After Saturday I think we were ready to forgive almost anything tonight – except perhaps extra time. I was even willing to pardon my partner Suzanne for preventing me from taking a trip to Peterborough (this is grossly unfair, but as they say history is written by the victors; my mother persuaded my father to go Christmas shopping once instead of the home game and that one turned out 7-6). And let’s just accept tonight for what it was, despite all the nonsense written in the programme. It was a game to win with as little effort as possible and move on; after Reid scored everyone in red was ready for a hot bath. It was an opportunity for some players to remind Parkinson they are around, but of them nobody took the chance – and in front of a crowd a little above 4,000 perhaps they have mitigating circumstances.
With Semedo, Martin and Anyinsah out of the equation, there had to be changes to the line-up. Fortune came in to give Doherty a rest alongside Dailly, who never seems to need one. Francis and Fry made up the back four. Not surprisingly McCormack came in to partner Racon in central midfield, but whether or not they were told to do so it seemed odd to me that McCormack spent most of the game, at least until the latter stages, in a more advanced role than Racon, despite his recent goals. If that gave us an odd shape, we also had Wagstaff, Jackson and Reid alternating in a flexible formation, with Abbott effectively the lone striker. Reid did seem to have a roving role, until he embarrassed their full-back to score the goal, after which he seemed to decide that’s the position he wanted to occupy. As an exercise in options it might have had merit, but the end-result was disjointed, with Racon not able to get forward and Abbott unable to hold the ball up for others to run, although in his defence the service was poor.
There was an early scare as Barnet hit the post with an early effort, but in general we did enough to have most of the play in the first half, without looking especially dangerous. Francis found himself up against a speedy and tricky winger, albeit one who looked like he tends to fluff the final ball, and provided an excellent example of how to handle the situation: a mix of timely tackles and the occasional shove. The game was going nowhere in particular when we took the lead out of nothing. Their full-back should have had the situation under control but dwelt on the ball and Reid took it from him and outpaced him. Rather than looking for any pass he simply went on and scored at the near post. It was a very well taken goal, but one that no defender should be proud of having given away.
I can’t remember any other notable incidents of the first half and at the break we were reasonably comfortable. But that only served to encourage all concerned to take it as easy as possible. When you start a game slowly and aren’t truly up for it it is hard to turn around. And after the break Barnet clearly decided that with nothing to lose they might as well take it to us. The second half was to be all about Elliot.
Wagstaff was replaced at the break, with Benson coming on and Jackson going wide right in a more conventional 4-4-2 set-up. If we thought that would create more of an attacking threat we were mistaken. Benson was to play his part, with one delightful flick to set up McCormack for a run through which should have ended with a better finish and just as important one moment in our own box where he put his head in where it hurts to clear. But Jackson looked uncomfortable on the right side and, with Reid after his goal flattering to deceive – and guilty of standing still instead of tracking his man in a dangerous position, which led to another Elliot save – we continued to struggle to make anything happen. Most of Elliot’s saves were good, including turning a Basey free kick around the post, but a couple at least were outstanding, including one at the near post from a McLeod shot (he came on as a substitute) and a one-on-one which he blocked.
Doherty came on for Fortune to try to ensure we kept what we had, and later Abbott departed for Sodje, to no obvious effect. It was a case of running down the clock – and to be honest, despite Elliot’s saves I’ve been more nervous in a pre-season friendly. When you’re 1-0 up on a night like tonight you just want the final whistle and to be spared another 30 minutes. It all came soon enough.
The games have been coming thick and fast and I’m not going to moan about tonight, even though on chances created Barnet will feel they have been robbed. Others may disagree, but I’m not bothered about a third-round FA Cup tie (except for the money). I’ll never want us to lose, but tonight , the prospect of Luton or Corby, and the Southend Johnstone’s Paint Trophy exercise, plus the ‘southern semi-final’ against Brentford are all games you just hope improve the gelling of the squad and can be negotiated without injury and suspensions for more important tasks. Let’s get serious again on Saturday as after the recent results and given the league position the bar has been raised, with two home games coming up and the chance to really push on. The reaction to the Brighton result has been spot on; taking it easier tonight was understandable. I just hope we haven’t used up our allocation of luck.
Player Ratings:
Elliot: 9/10. I don’t know what constitutes a perfect score; in football there always has to be the potential for more, but he was man of the match by a distance. If we make it through for a money-spinning third-round tie Murray owes him a pint.
Fry: 7/10. Reasonable enough game; was a touch unlucky to pick up a yellow card.
Francis: 7/10. I thought he was excellent in the first half against a difficult winger, but came under more pressure in the second as they went for it. Like Fry wasn’t able to get forward to much effect, given problems in front of them.
Fortune: 6/10. No obvious mistakes, but did seem to play the game without really imposing himself, or paying too much attention to distribution.
Dailly: 8/10. Composed and assured, Mr Reliable.
Reid: 6/10. Extra mark for the goal, but quite frankly after that his performance disappointed me. He’s good enough to have run them ragged but didn’t. Has to do more to be demanding a starting position.
McCormack: 5/10. Disappointing. I thought he’d slot into the Semedo role and play as if he had something to prove to Parkinson. Instead he was more advanced than Racon, which seemed to suit neither of them.
Racon: 6/10. Decent enough first half but barely featured in the second. He’s started scoring goals but was in my opinion too deep tonight.
Jackson: 5/10. Suffered from accommodating both Reid and Wagstaff and then being played out right in the second half. Back to normal position on Saturday I hope.
Wagstaff: 6/10. Not sure whether he picked up a knock or whether taking him off was tactical. Looked lively in the first half when he and Reid were switching around.
Abbott: 5/10. Service to him was usually poor, but didn’t do enough to suggest that he deserves a starting place ahead of Benson, Anyinsah and Martin. Missed opportunity.
Subs: Benson (6/10 – the flick and the defensive header, not a great deal else but we weren’t looking to go forward much in the second half); Doherty (7/10 – his coming on for Fortune didn’t exactly tie things up at the back as hoped); Sodje (5/10 – like Benson struggled to make an impact as we were effectively playing out the game).
Tuesday, 16 November 2010
Thursday, 11 November 2010
Don't Know What You've Got 'Til It's Gone
We knew it was coming, and the reasons for it, but a quick check on the club website today was depressing. We have, inevitably, joined the ranks of the cheap, unoriginal, ghastly, packaged, ad-ridden ‘Football League interactive’ websites. Up flashed an ad for Specsavers. Borrowing another phrase from The Boss, I wish I were blind. If Mr Happy keeps popping up I might have to burn down every Specsavers’ outlet in the hope that he’s hiding in one of them. We just have to pray that, like our stay in the third flight, it will prove to be a temporary aberration and binned at the earliest possible opportunity (can we make it a condition of a takeover?). Time then for a few things that have made me laugh of late, to brighten at least my mood.
In common with the rest of humanity, I might have no interest in the Johnstone’s Paint Trophy (having ditched the opportunity to exit gracefully we are now in the position where we have to go on and win the bloody thing). But I’m still sad enough to have sat in front of the PC through the game on Tuesday night to check progress on the BBC site. Couldn’t help being drawn to checking the details of the Wycombe v Bristol Rovers game going on at the same time (perhaps an after-effect of our own recent home reversal). Wycombe, 1-5 down at home with 10 minutes left, end up losing 3-6. Sounds like a proper spanking, then you look at the stats (yes, it’s getting sadder). Possession? 50-50. Corners? 9-2 in favour of Wycombe. Bristol’s attempts on target? Five - and only nine including off-target. Even ignoring how a team can manage to score six with no own goals and have five on target (I do remember Middlesbrough winning 3-2 at Arsenal and registering one attempt on target all game, the victory coming courtesy of two own goals), it sounds like one of those nights when nothing goes right and the opposition score with just about every shot. Sack the manager because he must have run over a cat or be paying for the sins of a previous life.
While we’re on Bristol Rovers, it’s disappointing to note that according to reports they are trying to farm out a certain Dominic Blizzard on loan, to give him some playing time. Our home game against them is coming up in a couple of weeks and I for one was looking forward to letting him know just what we think about his tackle on Basey – and more to the point Trollope and Blizzard's reaction to it. There will still be the opportunity to howl at the disgraceful Trollope, but if Blizzard’s available why don’t we take him on? I’m sure we could find a suitable position for him.
