Credit Where It's Due

Sometimes there’s no harm in giving a bit of credit, even when local rivals are involved. Just listened to the interviews on the radio with both Holloway and the Palace chairman. Both were open, clearly honest, and communicating fairly to their fans the reasons for the departure of a manager. Whatever the ins and out, and whatever happens next (on both fronts others are far better placed than me to comment), they both emerge with credit, with a willingness to talk to the media about a difficult affair, with no side to what they said, obvious regret from both parties that things haven’t worked out the way they hoped, and presumably a parting of the ways with good wishes all round.

Even though we understandably want to turn over Millwall when we play them, and feel that something’s wrong with the world if we are below them in the league, I couldn’t help thinking through recent years that in Jackett they had a good, level-headed manager doing a decent job (which is in no way any comment on the guy in charge now; on that front I have no idea). Palace will no doubt regroup and even if they do come back down will obviously have the resources in the short term to stand a fair chance of going back up.

OK, the (relative) goodwill will come to a quick end if there’s any suggestion that Palace might come knocking on Sir Chris’ door. I can’t say who would suit them, but can’t help thinking that one suitable candidate would be Curbishley, if he is looking to get back into the swing of things. The job itself would presumably involve a ‘no lose’ situation as far as this season is concerned (ie if they get relegated the guy stays, unless it’s a deal framed deliberately to tempt someone for just the rest of this season) and Curbs obviously has experience of keeping sides in the Premiership and of rebounding from the Championship after relegation. Might stick in the throat, but if he wants a job I wouldn’t blame him for sending in the application (although just how I’d feel if he led out a Palace team at The Valley would have to remain an open question; West Ham was another matter).

Closer to home, I couldn’t help noticing on the club site the piece about the ‘Addicks Place stones’ in front of The Valley having had a “full professional clean”. On the assumption that this has extended to the older bricks, that is welcome news and here too some credit where it’s due. It seems there were discussions with supporters over the appearance of the plot and if suggestions have been acted on so much the better. I will try to take a look at my brick on Sunday (assuming we leave the pub in time).

Of course we wish Wigan well in their European match tomorrow night. But it would be unreasonable of them to hope for anything other than a very tiring victory, including the possibility of a few post-match niggles for key players. Goodwill does after all only extend so far. Don’t know who draws up the fixture list for the Europa League, but if it had been me they would have been travelling to Rubin Kazan this week rather than the other way around.

As for last weekend, there were five requirements for me to have the perfect Saturday in Lyon. Well, the car worked OK, the corkscrew didn’t break, and after a fashion my partner Suzanne managed to work her new oven (I thought I was bad when it comes to having to read instruction manuals but she does take the biscuit). Three out of three became four out of four with our glorious victory. Believe me, there was a corner of Lyon where glasses were raised in tribute.

However, nobody likes perfection and perhaps predictably Lyon Duchere did not play their part to make it a clean sweep. They will have felt confident of beating mid-table Jura Sud and started the game well enough, generally dictating the play and looking threatening. But after a couple of efforts didn’t find the net Duchere were caught cold when their defence and goalkeeper hesitated and allowed in a Jura guy to score midway through the first half. No matter, plenty of time left – and indeed Duchere evened things up just a few minutes later as their nippy winger cut in and shot fiercely past their keeper at his near post. At that stage perhaps a little complacency set in as Duchere failed to use the equaliser as a springboard. Instead before the break they dawdled on the ball in midfield and Jura sprang forward well with numbers, played in their guy who rounded the keeper and scored.

At half-time the talk among the crowd (which must have numbered a little short of 200, including a carload who had clearly made the short trip from Jura) was that the Duchere manager might deliver a few choice words. Whatever was said didn’t have the desired effect as Duchere became increasingly frustrated at their inability to break down a team happy to keep their shape behind the ball and able to threaten far more on the break. Conditions weren’t easy as through Saturday it seemed the Mistral had made its appearance, but Duchere ended up failing to create a decent chance in the second half and can have no complaints about the result.

So be it. If I had to choose one of the five not to come off I guess I could have lived with the corkscrew breaking (provided this happened when the supermarket was still open), but other than that sorry Duchere but if pushed it had to be you.

Vive La Difference

Now we’ve got the internationals nonsense out of the way, can we get back to serious football please? For me this will involve a Lyon Duchere game tomorrow evening rather than a trip north to Blackburn. Having decamped to Lyon a week ago to avoid all the hubris of the England qualification games (and of course to see my French partner Suzanne), my own particular weekend treck (back to Blighty) should begin at sparrow’s fart on Sunday morning, assuming the alarm and coffee do the trick. I will have to content myself with texts updates and tracking the game on the Beeb, with fingers crossed for a happier outcome than Operation Ewood in another life some years ago.

