“We’ll work with Target 20k and Jimmy’s grandson James on refurbishing it.”
Jimmy Seed’s grandson Jim Dutton said: “I’m delighted with the news, as is my sister and all the family. I was there in 1981 when my mum cut the ribbon to open the stand and I was also there when my mum re-dedicated it in the 1990s.
@Henry Irving - Are there two grandsons involved, if not - why is he referred to as two different names?
Weirdest post ever. You really didn't know Jim is short for James?
I know the fashion now is for middle class parents to use the full name (James, Benjamin, Anthony) rather than the shortened version but really?
PS my son is called Joe although it says Joseph on his birth certificate. #keepingitreal
Just to deal with any confusion, telly is short for 'television' neither are on my birth certificate.
The Club put in brand new red seats in certain areas of the ground, Photos of the 1998 Play Off win outside the Covered End plus a general tidy up of the Valley.
Did anyone get consulted back then about these changes or did they just do it with the minimum of fuss?
This was done by this regime, so why change tact now and look to start pleasing fans, when just do, what you did back then.
Much like the spring clean, new seats and other bits and bobs in close season last year.
But the JS stand is more emotive because it's named after the only manager to have won anything for us - so involving family was sensible
No it wasn't at all. It was a cynical attempt to create good PR. It should be offensive to anyone who has any sense of history of our club.
I have on occassions found your input interesting but your refusal to acknowledge the obvious is tedious I am afraid to say.
The Club put in brand new red seats in certain areas of the ground, Photos of the 1998 Play Off win outside the Covered End plus a general tidy up of the Valley.
Did anyone get consulted back then about these changes or did they just do it with the minimum of fuss?
This was done by this regime, so why change tact now and look to start pleasing fans, when just do, what you did back then.
Much like the spring clean, new seats and other bits and bobs in close season last year.
But the JS stand is more emotive because it's named after the only manager to have won anything for us - so involving family was sensible
No it wasn't at all. It was a cynical attempt to create good PR. It should be offensive to anyone who has any sense of history of our club.
I have on occassions found your input interesting but your refusal to acknowledge the obvious is tedious I am afraid to say.
Sorry you feel that way - but I guarantee there would have been people say words to the effect of "Why didn't the club involve the family since they were the ones who raised it" so either way would lead to frustrations.
Re the sign, yes it was a very hard decision to withdraw my family's involvement. But to be honest, if we had new owners, I'd have been thrilled and proud to unveil a new sign at The Valley. But under current circumstances, I thought I might have felt like I was being used. Without real evidence of a genuine change of direction by the ownership, I felt I had no choice. But the bottom line is, I think my granddad would have approved of my actions.
I did buy season tickets for me and my youngest son Tommy (aged 10). I want him to maintain the family's connection with the club. He won't build up a connection without visiting the Valley. So I don't have any doubts that buying season tickets was the right thing to do under the circumstances. At the Middlesbrough match (2-0) last season he LOVED the protests and was singing "We want Rolland out!" with the rest of the fans. It was his first visit. He had his picture taken on the pitch. He protested. I think he's won over. He even wants to go to the Oxford match, if we can get tickets. Funnily enough, the club offered us the chance to sit on the fans sofa. Thanks god I persuaded him it wasn't a good idea! We bought our own tickets for the family stand instead. BTW have never been invited to the Valley since Martin Simons time.
Jim - if these dickheads running our club don't do it, one day WE WILL have a new owner and leadership team that understands and cares about our heritage and the sign will surely then be restored to it's proper condition.
The Club put in brand new red seats in certain areas of the ground, Photos of the 1998 Play Off win outside the Covered End plus a general tidy up of the Valley.
Did anyone get consulted back then about these changes or did they just do it with the minimum of fuss?
This was done by this regime, so why change tact now and look to start pleasing fans, when just do, what you did back then.
Much like the spring clean, new seats and other bits and bobs in close season last year.
But the JS stand is more emotive because it's named after the only manager to have won anything for us - so involving family was sensible
No it wasn't at all. It was a cynical attempt to create good PR. It should be offensive to anyone who has any sense of history of our club.
I have on occassions found your input interesting but your refusal to acknowledge the obvious is tedious I am afraid to say.
Sorry you feel that way - but I guarantee there would have been people say words to the effect of "Why didn't the club involve the family since they were the ones who raised it" so either way would lead to frustrations.
