Money for Nothing

"What We Gonna Do When The Money Runs Out?" (David Gray)



The audited accounts of the football club and its owner (Baton 2010 Ltd) to 30 Jun 2012 have been published on the Companies House website rather earlier than expected. 

As a reminder, the club (Charlton Athletic Football Company Ltd) is 100% owned by Baton, which in turn is 90% owned by CAFC Holdings Ltd (the mysterious BVI entity) and 10% owned by Richard Murray.

As a result the accounts of Baton consolidate the accounts of the football club (as well as those of Charlton Athletic Holdings Ltd, an additional and not very relevant property-related subsidiary).

Here is a summary of the accounts, with my personal observations in italics:

• Turnover was only 2.4% higher than in 2010/11 at £8.5m, despite the record-breaking performances on the pitch - as I've mentioned here before, attendances were poor last season in my view and indeed ticket/matchday income was approx £600k lower in 2011/12 compared to 2009/10 (the 'play-off' season) despite near identical average attendances (the difference must presumably be explained by heavy discounting).  This aspect must be disappointing to the Board and does not seem to have materially improved in the Championship;
• By comparison, operating expenses increased by 10.6% to £16.0m, of which wages/salaries accounted for approximately half (and which in turn increased by 17.8%) - as a result the operating loss increased from £6.1m to £7.5m, and this was only partially offset by £1m profit on the sale of players and other contingent payments relating to transfers (Elliott, Shelvey and Richardson) - in short, the operational finances remain a horror show even though the £16m expense line is lower than it was in 2009/10.  Whilst turnover will be higher in the Championship, so presumably will be the payroll (which at 100% of turnover in 2011/12 is eye-wateringly high).  Meanwhile the 17.8% increase in wages is indicative of the investment made in the playing squad to secure promotion, although given how much stronger the squad became perhaps this was actually indicative of how well the club 'wheeled and dealed' (ie. the increase wasn't even higher);
• The increase in wages/salaries however can partly be explained by 'contractual bonuses' of £658k upon promotion - if one dared to suggest that 75% of this was paid to the players rather than management, then it implies an average of £20-25k per first-team squad member;
• During 2011/12, £818k was paid to acquire players registrations (ie. transfer fees) - as we know, most of our transfers these days have 'undisclosed' fees but this provides some colour, although this £818k only includes the upfront cash elements of any transfer.  Meanwhile various websites show the transfer date of many of our 2011 summer signings as being either 30 Jun or 1 Jul, suggesting a degree of uncertainty over exactly which financial year they apply to.  However, my best guess would be that these fees relate to Messrs. Wiggins, Morrison, Hamer, Smith, Clarke, and Haynes ie. pretty good business;
• Bank loans and overdrafts (payable within one year) increased by £700k - meanwhile bank loans payable in more than one year decreased by £1.5m - it was noted in the 2010/11 accounts that £1.0m of bank loans were payable in less than one year, so given this was indeed repaid then bank loans/overdrafts effectively increased by £200k.  This is perhaps curious given banks are reportedly no longer financing football clubs;
• Totally unsurprisingly, amounts owed to the parent (ie. Baton) has increased materially by £7.3m, an amount roughly equal to the operational loss above (net of transfer fees) - this is perhaps the most important line in the accounts and at least partly confirms how the club is financing itself.  We don't know of course how Baton's parent (CAFC Holdings) is financing itself, suffice to say that it is rather important to the club that it does indeed do so!;
• Of the aforementioned bank loans and overdrafts outstanding, £2.2m is at a fixed rate of 7.2% whilst £3.5m is at floating rates of 2.5-3% above base rate - if we can hopefully assume that the Baton/CAFC Holdings debt is 'friendly' debt then the bank loans and overdrafts are the debts to worry about, and they are all repayable within five years - during the year, £405k was paid in interest;
• The club owes HMRC £1m within one year - this is not unusual given the lag between paying staff and paying PAYE/NI, but it is not hard to imagine a scenario where the ability for a company (losing over £500k per month) to actually write out the cheque when due becomes problematic (of course HMRC are hardly renowned for their patience);
• Up to £778k might be payable if members of the squad reach certain milestones (appearances etc.) - conversely up to £3.8m might be receivable for the same reason - there has been some speculation whether Jonjo Shelvey's England cap in Oct 2012 might trigger a payment, but if so one imagines it might have been material enough to constitute disclosure as a 'subsequent event' (it wasn't).  It is not clear therefore on what basis the full £3.8m might be earned (hopefully not Arsenal or Liverpool winning trophies);
• Of the £4.15m owed to Richard Murray at 30 Jun 2012, £1.55m has now become payable given promotion to the Championship (and of this amount, £250k is payable within one year) - he is also at 30 Jun 2012 personally guaranteeing the bank overdraft up to £800k - we will have to wait until next year's accounts to see whether this repayment was indeed made or perhaps deferred/restructured.  Meanwhile it is worth recalling that the loans from other former directors are not repayable until promotion to the Premier League - given the ongoing losses at the club and Murray's continued involvement, it is not entirely clear who had the better deal;
• Whilst the term 'debt' on a football club's balance sheet is not entirely clear-cut (it is vital to understand who it is owed to and their incentives), it is worth noting that total amounts owed in 30 Jun 2012 of £37.0m compares to £30.8m two years earlier - thus to believe that the club is in a stronger position today than it was then (prior to the involvement of the current owners), then one must conclude that the structure of that debt is 'safer' from the club's point of view, because it is unquestionably materially higher.  Not surprisingly the accounts are only prepared on a 'going concern' basis subject to the ongoing support of the club's bankers and CAFC Holdings;
• Since 30 Jun 2012, £661k has been spent acquiring player registrations (ie. transfer fees) - this was somewhat higher than I anticipated and is not easily explained.  Initially I thought it might relate to instalments due on existing squad players (perhaps by virtue of gaining promotion), but the note is not worded that way.  Instead I presume it relates to the transfers of the likes of Wilson, Button etc.  Either way, it seems high and if interpreted correctly rather flies in the face of the commonly-held view that no investment has been made in an already big squad.

