Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

New Article: Trying to square up the Circle of Discontent

24567

Comments

  • So still actual grass only on the wicket?

    Great that is the ideal way in modern football stadium. Got to have a grass pitch, if the run off areas are plastic that doesnt matter a jot.
  • Rothko said:
    Could you report what it says about under soil heating ?

    I am unable to open the link.

  • So still actual grass only on the wicket?

    Great that is the ideal way in modern football stadium. Got to have a grass pitch, if the run off areas are plastic that doesnt matter a jot.


    @calydon_road artificial pitches are not allowed above Rymans League level.
  • edited April 2014
    Kap10 said:

    So still actual grass only on the wicket?

    Great that is the ideal way in modern football stadium. Got to have a grass pitch, if the run off areas are plastic that doesnt matter a jot.


    @calydon_road artificial pitches are not allowed above Rymans League level.
    Thanks. I didnt know that. I was aware they got banned sometime in the 90s I think. I thought the new hybrids were now allowed? I have read the spec now and its turf on the top.

    In my eyes that pitch is still technically artificial but you could argue that all day long. Does anyone have the F.A. definition of "artificial" to hand perchance ? ;)
  • Rothko said:
    Could you report what it says about under soil heating ?

    I am unable to open the link.

    Definitely Undersoil Heating
  • It's perhaps slightly ironic that the seemingly prudent and sensible approach that RD wants to adopt is actually quite appealing, yet it is ultimately this that has resulted in Charlton Athletic, a club at least twice the size of AFC Bournemouth, not being able to compete with them in the transfer market for a highly effective player and fans favourite.

    Although the supposed 800,000 on PP might suggest otherwise.............. :s

  • Football fans bemoan the state of the game, the debt incurred by clubs that leads to uncertainty and in some cases closer of there beloved club.
    RD has a vision that this 'fools gold' way of running a football isn't the only way to do it.
    If would be nice of him to explain how he is wanting to change the way a football club is run without debt, as this incertainty surrounding his method does create this divide we are seeing within our clubs supporters, but at the end of the day it's his business and he calls it how and when he'll feels fit.

    I'd rather be the club in the UK to be trying a new way of existing in modern football than lurching from money men to money men with that nagging feeling if the owners was ever pulled out due to debt, we wouldn't have our charlton.

  • Ultimately RD's plan can only really succeed if the rest of the teams play by the FFP rules, and I just cannot see that happening.

    Even here in Oz where they have a Salary Cap in the Rugby League and AFL the clubs can normally find a way around the rules via 'third-party payments' (ie a local car dealer paying a player $200,000 PA to be their 'brand ambassador' and so on.

    So, essentially, whilst I admire RDs plan I cannot help but think that we are going to be playing with one hand tied behind our backs by paying players sub 8k per week (and still losing 7 million per year) whilst other club pay 15-20k per week (losing probably 20 million + per year) but have a much better chance of striking gold.

    As the estimable Airman Brown has pointed out repeatedly there is simply no way to breakeven in the Championship unless the playing staff budget is utterly slashed - and that means relegation.

    The only way forward is for FFP to be properly enforced and clubs forced to live within their means but I just can't see that happening.
  • There are two ways I can see to break even in the Championship on say a five year cycle. One is to discover and sign up some real gems which you are then able to sell for say £5m and the other is to become a yo-yo club and spend one year in five in the Premier League thus gaining access to parachute money.
    We only have 8 months to wait to see how FFP will work in practice and whether any club will have sanctions applied... Like you Ormiston I have my doubts as to whether they will follow through.
  • Sponsored links:


  • AFKA, you have voiced an excellent demand for reason, and basically something that I don't possess, patience. It makes no sense to be, as you say, constantly arguing about who is right or wrong, when clearly no-one is going to win that argument right now.

    The fact is that as a successful businessman, Roland will definitely have a forward plan for perhaps 5 years. I would love us to have some awareness of that plan, which would allow us all to measure progress. Any Business that sets off into the future without a plan, is in fact planning to fail. I keep harping on about the Academy, and developing our youngsters. We are currently seeing on the pitch the wisdom of such a strategy, for me the signs are very promising.
  • Nice one NW. In your opinion then we have gone for a fairly top of the range option then? That is really good news
  • I believe so. I think they got 3 or 4 companies in and gone with what they are all happy with. It should (fingers crossed) be a good surface.
  • There are two ways I can see to break even in the Championship on say a five year cycle. One is to discover and sign up some real gems which you are then able to sell for say £5m and the other is to become a yo-yo club and spend one year in five in the Premier League thus gaining access to parachute money.
    We only have 8 months to wait to see how FFP will work in practice and whether any club will have sanctions applied... Like you Ormiston I have my doubts as to whether they will follow through.

