I picked up this story from the Hill to the Valley blog but not everyone may visit that so I am reproducing it here: Spring
My comments would be:
1. It sounds like sour grapes, although clearly he wants to get even with us.
2. All this talk about Charlton being one of the biggest clubs in the division is nonsense, but it is a real problem for us as so many teams see us a scalp. We are a club desperately short of money, struggling to survive and at some risk of disappearing altogether.
3. In my view a manager is entitled to have favourites in the sense that he can make a judgment about which players are likely to do best. From what I saw of Spring he was a useful player, but arguably we had better players in his position.
3 comments:
What are you on about? Like it or not we are clearly one of the biggest clubs in the league along with Southampton and Sheffield Wednesday,in spite of the boards achievement in dragging us down to a position lower than in the glickstein days.
I agree with Anonymous. Size is not based simply on money available to spend.
Most of the other criteria, attendances, size of stadia, recent history all point to us being one of the biggest teams in the division.
In fact, I would suggest that with our playing budget last season we were one of the biggest in the division on that calculation too.
It does make it harder for us on occasion but, frankly we have to get used to it and rise above it. It was one of Pardew's favourite excuses for losing to teams that were put together for less than we spent on one player.
It doesn't wash with me, the club is where it is, we are one of the biggest in this division, even if we are the worst run!
How does one measure how big a club is? Manchester City used to claim to be a 'massive' club. Attendances are one yardstick, but they may be down this season. I don't think it helps us to be seen as a big club as it encourages other clubs to up their game when they play us.
Post a Comment