When we beat the Super Hoops 4-2

My notes on the game:

A working trip to Greece meant that I wasn't able to see Charlton's morale boosting wins that had preceded the Stockport match:4-0 at Norwich and the 4-1 victory over Bradford. Now my attendance at Loftus Road was in doubt.

The end of the week would see me representing the UK's interests in Brussels and the secretary of the committee had warned me that the meeting could be long and difficult. Hence, it was scheduled to continue on Saturday, but I took a risk and booked myself on the last flight on Friday night to Birmingham. 

Come Friday afternoon, the predicted difficulties were arising. Would I have to get one of Brussels's crazy Moroccan taxi drivers to take me the wrong way down one way streets (something they don't need much encouragement to do!) to make my plane. I had told the chair that I wanted to be at Loftus Road the next day. Suddenly, from nowhere, he produced a sum of money which solved the main obstacle, and I was on the flight to Brum.

Next day saw me on the train to Marylebone. Radio 5 commented that QPR were quietly confident of victory, observing that 'the cream must rise to the top' in Division 1! Well, we are used to being patronised by the media.

On walking to Baker Street, disaster struck. The Hammersmith and City line was out owing to 'subsisdence at Edgware Road', so I had to go across to the Central Line and travel to White City. I arrived five minutes late somewhat hot and flustered.

But what a feast of football! As the QPR web page later admitted, Charlton came determined to win and comprehensively outplayed the 'Super Hoops'. What is more, the Charlton faithful outsung a largely silent home support. 

Robinson took us 1-0 ahead, and after QPR had equalised, Steve Jones put us ahead before half time. A second Robinson goal and one by substitute Phil Chapple completed the picture. In the last fifteen minutes, however, we let QPR back into the game. Our defensive weaknesses under pressure became apparent and only a couple of great saves by Andy Peterson stopped it going to 3-4. And, as QPR had come back from 4-0 at Port Vale to draw 4-4 last season, anything could have happened then.

Nevertheless, a sparkling Charlton performance. Good attacking football, with Kinsella in midfield playing probably his best game of the season to date. So Charlton fans could with justification chant, 'QPR, ha! ha! ha!' However, as far as the media were concerned, it was not a question of Charlton winning, but of QPR losing.

Ironically I had be sent to Brussels by the Cabinet Office who claimed they were short staffed.   A former Cabinet Secretary is a keen QPR supporter.

The story behind Parker's departure for Chelsea

Like many fans, the departure of Scott Parker for Chelsea when we had a chance of European qualification left me with a bad taste in the mouth at the time, but Peter Varney gives a more informed and balanced view in Richard Cawley’s Substack.   Just a few excerpts as a taster (Varney also discusses the plot to sabotage The Valley floodlights).

‘Scott was like a lot of players. He wanted to play for England and in the Champions League. At the time Chelsea were a big club with Roman Abramovich coming on the scene. It transpired that Richard Murray had said, at the time when Scott last signed a contract, that he could go if a top-four club came in for him.

One of the things that fans often say is that, with a chance of Europe, how could he just walk away? They say that it is all about the money and whatever else. Of course money plays a part. They offered him significantly more than he was on at Charlton and a long contract. So it was about that, but it was also that ambition to play for England, play in the Champions League and test himself against the best players in the world.

It’s just a shame how it ended because I would say he is one of the best players to ever play for Charlton. So that legacy is so sad - he was massive for us in the Premier League, and in getting to the Premier League. Scott would be absolutely exhausted when he came off after any of our games. He ran and ran and ran.

He was so instrumental to Charlton and the way we played. He did the work of two players, effectively, box to box. And he could get goals. When you get a pattern of play, a shape - we weren’t having many injuries - and everything is rosey in the camp then there is no doubt if you lose your best player, him and Claus Jensen dominated the midfield, it has a massive effect.’

Curbs looks back on time at Charlton

A recent edition of Four Four Two has a double page spread interview with Alan Curbishley.

He states: 'After that first promotion to the Premier League, we made a joint decision that of whatever money we took from that season, a third would go on the squad, a third on the stadium and a third would be back-up money if we got relegated.  You see teams relegated from the Premier League having a mass exodus because they can't afford the players' contracts.   That plan meant we didn't have to sell anyone.  We could invest in the squad and we came back up as champions.'

