Bag Restrictions Not Required By New Legislation, Clubs Taking Cheap & Easy Way Out

I don’t think there’s any doubt that the new bag restrictions policy introduced by Charlton for games/events at The Valley - and it appears many other football clubs - is driven by convenience and a desire to save money, by taking the cheap way out, despite the inconvenience to supporters. The basic reason it appears – and just why Charlton and other clubs don’t acknowledge this I’ve no idea, unless it might expose that there are other options available other than restricting bag size to A4 – is compliance with The Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Act 2025, otherwise known as Martyn’s Law, which has received Royal Assent with new rules expected to come into force in spring 2027 (ie before the end of the current season).

Charlton restricts itself to commenting that the new bag policy is in order “to ensure the safety and security of entry of all spectators”. Brentford go into more detail, stating openly that new bag restrictions (ie the A4 rule) are in line with “incoming crowd safety legislation” which, the club states on its site, “requires Brentford to demonstrate enhanced, robust security arrangements”. It adds that “we must now tighten our bag policy to comply with incoming legislation and align with best safety and security practise across major UK sport and entertainment venues”. Chelsea are a little more vague, stating that “the bag policy is one of the measures we have in place for the safety and security of everyone attending our matches”.

So let’s be clear. The new legislation does not require bag restrictions. Clubs, such as Brentford, attempting to present new policies as required by the new legislation are quite frankly not being truthful. Note that Brentford actually give a dual reason for the change: first, to comply with new legislation (not true); second, to align with best practise (which is a choice, not a legal requirement, and the definition of best practise is of course subjective). Clubs are quite within their rights to imposes new regulations for entry to the venue, but it is a choice.

You get a clue to the real motivation from another justification for the bag restrictions. “Reducing the size and number of bags entering the stadium limits the opportunities for prohibited or dangerous items to be concealed and also speeds up bag searches, reducing queues for supporters”. Ah. So there is no legal requirement to reduce bag size, let alone to the absurd A4, but it is so that fewer staff are required to deal with bag searches and no special equipment is needed. It is common practise at many venues to put a bag through an X-ray scan or similar, to go through one yourself. But clubs don’t have the machines in place, don’t want to spend the money on them, don’t want to bring in additional staff to handle bags, and to be fair want to avoid what would probably be time delays getting into the ground. But there is nothing to prevent clubs from having a dedicated turnstile/entrance for people with bags, for these bags to be searched/X-rayed. Those wishing to bring in a bag accept it will take longer to get in with one.

If anyone doubts that Martyn’s Law doesn’t advocate/require bag restrictions, take a look through it yourself:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-terrorism-protection-of-premises-act-2025/terrorism-protection-of-premises-act-2025-statutory-guidance

A cursory look at the legislation is sufficient to determine that The Valley and other football grounds fall under its definition of enhanced tier premises, so it is right and proper that clubs look at the new legislation and what might need to be done to comply with it. The legislation is actually more focused on how venues deal with a terrorist attack than options such as bag restrictions. Relevant sentences include: the legislation requires venues to “have in place, so far as reasonably practicable, appropriate public protection measures that could be reasonably expected to reduce both the vulnerability of the premises or event to an act of terrorism occurring and the risk of physical harm being caused to individuals if an attack occurs there or nearby”; and “those responsible for enhanced tier premises or events must also put in place measures to reduce their vulnerability to terrorism. These may be implemented through people (such as training), processes (such as a bag search policy) or physical measures (such as CCTV)”; and “… for example, there is little point in arranging search and screening of bags at a main entrance, if additional entrances or exits elsewhere at the premises are open and can be accessed without bag checks in place”. So the legislation talks of a possible ‘bag search policy’, not a need for restrictions on bags, just for measures to deal with them.

OK, so let’s assume that Charlton want to impose this A4 restriction, because everyone else is doing it (which counts for nothing). What can be done to limit the inconvenience for supporters? It is accepted that most supporters do not want to take bags into the ground and are unaffected. But some are, both home and away fans.

Lockers? Hardly. If the objective is to make it more difficult for a terrorist you don’t provide the opportunity to anonymously put a bag in a locker. Bag storage areas? OK in principle, but for a start don’t charge for the service. Bloody ridiculous and offensive. Supporters are now asked to pay for the privilege of complying with a new restriction imposed at the whim of the club. And make it accessible to both home and away fans (which in practise means two different locations). Transparent bags? Also ridiculous and offensive to ask fans to pay for them. In any event these do not address the needs of a supporter who has a bag with him/her.