So in short no huge surprises but important to have it confirmed how the club is financing its losses.  It would be wonderful to obtain the accounts of CAFC Holdings but alas the British Virgin Islands has rather different disclosure requirements to the UK.

Looking back, perhaps it was indeed true that the club could never have been sustainable in League One, but a wage bill of over £8m was several times the turnover of some of the sides we played last season.  With all due respect to our exceptional achievements last season, a degree of perspective is nonetheless due.

This season whilst matchday turnover will be moderately higher and TV revenue substantially higher (albeit from a base of just £1m), it is hard to envisage the 2012/13 operating loss being much smaller given no substantial increase in attendances and the presumed relatively high wages of the likes of Fuller, Kerkar and the Premiership loans.

A final thought: the important line just below 'operating loss' on the P&L account happens to be 'profit on disposal of players' - with a few days left in the transfer window and given the above ,will the owners 'stick or twist'?

Brave Herts

Vicarage Road is far from being the most attractive away ground, but for me it represents a rare chance to see the Addicks without spending at least two hours on the road.

In fairness it could actually be quite a pleasant modern stadium (not dissimilar from The Valley infact), if only they'd construct a perfunctory stand to replace the supporter-less eyesore which covers one entire flank.

Then again if they had more seats to fill the club might have to reduce the rather ludicrous prices (£26-£31 for adults), which puts our own much more favourable pricing scheme in perspective.

Nonetheless as I tend to do these days, I opted to sit amongst the home fans given a primeval dislike of the behind-the-goal view. 

Chris Powell is at heart a highly conservative manager and his team selection reflected it - this is not a criticism incidentally, but merely an obvious observation.

It's clear that his favoured players are not necessarily the 'best' players, but those that he trusts to obey instructions and to 'do a job'. 

Bradley Pritchard, Lawrie Wilson, and Johnnie Jackson for example will never win any footballing talent contests, but it's clear that he trusts them unquestionably.  

He may have been surprised however by Gianfranco Zola's team selection, the mercurial Fernando Forestieri and Alex Geijo preferred to Matej Vydra and Troy Deeney, despite an impressive win at Brighton on Saturday.

Having played under the original Tinkerman (Claudio Ranieri), it seems he can't help tinkering himself - surely he couldn't have prioritised the FA Cup tie at Man City over a far more important Championship game?

Either way, although Vydra and Deeney would enter the fray before the end, it smacked of 'Football Manager' style decision-making, ironic given the club's shirt sponsors.

Watford took the lead early on however seemingly justifying their manager's selection, a weak shot was strangely only parried by Ben Hamer into the path of Daniel Pudil who fired home.

Despite the soft goal, Charlton were firmly in the match and were dominating midfield (not a common occurrence in truth), the energy of Pritchard especially noteworthy, as well as neat interplay along the right flank between Wilson and the dependable Chris Solly.

A cheeky Johnnie Jackson handball was correctly spotted by the assistant referee before he fired home, but minutes thereafter Charlton were on level terms when the skipper's corner was inexplicably
finished by Tommy Hoban.

Seemingly shell-shocked, Watford were soon behind when a rampaging Cedric Evina fed Bradley Pritchard and his delicate chipped cross was nodded in by Yann Kermogant. 

An early second-half onslaught was understandable and indeed it was almost entirely one-way traffic between the interval and Geijo's delightful goal which seemed to put the game beyond the subdued Addicks.

One can inherently dislike Watford's use of the loan system and specifically its tie-ups with Granada and Udinese (as well as wondering how much freedom Zola really has in team selection), but for this brief period the technical quality on show was highly impressive and unmistakenly 'continental'.

Forestieri was involved in all of their best moves, and whilst he had not exactly won the hearts of the travelling fans with his first-half handball, he is a fabulous talent.

At 3-2 and with Ben Hamer having already intervened impressively twice, one feared a 5-2 or 6-2 hammering but a stroke of luck totally changed the momentum of the game, and Charlton's far greater team spirit ensured there would then only be one winner.

Some great work by the ever-impressive Fuller set up the pinball which led ultimately to the goal, and the degree to which Watford heads dropped was tangible. 

That's the problem with loan players as we know only too well - they're not so great when things aren't going their way.

Most Charlton fans would probably have taken a point at this stage but Jackson's bullet header from a corner he might ordinarily have taken was the icing on the cake.

There was still the best part of 20 minutes left (including injury time) but other than a tight offside decision against Vydra, Hamer's goal was rarely troubled again.

A massive win without doubt which leaves Charlton almost equidistant between play-off and relegation places.

Our home form hasn't turned as I hoped it would, so a season of midtable consolidation would represent a successful outcome from here. 

However just as the much-needed Cardiff win proved the catalyst to a nice run of results, perhaps this similarly crazy result will do the same.

Here are my ratings:

Hamer 8 - would have been 9 without his questionable handling on the first goal;
Solly 8 - possibly slow to react to the first goal, but rock solid otherwise;
Evina 7 - neat work for the second goal; a more dynamic option than Kerkar or Seabourne;
Cort 5 - not his most comfortable afternoon; Watford's movement pulled us part in that second half spell
Dervite 5 - given a torrid time by Forestieri after half-time and oddly not even yellow-carded for the penalty;
Wilson 7 - you can see why Powell's likes his athletic and dependable approach;
Stephens 7 - always tried to 'do the right thing' and generally battled away in somewhat uncharacteristic fashion;
Jackson 8 - Watford's midfield has surely had better afternoons, but he never made it easy for them;
Pritchard 8 - amazing energy (worth focusing on him solely at times as I did just to appreciate it); technique can be woeful at times though;
Kermogant 6 - didn't win his usual share of headers but his late defensive duties emphasised the role he plays, particularly away from home;
Fuller 8 - led the line brilliantly; his first touch can be sublime and his unpredictability riles defenders.

