Ah
well, news that the youth cup game against Arsenal has been postponed has
resolved at least one of my dilemmas. Would have liked to go along to add to
the backing, but time is of the essence at the moment (which rather begs the
question why spend some rattling off yet another on thoughts about Roland) as
my place needs fumigating again before my French partner Suzanne arrives on
Wednesday and before we head off together on Thursday for a spot of fishing. And
snowmobiling (apparently), whalewatching, and a few other assorted activities
in Iceland, with (if we are lucky) the Northern Lights thrown in for fun.
This
junket, which was planned some time before the fixture list came out, means that
I’ll also be having to pass on Saturday’s trip to Sheffield for the cup game. If
all goes according to plan (and schedule), when we take the field I shall be
somewhere in the middle of nowhere (literally), possibly digging holes in the
ice to catch some dinner (or holes in the drifts to dig out Suzanne if she gets
a bit over-enthusiastic with her snowmobile). With luck, and barring erupting
volcanoes or frostbite in extremities, I’ll be back at it in time for QPR, no
doubt in a T-shirt basking in the balmy UK weather.
Perhaps
it’s a good time for a break in any event. I don’t like feeling negative about
Charlton-related developments (I think a fault of mine over the years has been
trying to be too upbeat, especially about some players’ performances, as I
really want them all to turn out to be world-beaters). If I’m due a period of being
sent to Coventry, I’m happy that it isn’t actually Coventry and if distance and
isolation helps a sense of perspective I ought to be spot on by the time we get
back.
Let’s
try a bit of interim perspective, if that’s possible. Our overriding priority for
this season, before and since the takeover, has been to avoid relegation (of
course we hoped for something better in the summer/autumn, but the absence of
strengthening until virtually the first game cast doubt over what might be
achievable, while subsequently injuries have left us stretched). I can’t see
relegation as a blip at the start of a brave new era; it would be a massive
setback. I’ve followed us in the third flight enough times in my life not to be
full of glee at the prospect of doing so again, especially so soon after
getting back up. I don’t entertain any notions of us being ‘too big’ for the
third flight (how can we?); if we get relegated it will be because over the
season we were one of the three worst teams and have to accept that. So the
following questions are addressed purely in terms of whether changes made, in
my opinion, increase or less the risk of our being relegated.
Do
I believe Duchatelet is completely indifferent to whether or not we are
relegated? No, despite the indications in The Voice of The Valley about the adjustment
to his purchase price if we go down. Any such clause would seem like sensible
business practise in light of our position and doesn’t amount to a compelling
reason to think that we have just been bought as a feeder club. Does he want to
get us into the Premiership? Yes, there is every reason to believe that he does.
Why wouldn’t he, whether it’s about money or ego? That’s the good news/positives
out of the way.
Have
the changes made to the squad made relegation more or less likely? I don’t
think there’s any question it’s the former. For sure we needed strengthening in
the window. But for me that amounted to retaining core strengths (including
team morale and character, in the form of key players). By all accounts (again
drawing on The Voice and other bloggers), in addition to disposing of Alnwick,
Stephens and Kermorgant (and of course Smith), Morrison would have gone if an
offer had been sorted out, Evina and Pritchard may well have gone on loan. Who
else might have been sold if offers had come in and/or they were fit will
remain speculation.
Irrespective
of the abilities of the players brought in, we have 18 league games left to get
out of the bottom three. Others have commented on how many points we may need to
get. The way the league is panning out we could get lucky and finish fourth
from bottom on a low points total. But as desperation sets in others will be
fighting and it’s reasonable to expect those around us to average more points
than they have to date. Our position is precarious (but not yet desperate) and
all we can do is watch, wait and hope as far as the league is concerned during
the week ahead. Even a target of 50 requires 26 points from these 18 games.
That’s more than an equal number of wins/draws/defeats.
In
short, Sir Chris stressing that the new players have to hit the ground running
is an understatement, especially if there are more coming in during the loan
widow. They are in new surroundings, a new country, with new teammates, and (so
far) no experience of Championship football (or of playing on our pudding of a
pitch). You hope for quick miracles and early understanding, but it is an
enormous ask. We could easily after a while come together and begin to play
well, learning to focus on the strengths of a changed team, only for it to be
far too late. And while this is going on, will some players who it seems the
club was happy to move on be really committed to the task? I hope so.
Which
of course brings us back to Sir Chris. It is given that his contract situation,
and that of a number of players, was an utterly undesirable state of affairs
for Duchatelet to acquire, for which the previous owners are to blame. However,
the idea that it makes sense in our situation for him to take his time to
assess the boss and to make a real decision at the end of the season rings
hollow to me. Understandable perhaps, but not what we need in our position.
There’s an element of sentimentality involved for sure, given our deep
affection for Powell. But we don’t have time on our hands and surely it would
help rather than hinder our cause if the players (new and old) were made aware
in no uncertain terms that the manager has the backing of the owner. I happen
to feel he deserves that.