Why did I bother with all of this? Personal interest for sure. I’m planning a trip for October, to take in the Bristol City game at The Valley, go up north to visit a friend, then train back to Burnley for the away game at Turf Moor before back to London then France. That means I’d be carrying a small backpack, an easyjet-compatible one, for clothes and toiletries. In light of Charlton’s policy change I thought I’d better check what Burnley do.

Checked out the Burnley FC website and it states that ‘Small bags/backpacks – must be able to fit under your seat’. Great, I thought, my bag will comply with that. To double check I emailed, using the address provided. There was a prompt and helpful reply: “I can confirm that small backpacks are allowed at the Turf Moor, and we’d ask that you just store this under your seat”. All is well. Until the next day when I received another email, from a different person at the club. “We do not allow bags that exceed an A4 size”. I have sent another email to ask for clarification on which is correct. The second email added that “we offer a storage service where you can leave your belongings with us; however, you might find it difficult to move between this space and our away end, especially post-match”. So as much use as a chocolate teapot to someone hoping to get a supporters’ coach back to London. Pending clarification, seems my only option is to either not take my bag with me (ie try to wear the changes of clothes) or arrange to meet the Charlton coaches arriving at the ground (assuming there are some) and to put my bag on one of them for the post-match return.

I don’t add this to embarrass Burnley in any way, just seems that there is considerable confusion around the (possible) new restrictions. And I very much doubt if my case is unique. Are clubs really unable to deal with a supporter wishing to take into the ground a bag which will fit under the seat, one who is happy to have it searched/emptied etc?

Glass Half-Full Or Half-Empty After Another Draw?

Portsmouth at home. A club which has spent big in the summer and is, like us, looking to improve on last season’s standing in the Championship. They did the double over us last season and we played poorly in both games, so we undoubtedly owed them one, although there can never be bad feeling towards the club that came to The Valley as the opposition for that game and played their part by losing. They’ve had a mixed start to the season, two wins and three defeats, but won last time out. We just hoped before the game for, in order of priority: the points, a decent performance, a decent game of football (ie not another against teams prioritising keeping possession over scoring goals), no fresh injuries, some coming back from injury.

What we got by just about every measure a glass half full/empty. The game itself was pretty even, quite entertaining, we didn’t play badly, should have been ahead at half-time, having spurned the best chance of the game, then watched as Okonkwu pulled off the save of the game early in the second half. Another ref bottled another important decision as at the close Leaburn is bundled over from behind in the box, protests waved away. A point and a clean sheet’s no bad outcome, but consecutive home games without scoring and two points from them when we were looking for more. We have no choice other than to take it and concentrate on the positives, including being two points off the top after seven games with just one defeat (albeit a bad one) rather than four games without a win and just one goal score.

The most important issue for the team was whether or not Leaburn would be available (or risked) after his early departure on Wednesday night, and how Jones would cope if he was not. And the good news was that he did make the team, while Jones made just two changes from QPR. McNamara returned from suspension and at left-back Mesik was chosen over Bell, who took a rest on the bench. Jones and Bindon would continue as the central pairing. Coventry and Skip would start as the defensive midfield pairing while in the three further forward Carey was back among the subs with Grant given the central spot, Campbell and Alli the two wider positions. With Mbick missing out through injury, Kelman was back as a substitute, along with Brooks, Bell, Ouma, Mwamba, Rankin-Costello, Knibbs, Carey and Nkeng.

As in other recent games we started the brighter of the teams. Alli forced their keeper into a rushed clearance which dropped to TC, but he couldn’t bring it under control, Coventry and Skipp played in Campbell but his low cross was gathered by their keeper, Mesik won the ball and Grant played it on for Leaburn, whose shot from a wide angle was saved, and Leaburn tussled for the ball and got it out to Campbell, whose cross was cleared at the near post – all in the first 10 minutes. To be fair Portsmouth had one early moment, when a pass into our box found one of theirs inexplicably on his own, but he miscontrolled it and the chance was gone.

After that opening Portsmouth did enjoy a better spell. Okonkwu was forced to block a low cross from their right, a forward waiting behind. But we continued to create openings. From a short free-kick TC lifted a cross to beyond the far post. It was headed back by Bindon but nobody was on hand to get a final decisive touch. And on 30 minutes Alli played the ball on to Grant, who took a good first touch and got in a decent shot from a tight angle which their keeper saved. And the real chance came from the resulting corner as a TC cross dropped for Alli alone at the far post but he lifted his effort over the bar. That one should have been us ahead.

At the break we were winning on points but that doesn’t count for much. Seven efforts on goal, three on target, against two and one for them. We simply hadn’t scored and you felt that the first goal for either side would prove crucial.