If Wycombe and others are feeling a little down, there is of course always someone worse off than yourself. I keep tabs on the progress of my adopted French team, Lyon Duchere, and a recent check on the CFA Groupe B table, which showed Duchere eighth in the 17-strong league (but with a game in hand over a few of those above them), also drew my attention to Louhans-Cuiseaux. A quick check reveals that Louhans is a “market town of great charm” in south-east Burgundy (just north-east of Macon). It “lies on one of France's prettiest small rivers, the River Seille, and has a delightful mediaeval charm and tranquil atmosphere”. Cuiseaux it seems lies just a little to the south. The two villages – which merged their football teams in 1970 – sound absolutely spendid places to visit. But they have a truly pants combined team, this season at least. Their record so far reads ‘played 10, won 0, drawn 0, lost 10, goals for 3, goals against 31’. In this division you get three points for a win, one for a draw, and one for showing up. Louhans-Cuiseaux’s points tally is 9, suggesting that they decided not to turn up for one of the games. Their best result of those played is having held the opposition to a 1-0 victory (yes, it was Duchere). I’ve no idea if the manager’s already been sacked yet, but if not might be worth getting down to the bookies.
I suppose if you’re bang in the heart of Burgundy there are compensations when your football team is propping up the table. All of which brings us back to Charlton, as the club has just announced that there will be a trial sale of real ale in the ground for the Yeovil game. Can we not find it in our hearts to ship in a case of the local Louhans-Cuiseaux tipple, on a trial basis of course, for the following game? The beer trial is apparently in response to requests from fans. Please take this as the start of a request campaign. If nothing happens, I’m going to start writing letters and if that doesn’t work I’ll hunt you down. Just as soon as I’ve sorted out Mr Happy from Specsavers.
In common with the rest of humanity, I might have no interest in the Johnstone’s Paint Trophy (having ditched the opportunity to exit gracefully we are now in the position where we have to go on and win the bloody thing). But I’m still sad enough to have sat in front of the PC through the game on Tuesday night to check progress on the BBC site. Couldn’t help being drawn to checking the details of the Wycombe v Bristol Rovers game going on at the same time (perhaps an after-effect of our own recent home reversal). Wycombe, 1-5 down at home with 10 minutes left, end up losing 3-6. Sounds like a proper spanking, then you look at the stats (yes, it’s getting sadder). Possession? 50-50. Corners? 9-2 in favour of Wycombe. Bristol’s attempts on target? Five - and only nine including off-target. Even ignoring how a team can manage to score six with no own goals and have five on target (I do remember Middlesbrough winning 3-2 at Arsenal and registering one attempt on target all game, the victory coming courtesy of two own goals), it sounds like one of those nights when nothing goes right and the opposition score with just about every shot. Sack the manager because he must have run over a cat or be paying for the sins of a previous life.
While we’re on Bristol Rovers, it’s disappointing to note that according to reports they are trying to farm out a certain Dominic Blizzard on loan, to give him some playing time. Our home game against them is coming up in a couple of weeks and I for one was looking forward to letting him know just what we think about his tackle on Basey – and more to the point Trollope and Blizzard's reaction to it. There will still be the opportunity to howl at the disgraceful Trollope, but if Blizzard’s available why don’t we take him on? I’m sure we could find a suitable position for him.
If Wycombe and others are feeling a little down, there is of course always someone worse off than yourself. I keep tabs on the progress of my adopted French team, Lyon Duchere, and a recent check on the CFA Groupe B table, which showed Duchere eighth in the 17-strong league (but with a game in hand over a few of those above them), also drew my attention to Louhans-Cuiseaux. A quick check reveals that Louhans is a “market town of great charm” in south-east Burgundy (just north-east of Macon). It “lies on one of France's prettiest small rivers, the River Seille, and has a delightful mediaeval charm and tranquil atmosphere”. Cuiseaux it seems lies just a little to the south. The two villages – which merged their football teams in 1970 – sound absolutely spendid places to visit. But they have a truly pants combined team, this season at least. Their record so far reads ‘played 10, won 0, drawn 0, lost 10, goals for 3, goals against 31’. In this division you get three points for a win, one for a draw, and one for showing up. Louhans-Cuiseaux’s points tally is 9, suggesting that they decided not to turn up for one of the games. Their best result of those played is having held the opposition to a 1-0 victory (yes, it was Duchere). I’ve no idea if the manager’s already been sacked yet, but if not might be worth getting down to the bookies.
I suppose if you’re bang in the heart of Burgundy there are compensations when your football team is propping up the table. All of which brings us back to Charlton, as the club has just announced that there will be a trial sale of real ale in the ground for the Yeovil game. Can we not find it in our hearts to ship in a case of the local Louhans-Cuiseaux tipple, on a trial basis of course, for the following game? The beer trial is apparently in response to requests from fans. Please take this as the start of a request campaign. If nothing happens, I’m going to start writing letters and if that doesn’t work I’ll hunt you down. Just as soon as I’ve sorted out Mr Happy from Specsavers.
Monday, 8 November 2010
Investor Criteria: Jordan Need Not Apply
The season, and more or less everything else Charlton-related, just keeps getting more confusing, at least for a simple soul like myself. On the fresh investment/takeover front, as ever I have no idea what is or might be going on behind the scenes (anybody looking for actual news here please stop now); and nobody can blame Richard Murray for not being specific in the statement released by the club. If anything has to remain confidential until signed, or at least a formal offer made, it’s on this front. But the latest report from the BBC, citing a “senior source at the club”, seems reasonably blunt, suggesting that the Beeb at least is confident about its facts.
The weekend speculation, from the somewhat less reliable source of The News of the World, focused on Peter Ridsdale apparently trying to put together a deal to take us over, one that was prompting divided opinion on the part of the board (which is a little odd as Murray’s is the only opinion that matters). That prompted a denial from him, that the reports were “categorically untrue and without foundation” and that “at no time have I made a bid for Charlton nor do I intend to do so”. That does of course leave it open whether he could be involved in a bid in some way, shape or form. Then came the club statement on the site, that the process of actively seeking investment “continues”, that “we have constant conversations with interested parties” (pedant linguistic point here: regular, ongoing conversations fine, constant conversations not), but that “we’d like to make it clear to supporters that no deal is imminent”. All fine and good.
The subsequent BBC report claimed that a takeover bid led by Sebastien Sainsbury had been rejected, on the grounds that the offer had not come with proof of funds. The report referred to Ridsdale in the context of him being involved in a rival US bid advised by the MD of Citibank’s sports finance unit, who apparently tried to buy Cardiff and Hull. Given that Sainsbury was reportedly involved in a failed bid in 2004 to buy Leeds and that he apparently in July registered a ‘takeover vehicle’ called Charlton Athletic 2010 Ltd, this leaves entirely open whether the NoTW simply thought that all roads lead back to Ridsdale, or whether he is involved in some way without having or intending to bid himself. We just don’t know and maybe never will. If there was a bid by Sainsbury and if it was rejected for lacking proof of funds, clearly that leaves the door open for a fresh effort addressing those concerns.
Our backstop is Murray’s repeated pledge that “the future of the club is paramount in my thoughts, and the identity of any new owners or investors is of huge importance to the board and I; they have to be right for the board and the club”. We can’t tell whether he means that Sainsbury or Ridsdale might not meet our ‘fit and proper person’ criteria, but maybe there’s mileage in applying some simple risk/return profile rules.
It’s reasonable to apply four ratings/rankings for any prospective new owner (a new investor is a different matter; anyone with a cheque that doesn’t bounce for a minority stake would be acceptable). In an ideal world a new owner of the club would have the personal credentials of a Nelson Mandela (I would have said St Francis of Assisi but as a life-long committed atheist he would have failed my test), the assets of at least an Abramovich, the style sense of a Mourinho, and no property-related vehicles. The last criterion has to be applied because of the obvious risk involved in The Valley and/or training ground being used in an asset-stripping purchase; it shouldn’t be necessary as Murray’s pledge is clear. The third is just a subjective variable which can be used at random in the event that there are areas of doubt; it would have been useful in eliminating Gold and Sullivan. For reference purposes, and with a note to his own recent comments, Jordan scores zero on all fronts and can be considered the benchmark for the unacceptable, even if he came backed by sole rights over China’s foreign exchange reserves.
There are of course acceptable trade-offs. I have nothing but respect for the way that for example Barry Hearn has run Orient, not simply throwing money away in a fruitless pursuit of ‘success’. But we don’t need a replacement for Murray of this nature as there would, for us at least, be no upside. An acceptable financial commitment is required, ie some person or group that will only see a return with us at least stable in The Championship with aspirations of a return to The Premiership. It’s taken a few years for even the very flush owners of QPR to get that team into a position to challenge for a place in the top flight. We all have patience if things seem to be moving in the right direction (as three wins on the spin demonstrate). The Dubai guys in different global and regional circumstances would have been fine, especially if Murray had a continuing role.
