Last season I came away from one game, against Preston, totally bemused at how a Charlton team could take the pitch with apparently so little idea of what to do and maintain that level of incompetence for a full 90 minutes. By comparison that was a good display. Forget the fact that we played very well for the first 20 minutes or so (which we did) and could easily have been a couple of goals to the good (2-1 would have been a fair scoreline after five minutes). Nothing that resembles a team can capitulate in the way that we did after they scored. A game that we could have won 5-1 became one we could easily have lost 6-0 if Bristol had been bothered enough to compound the humiliation. That they didn’t feel a need to add to their two goals said it all.
It really isn’t worth trying to list the events of the game, the litany of chances created early in the game which were through a combination of poor finishing, bad luck and excellent goalkeeping (one save from an Ambrose shot was a turning point in the first half, a superb deflection late in the day just drove home the point we weren’t going to score come what may) were not converted, or to bother with player ratings (for what it’s worth I thought Youga was exceptional through the game, despite some mistakes late on as he tired). Collectively it was shameful and embarrassing.
It is surely unacceptable – or a sign of some truly deep-seated problems in the dressing room – for a team to fall apart in the way we did after conceding a goal. Where before there had been vibrancy, movement and positive passing players hid, getting rid of the ball as soon as possible, by whatever means. And with few players wanting the ball movement disappeared, leaving the man in possession to lose the ball, have to run with it with no other option, or hit it long. Just to compound the misery we had substitutions which, whatever their purpose, left the team utterly incoherent. It seemed as if Pardew wanted to demonstrate an ability to make things worse just when we thought it wasn’t possible (which does sound a little unfair on Dickson, Todorov and Sam who came on; nobody could have turned it around on the night).
We looked like a team that has become too used to losing. And we have lost four of the last five. With ready-made excuses in the form of the absence of Hudson, Semedo plus Zhi, the distraction of the possible takeover, the apparent injustice of going behind having created so many chances seemed sufficient for heads to fall instantly. Is our confidence and motivation really that fragile? If it is we have serious problems. Another capitulation on Saturday and the fans could really turn on the team and the manager. As it was tonight, bare minimum support was provided before astonishment at what was going on on the pitch led to gallows humour.
There’s a lot of work to be done starting tomorrow morning, hopefully with the players and manager collectively accepting responsibility for an unacceptable display and discussing between them some home truths. At least before the game on Saturday we should be spared being told how close to a play-off place we are. We were up against a good team tonight, one which kept its shape when under the cosh and which played good football when given the chance. The last 30 minutes of the game for them was nothing more than a training session. This is an incoherent and inadequate account of what happened tonight; but in the circumstances that’s appropriate.
Tuesday, 21 October 2008
Addicks Expect
For the second time in recent years I found myself in sitting in bright sunshine, on the Champs Elysees, sipping wine (OK gulping it as usual) and basking in the ambiance, only for my wellbeing to be upset by a text informing me of a 2-0 away defeat. Last time around it was Fulham, a game we were unlucky to lose but which could have been seen as one of those things for a mid-table Premiership team. If I’d known then what the next few years held in store I would have bought a second-hand laptop and asked the waiter how much it would cost to stay there. This time around it was away to Cardiff, a piss-pot result that leaves us at the lower end of midtable, basically amongst the stiffs.
Judging from the tone of some of the other blogs its clear we are all feeling rather sorry for ourselves, not surprisingly. I penned something at the end of September entitled ‘something better change’, basically on the grounds that my liver could not continue to cope with regular disappointments. I was thinking at the time in terms of the team/formation and my expectations rather than prospective buyers capable of putting the club back among the elite, ie where we belong (you can manipulate the statistics to back that up, especially if you include the war years). It seems that what we have now is a microcosm of our raised expectations: we are all waiting for news.
On that front, I think it would be in the club’s interest to announce on the official site some time before tonight’s kick-off whether or not there is to be an announcement of significance. In the absence of any news we are going to turn up tonight (yes, I will be there, despite picking up a French bug, although I can hardly claim credit on this front as for me it’s an extended stroll) with half a mind that there will be the signing of a deal or confirmation before the game or at half-time. If there is no such prospect in the near future it would be better to announce this now so that we can just concentrate on the game. I appreciate the limitations imposed on the directors at present, assuming there is still a process of due diligence ongoing, but surely there is nothing to stop the club confirming that no material announcement is imminent. In the absence of such news our hopes are going to be raised with each passing minute as the match gets near – and more unfulfilled expectations we can do without at the moment.
Just to add my agreement with others over ‘lines in the sand’. A move away from The Valley to the peninsula and a new ground: regrettable but acceptable, especially assuming some time to say our farewells to our home. A move to the Olympics stadium: forget it. Involvement of Dennis Wise and his ilk? Surely we can have confidence that Richard Murray and others are going to make it clear that, while not for sure a deal-breaker, this would send entirely the wrong message. Don’t want them. A move away from The Valley and having to accept Wise et al could be a step too far for many.
At another level of course it’s all rather daft to talk in these terms. I don’t own the club (save for a few shares) and nobody is offering me bucket-loads to jump ship. Neither am I, or I assume others, waiting in the wings to deliver alternative financing such that we are in a position to really criticise whatever decision the board makes – if indeed there is a decision to make. All we can do is outline how we feel about possible developments. And at the moment morale off – and probably on – the pitch is not good.
But damn it all we are Charlton supporters. So to the club - give us some indication over whether tonight might bring news so that we can focus on the game if there is no prospect; to the players – sod the injury crisis, go out and ensure that the fans stay onboard through the evening, whatever happens; to supporters – whatever, let’s give the team and the board the best backing we can. And for me? Well, bug notwithstanding it’s wine if we win and wine if we lose – but cognac if something is pulled out of the hat.
Judging from the tone of some of the other blogs its clear we are all feeling rather sorry for ourselves, not surprisingly. I penned something at the end of September entitled ‘something better change’, basically on the grounds that my liver could not continue to cope with regular disappointments. I was thinking at the time in terms of the team/formation and my expectations rather than prospective buyers capable of putting the club back among the elite, ie where we belong (you can manipulate the statistics to back that up, especially if you include the war years). It seems that what we have now is a microcosm of our raised expectations: we are all waiting for news.
On that front, I think it would be in the club’s interest to announce on the official site some time before tonight’s kick-off whether or not there is to be an announcement of significance. In the absence of any news we are going to turn up tonight (yes, I will be there, despite picking up a French bug, although I can hardly claim credit on this front as for me it’s an extended stroll) with half a mind that there will be the signing of a deal or confirmation before the game or at half-time. If there is no such prospect in the near future it would be better to announce this now so that we can just concentrate on the game. I appreciate the limitations imposed on the directors at present, assuming there is still a process of due diligence ongoing, but surely there is nothing to stop the club confirming that no material announcement is imminent. In the absence of such news our hopes are going to be raised with each passing minute as the match gets near – and more unfulfilled expectations we can do without at the moment.