'All of the players we brought to the club had a point to prove.  We never bought the ready-made Premier League player until later.   It ended up working to our detriment a little bit because once we got to that 40 point safety mark, we tailed off from some really good positions.'

'The closest we came to Europe was in 2003/4.  I'm sure we would have finished in the top four or five if Scott Parker hadn't joined Chelsea in January.  We got £12 million, but so late in the window I couldn't spend it.'

Curbs says he didn't get the interviews the other boys did for the England job in 2006, they were interviewed in a private house, he was interviewed in the FA offices because of a timing clash with a FA Cup replay.

In terms of other high profile jobs, Curbs said that he was in a position at Charlton where he was in charge of the whole football club.  He didn't think he was ready for a bigger club, he needed more experience.  He had one year left on his contract and has just been interviewed for the England job.  He wanted his contract to run out - but we all know what happened.

The club's debt to Lennie Lawrence

Lennie Lawrence has stepped back as Hartlepool United coach and taken the No.2 role: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/ce3lgy17q0ko

However, before this became known Four Four Two published a two page tribute to the Charlton legend in their March issue.   The survival of the club owes much to him.

Lawrence notes that Hartepool asked him to do the job for a month, just like Charlton did 40 years ago. 

The 77-year old says that  'Man management remains the most important thing and there are aspects of it that are the same as they were 30 years ago.   Others are different (he cites social media)and you need to embrace that.'

Lawrence says that he was not particularly abrasive or confrontational back in the day and 'these approaches now wouldn't hold you in good stead.   To use a modern buzzword, you have to show empathy towards players as well as being demanding and having standards - you've got to understand them and help them.'

'Sometimes it's not what you say but how you say it - that's the key, there has to be mutual respect.  The first thing I said to the players when I took Charlton over 40 years ago was "I promise I'll be honest with you and I'll try to be fair - I can't always be fair, but I'll try to be honest -that's the starting point.'

What went wrong (6) and the future for Charlton

The ESI episode was so bizarre but also so worrying that it is difficult to sum it up.   Best just to refer back to the court hearing.  This account gives a sense of the confusion: https://addicksdiary3.blogspot.com/2020/09/our-day-in-court.html

A legal action has now been brought against Charlton Athletic in respect of an alleged £500,000 owing to Pauil Elliott in relation to this takeover, but as the matter is now sub judice no further comment is permissible.

The Sandgaard period is very fresh in our memories.  I think that he was well intentioned but naive, a typical example of a businessman successful in another field thinking he can sort out the much more challenging and uncertain world of football.  He under estimated how much getting promoted would cost and, like Roland, involved some unsuitable people in running the club, not least his son.  I am more tolerant than some of his egotistical guitar playing antics.  If you are going to put millions into a loss making business, you are entitled to a bit of fun.

I find it difficult to work out what the strategy of the fragmented present ownership is.  If they want to make money out of Charlton, they should get the club promoted to the Championship and then sell it on as a potential Premier League club.   That requires much more investment than has been forthcoming.

Indeed, apart from Alfie May, it's the old story: use Academy players while they are still developing and see what we can pick up at the end of the transfer window on the cheap or as loan signings.  We were very fortunate with Rak Sakyi last year.

I am sceptical about Charlie Methven whom I think is a slippery customer.  VOTV website editor Rick Everitt has been surprisingly silent on the topic: usually he is first in the queue to denounce a new owner.  However, he may be weighed down by his civic duties.

In my view there were two crucial turning points in our history.   First, and most crucially, the failure to back Jimmy Seed when he wanted to make Charlton the Arsenal of South London by developing The Valley and making marquee signings.  Second, the mess made of the Alan Curbishley succession.  He should have been allowed to stay on for a final year while potential successors were researched.  Instead we got Dowie and his all purpose PowerPoint.

What future for Charlton?

'Charlton till I die' has more meaning for some of us and as a great-grandfather I am unlikely to see the end of this saga, but it may not be a happy one.  Charlton had the third biggest loss in League One in the last accounting period and has one of the biggest debts (£20m).  The ground and the training ground are owned by Roland who is said to want an excessive £50m for them.

So here are three scenarios with probabilities attached:

1. Charlton get promoted to the Championship and are bought by a seriously rich individual who is prepared to spend to get the club in the Premier League.  These days you have to be a billionaire.  20 per cent.