Posh Spice

Watching Charlton has become rather predictable, even if the results remain unpredictable.

You can show up confident that we will be outplayed in midfield, but set up to be 'bloody hard to beat' and ordered to give absolutely everything for the shirt.

It's not pretty but you can't deny it's been successful. 

Somewhat remarkably given how we all felt just three weeks ago, we sit just five points off the play-offs.

On a chilly South-East London night, it was clear from Powell's team selection that we would revert firmly to type.

Unusually playing two target men together signalled we intended to 'go direct', whilst at the same time cementing the view that Bradley Wright-Phillips is at best a fringe player nowadays.

Although Kermogant enjoys a cult status at The Valley, seeing him alongside Fuller emphasised for me at least the difference in quality, with the Jamaican showing a good deal more guile along with the same terrific upper body strength that his partner also displays.

An early volleyed effort by Kermogant from a Fuller knock-down boded well, but there wasn't much chemistry between the pair.  A pacier partner like Haynes would suit both better.

As we know the Charlton midfield is ponderous on good days, but it was set up to be particularly so with Jackson and the surprisingly ineffective Frimpong unable to do much more than 'hold' in the centre.

Pritchard's workrate and athleticism is really astonishing and his defensive contribution is probably underappreciated, but he is really just that ie. an athlete, not a footballer. 

Kerkar meanwhile is just frustrating, even more so when he gets into dangerous positions as he did on a couple of occasions in the first half.

However the back four was rock solid, and whilst Posh regularly and impressively bypassed our static midfield, they never really threatened to score except from the deflected shot which rebounded off Hamer's post.

George Boyd and the less-than-svelte Lee Tomlin were technically the most impressive players on the pitch, but it's telling that they have contributed nearly half of their side's goals this season.

On this performance, a 15 goals per season type of striker would have seen them sitting somewhere in midtable.  Instead they rely on the midfield for their goals.

Chris Solly in particular was terrific at the back, winning tackles and bombing forward where he could - two pinpoint early second half crosses for Kermogant and Pritchard particularly noteworthy.

The late introduction of Danny Green changed the dynamic, and whilst Powell presumably considers him rather 'unreliable', he does at least pass and move with a degree of competence. 

Fuller's goal shortly thereafter was a wonder strike but the space he found himself in was actually created by one of the few episodes of neat interchange through the midfield.  A lesson perhaps?

The second goal was also well-worked, Hulse and Kermogant both involved in the move at the beginning as well as at the end, finishing off Green's perfect low cross to put the game beyond the visitors.

As my last post suggested, if our away form to date can be explained by more than just mediocre opposition, then this season could really surpass all reasonable expectations. 

As the quality of opposition at The Valley degrades as the League table suggests it will, then even average performances may be enough to pick up wins. 

Last night provided supporting evidence.

Here are my player ratings:

Hamer 7 - flapped a couple of times, but distribution was good and handling generally secure;
Solly 8 - the team's outstanding player; so much more effective on the right
Seabourne 6 - a solid unspectacular short-term answer; Nigel Adkins can safely delete his mobile no. though
Morrison 7 - the team's on-pitch leader even if he isn't wearing the armband
Cort 6 - causes nervous moments when the ball is on the floor, but wins vital headers
Pritchard 6 - helps Solly immensely by tracking back, but lack of quality is painful to watch
Jackson 6 - one of his better games but the opposition midfield highlighted his limitations
Frimpong 5 - on this performance Cazorla and Arteta need not fear for their places
Kerkar 6 - never stops trying and occasionally got into good positions, but no end product
Fuller 7 - service was poor so he had to take matters into his own hands; a quality act
Kermogant 6 - struggled to get involved; realistically should be 3rd choice target man
---
Green 7 - Powell's natural conservativeness will see Pritchard usually preferred; shame
Hulse 7 - added some energy upfront; more mobile than Kermogant

Home and Away

The mood amongst Charlton fans has shifted in the space of just eleven days from manic depressive to cautiously optimistic.

Three wins in a row within the context of some meaningful additions to the squad, has even had some fans (including me) daring to look up to Blackburn in 6th place, just five points away.

Indeed a glance at the league table more generally reveals a rather extraordinary statistic:

We have played only one of the bottom half teams at home (namely Barnsley).

Given that we have played eight League games already, this is rather surprising. 

The observation is slightly self-fulfiling because our home form has been so poor (only 8 points from 8 games) and thus 14 points have 'leaked out' of The Valley into the points total of the sides we have played, thus aiding their League position.

Putting this slight bias to one side, it remains true that the average current League position of the 8 teams we have played at home is just 6.5. 

Meanwhile the average current League position of the 9 teams we have played away from home is 16.4, almost ten League positions worse.

It is worth noting that the most 'extreme' possible version of this effect (ie. if our home games had all been against the top 8, and our away games had all been against the bottom 9) would only give an average League position of 4.5 and 20 respectively, compared to 6.5 and 16.4 actual. 

Meanwhile the observation shows little sign of letting up with the teams sitting in 7th and 8th place currently (Brighton and Huddersfield) visiting The Valley between now and Dec 8th.

The extent of this odd distribution of fixtures is perhaps best represented optically via the current League table (with teams we have played at home and away represented in red and blue respectively):

Palace
Cardiff
Middlesboro'
Hull
Leicester
Blackburn
Brighton
Huddersfield
Millwall
Forest
Watford
Blackpool
Derby
Charlton
Burnley
Wolves
Bolton
Leeds
Birmingham
Barnsley
Sheff Wed
Ipswich
Bristol City
Peterborough

There are a few potential conclusions one might be able to draw from this seemingly important observation.

Firstly, it is not surprising perhaps that our home form has been poor.  In short, we have played the best teams.