You seem to be missing the point of why people think this is a cock up by the club. Yes the club should consult the family and if they didn't that would be justifiable reason to slag them off. However that isn't the real problem with this saga. The fact that the club made a big public song and dance about simply fixing a sign in a desperate bid for good publicity before anything has actually happened is the complaint. If they had just gone about it and replaced the sign without the pathetic PR attempt then it would have been a well done job by the club and those involved, even if the family chose not to be involved and publicly stated as such. Save the PR for after it's been done. At least the club wouldn't have again scored a public PR own goal and even if the sign does get done it's too late, they've managed to cock up something as simple as that with their desperation and overall ineptitude. .
Sorry you feel that way - but I guarantee there would have been people say words to the effect of "Why didn't the club involve the family since they were the ones who raised it" so either way would lead to frustrations.
Which is why I apologised to those inside the club who had good intentions. I just didn't want the family connection to be used by the owners - I could see it turning into a PR exercise. I wish they had just painted the sign and we could have all looked and said 'good job'. Of course standing on the sacred turf representing grandad would have given us great pleasure, as it has in the past. But maybe some other time eh? Hopefully in my lifetime.
When I'm walking naked on a beach holiday. Two footprints and a line in the middle :-)
I am not sure if last night's statement will change this though
You realise this could infer you are stationary but maybe swinging?
But I said walking :-)
If you're walking on a beach and only leave 2 footprints are you; a) one-legged and have not walked very far? b) walking in the sea? c) unable to count? d) suffering from really poor eyesight? That would at least go some way to explain your "line" comment
The Club put in brand new red seats in certain areas of the ground, Photos of the 1998 Play Off win outside the Covered End plus a general tidy up of the Valley.
Did anyone get consulted back then about these changes or did they just do it with the minimum of fuss?
This was done by this regime, so why change tact now and look to start pleasing fans, when just do, what you did back then.
Much like the spring clean, new seats and other bits and bobs in close season last year.
But the JS stand is more emotive because it's named after the only manager to have won anything for us - so involving family was sensible
No it wasn't at all. It was a cynical attempt to create good PR. It should be offensive to anyone who has any sense of history of our club.
I have on occassions found your input interesting but your refusal to acknowledge the obvious is tedious I am afraid to say.
Sorry you feel that way - but I guarantee there would have been people say words to the effect of "Why didn't the club involve the family since they were the ones who raised it" so either way would lead to frustrations.
You seem to be missing the point of why people think this is a cock up by the club. Yes the club should consult the family and if they didn't that would be justifiable reason to slag them off. However that isn't the real problem with this saga. The fact that the club made a big public song and dance about simply fixing a sign in a desperate bid for good publicity before anything has actually happened is the complaint. If they had just gone about it and replaced the sign without the pathetic PR attempt then it would have been a well done job by the club and those involved, even if the family chose not to be involved and publicly stated as such. Save the PR for after it's been done. At least the club wouldn't have again scored a public PR own goal and even if the sign does get done it's too late, they've managed to cock up something as simple as that with their desperation and overall ineptitude. .
Swisdom is an intelligent bloke. He doesn't miss the point. He just isn't listening, the same as anyone else with a financial interest.
The Club put in brand new red seats in certain areas of the ground, Photos of the 1998 Play Off win outside the Covered End plus a general tidy up of the Valley.
Did anyone get consulted back then about these changes or did they just do it with the minimum of fuss?
This was done by this regime, so why change tact now and look to start pleasing fans, when just do, what you did back then.
Much like the spring clean, new seats and other bits and bobs in close season last year.
But the JS stand is more emotive because it's named after the only manager to have won anything for us - so involving family was sensible
No it wasn't at all. It was a cynical attempt to create good PR. It should be offensive to anyone who has any sense of history of our club.
I have on occassions found your input interesting but your refusal to acknowledge the obvious is tedious I am afraid to say.
Sorry you feel that way - but I guarantee there would have been people say words to the effect of "Why didn't the club involve the family since they were the ones who raised it" so either way would lead to frustrations.
You seem to be missing the point of why people think this is a cock up by the club. Yes the club should consult the family and if they didn't that would be justifiable reason to slag them off. However that isn't the real problem with this saga. The fact that the club made a big public song and dance about simply fixing a sign in a desperate bid for good publicity before anything has actually happened is the complaint. If they had just gone about it and replaced the sign without the pathetic PR attempt then it would have been a well done job by the club and those involved, even if the family chose not to be involved and publicly stated as such. Save the PR for after it's been done. At least the club wouldn't have again scored a public PR own goal and even if the sign does get done it's too late, they've managed to cock up something as simple as that with their desperation and overall ineptitude. .