That goal very nearly came for them as we started the second half sloppily. We failed to clear our lines and from the edge of the area their guy put in a very good shot headed for inside the far post. Okonkwu got down to his left to make an excellent one-handed save, and get up again in time to prevent a corner. After that for some time it was a case of nearly but not quite for both sides. With the hour up we were looking tired and Portsmouth were putting us under the cosh, but for some reason there were no substitutions from Jones, while Portsmouth were introducing fresh legs.

Biden slipped and lost the ball, to be bailed out by Skipp with a very timely tackle. Finally, on 74 minutes we did have a change, with Kelman replacing a spent Alli. No change of formation as Grant moved wider right. A poor McNamara ball inside was intercepted and Portsmouth broke, Okonkwu eventually making a decent save. And on 80 minutes a Portsmouth low cross from their right went just beyond their lunging forward. Just needed a touch.

After that we did finish strongly as perhaps we were chasing the game. A corner taken short to TC, who played it square for Skipp, who in turn passed left for Coventry, but his shot went over the bar. And the big moment of the final stages came on 86 minutes as Grant had a shot blocked and with the ball up in the air Leaburn was waiting, only to be bundled over from behind before it dropped. Just how Ouma could be penalised as he was against Stoke and nothing was given this time can only be explained by crap refereeing. And after three minutes of stoppage time that was indeed that.

No doubt Jones will accentuate the positives, quite rightly point to the fixture list and injuries, and poor decisions by the officials. My only quibble would be we made just one substitution despite players being exhausted. Bell was an option in defence, Mwamba, and why Carey wasn’t introduced I don’t know. We had Carey, Knibbs and Rankin-Costello unused (while Apter isn’t making the squad), while if Nkeng wasn’t ready to replace Alli what was he doing on the bench? Jones is paid to make these decisions and of course will have had his reasons. I just don’t yet know what they are.

Nevertheless, on to Cardiff and one more game before the extended break – although that can’t be the mindset for it, we will be against a team yet to record a win. Once that’s out of the way hopefully we will have more players back when it all resumes and can move up a gear.

Another Hard Night, But A Point

After around four days of licking our wounds, last night was as everyone agreed about bouncing back, showing a reaction, ideally getting the win but at least stopping any rot. At this stage of the season nobody can be sure about what ‘back on track’ looks like. West Ham took just two points from their first three games, including a famous defeat, yet before last night’s games sat at the top of the league. We aren’t sure whether to focus on three wins and just one defeat in five or one point from two away games and our own bubble being burst. A win and we could find ourselves back in first place, second at worst (given some not playing); a draw and it’s still a decent start; defeat and we’re getting gloomy again. What was not in doubt was that we would need a very good performance to beat a QPR side enjoying their own good start.

We got a decent performance and a hard-earned point. For the second time in three games we were up against a side hell-bent on keeping the ball – and to that extent QPR, like West Brom, succeeded, enjoying 70%-plus possession. That kept us pinned back in our own half, kept our forward-looking players focused on defending and running around trying to close down their opposite number. But, also like West Brom, who did actually score a goal against us, QPR largely failed to turn dominant possession into goalscoring opportunities. For that they may point to injuries of their own, but one curled shot just wide, two dangerous low balls across our box, and a one-on-one resulting from our mistake is not much return.

We defended very well, even towards the end when a number were not surprisingly flagging, and might even have won but for a debatable offside, a penalty not awarded, and a blatant pull back not even punished by a free-kick (and yellow card). But truth be told we struggled through the game to keep and make use of the ball and were down to the bare bones in terms of available players, limiting our ability to freshen things up, especially once Leaburn did not return for the second half. And at the end I’d guess both teams and managers were, if not ecstatic, reasonably satisfied with the draw.

The team would again be about whether one or two more might be available and, if not, how to manage/shuffle a squad of 25 (with Burke not on the final list submitted to the EFL) reduced to in effect 17 with seven injured and another (McNamara) unavailable. While the team for Stoke included a large element of resting players (and we paid the price), two home games surely meant best available starting if they could walk. Jones opted for just two actual changes, really three in practise as McNamara would have been right-back but for his suspension, so Mesik continued in that spot, Jones, Bindon and Bell the other three. Coventry returned to partner Skipp as the defensive midfield pairing, Ouma back among the subs, and Carey starting again in the central position of the more forward three, Rankin-Costello dropping to the bench. On the bench there would be no place for Apter, with Laqeretabua and Nkeng preferred.

As at Stoke we started the game brightly. From an early corner Leaburn managed to get his head to the ball but under pressure put it wide, Campbell had a shot blocked having been played in by Leaburn. But as QPR settled into their game the balance shifted in their favour as we saw less and less of the ball, especially in their half. They were to win nine corners in the first half and from one of them a curler from the edge of our area went only just wide with Okonkwu probably beaten. But in terms of near misses that was about it, QPR’s cause not helped by their dangerous winger going off injured. And the pendulum did shift back at the end of the half.