Hopefully everybody’s rested up (knocking in a few against West Ham doesn’t really count, although for the record Suzanne is happy to hear we had another Frenchman featuring on trial), perhaps one or more of the injured will be back. Whatever, it really feels like the early skirmishes of the season have passed and now it’s down to the business of ensuring we don’t get embroiled in a relegation scrap. Five tough games (on paper) ahead before we rub salt into Doncaster’s wounds with the replayed game (no, don’t wish to suggest that one’s any sort of gimmee). Show a replay of the Forest game to serve as a reminder of what’s eminently possible, if minds as well as bodies are up for it.

Actually getting to watch the England games while in France has been a bit of a challenge, especially if for a Friday night you are booked into an hotel up a hill in a village outside Vaison la Romaine, one with a splendid view of Mont Ventoux but a restaurant that at this time of year stops newcomers at eight on the dot and which only has the basic TV channels in the room. So after traffic foul-ups and delays getting out of Lyon, instead of a slap-up feed washed down with something red and England on in the background, we ended up with a motorway service station ‘salad’ each while watching France trounce Australia (albeit with the head start of a real homer penalty for a handball; the replays showed that the ball didn’t even touch the guy’s hand). Catching the Poland game proved easier when back in Lyon (no ITV but enough streaming options).

Others clearly place a much higher importance on England games than I do (if it’s a choice between England winning the pot in Brazil and us staying up/getting promoted I’d have no hesitation in choosing the latter). Doesn’t mean I’m not pleased to be English, let alone in any way ashamed of the fact as the Mail might want to suggest (truth is it’s the Mail that hates Britain, which is why it rants so much, in a frustrated desire to turn the clock back 50 years to some supposed idyll that never existed).

I’m an Addick, a Londoner, English, British and European (I’d go on to suggest a global citizen, but then you kind of lose meaning if you’re defining yourself) and happy to be all of those things. I’m just not much of a flag-waver and cannot help but laugh at the suggestion of ‘English/British values’ (like ‘Christian values’ they don’t exist, they are just a set of labels for fairly basic habits and customs that are always positive and in essence exist anywhere you go). Seems that when Wiltshire was pressed on the matter his overriding characteristic of an English player is the ability to tackle hard, which led to the absurdity of Wenger being obliged to defend one of his players in public having complained for years of being stripped of decent players as a result of ‘tough tackling’. Then you had Rednapp making the daftest comment I heard, along the lines of ‘if they’re born in Britain it doesn’t matter where they come from’ (well Harry, if they were born in Britain that’s exactly where they came from).

I guess I’m just wary (to put it mildly) of any organisation, political or otherwise, the rationale for which is to emphasise division and separateness (ie ‘all our ills are their fault’) rather than focus on the far greater commonality of goals and aspirations and how to try achieve them. Tomorrow afternoon, thousands of people will flock to Blackburn’s ground and for a short period of time two different groups will want different outcomes. Once the game’s over, they will go their separate ways and then do pretty similar things (there’s a cheap joke in there somewhere about the habits of northerners but we’ll let it pass).

Which to try to get back to Charlton might provide some clue as to why Sir Chris gets the support that he does from the majority of Addicks (myself included). We loved him as a player, not because of where he came from (he did have a skeleton in his own past after all) but because he displayed consistently what are reasonable to view as positive and endearing characteristics. The goodwill generated has carried over to a strong desire to see him succeed as a manager, a feeling only intensified by what he has actually done since taking over, not just overseeing promotion but crafting a team that also displays positive characteristics (most of the time, except when we play Millwall it seems). Things can always change; of course there may come a time when the players don’t respond well to him and his staff, when the results and situation require a different approach and a new leader. But as others have said as things stand the far greater danger is that another club will come knocking on his door.

Those that might support a change of manager I’m sure don’t do so from any sense of mischief, or because they are any more or less of an Addick than me. Just amounts to a difference of opinion over what is best for the club we support, which is the overriding shared desire. Again, far more unites us than divides us. Blimey, even when I feel disgruntled about the owners I have to remember that in addition to them writing the cheques they did after all choose Sir Chris.

So, all that’s required for tomorrow is the car to work (so that we can get to the Croix Rousse market and back), the corkscrew not to break (I have a rather nice Barolo lined up for the afternoon), Suzanne’s new cooker to work properly (so that she can concentrate on rustling up something to accompany the wine), three points to come our way, and then victory for Duchere (they’ve made a decent start to the season, lying third with four wins, two draws and a defeat from the first seven; the match is at home to Jura Sud, while tonight the two teams above Duchere – Yzeure and Moulins – play each other, so there’s scope for ground to be made up). All those fall into place and Sunday can look after itself.

Take The Point, Take The Break

The question before the game was which team would show up, the one that didn’t perform against Millwall or the one that did against Forest. In the event it proved to be something between the two. The effort and commitment were there, but the quality seldom was. As an attacking force our threat diminished the longer the game went on and we ended the match looking pretty much what we are: a patched-up side missing key players, trying to make it to an international break with something to show from the game. That we emerged with a point, and our first clean sheet of the season, was due to the excellence of the defence – but also the fact that the petulant Ince, having been handed the chance of the game at the death by terrible indecision on the part of Wilson, put it wide.

