Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
POST-MATCH THREAD: Charlton Athletic v Sheffield United: Saturday 17th January 2026: KO 15:00
Comments
-
Nice idea, but would make one change, the player who made the foul goes off, and the fouled player stays on...Sword65pf said:
The best way to deal with the injured player going off and waiting to go back on,is to make sure the player that made the foul also goes off, no advantage.PragueAddick said:
Steve Brown makes this point every week on CTV,in fact they've made a running joke of it. This time Terry said deadpan "serious concern here as Thomas Kaminski goes down".Off_it said:This "timeout" thing has to stop. Everyone does it. We always do it, but they also did it in the second half when the ref went over to their keeper and called the trainer on, but he never came on. Their players all went into a huddle and the ref just stood there until eventually the keeper just got up again.
Some of these breaks last for five minutes or more. The game just stops and everyone seems to accept it. Ridiculous.
Brownie's other weekly gripe is the equally ridiculous mandatory 30 seconds off the pitch after an injury. It means say that Lloyd Jones gets an elbow from an opposing forward, gets treatment, we get a free kick but have to play 30 seconds without our most important defender.
Brownie can go on a bit at times, but he is quite right to go on about this every week. Which bunch of clowns are responsible for these two regulations? Presumably the FA? I don't think the 30 second rule applies in Europe.0 -
Or the player who made the foul goes off and comes back on with the player he fouled.eastterrace6168 said:
Nice idea, but would make one change, the player who made the foul goes off, and the fouled player stays on...Sword65pf said:
The best way to deal with the injured player going off and waiting to go back on,is to make sure the player that made the foul also goes off, no advantage.PragueAddick said:
Steve Brown makes this point every week on CTV,in fact they've made a running joke of it. This time Terry said deadpan "serious concern here as Thomas Kaminski goes down".Off_it said:This "timeout" thing has to stop. Everyone does it. We always do it, but they also did it in the second half when the ref went over to their keeper and called the trainer on, but he never came on. Their players all went into a huddle and the ref just stood there until eventually the keeper just got up again.
Some of these breaks last for five minutes or more. The game just stops and everyone seems to accept it. Ridiculous.
Brownie's other weekly gripe is the equally ridiculous mandatory 30 seconds off the pitch after an injury. It means say that Lloyd Jones gets an elbow from an opposing forward, gets treatment, we get a free kick but have to play 30 seconds without our most important defender.
Brownie can go on a bit at times, but he is quite right to go on about this every week. Which bunch of clowns are responsible for these two regulations? Presumably the FA? I don't think the 30 second rule applies in Europe.0 -
Agreed, I think just making the players all move to the center circle, or far side of the pitch away from the dugouts would make more sense.ForeverAddickted said:
I mean its "something" - But take Saturday for example, Kaminski goes down injured, meanng in the future we have to take off an outfield player for 30-secs... Oh look, might as well sacrifice Kelman for that amount of time, seeing that we cant get out of our half.fenaddick said:3 -
The easiest way is to prevent the other 10 players from going to the sidelines to 'confer' with the manager/coaches .. the side with the non injured keeper should be free to chat with whoever they likeAFKABartram said:They’ll find a way to stop the keeper injured situation this summer or next I reckon.The key question for us though is why do we need to be the instigator of needing to regroup, rejig tactics just 10-15 minutes into a game so frequently?
Another way would be to 'send the keeper off', (Rugby equivalent yellow card) for 10 minutes and not to allow a sub for that time
Both ways though would cause great controversy especially if the home team was affected. Neither will be implemented
0 -
The problem with that is if the reason for the keeper going down is genuine.Lincsaddick said:
The easiest way is to prevent the other 10 players from going to the sidelines to 'confer' with the manager/coaches .. the side with the non injured keeper should be free to chat with whoever they likeAFKABartram said:They’ll find a way to stop the keeper injured situation this summer or next I reckon.The key question for us though is why do we need to be the instigator of needing to regroup, rejig tactics just 10-15 minutes into a game so frequently?
