Why would our owner need an excuse to ‘storm off’ as you put it? He could put the club up for sale any time and for any reason he chooses. Your comment ‘stuffing the board with lickspittles’ is both inaccurate and deeply offensive. His nephew Pete has made huge sacrifices to perform his role including living thousands of miles apart from his family. He is well respected within the club for the work he does and is an enthusiastic supporter who watches most games amongst the fans behind the goal. Rob’s wife Missy has turned our merchandising operation into a very successful business, and let’s not forget other board members like Trevor Stroud and David Cook who did so much for the club when we were under Trust ownership. Regarding your last comment, I am sure that Rob would be prepared to answer any questions and I’m equally sure it wouldn’t make any difference to your opinion of him.
I’ve come back to this thread after a couple of days absence. I noticed that the subject of freedom of information about players’ injuries, illnesses etc that concern us (because we’ve had a taste of the Championship and would like at least one season back there in front of crowds) started on this very thread.
I had already picked up on the topic on the Charlton matchday thread. I don’t see having information on this subject as a right or an entitlement (to use one of @drcongo’s favourite terms). I see our desire to know as a reflection of our worry that, with so many absentees, the promotion which Rob Couhig has set his businessman’s heart on will be very difficult to achieve. That worry may well be compounded by the thought that failure to achieve promotion may shorten what has been a very successful tenure by the Couhig family.
@aloysius as I recall (and I may be paraphrasing somewhat) has always been of the mind Rob C is a lying carnival barker who is about to storm off and leave us in the lurch ever since he failed to open his checkbook and keep us in the Championship.
You're right @Malone the road thing is an interesting long-term issue.
I could of course be proved wrong, but everything I have seen and heard from our owners including plans for a new access road, bigger stand at the Valley End etc suggests they are very much in for the long term. If winning promotion was the only deciding factor they could have walked away after the play off final, probably with a modest profit on their investment.
I am with you on this one @glasshalffull, we are so lucky to have the Couhigs and what other person would leave their family 1000’s of miles away to look after the clubs finances?
The Couhigs have the clubs best interests at heart and are not just owners but massive wholehearted supporters and very nice people as well.
Long may they remain owners as good knows what would happen should they leave.
The Couhigs are fantastic. If there were a pair of scales for their ownership the positive side would be weighed down with "saved the club, helped us into the Championship, behave like fans, fight tooth and nail against injustices against us" and so forth.
The negative side would say things like "can be a bit boasty about clean toilets."
Fans will always find fault with owners as we have seen with the criticism of the Trust and the comments made by Aloysius and others about the Couhigs. However, whilst I acknowledge that there was much understandable negativity about Steve Hayes, he did sink a lot of his money into the club and remains a keen supporter. It is easy to demonise him without knowing all the facts. I disagreed with him on several issues, but I believed it was important to support him publicly whilst I was serving on the board of directors.
"It is easy to demonise him without knowing all the facts"
The black and White campaign publicly and vocally tried to get Mr Hayes to answer a series of vitally important questions regarding his intentions and the future of the club.
None of which he answered or addressed, just him and his then cohorts coming out with nonsensical reasons that we had to move stadium
The whole secrecy for marginal gains argument lost a bit of credibility for me when gaz was wheeled out to answer fans questions minutes before a first team game when he should have been with the young development lads and his management team preparing them for the game. But I guess it’s just a cup game so gimping our prep a little bit was ok.
I still don’t think anyone is arguing for precise injury details. However when I read that player a has a broken ankle and player b has just had surgery having that in the public domain is hardly going to help Charlton. As they return and are maybe a couple of games away referring to them as ‘close’ is the kind of thing that keeps the opposition guessing.
It is also totally inaccurate. Almost every manager in the game (including in the PL) will name the line up, say a few words to the players then let them get on with warming up. Quite what it has to do with injury news I have no idea because that was just one of several questions that GA answered before returning to the dressing room.
Hearing about those two (Hanlan & KaiKai) being long(ish) term absences has done nothing to boost my confidence about making the playoffs. If it had been news that they were both back in light training - that would have given us all a lift. There’s a lot of psychology at play here.
And there is the problem ! People guess and make up stories if they don't know the truth, then it starts going round and people start to argue about whether it's true or not.
We don't need to know what sort of injury it is, or how many specific weeks... just short, mid, or long term would keep everyone happy, and would keep opposition unsure.