Of course, where it all gets messy is when we attract interest from all the flotsam and jetsam of the football world with no real interest in the club other than making a buck (ie selling it on at a higher price within a few years). Not necessarily bad if it works, but a bloody disaster if it doesn’t (when the tax bills start running up and suddenly we find the ground’s truly on the line). I’ve no idea where Sainsbury sits in that context, but it’s fair to say that there would be doubts about Ridsdale, especially in view of the comments of others. Trouble is, overseas money would have to be attracted by the long term prospects (of course they’d learn to love us and the club) as anyone with the funds available could presumably get a half-decent Championship club.
So, all as clear as mud. With nothing imminent, we wait, and think about matters on the pitch. I was in Amsterdam when we took on Swindon and spent the weekend trying to catch up rather than taking a trip to Barnet. Didn’t sound like a thriller and of course a replay has mixed implications: yes, as Elliot says on the site another game can help with the gelling process, but it will presumably be a game that will cost us money on the night. I know it’s wrong, and for sure the prospect of a second-round home tie against Luton or Corby gives even us with our recent cup record a decent shot at making the third-round draw. And that in turn could help boost the coffers. But money aside I just don’t at present look forward to the possibility of a third-round clash with one of the ‘big boys’. It would just serve as a reminder of what used to be. As and when we’re back in The Championship a cup run, or just a game against Premiership opposition, is an attractive prospect as it would be enticing, holding out what could be in the future, rather than what has gone before.
It (I hope) goes without saying that tomorrow night’s clash against Southend will also see me absent. I made it there last season for the league game, but a second trip for a competition even the final of which is not appealing (done the Full Members Cup Final, which is on a par) is too much to take on board. There are restrictions on how many of the recent starting X1 we can rest, but I hope the allocation’s used in full. And in what’s becoming a list of sorry excuses, Peterborough on Saturday is unlikely. Lyon comes to London this weekend and I’m not sure this is what Suzanne had in mind when she said she’d like to see more of England.
Which just leaves one abiding thought concerning reaction to the Brighton game. Did the level of criticism from many have a positive impact? It shouldn’t have, and I’d be tempted to say instead that in the subsequent three games we’ve had the breaks when against Brighton we didn’t (which is not to say we were unlucky to lose), but you never know. How do we go from shipping seven goals in two games to three successive clean sheets? Greater focus on cutting out simple mistakes and greater emphasis on defending? Again, shouldn’t be necessary, and again it’s clear from the highlights that Swindon at least could easily have taken the lead, which could have meant a different outcome. Small margins, but if there’s a lesson it has to be most games this season are going to be won or lost by a few key moments – at least until we’ve fully gelled and roll over all who stand in our way.
The weekend speculation, from the somewhat less reliable source of The News of the World, focused on Peter Ridsdale apparently trying to put together a deal to take us over, one that was prompting divided opinion on the part of the board (which is a little odd as Murray’s is the only opinion that matters). That prompted a denial from him, that the reports were “categorically untrue and without foundation” and that “at no time have I made a bid for Charlton nor do I intend to do so”. That does of course leave it open whether he could be involved in a bid in some way, shape or form. Then came the club statement on the site, that the process of actively seeking investment “continues”, that “we have constant conversations with interested parties” (pedant linguistic point here: regular, ongoing conversations fine, constant conversations not), but that “we’d like to make it clear to supporters that no deal is imminent”. All fine and good.
The subsequent BBC report claimed that a takeover bid led by Sebastien Sainsbury had been rejected, on the grounds that the offer had not come with proof of funds. The report referred to Ridsdale in the context of him being involved in a rival US bid advised by the MD of Citibank’s sports finance unit, who apparently tried to buy Cardiff and Hull. Given that Sainsbury was reportedly involved in a failed bid in 2004 to buy Leeds and that he apparently in July registered a ‘takeover vehicle’ called Charlton Athletic 2010 Ltd, this leaves entirely open whether the NoTW simply thought that all roads lead back to Ridsdale, or whether he is involved in some way without having or intending to bid himself. We just don’t know and maybe never will. If there was a bid by Sainsbury and if it was rejected for lacking proof of funds, clearly that leaves the door open for a fresh effort addressing those concerns.
Our backstop is Murray’s repeated pledge that “the future of the club is paramount in my thoughts, and the identity of any new owners or investors is of huge importance to the board and I; they have to be right for the board and the club”. We can’t tell whether he means that Sainsbury or Ridsdale might not meet our ‘fit and proper person’ criteria, but maybe there’s mileage in applying some simple risk/return profile rules.
It’s reasonable to apply four ratings/rankings for any prospective new owner (a new investor is a different matter; anyone with a cheque that doesn’t bounce for a minority stake would be acceptable). In an ideal world a new owner of the club would have the personal credentials of a Nelson Mandela (I would have said St Francis of Assisi but as a life-long committed atheist he would have failed my test), the assets of at least an Abramovich, the style sense of a Mourinho, and no property-related vehicles. The last criterion has to be applied because of the obvious risk involved in The Valley and/or training ground being used in an asset-stripping purchase; it shouldn’t be necessary as Murray’s pledge is clear. The third is just a subjective variable which can be used at random in the event that there are areas of doubt; it would have been useful in eliminating Gold and Sullivan. For reference purposes, and with a note to his own recent comments, Jordan scores zero on all fronts and can be considered the benchmark for the unacceptable, even if he came backed by sole rights over China’s foreign exchange reserves.
There are of course acceptable trade-offs. I have nothing but respect for the way that for example Barry Hearn has run Orient, not simply throwing money away in a fruitless pursuit of ‘success’. But we don’t need a replacement for Murray of this nature as there would, for us at least, be no upside. An acceptable financial commitment is required, ie some person or group that will only see a return with us at least stable in The Championship with aspirations of a return to The Premiership. It’s taken a few years for even the very flush owners of QPR to get that team into a position to challenge for a place in the top flight. We all have patience if things seem to be moving in the right direction (as three wins on the spin demonstrate). The Dubai guys in different global and regional circumstances would have been fine, especially if Murray had a continuing role.
Of course, where it all gets messy is when we attract interest from all the flotsam and jetsam of the football world with no real interest in the club other than making a buck (ie selling it on at a higher price within a few years). Not necessarily bad if it works, but a bloody disaster if it doesn’t (when the tax bills start running up and suddenly we find the ground’s truly on the line). I’ve no idea where Sainsbury sits in that context, but it’s fair to say that there would be doubts about Ridsdale, especially in view of the comments of others. Trouble is, overseas money would have to be attracted by the long term prospects (of course they’d learn to love us and the club) as anyone with the funds available could presumably get a half-decent Championship club.
So, all as clear as mud. With nothing imminent, we wait, and think about matters on the pitch. I was in Amsterdam when we took on Swindon and spent the weekend trying to catch up rather than taking a trip to Barnet. Didn’t sound like a thriller and of course a replay has mixed implications: yes, as Elliot says on the site another game can help with the gelling process, but it will presumably be a game that will cost us money on the night. I know it’s wrong, and for sure the prospect of a second-round home tie against Luton or Corby gives even us with our recent cup record a decent shot at making the third-round draw. And that in turn could help boost the coffers. But money aside I just don’t at present look forward to the possibility of a third-round clash with one of the ‘big boys’. It would just serve as a reminder of what used to be. As and when we’re back in The Championship a cup run, or just a game against Premiership opposition, is an attractive prospect as it would be enticing, holding out what could be in the future, rather than what has gone before.
It (I hope) goes without saying that tomorrow night’s clash against Southend will also see me absent. I made it there last season for the league game, but a second trip for a competition even the final of which is not appealing (done the Full Members Cup Final, which is on a par) is too much to take on board. There are restrictions on how many of the recent starting X1 we can rest, but I hope the allocation’s used in full. And in what’s becoming a list of sorry excuses, Peterborough on Saturday is unlikely. Lyon comes to London this weekend and I’m not sure this is what Suzanne had in mind when she said she’d like to see more of England.
Which just leaves one abiding thought concerning reaction to the Brighton game. Did the level of criticism from many have a positive impact? It shouldn’t have, and I’d be tempted to say instead that in the subsequent three games we’ve had the breaks when against Brighton we didn’t (which is not to say we were unlucky to lose), but you never know. How do we go from shipping seven goals in two games to three successive clean sheets? Greater focus on cutting out simple mistakes and greater emphasis on defending? Again, shouldn’t be necessary, and again it’s clear from the highlights that Swindon at least could easily have taken the lead, which could have meant a different outcome. Small margins, but if there’s a lesson it has to be most games this season are going to be won or lost by a few key moments – at least until we’ve fully gelled and roll over all who stand in our way.
Saturday, 30 October 2010
Effort Brings Due Rewards
Before the game we’d all have taken a win of any kind; after that, having conceded seven in two, a win with a clean sheet. So no room for anything other than delight – at both the result and a performance which, if it lacked some quality and precision, left nothing to be desired in terms of effort and commitment. After what happened last time at The Valley it was pleasing to see that the players were well aware that a determined display was required. In the post-Brighton debate over Parkinson, it must count that in key areas players ran their socks off. This time we did have something to hang on to, and if the second half was more about stopping them equalising than getting a second (can’t say making it safe, having blown a three-goal lead last Saturday) this was an example of the ends justifying the means.