    Fair point, but how many players have left the Championship for that kind of money recently? There may be a couple but generally speaking you are looking more in the 2 million bracket and lower.

    The real issue there is that the PL clubs can scout globally (many are using the Africa-to-France route) so they don't have the same need for the "pyramid" system they had in the past.

    Plus, top young players and their agents are so savvy now in signing only shorter deals so they can go for just compensation to a PL club - and take a fat signing on fee.
  • Lidivision. across Europe and Africa - we have no way of knowing yet what access CAFC will have to the Liege network until there is a statement and some activity over the summer.
    So far our young players like Cousins and Harriot have signed 3 year deals. Let's see what happens with Poyet, Fox and all the other names mentioned who have not yet played for the first team.
    I agree it is rare, perhaps once or twice a season across the whole division. And if CAFC regularly sells the best young players then surely prospects in the league are damaged?
  • for anyone interested in the company relaying our hallowed turf its

    http://www.tgms.co.uk/253--sports-pitch-construction-drainage-projects.htm

    as stated above their is a proposal document on the greenwich website but that website is awful (quelle bon surprise) and none of us can get a link to work to the relevant page. just go to planning search and enter "charlton athletic" that worked for me.
  • Currently the new pitch is awaiting planning consent. The relevant page on the Greenwich Council web site is:

    http://publicaccess.royalgreenwich.gov.uk:81/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=_GRNW_DCAPR_76822

    Whilst it may be a done deal from the CAFC side of things, planning consent is still required. The draft project plan amongst the documents on the above link has work starting on 19th May and finishing on 7th July. Hopefully this can go ahead as planned as any slippage will, I guess, have a knock-on effect on the start of the 2014/15 season.

    There are detailed technical specs submitted with the application. Certainly make interesting reading if you're a bit of a geek like me. :-)
  • Currently the new pitch is awaiting planning consent. The relevant page on the Greenwich Council web site is:

    http://publicaccess.royalgreenwich.gov.uk:81/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=_GRNW_DCAPR_76822

    Whilst it may be a done deal from the CAFC side of things, planning consent is still required. The draft project plan amongst the documents on the above link has work starting on 19th May and finishing on 7th July. Hopefully this can go ahead as planned as any slippage will, I guess, have a knock-on effect on the start of the 2014/15 season.

    There are detailed technical specs submitted with the application. Certainly make interesting reading if you're a bit of a geek like me. :-)

    guilty as charged.

    if RBG even try blocking/delaying an application for a football team to build a football pitch....mmmm they couldnt possibly could they?
  • Sponsored links:




  • guilty as charged.

    if RBG even try blocking/delaying an application for a football team to build a football pitch....mmmm they couldnt possibly could they?

    No need to be guilty in the slightest. Sorry if my posting implied that!

    They could in theory block it, and a local resident could make waves, but I'd be surprised if there were any objections, as it's simply a replacement of the current pitch, albeit with the need for a plant room for the pumps and boiler for the undersoil heating and the irrigation system.

    I'm a bit surprised that planning consent is required, but not being a surveyor or town planner I have no idea for the justification!

    The specs are pretty damned good so we will have a really good pitch next season!
  • I've always been in the "let's give it time" camp, with the huge qualifier that we must avoid relegation at all (reasonable) cost. So the concern around SCP/Yann/Stephens & inferior replacements is obviously justified, but doesn't for me mean that RD's broader vision is necessarily wrong (it is definitely unproven however). If we stay up - and we really ought to from our current position - then we effectively start again. (and hopefully RD has already learned some lessons)

    I understand those who feel the heart & soul of the club have been ripped out. I don't feel so wounded, personally - the previous owners were hardly inspiring, and over a 40+ year period it's been hard to fall in love with owners/directors muchof the time. Actually the golden period of 1988 to about 2005 could be regarded as an exceptional period, one few clubs experience.

    And even here, the reputation has been tarnished by subsequent events. Did those who disillusioned now feel OK about us chucking money at mercenaries like Marcus Bent? Did it feel like 'our' Charlton with him and Jimmy Floyd leading the line?