However the key question (which ultimately will dictate where we finish the season) is whether our materially better away form is simply explained also by the polar opposite (ie. we've played the poorest teams), or whether we are also inherently better equipped tactically to play away from home.

If the answer rests more with the latter then the conclusion is quite optimistic. 

Notwithstanding the fact that we simply don't play as well at home, we should pick up proportionately more points because the opposition will be worse. 

Likewise, whilst the current heady rate of points accumulation (15 from 9 games) will likely degrade to some degree, the team's inherent strengths on the road should nonetheless keep the points total ticking over nicely. 

Cue a realistic push for the play-offs.

If the answer however rests more with the former, then we may be in for a nasty shock despite sitting pretty right now.

As the quality of opposition away from home improves, the pressure on the impressive defence proves too much (particularly given our ongoing problem with keeping possession). 

Meanwhile the inability to break teams down consistently at home remains, regardless of weaker opposition.  Fans get frustrated and nervous as a result, impacting the players.

Cue a worrying flirtation with the relegation zone.

My personal view is that the optimistic conclusion is more likely.

Even discounting for weak opposition, I think the away form (particularly defensively) is too good to be explained away so easily. 

Nine goals conceded on the road is the joint best in the division after all, and it's been achieved with arguably the team's best player (Wiggins) missing for the majority.

Indeed regardless of which conclusion one draws, it is likely that the squad available in the remaining 29 games will be stronger than that available in the 17 so far (as injured players return and reinforcements play a part).

Things may be about to get very interesting.


Dragon Slayers

I was in sunny San Francisco instead of a chilly Valley on Tuesday night, and having sat through so much midweek dross in recent seasons, typically I missed a veritable goal-fest. 

However my friend and fellow supporter Chris was there and was kind enough to pen an honest and thorough account of the night's action which I thought it would a shame not to share:

Contrary to what you may have read elsewhere, or inferred from what you've read, Powell actually set up with a 4-5-1.

That was as I'd have expected after the Middlesborough disaster, but the personnel he chose was a surprise, to me anyway.

One change I did anticipate was Solly moving back to left back with Morrison then replacing him at right back.

I think fans have misunderstood Powell's logic since Wiggins has been injured.

My take is that his decision making has been driven more by his thoughts about Lawrie Wilson than about where to play Solly or by doubts about Evina.

He eventually played Evina not because he suddenly decided he was good enough, but because Wilson, whilst playing at right-back, suggested he could also play right midfield.

Powell was then impressed by how well Wilson and Solly worked together and so chose to compromise defensive integrity to retain that combination when Evina himself got injured.

Hence, he played Kerkar at left-back vs. 'Boro. With Wilson out for Cardiff, the reaction was obvious.

I was a bit surprised, however, to see Dervite drop back to replace Morrison alongside Cort, not because I have doubts about Dervite, per se, but because it made the midfield less solid.

The middle three was then, from right to left, Pritchard, Stephens and Jackson. Of those three, the only one with sufficient quality to play at this level is Stephens, but Pritchard does have a great engine.

The idea, I assumed, was to contain and, when possible, get the ball out to Haynes on the right and Kerkar on the left.

I watched Haynes' movement very carefully early in the game and there is no doubt he was playing in the wide position in a 4-5-1 ie. Hulse was on his own up front.

After 35 minutes I was wondering whether I'd bother to renew my season ticket for next season in League One.

Cardiff were 2-0 ahead and, whilst both goals may have been disappointing from a defensive point of view, there was a huge chasm between the two sides in terms of composure and quality on the ball.

Cardiff passed and moved elegantly and effectively whilst Charlton were unable to string two passes together. It was simply embarrassing and the result seemingly an inevitability.

By this time Charlton had gone 4-4-2 with Haynes pushed forward alongside Hulse, Pritchard on the right of midfield, where he is unquestionably less effective than when deployed more centrally, leaving central midfield patrolled by Stephens and the struggling, sluggish Jackson.

We looked a poor side, painfully lacking in quality and without an obvious game plan.

Football is a funny old game though and that phrase could have been invented for what happened on Tuesday evening.

On 38 minutes, Michael Morrison, looking uncomfortable at right back and without any real control over the football, booted it high and aimlessly into the Cardiff penalty area.

It was the kind of random, pressured football, played with neither purpose nor control that had characterised Charlton's performance to that point in the game.

However, underpressure from Hulse, Marshall, the hapless Cardiff keeper, failed to catch the ball cleanly.

The loose ball found its way to Jackson who finished calmly and cleanly. It was a surreal moment.

Jackson reacted as if he'd scored a late consolation goal in a heavy defeat whilst I half-expected the referee to give a foul against Hulse. However the goal stood and it was 1-2.

On the stroke of half-time a Kerkar corner found Jackson completely unmarked in a central position. A terrific header. 2-2. What? How did that happen?

Cardiff must have spent their half-time break shocked, confused and disorientated.

Charlton, on the other hand, must have been buzzing. Beaten and depressed, they were now alive and kicking.

Cardiff came out early after half-time and were kept waiting by a Charlton side that must still have been listening to Chris Powell repeating the scoreline. "I know it feels like 0-4, but it's 2-2. They're better than us, but we can win this".

The second half started slowly, but Cardiff's confident rhythm and swagger had deserted them and it was clear that Charlton were, indeed, back in the game.

On 53 minutes the Addicks won a free kick midway into the Cardiff half but right out on the left touch line; my seat at the front of the Upper West gave me a perfect view of the trajectory towards goal.

I wondered if Stephens could repeat the outstanding deliveries into the box he'd managed on more than one occasion in the first half. He couldn't.

It was immediately obvious that he'd over hit his cross. It was going to sail aimlessly beyond the Charlton players waiting to compete for it. In fact, it was way too high; very disappointing. But wait, hang on....you're kidding, it's actually going in!

What did Napoleon say about lucky generals?

Twelve minutes later it was 5-2! Charlton were now playing with confidence, freedom, pace and conviction. Cardiff had simply lost it.