Overall, Racon and Semedo put in the best combined performance I’ve seen from them this season; indeed, what stood out for me was Racon’s tackling as much as his distribution. Doherty and Dailly both had the occasional iffy moment, but broke up attacks and headed the ball away countless times. Benson’s play outside the box was the best to date and he nearly rounded off the day with a flick that went just over after some superb trickery down the line by Martin late in the day. Anyinsah was a threat all afternoon, while Wagstaff scored the goal and was the main outlet when we needed to relieve the pressure (although his choice of pass when in good positions in the second half especially let him down). Let’s not go overboard. Sheff Wed proved to be strong but surprisingly limited and rather sluggish opposition, at least until they brought on Johnson in the second half. And the game turned on us scoring a rather fortunate goal (albeit deserved on the balance of play in the first half). Far from perfect, but we know the circumstances and the season at the moment is still about improvement. After Brighton, two wins, back into the top six (and only six places below Palace now). I think we’d have all taken that.
The team was unchanged from Carlisle, with Parkinson opting not to alter the defence, bring in McCormack, and to retain Jackson wide left. A change of ends after the toss-up meant the chance for the Covered End to welcome back Nicky Weaver, but the mix of boos and applause probably summed it up. There’s no hard feelings really. We didn’t like him before he came to us, cheered him when he did, and it’s not his fault that the time he was here was a horrible period for the club. Good luck to him. In fact Weaver was to feature prominently in the first half, for good and bad. He reminded us that as a shot-stopper he is one of the best, turning away a couple of decent strikes. But his inability to command an area, or indeed come off his line, meant that any good cross caused them problems. A couple of repeats of the corner that saw Benson score at the death against Carlisle nearly produced a similar outcome.
We did have the better of the first half, in terms of possession and chances. Wednesday had their moments, but aside from one Elliot save, turning a shot round the post, and one wicked shot which curled just wide everything was blocked before it got through. At the other end Benson and Anyinsah were winning balls in the air they had no right and looked menacing, crosses were narrowly not converted, although clear-cut chances were hard to come by. However, we took the lead when a corner was half-cleared and someone put in a lousy shot which bounced back off a Charlton shirt invitingly for Wagstaff around the edge of the box. His shot was true, giving Weaver no chance. The only sour point of the first half was how the referee could have a long chat with one of theirs after he’d deliberately pulled back Jackson in a dangerous position and not produce a card, only to pull one out when Semedo clipped someone breaking out.
Wednesday came out a little more purposeful in the second half and as the game wore on it not surprisingly became increasingly about whether we would hold out. Their substitutions were with attacking intent as they had to chase the game, and Johnson in particular made a difference. We became less intent on supporting the forwards from midfield and were, quite frankly, quite happy for the game to be over. There were some dangerous moments. One header should have been buried, there were a few goalmouth scrambles, and substitute Morrison (formerly of the team a few places above us) almost got through but poked it wide of Elliot. Nevertheless, there have been much sweatier final 20 minutes and most of the time the defence coped very well. Martin came on for Anyinsah and again almost rounded the game off by completely trumping their guy down the line and delivering it for Benson, while also picking up a booking for having to jump over a tackle which if he’d stayed on his feet may well have produced a penalty. I also thought we should have had a penalty before then when Anyinsah turned his man and was pulled back just enough to stop him getting to the ball before the next defender.
Racon gave way to McCormack at the death, but by then all we wanted was the final whistle. Cue some relief and some quiet satisfaction over a display which was very good in the context of what had gone before. It’s a game of margins and while others may disagree we played as well against Brighton in the first half. That time everything went against us. Subsequently we’ve snatched a last-second winner away and won at home with a clean sheet. So it’s something better than Australian or Beaujolais for me tonight (and everyone else I hope). Let’s hope we feel the same way after Swindon on Tuesday (personally I’ll be in Amsterdam drinking whatever is put in front of me).
Player Ratings:
Elliot: 7/10. Only really called on once, when he made a decent save, which is testament to those in front of him and very welcome after the recent goals against tally.
Francis: 7/10. Decent game, contributed going forward in the first half in particular.
Doherty: 8/10. Made a couple of errors, but overall was a rock and neutered their long-throw threat.
Dailly: 8/10. As for Doherty. Wednesday didn’t have the pace to test us on that front. Must be relieved not to be asked to play full-back any more.
Fry: 7/10. Gave away a few needless free-kicks but otherwise solid.
Jackson: 6/10. Seemed a little off the pace sometimes but added solidity and nearly scored in the first half with a decent shot.
Semedo: 8/10. Excellent game. Sensibly managed to avoid getting sent off after the early booking, despite their antics.
Racon: 8/10. My man of the match. Excellent distribution and exceptional tackling. He and Semedo ran the game in the first half at least.
Wagstaff: 7/10. Could have been a 6 or a 9. Scored, did many things well, just loses a mark for not making the most of some very good positions in the second half, choosing the wrong pass.
Anyinsah: 7/10. Put himself about and almost got through on a number of occasions. Stayed on his feet when tugged back having turned the defender.
Benson: 7/10. Much better all-round contribution, just a pity that flick or any of the first-half headers didn’t go in.
Subs: Martin (7/10 – played centrally, coming on instead of Sodje or Abbott, and almost laid on a second); McCormack (only on for a couple of minutes).
Overall, Racon and Semedo put in the best combined performance I’ve seen from them this season; indeed, what stood out for me was Racon’s tackling as much as his distribution. Doherty and Dailly both had the occasional iffy moment, but broke up attacks and headed the ball away countless times. Benson’s play outside the box was the best to date and he nearly rounded off the day with a flick that went just over after some superb trickery down the line by Martin late in the day. Anyinsah was a threat all afternoon, while Wagstaff scored the goal and was the main outlet when we needed to relieve the pressure (although his choice of pass when in good positions in the second half especially let him down). Let’s not go overboard. Sheff Wed proved to be strong but surprisingly limited and rather sluggish opposition, at least until they brought on Johnson in the second half. And the game turned on us scoring a rather fortunate goal (albeit deserved on the balance of play in the first half). Far from perfect, but we know the circumstances and the season at the moment is still about improvement. After Brighton, two wins, back into the top six (and only six places below Palace now). I think we’d have all taken that.
The team was unchanged from Carlisle, with Parkinson opting not to alter the defence, bring in McCormack, and to retain Jackson wide left. A change of ends after the toss-up meant the chance for the Covered End to welcome back Nicky Weaver, but the mix of boos and applause probably summed it up. There’s no hard feelings really. We didn’t like him before he came to us, cheered him when he did, and it’s not his fault that the time he was here was a horrible period for the club. Good luck to him. In fact Weaver was to feature prominently in the first half, for good and bad. He reminded us that as a shot-stopper he is one of the best, turning away a couple of decent strikes. But his inability to command an area, or indeed come off his line, meant that any good cross caused them problems. A couple of repeats of the corner that saw Benson score at the death against Carlisle nearly produced a similar outcome.
We did have the better of the first half, in terms of possession and chances. Wednesday had their moments, but aside from one Elliot save, turning a shot round the post, and one wicked shot which curled just wide everything was blocked before it got through. At the other end Benson and Anyinsah were winning balls in the air they had no right and looked menacing, crosses were narrowly not converted, although clear-cut chances were hard to come by. However, we took the lead when a corner was half-cleared and someone put in a lousy shot which bounced back off a Charlton shirt invitingly for Wagstaff around the edge of the box. His shot was true, giving Weaver no chance. The only sour point of the first half was how the referee could have a long chat with one of theirs after he’d deliberately pulled back Jackson in a dangerous position and not produce a card, only to pull one out when Semedo clipped someone breaking out.
Wednesday came out a little more purposeful in the second half and as the game wore on it not surprisingly became increasingly about whether we would hold out. Their substitutions were with attacking intent as they had to chase the game, and Johnson in particular made a difference. We became less intent on supporting the forwards from midfield and were, quite frankly, quite happy for the game to be over. There were some dangerous moments. One header should have been buried, there were a few goalmouth scrambles, and substitute Morrison (formerly of the team a few places above us) almost got through but poked it wide of Elliot. Nevertheless, there have been much sweatier final 20 minutes and most of the time the defence coped very well. Martin came on for Anyinsah and again almost rounded the game off by completely trumping their guy down the line and delivering it for Benson, while also picking up a booking for having to jump over a tackle which if he’d stayed on his feet may well have produced a penalty. I also thought we should have had a penalty before then when Anyinsah turned his man and was pulled back just enough to stop him getting to the ball before the next defender.