Swisdom is an intelligent bloke. He doesn't miss the point. He just isn't listening, the same as anyone else with a financial interest.
I wondered when the financial interest would get dragged up. Once again it's absolutely fuck all to do with the sign. Or anything for that matter.
Let's get this straight. As a patron to the CACT we were asked to give some expert advice on something that impacted them and their facility. We made some comments and were then invited to comment on the wider scheme as it was clear we know what we are talking about. The training facility will be here long after many of us have left this earth and for my company to be involved in the training facility at the club we have supported for four generations was too good an opportunity to turn down.
Back to the sign - it will be done soon so we can stop talking about it.
But Steve, the sign wont have the family blessing and that speaks volumes.
As for business interests, Axis walked, Andrews walked from the club , WJ King walked from the club, Data Techniques told them to shove it what does that tell you?
The Club put in brand new red seats in certain areas of the ground, Photos of the 1998 Play Off win outside the Covered End plus a general tidy up of the Valley.
Did anyone get consulted back then about these changes or did they just do it with the minimum of fuss?
This was done by this regime, so why change tact now and look to start pleasing fans, when just do, what you did back then.
Much like the spring clean, new seats and other bits and bobs in close season last year.
But the JS stand is more emotive because it's named after the only manager to have won anything for us - so involving family was sensible
No it wasn't at all. It was a cynical attempt to create good PR. It should be offensive to anyone who has any sense of history of our club.
I have on occassions found your input interesting but your refusal to acknowledge the obvious is tedious I am afraid to say.
Sorry you feel that way - but I guarantee there would have been people say words to the effect of "Why didn't the club involve the family since they were the ones who raised it" so either way would lead to frustrations.
You seem to be missing the point of why people think this is a cock up by the club. Yes the club should consult the family and if they didn't that would be justifiable reason to slag them off. However that isn't the real problem with this saga. The fact that the club made a big public song and dance about simply fixing a sign in a desperate bid for good publicity before anything has actually happened is the complaint. If they had just gone about it and replaced the sign without the pathetic PR attempt then it would have been a well done job by the club and those involved, even if the family chose not to be involved and publicly stated as such. Save the PR for after it's been done. At least the club wouldn't have again scored a public PR own goal and even if the sign does get done it's too late, they've managed to cock up something as simple as that with their desperation and overall ineptitude. .
Swisdom is an intelligent bloke. He doesn't miss the point. He just isn't listening, the same as anyone else with a financial interest.
I wondered when the financial interest would get dragged up. Once again it's absolutely fuck all to do with the sign. Or anything for that matter.
Let's get this straight. As a patron to the CACT we were asked to give some expert advice on something that impacted them and their facility. We made some comments and were then invited to comment on the wider scheme as it was clear we know what we are talking about. The training facility will be here long after many of us have left this earth and for my company to be involved in the training facility at the club we have supported for four generations was too good an opportunity to turn down.
Back to the sign - it will be done soon so we can stop talking about it.
Yes, let's get this straight. Are your company getting paid money by Charlton or another benefit in kind, or are your company offering expert advice for free ?
But Steve, the sign wont have the family blessing and that speaks volumes.
As for business interests, Axis walked, Andrews walked from the club , WJ King walked from the club, Data Techniques told them to shove it what does that tell you?
It tells me they dont want to be a major sponsor of the club any more. Nor do I. I just want to do the best we can for CACT with whom we have a vested interest.
Sorry you feel that way - but I guarantee there would have been people say words to the effect of "Why didn't the club involve the family since they were the ones who raised it" so either way would lead to frustrations.
Which is why I apologised to those inside the club who had good intentions. I just didn't want the family connection to be used by the owners - I could see it turning into a PR exercise. I wish they had just painted the sign and we could have all looked and said 'good job'. Of course standing on the sacred turf representing grandad would have given us great pleasure, as it has in the past. But maybe some other time eh? Hopefully in my lifetime.
There will be some other time, and hopefully in the not too distant future.
The Club put in brand new red seats in certain areas of the ground, Photos of the 1998 Play Off win outside the Covered End plus a general tidy up of the Valley.
Did anyone get consulted back then about these changes or did they just do it with the minimum of fuss?
This was done by this regime, so why change tact now and look to start pleasing fans, when just do, what you did back then.
Much like the spring clean, new seats and other bits and bobs in close season last year.
But the JS stand is more emotive because it's named after the only manager to have won anything for us - so involving family was sensible
No it wasn't at all. It was a cynical attempt to create good PR. It should be offensive to anyone who has any sense of history of our club.