Now
some other quibbles. We were told that Duchatelet would not have day-to-day
involvement. Well, if he’s a bit bored and does after all have time on his
hands, I don’t mind if he spends it looking at day-to-day affairs. But when it
comes to undermining the manager’s position by getting involved in player
selection that’s unforgivable. Sure, there’s a process of getting to know each
other, working things through. But if you don’t trust his judgement to the
extent of who goes on the pitch (let alone selling players he wants to keep) replace
him with someone you have faith in or do the job yourself.
Reading
The Voice was depressing, including the suggestion that the family area may be
relocated to where I currently sit (surely we are not going to be in a position
where we want to give people a reason not to renew?) but mostly for the account
of Kermorgant’s departure. Either that article is wrong, and the sentiments
that he expressed in the South London Press interview are wide of the mark, or
the club statement giving the impression that everything was done to try to
keep him is misleading. Decide for yourselves. It does drive home the point
that Meire may well be intelligent, articulate etc but she doesn’t pay the
piper. (Another anecdote from personal experience is that the guy I sold my
company to had a PA; she was his ‘eyes and ears’ in the office and everyone
knew it; the guy often complained to me that she was being treated unfairly by
others as she was frozen out; the fault was his, not hers, for putting her in
that position. I’m sure Meire’s a lot smarter and more discerning than to
simply report back everything said and done, but she’s a piper too after all.)
In
short (again), putting to one side for now whatever vision/strategy Duchatelet has for
Charlton, the tactics to date have been (in my opinion) dreadful. It simply isn't enough to think he's a successful businessman so he can't be dumb (I keep remembering the '5-year plan' that the Icelandic former owners of West Ham had for that club). Dumb is a bit all-embracing and covers a multitude of character traits which in some situations can be strengths and in others weaknesses. Perhaps he’s
a fan of Von Clausewitz. “It’s better to act quickly and err than to hesitate
until the time of action is past”, or “pursue one great decisive aim with force
and determination”. If he is, I hope he doesn’t forget “obstinacy is a fault of
temperament. Stubbornness and intolerance of contradiction result from a
special kind of egotism, which elevates above everything else the pleasure of
its autonomous effect, to which others must bow”. I don’t think that one’s
meant as a compliment.
7 comments:
I hope that you will enjoy your break in Iceland. It's a really great place to go. Possibly this will allow you to recharge your batteries. I agree that another relegation to League 1 would be disastrous because I think we would lose a lot of season ticket holders. As for your criticisms of Roland, we will have to agree to disagree, although I am quite surprised that you are a Bonapartist. As for Chris Powell, I think that the fundamental problem was the lack of funds to renew the squad last summer. This summer I think is the time for change and to bring in a new manager. I am afraid we cannot be sentimental about this.
Perhaps we are the dumb ones believing that all CP needs is a new contract and 5 million quid for a few new players then the dream can continue !
I hope you catch the right kind of fish and look forward to your next post.
Thanks Wyn, never been there before and hope it will be fun. Whether the batteries get recharged or frozen solid only time will tell. Suzanne will have a chuckle at the suggestion I am a Bonapartist (actually Wellington - as a general, not PM - was my schoolboy hero).
Perhaps we should settle on a friendly bet: if RD proves to be a success (for us), over the medium term, I'll owe you a good bottle of red (or equivalent).
Anon, not sure what the wrong kind of fish would be, unless I end up as a real Jonah. A new contract for CP and money would have been one option, who knows if it would have succeeded? Selling players he wanted to keep, giving him ones he clearly wouldn't have chosen, but leaving him hanging to dry doesn't look to me like a recipe for success.
When I said you were a Bonapartist it was a reference to a book about British supporters of Napoleon during the Napoleonic Wars which is then generalised to an argument about people who oppose a regime. I am quite happy to bet a good bottle of red but we would need to define medium term and what the parameters of success are. Meanwhile, I am drafting my first posting in Franglais.
In that sense, Wyn, consider me a Bonapartist (although the easier label is a natural-born contrarian).
I don't think we can hope to cover all possible eventualities and I'm sure we will both end up complying with the spirit of the bet.
How about: If we stay up and on the anniversary of the takeover we are higher in the Championship than we were at that date that RC bought the club, I will (very happily) accept having lost the bet. If we are relegated and do not rebound at the first attempt, you lose (and then we will both need to empty the contents of the bottle, and many others). If we are relegated and bounce back next season, we call it a draw.
Gives a cut-off date of no longer than the end of next season.
Tried to keep it balanced and (hopefully) fair but would look at other parameters.
That seems very fair. Meanwhile, I am finding out what an art it is to write Franglais (which I greatly enjoy in Private Eye). Does it have to be French wine?
À la victor le choix.
Post a Comment