Just to add my agreement with others over ‘lines in the sand’. A move away from The Valley to the peninsula and a new ground: regrettable but acceptable, especially assuming some time to say our farewells to our home. A move to the Olympics stadium: forget it. Involvement of Dennis Wise and his ilk? Surely we can have confidence that Richard Murray and others are going to make it clear that, while not for sure a deal-breaker, this would send entirely the wrong message. Don’t want them. A move away from The Valley and having to accept Wise et al could be a step too far for many.
At another level of course it’s all rather daft to talk in these terms. I don’t own the club (save for a few shares) and nobody is offering me bucket-loads to jump ship. Neither am I, or I assume others, waiting in the wings to deliver alternative financing such that we are in a position to really criticise whatever decision the board makes – if indeed there is a decision to make. All we can do is outline how we feel about possible developments. And at the moment morale off – and probably on – the pitch is not good.
But damn it all we are Charlton supporters. So to the club - give us some indication over whether tonight might bring news so that we can focus on the game if there is no prospect; to the players – sod the injury crisis, go out and ensure that the fans stay onboard through the evening, whatever happens; to supporters – whatever, let’s give the team and the board the best backing we can. And for me? Well, bug notwithstanding it’s wine if we win and wine if we lose – but cognac if something is pulled out of the hat.
Tuesday, 14 October 2008
Bring It On? Don't Make Me Laugh
Bring it on? Zabeel Investments? Dubai? Pah. Just a wanabee Abu Dhabi. I mean, what’s the point of being in the Gulf if you don’t have substantial oil reserves? I don’t even remember anyone even wanting to invade Dubai. Lousy human rights record (see the piece in The Observer magazine of 5 October). The idea that our fine and noble club could end up being the plaything of a plaything state is just too much to bear and it’s time for the board to stand up for our values. But the prospect of being a fall-back plaything of a plaything state is even worse.
I’m seldom if ever first with the news and I have no insight into the intentions of Zabeel Investments or angle on whether the reports about them looking instead to buy West Ham are true. I was going to pen something highlighting the snippet in The Observer on Sunday suggesting that the Maktoums were still intent on buying Liverpool and the risks that this could entail, including us being bought by Zabeel, costs rising sharply in a promotion push, only for them to walk away not long down the line in pursuit of what others may consider to be a larger club. Sooner or later a foreign investment in a football club will go this way; I had been assuming it would be Manchester City as anyone taking a look at the club and the town would have to have second thoughts. Probably still will be.
So we have to wait and see for a while. The club was sensibly circumspect with its announcement, making it plain it was an indicative offer with no guarantee that a definite one will follow - which unfortunately would seem to rule out the possibility of a Citigroup-style suing of West Ham (or Liverpool, or anyone else). Oh what the hell, I think we should sue West Ham anyway. Everyone else is. For good reason. We can always fill in the details of the suit further down the line.
I’m sure other blogs have covered this ground, but just in case I thought I’d check out what a friend with Irish racing connections might think about the Maktoums. Reading between the lines and with no more guarantee of accuracy than a Palace programme match report, the general line seemed to be they are of the highest integrity and where they invest they do not leave enemies behind. Horses are tied up with the culture and sense of identity, which are behind the massive amounts spent on racing; investment in other sporting ventures are different in nature and geared around the main objective, selling Dubai as a sporting and leisure centre. That objective in turn means that whatever the Maktoums end up investing in becomes something of a flagship for Dubai, so they are not looking at a football team as a plaything, rather as something that they have more than a vested interest in ensuring it succeeds. This suggests the risk of them buying the club and then walking away further down the line to take on another is remote.
Why Charlton? This has to be the remaining worrying element. The real prize for them is Arsenal but they can’t get it. They do have the stadium name, however. The thing that West Ham and Charlton have in common is of course proximity to the 2012 Olympics venue. The Maktoums are heavily invested in the docklands in general and there must be some thought to a football club that could relocate to the Olympic stadium once it becomes a white elephant (personally I’m in full support for the proposal in a letter in the Financial Times recently that we should outsource the Olympics to Beijing).
There is no question that expansion of The Valley is by a distance the most desirable plan for Charlton. It is fundamental to any hope we have of truly establishing ourselves in the Premiership that we increase attendances. I was among the few (at least among people I know) who thought relocation to a new ground in the peninsula was not a complete no-no a few years back. I still consider it to be a price worth paying if increasing capacity at The Valley becomes impossible and if the end result is a realistic prospect of 40,000 watching Charlton in the top flight (no, I’m not suggesting there are any guarantees). However, relocation to a ground the other side of the river is, as far as I’m concerned, completely out of the question.
It’s all more than a little academic. At the moment we don’t know if a purchase of Charlton will go through and on what basis. Overall I think we are ready to accept the changes that this would imply, confident in both Richard Murray’s ability to ensure the club remains in good hands and in the Charlton fans’ ability to ensure that the characteristics of the club we truly value are preserved. But there are lines in the sand. If it were ever to become a choice between 20 years in the lowest division and relocation to the north side of The Thames for me there is no issue (provided in the bottom league we don’t have to play Millwall).
Talking of preserving qualities and double-standards, the best laugh I had over the weekend was the booing of Ashley Cole. As part of what I do I have recently had to plough through acres of sanctimonious twaddle by teenage scribblers overseen by idiots about the financial sector crisis; but I haven’t yet come across anything quite so daft as Rio Ferdinand suggesting that the fans who booed might be ashamed of themselves. This is Rio Ferdinand. The inarticulate, suspension-serving role model for the truly hopeless. Suggesting some other people should feel shame for their actions in expressing their derision for Ashley Cole. Please.
I regularly howl at the periodic booing of Charlton fans as being totally counter-productive. But surely nobody, not even Ferdinand and Rooney and any other representative of the collective brain cell of England footballers, could pretend that Cole was booed for having made a mistake. He was being booed for being Ashley Cole, with the mistake just the excuse. Let’s get this right. Wembley is just around the corner from ... Arsenal. This is the Ashley Cole who endeared himself to all football fans with his apparent reaction to the dreadful injustice of Arsenal’s new contract offer, one which had he accepted would have amounted to a revival of the slave trade. The Ashley Cole who cheated on a nation’s sweetheart. His terrific gaffe on Saturday gave Wembley’s fans the opportunity to send a message that, yes, we have to put up with the sort of characters that pull on an England football shirt, but don’t expect us to like them. And yes, Rio, just in case there’s any doubt that includes you too.