@bluntphil interviews Gaz at least once a week. I’m sure a compromise could be found where the high level injury details are shared, without the need for specifics. I think this would be a popular outcome, based on some of the more measured responses on here (e.g. @HolmerBlue above). This often happens voluntarily anyway, it’s not like there is a deliberate 100% blackout on any injury information seeping out - there’s just been some key stuff recently where they clearly think the opposition not knowing if Vokes, for example, is playing or not, could benefit them. And similarly other key players who have been 50/50 in the lead up to a game. And for anyone constantly parroting the Shrewsbury result as evidence that it doesn’t work, remember it’s about “seeking” marginal gains. Sometimes these things work, other times not. Doesn’t mean it’s not worth doing. (Does anyone remember Scotty’s miracle appearance at Gander Green Lane? No way Sutton expected that...)
But it’s interesting how this one story gets traction over other scenarios. Is this purely information void or is the natural view to believe a big injury over a knock?
I don’t think the big injury story is true based on my limited knowledge.
The problem I have with answering your question, @Right_in_the_Middle, is that, for the life of me, I cannot remember the source. I can only think that I felt it was perfectly plausible when/where I read it. My reaction at the time was based on the fact that I had heard previously that Hanlan had an abdominal problem and, although I obviously knew that KaiKai was unavailable, I didn’t think that the person saying that he had a broken ankle was someone silly enough to make such a comment tongue in cheek. I’m sure it was the same person commenting on both cases.
But (and it’s a big but) I am well capable of missing ironic intent, especially when such an interpretation would suggest inappropriately mischievous intent.
This is potentially a seriously misleading piece of misinformation and I hope @AlanCecil or @bluntphil (for example) could confirm or deny it.
@micra don't worry about not making the playoffs just yet dear boy. Last season we started out as a 'bang average League One side' after poor recruitment and had a winless run that 'ended our chances of the playoffs' before Wembley. ☺ Long and winding road ahead...
I suppose you could argue, if the marginal gains theory is correct, that leeking misinformation to the effect that Tafazzoli / Vokes / Whoever is unavailable due to a broken toe when they will in fact be starting would also be a valid tactic.
Comments
Or a tunnel?
Why would our owner need an excuse to ‘storm off’ as you put it? He could put the club up for sale any time and for any reason he chooses. Your comment ‘stuffing the board with lickspittles’ is both inaccurate and deeply offensive. His nephew Pete has made huge sacrifices to perform his role including living thousands of miles apart from his family. He is well respected within the club for the work he does and is an enthusiastic supporter who watches most games amongst the fans behind the goal. Rob’s wife Missy has turned our merchandising operation into a very successful business, and let’s not forget other board members like Trevor Stroud and David Cook who did so much for the club when we were under Trust ownership. Regarding your last comment, I am sure that Rob would be prepared to answer any questions and I’m equally sure it wouldn’t make any difference to your opinion of him.
I’ve come back to this thread after a couple of days absence. I noticed that the subject of freedom of information about players’ injuries, illnesses etc that concern us (because we’ve had a taste of the Championship and would like at least one season back there in front of crowds) started on this very thread.
I had already picked up on the topic on the Charlton matchday thread. I don’t see having information on this subject as a right or an entitlement (to use one of @drcongo’s favourite terms). I see our desire to know as a reflection of our worry that, with so many absentees, the promotion which Rob Couhig has set his businessman’s heart on will be very difficult to achieve. That worry may well be compounded by the thought that failure to achieve promotion may shorten what has been a very successful tenure by the Couhig family.
@aloysius as I recall (and I may be paraphrasing somewhat) has always been of the mind Rob C is a lying carnival barker who is about to storm off and leave us in the lurch ever since he failed to open his checkbook and keep us in the Championship.
You're right @Malone the road thing is an interesting long-term issue.
I could of course be proved wrong, but everything I have seen and heard from our owners including plans for a new access road, bigger stand at the Valley End etc suggests they are very much in for the long term. If winning promotion was the only deciding factor they could have walked away after the play off final, probably with a modest profit on their investment.
Promotion may not be the only deciding factor but it must (understandably) be high on the list of priorities.
I am with you on this one @glasshalffull, we are so lucky to have the Couhigs and what other person would leave their family 1000’s of miles away to look after the clubs finances?
The Couhigs have the clubs best interests at heart and are not just owners but massive wholehearted supporters and very nice people as well.
Long may they remain owners as good knows what would happen should they leave.
Might to some fans' sleep pattern?
The Couhigs are fantastic. If there were a pair of scales for their ownership the positive side would be weighed down with "saved the club, helped us into the Championship, behave like fans, fight tooth and nail against injustices against us" and so forth.
The negative side would say things like "can be a bit boasty about clean toilets."
I did see a sign about toilet upgrades yesterday - albeit not pinned up outside the toilets
I recall at the time you had very positive views regarding Sharkie Hayes!
However, I think your confidence regarding the current owners is spot on this time.
Don't worry about the money!
One of the all time infamous quotes in Wycombe's history.