I have on occassions found your input interesting but your refusal to acknowledge the obvious is tedious I am afraid to say.
Sorry you feel that way - but I guarantee there would have been people say words to the effect of "Why didn't the club involve the family since they were the ones who raised it" so either way would lead to frustrations.
You seem to be missing the point of why people think this is a cock up by the club. Yes the club should consult the family and if they didn't that would be justifiable reason to slag them off. However that isn't the real problem with this saga. The fact that the club made a big public song and dance about simply fixing a sign in a desperate bid for good publicity before anything has actually happened is the complaint. If they had just gone about it and replaced the sign without the pathetic PR attempt then it would have been a well done job by the club and those involved, even if the family chose not to be involved and publicly stated as such. Save the PR for after it's been done. At least the club wouldn't have again scored a public PR own goal and even if the sign does get done it's too late, they've managed to cock up something as simple as that with their desperation and overall ineptitude. .
Swisdom is an intelligent bloke. He doesn't miss the point. He just isn't listening, the same as anyone else with a financial interest.
I wondered when the financial interest would get dragged up. Once again it's absolutely fuck all to do with the sign. Or anything for that matter.
Let's get this straight. As a patron to the CACT we were asked to give some expert advice on something that impacted them and their facility. We made some comments and were then invited to comment on the wider scheme as it was clear we know what we are talking about. The training facility will be here long after many of us have left this earth and for my company to be involved in the training facility at the club we have supported for four generations was too good an opportunity to turn down.
Back to the sign - it will be done soon so we can stop talking about it.
Yes, let's get this straight. Are your company getting paid money by Charlton or another benefit in kind, or are your company offering expert advice for free ?
My money isn't involved but @Swisdom has stated repeatedly that his firm has done a limited amount of paid for work at sparrows lane.
He doesn't see that the regime is all bad, there are some positives, and he/she (I assume he in the rest of this post) makes good points around different ways of supporting the club.
I do not often agree with the positives that he sees, but I respect his support for the club and the fact he is prepared to state that knowing full well he is going to get a lot of disagreement thrown against him.
Fair play, keep it up.
Also though, not everything is rosy in the garden of Charlton and this could also be recognised sometimes to show a more balanced view.
But Steve, the sign wont have the family blessing and that speaks volumes.
As for business interests, Axis walked, Andrews walked from the club , WJ King walked from the club, Data Techniques told them to shove it what does that tell you?
Why is Andrews name on the Dugout pods? if they are no longer involved, also the club should remove the two Andrews signs either side of the JS sign.
Of course Jimmy Seed should be given all the respect he deserves, any monument to him should be maintained. But his grandson has no position in my opinion.
But Steve, the sign wont have the family blessing and that speaks volumes.
As for business interests, Axis walked, Andrews walked from the club , WJ King walked from the club, Data Techniques told them to shove it what does that tell you?
Why is Andrews name on the Dugout pods? if they are no longer involved, also the club should remove the two Andrews signs either side of the JS sign.
This is a good point, dansk. It's also one someone mentioned a few pages back: the equipment required to repair the JS sign is actually required to remove that advertising too...
It's almost as if the club could tick two basic maintenance tasks off their to do list, whilst also making it in to a PR piece...
Of course Jimmy Seed should be given all the respect he deserves, any monument to him should be maintained. But his grandson has no position in my opinion.
He does when the club seek to use his voice and the action as a PR peice, as he mentions above.
The club have made a big deal out of intending to do basic maintenance that should've been carried out ages ago.
That his family felt the need to underline the need for such maintenance says a lot. Of course, we have a COO who seems unable to grasp the name of the stand anyway; so it's no surprise.
My money isn't involved but @Swisdom has stated repeatedly that his firm has done a limited amount of paid for work at sparrows lane.
He doesn't see that the regime is all bad, there are some positives, and he/she (I assume he in the rest of this post) makes good points around different ways of supporting the club.
I do not often agree with the positives that he sees, but I respect his support for the club and the fact he is prepared to state that knowing full well he is going to get a lot of disagreement thrown against him.
Fair play, keep it up.
Also though, not everything is rosy in the garden of Charlton and this could also be recognised sometimes to show a more balanced view.
I think anybody that defends the Belgians needs to be shot.
But Steve, the sign wont have the family blessing and that speaks volumes.
As for business interests, Axis walked, Andrews walked from the club , WJ King walked from the club, Data Techniques told them to shove it what does that tell you?