Another way would be to 'send the keeper off', (Rugby equivalent yellow card) for 10 minutes and not to allow a sub for that time
Both ways though would cause great controversy especially if the home team was affected. Neither will be implemented0 -
Good grief. Someone mentioned IFAB. I had no clue that it existed. Not sure Brownie does either 🤣
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Football_Association_Board
0 -
Exactly .. if the keeper hobbles off with arms round 2 'physios', ignore my comments lolMuttleyCAFC said:
The problem with that is if the reason for the keeper going down is genuine.Lincsaddick said:
The easiest way is to prevent the other 10 players from going to the sidelines to 'confer' with the manager/coaches .. the side with the non injured keeper should be free to chat with whoever they likeAFKABartram said:They’ll find a way to stop the keeper injured situation this summer or next I reckon.The key question for us though is why do we need to be the instigator of needing to regroup, rejig tactics just 10-15 minutes into a game so frequently?
Another way would be to 'send the keeper off', (Rugby equivalent yellow card) for 10 minutes and not to allow a sub for that time
Both ways though would cause great controversy especially if the home team was affected. Neither will be implemented0 -
Absolutely, I was just saying this based on the insistence to put the injured player on the sideline, basically to even it up.eastterrace6168 said:
Nice idea, but would make one change, the player who made the foul goes off, and the fouled player stays on...Sword65pf said:
The best way to deal with the injured player going off and waiting to go back on,is to make sure the player that made the foul also goes off, no advantage.PragueAddick said:
Steve Brown makes this point every week on CTV,in fact they've made a running joke of it. This time Terry said deadpan "serious concern here as Thomas Kaminski goes down".Off_it said:This "timeout" thing has to stop. Everyone does it. We always do it, but they also did it in the second half when the ref went over to their keeper and called the trainer on, but he never came on. Their players all went into a huddle and the ref just stood there until eventually the keeper just got up again.
Some of these breaks last for five minutes or more. The game just stops and everyone seems to accept it. Ridiculous.
Brownie's other weekly gripe is the equally ridiculous mandatory 30 seconds off the pitch after an injury. It means say that Lloyd Jones gets an elbow from an opposing forward, gets treatment, we get a free kick but have to play 30 seconds without our most important defender.
Brownie can go on a bit at times, but he is quite right to go on about this every week. Which bunch of clowns are responsible for these two regulations? Presumably the FA? I don't think the 30 second rule applies in Europe.0 -
That’s what I suggested.👍MuttleyCAFC said:
Or the player who made the foul goes off and comes back on with the player he fouled.eastterrace6168 said:
Nice idea, but would make one change, the player who made the foul goes off, and the fouled player stays on...Sword65pf said:
The best way to deal with the injured player going off and waiting to go back on,is to make sure the player that made the foul also goes off, no advantage.PragueAddick said:
Steve Brown makes this point every week on CTV,in fact they've made a running joke of it. This time Terry said deadpan "serious concern here as Thomas Kaminski goes down".Off_it said:This "timeout" thing has to stop. Everyone does it. We always do it, but they also did it in the second half when the ref went over to their keeper and called the trainer on, but he never came on. Their players all went into a huddle and the ref just stood there until eventually the keeper just got up again.
Some of these breaks last for five minutes or more. The game just stops and everyone seems to accept it. Ridiculous.
Brownie's other weekly gripe is the equally ridiculous mandatory 30 seconds off the pitch after an injury. It means say that Lloyd Jones gets an elbow from an opposing forward, gets treatment, we get a free kick but have to play 30 seconds without our most important defender.
Brownie can go on a bit at times, but he is quite right to go on about this every week. Which bunch of clowns are responsible for these two regulations? Presumably the FA? I don't think the 30 second rule applies in Europe.0 -
Blimey mate, that would be some serious pre planned skullduggery though woudnt it?😂fenaddick said:
Easy to game that though. Short forward gets fouled by Lloyd Jones, contact is minimal but the forward realises if he "needs treatment' that Jones can't defend the cross from the free kick so calls the physio on and we effectively have our best defender in a sin binSword65pf said:
The best way to deal with the injured player going off and waiting to go back on,is to make sure the player that made the foul also goes off, no advantage.PragueAddick said:
Steve Brown makes this point every week on CTV,in fact they've made a running joke of it. This time Terry said deadpan "serious concern here as Thomas Kaminski goes down".Off_it said:This "timeout" thing has to stop. Everyone does it. We always do it, but they also did it in the second half when the ref went over to their keeper and called the trainer on, but he never came on. Their players all went into a huddle and the ref just stood there until eventually the keeper just got up again.
Some of these breaks last for five minutes or more. The game just stops and everyone seems to accept it. Ridiculous.
Brownie's other weekly gripe is the equally ridiculous mandatory 30 seconds off the pitch after an injury. It means say that Lloyd Jones gets an elbow from an opposing forward, gets treatment, we get a free kick but have to play 30 seconds without our most important defender.
