Charlton 2 Tottenham 0
So, after two postponements for the convenience of the FA, and their much-vaunted FA Cup, Charlton had their first home league game for some weeks, and of course it was the one everyone very much wanted to win, partly because it was eminently winnable, as Spurs are not the team they once were, nor yet the team their fans think they are; second, because Spurs, along with Bolton, Liverpool and Middlesbrough, are fellow-competitors in the mini-league centred around positions 5-9 of the table, which is in fact more interesting than the struggle for positions 1-4, which are starting to look as though they are going to be self-selecting. Even the mainstream press are now talking about the likelihood that even the 7th-placed side in the table will get into Europe next season, and that means that Charlton need to stay very much involved; this win was just what they needed. You can read proper reports from people who were there: the Inspector and Wyn Grant. If you don't follow the links, the gist is that Charlton fully merited their win, and played really well.
Everyone seems to be highly delighted by the whole thing, and reports in yesterday's Daily Mirror that Alan Curbishley will surely be wanting to take the Manchester City job as "he has taken Charlton as far as he can" look absurd by comparison. Also the implication that Charlton, whoever is in charge of them, can never progress beyond the 7th/6th slot they are aiming for, while Manchester City, in the right hands, can win anything, is downright stupid, yet typical of the belief among football journalists that success in English football competitions is a reserved privilege for a handful of teams, and that the rest should keep to their rightful places. As I pointed out the other day, Manchester City are not a bigger club than Charlton; they are heavily in debt and the potential support of the two clubs is not dissimilar. Curbs himself, talking about Leeds United's costly European adventures two years ago, is on record as saying that anyone can buy success if they can borrow enough money, but that he prefers to do things little by little, with the resources to hand. So I reiterate: why would he wish to leave a solvent club for a less successful one which is in debt?
Postscript - one day later:
It seems that my arguments against Curbs moving to Man City had already been anticipated by the great man himself, who ruled himself out of the list of candidates for the job, and wryly noted that the fact that City are £62 million in debt, while Charlton aren't in debt at all, was the reason they were interested in him. It's here, in an interview with The Times.