Fans will always find fault with owners as we have seen with the criticism of the Trust and the comments made by Aloysius and others about the Couhigs. However, whilst I acknowledge that there was much understandable negativity about Steve Hayes, he did sink a lot of his money into the club and remains a keen supporter. It is easy to demonise him without knowing all the facts. I disagreed with him on several issues, but I believed it was important to support him publicly whilst I was serving on the board of directors.
"It is easy to demonise him without knowing all the facts"
The black and White campaign publicly and vocally tried to get Mr Hayes to answer a series of vitally important questions regarding his intentions and the future of the club.
None of which he answered or addressed, just him and his then cohorts coming out with nonsensical reasons that we had to move stadium
, because the dug outs weren't big enough.
Well the dugouts are certainly big enough now. We could actually put them on airbnb 😁.
True but you now can't see the pitch from a fair bit of the 'Main' (PreSonos?) Stand. It also always looks pretty empty on tv.
The whole secrecy for marginal gains argument lost a bit of credibility for me when gaz was wheeled out to answer fans questions minutes before a first team game when he should have been with the young development lads and his management team preparing them for the game. But I guess it’s just a cup game so gimping our prep a little bit was ok.
What? The players were out on the pitch warming up at the time Gareth was doing the Q&A. He doesn't normally coach them during the warm-up...
I still don’t think anyone is arguing for precise injury details. However when I read that player a has a broken ankle and player b has just had surgery having that in the public domain is hardly going to help Charlton. As they return and are maybe a couple of games away referring to them as ‘close’ is the kind of thing that keeps the opposition guessing.
That's got to be a contender for most utterly miserable post of the week.
It is also totally inaccurate. Almost every manager in the game (including in the PL) will name the line up, say a few words to the players then let them get on with warming up. Quite what it has to do with injury news I have no idea because that was just one of several questions that GA answered before returning to the dressing room.
Hearing about those two (Hanlan & KaiKai) being long(ish) term absences has done nothing to boost my confidence about making the playoffs. If it had been news that they were both back in light training - that would have given us all a lift. There’s a lot of psychology at play here.
Are you sure that news is true though? It sounded tongue in cheek to me
And there is the problem ! People guess and make up stories if they don't know the truth, then it starts going round and people start to argue about whether it's true or not.
We don't need to know what sort of injury it is, or how many specific weeks... just short, mid, or long term would keep everyone happy, and would keep opposition unsure.
@bluntphil interviews Gaz at least once a week. I’m sure a compromise could be found where the high level injury details are shared, without the need for specifics. I think this would be a popular outcome, based on some of the more measured responses on here (e.g. @HolmerBlue above). This often happens voluntarily anyway, it’s not like there is a deliberate 100% blackout on any injury information seeping out - there’s just been some key stuff recently where they clearly think the opposition not knowing if Vokes, for example, is playing or not, could benefit them. And similarly other key players who have been 50/50 in the lead up to a game. And for anyone constantly parroting the Shrewsbury result as evidence that it doesn’t work, remember it’s about “seeking” marginal gains. Sometimes these things work, other times not. Doesn’t mean it’s not worth doing. (Does anyone remember Scotty’s miracle appearance at Gander Green Lane? No way Sutton expected that...)
Foe statistical purposes:
But it’s interesting how this one story gets traction over other scenarios. Is this purely information void or is the natural view to believe a big injury over a knock?
I don’t think the big injury story is true based on my limited knowledge.
The problem I have with answering your question, @Right_in_the_Middle, is that, for the life of me, I cannot remember the source. I can only think that I felt it was perfectly plausible when/where I read it. My reaction at the time was based on the fact that I had heard previously that Hanlan had an abdominal problem and, although I obviously knew that KaiKai was unavailable, I didn’t think that the person saying that he had a broken ankle was someone silly enough to make such a comment tongue in cheek. I’m sure it was the same person commenting on both cases.
But (and it’s a big but) I am well capable of missing ironic intent, especially when such an interpretation would suggest inappropriately mischievous intent.
This is potentially a seriously misleading piece of misinformation and I hope @AlanCecil or @bluntphil (for example) could confirm or deny it.
For statistical purposes:
• Grammar School educated…yes
•. Born with smartphone in hand…well, hardly!
@micra don't worry about not making the playoffs just yet dear boy. Last season we started out as a 'bang average League One side' after poor recruitment and had a winless run that 'ended our chances of the playoffs' before Wembley. ☺ Long and winding road ahead...
I’m a natural born worrier @Wendoverman.
I suppose you could argue, if the marginal gains theory is correct, that leeking misinformation to the effect that Tafazzoli / Vokes / Whoever is unavailable due to a broken toe when they will in fact be starting would also be a valid tactic.