The team was unchanged from Tuesday, with Church overcoming his knock and Pritchard returning to take a place on the bench. And the opening 20 minutes were to prove our brightest spell of the game. We were in the ascendency, largely controlling midfield, and the passing and movement, while not perhaps having the good tempo of Tuesday night, kept us ticking over without being especially threatening. Gower provided the anchor in midfield, with Stephens and Cousins keeping possession well, while Wiggins was keeping Ince under control and Morrison and Wood ensuring that Fuller wasn’t able to break free.

An early free kick just outside the box after a clumsy challenge saw Stephens strike it well enough but without enough dip to get it below the bar, and a few minutes later he hit one over from outside the box. But if we’d won the first 20 minutes on points Blackpool came more into it after that and, with Ince and Fuller, you had the fear that they had the players more likely to break the deadlock. Hamer seemed a little traumatised by Reid’s goal for Forest as shots that were going wide or over the bar saw him scrambling after them, but when it mattered he was there, diving low to his left to save well from a header.

That, to the best of my recollection, was about it for the first half, bar a decent ball in or two from Wiggins (and to be fair some indifferent ones). At the break the question was which team, or player, would take the game by the scruff of the neck.

It didn’t prove to be us. Increasingly Church and Sordell were frustrated by poor service and their inability to provide any material challenge in the air to their centre-backs, and Harriott was unable to make or exploit space in the hole behind them. The one decent effort we had was a rasping shot from Cousins which was touched around the post, but in the main balls were played forward more in hope than expectation. Wood did bring a decent tip over from their keeper but was in any case penalised for a push. And Sordell did manage to lay claim to the worst penalty appeal of the season, ensuring that he’d just managed to get into the box before falling over. I think I’m as partisan as they come, but it didn’t occur to me to howl for a decision in our favour.

At the other end Blackpool increasingly relied on the long throw to provide something that might fall for them in the box. That threat was handled well by Hamer and those in front of him. Changes were made by both sides, to no real effect. If anything our substitutions made us more disjointed. Surprisingly (for me) Gower was taken off, with Pritchard coming on. We lost an important element of control in midfield with his departure and really added little. Stewart replaced Church, who seemed to be fading and feeling the knock from Tuesday, and late on Pigott came on for Sordell.

By the end our chances of nicking one and taking the three points were diminishing and I suspect we’d all have settled for the draw. That we were nearly denied that was down to a moment of madness. There were enough players around for there not to be a threat but Wilson seemed caught in at least three minds and ended up heading the ball into the path of Ince. He should have scored, but perhaps there is some justice. He’d been lucky to just get a yellow for a nasty, petulant kick out after his inability to control the ball had lost possession, while his first-half performance had suggested he is preparing himself for the Premiership as the rule was ‘there was contact, I’m entitled to fall on my face’. He missed and that was that.

The positives? The clean sheet, another encouraging showing from Cousins, and the highly impressive performance from my man of the match, Wood (with Morrison not far behind). The negatives? Further evidence that Harriott isn’t a guy to play in the hole (his main asset is pace and that just doesn’t get utilised), and the fact that our front two failed to carve out anything, even though they were working on scraps. The stats do sometimes speak for themselves. On Tuesday we had 22 attempts on goal; today we had eight, two on target. I suspect one of those was one that barely reached their keeper and you can’t exactly complain about a 0-0 if you create that little.

Rest up for a couple of weeks and let’s get going after the break. Personally I’ll depart to Lyon for a break (and the chance to check on the progress of my adopted French team, Lyon Duchere).

Player Ratings:

Hamer – 8/10. Seemed nervous in the first half, but made the save when called on and instrumental in ensuring that their string of long throws into the box didn’t result in goals.

Wilson – 5/10. Sorry, but it was a bad mistake at the death which very nearly resulted in a defeat.

Wiggins – 7/10. That Ince produced next to nothing has to reflect well on his performance. Not quite the effectiveness going forward we saw on Tuesday night, but perhaps he had Ince in mind.

Morrison – 8/10. Another sterling showing. Fuller was seen off and they didn’t have a decent chance until gifted one.

Wood – 8/10. My man of the match, after a very good showing on Tuesday night. He’s come back in to a back four, done a resolute job in two games, and so far not put a foot wrong.

Stephens – 7/10. For me more effective when Gower was on the pitch than when required to control the centre after his departure. Good first half but faded in the second.

Gower – 7/10. Nothing dramatic, but I don’t know why he was substituted (especially as that didn’t seem to be a change in formation). Without him we were winning far less of the challenges.

Cousins – 7/10. Another good showing (tempted to make it an 8). What impresses me is both his ability to retain possession and to make a simple but productive pass.