Racon gave way to McCormack at the death, but by then all we wanted was the final whistle. Cue some relief and some quiet satisfaction over a display which was very good in the context of what had gone before. It’s a game of margins and while others may disagree we played as well against Brighton in the first half. That time everything went against us. Subsequently we’ve snatched a last-second winner away and won at home with a clean sheet. So it’s something better than Australian or Beaujolais for me tonight (and everyone else I hope). Let’s hope we feel the same way after Swindon on Tuesday (personally I’ll be in Amsterdam drinking whatever is put in front of me).
Player Ratings:
Elliot: 7/10. Only really called on once, when he made a decent save, which is testament to those in front of him and very welcome after the recent goals against tally.
Francis: 7/10. Decent game, contributed going forward in the first half in particular.
Doherty: 8/10. Made a couple of errors, but overall was a rock and neutered their long-throw threat.
Dailly: 8/10. As for Doherty. Wednesday didn’t have the pace to test us on that front. Must be relieved not to be asked to play full-back any more.
Fry: 7/10. Gave away a few needless free-kicks but otherwise solid.
Jackson: 6/10. Seemed a little off the pace sometimes but added solidity and nearly scored in the first half with a decent shot.
Semedo: 8/10. Excellent game. Sensibly managed to avoid getting sent off after the early booking, despite their antics.
Racon: 8/10. My man of the match. Excellent distribution and exceptional tackling. He and Semedo ran the game in the first half at least.
Wagstaff: 7/10. Could have been a 6 or a 9. Scored, did many things well, just loses a mark for not making the most of some very good positions in the second half, choosing the wrong pass.
Anyinsah: 7/10. Put himself about and almost got through on a number of occasions. Stayed on his feet when tugged back having turned the defender.
Benson: 7/10. Much better all-round contribution, just a pity that flick or any of the first-half headers didn’t go in.
Subs: Martin (7/10 – played centrally, coming on instead of Sodje or Abbott, and almost laid on a second); McCormack (only on for a couple of minutes).
Thursday, 28 October 2010
On A Lighter Note ...
It’s all been too serious of late. And having taken up too much space waffling extensively on matters Charlton, there hasn’t been the opportunity to squeeze in an update on whether during the past week in Lyon I managed to make it to the crucial CFA Group B Lyon Duchere away game at Besancon. The truth is I didn’t. My partner Suzanne was up for it in principle (no, honest, apparently it’s a very nice town and an overnight stay could have been rounded off by the game), but it would have meant sacrificing our one full day of pure R&R (with associated and aforementioned rabbit in mustard) for a two hours-plus drive back on a Saturday night - and perhaps more to the point having to take a risk on running out of petrol in light of a problem or two in this department of late in France, with a little reserve required to get me to the airport on Sunday.
(Sorry if anyone’s expecting dramas, but I didn’t see any riots during the week. If I’d known that shops were going to be looted, I’d have joined the protest march and directed it towards a good wine shop I know. I could just see the reports: ‘Police are looking for a man with an English accent wearing a Charlton shirt and carrying two bottles of Chateau d’YQuem and two bottles of Petrus’. If you think that might have resulted in a rather limited number of suspects, don’t forget that there is another Duchere-supporting Addick out there.)
So having already passed on a seven-goal thriller at Carlisle, it was with some trepidation that I checked the France Football site today for an update on what I might have had. I was aware that Duchere are not noted for their high-scoring games. Prior to Saturday this season’s eight games had produced 16 goals (nine for, seven against), not bad but less impressive (11 in seven) when you strip out that exceptional 4-1 home win over low-flying Chasselay (a town which as noted in a previous comment may have featured in a Monty Python classic but whose defence must be permanently lathered, much like our own of late). What I hadn’t done was check on Besancon’s record in that department. They actually went into the game unbeaten this season, but with only two wins out of eight. The other six were drawn and the accumulated goals tally for their games stood at 13.
I think people should be able by now to see where this is going. Duchere and Besancon did indeed duly play out a 0-0 draw on Saturday evening. I don’t have a match report to pass on, but you can imagine the entertainment quotient for a game that I guess will live longer in my memory than that of any other living soul. Suzanne may have been sold on going to the game, but just how many brownie points I would have lost will forever remain, fortunately, a matter of pure conjecture.
The result nevertheless set me thinking about the worst 0-0 draw I’ve ever seen. It’s another I may have mentioned before (prior to the Notts County game), when on New Year’s Day a County-supporting friend and I drove from London to Nottingham (and back), in a very poor state, to watch two utterly indifferent and hungover teams on a quagmire of a pitch. Never mind goalmouth action, I don’t think the ball moved more than 10 yards either side of the centre-circle all game. All I do remember of the occasion was the pair of us (plus a few others) pleading for those in a tea shack the other side of a fence to get to us whatever liquid (quite literally) they might have had. Aye, we had it tough.
That’s one of only two tea-shack related incidents at football matches I can recall. The other was when for some inexplicable reason some friends and I drove south from university at Sheffield one Saturday to take in a Chesterfield v Millwall game. We went in what passed for the away end, thinking it better that with London accents that was the safer option (nobody in their right mind would be there and not a Spanner). After about 20 minutes I was in the queue for a cuppa and Chesterfield were awarded a penalty. The poor runt of a Chesterfield fan with the task of dishing out the refreshments was obviously a little keen to see what was happening on the pitch. Far be it for me to condone this sort of behaviour, but a big, hairy Spanner waiting to be served leant into the cabin and hollered “are you serving the f***ing tea or watching the f***ing game?” There was a quick reordering of priorities.
So, Sheffield up against us again on Saturday. Always brings back memories for me, given my three years there (more if the post-graduation period on the dole is added; well, after the strains of securing a philosophy degree you need time out to consider the first steps on a career path). Recent experience has not been positive. With a fellow Addick driving, we went up to Bramall Lane for the match in our final Premiership season. On the bus to the ground an old lady asked us if we were OK to find the ground and I explained we were, given my time there (when for a while as sports editor of the university paper I used to avail myself of the press pass to United games). ‘Did we treat you right?’ she kindly inquired. Well, you did before, but not on that day, which saw an aimless and spineless performance from us rounded off with a late winner for them from Gillespie (where is he now? Apparently Darlington if Wikipedia is to be believed). Nor on my next excursion to the city of steel, to Hillsborough in our final Championship season. That saw us routed 4-1. The recent results at The Valley against Sheffield teams have of course been more mixed, but nobody’s going to forget the pasting dished out in Pardew’s last game.
Consequently I feel we are owed one. Could be a decent game, against a (relatively) ‘big’ team in this division, one currently fourth. Oh merde, I was going to say I’m quite looking forward to it. I think I used those words ahead of our last home game.
(Sorry if anyone’s expecting dramas, but I didn’t see any riots during the week. If I’d known that shops were going to be looted, I’d have joined the protest march and directed it towards a good wine shop I know. I could just see the reports: ‘Police are looking for a man with an English accent wearing a Charlton shirt and carrying two bottles of Chateau d’YQuem and two bottles of Petrus’. If you think that might have resulted in a rather limited number of suspects, don’t forget that there is another Duchere-supporting Addick out there.)
So having already passed on a seven-goal thriller at Carlisle, it was with some trepidation that I checked the France Football site today for an update on what I might have had. I was aware that Duchere are not noted for their high-scoring games. Prior to Saturday this season’s eight games had produced 16 goals (nine for, seven against), not bad but less impressive (11 in seven) when you strip out that exceptional 4-1 home win over low-flying Chasselay (a town which as noted in a previous comment may have featured in a Monty Python classic but whose defence must be permanently lathered, much like our own of late). What I hadn’t done was check on Besancon’s record in that department. They actually went into the game unbeaten this season, but with only two wins out of eight. The other six were drawn and the accumulated goals tally for their games stood at 13.
I think people should be able by now to see where this is going. Duchere and Besancon did indeed duly play out a 0-0 draw on Saturday evening. I don’t have a match report to pass on, but you can imagine the entertainment quotient for a game that I guess will live longer in my memory than that of any other living soul. Suzanne may have been sold on going to the game, but just how many brownie points I would have lost will forever remain, fortunately, a matter of pure conjecture.
The result nevertheless set me thinking about the worst 0-0 draw I’ve ever seen. It’s another I may have mentioned before (prior to the Notts County game), when on New Year’s Day a County-supporting friend and I drove from London to Nottingham (and back), in a very poor state, to watch two utterly indifferent and hungover teams on a quagmire of a pitch. Never mind goalmouth action, I don’t think the ball moved more than 10 yards either side of the centre-circle all game. All I do remember of the occasion was the pair of us (plus a few others) pleading for those in a tea shack the other side of a fence to get to us whatever liquid (quite literally) they might have had. Aye, we had it tough.