    Then we have the issue of youth. Of course it's essential that our best young talent is on decent contracts. Any real stars amongst them will be sold - accept this. The question is how we use any funds. When Lee Bowyer was sold, that (I assume) meant we were under less pressure to sell Rufus, we bought Kinsella for a fraction of the money in, and laid foundations for promotion. That's the model we have to follow, at least in the short term.

    If FFP is a sham, then maybe such prudence will never work. But i don't blame RD for trying to construct a model that is not reliant on obscenely rich people chucking their dubiously-obtained cash around...

    Well said

  • There are two ways I can see to break even in the Championship on say a five year cycle. One is to discover and sign up some real gems which you are then able to sell for say £5m and the other is to become a yo-yo club and spend one year in five in the Premier League thus gaining access to parachute money.
    We only have 8 months to wait to see how FFP will work in practice and whether any club will have sanctions applied... Like you Ormiston I have my doubts as to whether they will follow through.

    In the medium to long term all the clubs will be able to break even if they all follow the FFP rules and offer players less money.

    The Agents are only going to demand more and more money so those that are, realistically, never going to make it in the Premier League will have to accept a lot less money.

    I think the number of clubs that believe that they can afford to bankroll their club for ever are so few that I think the rest will be able to force through FFP. If not then all those that are voting against it will need to be willing to dump c. £5m a year on excessive players wages, and I cant't see that happening for ever.
  • I've always been in the "let's give it time" camp, with the huge qualifier that we must avoid relegation at all (reasonable) cost. So the concern around SCP/Yann/Stephens & inferior replacements is obviously justified, but doesn't for me mean that RD's broader vision is necessarily wrong (it is definitely unproven however). If we stay up - and we really ought to from our current position - then we effectively start again. (and hopefully RD has already learned some lessons)

    I understand those who feel the heart & soul of the club have been ripped out. I don't feel so wounded, personally - the previous owners were hardly inspiring, and over a 40+ year period it's been hard to fall in love with owners/directors muchof the time. Actually the golden period of 1988 to about 2005 could be regarded as an exceptional period, one few clubs experience.

    And even here, the reputation has been tarnished by subsequent events. Did those who disillusioned now feel OK about us chucking money at mercenaries like Marcus Bent? Did it feel like 'our' Charlton with him and Jimmy Floyd leading the line?

    Then we have the issue of youth. Of course it's essential that our best young talent is on decent contracts. Any real stars amongst them will be sold - accept this. The question is how we use any funds. When Lee Bowyer was sold, that (I assume) meant we were under less pressure to sell Rufus, we bought Kinsella for a fraction of the money in, and laid foundations for promotion. That's the model we have to follow, at least in the short term.

    If FFP is a sham, then maybe such prudence will never work. But i don't blame RD for trying to construct a model that is not reliant on obscenely rich people chucking their dubiously-obtained cash around...

    good post with a number of pertinent comments
  • edited April 2014
    The club doesn't need to wait for planning permission to do the work on the pitch. It's perfectly legal to proceed without it - even if it was a structure that is likely to affect others, which it isn't - in anticipation of the decision and almost impossible to see such an application being turned down. It makes no difference, legally, if the work has already been done by the time it is approved and it's likely to be approved by officers under delegated powers rather than at committee, I would think.


  • a plant room for the pumps and boiler for the undersoil heating and the irrigation system.

    this could be an issue with the noise possibly of running something like that overnight
  • i'm totally horny for this new pitch
  • The club doesn't need to wait for planning permission to do the work on the pitch. It's perfectly legal to proceed without it - even if it was a structure that is likely to affect others, which it isn't - in anticipation of the decision and almost impossible to see such an application being turned down. It makes no difference, legally, if the work has already been done by the time it is approved and it's likely to be approved by officers under delegated powers rather than at committee, I would think.

    But why is there a need for a submission, thats what I don't understand. Additional admin cost for both club and council.
  • The club doesn't need to wait for planning permission to do the work on the pitch. It's perfectly legal to proceed without it - even if it was a structure that is likely to affect others, which it isn't - in anticipation of the decision and almost impossible to see such an application being turned down. It makes no difference, legally, if the work has already been done by the time it is approved and it's likely to be approved by officers under delegated powers rather than at committee, I would think.

    Thanks, Airman. I think it's almost impossible for it to be turned down although you could argue its a change of use to a pitch that actually allows football to be played.... :-)
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!