
I recorded it last night as I couldn’t watch live.
My bestie sent me a message that I didn’t read until after I’d seen it.
This is what it said, ‘Fuck me!! Charlie Kirk is absolute shite!!!!!’
😂😂4 - Sponsored links:
-
Agree with your bestie..KBslittlesis said:I recorded it last night as I couldn’t watch live.
My bestie sent me a message that I didn’t read until after I’d seen it.
This is what it said, ‘Fuck me!! Charlie Kirk is absolute shite!!!!!’
😂😂
But it was much more than Kirk, although he did have two gilt edged chances to have won this game for us which he managed to cock up spectacularly....0 -
I will say what I have said on this thread earlier. Charlie Kirk isn't good enough for our first team and something will have gone very wrong if he starts a league game. But the fact we are probably 5-10 pages down on slagging him off, the day after a massive low point in our history, when he wasn't even the worst player on the pitch (thats not saying much) is a huge problem.
Guy is clearly struggling mentally, but look on the CAFC social posts on the game. 85% of the posts saying how crap he was.
It's an obsession now amongst us. Some people need to get a life and worry about their own shortcomings.
Yes he was crap, but then again Thomas was disgracefully bad. Ness awful. Tedic terrible. Edun was useless.
Do we comment on them? No - the whole team was a total disgrace to the shirt and rather than people focussing their attention on that, everyone dives onto social to slag off Charlie Kirk.
He wont be having an influence on our first team. I would be more concerned at those who are, who were equally dogshit. They are a much bigger problem.
19 -
Pretty much my reply tbh.eastterrace6168 said:
Agree with your bestie..KBslittlesis said:I recorded it last night as I couldn’t watch live.
My bestie sent me a message that I didn’t read until after I’d seen it.
This is what it said, ‘Fuck me!! Charlie Kirk is absolute shite!!!!!’
😂😂
But it was much more than Kirk, although he did have two gilt edged chances to have won this game for us which he managed to cock up spectacularly....
But the thing that’s really telling is, she never slags off our players. She is always so mindful of people’s circumstance that she’s always telling me off when I do it.
Really made me lol.
In fact, it cheered me right up 😂😂0 -
Mendonca In Asdas said:Think the death of his dad has broken him, and he badly needs a fresh start at another club, his agent, if he has one, should be advising him this.
Death of a parent or a sibling can affect performances in many ways. Daniel James lost his dad at 22 and is now 25 (same as Charlie) Daniel's Dad died just days before he signed for Man United from Swansea but he died knowing that he was signing.
I don't know Kirk's personality so difficult to comment but for James he spoke openly about the bereavement and how it inspired him despite missing his Dad.
Last night would've been a great opportunity for Charlie to have put his self in the shop window but unfortunately in a poor team performance he stood out in the worse possible way.
His Agent knows it's catch 22. Kirk just won't get a contract with the wages he's on at Cafc. What does the agent do send a video of the Burton game when he scored two goals and looked half decent; definitely not every other game he has played for Charlton.
I want every player to succeed here including Kirk, but for a myriad of reasons its been a poor move for player and club.
1 -
There are worse but he is definitely on the short list.J BLOCK said:Strong case for the worst signing in our history. Shows no ability and zero effort.
I can think of a handful of signings that either never played or played less than 5 games
that I would give the award to over Kirk.
im struggling to think of anyone as bad as Kirk that cost a fee and played more than 30 first team games
0 -
He hasn't turned into anythingCallumcafc said:Trying to be kind, I think his decline should be sent off to a lab somewhere for some type of study.
How does a player with 181 appearances and 29 goals in L2 and L1 in his time with Crewe turn into what we saw on the pitch today?
I am baffled.
He has never given a shit about Charlton
He is so desperately thick and entitled he doesn't even realise that ripping the piss with his non-performances is bringing his pitiful career to a premature end
There won't be any club or manager that will offer him a job now they know that he refuses to take the chance to shine against part-time 8th tier footballers
He'll just pick up his fat cheques from Charlton to the end of his very generous contract and that will be it good night nurse
And good riddance to bad rubbish
In an era of truly shitty Charlton recruitment he is the fetid sludge at the very bottom of the barrel, we've had dozens of plodders with fractions of his talent but nobody in a decade has underperformed him.1 -
.0 -
DamoNorthStand said:I will say what I have said on this thread earlier. Charlie Kirk isn't good enough for our first team and something will have gone very wrong if he starts a league game. But the fact we are probably 5-10 pages down on slagging him off, the day after a massive low point in our history, when he wasn't even the worst player on the pitch (thats not saying much) is a huge problem.