Harriott – 6/10. Really feel he’s been asked to perform in a position which isn’t for him, at least not yet. His control and ability to pick a pass aren’t especially strong and in the hole his pace gets neutralised. I hope – when all are back fit – that he gets the opportunity as an outright winger.

Church – 6/10. Below par performance, perhaps the result of his knock on Tuesday night. Not equipped to be a target man for balls forward and today unable to create much.

Sordell – 6/10. The service was poor and too often was jumping aimlessly for balls he had no chance of winning. Both he and Church quite clearly need the return of Kermorgant.

Subs – Prichard (6/10 – struggled to make an impact when he came on); Stewart (6/10 – much the same); Pigott (much the same).

Pride Restored

After the spineless performance against Millwall and a bad defeat at Burnley, my main wish was to walk away from the two next home games feeling proud of the team I support, whatever the result. Part one has been accomplished. The effort, determination and character that were so sadly absent before were back in force, which together with no little ability and so much better movement ended up making a decent Forest team look pretty ordinary for large periods of the game. That we should have won nobody can seriously argue against; the stats alone ought to confirm that as we had by far the greater number of scoring opportunities, in both halves. But it felt like a victory.

Sir Chris celebrated at the end like it was and he had every right to. And note to board: there is no other manager in the country, not one, who would have received the backing from the crowd that Powell received after we’d fallen behind in the first minute. (Of course, for a laugh I’d texted my French partner Suzanne at 19.40 to say ‘good news, we’re not losing yet’; had to send one at 19.48 to say ‘we are now’.)

Sod’s law means that when you have ample time to write a match account, due to a 12.15 kick-off, the incidents of note could have been scribbled on the proverbial back of a fag packet. Now it’s 22.30 and trying to describe all of those from tonight’s encounter would take me well past my bedtime. Suffice to say – again in direct contrast with the televised Millwall match – this was one that any neutral would have thoroughly enjoyed.

The absence of Kermorgant from the squad did underline how questionable was the decision to send him on towards the end away at Burnley. Without him, and the others (including Pritchard), we lined up with a flat back four (Wilson, Wiggins, Morrison and Wood in front of Hamer), a front two (Church and Sordell), and a four-man midfield of Stephens, Gower, Cousins and Harriott. But the surprise was that Harriott operated less on the flank than in a roving role, putting the onus on the full-backs to provide the width; Stephens tended to be on the left side, Gower central and Cousins to his right.

The game had barely started when a ball played in the air out wide prompted a silly and unnecessary challenge by Cousins on the returning Andy Reid. The free kick was right on the touchline and seemed an open opportunity for him to curl in something dangerous for someone to get on the end of. Just didn’t expect him to curl one quite superbly into the top far corner of the net. Quite clearly Hamer didn’t either as despite the angle he couldn’t get a touch on it.

Not surprisingly the team seemed stunned and for the next 10 minutes or so Forest set out to put their stamp on the game. Not by pulling us apart but by demonstrating that they were bigger, stronger, could knock the ball around at ease. They would have realised that we were low on confidence and might have killed the game off in that period. Instead, with the crowd repeating the Cardiff reaction of last season, we gradually worked our way back into the game and, despite the absence of an aerial threat for balls played forward, began to create chances, due in no small part to the contribution of Wiggins going forward.

A lot of things in that period weren’t going right, not least as Harriott operating centrally found himself running into crowded areas. But it was already apparent that the movement and willingness to give the guy with the ball necessary support was a world apart from the Millwall game, not least due to the contribution of Stephens. That alone began to bring rewards.

The first of many chances that came and went was the result of a Wiggins ball in from the left. Church had escaped his markers and got between them and the keeper, only to fail to get a decisive contact. It was a bad miss. From another Wiggins cross Cousins failed to make any contact when in a great position to score. Wilson cut into the box and I thought his shot was destined for the net, only for it to go agonisingly wide. And just before the break Stephens got clear down the left and a parried shot led to the sort of goalmouth scramble that when you’re luck’s in gets converted. Against that, one interception saw Forest break clear and only a combination of Wood and Wilson managed to prevent their guy putting it away. At the break we were a distance ahead on chances but hadn’t taken any and were behind to something exceptional.

We picked things up where we left off in the second half, with early jitters between their defenders and keeper resulting in a corner and another near miss. Forest’s anxiety at their loss of control of a game that early on seemed theirs for the taking was to be reflected in three substitutions quite early on. But we still needed to score.

Just when we were starting to think it might really be one of those nights we did. Decent work down the left ended with the ball running loose on the other side and Wilson bearing down on it in loads of space. Seemed he would take it on and shoot, but instead he played it square to Sordell in a better position and he finished coolly, showing what he might be able to do regularly if the service is provided.