Panicky at the back, their confidence in midfield had deserted them completely. Charlton were first to the second ball.

Most of the crowd must have been wondering what they had drunk along with their half-time tea. It was hard to believe.

A superb piece of skill by Pritchard had set up Haynes and Kerkar had set up Hulse for a simple headed goal.

Stephens was now dominant as Charlton surged forward. Haynes's pace threatened to destroy Cardiff's shell-shocked defence, whilst anybody questioning the Board's determination to support Chris Powell only had to watch the excellent loanee Hulse lead the line.

It was an extraordinary turnaround. A dramatic example of the impact confidence and momentum can have on a game of football.

Then Danny Haynes pulled up and lay, agonisingly on the left touch line. Not the hamstring again? He made a funereal march to the bench. Completely distraught he was comforted by Chris Powell.

Wright-Phillips entered the fray, but Charlton lost the high tempo they'd been enjoying. Perhaps that was inevitable and Cardiff began to get back into the game, but surely the result was safe?

On 90 minutes Powell gave the classy Stephens the chance to milk the crowd's applause. How can anyone fail to recognise his quality and courage?

Danny Hollands was given the bonus of a late appearance; it's important to make everybody feel involved. The gaffer will think twice before making that change again.

Charlton were now unable to retain possession and Cardiff began to see more of the ball. Six minutes injury time? You must be joking! Where did that come from?

Still, it's 5-2 so we're home and dry.

But wait, a long hopeful ball down the middle. Cort fails to deal with it. 5-3.

The young man next to me made a flippant remark about the Cardiff celebration. You'll be panicking if they score another I told him.

Another long ball forward. Again the Charlton defence fails to deal with it. 5-4 and still a minute plus to go. You can't be serious? His head was in his hands.

Yet another long ball forward. Hamer comes and flaps. Another cross. Too long. Game over. Phew! Unbelievable.

In simple terms, a night where Charlton beat a much better side because they worked hard and got the breaks when they mattered.

In truth, a lucky win. Who cares though? A fantastic boost to confidence, collectively and individually.

It is possible to beat better sides. Work hard, be positive and press. Even good sides can look shaky when not given the time to play.

Of individual players, Michael Morrison is a star, but he's not a right back.

Chris Solly is a star and he's probably as good at left back as he is at right back.

Leon Cort? Hmmm. Not sure. Dervite looks decent, but something wasn't right at the back.

Powell needs Evina and then Wiggins back. In the meantime, he has a problem to solve as the Dan Seabourne loan proves.

Haynes's pace makes him a threat, but it is not obvious he's got the quality needed. An option from the bench perhaps?

Hulse, the best striker bar Fuller.

Stephens can play. The midfield is weak though.

There's much work to do yet, but with Fuller, Wilson and Wiggins back we should be ok.

We've now played the top five teams at home.

Ironically, had we won the games against Watford and Barnsley we'd be looking great, just one point off sixth place! The margins are very fine indeed.

Possessed

As I’ve tried to emphasise on numerous previous posts, it is lazy to pay too much attention to results and not enough to performances. 

Given football is inherently a low-scoring game, the former are riddled with ‘randomness’. 

 

The latter however ultimately will drive overall season performance, and is in turn driven by much less volatile factors like payroll, transfer budget, managerial prowess and coaching.

Readers of this blog will know that I was very critical of our performance against Leicester (despite winning the game), and was very impressed by the quality of the visitors that night. 

Not surprisingly to me at least, since that balmy late-summer evening Charlton have picked up 5 points from 7, whilst Leicester have picked up 15 points from 7.

So within this context, how does one assess last night’s performance against Watford?

Given that it was clearly a true ‘game of two halves’ (with the highly impressive Forestieri sent off on the stroke of half-time), then one must assess it in two parts.

The first half was fairly even with Watford playing the neater football but without much penetration. 

 

Chelsea loanee and England U-19 starlet Nathaniel Chalobah was particularly impressive, varying the pace of the game in a way that I can only wish a Charlton central midfielder could.

Their goal was the result of some rare sloppy defending, a low driven corner wasn’t intercepted before Tommie Hoban’s header ended up in the back of the net via at least one deflection.

Charlton bounced back however with the type of goal which almost frustrates as much as it excites, because it proves that we can create some high-quality chances through the central midfield (we just do it so rarely).

Some neat work from Kerkar saw the ball fed to Stephens in space, and his early pass picked out Fuller’s run to perfection – the Jamaican’s finish was controlled and impressive, as indeed was his play for most of the evening. 

Whilst Kermogant brings a greater aerial threat, Fuller’s ability to take the ball and face the opposition goal makes him a considerably more potent player than the Frenchman.

The goal had been Charlton’s only chance of the first-half so whilst the game was 11 against 11, one could hardly claim that we had dominated the game up until that point.

However with Powell given the luxury of a half-time teamtalk knowing his side would emerge against 10 men, my expectations for the second half performance were ratcheted up to a large extent. 

Ignoring the actual result, did we fulfil these expectations?  No, not really.

When teams go to a 4-4-1 in this situation, from an attacking point of view not much has changed.  You are still facing two banks of four infront of the keeper.

However importantly the depleted side have no realistic chance of holding the ball up in attack, and thus those aforementioned banks of four never get any respite. 

Thus a patient approach which emphasises maintaining possession, probing and waiting for space to emerge around a tiring side would seem the best approach, particularly with 45 minutes to play.

For the first 15 minutes or so this seemed to be the plan and there were some promising signs.  Wright-Phillips twice went close, the first effort self-made and impressive; the second brilliantly created by Fuller and rather wasted, albeit under pressure.

Fuller meanwhile carved out a good chance of his own, a superb first touch opening up a yard of space in the box, his angled drive well blocked by Watford’s Ben Hamer-lookalike, Manuel Almunia.

But then it just seemed to go awry – there’s no doubting we continued to dominate possession (but then so we should), but we seemed to be trying too hard, bombing forward with heads down and pumping balls into the box long before the clock might have demanded it. 