I’m seldom if ever first with the news and I have no insight into the intentions of Zabeel Investments or angle on whether the reports about them looking instead to buy West Ham are true. I was going to pen something highlighting the snippet in The Observer on Sunday suggesting that the Maktoums were still intent on buying Liverpool and the risks that this could entail, including us being bought by Zabeel, costs rising sharply in a promotion push, only for them to walk away not long down the line in pursuit of what others may consider to be a larger club. Sooner or later a foreign investment in a football club will go this way; I had been assuming it would be Manchester City as anyone taking a look at the club and the town would have to have second thoughts. Probably still will be.
So we have to wait and see for a while. The club was sensibly circumspect with its announcement, making it plain it was an indicative offer with no guarantee that a definite one will follow - which unfortunately would seem to rule out the possibility of a Citigroup-style suing of West Ham (or Liverpool, or anyone else). Oh what the hell, I think we should sue West Ham anyway. Everyone else is. For good reason. We can always fill in the details of the suit further down the line.
I’m sure other blogs have covered this ground, but just in case I thought I’d check out what a friend with Irish racing connections might think about the Maktoums. Reading between the lines and with no more guarantee of accuracy than a Palace programme match report, the general line seemed to be they are of the highest integrity and where they invest they do not leave enemies behind. Horses are tied up with the culture and sense of identity, which are behind the massive amounts spent on racing; investment in other sporting ventures are different in nature and geared around the main objective, selling Dubai as a sporting and leisure centre. That objective in turn means that whatever the Maktoums end up investing in becomes something of a flagship for Dubai, so they are not looking at a football team as a plaything, rather as something that they have more than a vested interest in ensuring it succeeds. This suggests the risk of them buying the club and then walking away further down the line to take on another is remote.
Why Charlton? This has to be the remaining worrying element. The real prize for them is Arsenal but they can’t get it. They do have the stadium name, however. The thing that West Ham and Charlton have in common is of course proximity to the 2012 Olympics venue. The Maktoums are heavily invested in the docklands in general and there must be some thought to a football club that could relocate to the Olympic stadium once it becomes a white elephant (personally I’m in full support for the proposal in a letter in the Financial Times recently that we should outsource the Olympics to Beijing).
There is no question that expansion of The Valley is by a distance the most desirable plan for Charlton. It is fundamental to any hope we have of truly establishing ourselves in the Premiership that we increase attendances. I was among the few (at least among people I know) who thought relocation to a new ground in the peninsula was not a complete no-no a few years back. I still consider it to be a price worth paying if increasing capacity at The Valley becomes impossible and if the end result is a realistic prospect of 40,000 watching Charlton in the top flight (no, I’m not suggesting there are any guarantees). However, relocation to a ground the other side of the river is, as far as I’m concerned, completely out of the question.
It’s all more than a little academic. At the moment we don’t know if a purchase of Charlton will go through and on what basis. Overall I think we are ready to accept the changes that this would imply, confident in both Richard Murray’s ability to ensure the club remains in good hands and in the Charlton fans’ ability to ensure that the characteristics of the club we truly value are preserved. But there are lines in the sand. If it were ever to become a choice between 20 years in the lowest division and relocation to the north side of The Thames for me there is no issue (provided in the bottom league we don’t have to play Millwall).
Talking of preserving qualities and double-standards, the best laugh I had over the weekend was the booing of Ashley Cole. As part of what I do I have recently had to plough through acres of sanctimonious twaddle by teenage scribblers overseen by idiots about the financial sector crisis; but I haven’t yet come across anything quite so daft as Rio Ferdinand suggesting that the fans who booed might be ashamed of themselves. This is Rio Ferdinand. The inarticulate, suspension-serving role model for the truly hopeless. Suggesting some other people should feel shame for their actions in expressing their derision for Ashley Cole. Please.
I regularly howl at the periodic booing of Charlton fans as being totally counter-productive. But surely nobody, not even Ferdinand and Rooney and any other representative of the collective brain cell of England footballers, could pretend that Cole was booed for having made a mistake. He was being booed for being Ashley Cole, with the mistake just the excuse. Let’s get this right. Wembley is just around the corner from ... Arsenal. This is the Ashley Cole who endeared himself to all football fans with his apparent reaction to the dreadful injustice of Arsenal’s new contract offer, one which had he accepted would have amounted to a revival of the slave trade. The Ashley Cole who cheated on a nation’s sweetheart. His terrific gaffe on Saturday gave Wembley’s fans the opportunity to send a message that, yes, we have to put up with the sort of characters that pull on an England football shirt, but don’t expect us to like them. And yes, Rio, just in case there’s any doubt that includes you too.
Saturday, 11 October 2008
Bring It On
Whether its just being knackered after the week that was or whether its that stage of life, my initial reaction to the news of a prospective takeover of the club by Dubai’s Maktoum family is bring it on. These things can always go pear-shaped – for example purchasing Manchester City comes with a written guarantee of failure – but you’ve got to feel that its time to take the risk. After all, the balance of risk is staring us in the face and, with no sleight whatsoever to the current board/owners, the increasing prospect of a return to the sort of situation for Charlton that I spent the first half of my life enduring (it wasn’t that bad, I didn’t expect any better) is simply not appealing.
We would no doubt continue to follow the club. But we are all aware that a failure to get promoted this season – and most people would say we have no better chance than perhaps half the division (I can’t bring myself to agree) – means an end to the parachute payments and a further cutting of the cloth, coupled with a prospective fall in season ticket sales, whether or not the promotion freebie offer is extended. In case it has escaped anyone’s attention the economy is developing not necessarily to our advantage. The implications for football in general are bad enough, but with Far East gambling money and TV rights to continue to prop up the top flight the real effects are going to be felt outside the Premiership.
There’s nothing wrong with being one of a dozen or so decent Championship clubs. However much we carp, the quality of football in the second flight is far higher than it was even five years ago let alone 20, and sooner or later we would get used to our revised status and truly enjoy the greater comradeship that is the Championship – always provided that Millwall and Leeds stay where they are; if they don’t I want out of this league one way or another. Cobblers. I just don’t want to. I have more than the T-shirt.
I haven’t checked emails this morning; it’s been a late start. And I’m probably the first to know about the Dubai bid. I don’t doubt that there might be one or two in there from a Man City friend who has been the butt of my derision in recent months (well, years actually). I think it was the words I wrote to Once I Had A Secret Love (‘once I had a football team etc) that hit hardest. Fact is, Platini and others don’t really understand British football. He recently questioned whether if Liverpool were bought by the Maktoums, taking over the reins from US owners, managed by a Spaniard and with nearly all the players from outside the UK would there be anything left that was Liverpool? Well Michel, there is. It’s called the fans.