On 38 minutes, with QPR pressing forward Skipp wrongfooted them and slide through a perfectly weighted pass for TC to spring onto. He didn’t need to take a touch before planting it beyond their keeper and into the net, only for the offside flag to cut short our celebrations. It was to say the least very tight, have to see yet more replays before any definitive answer is possible, but he may have been onside. And there was still time for the ref to not award us a penalty. We were applying late pressure, the ball bouncing around their box, and Mesik chased one down. The QPR defender slipped/fell/was pushed and went to ground and in doing so brought Mesik down with him. If no foul had been given against Mesik it was surely a penalty, however unintended. But we are not exactly getting the breaks from the officials at the moment.

So at half-time, although the stats looked poor, we felt a goal was possible and that would change the game. But a few minutes before the break there was a confusing episode as Rankin-Costello appeared stripped off and ready to come on. The assumption was it would be for Carey, but why make such a move so close to half-time, with such a change then surely likely to seriously damage his confidence. Rankin-Costello sat down again and the mystery was resolved when he came on at the start of the second half but for Leaburn, who had obviously picked up a knock.

Rather than opting for his only replacement, Mbick, Jones the Boss chose to change the formation, switching to a back three/five with Rankin-Costello and Mesik wing-backs, while Grant and Campbell would operate up front. The change really didn’t work (at West Brom switching to that set-up did help to get us a point). We looked vulnerable on their left side and did come under the cosh. On 55 minutes the first of two dangerous low crosses flashed across our box, only needing a touch, and on 61 minutes Bindon lost the ball and they played their guy in for a run in on Okonkwo. Fortunately he stood tall and managed to get a leg in the way of the eventual effort.

On 63 minutes we abandoned the formation change as Mbick replaced Carey. And back out left TC began to cause them problems. As they tired we had more joy on the break but were stopped by cynical fouls. Grant intercepted the ball but was held back. Amid all this QPR were still controlling possession but we covered well. They brought on three subs on 77 minutes to fresh things up, which did not bode well for the run-in as we were tiring too.

On 83 minutes the second of their dangerous crosses was drilled in, from the right, again nobody getting the vital touch. Muamba came on for Skipp and on 87 minutes on another day we might have had another penalty as a QPR defender’s upper arm blocked a shot, but it was from close range. Would have been very soft. Ali replaced an exhausted Campbell and in the first of three stoppage time minutes we might have won the game, only for the ref to bottle it again. Mbick broke well with the ball and played it through for Grant. He was obviously held back and couldn’t reach the ball, the ref doing nothing. The final act of the game was a corner for us, but it came to nothing and it would be a point apiece.

The injuries, fixture list, and officials’ decisions are doing us no favours at present. We will go again at home to Portsmouth on Saturday, hoping that Leaburn’s withdrawal was precautionary (Mbick is a great prospect but still returning from his lengthy injury) and that perhaps some of the other injured will be available. If not some of our number will end Saturday thinking they might be extras from ‘They Shoot Horses Don’t They?’.

Ref Plays Starring Role For Stoke

After a good point away in midweek, which may have ended the 100% record but kept us unbeaten, today was going to be a hard one to call, for several reasons. How would the team be shuffled with tired legs to consider (with two games next week as well)? Would Stoke’s defence be weak, considering nine conceded in four games but a clean sheet (and their first win) last time out? And of course who would get the breaks on the day? The answer to the last question was Stoke, aided and abetted by a truly dreadful performance from the match officials.

The referee’s inadequacies began with the softest of penalties given in the 15th minute, after a very bright start to the game from us, progressed through various errors in decisions, ridiculous yellow cards (given in our case and not given in theirs, the ref falling for Stoke’s histrionics and ignoring their cynicism), and culminated in a second yellow and a red for McNamara when the first was the result of a situation which should not have arisen (everyone saw it was a Charlton corner) and the second a misinterpretation/overreaction to a gesture towards a Stoke player not even being spoken to for yet another scything down of Leaburn. Along the way we conceded three more goals, the result of a lack of understanding and coordination and dreadful bad luck (their second came as a clearance hit Grant and rebounded to their guy to shoot home, their fourth as a shot going wide was deflected in by a guy who knew little about it).

We contributed to our defeat with changes that left too many untested combinations in key areas and a poor reaction to going behind from the penalty. It made it one of those games – like Southampton at home last season – when you have to take it on the chin, metaphorically kick the cat, drink lots of red wine, go to sleep and wake up looking ahead to Wednesday night.