Watford’s back four defended manfully, winning most first headers and putting bodies in the way of speculative shots, most notably from Stephens.

In the 70^th minute with Watford having shown precious little sign of threatening to take all three points, a silly free-kick conceded by Cort was immaculately fired home by Swiss international Almen Abdi.

There was no need for panic with 20 minutes plus injury time left, but clearly some change was required with Charlton’s momentum having already stalled by the hour mark. 

However not only did it take an inexplicable seven minutes for some much-needed substitutions (if only for the benefit of fresh legs against tired ones), but the ‘Plan B’ was even less imaginative than the ‘Plan A’ had become. 

We ended the game with a unique 2-4-4 formation with Cort joining Hulse, Fuller and Wright-Phillips in a forward quartet.  For a Watford side that had dealt comfortably with everything thrown high into the box, it must have been a welcome sight. 

Whilst a draw would have been a fairer result, Charlton’s lack of imagination in possession certainly did not warrant what would have been a vital three points. 

The extent of second half possession should have been a given when playing 11 against 10 at home – it’s what you do with that possession that dictates whether we did indeed ‘batter’ the Hornets as some oddly rose-tinted supporters suggested on the web.

It’s a familiar refrain and with trips to Leeds, Blackpool and Wolves to come before October is over, it quickly needs to change.

Here are my ratings:

Hamer 5: had little to do, but spilled an early shot and inexplicably handled a late back pass that could have put the game beyond reach

Solly 6 – he is compromised going forward because he can’t whip a cross in with his left foot; solid defensively as always

Wilson 6 – seemed to enjoy the extra freedom that playing 10 men gave him, and ended the game in midfield; improving

Cort 5 – did not seem to enjoy facing the muscular presence of Troy Deeney; late foul was costly

Morrison 6 – he will have tougher evenings than this; the deficiencies lay further forward

Green 4 – oddly anonymous after Saturday’s man-of-the-match performance; correctly withdrawn

Kerkar 6 – never seems to have the ball fully under control, but his workrate is impressive

Hollands 3 – patently not good enough for this level; runs like a middle-aged marathon runner looking to go sub-5 hours

Stephens 7 – sublime pass for Fuller’s goal and comfortably the best midfielder, but didn’t really ‘step up to the plate’ in the 2^nd half when needed; late chance could have salvaged a point

Fuller 8 – different class at this level even if his legs are beginning to go; first touch shows what it takes to be a Premiership player

Wright-Phillips 6 – 1 goal in 11 now; no faulting his attitude but a non-scoring striker is a passenger in an already struggling side

--

Pritchard 5 – not on for long, but like Hollands he patently doesn’t have the class for this level

Hulse 4 – a succession of lost headers was the story of the team’s whole night

Stumbling on Happiness

I took my 3-year old son to his first Charlton game on Saturday, and it went remarkably well.
I bought seats towards the front of the West Lower which whilst not affording the type of perspective offered higher up, it is infact an ideal spot for a youngster as they definitely feel more engaged in the action.

Indeed with our seats towards the South end of the ground, even a 3-year old could detect that Danny Green was having a bit of a blinder, and there was no doubt who his favourite player was when I quizzed him afterwards.

It transpires that the 4-4-1-1 formation utilised on Saturday came about largely by accident with Ricardo Fuller’s late withdrawal leaving Powell without a target man (or at least one he was confident enough to throw into this fixture).

However even though the ‘1’ at the head of the formation (Wright-Phillips) was left rather marginalised, it was soon apparent that the extra man in midfield was giving Hollands and Stephens the ability to dominate affairs, perhaps for the first time this season.

Johnnie Jackson did a reasonable enough job ‘in the hole’ but I wonder whether the more mobile likes of Scott Wagstaff or Bradley Pritchard might add more there longer-term, assuming Powell persists with the formation. 

Indeed we looked more potent when Jackson was replaced by Pritchard shortly after half-time whilst perhaps not coincidentally, Blackburn barely left their own half for the remainder of the game.

Speaking of Blackburn, the suggestion that the players were fully behind Steve Kean all along was given further impetus by this performance, which appeared remarkably casual in the absence of their troubled former manager. 

Whilst a point against a side packed with the likes of Robinson, Murphy, Olsson, Etuhu, Murphy, Gomes and Rhodes would have been considered satisfactory pre-match, it was a cause for frustration that the extra two points were not forthcoming.

Perhaps having clung on against Leicester earlier in the season, there was a degree of fortune evening itself out as it inevitably does.

Blackburn’s goal was class however and if one was brutally truthful, Charlton’s central midfield rarely looked like carving open the Blackburn defence with similarly slick passing even if they maintained possession better than in previous weeks.

The multitude of chances that we did create were more often generated either by some outstanding wingplay (particularly by Green), or by a succession of corners and long throw-ins aimed at the significant frame of Leon Cort.

Incidentally William Hill have been offering 16/1 on Cort to ‘score at anytime’ throughout our games this season, odds which appear generous given his importance at set pieces.

Defensively we were rarely troubled aside from the goal, but there is undoubtedly a sense of real solidity at the back which bodes well for the months ahead. 

Lawrie Wilson looked comfortable at right-back, whilst Michael Morrison was every inch the rock hard central defender.  Indeed our vantage point afforded us the luxury of seeing just how good he is at close quarters – Rhodes never stood a chance.

Eight games may not be considered statistically significant, but there does seem to be a pattern emerging and it is one that is not altogether surprising given what we know about Charlton’s strengths and weaknesses.

Nine goals scored places us joint in the goalscoring table with Birmingham, and above only lowly Ipswich and Peterborough. 

Meanwhile ten goals conceded is as good or better than all but six teams, all of which occupy a top seven spot.

I think we can be confident of not getting thumped too often this season, but there remains question marks regarding our midfield guile and goalscoring potency (eg. BWP has managed just 1 goal in his last 10 League appearances incidentally).