We (the fans that is, not just wisened old bloggers) have rightly taken plaudits for the way we have collectively contributed to the development of Charlton over recent years. We have full confidence that Richard Murray is not going to sell on any terms, but ultimately whether the club retains the character that we value will be down to us. And that’s not just sentimental twaddle. It’s what Platini and others don’t understand. So again, bring it on.
We would no doubt continue to follow the club. But we are all aware that a failure to get promoted this season – and most people would say we have no better chance than perhaps half the division (I can’t bring myself to agree) – means an end to the parachute payments and a further cutting of the cloth, coupled with a prospective fall in season ticket sales, whether or not the promotion freebie offer is extended. In case it has escaped anyone’s attention the economy is developing not necessarily to our advantage. The implications for football in general are bad enough, but with Far East gambling money and TV rights to continue to prop up the top flight the real effects are going to be felt outside the Premiership.
There’s nothing wrong with being one of a dozen or so decent Championship clubs. However much we carp, the quality of football in the second flight is far higher than it was even five years ago let alone 20, and sooner or later we would get used to our revised status and truly enjoy the greater comradeship that is the Championship – always provided that Millwall and Leeds stay where they are; if they don’t I want out of this league one way or another. Cobblers. I just don’t want to. I have more than the T-shirt.
I haven’t checked emails this morning; it’s been a late start. And I’m probably the first to know about the Dubai bid. I don’t doubt that there might be one or two in there from a Man City friend who has been the butt of my derision in recent months (well, years actually). I think it was the words I wrote to Once I Had A Secret Love (‘once I had a football team etc) that hit hardest. Fact is, Platini and others don’t really understand British football. He recently questioned whether if Liverpool were bought by the Maktoums, taking over the reins from US owners, managed by a Spaniard and with nearly all the players from outside the UK would there be anything left that was Liverpool? Well Michel, there is. It’s called the fans.
We (the fans that is, not just wisened old bloggers) have rightly taken plaudits for the way we have collectively contributed to the development of Charlton over recent years. We have full confidence that Richard Murray is not going to sell on any terms, but ultimately whether the club retains the character that we value will be down to us. And that’s not just sentimental twaddle. It’s what Platini and others don’t understand. So again, bring it on.
Saturday, 4 October 2008
Life Is Sweet Once More
Ah, let’s just take a minute or two to bask in the warm glow of a glorious victory. Plaudits and congratulations all round, three points in the bag, possible crisis averted. It’s so nice to celebrate with a glass of wine rather than having to gulp it down in a headlong rush to forget. OK, we all realise it was far from perfect. Just as on every other day so far this season it could easily have turned out differently. But there were enough sturdy performances and enough cohesion and purpose to ensure that Ipswich, while a touch unlucky to lose on the balance of play and chances created, could not claim to be robbed. Perhaps most significant, just like us a week ago after they went 2-1 down they failed to create a single clear-cut chance; Lisbie did seem to get between Hudson and Weaver and be in a position to head over the keeper and into an empty net. But he was never going to do that, was he?
Given that in a recent post I was questioning whether the Holland/Bailey combination in central midfield was not our best option (which is not to say that either is not worthy of a place) and whether we could really afford to start with Bouazza and Sam, it follows that I thought the changes to the starting eleven were astute. The back five was unchanged, with Cranie still getting the nod at right-back, but Holland dropped to the bench for Zhi to return, while Sam also stood down for Ambrose and Todorov got the nod over Gray.
I thought in the first 20 minutes we were clearly the better team. There was better movement and control than in previous games, even if we had the handicap once more of scoring first. A free kick in a reasonable position and Bailey drove the ball hard and low. My first reaction was it was going wide – and I think Wright in the Ipswich goal thought the same. Seems to have taken a deflection and next thing you know its in the net. Credited to Bailey, but maybe a case for the dubious goals committee. Zhi ensured better link-up play, while Todorov, while not surprisingly still looking short of match practise, held it up well and almost played in Varney on a few occasions.
However, we were getting little joy down the flanks; Bouazza was to have a very poor game, save one moment, and Ambrose flitted in and out of the game. Both seemed spectators when they didn’t have the ball and did not do enough to make themselves available. Shortly after the goal Bailey was clattered from behind and fell awkwardly, the first occasion when referee Hegley made the wrong decision over cards. He had to go off, although with Holland coming on you can’t say it made us materially weaker. Bailey and Zhi had looked good together.
Whether or not the change affected us – and Ipswich also made a substitution, bringing on the lively Counago - as the half progressed Ipswich got more of a grip on midfield, pressuring Zhi in particular. He thrives on moving the ball on quickly, which means players making themselves available. When they don’t he can be caught in possession. A poor mistake by Youga, who otherwise was playing well and creating more than Bouazza going forward, almost led to a goal and it was no real surprise that another cross from their right side caused problems. Cranie had to play the ball running towards goal near the far post, with a forward on his shoulder. Unfortunately he planted it in the net. After that Ipswich clipped the top of the bar from a free kick, but at the break it was pretty much a case of honours even and all to play for.
I don’t know if he was injured or just upset at the own goal, but Cranie was replaced at half-time by Semedo. It was to be a significant change as Semedo, who hadn’t before looked to me comfortable at right-back, took his opportunity with both hands. He was energetic, enthusiastic, and during the second half cropped up in advanced positions on the break, leaving Ambrose some way behind.
The next goal was always going to be crucial, but with Ipswich enjoying better control in midfield but Varney causing them problems with his pace and running it was an even bet which team would get it. In the event Ambrose and Semedo seemed to run down the right together before the former put in a superb cross. Bouazza had read it well and was in the right place. But he seemed to completely screw it up. However, after connecting with something the ball bounced down and then up and over Wright into the net. A free kick going wide before being deflected, an own goal, and a miskick. Ah well, who cares, this is the Championship.
After that we threatened on the break, with Varney getting around their defender only to be pulled down either outside or just inside the box. From the East Stand we couldn’t tell. The referee gave it outside, but for some reason didn’t give the defender even a yellow card, having booked Bouazza in the first half for a tug back in the Ipswich half. I think he just forgot. In this brave new world players are not supposed to call for cards, but if the referees singularly fail to make such obvious decisions what are they supposed to do? Respect? Don’t make me laugh.
The defending was sometimes frantic in the last 20 minutes, but in general Hudson – who had another very impressive game – and Primus dealt with what was thrown at them. Weaver was called on once or twice, but it never looked desperate. We found it difficult to keep possession, however. Again, Semedo showed up both Ambrose and Bouazza with the pace and energy he showed getting forward and back. Gray replaced a tiring Todorov and after a few mild scares it was all done and dusted.