Putting together a team after Wednesday’s exertions was always going to be challenging – and several changes were made. In defence McNamara was moved to the bench and Mesik came in at right-back, with Jones and Bindon the central pairing and Bell at left-back. The defensive midfield two were both changed, with Coventry and Mwamba on the bench, replaced by newcomers Skipp and Ouma. Obviously a gamble but perhaps a necessary one. The more forward three were also adjusted, with Rankin-Costello’s sub cameos earning him a start, with Campbell and Grant either side of him, while Leaburn would continue as the lone striker. With no sign of any on the injured list, the bench had a lopsided feel to it, with McNamara the only defensive cover, Coventry and Mwamba available for defensive midfield, then Carey, Knibbs, Ali and Apter all possibles for the three, Mbick being Leaburn’s back-up/late replacement. It all came across as an element of needs must, but we just had to trust Jones’ assessment of who was most in need of a rest.

We did start brightly. TC skinned their guy on the left but stumbling into the box couldn’t deliver a telling final ball, then several half-chances came and went from a set-piece on seven minutes, with shots blocked and the ball just not quite dropping well for us. On 12 minutes Stoke did have a dangerous shot deflected over for a corner. And from that corner the game changed. Ouma was wrestling with his guy, both of them pulling and pushing. Ball in, their guy goes to ground, and the ref is conned. If that was a penalty there would have to be 20 given every game. Their guy scored.

That was when we needed to calm things down, get control of the game again. Instead we looked all at sea as Stoke not surprisingly were galvanised and the crowd got behind them – and the ref continued to lend them a helping hand. On 17 minutes Leaburn was cynically fouled to prevent him advancing, no yellow given. Then a clear Stoke handball was ignored, their guy moving forward after that and getting a free-kick. On 21 minutes Stoke extended their lead as a ball into our box was kicked clear by Ouma only for it to rebound off an unsuspecting Grant. It could have gone anywhere but dropped nicely for their guy to have the time to pick his spot, shooting low into the net on Okonkwu’s right side.

Bad went to much worse on 24 minutes. And this goal has to go down to our poor defending. A guy down their left put in a decent cross. Jones had moved to the near post to cover something and behind him Bindon was slow to sense the danger, allowing a free header. The two looked at each other after the ball was headed into the net. They can’t be expected to get everything right as a pairing after just one game together and this one cost us badly.

Jones the Boss reacted with a change after that goal, with McNamara coming on, surprisingly for Campbell. Perhaps he was felt to be in need of a rest, but didn’t look injured. Perhaps it was just tactical as we switched to a back three/five and pushed Grant up alongside Leaburn.

As half-time drew near you felt that if we could just get a goal from somewhere the whole momentum of the game could shift and we could go in at the break with something to play for. Instead another goal came but for them. We didn’t deal well with a Stoke attack down the right side and although a low cross was kicked away it went to a guy in space inside our box. His low shot was going wide before it took a deflection off another Stoke player. It really summed up the first half and slammed the door shut to any second-half rally. There was still time for the ref to ignore a blatant bad foul on Jones, the Stoke forward not looking at the ball but just intent on delivering a cheap shot on a guy getting booed by the home fans for some unfathomable reason. It was more than a yellow, nothing was given. Instead the ref booked Leaburn before calling an end to the half.

At the break Coventry was brought on for Ouma. Pairing him and Skipp just hadn’t worked out. And pretty soon what was already a hopeless cause became a complete exercise in damage limitation as the ref intervened once more. On 46 minutes a Stoke defender played the ball back and it went well over the goalline before their keeper kicked it clear. Unbelievably a goalkick was given. From that Stoke launched an attack and McNamara found himself exposed and pulled a guy back, getting a yellow. No complaints about the eventual booking but it arose from a situation that simply shouldn’t have happened but for the officials’ incompetence. And just a few minutes later as Leaburn advanced down our left he was hacked down yet again. Ref makes no attempt to even talk to the Stoke player and as others arrived around the incident McNamara waved his arm in the direction of the Stoke player. This was interpreted as demanding a card and instead the yellow was brought out for McNamara and then the red. Simply appalling refereeing.

The rest of the game was a meaningless exercise. We were intent on picking up no more injuries and just seeing it out without more cards – which almost didn’t happen as Leaburn got into a tussle with a defender and Stoke again displayed their cynicism and gamesmanship by calling for a second yellow. At least the ref didn’t respond to that. Leaburn would be replaced by Mbick, Rankin-Costello by Ali, then Apter for Grant.