Here are my player ratings:

Hamer 7 – blameless for the goal and otherwise had little to do

Wilson 7 – supported Green when required and looked comfortable in possession

Solly 6 – possibly at fault for the goal but otherwise did his usual cleaning up jobs admirably

Morrison 8 – one first-half tackle could have been heard on the other side of the river

Cort 8 – a real handful at set-pieces – Watford’s more mobile forwards may offer more threat

Hollands 7 – far more impressive than previous weeks, benefitting from needing to do one third less work

Stephens 7 – if he is genuinely Premiership class, then I still expect more – tries to be the metronome with varying success

Green 8 – occasionally chose the wrong option but a constant menace – looks more comfortable in the Championship oddly

Kerkar 7 – strange to see such a tall wide midfielder but linked up well when required though rarely able to get around his full-back

Jackson 6 – may fulfil the ‘free role’ more competently if the lone striker is a true hold-up man (BWP patently isn’t)

Wright-Phillips 5 – not really his fault, but worked hard for little reward – needs a goal badly

--

Pritchard 7 – not technically gifted but provides plenty of energy – needs classier midfielders around him

The TransferCo Concept

A group of Charlton fans are taking steps to set up a Supporters Trust, with the stated aim, "To preserve Charlton Athletic for this and future generations."

I was asked by the interim Chair of the Trust (Barnie Razzell) to publicise this process, and I am happy to do so. Any fans looking for more information can find it here.

However as I explained briefly in an amicable email correspondance with Barnie, I was a little sceptical about what a Trust could realistically achieve, although conversely it can't do much harm either.

My scepticism rests inevitably upon money, the lack of which may render the Trust powerless whether in a confrontational situation or a supportive one (particularly when dealing with owners who are not 'true' fans).

As it happens alongwith a fellow supporter, I have been toying around with another concept for nearly two years now, dating back to the pre-Jimenez/Slater days.

The takeover appeared to render my concept moot, but recent developments have brought it firmly back onto the table now that funds to spend on transfers are seemingly unavailable again.

It is not an alternative to a Trust but potentially represents a way for supporters to get involved, help the team directly, be aligned with the owners and perhaps even generate a healthy financial return too.

The plan very roughly is as follows, and before anyone draws attention to the fact that it perhaps rings some bells from the 1980s, yes I did help to buy Ronnie Moore.

Key to the attractiveness of the proposal is the fact that banks have essentially stopped lending to football clubs, and understandably so.

Thus in the absence of directors' loans (which Charlton have historically relied upon), funds for new transfers can only be generated by selling players, or from operational cashflow.

The former usually weakens the squad in the long-term (the Carl Jenkinson situation was unusual in this sense), whilst the latter is unrealistic in the context of existing deficits.

Everyone knows that medium-sized football clubs are inherently unprofitable, but some aspects of their operations are potentially very profitable. 

Traditional loans to a football club (whether by banks or directors) are used to fund the entire unprofitable operation, but what if loans could be directed specifically towards only the potentially profitable part?

The first formal step in my alternative proposal would be to incorporate a limited company (hereafter termed 'TransferCo'), ostensibly to act as a cash shell at least in the near-term, but in the medium-term to invest in a specific opportunity (see below).

TransferCo's Articles would state that it was in the business of investing in undervalued footballing talent, or something similar.

Directors would need to be appointed, probably selected from those fans keen to be involved and with the time and inclination to do so.

Administration costs (eg. legal, audit etc.) would likely be relatively low throughout given the simplicity of its business, and may well be available from suitably qualified fans on a pro bono basis.

At this point (or perhaps even before), the Directors of TransferCo would approach the club to explain their proposal and hopefully receive some clear 'buy-in'.

The aim as you have no doubt worked out would be to lend the club funds to sign a player but one who has certain important characteristics as follows:

1. the target player(s) should be young (probably 18-21 years old) in order to reduce the 'Bosman risk' in subsequent years, and to provide a longer runway for improvement;

2. the target player(s) should have very clear potential to improve as a player and be receptive to good coaching and mentoring (qualitative factors like character etc. are key here); and

3. the target player(s) should nonetheless be ready for first team action if not immediately, then at least very soon (thus clearly improving the existing squad).

Realistically the target player(s) would already be impressing at League One or Two level, or alternatively on the fringe of Premiership or Championship sides.

Clearly it would be the club's prerogative to provide a shortlist of suitable targets (in the usual way), but equally the Directors of TransferCo would expect to ask important questions especially regarding 'value for money'.

The advantage of having even a very small but real cash transfer budget is that the universe of free transfers, loan signings and out-of-contract players is by definition relatively small and compromised.

Moreover transfer funds saved by recruiting from the above pool is often offset by higher wages and signing-on fees, as canny agents recognise this obvious arbitrage.

The second and most important step would be to issue shares in TransferCo, with the aim of raising say £250,000 for the first acquisition.

This may sound like an unrealistic amount of money, but I would argue it is not so long as shares are offered to a wide enough section of fans.

For example, the following contributions would achieve the fundraising target:

5 x £10,000
50 x £1,000
200 x £250
1000 x £100
TOTAL: £250,000

Minimum investment could be set relatively low (at say £100) to encourage wide participation, and this should not discourage fans able to invest more since their ownership stake would obviously be commensurately higher.

Moreover because of the possibility of a financial return (see below), shares could be offered more widely than to just 'regular' fans. For example local companies, former Charlton players and former directors could be approached too.

Once the monies had been raised and a potential transfer target found (and terms agreed with the selling club), then TransferCo would lend the club money for the sole purpose of completing the transaction, possibly secured on some club assets.

I have not for the timebeing considered the implications of the selling club demanding 'add-ons' (for appearances, promotion etc.), but I'm confident these can be ironed out perhaps simply by offering more cash upfront (since said cash is now readily available).