The overall performance was mixed, but Todorov, Ambrose and Zhi presumably need more games to get fully up to speed. I think it’s positive to view, for now at least Holland and Bailey, and Todorov and Gray, as interchangeable. There’s a two-week break now and at least I can look at the Sunday papers – and yes, even the league table – without suffering palpitations.
Player Ratings:
Weaver: 7/10. Capable enough, only called on to make saves a few times.
Cranie: 6/10. Have to see why he was replaced at half-time; no real blame for the own goal, these things happen and he had to play the ball. But Semedo gave us a lot more in the second half.
Youga: 7/10. Generally impressive, but one bad mistake in the first half could easily have cost a goal.
Hudson: 9/10. I thought he was excellent today, held the back line together, good tackles and interceptions.
Primus: 8/10. Also very good. Nice to see him knowing how far he could go in dealing with Counago in particular.
Bouazza: 5/10. I thought he had a very poor game, not finding or making space, not getting past the full back. Capable of much more. But saw the opportunity for what proved to be the winner.
Bailey: 7/10. Only on for around 15 minutes but looked good with Zhi in that time – and presumably he will keep the goal.
Zhi: 6/10. Something of an enigma today. Looked good moving forward and did get in a fair share of tackles. But Ipswich had better control of midfield and Zhi was outmuscled on a number of occasions. Should be a case of sticking with him and him getting fully up to speed.
Ambrose: 6/10. Moderately encouraging but he too can do more. Was a bit peripheral for much of the game, but gets credit for the cross for the winner.
Todorov: 6/10. Needs more games, good movement and passes in the first half but conditions were not easy for him.
Varney: 8/10. Didn’t score, but almost single-handedly worried Ipswich in the second half with his pace and running.
Subs: Holland 7/10 (does what it says on the bottle); Semedo: 8/10 (something of a revelation); Gray: 6/10 (no great impression on the game).
Given that in a recent post I was questioning whether the Holland/Bailey combination in central midfield was not our best option (which is not to say that either is not worthy of a place) and whether we could really afford to start with Bouazza and Sam, it follows that I thought the changes to the starting eleven were astute. The back five was unchanged, with Cranie still getting the nod at right-back, but Holland dropped to the bench for Zhi to return, while Sam also stood down for Ambrose and Todorov got the nod over Gray.
I thought in the first 20 minutes we were clearly the better team. There was better movement and control than in previous games, even if we had the handicap once more of scoring first. A free kick in a reasonable position and Bailey drove the ball hard and low. My first reaction was it was going wide – and I think Wright in the Ipswich goal thought the same. Seems to have taken a deflection and next thing you know its in the net. Credited to Bailey, but maybe a case for the dubious goals committee. Zhi ensured better link-up play, while Todorov, while not surprisingly still looking short of match practise, held it up well and almost played in Varney on a few occasions.
However, we were getting little joy down the flanks; Bouazza was to have a very poor game, save one moment, and Ambrose flitted in and out of the game. Both seemed spectators when they didn’t have the ball and did not do enough to make themselves available. Shortly after the goal Bailey was clattered from behind and fell awkwardly, the first occasion when referee Hegley made the wrong decision over cards. He had to go off, although with Holland coming on you can’t say it made us materially weaker. Bailey and Zhi had looked good together.
Whether or not the change affected us – and Ipswich also made a substitution, bringing on the lively Counago - as the half progressed Ipswich got more of a grip on midfield, pressuring Zhi in particular. He thrives on moving the ball on quickly, which means players making themselves available. When they don’t he can be caught in possession. A poor mistake by Youga, who otherwise was playing well and creating more than Bouazza going forward, almost led to a goal and it was no real surprise that another cross from their right side caused problems. Cranie had to play the ball running towards goal near the far post, with a forward on his shoulder. Unfortunately he planted it in the net. After that Ipswich clipped the top of the bar from a free kick, but at the break it was pretty much a case of honours even and all to play for.
I don’t know if he was injured or just upset at the own goal, but Cranie was replaced at half-time by Semedo. It was to be a significant change as Semedo, who hadn’t before looked to me comfortable at right-back, took his opportunity with both hands. He was energetic, enthusiastic, and during the second half cropped up in advanced positions on the break, leaving Ambrose some way behind.
The next goal was always going to be crucial, but with Ipswich enjoying better control in midfield but Varney causing them problems with his pace and running it was an even bet which team would get it. In the event Ambrose and Semedo seemed to run down the right together before the former put in a superb cross. Bouazza had read it well and was in the right place. But he seemed to completely screw it up. However, after connecting with something the ball bounced down and then up and over Wright into the net. A free kick going wide before being deflected, an own goal, and a miskick. Ah well, who cares, this is the Championship.
After that we threatened on the break, with Varney getting around their defender only to be pulled down either outside or just inside the box. From the East Stand we couldn’t tell. The referee gave it outside, but for some reason didn’t give the defender even a yellow card, having booked Bouazza in the first half for a tug back in the Ipswich half. I think he just forgot. In this brave new world players are not supposed to call for cards, but if the referees singularly fail to make such obvious decisions what are they supposed to do? Respect? Don’t make me laugh.
The defending was sometimes frantic in the last 20 minutes, but in general Hudson – who had another very impressive game – and Primus dealt with what was thrown at them. Weaver was called on once or twice, but it never looked desperate. We found it difficult to keep possession, however. Again, Semedo showed up both Ambrose and Bouazza with the pace and energy he showed getting forward and back. Gray replaced a tiring Todorov and after a few mild scares it was all done and dusted.
The overall performance was mixed, but Todorov, Ambrose and Zhi presumably need more games to get fully up to speed. I think it’s positive to view, for now at least Holland and Bailey, and Todorov and Gray, as interchangeable. There’s a two-week break now and at least I can look at the Sunday papers – and yes, even the league table – without suffering palpitations.
Player Ratings:
Weaver: 7/10. Capable enough, only called on to make saves a few times.
Cranie: 6/10. Have to see why he was replaced at half-time; no real blame for the own goal, these things happen and he had to play the ball. But Semedo gave us a lot more in the second half.
Youga: 7/10. Generally impressive, but one bad mistake in the first half could easily have cost a goal.
Hudson: 9/10. I thought he was excellent today, held the back line together, good tackles and interceptions.
Primus: 8/10. Also very good. Nice to see him knowing how far he could go in dealing with Counago in particular.
Bouazza: 5/10. I thought he had a very poor game, not finding or making space, not getting past the full back. Capable of much more. But saw the opportunity for what proved to be the winner.