The outpouring of relief, the effort expended, and the fact that we now had something to protect perhaps not surprisingly resulted in the tempo dropping and Forest coming more into the game. There was always a threat from set pieces, with more than a fair share of pushing/pulling/blocking going on which the ref seemed oblivious to. But by and large we kept them at bay and continued to fashion the better chances.

I’m not sure I remember all of them, but Cousins hit the post from a tight angle inside the box, prompting another scramble from which a goal seemed inevitable, then Harriott blazed over from a good position. At the other end it seemed for a moment that the ball would break in the box for one of their guys, but Cousins was to make a quite superb block. It was all set up for a last-gasp winner for us and the chance did come at the death (after Hughes had replaced Gower, Church limped off for Pigott, and Dervite made a late entry to the fray). Another corner and Morrison coming in at the far post couldn’t keep the shot down.

With the final whistle the players didn’t seem sure whether to celebrate or bemoan the fact that this was a game that we should have won, with a little more composure and luck in their box (can’t even call it the final third as some of the chances were from a few yards out). Whatever the initial reaction, with a chance to reflect they should take away pride in the performance and the obvious lesson that to compete in any Championship game requires the level of commitment that was on show tonight and not in the previous home game. There is no excuse for letting standards drop on Saturday.

Player Ratings:

Hamer – 6/10. Their goal made him look a little foolish and given the distance and angle there has to be some culpability, even though it was a superb curling effort. Otherwise struggled to deal with their corners but thanks to those in front of him didn’t have a shot in anger to save.

Wilson – 7/10. Defensively sound, bar one moment at the end when having been beaten to the ball lost his composure and was rounded again when on the ground. Gets a clear assist for our goal.

Wiggins – 8/10. There was concern about his form in the early games, but tonight he provided our most potent attacking threat in the first half as well as playing his part defensively.

Morrison – 8/10. Oh, so nearly a 9, if only he’d converted the chance at the finish.

Wood – 7/10. Quietly effective and impressive. Their absence of chances from open play was in no part due to him.

Stephens – 8/10. Just a world apart from the Millwall display. Not every pass or flick came off but made himself available, supported the guy with the ball, and almost scored.

Gower – 7/10. Unfussy and composed. Provided solidity in the centre of midfield.

Cousins – 7/10. Poor foul at the start to give away the free kick for their goal, missed a good chance in the first half, and couldn’t quite convert the one in the second. But otherwise very good, notable that unlike Pritchard when isolated in possession he didn’t tend to lose it but managed to find an out. And deserves a mark for his block in the box towards the end.

Harriott – 6/10. Harsh perhaps as he didn’t stop running and trying to make things happen, but didn’t really cause them the problems he might have done in his role and often chose the wrong pass/option.

Church – 7/10. Another tireless performance but as against Millwall he failed to take a good chance when it arose.

Sordell – 7/10. Often out of the game, is unable to provide an effective challenge for balls in the air, but took his chance when it came.

Subs – Hughes (7/10: a delight to see him back on the pitch, brought on to help shore things up); Pigott (6/10; worked hard enough and did offer more of a challenge to their centre-backs when it came to competing for balls in the air); Dervite (too late on for a mark).

When The Going Gets Tough ....

In early September, after beating Leicester, I rattled off something and gave it a headline of ‘Reasons To Be Cheerful’. Fast forward a few weeks and that isn’t exactly a title likely to be repeated. One decent away draw followed by three defeats, each one in its way increasingly dispiriting. The Millwall game was notable only for how poorly we played (perhaps also for what was a miserable crowd for this fixture, of just short of 16,000). Until yesterday we could at least highlight the fact that each game we’d played had been decided by the odd goal (leaving aside the half-completed Doncaster game). Some fellow Addicks did drive up for the game and the reply to my text to them offering commiserations was ‘the day has had very little to recommend it’.

At least when it comes to Charlton I do (perhaps too often) try to accentuate the positive. Only two crumbs of comfort come to mind. First, we know that we we’re likely to struggle if we’re without key players and being without four for yesterday at least (Solly, Jackson, Kermorgant and Cort) didn’t inspire confidence before the start. They will come back and we will improve with them. Second (and this may be clutching at straws), at the end of September last season we were 19th and hardly pulling up trees (of course we’d beaten Leicester but had only two wins from the first eight games); by early November we were 21st and about to take on Cardiff at home, with just one win (and four defeats) out of seven at home. Finishing ninth (and strongly) did put a gloss on a season which with seven or eight games left could have ended with us going back down.

Of course it’s different this time around. Last season we were finding our feet back in The Championship and progressing. But let’s not forget the mood going into that Cardiff game – and especially after 20 minutes. The crowd were instrumental in the turnaround that night – and that backing in turn is due in no small part to support for Sir Chris. Anyone daft enough to want him to be replaced should seriously ask themselves why – and perhaps more important why they think that such a change would lead to something better.