I would suggest that the money be lent with a moderate interest rate of say 5% (in the current climate), perhaps to accumulate and be payable only upon repayment of the full loan (see next step).

The loan would become payable upon the earlier of the following:

1. an agreed date in the future (say 4 years from the transfer date);
2. the transfer of the player's registration to another club;
3. promotion to the Premier League;
4. injury-forced retirement of the player (presumably triggering an insurance payout).

In addition as a 'kicker', TransferCo would be entitled to a percentage share (say 25%) of any profits made if/when the player is transferred to another club.

From a pure cashflow perspective, it is clearly in the club's interests to opt for repayment in scenario 2. versus 1..

Scenario 3. would be terrific and repayment of the loan can easily be made from the additional revenues promotion would generate. Scenario 4. would be unfortunate but somewhat improbable.

Thus there is clearly an incentive for the player to be used, improved and then sold on for profit.

This may appear to be somewhat self-defeating, but the club still benefits from the player's performances for 2-3 seasons and can recycle any excess cash into new signings if it wishes.

In recent times, perhaps Nicky Bailey represents the best example of this type of approach in action - a raw talent from the lower leagues, he was nonetheless good enough to both make an instant impression and improve sufficiently to attract a sizeable bid 2-3 years down the line.

Perhaps the beauty of this overall proposal is the ability to do it multiple times, either from the same TransferCo, or via several TransferCos of varying sizes (each liquidated upon repayment, and funds returned to shareholders).

It is reasonable to ask why the club would entertain this prospect at all, and indeed I'm honest enough to acknowledge that it is a proposal which would likely have received a better hearing under the previous fans-led administration.

Nonetheless with the club's finances apparently severely challenged at the present time, there is clearly a potential alignment of interests here - all other things being equal, both the owners and fans want a stronger playing squad.

Most interestingly perhaps, it is clear that Tony Jimenez fancies himself as an identifier and developer (via his appointed coaching staff) of footballing talent.

Without wishing to opine upon the relative contributions of owners/scouts/management/coaches, the evidence in just the past two seasons of the likes of Rhoys Wiggins, Michael Morrison, Dale Stephens and Ben Hamer (all signed for a fee) suggests there may indeed be grounds for hope. 

After all each has undoubtedly been a key player since joining, and has a current market value well in excess surely of the fees originally paid.

I'd be very keen to hear your views on the above concept - all comments welcome.

Red Leicester

Relativity is a funny thing.

When Charlton were relegated in 2007, the opening home game of the Championship season versus Scunthorpe felt like a nasty taste of cold turkey.

Now that we are back at that level via a promotion, the opening home game had a tangible sense of ‘occasion’ even despite a mildly disappointing crowd of 16,658.

By comparison our first midweek home game of the aforementioned 2007/8 season (versus Norwich) attracted a crowd of over 21,000, suggesting several thousand fans have sadly been lost during the course of the last few tumultuous years.

It’s a shame that more weren't there to see it because on last night’s evidence, there will be plenty of entertainment on show and whilst Charlton will lack the quality of some of the division’s better sides, they will more than match them for heart. 

There was no doubting the quality of Charlton’s two first-half finishes though, both devastating yet from what were barely half chances.

Leicester looked shell-shocked and two half-time substitutions signalled intent, and indeed the degree to which Andy King subsequently bossed the midfield (more about that later) suggests Nigel Pearson’s team selection may have been wrong to begin with.

It was no surprise meanwhile that Jermaine Beckford did not appear for the second half after a display which bordered on the casual – a fairlytale career which seemed set to take him from non-League to Premiership stardom stalled badly once he reached the highest level, and he now barely looks Championship quality on this evidence.

The second half was one-way traffic with Charlton not carving out a single opening, whilst the Foxes created four gilt-edged chances, yet only converting one.  

Had Jamie Vardy scored with a late point-blank header, few Charlton fans could have complained a draw wasn’t a fair result but given the cruel way points were lost at Birmingham, perhaps we deserved some good fortune.

The degree to which the Charlton midfield went awol in the second half must be a cause for concern however, especially with little in the way of more compelling alternatives in the squad. 

Bradley Pritchard provided an energetic link between defence and attack (notably during the build-up to the opening goal), but I question whether he has the quality on the ball to make a real impact at this level – then again the same could be said of Scott Wagstaff.

The less said about the contributions of Stephens, and particularly Hollands and Jackson the better – the latter two would look slow next to a stationary vehicle, but perhaps in League One this was less of a factor.  Worryingly Lawrie Wilson also looked off the pace during his late cameo.

With Kermogant and now Ricardo Fuller providing obvious outlets for a ball that bypasses the midfield entirely, perhaps we can succeed merely by being a little direct and maintaining a high tempo, but to the extent we can do some business in the final days of the window, we are desperate for some midfield back-up.

Without it I sense a midtable season, which (financial implications notwithstanding) would suit most of us just fine.

Here are my player ratings:

Hamer 8 – safe handling when called upon although his defence left him exposed at times

Solly 6 – rarely able to bomb forward, but dependable when required defensively

Wiggins 7 – great quality on the ball though went missing for Dyer’s golden second half chance

Cort 6 – at nearly 33 years old, he is slow on the turn (notably in the first half) but terrific in the air and reads the game well

Morrison 7 – looked more comfortable than his defensive partner; a vital player

Jackson 4 – I’ve never been his biggest fan, and for once at least I had some justification – virtually anonymous

Stephens 5 – great early promise at the start of last season has not been fulfilled – game went on around him in the second half

Hollands 4 – not good enough at this level I’m afraid

Pritchard 7 – as mentioned, in the team for his running (just don’t expect any moments of genius)

Kermogant 6 – won his fair share of headers and scored a great goal, but he lacks mobility to get behind defences facing goal

Wright-Phillips 8 – looked the player we all hope he could be for us this season; hard-working, pacy and devastating when called upon

Wilson, Cook, Kerkar – late substitutes