Bailey: 7/10. Only on for around 15 minutes but looked good with Zhi in that time – and presumably he will keep the goal.
Zhi: 6/10. Something of an enigma today. Looked good moving forward and did get in a fair share of tackles. But Ipswich had better control of midfield and Zhi was outmuscled on a number of occasions. Should be a case of sticking with him and him getting fully up to speed.
Ambrose: 6/10. Moderately encouraging but he too can do more. Was a bit peripheral for much of the game, but gets credit for the cross for the winner.
Todorov: 6/10. Needs more games, good movement and passes in the first half but conditions were not easy for him.
Varney: 8/10. Didn’t score, but almost single-handedly worried Ipswich in the second half with his pace and running.
Subs: Holland 7/10 (does what it says on the bottle); Semedo: 8/10 (something of a revelation); Gray: 6/10 (no great impression on the game).
Friday, 3 October 2008
Striking The Wrong Note
Now I’m all for accentuating the positive, even sometimes with the tongue planted firmly in the cheek. And I don’t particularly enjoy criticising others – by implication it means I am not especially happy with the prevailing situation, and by nature I much prefer to be a happy bunny. After all, its not as if we ask much of our football team. Only that it wins, entertains, shows commitment to the cause, gets into Europe – or at the very least doesn’t lose to Palace. However, sometimes things strike the wrong chord and it seems to me that there have been a couple of examples of that of late.
First, the Charlton website is touting the fact that despite two defeats we are still ‘only’ four points off a play-off spot. That statement is depressing at every level. It suggests that a play-off spot is the pinnacle of our ambitions (which in terms of club development suggests we have gone backwards to the point of the last time we only sneaked into the play-offs – to lose to Palace); it even hints that we are, with a limited horizon, succeeding. And to be four points off a play-off spot after nine games, lying 17th in the table, is a source of misery, not hope. After all, if we continue in the same fashion after 18 games we will be ‘only’ eight points off a play-off spot; and after 36, as the season enters the final run-in, we will be handily placed, tucked in just some 16 points below the team in sixth.
Second, Alan Pardew in his programme notes for the Sheff Wed game went out of his way to “reassure supporters that this club is not a vehicle for me – this is not a stop-off on my career”. Another time and in a different context these remarks would have been appreciated, and I assume they are heart-felt. However, Pardew’s stock has fallen since his failure to keep us in the Premiership (no real blame there but with seven games to go I would have backed us to stay up – and still hope we join the queue of those waiting to sue West Ham) and more particularly the failure to rebound. As some fans apparently made clear at the Palace game, the table has turned and for the near future at least it is up to Pardew to demonstrate that he is the still the right man to manage the club. No Charlton fan that I know of is currently contemplating the risk of Pardew jumping ship to join another club.
Even the great Lennie Lawrence called it wrong when he took his realistic appraisal of situations to the extent of considering Charlton a small club with a ceiling of potential that could not be raised. We all have unrealistic ambitions for our teams, but not many clubs can point to the sorts of attendance that we enjoyed for long periods, or the extensive potential catchment area for new fans. That the conditions were never in place to begin to exploit that potential during his tenure is a fact. But most clubs simply do not have that potential. Curbs (and no doubt Richard Murray) seemed to me to get it right by acknowledging that the key to our future is being able to both expand the capacity of The Valley and to fill it. Until that happens in the Premiership we will always be punching above our weight and in the Championship we are really just another club (with ambitions).
At the moment I don’t want to look at the league table, or hear ‘reassurances’ that some people are not too big for us. I do want to hear and see evidence that we are moving in the right direction. In practical terms that means Pardew having the support of the players, the players showing the necessary commitment, and the fans providing the backing that can help. We need to concentrate on playing better and finding the style of play (and combination of players) that best suits our available resources. (To the relief of anyone reading I’m not going to repeat the contents of the previous post.)
Also, on Saturday the last thing I want to hear is booing if we start poorly and/or go behind. Whether Pardew is the right man for the job is now a real issue for discussion – for that it’s worth, my view is that unless he clearly loses the support of the players he is and should be given the season to prove it; after all, we don’t have much to lose – but not during the game. It’s the same old well-worn argument. But it still boils down to a definition of supporter.
First, the Charlton website is touting the fact that despite two defeats we are still ‘only’ four points off a play-off spot. That statement is depressing at every level. It suggests that a play-off spot is the pinnacle of our ambitions (which in terms of club development suggests we have gone backwards to the point of the last time we only sneaked into the play-offs – to lose to Palace); it even hints that we are, with a limited horizon, succeeding. And to be four points off a play-off spot after nine games, lying 17th in the table, is a source of misery, not hope. After all, if we continue in the same fashion after 18 games we will be ‘only’ eight points off a play-off spot; and after 36, as the season enters the final run-in, we will be handily placed, tucked in just some 16 points below the team in sixth.
Second, Alan Pardew in his programme notes for the Sheff Wed game went out of his way to “reassure supporters that this club is not a vehicle for me – this is not a stop-off on my career”. Another time and in a different context these remarks would have been appreciated, and I assume they are heart-felt. However, Pardew’s stock has fallen since his failure to keep us in the Premiership (no real blame there but with seven games to go I would have backed us to stay up – and still hope we join the queue of those waiting to sue West Ham) and more particularly the failure to rebound. As some fans apparently made clear at the Palace game, the table has turned and for the near future at least it is up to Pardew to demonstrate that he is the still the right man to manage the club. No Charlton fan that I know of is currently contemplating the risk of Pardew jumping ship to join another club.
Even the great Lennie Lawrence called it wrong when he took his realistic appraisal of situations to the extent of considering Charlton a small club with a ceiling of potential that could not be raised. We all have unrealistic ambitions for our teams, but not many clubs can point to the sorts of attendance that we enjoyed for long periods, or the extensive potential catchment area for new fans. That the conditions were never in place to begin to exploit that potential during his tenure is a fact. But most clubs simply do not have that potential. Curbs (and no doubt Richard Murray) seemed to me to get it right by acknowledging that the key to our future is being able to both expand the capacity of The Valley and to fill it. Until that happens in the Premiership we will always be punching above our weight and in the Championship we are really just another club (with ambitions).
At the moment I don’t want to look at the league table, or hear ‘reassurances’ that some people are not too big for us. I do want to hear and see evidence that we are moving in the right direction. In practical terms that means Pardew having the support of the players, the players showing the necessary commitment, and the fans providing the backing that can help. We need to concentrate on playing better and finding the style of play (and combination of players) that best suits our available resources. (To the relief of anyone reading I’m not going to repeat the contents of the previous post.)