I’ve seen comments on pieces from other bloggers expressing surprise that the fans haven’t been much more vocal in their criticism of the board/owners. But what do we (collectively) do? Start singing ‘sack the board’? We know full well that we lose money and are reliant on the cheques being written. It may well be that the owners have had enough and want to sell; if so, the idea touted around of a price tag of around 40m, however structured, is also plain daft. If they are still committed to the cause (which in loose terms can be stated as making us the premier team in Europe), and it really is the constraints of the FPL that are driving decisions on budgets, they would of course help their cause by communicating their intentions. Yes, Michael Slater has written in the programme, but we know he doesn’t really call the shots – and if it boils down to whether you believe the denials of any plans to sell or the sentiments expressed in The Voice of the Valley there can’t be any doubt as to who gets the nod from most fans (including me).

We know we have two tough home games coming up. The horror scenario involves first Andy Reid reminding us of what we once had, and then Ricardo Fuller reminding us of what we let go. The idea that if these games go badly Powell will be offered up as a sacrificial lamb still wouldn’t stack up. Instead any such move would be more likely to spark a proper revolt against the owners. What are the reasons for sacking a manager? Well, the expectation that another guy would do a better job with the available resources, even that the manager has lost the backing of the players, which amounts to the same thing. I can’t see the case for another manager doing a better job. The only thing that worries me is that there was a decidedly downbeat tone to Sir Chris’ comments after yesterday’s game. Hope it was just a case of immediate post-match disappointment and that he’s feeling better today.

When you’re in trouble you need unity and character, from the fans, the team, the management, and the board. In the past two seasons the team has demonstrated the character and commitment required, on many occasions; last season the fans stood up when it counted; and those who want a managerial change might like to listen again to Sir Chris’ speech after the final game. He, us and the team all need a lift and I for one want to walk away from the next two games proud of our team, even if we don’t get the results. That requires the team, whoever turns out, showing character and collective resolve. Those qualities were missing against Millwall and we need to get them installed again, quickly.

Bad Day All Round

Some matches you get something you don’t deserve, sometimes you don’t get the rub of the green. Today we got what we deserved. That’s not to say a very ordinary Millwall team were worthy winners. A fair-minded neutral might give them some credit for their defensive work, but no more. They adopted a ‘shoot on sight’ policy in the first half and eventually it paid off by means of a deflection. Having got their goal they were not surprisingly content to keep things very tight, but their second-half chances were almost the equal of ours and saw out the game with relative ease. More generally, their midfield play was more controlled, better organised and more purposeful than ours, with Bailey looking ponderous and limited but still having a better grasp on the play than our guys, by keeping things moving and providing an effective barrier in front of defence. That they rarely (if at all) rose above the mundane says a lot about the quality of our play.

I think it’s too simple just to conclude that we were poor. Breaking it down, up front Pigott was made to look like a raw recruit, in sharp comparison with the combative, astute and experienced Kermorgant, who we obviously missed badly. Church had a decent game and was for a long period the only bright spark, but didn’t take the one good chance we fashioned in the second half. At the back, we were seldom troubled and those involved, including Wood who was sacrificed to change the formation and especially Morrison, who ended the game up front, played well enough (although Hamer’s distribution alternated between the excellent and the horrible – and nearly costly).

For me, the real problem was the central midfield three, individually and collectively. Far too often the ball was given away cheaply, the passes that found their man were usually too slow and a little misplaced, and worst of all when a pass was made far too little was done to support the guy with the ball. Millwall were able to crowd the guy with the ball and win back possession far too often. Pritchard was the main culprit in that it was often him getting outmuscled by much bigger guys; but the fault was collective as nothing was done to get around the problem, to get closer to the man in possession and give him an out. We didn’t learn the lesson and it cost us, as Pritchard was crowded out and their guy’s harmless shot took the deflection for the goal. Stephens, Pritchard and Jackson need to work as a unit for the formation to work and today at least they singularly didn’t. Others may focus on the ineffective knocking around of the ball at the back, but in large part that arose because balls hoofed up to Pigott were getting us nowhere and those in midfield stood and watched instead of working to make space to enable us to move forward.

It all added up to a poor game between two struggling teams decided by a fluke, in front of what for a Charlton v Millwall game looked like a poor crowd. If that sounds to some like sour grapes, let me add that if we play to that standard for the rest of the season we will almost certainly be relegated. Today we fell short on quality; without quality we fell short on determination and drive.  

The main news on arrival was that Kermorgant was still out and that Sir Chris had given Pigott the nod to play up front with Church instead of Sordell – or any change of formation. With Solly and Cort still unavailable, and the Gower/Cousins midfield pairing seemingly remaining second choice, the rest of the team more or less picked itself.

The early exchanges were inconclusive, with both teams struggling to put together anything meaningful. Bailey’s last kick at The Valley had been a penalty miss and there was some amusement that his first in this game was a truly naff shot. We weren’t being threatened at the back (except for when Hamer almost managed to give the ball to their forward, once near the goal-line and once from a kick out) but weren’t posing them any problems either.