That’s one of only two tea-shack related incidents at football matches I can recall. The other was when for some inexplicable reason some friends and I drove south from university at Sheffield one Saturday to take in a Chesterfield v Millwall game. We went in what passed for the away end, thinking it better that with London accents that was the safer option (nobody in their right mind would be there and not a Spanner). After about 20 minutes I was in the queue for a cuppa and Chesterfield were awarded a penalty. The poor runt of a Chesterfield fan with the task of dishing out the refreshments was obviously a little keen to see what was happening on the pitch. Far be it for me to condone this sort of behaviour, but a big, hairy Spanner waiting to be served leant into the cabin and hollered “are you serving the f***ing tea or watching the f***ing game?” There was a quick reordering of priorities.
So, Sheffield up against us again on Saturday. Always brings back memories for me, given my three years there (more if the post-graduation period on the dole is added; well, after the strains of securing a philosophy degree you need time out to consider the first steps on a career path). Recent experience has not been positive. With a fellow Addick driving, we went up to Bramall Lane for the match in our final Premiership season. On the bus to the ground an old lady asked us if we were OK to find the ground and I explained we were, given my time there (when for a while as sports editor of the university paper I used to avail myself of the press pass to United games). ‘Did we treat you right?’ she kindly inquired. Well, you did before, but not on that day, which saw an aimless and spineless performance from us rounded off with a late winner for them from Gillespie (where is he now? Apparently Darlington if Wikipedia is to be believed). Nor on my next excursion to the city of steel, to Hillsborough in our final Championship season. That saw us routed 4-1. The recent results at The Valley against Sheffield teams have of course been more mixed, but nobody’s going to forget the pasting dished out in Pardew’s last game.
Consequently I feel we are owed one. Could be a decent game, against a (relatively) ‘big’ team in this division, one currently fourth. Oh merde, I was going to say I’m quite looking forward to it. I think I used those words ahead of our last home game.
Monday, 25 October 2010
The Eternal Optimist
Modern technology can be a mixed blessing when it comes to periodically tracking the Addicks’ fortunes from foreign shores (I’m sure our resident overseas bloggers have got it down to a fine art), especially as the chances of wandering into a sports bar and finding us on the telly have declined somewhat in the past few years (ah, those halcyon days when in Madrid I managed to catch the last 20 minutes of a home game against Villa and Hughes’ late winner). And while for those actually in attendance in Carlisle on Saturday afternoon it might have been a roller-coaster, for me it proved a veritable montagnes russes.
Having left the rabbit to marinade in the mustard overnight (OK, if truth be told we left it in the salted water overnight because we forgot about it, but my partner Suzanne apparently dreamt about rabbits and corrected the mistake some time in the wee small hours while I was still comatose and probably dreaming of more earthly pursuits), there was no need for extensive shopping at the La Croix Rousse market. But we went anyway, out of habit, with this being an excuse to have some pastis while perusing the property mags. And the afternoon was whiled away in an enjoyable yet fruitless exercise in pouring euros into machines to try to win a cuddly toy for Suzanne. Having given up and settled on another bar, it was time to check how things were going on, since one usually regular supplier of info by texts had, following last Saturday’s setback, decided to go shopping for curtains instead of doing the right thing and staying glued to the radio and updating me.
Zoot alore! We’re winning 3-1! The euphoria was tempered when the mobile made it through to the BBC page on the game, as I realised we had been 3-0 up. And before I had the chance to ponder on the chances of playing out the game the page updated to show 3-2. From afar it seemed inevitable there would be an equaliser and before the pastis was finished that was confirmed. The afternoon sun was setting and the mood darkened as the temperature dropped. Could we hold out? The rabbit couldn’t wait much longer and I handed the phone back to Suzanne for the walk back to the car. As we got in she looked again and the text had updated to say ‘full time’ while the result at the top was still showing 3-3. Bugger. A 4-0 home defeat followed by blowing a three-goal lead. All that was left when back in the flat was to check the details and the table. But wait. Something’s wrong. No, something’s bloody good. Open the good red after all Suzanne, I'm not a miserable old git any more.
I can’t comment on the game, having only watched the highlights on my return to London. But what a difference a goal makes. No, it doesn’t mean all is great; but imagine the reaction if Benson hadn’t buried the header. Small margins indeed; and Parky must have said a quiet word of thanks to whoever he might think is up there.
I was surprised by the vehemence of the reaction to the Brighton defeat. Yes, it hurt and hurt badly. But I didn’t think it was our worst performance of this season (and there were many worse last season). Brighton looked something special (well, they do have Kishishev, who I will always fondly remember for that golden period of him, Murphy and Smertin, plus Rommedahl and Thomas supplying the ammo for Bent), were full of confidence, but were still flattered by the eventual margin. When I said as much after the game to friends, someone I didn’t know took issue and asked me whether I was happy with us drifting to being a mid-table third-tier outfit (we agreed we’d both seen that before). Of course not, but before the season began we all knew that was an entirely possible outcome, given the changes made, so you come back to what can be done about it? Inevitably that leads to ‘change the manager’ as the only available recourse, since I’m not aware that if we’d all turned out our pockets we would come up with the investment needed to make a difference.
It’s clear that a good number of fans after Brighton believed that the stage had been reached when Parkinson had to go. I’m not in that camp, on the grounds that it’s not evident to me that he’s lost the dressing room, that the stage has been reached whereby change of any kind would have to be for the better, that sacking him will cost us more money we don’t have, and that I can’t see a better manager (or at least one with a better recent track record) would see us an attractive option. Winning the first two games was with hindsight a false dawn, one which encouraged unrealistic expectations. I think we all believed before the season started that it would take time for a new team to gel and that results would be patchy at best. OK, the season’s one-quarter old now and a humiliating home defeat to move us down into the lower half of the league hardly suggests that things are moving in the right direction. A last-gasp winner that leaves us one point off a play-off spot and three from second at least provides some balance.
I saw a post on the club site asking whether Abbott and Benson are the worst forwards we’ve ever had. Well, they’re not (off the top of my head Endean comes first). I’m far from convinced about Abbott (but hope I’m proved wrong and he has made a difference in some games), but for crying out loud give Benson a chance. Outside the box he’s struggled, but after four first games without a goal it’s now five goals in five games – and five goals which have earned us six points; not one hasn’t mattered in the result. Of course, four of them have been scored away from The Valley, where one in four games – of which we’ve only won one – doesn’t help as regards the popularity stakes. When it comes to matters on the pitch, for me the greater question is why are we conceding so many goals?
Four seasons of horrible failure have not surprisingly left their mark. For many years being a Charlton fan was a source of considerable pride for us all (it still is a source of pride, but the talk now with others centres on where it all went wrong, not the ‘Charlton model’ for punching above your weight). Looking up at the likes of Doncaster and Shrewsbury, let alone (temporarily) Palace and Millwall, and watching a club like Brighton moving swiftly past us hurts badly. But when the crowd have sung ‘we want our Charlton back’ it can surely only apply to attitude and commitment, not some sort of right to be in the top two leagues. We have to earn that right. I don’t take issue with those who believe that Parkinson isn’t the man for the job; but some of the post-Brighton reaction on the club site came across as people believing that we simply deserve more, because of what we’ve been fed through the Curbishley era and have come to expect and because of the awful extent and pace of our decline.
I don’t think Murray’s done Parkinson many favours with some of his statements. Stressing that we have to do everything possible to get back to The Championship and that a top-six finish is expected is all fine and good. But when you’ve just sold every player with a price tag and released just about anyone that could be (for perfectly good reasons) it just struck the wrong note for me. He’s suggested that the squad is now better balanced; indeed it is, but through the loss of most of the quality that was there. This isn’t real criticism over intent and goals, but rather tone and timing. From Parkinson’s perspective, it might sound like ‘I’ve taken away your best players and given you a shoestring with which to build a new team, now go and get me promotion’. The comments may have been intended to galvanise support, but if the chairman expects top-six how are fans expected to react to the Brighton result (especially with the depressing news that Youga isn’t going to return and that Reid is out for a month)? After all, he doesn’t have to appease activist shareholders any more.
Murray has earned our full support and there’s no-one else around willing to fund us (I’d be very surprised if we manage to break even this season), let alone provide the sort of funds to buy us promotion. Parkinson can’t be blamed for our relegation from The Championship and it’s still entirely unclear to me whether we will finish nearer the top or the bottom, or more important that a change of manager would increase the chances of the former. Carlisle certainly doesn’t mean the pressure’s off. But another brace from Benson on Saturday, a much-needed victory at home, and a move into a play-off spot would make for an entirely different mood than last time around. May it come to pass.