Also, on Saturday the last thing I want to hear is booing if we start poorly and/or go behind. Whether Pardew is the right man for the job is now a real issue for discussion – for that it’s worth, my view is that unless he clearly loses the support of the players he is and should be given the season to prove it; after all, we don’t have much to lose – but not during the game. It’s the same old well-worn argument. But it still boils down to a definition of supporter.
Monday, 29 September 2008
Something Better Change
Powell, Fortune, Hughes (did he really get on for Hull at the weekend?), Rommadahl, Kitson, Todorov, Hales. Heroes all, even had they done only one thing in their Charlton careers. Let’s hope we add to the list tomorrow night. Because yet one more victory at Selhurst Park would go some way to easing the disappointment of Saturday. A bloody long way in fact. For me Fortune’s equaliser buried the ghost of the wilderness years, so there’s no bad feeling (and it’s a bloody game of football for crying out loud). Doesn’t mean we have to like them though.
It’s all Curbishley’s fault really. For most of my time following Charlton the top flight was a distant dream, with little realistic prospect of ever getting there. The magnificent sojourn under Lennine Lawrence was really the exception that proved the rule. It was great fun but never quite felt right; and it didn’t really count anyway because of where we were playing. But Curbishley raised our hopes and delivered, gave us a little time to get used to drinking at the top table. I miss it, for all the indecent squalor of the Premiership.
So something has to change, because, as has been pointed out, my liver can’t take the fall-out from perpetual disappointment. Either we have to get better playing as we are (that is a call for the manager, although sooner or later the Holland/Bailey central partnership and the choice of wide players will have to change), or we make changes soon, or I get used to watching a middling second-flight team all over again. I can’t rule out the last option but I just don’t feel ready for it (and in any event if we are to be mid-table it makes a case for bringing in the youngsters in order to develop for next season).
Pardew has hinted at changes, talking of some players chomping at the bit and suggesting that as we have options in midfield that might be where we adjust. However, at the risk of someone whose footballing career peaked at the age of 15 and six goals in three games for the school advising people who make a living out of the game, I think looking at midfield is the wrong starting point. It is indeed where we have options, but these options should be framed around what could be the best set-up for the team.
We are lacking in options up front, even with the return of Todorov. Basically, unless we play 4-5-1 (which at least at home we’re not going to) or employ Ambrose as a striker (which I can’t see working, although him playing in the hole is another matter), or wait for a return of McLeod, it’s Gray and Varney with Todorov and Dickson (respectively) as back-ups. I find it inconceivable that Gray and Todorov could play together, given their similar strengths and weaknesses, and hard to see how Varney and Dickson could form a partnership.
Consequently, in my view we have to accept that Gray/Todorov and Varney/Dickson will be in the starting line-up – and choose the style of play and midfield accordingly to get the best out of them. What was depressing on Saturday (albeit a reflection of Wednesday defending in depth) was seeing Todorov having to leap hopelessly for aimless balls forward. To my mind Gray is best employed – as indeed is Todorov - linking up play, while Varney’s strength is running into the channels and using pace to get on the end of intelligent passes.
By implication we need a midfield that has the pace and mobility to get forward and back as a unit and to be able to pass and move. It’s not Pardew’s fault that so far this season he has been unable to call on a player well suited to that set-up, ie Zheng Zhi. And I’m not convinced that we are best served by having Sam and Bouazza in the starting XI. Having two out-and-out wingers can narrow the space for Varney to run into (in turn creating space for mobile midfielders to run into). I wish the pair of them would study the contribution made in the last promotion season by Robinson and Newton. Both did more than their share of defensive work and get forward – and both scored goals. But then had out-and-out goalscorers in Mendonca and Hunt, which put an emphasis on getting good service to them in the box. This time around it is different. Given the forward combination we should be emphasising playing through midfield, not necessarily looking to shore up the middle (ie Holland and Bailey) and relying on wingers who together have not yet delivered the goods this season (not forgetting some excellent crosses from Sam and Bouazza’s goal against Reading).
To follow the argument through, if we have Sam or Bouazza in the side, with Zhi or Ambrose – or both, if Zhi plays in the centre alongside Holland or Bailey – we need to look to full backs to get forward. This suggests Youga and Moutaouakil being first choice. Before the start of the season I thought they would be, allowing for the latter’s initial suspension, but I’m more sympathetic than some with Pardew for bringing in Cranie on loan, especially after the obvious shocker that Yassin had at Preston. However, to quote Fagin, I’m reviewing the situation (ie I’m changing my mind). If we have to play to a system that best utilises our strengths we have to accept some deficiencies. It’s not as if we’re running away with the league as it is.
I thought we had stumbled on this system last season, with the home games against Stoke and especially Palace. With the exception of the two centre-backs (who don’t really count in this context) and Halford we have all the players who embarrassed Palace that night with fast, attractive and intelligent football. I’d like to see more of that.
So, my possible altered line-up – not necessarily for the next game but through the season - would be: Weaver, Moutaouakil, Youga, Hudson, Primus, Holland/Bailey/Semedo, Zhi, Sam, Varney, Gray/Todorov, Ambrose. Subs: Elliot, Semedo/Holland/Bailey, Todorov, Shelvey, Dickson. But quite frankly I don’t care if we pick 11 Harry Cripps tomorrow night if they do the business.
At least I got one laugh on Saturday. I’m beginning to believe that your quality of life can be discerned by what you do on a Saturday morning. In my early years clearly Saturday morning was little different from any other morning. Then my parents bought a couple of shops and Saturdays turned into forced child labour (the only escape being The Valley). This drudgery continued with secondary school, which included Saturday mornings. Then there was university, where at least Saturday morning returned to being like any other (at least it did for philosophy students). This ushered in a golden age when Saturday mornings were spent sleeping it off, drinking more, sleeping, watching TV and other nefarious activities. More recently Saturday mornings have become a mad dash to try to do the urgent things, which if completed opened up the possibility of making a start on the endless list of ‘things which need to be done but are not urgent’. Something’s gone wrong somewhere.
So, this Saturday morning hell was a trip to the supermarket (I do manage to have all the tins of food run out at pretty much the same time; it’s an art perfected over the years). There really ought to be some sort of test for trolley usage at the entrance, with those failing having to take a learner course in the car park; along with a social skills test, ie planting in people’s heads the idea that dawdling in the middle of the aisle, leaving your trolley bang slap in the middle of said aile etc is not acceptable. (Actually my latest pet hate is those people on a train or bus who think it’s OK to take the seat on the outside so that – they hope – no-one can/will sit next to them; well, they didn’t pay for two seats so I try to take up the one next to them even if double seats are available elsewhere.)