Some games nothing goes your way. Perhaps we went into it with a poor mindset, feeling sorry for ourselves having to play two away games up north in the space of a few days, compounded by the early kick-off. More fundamentally, the Jones-Bindon partnership is still being built and their misunderstanding cost us one goal today, while having Skipp and Ouma as the defensive midfield pairing was a step too far, a tough ask for both of them. We simply have to shrug off the afternoon and prepare for Wednesday night, because we need a rousing performance to put this one firmly to bed.

Good Point On A Tough Night

We all knew before this one that a draw would be a good result, although of course also that we needed a win to go back to the top - and we are getting greedy. What we were treated to was a gutsy performance against a side which prioritised retaining possession (which is not to say they made no use of it), leaving us for most of the game chasing shadows and struggling to make use of the ball when we had it, given West Brom’s effective press, obliging us to go long. That we came from behind to get something from the game (for the second time out of four so far) was thanks to a formation change and the subs’ impact, for which Jones takes credit, and disciplined defending, their goal being an unfortunate exception capping off a rather sloppy start to the second half.

The BBC labelled West Brom’s formation as a 4-4-2. In practise it was more like a 4-6-0 with a high press. That they ended up with 71% possession but just three shots on target is a fair reflection of the way they are playing the game. That’s not a criticism, like us they are reshaping and building after flirting with relegation last season. As they should, they play to their strengths. And their set-up can squeeze the life out of the opposition, preventing the back line from playing out of defence. That we didn’t buckle, changed formation from a 4-2-3-1 to a 3-5-2 and created a decent chance to level the game, is in turn to our credit.

The team was always going to throw up some tough choices for Jones. And there were changes, not all enforced. In front of Okonkwo would be McNamara, Jones, new boy Bindon and Bell, with Mesic, through no fault of his own, missing out in the contest for the left-back slot. The defensive midfield pairing would be Coventry and Mwamba, who has greatly impressed so far from the bench, with Chalobah not available (or risked), Skipp not yet considered, and Ouma not getting the nod. The three in front of them would be Campbell, Grant and Alli, as per the second half on Saturday, with Carey dropping to the bench alongside Knibbs and Rankin-Costello. Up front would be Leaburn with Mbick once more the only replacement, no sign yet of Godden or Kelman. Nkeng and Apter were also among the subs.

We started brightly but pretty soon they settled into their pattern, which we struggled to counter. We did have moments in the first half. In the first 10 minutes Ali intercepted a poor West Brom pass, fed Campbell on the left, and his dangerous low cross was blocked. Then on 22 minutes, after West Brom made a pig’s ear of a free kick in a dangerous position, we broke well, sent Leaburn into the channel, but he didn’t take the shot and the chance was lost. For them, despite all the possession, the only moment of danger was McNamara getting caught out and their guy in space on the left side of our box, Okonkwo saving his shot.

At the break the stats told their own story. West Brom with 72% possession and eight shots (only one on target) to our two (and zero). You felt we would need to find a way to play the game in their half, keep the defensive discipline, with the concern that if they did get their noses in front it could prove terminal.

What we didn’t need was a sloppy start to the second half, but that’s what we got, while they were lifted by a change and the introduction of a nippy winger. A McNamara error led to an early chance for them, with the guy’s curler deflected wide, then a little later good passing by them set up a guy inside the box, his shot well saved by Okonkwu.

Consequently it wasn’t that surprising that West Brom took the lead, on 58 minutes, although that it was from a corner – they had studiously avoided high balls into our box, knowing they were short in that department – was unexpected. The ball was swung in to around our far post. McNamara headed it out well enough, but it dropped to their guy around the edge of the box. Now it would normally have been McNamara’s area to cover, but he couldn’t be expected to head clear, land, then be able to close the guy down – and criminally nobody else in a red shirt realised the danger and moved to cover. As a result their guy had time to bring it down and pick his spot, burying a powerful drive beyond Okonkwu into the net.

It seems we had been on the point of making changes and they came straight after the goal. Mesik, Ouma and Rankin-Costello came on for Grant, Ali and Muamba. And with that we switched to a 3-5-2, with Bell moved inside and McNamara and Mesik becoming wing-backs, while TC also moved inside to give Leaburn some support.

The changes almost brought quick benefit as a long ball out of defence found Leaburn, who was cynically taken out but remarkably nothing was given. The officials made several errors, including confusing corners and goalkicks but more important missing two or three fouls on our players in good positions.

West Brom continued to threaten and nobody doubts that if they had scored again it would most likely have been game over. But a few shots didn’t find their mark or were blocked. And on 68 minutes we drew level, a goal fashioned from the formation change and the substitutes. Mesik won the ball and passed to Rankin-Costello, who drove forward. He then slid the ball back out wide for Mesik. His cross from the left was decent enough, but it seemed set to be headed clear before Leaburn managed to get in the way and keep the ball in the danger zone. It dropped for Campbell and he tucked it home with his left foot into the corner, beyond a despairing lunge or two.