Having left the rabbit to marinade in the mustard overnight (OK, if truth be told we left it in the salted water overnight because we forgot about it, but my partner Suzanne apparently dreamt about rabbits and corrected the mistake some time in the wee small hours while I was still comatose and probably dreaming of more earthly pursuits), there was no need for extensive shopping at the La Croix Rousse market. But we went anyway, out of habit, with this being an excuse to have some pastis while perusing the property mags. And the afternoon was whiled away in an enjoyable yet fruitless exercise in pouring euros into machines to try to win a cuddly toy for Suzanne. Having given up and settled on another bar, it was time to check how things were going on, since one usually regular supplier of info by texts had, following last Saturday’s setback, decided to go shopping for curtains instead of doing the right thing and staying glued to the radio and updating me.
Zoot alore! We’re winning 3-1! The euphoria was tempered when the mobile made it through to the BBC page on the game, as I realised we had been 3-0 up. And before I had the chance to ponder on the chances of playing out the game the page updated to show 3-2. From afar it seemed inevitable there would be an equaliser and before the pastis was finished that was confirmed. The afternoon sun was setting and the mood darkened as the temperature dropped. Could we hold out? The rabbit couldn’t wait much longer and I handed the phone back to Suzanne for the walk back to the car. As we got in she looked again and the text had updated to say ‘full time’ while the result at the top was still showing 3-3. Bugger. A 4-0 home defeat followed by blowing a three-goal lead. All that was left when back in the flat was to check the details and the table. But wait. Something’s wrong. No, something’s bloody good. Open the good red after all Suzanne, I'm not a miserable old git any more.
I can’t comment on the game, having only watched the highlights on my return to London. But what a difference a goal makes. No, it doesn’t mean all is great; but imagine the reaction if Benson hadn’t buried the header. Small margins indeed; and Parky must have said a quiet word of thanks to whoever he might think is up there.
I was surprised by the vehemence of the reaction to the Brighton defeat. Yes, it hurt and hurt badly. But I didn’t think it was our worst performance of this season (and there were many worse last season). Brighton looked something special (well, they do have Kishishev, who I will always fondly remember for that golden period of him, Murphy and Smertin, plus Rommedahl and Thomas supplying the ammo for Bent), were full of confidence, but were still flattered by the eventual margin. When I said as much after the game to friends, someone I didn’t know took issue and asked me whether I was happy with us drifting to being a mid-table third-tier outfit (we agreed we’d both seen that before). Of course not, but before the season began we all knew that was an entirely possible outcome, given the changes made, so you come back to what can be done about it? Inevitably that leads to ‘change the manager’ as the only available recourse, since I’m not aware that if we’d all turned out our pockets we would come up with the investment needed to make a difference.
It’s clear that a good number of fans after Brighton believed that the stage had been reached when Parkinson had to go. I’m not in that camp, on the grounds that it’s not evident to me that he’s lost the dressing room, that the stage has been reached whereby change of any kind would have to be for the better, that sacking him will cost us more money we don’t have, and that I can’t see a better manager (or at least one with a better recent track record) would see us an attractive option. Winning the first two games was with hindsight a false dawn, one which encouraged unrealistic expectations. I think we all believed before the season started that it would take time for a new team to gel and that results would be patchy at best. OK, the season’s one-quarter old now and a humiliating home defeat to move us down into the lower half of the league hardly suggests that things are moving in the right direction. A last-gasp winner that leaves us one point off a play-off spot and three from second at least provides some balance.
I saw a post on the club site asking whether Abbott and Benson are the worst forwards we’ve ever had. Well, they’re not (off the top of my head Endean comes first). I’m far from convinced about Abbott (but hope I’m proved wrong and he has made a difference in some games), but for crying out loud give Benson a chance. Outside the box he’s struggled, but after four first games without a goal it’s now five goals in five games – and five goals which have earned us six points; not one hasn’t mattered in the result. Of course, four of them have been scored away from The Valley, where one in four games – of which we’ve only won one – doesn’t help as regards the popularity stakes. When it comes to matters on the pitch, for me the greater question is why are we conceding so many goals?
Four seasons of horrible failure have not surprisingly left their mark. For many years being a Charlton fan was a source of considerable pride for us all (it still is a source of pride, but the talk now with others centres on where it all went wrong, not the ‘Charlton model’ for punching above your weight). Looking up at the likes of Doncaster and Shrewsbury, let alone (temporarily) Palace and Millwall, and watching a club like Brighton moving swiftly past us hurts badly. But when the crowd have sung ‘we want our Charlton back’ it can surely only apply to attitude and commitment, not some sort of right to be in the top two leagues. We have to earn that right. I don’t take issue with those who believe that Parkinson isn’t the man for the job; but some of the post-Brighton reaction on the club site came across as people believing that we simply deserve more, because of what we’ve been fed through the Curbishley era and have come to expect and because of the awful extent and pace of our decline.
I don’t think Murray’s done Parkinson many favours with some of his statements. Stressing that we have to do everything possible to get back to The Championship and that a top-six finish is expected is all fine and good. But when you’ve just sold every player with a price tag and released just about anyone that could be (for perfectly good reasons) it just struck the wrong note for me. He’s suggested that the squad is now better balanced; indeed it is, but through the loss of most of the quality that was there. This isn’t real criticism over intent and goals, but rather tone and timing. From Parkinson’s perspective, it might sound like ‘I’ve taken away your best players and given you a shoestring with which to build a new team, now go and get me promotion’. The comments may have been intended to galvanise support, but if the chairman expects top-six how are fans expected to react to the Brighton result (especially with the depressing news that Youga isn’t going to return and that Reid is out for a month)? After all, he doesn’t have to appease activist shareholders any more.
Murray has earned our full support and there’s no-one else around willing to fund us (I’d be very surprised if we manage to break even this season), let alone provide the sort of funds to buy us promotion. Parkinson can’t be blamed for our relegation from The Championship and it’s still entirely unclear to me whether we will finish nearer the top or the bottom, or more important that a change of manager would increase the chances of the former. Carlisle certainly doesn’t mean the pressure’s off. But another brace from Benson on Saturday, a much-needed victory at home, and a move into a play-off spot would make for an entirely different mood than last time around. May it come to pass.
Saturday, 16 October 2010
Bewitched, Bewildered and Beaten
When you lose 4-0 at home you need a stiff drink or a sense of perspective, or both. With the former in hand let’s try the latter. First up, it wasn’t a debacle. Some may disagree, but we’ve played worse this season and will play worse and win games. Did we deserve to lose? Yes. Did the display amount to a gutless capitulation and justify calls for the manager to be sacked (the first I’ve heard against Parkinson)? No. It turned out bloody badly in the end. In my eyes, the first goal was very important (against a team that has conceded very few away so far) and the second was crucial. After that, the game was up, barring a miracle.
We were up against a team full of confidence and one with a clear instruction on how to play. We know what Poyet has done and what he demands, the question was could we match/better it. They’re not bloody Arsenal after all. They may try to play like them, but scratch the surface and the weaknesses are revealed. We did that a few times in the first 30 minutes, but this is a game – at every level – about margins and doing the basics well (as England recently demonstrated). We didn’t take chances that came our way and made mistakes at the back, which were punished. What does that say about us and them? Well, they look like they’re going places – although the season is long and who know about their squad resources - and the chances are we’re not. We’re still trying to work out how we play and they have it drilled into them. I won’t say good luck to them as I really don’t care. But today did drive home that the promised improvement as players get to know each other is still something we hope for.
The team was a little surprising in that Dailly was kept at right-back, with Francis on the bench, to continue with Fortune and Doherty in central defence, with Reid and Martin taking the wide berths. Benson and Abbott were paired up front. The first 20 minutes were about as good a game as we’re likely to watch this season. Brighton played it around, but not without purpose, while we were, if not matching them in their speed of movement and passing, showing that we had weapons to hurt them. But when it came to those details, the simple things, we often came up short. Crosses weren’t precise (Reid being the main culprit), control sometimes wasn’t good enough. Brighton could have taken the lead early on but were denied by a double save from Elliot, while good work from Martin ended with a delivery that Abbott headed over.
So much seemed to hinge on who would gain an advantage and unfortunately it was them. If their first goal was a training ground set-piece it’s one of the best I’ve seen. From a corner they played it in, out, and by the time they’d pulled us around towards the ball out and in again, to a guy by that time unmarked to score. If they meant it, full marks to them. After that, the margins went against us, thanks in no small part to the referee. Brighton might like to play it around, but they were happy to make cynical challenges when we looked like breaking through. Three or four were made and passed with the ref only talking to them. Not good enough. They were deliberate, stopped us in our tracks, and merited cards (in the end the ref finally gave one for such a challenge, against us, with only one yellow all afternoon).