Brownie can go on a bit at times, but he is quite right to go on about this every week. Which bunch of clowns are responsible for these two regulations? Presumably the FA? I don't think the 30 second rule applies in Europe.0 -
Sponsored links:
-
And you don't think the first keeper to go down fake injured wasn't also pre planned? Players and clubs will always look to exploit any loopholes in rulesSword65pf said:
Blimey mate, that would be some serious pre planned skullduggery though woudnt it?😂fenaddick said:
Easy to game that though. Short forward gets fouled by Lloyd Jones, contact is minimal but the forward realises if he "needs treatment' that Jones can't defend the cross from the free kick so calls the physio on and we effectively have our best defender in a sin binSword65pf said:
The best way to deal with the injured player going off and waiting to go back on,is to make sure the player that made the foul also goes off, no advantage.PragueAddick said:
Steve Brown makes this point every week on CTV,in fact they've made a running joke of it. This time Terry said deadpan "serious concern here as Thomas Kaminski goes down".Off_it said:This "timeout" thing has to stop. Everyone does it. We always do it, but they also did it in the second half when the ref went over to their keeper and called the trainer on, but he never came on. Their players all went into a huddle and the ref just stood there until eventually the keeper just got up again.
Some of these breaks last for five minutes or more. The game just stops and everyone seems to accept it. Ridiculous.
Brownie's other weekly gripe is the equally ridiculous mandatory 30 seconds off the pitch after an injury. It means say that Lloyd Jones gets an elbow from an opposing forward, gets treatment, we get a free kick but have to play 30 seconds without our most important defender.
Brownie can go on a bit at times, but he is quite right to go on about this every week. Which bunch of clowns are responsible for these two regulations? Presumably the FA? I don't think the 30 second rule applies in Europe.1 -
Inexplicable.AFKABartram said:When we are deep into injury time with only one or two phases of play left, the 9 men get a chance to launch a long throw deep into our box. It’s a leveller, anything can happen with these long throws, makes no difference if you have 9 or 11.Can anyone think the logical thing to do was to take off 6ft 7 Leaburn from defending it for Godden?? particularly when we had stopped trying to score a goal 10 mins earlier.
I can only assume Nathan was 100% confident Leaburn's height wasn't required and he wanted to get Godden on the pitch to make Godden more settled for Tuesday.
Utterly bizarre.
I doubt a journo will ask Jones though because he's so spiky and incredibly thin skinned.2 -
Pretty sure Cawley/Mendez said they would have done so if Chris Wilder hadn't spouted off for an absolute ageCovered End said:
Inexplicable.AFKABartram said:When we are deep into injury time with only one or two phases of play left, the 9 men get a chance to launch a long throw deep into our box. It’s a leveller, anything can happen with these long throws, makes no difference if you have 9 or 11.Can anyone think the logical thing to do was to take off 6ft 7 Leaburn from defending it for Godden?? particularly when we had stopped trying to score a goal 10 mins earlier.
I can only assume Nathan was 100% confident Leaburn's height wasn't required and he wanted to get Godden on the pitch to make Godden more settled for Tuesday.
Utterly bizarre.
I doubt a journo will ask Jones though because he's so spiky and incredibly thin skinned.0 -
Jones seemed more interested to find out who was Charlton fans in the press room after the game on Saturday. BonkersCovered End said:
Inexplicable.AFKABartram said:When we are deep into injury time with only one or two phases of play left, the 9 men get a chance to launch a long throw deep into our box. It’s a leveller, anything can happen with these long throws, makes no difference if you have 9 or 11.Can anyone think the logical thing to do was to take off 6ft 7 Leaburn from defending it for Godden?? particularly when we had stopped trying to score a goal 10 mins earlier.
I can only assume Nathan was 100% confident Leaburn's height wasn't required and he wanted to get Godden on the pitch to make Godden more settled for Tuesday.
Utterly bizarre.
I doubt a journo will ask Jones though because he's so spiky and incredibly thin skinned.0 -
??shirty5 said:
Jones seemed more interested to find out who was Charlton fans in the press room after the game on Saturday. BonkersCovered End said:
Inexplicable.AFKABartram said:When we are deep into injury time with only one or two phases of play left, the 9 men get a chance to launch a long throw deep into our box. It’s a leveller, anything can happen with these long throws, makes no difference if you have 9 or 11.Can anyone think the logical thing to do was to take off 6ft 7 Leaburn from defending it for Godden?? particularly when we had stopped trying to score a goal 10 mins earlier.