West Brom were stung by that and now suddenly had a game to win that they thought might already be in the bag. And the remainder of the game, including just three minutes of stoppage time, was nip and tuck, might have gone either way. Mbick replaced a tired Leaburn after 79 minutes, on 88 Carey came on for Coventry. There was time for Mbick to intercept and get taken out with nothing given, but neither side could break the deadlock.

At the end no question we were the happier of the two. Did we deserve a draw? One of those where the stats say no (West Brom with 71% possession, 15 shots with three on target against our four and one) but we scored as many times as them, they can have no real complaints that they were unable to see out the game or add to their lead. The performance was far from perfect but mostly that was due to West Brom’s tactics. Against Derby we turned things around with a Jones header, against Preston with a change in personnel, and last night with a change in formation and the contribution of the subs. That points to flexibility and options, all of which is very positive.

Just want Ramsay, Edwards, Koumeito (sadly not likely Sichenje for some time), Chalobah, Godden and Kelman all back fit and chomping at the bit, plus Skipp settling in. I’ve no idea whether any of them will be available for Stoke on Saturday, or how Jones will shuffle the pack in view of tired legs and knocks. It will be another, different challenge. Stoke have conceded nine goals in four games, despite a clean sheet in their most recent one, so hopefully there will be gaps we can exploit. We go into the game with well-founded confidence.

Thanks So Much Greg

We all kinda knew this one was coming. The numbers didn’t stack up, especially after last night’s two additions. But confirmation that Greg Docherty would leave the club, after the cancellation of his contract by mutual consent, still leaves us with a heavy heart. The words of Nathan Jones and James Rodwell hit the spot. All we can do as fans is add our very heartfelt thanks to Doc for all he has done since signing for us. The stay wasn’t that long, the contribution immense, to say that we are in a better position from when he joined is a massive understatement. I just hope that wherever he ends up truly appreciates what an asset they are getting and that Greg really enjoys the next stage of his career.

Of the others who have left, temporarily or permanently, overall the news is positive. The Kaminski situation and outcome mystifies me, just have to wait for some clarification. But exactly why he and Jones fell out and why a 33-year-old goalkeeper, one on the fringes of the international picture, might choose to go to ply his trade in Cyprus is a puzzle. Perhaps he has personal reasons for the choice. In any event good luck to him, we can afford to be magnanimous as we very much like the cut of his replacement.

Joining him on the ‘out on loan’ front - along with Mitchell(Z), Gough, Laqeretabua, Ewens-Findley, Rylah, Olaofe and (strictly speaking) Ahadme (I think that’s all) - are Asiimwe, Fullah and Kanu. All the young ones at least clearly have a path back and we all hope that comes to pass, that they benefit and progress in the time away. The confirmation that Kanu actually has a year longer on his contract than thought, and the new contract for Fullah, indicate that they will remain very much in the club’s thoughts.

It merely remains to add that we all hope that Skipp, Nkeng and Bindon, along with the other eight new players, have very rewarding Charlton careers, as obviously we as fans would be the beneficiaries as well as the club. How quickly Bindon and Skipp in particular are introduced to the first team, potentially tonight, is of course up to Jones the Boss and how he sees things. There must be some temptation to leave the back four unchanged since Jones the Player and Bindon will no doubt need a little time to get used to each other and the back line was effective against Preston. Without Docherty and with Chalobah at least doubtful, there could be an early introduction for Skipp, depending on his fitness and whether Jones feels that Mwamba is ready to start a game. Either way, tonight’s line-up will have half an eye on Stoke away on Saturday and the demands on each player in turn.

It has been an excellent transfer window, we are materially stronger than we ended last season, despite the setback losing Koumetio and Sichenje at Spurs. Not getting Rak-Sakyi was a disappointment, but there is it, we wait to see how ready Nkeng might be and whether Alli and/or Apter step up and take their opportunity. The lone striker position is still stretched if only Leaburn and Mbick are available, hopefully Godden and Kelman will be back soon, then we will have options again in that position too (and contrary to popular opinion I’m confident that Godden or Kelman can play alone up front, provided the rest of the team – especially the three behind the one up front – react accordingly, looking to pick off a second ball instead of hoping they can win anything in the air or hold up play as well as Leaburn is currently doing).

We’ve made a great start, just now needs cementing with the two tough away fixtures, before two back at The Valley.