Our first-half attacking threat amounted to one decent moment, when a Wiggins cross seemed set to be converted at the far post only for a Millwall defender to get a touch to divert it behind for a corner. Otherwise there was a bit of trickery around the box from Pigott, a move involving Jackson, and that was it as far as I can remember. At the break their keeper hadn’t had to make a save. At the other end, aside from a couple of fairly routine saves from shots outside the box, Hamer was comfortable too – until the deflected shot, which gave him no chance.

The debate at the break was whether changes needed to be made then, or to give it 10 or 15 minutes more. We actually started the second half a bit brighter and Stephens had a decent half-chance on the edge of the box but couldn’t get over the ball to get the strike on target. But before long the game settled back into the previous pattern. The first change saw Stewart come on for Wood, in a switch to 4-4-2, with Pritchard moving wider to the right. Millwall also made a change and for a 10-minute period they had a couple of half-chances that might have made the game safe.

Stewart did look lively and threatening, but the quality of service to him and to the front two remained well below what is required. So on came Sordell for Pigott and Harriott for Pritchard, to give us two outright wingers and fresh legs up front. And we did, finally, manage to fashion a proper chance, from a move which was in stark contrast to the rest of the game. Good, slick interchange involving Sordell ended with Church being played in on the left side of the box. You could see the intent: curl it around the keeper into the net. But the shot was badly underhit and easily smothered. After we’d won possession in midfield Harriott had a run in space, but his attempted pass was also too weak and the moment went. Having spent most of the game unable to create decent openings, when they came we failed to take them.

At the death there was a shot from Stewart saved at the near post, but even with Morrison pushed forward (making it effectively a 3-4-3) we couldn’t win the aerial duel where it mattered, while perhaps not surprisingly there wasn’t a great deal of coordination. The team left the pitch to boos and a worrying afternoon contained no positives for me. We had to eat it last season and have to do it again, the difference being this time around we played worse against what looked like a poorer Millwall.

There’s no obvious answer, other than of course the return of Kermorgant and having Solly and Cort available too. I just hope the players take a long look at their performances today and come to the fairly obvious conclusion that they need to, and can, perform much better. If not, we are truly in the merde.

Player Ratings:

Hamer – 6-10. Nothing more than routine saves, no chance with the goal, but while I’m usually reluctant to dock a keeper a point for distribution at least twice today his decisions with the ball almost cost us.

Wilson – 6/10. The starting formation requires a lot from the wing-backs, but whereas Wiggins did get involved going forward he didn’t feature, except for strangely ducking under a cross I thought he was set up for. Much more involved as an attacking threat when we brought on the two wingers.

Wiggins – 7/10. Decent enough game, at the back and going forward. Often given the ball only to find nobody within 15 yards or more to lend support.

Wood – 7/10. No complaints, did his job before being taken off to change the formation.

Morrison – 8/10. In a poor game for me he stood out, being dominant at the back (albeit not influential when playing centre-forward).

Dervite – 7/10. As for Wood, no complaints. Involved in a fair amount of the inconsequential square passes at the back, but again that seemed to reflect the lack of alternatives.

Jackson – 5/10. Often the talisman and a player who has turned games around. Didn’t happen today. The poor mark is also a reflection of the inability of the central three to control the game.

Stephens – 5/10. The 3-5-2 set-up is designed not least to accommodate him, to allow him to be the playmaker. There were some excellent passes, but he was invisible for the first period of the game, played some shocking passes, and missed from a decent position. Quite simply has to play better to deserve a starting place.

Pritchard – 5/10. Outmuscled and often pounced on by them as an opportunity to win the ball back. Didn’t feature going forward either.

Pigott – 5/10. No getting away from it, he was in their pocket. Threatened a couple of times, and kept going, but also misplaced passes and basically won nothing in the air.

Church – 7/10. Would have been a higher mark if he hadn’t failed to make the most of our best chance with a weak finish. Otherwise he was one of the few guys out there today who looked as if he knew what he was doing.

Subs – Stewart (7/10: clearly made a difference and gave us an attacking threat that was largely absent before; would have been nice if he’d rounded it off with a goal at the end); Sordell (7/10 – my first sight of him and it was fair enough, involved in our one good move); Harriott (6/10 – added to the threat going forward but did mess up his one good opening). 

Reasons To Be Cheerful

A (home) victory to send us into the international break, a transfer deadline day without the mooted sale of a key player to raise material funds (which does somewhat narrow the shortlist of potentials), plus what looks like a decent exchange to strengthen the side. The concerns don’t go away, but a number of them are greatly eased. I can’t remember the mood – judging by others’ posts and the comments of other Addicks - being as down as it was ahead of Saturday’s game, especially at this stage of the season (it would of course have been a good deal worse this long into the ‘Dowie season’ if we had an inkling of what lay ahead).