I can only assume Nathan was 100% confident Leaburn's height wasn't required and he wanted to get Godden on the pitch to make Godden more settled for Tuesday.
Utterly bizarre.
I doubt a journo will ask Jones though because he's so spiky and incredibly thin skinned.0 -
He asked who in the press room were Charlton fans to ask if they would have taken the result at the start of the day (or something similar, can’t remember the exact question)AFKABartram said:
??shirty5 said:
Jones seemed more interested to find out who was Charlton fans in the press room after the game on Saturday. BonkersCovered End said:
Inexplicable.AFKABartram said:When we are deep into injury time with only one or two phases of play left, the 9 men get a chance to launch a long throw deep into our box. It’s a leveller, anything can happen with these long throws, makes no difference if you have 9 or 11.Can anyone think the logical thing to do was to take off 6ft 7 Leaburn from defending it for Godden?? particularly when we had stopped trying to score a goal 10 mins earlier.
I can only assume Nathan was 100% confident Leaburn's height wasn't required and he wanted to get Godden on the pitch to make Godden more settled for Tuesday.
Utterly bizarre.
I doubt a journo will ask Jones though because he's so spiky and incredibly thin skinned.2 -
We’ve definitely got Nathan ‘spikey’ jones back haven’t we?, he has to have that edge to give his best.fenaddick said:
He asked who in the press room were Charlton fans to ask if they would have taken the result at the start of the day (or something similar, can’t remember the exact question)AFKABartram said:
??shirty5 said:
Jones seemed more interested to find out who was Charlton fans in the press room after the game on Saturday. BonkersCovered End said:
Inexplicable.AFKABartram said:When we are deep into injury time with only one or two phases of play left, the 9 men get a chance to launch a long throw deep into our box. It’s a leveller, anything can happen with these long throws, makes no difference if you have 9 or 11.Can anyone think the logical thing to do was to take off 6ft 7 Leaburn from defending it for Godden?? particularly when we had stopped trying to score a goal 10 mins earlier.
I can only assume Nathan was 100% confident Leaburn's height wasn't required and he wanted to get Godden on the pitch to make Godden more settled for Tuesday.
Utterly bizarre.
I doubt a journo will ask Jones though because he's so spiky and incredibly thin skinned.0 -
Cheersfenaddick said:
He asked who in the press room were Charlton fans to ask if they would have taken the result at the start of the day (or something similar, can’t remember the exact question)AFKABartram said:
??shirty5 said:
Jones seemed more interested to find out who was Charlton fans in the press room after the game on Saturday. BonkersCovered End said:
Inexplicable.AFKABartram said:When we are deep into injury time with only one or two phases of play left, the 9 men get a chance to launch a long throw deep into our box. It’s a leveller, anything can happen with these long throws, makes no difference if you have 9 or 11.Can anyone think the logical thing to do was to take off 6ft 7 Leaburn from defending it for Godden?? particularly when we had stopped trying to score a goal 10 mins earlier.
I can only assume Nathan was 100% confident Leaburn's height wasn't required and he wanted to get Godden on the pitch to make Godden more settled for Tuesday.
Utterly bizarre.
I doubt a journo will ask Jones though because he's so spiky and incredibly thin skinned.0 -
No surprise. Daft in the first place to even think about an appeal, let alone put one in
20 -
I'm presuming the majority are quite senior and can only see as far as TC on that wing.stjohnshill said:Quite alarming to hear TC got MOTM in the lounge over Kaminski. I do seriously wonder what some of our fans see at times5 -
Sponsored links:
-
Shouldn't he get an extra match suspension for a frivolous appeal...15
-
They don't seem to do that anymore. If they do, it isn't often. That was a ridiculous appeal if ever there was one.eastterrace6168 said:Shouldn't he get an extra match suspension for a frivolous appeal...2 -
I know we got clobbered by it, can't remember who...🤔MuttleyCAFC said:
They don't seem to do that anymore. If they do, it isn't often. That was a ridiculous appeal if ever there was one.eastterrace6168 said:Shouldn't he get an extra match suspension for a frivolous appeal...0 -
We got done in a 4-0 defeat at the Emirates I think. Can't recall his name, began with S I think. Was harsh to add a game. I was at that game.3
-
Sankofa.MuttleyCAFC said:We got done in a 4-0 defeat at the Emirates I think. Can't recall his name, began with S I think. Was harsh to add a game. I was at that game.