At the break clearly we were still in it. But we needed the next strike to be in our favour. Instead a mistake by Doherty conceded possession in a very poor position and they danced the ball into the net. That saw heads drop and changes made. Dailly may have had a storming game at full-back against Plymouth, but you just felt for him today when in a classic position he pushed the ball past their guy and had to try to run past him. No chance and no contest. Fortune was withdrawn, with Francis coming on and Dailly moving to the centre, while the disappointing Abbott was replaced by Anyinsah. Not long after Reid was crocked and left, replaced by Wagstaff.
Not having to chase the game, Brighton were happy to play it around and we needed some inspiration to get back into it. It didn’t come. Instead they brought on LuaLua to torment us – and con the ref. He clearly lost control of the ball, which went some yards away from him, and made a meal of being ‘checked’ to win a free kick. Margins again. But the free kick was set up for him to score and put the game to bed. There was just time for him to embarrass Francis and deliver a cross for a fourth.
The final whistle was greeted with boos and calls for Parkinson’s head. I don’t think I’m deluding myself in concluding we were beaten by a better side but that the breaks didn’t go our way at crucial times. I don’t feel like calling for the manager to be sacked, or that today was a disgrace. It showed how far we still have to go and might help to frame expectations for the season, but that’s it. That said, it’s one win in six, against moderate opposition. The next couple of games the pressure is on – you can’t lose by four at home and think it isn’t. Another couple of poor results and the season would turn really sour. I think I’ll naff off to Lyon and hope for more perspective tomorrow.
I’ve rambled on recently about just not knowing what to expect from this season, especially after the two wins at the start raised expectations. I noticed that recently we were still about fifth favourite to get promotion, suggesting that others expect us to improve. Today showed us that against a team enjoying life and confident in how they intend to play we are still a work in progress. Doherty and others talked in terms of needing to improve and generate momentum from around November. I’m ready for that.
Player Ratings:
Elliot: 7/10. Excellent double save to keep the game scoreless and had no chance with any of the goals.
Dailly: 6/10. Poor sod. A cameo at full-back when needs must is fair enough, but it was a mistake to ask him to do it again. Keep him where he belongs.
Jackson: 6/10. Their first ended up being scored in his area, but no obvious problems, no great forward contribution either.
Fortune: 6/10. Nothing daft, but we conceded four. Our problem (to me) is that we have three adequate ‘big’ guys for the centre (Fortune, Doherty, Llera) and only one (Dailly) to play the Bobby Moore role.
Doherty: 5/10. Bad mistake (I think) which led to their second goal, which killed the game. He’s been fine to date, but this one was a big one.
Reid: 6/10. Fans’ favourite, but today his crossing when in good positions was poor. Tried to make things happen, just hope the injury isn’t bad.
Semedo: 6/10. Competitive as ever, but their play meant he was unable to command and we seldom controlled the game.
Racon: 5/10. Didn’t work for him today, at least not going forward. We need and expect more out of him if we are to dominate play.
Martin: 6/10. Good work early on, but seldom featured to good effect in the second half.
Abbott: 5/10. When the delivery from the flanks isn’t good his limitations seem apparent. Didn’t cause them any problems except for the header.
Benson: 5/10. His job is to score goals, which he has done of late. Whether he and Abbott together are the best possible pairing we’ll have to see against lesser opposition.
Subs: Francis (6/10 – taken apart for their fourth goal, but by then who cared?); Anyinsah (5/10 – no discernible impact, but the game was already up when he came on); Wagstaff (5/10 – ditto).
We were up against a team full of confidence and one with a clear instruction on how to play. We know what Poyet has done and what he demands, the question was could we match/better it. They’re not bloody Arsenal after all. They may try to play like them, but scratch the surface and the weaknesses are revealed. We did that a few times in the first 30 minutes, but this is a game – at every level – about margins and doing the basics well (as England recently demonstrated). We didn’t take chances that came our way and made mistakes at the back, which were punished. What does that say about us and them? Well, they look like they’re going places – although the season is long and who know about their squad resources - and the chances are we’re not. We’re still trying to work out how we play and they have it drilled into them. I won’t say good luck to them as I really don’t care. But today did drive home that the promised improvement as players get to know each other is still something we hope for.
The team was a little surprising in that Dailly was kept at right-back, with Francis on the bench, to continue with Fortune and Doherty in central defence, with Reid and Martin taking the wide berths. Benson and Abbott were paired up front. The first 20 minutes were about as good a game as we’re likely to watch this season. Brighton played it around, but not without purpose, while we were, if not matching them in their speed of movement and passing, showing that we had weapons to hurt them. But when it came to those details, the simple things, we often came up short. Crosses weren’t precise (Reid being the main culprit), control sometimes wasn’t good enough. Brighton could have taken the lead early on but were denied by a double save from Elliot, while good work from Martin ended with a delivery that Abbott headed over.
So much seemed to hinge on who would gain an advantage and unfortunately it was them. If their first goal was a training ground set-piece it’s one of the best I’ve seen. From a corner they played it in, out, and by the time they’d pulled us around towards the ball out and in again, to a guy by that time unmarked to score. If they meant it, full marks to them. After that, the margins went against us, thanks in no small part to the referee. Brighton might like to play it around, but they were happy to make cynical challenges when we looked like breaking through. Three or four were made and passed with the ref only talking to them. Not good enough. They were deliberate, stopped us in our tracks, and merited cards (in the end the ref finally gave one for such a challenge, against us, with only one yellow all afternoon).
At the break clearly we were still in it. But we needed the next strike to be in our favour. Instead a mistake by Doherty conceded possession in a very poor position and they danced the ball into the net. That saw heads drop and changes made. Dailly may have had a storming game at full-back against Plymouth, but you just felt for him today when in a classic position he pushed the ball past their guy and had to try to run past him. No chance and no contest. Fortune was withdrawn, with Francis coming on and Dailly moving to the centre, while the disappointing Abbott was replaced by Anyinsah. Not long after Reid was crocked and left, replaced by Wagstaff.
Not having to chase the game, Brighton were happy to play it around and we needed some inspiration to get back into it. It didn’t come. Instead they brought on LuaLua to torment us – and con the ref. He clearly lost control of the ball, which went some yards away from him, and made a meal of being ‘checked’ to win a free kick. Margins again. But the free kick was set up for him to score and put the game to bed. There was just time for him to embarrass Francis and deliver a cross for a fourth.
The final whistle was greeted with boos and calls for Parkinson’s head. I don’t think I’m deluding myself in concluding we were beaten by a better side but that the breaks didn’t go our way at crucial times. I don’t feel like calling for the manager to be sacked, or that today was a disgrace. It showed how far we still have to go and might help to frame expectations for the season, but that’s it. That said, it’s one win in six, against moderate opposition. The next couple of games the pressure is on – you can’t lose by four at home and think it isn’t. Another couple of poor results and the season would turn really sour. I think I’ll naff off to Lyon and hope for more perspective tomorrow.
I’ve rambled on recently about just not knowing what to expect from this season, especially after the two wins at the start raised expectations. I noticed that recently we were still about fifth favourite to get promotion, suggesting that others expect us to improve. Today showed us that against a team enjoying life and confident in how they intend to play we are still a work in progress. Doherty and others talked in terms of needing to improve and generate momentum from around November. I’m ready for that.
Player Ratings:
Elliot: 7/10. Excellent double save to keep the game scoreless and had no chance with any of the goals.
Dailly: 6/10. Poor sod. A cameo at full-back when needs must is fair enough, but it was a mistake to ask him to do it again. Keep him where he belongs.
Jackson: 6/10. Their first ended up being scored in his area, but no obvious problems, no great forward contribution either.
Fortune: 6/10. Nothing daft, but we conceded four. Our problem (to me) is that we have three adequate ‘big’ guys for the centre (Fortune, Doherty, Llera) and only one (Dailly) to play the Bobby Moore role.
Doherty: 5/10. Bad mistake (I think) which led to their second goal, which killed the game. He’s been fine to date, but this one was a big one.
Reid: 6/10. Fans’ favourite, but today his crossing when in good positions was poor. Tried to make things happen, just hope the injury isn’t bad.
Semedo: 6/10. Competitive as ever, but their play meant he was unable to command and we seldom controlled the game.
Racon: 5/10. Didn’t work for him today, at least not going forward. We need and expect more out of him if we are to dominate play.
Martin: 6/10. Good work early on, but seldom featured to good effect in the second half.
Abbott: 5/10. When the delivery from the flanks isn’t good his limitations seem apparent. Didn’t cause them any problems except for the header.
Benson: 5/10. His job is to score goals, which he has done of late. Whether he and Abbott together are the best possible pairing we’ll have to see against lesser opposition.
Subs: Francis (6/10 – taken apart for their fourth goal, but by then who cared?); Anyinsah (5/10 – no discernible impact, but the game was already up when he came on); Wagstaff (5/10 – ditto).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)