Why is Andrews name on the Dugout pods? if they are no longer involved, also the club should remove the two Andrews signs either side of the JS sign.
So the whole reason for flying this kite was to get fans to raise funds to pay for access equipment to remove adverts for an anti regime company. Now it makes sense. Nothing else does.
The Club put in brand new red seats in certain areas of the ground, Photos of the 1998 Play Off win outside the Covered End plus a general tidy up of the Valley.
Did anyone get consulted back then about these changes or did they just do it with the minimum of fuss?
This was done by this regime, so why change tact now and look to start pleasing fans, when just do, what you did back then.
Much like the spring clean, new seats and other bits and bobs in close season last year.
But the JS stand is more emotive because it's named after the only manager to have won anything for us - so involving family was sensible
No it wasn't at all. It was a cynical attempt to create good PR. It should be offensive to anyone who has any sense of history of our club.
I have on occassions found your input interesting but your refusal to acknowledge the obvious is tedious I am afraid to say.
Sorry you feel that way - but I guarantee there would have been people say words to the effect of "Why didn't the club involve the family since they were the ones who raised it" so either way would lead to frustrations.
You seem to be missing the point of why people think this is a cock up by the club. Yes the club should consult the family and if they didn't that would be justifiable reason to slag them off. However that isn't the real problem with this saga. The fact that the club made a big public song and dance about simply fixing a sign in a desperate bid for good publicity before anything has actually happened is the complaint. If they had just gone about it and replaced the sign without the pathetic PR attempt then it would have been a well done job by the club and those involved, even if the family chose not to be involved and publicly stated as such. Save the PR for after it's been done. At least the club wouldn't have again scored a public PR own goal and even if the sign does get done it's too late, they've managed to cock up something as simple as that with their desperation and overall ineptitude. .
Swisdom is an intelligent bloke. He doesn't miss the point. He just isn't listening, the same as anyone else with a financial interest.
I don't go along with the financial interest point that keeps being thrown at Swisdom but he does appear to always ignore the particular point that I and others have made. As he has done again.
Comments
I have on occassions found your input interesting but your refusal to acknowledge the obvious is tedious I am afraid to say.
Which is why I apologised to those inside the club who had good intentions.
I just didn't want the family connection to be used by the owners - I could see it turning into a PR exercise.
I wish they had just painted the sign and we could have all looked and said 'good job'.
Of course standing on the sacred turf representing grandad would have given us great pleasure, as it has in the past. But maybe some other time eh? Hopefully in my lifetime.
a) one-legged and have not walked very far?
b) walking in the sea?
c) unable to count?
d) suffering from really poor eyesight? That would at least go some way to explain your "line" comment
Let's get this straight. As a patron to the CACT we were asked to give some expert advice on something that impacted them and their facility. We made some comments and were then invited to comment on the wider scheme as it was clear we know what we are talking about.
The training facility will be here long after many of us have left this earth and for my company to be involved in the training facility at the club we have supported for four generations was too good an opportunity to turn down.
Back to the sign - it will be done soon so we can stop talking about it.
As for business interests, Axis walked, Andrews walked from the club , WJ King walked from the club, Data Techniques told them to shove it what does that tell you?
I just didn't want the family connection to be used by the owners - I could see it turning into a PR exercise.
I wish they had just painted the sign and we could have all looked and said 'good job'.
Of course standing on the sacred turf representing grandad would have given us great pleasure, as it has in the past. But maybe some other time eh? Hopefully in my lifetime.
There will be some other time, and hopefully in the not too distant future.
He doesn't see that the regime is all bad, there are some positives, and he/she (I assume he in the rest of this post) makes good points around different ways of supporting the club.
I do not often agree with the positives that he sees, but I respect his support for the club and the fact he is prepared to state that knowing full well he is going to get a lot of disagreement thrown against him.
Fair play, keep it up.
Also though, not everything is rosy in the garden of Charlton and this could also be recognised sometimes to show a more balanced view.
But his grandson has no position in my opinion.
It's almost as if the club could tick two basic maintenance tasks off their to do list, whilst also making it in to a PR piece... He does when the club seek to use his voice and the action as a PR peice, as he mentions above.
The club have made a big deal out of intending to do basic maintenance that should've been carried out ages ago.
That his family felt the need to underline the need for such maintenance says a lot. Of course, we have a COO who seems unable to grasp the name of the stand anyway; so it's no surprise.
I'm with Jim/ James / Peter / Jimmy / Charlton or whatever he is called.
Sorry, Swisdom / Steve - you lose. You just can't compete on names. Let alone on anything else.