Roland and his Hubris

Dictionary definition: Hubris means extreme pride or self-confidence. Hubris often indicates a loss of contact with reality and an overestimation of one’s own competence,accomplishments or capabilities, especially when the person exhibiting it is in a position of power.

An example of this would be selling your best player and goal scoring threat because you are the new owner and you want to demonstrate who is boss.

7 thoughts on “Roland and his Hubris

  1. totally agree. Been saying this since he sold Yann. Such a very stupid decision and I think we will be relegated because of this decision.

  2. Also agree. Yann’s transfer was as bad as “sacking” Chris Powell. And don’t forget Animal, that had a bid come in for Morrison, he too would’ve gone. And that would have definitely spelt THE END. I still believe there’s something he’s not telling anyone.
    Could someone please let me know if the rumour is true that the owner will save a few £million if we get relegated? A clause he was rumoured to have had inserted into the purchase contract with Slatter & Jiminez.

  3. Or you do not think he is worth 15,000 a week for 2 years, 5 goals in 6 months and 3 months injured.A bit of Hubris going on with some of you bloggers !

  4. Thanks for commenting . I guess in a world where we were prepared to pay the full wages of both Chris Eagles & Connor Wickham ,not to mention Johnny Williams & Leon Best whilst he has already scored 5 goals in 9 games for Bournemouth , my answer is Yes – to the worth question – not to the hubris !

    • It seems extraordinary that CAFC were prepared to pay the wages in full of the players that you mentioned. I know that money isn’t the only consideration for players, it was reported for instance that Best wanted to stay for family reasons in the North. It does however beg the question of why Charlton have failed so miserably to sign so many of the reported targets. I had assumed that it was probably a question of wages but maybe not.

  5. I doubt very much we were willing to pay the full wages of these players , normally the club who owns the players contract pays a % of the wages, so a 3 month loan player on part wages may well be more attractive than a 2 year contract for a injury prone 32 year old .I did not want Yann to leave either , but he was offered a new contract and if Bournmouth had not come in for him he would have signed very happily. In the end it was his decision and RD should not be vilified in such a way for trying to keep players wages in perspective.

    • I really have no idea as to the financial agreements involved around the various loan targets that CAFC were trying to sign, perhaps I misunderstood Albury Addick’s post?. If there were to be some clarification to be had with regard to the question of Charlton’s wage % commitment for some of the loan targets then it might be worth looking more closely at the financial case that you put for the three month loan player versus Kermorgant (on the basis of course that the 15,000.00 that you cite as Yann’s wage demand is correct). Of course RD has saved on all counts given that Charlton failed to secure the striker that Riga wanted. Unfortunately that failure could yet cost CAFC their Championship status.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s