First and foremost, against Leicester there was nothing wrong with the team’s attitude, as underlined on the club site by Kermorgant. Concerns on that front have not surprisingly been aired, given the number of players out of contract at the end of this campaign and the possibility that uncertainty about the club’s finances and ambitions might be affecting performances on the pitch. Sir Chris talked about some soul-searching in the dressing room of late and perhaps that had the desired effect. It’s also reasonable to suggest that it’s no coincidence that our first victory of the season was also the first game that Jackson lasted a full 90 minutes (98 if the daft amount of stoppage time is added). I wouldn’t say he had an outstanding match, but every decent team needs a strong spine and ours runs through Hamer, Morrison, Jackson and Kermorgant.

The change in formation has clearly helped, especially given Solly’s absence (with what now seems to be a genuine niggle rather than the pre-transfer tactical injury we had feared). I thought Stephens looked much more assured in a five-man midfield. There’s plenty of work still to be done at the back as the coordination was sometimes off. Sometimes two of the three centre-backs were jumping for the same ball and, potentially more costly, when Leicester had their two moments when players broke through all our defenders were drawn to the ball, with nobody trying to cover the spare man (the result of which was one Hamer one-on-one save and one spurious appeal for a penalty, to which the ref correctly responded to by issuing the second yellow).

Seems like some more practise with the system and better communication is needed, but we didn’t see the howlers that Doncaster benefited from. The conditions there were presumably a factor, but belatedly getting the Middlesbrough programme I was struck by Hamer commenting that Bournemouth scored from a short corner that they’d tried a couple of times before and that we should have been alert to it; sleeping at the back against Doncaster saw their forward left alone to pick up a throw (to cross for their first) and a guy unmarked from a corner to send in a free header (which led to their third). The ‘sins’ on Saturday seemed to be the result of over-enthusiasm rather than being asleep, which has to be the lesser of two evils.

The shipping out on loan of Hollands and Green do smack of bon voyage rather than au revoir. Good luck to both of them if they don’t return (ideally both will have outstanding success and come back raring to go). Their departures, temporary or not, do mark a further distancing from the promotion team/squad and I guess a natural evolution. Powell talked early last season about the players finding their feet in the higher division, but of the 33 with squad numbers listed for the first home game of the last campaign some 13 have now left us (for the record Taylor, Green, Haynes, Wright-Phillips, Wagstaff, Kerkar, Sullivan, Mambo, Bover, Hollands, Smith, Hayes and Clarke); the total would be 14 if you include Button, who came and went in the interim. Of the other 20, however, no less than 10 featured in Saturday’s starting X1 (the only addition being Church), while all bar Hughes, Cook, Osborne and Azeez have been in the matchday squad, with the other new additions being Gower, Wood and Sordell. Now we add the name of Stewart, who hopefully will prove to be a star.

The simple fact that nobody was sold on deadline day is in itself reassuring, although of course that begs the question of whether there were offers on the table. Selling Kermorgant would have been just criminal, horribly destabilising; selling Solly would have been a big loss but as others have suggested more understandable if the price was right (Wyn Grant has cited sources as indicating that Solly has signed a new contract, although given that the club has announced Pigott agreeing a new deal and has made no announcement re Solly this has to remain unconfirmed). All conjecture now, at least until January. Perhaps the Voice of the Valley piece on the mooted club sale document had the desired effect in convincing the owners that they needed to avoid a major sale at this juncture to strengthen the board’s claims that no such plans have been put forward.

The owners have only themselves to blame for such idle thoughts, given their decision to remain annonymous/silent. Its wishful thinking to imagine that concerns on that front will be eased – barring news of some Sheff Utd-style new investor. We have to look to VotV to keep up the pressure, plus the CAST to work to improve relations between the board/owners and the fans (can they claim the credit for red wine appearing in the East Stand bar? If so, they have my thanks, just as the club will have my money; just please change the sign saying ‘beer only’ for some queues to ‘booze only’ as it gets a little confusing for us simple wine drinkers). I just wonder if I’m the only sceptic who feels that the new ‘fair play’ rules will be repeatedly used, by many clubs, as a smokescreen. Any accountant worth his/her salt should be able to drive a coach and horses through much of the restrictions.

On the CAST front, of course I’ve signed the petition for getting The Valley to be designated an asset of community value. But I can’t help feeling that the relevant legislation (apparently contained in the Localism Act) might be – indeed should be – a double-edged sword. If places such as The Valley are (understandably and quite correctly) designated ACVs, it is only a natural counter-balance to assume that the legislation also allows for some places to be designated LCVs (liabilities of community value). Surely there should be scope for fans to campaign for the removal of unwanted local eyesores in the hope that by being designated LCVs the chances of their being demolished asap would be increased. I can, just off the top of my head, think of two perfectly suitable ‘stadiums’ not too far away.