2. Charlton muddle through as a mid-table League One club (perhaps including one season in League Two).  40 per cent.

3. Charlton fall into the National League, the club is no longer viable or sustainable.  Fans form AFC Charlton using a Kent nonleague -ground and entering Step 6 of the non-league pyramid. 20 per cent (and 20 per cent for something I have not anticipated).

The original version recommended reading Dave from Drinking During The Game and some of his posts remain invaluable.  Sadly he passed away not long after this essay was written.

The Charlton line in my family has come to an end.   My granddaughter lives in Spain with her parents and daughter and follows Real Madrid.

What went wrong (5)

 Some Charlton fans think that the Roland era was much better than what followed or went before, although it's not a competitive league.   Steve Sutherland thinks that Charlton fans will rue amtagonising Rolamd and he does still own the stadium and the training ground.

Roland's idea of a network of European clubs was not in principle a bad one and Manchester City have produced a more sophisticated version on a global basis: https://footballeconomyv2.blogspot.com/2019/11/share-sale-puts-high-value-on.html   Indeed, Chelsea have now said they will follow suit.

However, it all went wrong for Roland when he lost the mother ship, Standard Liege, after fans there got fed up with him.  All the other clubs in the network apart from Charlton were third rate at best.

So let's look at the charge sheet against Roland.  He appointed as chief executive a lawyer with no previous experience of football who made errors in negotiating contracts.  She introduced gimmicks like the fan sofa, eventually destroyed by fans.  Nevertheless, she subsequently commanded an annual salary estimated to be £137,000 in a similar position at Sheffield Wednesday.

The really big puzzle is why she made no use of her knowledge of competition law.  Roland believed that his financial model would work because there was bound to be a levelling of the playing field in English football, certainly in the EFL.  Katrien Meire should have told him that any such move would have been open to challenge in the courts umder both domestic and EU competition law.   The Premier League had already had its fingers burnt in a face off with the European Commission in 2006.

One of Roland's first acts was to sell off Yann Kermorgant.   He then foisted on us a series of incompetent players from the continent, advised by someone with a laptop and no football background.  When Chris Powell got us promoted, he failed to back him with sufficient funds.  We then had a rapid succession of managers largely in the range barely adequate to useless.

One of the most effective critques of Roland's stewardship ws provided by Millwall fan Rod Liddle: https://addicksdiary3.blogspot.com/search?q=Liddle+gives+it+large

The barmy Belgian had a great opportunity, but he ended up doing us a lot of harm.

What went wrong (4)

These blog posts are very much a first draft of history and I would like someone with the inside knowledge and contacts to write an authoritative account of the club's history since the departure of Curbs.'

A persistent belief of some Charlton fans is that prospective purchasers of the club are interested in a property play, although, of course, Roland currently owns The Valley and the training ground.  The Valley is a very awkward site for development and it is in South London not North London.   Watching University Challenge last night, I was struck by how many contestants representing UCL and King's Cambridge were from North London.

Conversion or demolition of The Valley would be expensive.  However, the biggest problem is the constrained access which would make planning permission difficult to secure, plus the steep slope on part of the site.

Nevertheless, one group of owners, sometimes referred to in some quarters as 'the spivs' (shurely visionary entrepreneurs, ed) were backed by sufficient cash to contemplate building a soulless functional replacement stadium near the O2.

Read here about the secret plan to leave The Valley: https://www.votvonline.com/home/the-2017-18-blogs/22-12-how-jimenez-schemed-to-leave-the-valley/

There were furher relevations in a court case: https://www.theguardian.com/football/2018/feb/09/charlton-khakshouri-jimenez-cash-modern-football

In summary, 'a man called Darius Khakshouri was awarded $4m in damages at the Royal Courts of Justice. In Court 9, Mr Justice Green found in favour of Khakshouri and against Tony Jimenez and Kevin Cash after the property developer claimed he had been deceived by the pair over a loan. That loan was of £1.8m, made in the autumn of 2013, in a last-minute bid to keep Charlton Athletic in business

Cash's  business operations based offshore and split between trusts and holding companies. A similarly nebulous structure was found to lie behind Charlton’s ownership during Jimenez’s and Cash’s involvement at the club. In his ruling, Justice Green found that neither Jimenez nor Cash actually owned Charlton, another reason why their representations to Khakshouri had been deceitful.'

In 2019 the Court of Appeal ruled that Jiminez would have to reveal details of his tax affairs: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-47075503

Charlton does seem to be attractive to entrepreneurs who fall below the highest standards of propriety.