Not Often This Good

I don’t think I’ve ever before been in a more relaxed, positive mood going into the final day of a transfer window (please note anyone looking here for some nugget of ITK info will be disappointed). If we get one or two more in, including the obvious name, great; if we have to juggle the books and two or three depart, sad but also perfectly understandable. If we do nothing, as long as the squad numbers add up so be it, now that we have covered for the defensive injury calamity with the addition of Bindon. We have strengthened materially and tied down three of our most valuable assets to long-term contracts (and I also liked that Jones the Boss added that even so if they have the opportunity to move to the Premiership the club will not stand in their way). Oh, and did I forget to mention? We are top of the league.

Having watched the West Ham game from a hospital bed in Chalon, I managed to take in the Preston match in a Paris hotel room (having even found an HDMI lead in a nearby shop to rig up the lap-top with the room’s large TV, lovely jubbly), with my partner Suzanne having booked the weekend away before my recent problem and not quibbling about taking time out to watch the game.

Too late for any kind of match report, just a few observations. Clearly, as at home to Derby, we didn’t click in the first half, the only difference being we didn’t go behind. Our play was, as Jones acknowledged, just too sluggish and unadventurous, making it easy for a Preston back five to contain the threat. Against Derby we were rejuvenated by a Jones the Player header, this time around Jones the Boss didn’t wait and made the change at the break, withdrawing Carey for Alli and switching Grant into the more central role.

Carey. Let’s make some things clear, he has been a fantastic signing and is a key member of the team/squad. We are going to need him through this season and beyond, his driving with the ball and his goals. The only question right now for Jones and his team is whether or not he is our best option to start the game in the central position of the three (clearly he is not suited to either of the wider roles) or used as an impact substitute later on, when the opposition is more tired and gaps start to appear. There will be times we are chasing a game and need a goal. A fresh Carey coming off the bench would be one excellent option (IMO).

As stressed before, the change in our formation requires the central player in the three behind the front man to pick a pass and knit the three together. It’s a different skillset than Carey displayed last season. So either with practise he gets better at doing that, or he is kept in reserve for when during a game we need a different option and fresh legs.

It is not as if there are no alternatives. Grant switched inside on Saturday, Rankin-Costello has been used in the role, while Knibbs, the most obvious choice, seems out of favour. His performance against Spurs (and those of others) should count for nothing, while on the positive side in pre-season he linked up well with Grant in particular, signs of an immediate understanding.

For the three we currently have TC, Grant, Alli, Apter, Carey, Knibbs and Rankin-Costello. That is sufficient to mix and match. But if Rak-Sakyi were to join after all, surely Apter would have to find pastures new as Alli has only just come in. Equally, if Jones feels that Knibbs is fourth-choice for the central spot, behind Carey, Grant and Rankin-Costello, and does not intend to play him, so be it, he must have his reasons, but as things stand it’s a wasted squad position.

Of course we’re not getting over-excited about topping the league with a 100% record after three games. With away games at WBA and Stoke approaching, after five we will have a better idea – and after 10 games you can at least tell who has had a good start and who has not. Still nice though – and a better feeling than last season’s start, when we were cheered by the sight of us being competitive (before injuries took their toll). This time around we are giving the early impression of being capable of more than that.

It is very rare, for us for sure but probably for most clubs, for all to be in alignment: fans content with the ownership, the manager, and the team/squad, creating a virtuous circle. For me the last time was the brief period under the spivs (before they ran out of money and showed their real intentions, sacrificing us to the whims of Duchatelet) with Sir Chris in charge before and after promotion. Before that you have to go back to the Premiership years with Curbs and Murray. Then you have the set-up with the Return to The Valley. Just before that we had Lennie Lawrence and a terrific fighting team, but the ownership counted against perfect union. Long may this continue – although of course it cannot last indefinitely – and enjoy it.

Finally, a belated RIP Mike Bailey and condolences to his family and friends. Like many others I was just a little too young to remember his performances on the pitch, although I must have seen him play. I do remember being huddled around a radio with my father in February 1965 (bloody hell, that’s over 60 years ago) to hear news of our FA Cup fourth round replay at Middlesbrough. I still have the newspaper clipping in my scrapbook: ‘Mike Bailey breaks leg and out go Charlton’. He broke his leg in the 10th minute. He did return and went on to play 169 times for us, scoring 22 goals, before he moved on to Wolves in 1966 for £35k.

Bailey’s time as Charlton manager (1980-81), succeeding Andy Nelson, was marked by promotion back to the Second Division only for his prompt – and for me at least still very curious – replacement by Alan Mullery, who had ironically many years before replace Bailey in the England squad. It was a curious time, at the end of the Glickstein era, and I leave it to others to explain what really happened. Suffice to say, Bailey was a Charlton hero/legend.