Guy is clearly struggling mentally, but look on the CAFC social posts on the game. 85% of the posts saying how crap he was.
It's an obsession now amongst us. Some people need to get a life and worry about their own shortcomings.
Yes he was crap, but then again Thomas was disgracefully bad. Ness awful. Tedic terrible. Edun was useless.
Do we comment on them? No - the whole team was a total disgrace to the shirt and rather than people focussing their attention on that, everyone dives onto social to slag off Charlie Kirk.
He wont be having an influence on our first team. I would be more concerned at those who are, who were equally dogshit. They are a much bigger problem.I think you're way off the mark here. Kirk was by some distance the worst player on the pitch. Thomas wasn't disgracefully bad at all. He was ok. Not very good but not very bad. His distribution wasn't great, which it never is, but he was far too strong for their attackers and we limited them to one shot on target all game, which was from a free kick he didn't give away. He didn't get caught on the ball regularly like Ness did and he actually had his man covered before Ness stupidly slid in for the own goal. Ness was a good sight worse than Thomas and put us in a fair few dangerous situations with casual play. Tedic was poor but was also given nothing, and Edun annoyed me with his overplaying but was at least trying to make something happen.Kirk managed to get absolutely everything wrong though; he gave the ball away a lot, when he didn't he played safe passes inside when his job is to create, he got tackled and fell over off our corner and gifted them a counter that the defence had to deal with and missed two golden opportunities in front of goal which would have won us the game. Kirk's job is to provide an attacking outlet, create chances and score goals when the opportunity arises but he got all of those things wrong, and did it all while looking like he couldn't have given less of a shit. Thomas's job was to stop them scoring and he did that. I'm not impressed, he stopped 8th division players doing him over and that's all, but Kirk failed to do his job and to be honest barely even tried to get it done. I really hate slagging off our players but even I have had to draw the line at the showing Kirk gave last night. He won't come up against an easier opposition and he still managed to be an absolute joke. If he carries on like this his footballing career will follow the Marcus Maddison path of a luxury player who doesn't provide the spark to make his half-arsery worth anyone's time.24 -
Pound for pound he's got to be up there with Amdy Faye as the worst.Todds_right_hook said:
There are worse but he is definitely on the short list.J BLOCK said:Strong case for the worst signing in our history. Shows no ability and zero effort.
I can think of a handful of signings that either never played or played less than 5 games
that I would give the award to over Kirk.
im struggling to think of anyone as bad as Kirk that cost a fee and played more than 30 first team games3 -
I've been quite critical of Kirk, but I'm currently working with an Charlton player who reckons that he's always been a quality player when he's played against him, and he's pretty emphatic about it. 🤷♂️2
- Sponsored links:
-
I've seen paint run faster!Garrymanilow said:The crazy thing with Kirk is that I honestly thought he'd enjoy himself out there a bit. He's got some skill, he's going to be quicker than his opposite number. I thought he'd go out there, do some annoying skill stuff, beat his full back a few times and show off a bit to stick it to all the people who say he's shit and get a move in January. At the very least I thought he'd be overall not good enough but would still manage to score, which is what we saw him do in pre-season. I think he tried one clever little pass early on, it didn't come off and he hid after that. He's a real coward
3 -
......and doesn't that make his appalling behaviours & performances on the pitch so much more unacceptable? Having the ability but failing to show or put in a shift is so much NOT the Charlton way. Our past, proud, enjoyable & successful recent history was founded on the likes of Robinson, Kinsella, Peacock - all of whom had obvious talents that were accentuated 10-fold through graft and commitment. Kirk is either mentally unfit to be playing for us at this time or has a serious attitude problem. Either way, all I know is that, if I had my way, he would never play for a Charlton side ever again. I'd (reluctantly) pay up his contract and get rid. You wouldn't employ an actor who was word-perfect in rehearsals and then couldn't remember his lines when on stage. Other players are not good enough either (e.g. Tyreece Campbell has 1 good game in 10 IMHO) but I see most of them putting in a shift that, at least, 'supplements' their limited abilities. I have to say, though, that this squad must be up there with the most light-weight squads I've ever encountered in my 50 years supporting the team. First name on my team-sheet: Dobson. Second: May. Third: Corey B-T Fourth: Leaburn/Aneke Fifth: ???????????????????????????????????????????????????Gribbo said:I've been quite critical of Kirk, but I'm currently working with an Charlton player who reckons that he's always been a quality player when he's played against him, and he's pretty emphatic about it. 🤷♂️1 -
Losing his dad was sad, but no worse than anybody else Losing their dad.