Waiting at the check-out and a rather outsized and necessarily lycra-clad woman with a couple of brats behind started loading up her shopping. I kid you not she had the largest bag of really poor crisps that you could ever see, vast containers of Pepsi, other bottled/carbonated drinks, vast plastic loaves of break, and more sugar than Cuba produces in a year. She then turned to one of her offspring: ‘Kylie, go and get some low-fat butter’. I burst out laughing, but I don’t think the woman in question ever made the connection between this and her culinary preferences. One small moment of pleasure in an otherwise disappointing Saturday.
It’s all Curbishley’s fault really. For most of my time following Charlton the top flight was a distant dream, with little realistic prospect of ever getting there. The magnificent sojourn under Lennine Lawrence was really the exception that proved the rule. It was great fun but never quite felt right; and it didn’t really count anyway because of where we were playing. But Curbishley raised our hopes and delivered, gave us a little time to get used to drinking at the top table. I miss it, for all the indecent squalor of the Premiership.
So something has to change, because, as has been pointed out, my liver can’t take the fall-out from perpetual disappointment. Either we have to get better playing as we are (that is a call for the manager, although sooner or later the Holland/Bailey central partnership and the choice of wide players will have to change), or we make changes soon, or I get used to watching a middling second-flight team all over again. I can’t rule out the last option but I just don’t feel ready for it (and in any event if we are to be mid-table it makes a case for bringing in the youngsters in order to develop for next season).
Pardew has hinted at changes, talking of some players chomping at the bit and suggesting that as we have options in midfield that might be where we adjust. However, at the risk of someone whose footballing career peaked at the age of 15 and six goals in three games for the school advising people who make a living out of the game, I think looking at midfield is the wrong starting point. It is indeed where we have options, but these options should be framed around what could be the best set-up for the team.
We are lacking in options up front, even with the return of Todorov. Basically, unless we play 4-5-1 (which at least at home we’re not going to) or employ Ambrose as a striker (which I can’t see working, although him playing in the hole is another matter), or wait for a return of McLeod, it’s Gray and Varney with Todorov and Dickson (respectively) as back-ups. I find it inconceivable that Gray and Todorov could play together, given their similar strengths and weaknesses, and hard to see how Varney and Dickson could form a partnership.
Consequently, in my view we have to accept that Gray/Todorov and Varney/Dickson will be in the starting line-up – and choose the style of play and midfield accordingly to get the best out of them. What was depressing on Saturday (albeit a reflection of Wednesday defending in depth) was seeing Todorov having to leap hopelessly for aimless balls forward. To my mind Gray is best employed – as indeed is Todorov - linking up play, while Varney’s strength is running into the channels and using pace to get on the end of intelligent passes.
By implication we need a midfield that has the pace and mobility to get forward and back as a unit and to be able to pass and move. It’s not Pardew’s fault that so far this season he has been unable to call on a player well suited to that set-up, ie Zheng Zhi. And I’m not convinced that we are best served by having Sam and Bouazza in the starting XI. Having two out-and-out wingers can narrow the space for Varney to run into (in turn creating space for mobile midfielders to run into). I wish the pair of them would study the contribution made in the last promotion season by Robinson and Newton. Both did more than their share of defensive work and get forward – and both scored goals. But then had out-and-out goalscorers in Mendonca and Hunt, which put an emphasis on getting good service to them in the box. This time around it is different. Given the forward combination we should be emphasising playing through midfield, not necessarily looking to shore up the middle (ie Holland and Bailey) and relying on wingers who together have not yet delivered the goods this season (not forgetting some excellent crosses from Sam and Bouazza’s goal against Reading).
To follow the argument through, if we have Sam or Bouazza in the side, with Zhi or Ambrose – or both, if Zhi plays in the centre alongside Holland or Bailey – we need to look to full backs to get forward. This suggests Youga and Moutaouakil being first choice. Before the start of the season I thought they would be, allowing for the latter’s initial suspension, but I’m more sympathetic than some with Pardew for bringing in Cranie on loan, especially after the obvious shocker that Yassin had at Preston. However, to quote Fagin, I’m reviewing the situation (ie I’m changing my mind). If we have to play to a system that best utilises our strengths we have to accept some deficiencies. It’s not as if we’re running away with the league as it is.
I thought we had stumbled on this system last season, with the home games against Stoke and especially Palace. With the exception of the two centre-backs (who don’t really count in this context) and Halford we have all the players who embarrassed Palace that night with fast, attractive and intelligent football. I’d like to see more of that.
So, my possible altered line-up – not necessarily for the next game but through the season - would be: Weaver, Moutaouakil, Youga, Hudson, Primus, Holland/Bailey/Semedo, Zhi, Sam, Varney, Gray/Todorov, Ambrose. Subs: Elliot, Semedo/Holland/Bailey, Todorov, Shelvey, Dickson. But quite frankly I don’t care if we pick 11 Harry Cripps tomorrow night if they do the business.
At least I got one laugh on Saturday. I’m beginning to believe that your quality of life can be discerned by what you do on a Saturday morning. In my early years clearly Saturday morning was little different from any other morning. Then my parents bought a couple of shops and Saturdays turned into forced child labour (the only escape being The Valley). This drudgery continued with secondary school, which included Saturday mornings. Then there was university, where at least Saturday morning returned to being like any other (at least it did for philosophy students). This ushered in a golden age when Saturday mornings were spent sleeping it off, drinking more, sleeping, watching TV and other nefarious activities. More recently Saturday mornings have become a mad dash to try to do the urgent things, which if completed opened up the possibility of making a start on the endless list of ‘things which need to be done but are not urgent’. Something’s gone wrong somewhere.
So, this Saturday morning hell was a trip to the supermarket (I do manage to have all the tins of food run out at pretty much the same time; it’s an art perfected over the years). There really ought to be some sort of test for trolley usage at the entrance, with those failing having to take a learner course in the car park; along with a social skills test, ie planting in people’s heads the idea that dawdling in the middle of the aisle, leaving your trolley bang slap in the middle of said aile etc is not acceptable. (Actually my latest pet hate is those people on a train or bus who think it’s OK to take the seat on the outside so that – they hope – no-one can/will sit next to them; well, they didn’t pay for two seats so I try to take up the one next to them even if double seats are available elsewhere.)
Waiting at the check-out and a rather outsized and necessarily lycra-clad woman with a couple of brats behind started loading up her shopping. I kid you not she had the largest bag of really poor crisps that you could ever see, vast containers of Pepsi, other bottled/carbonated drinks, vast plastic loaves of break, and more sugar than Cuba produces in a year. She then turned to one of her offspring: ‘Kylie, go and get some low-fat butter’. I burst out laughing, but I don’t think the woman in question ever made the connection between this and her culinary preferences. One small moment of pleasure in an otherwise disappointing Saturday.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)