He got sent off conceding a penalty ... that wasn't really a penalty ... and as the attacker was by the goal line out on the right of the penalty box it couldn't really be classed as a "goal scoring opportunity" ... and I think there was a bloody good shout for offside in the build up that should have negated the whole move.
But apart from that it was a sound decision.5 -
Osei Sankofa should never have got an extra game.MuttleyCAFC said:We got done in a 4-0 defeat at the Emirates I think. Can't recall his name, began with S I think. Was harsh to add a game. I was at that game.
2 -
CHarriots - horses for courses.DamoNorthStand said:
Harriots is up there with Ventokele for my favour ever mispronounced player.Henry Irving said:Terrible performance both v 11 men and v 9.
1st we were outplayed and only Kaminski saved us, literally.
Early 2nd half goal should have been springboard to easy 3 or 4 win but we were sloppy.
Hard to judge v 9 but Dykes and Clarke looked good.
Whole team needs to improve and we need a LWB.
Not seen the two red card incidents but the 2nd looked horrendous. Hope Knibbs isn't too bad but at least it is an area of the pitch where we have decent cover.
Bumped into Miles' mum pre-game who was looking very relaxed. Callum Harriot was there too.0 -
Jones basically said that because Wilder had gone on for so long, he would have to cut short the interviews with the "independent" media (he'd already done the official one for Charlton TV).fenaddick said:
Pretty sure Cawley/Mendez said they would have done so if Chris Wilder hadn't spouted off for an absolute ageCovered End said:
Inexplicable.AFKABartram said:When we are deep into injury time with only one or two phases of play left, the 9 men get a chance to launch a long throw deep into our box. It’s a leveller, anything can happen with these long throws, makes no difference if you have 9 or 11.Can anyone think the logical thing to do was to take off 6ft 7 Leaburn from defending it for Godden?? particularly when we had stopped trying to score a goal 10 mins earlier.
I can only assume Nathan was 100% confident Leaburn's height wasn't required and he wanted to get Godden on the pitch to make Godden more settled for Tuesday.
Utterly bizarre.
I doubt a journo will ask Jones though because he's so spiky and incredibly thin skinned.
Call me cynical, but if we had won 4-0, I suspect he would have made time for all the journalists.
Quite weird really. It's not like the Chelsea game where there were lots of reporters who wouldn't normally be at The Valley; surely he must know Mendez is a Charlton fan, and that while Cawley isn't a Charlton fan, he's deeply involved with the club.fenaddick said:
He asked who in the press room were Charlton fans to ask if they would have taken the result at the start of the day (or something similar, can’t remember the exact question)AFKABartram said:
??shirty5 said:
Jones seemed more interested to find out who was Charlton fans in the press room after the game on Saturday. BonkersCovered End said:
Inexplicable.AFKABartram said:When we are deep into injury time with only one or two phases of play left, the 9 men get a chance to launch a long throw deep into our box. It’s a leveller, anything can happen with these long throws, makes no difference if you have 9 or 11.Can anyone think the logical thing to do was to take off 6ft 7 Leaburn from defending it for Godden?? particularly when we had stopped trying to score a goal 10 mins earlier.
I can only assume Nathan was 100% confident Leaburn's height wasn't required and he wanted to get Godden on the pitch to make Godden more settled for Tuesday.
Utterly bizarre.
I doubt a journo will ask Jones though because he's so spiky and incredibly thin skinned.0 -
It wasn't even the worst performance this season, we won for £$%&s sake.PBr said:I just don’t believe that was one of the worst performances in 60 years! Come on, get a sense of perspective. Even this season, Southampton ran through us 5 times in a row and scored 5 goals. It was Groundhog Day. We did not play at all well against Sheff Utd but we didn’t concede on minute 2, minute 5 and on and on. We will be stronger against Derby.
I've probably seen more than 100 worse performances than that.3 -
It might be our worst ever victory though.Covered End said:
It wasn't even the worst performance this season, we won for £$%&s sake.PBr said:I just don’t believe that was one of the worst performances in 60 years! Come on, get a sense of perspective. Even this season, Southampton ran through us 5 times in a row and scored 5 goals. It was Groundhog Day. We did not play at all well against Sheff Utd but we didn’t concede on minute 2, minute 5 and on and on. We will be stronger against Derby.
I've probably seen more than 100 worse performances than that.3