It was about 2 years ago so we can't keep using it as a reason for him playing shit.
14 -
I mean presumably he did listen to Gallen given he'd wanted Kirk for a while.Dazzler21 said:
If Sandgaard had just listened to scouts with the money he spent we could have easily been in the Championship right now.Rothko said:I finally gave up on Charlie last night, and he's the prime example of the Sandgaard era, loads spent badly
But the general point is spot on - Sandgaard at the start at least was genuinely trying to do well and putting some money in, which we rarely have, and just did it so badly because of a failure to get some decent advice.1 -
Always given him some leeway in the past due to his personal circumstances… but last night was too much .., he can never play for us again2
-
I’ll stick up for TS here, he is not a “football” man, who was he supposed to go to for advice? Gallen was the incumbent at the time, blame him, not TSNorth Lower Neil said:
I mean presumably he did listen to Gallen given he'd wanted Kirk for a while.Dazzler21 said:
If Sandgaard had just listened to scouts with the money he spent we could have easily been in the Championship right now.Rothko said:I finally gave up on Charlie last night, and he's the prime example of the Sandgaard era, loads spent badly
But the general point is spot on - Sandgaard at the start at least was genuinely trying to do well and putting some money in, which we rarely have, and just did it so badly because of a failure to get some decent advice.7 -
He could and should have appointed a Chief Exec with football experience, and let them oversee the whole thing, not hope Gallen's list of ex-players and Crystal Palace rejects could come up trumps on its own.DA9 said:
I’ll stick up for TS here, he is not a “football” man, who was he supposed to go to for advice? Gallen was the incumbent at the time, blame him, not TSNorth Lower Neil said:
I mean presumably he did listen to Gallen given he'd wanted Kirk for a while.Dazzler21 said:
If Sandgaard had just listened to scouts with the money he spent we could have easily been in the Championship right now.Rothko said:I finally gave up on Charlie last night, and he's the prime example of the Sandgaard era, loads spent badly
But the general point is spot on - Sandgaard at the start at least was genuinely trying to do well and putting some money in, which we rarely have, and just did it so badly because of a failure to get some decent advice.2 -
I wouldn't want him anywhere near the U18's. God help us if they start thinking that's the required standard for professional football.cazo said:Should never be in the first team squad again make him train with the under 184 -
He openly said he didn't need to employ experienced football people because running a football club is easy. I wonder if he still thinks that ?North Lower Neil said:
He could and should have appointed a Chief Exec with football experience, and let them oversee the whole thing, not hope Gallen's list of ex-players and Crystal Palace rejects could come up trumps on its own.DA9 said:
I’ll stick up for TS here, he is not a “football” man, who was he supposed to go to for advice? Gallen was the incumbent at the time, blame him, not TSNorth Lower Neil said:
I mean presumably he did listen to Gallen given he'd wanted Kirk for a while.Dazzler21 said:
If Sandgaard had just listened to scouts with the money he spent we could have easily been in the Championship right now.Rothko said:I finally gave up on Charlie last night, and he's the prime example of the Sandgaard era, loads spent badly
But the general point is spot on - Sandgaard at the start at least was genuinely trying to do well and putting some money in, which we rarely have, and just did it so badly because of a failure to get some decent advice.
2
This discussion has been closed.
