Nigel Williamson (aka IncorruptibleAddick) has replied on the Sunday Times' site to Liddle's article as follows:-
I've supported Charlton since 1966 and most supporters do not recognise this description of "the apparent destruction of this once great club".
The "worry" over the future of "Charlton’s beautiful and historic ground" is a figment of Mr Liddle's imagination. Does it have anything to do with the fact that he's a supporter of Millwall, a club that not so long ago sold its own "historic ground" and moved to a new site? Mr Liddle's team visit The Valley in 14 days time. He will be made welcome but he will see a very different and far more positive picture than the one he so luridly paints here.
For the record, the ground celebrates its centenary as Charlton Athletic's home in 2019 and plans are already well advanced for the club to mark the anniversary with a series of commemorative events. Two years after that in 2021, Charlton will still be at the Valley to celebrate another significant anniversary - the centenary of the club's admission to the Football League. Far from the club being "in the hands of people who have no sense of the community history", it is exactly that community history which the programme of anniversary events currently will honour and celebrate.
It's actually an exciting time to be a Charlton supporter and the vast majority are sick to death of the futile and self-destructive protests by a small group of militant agitators. The owner has pumped millions into the club, which was facing the prospect of administration when he rescued it. The club has just appointed an inspirational young manager, the team sits six points off a play-off place and two new signings were in place before the January transfer window had even opened.
Mr Liddle's close interest in his own club's oldest rival is appreciated. But the narrative he tries to present here is just plain wrong.
"It's actually an exciting time to be a Charlton supporter and the vast majority are sick to death of the futile and self-destructive protests by a small group of militant agitators." says Nigel Williamson
This opens another question: what do people believe the split between the pro and anti-Roland factions to be? I read CL, no other forum and quit the Facebook group some time ago. I follow a few Charlton fans on Twitter, all of whom seem to be in the CARD camp. Yet here's a guy claiming the vast majority of fans are in support of the regime. And if it's such an exciting time to be a Charlton fan, why are attendances so low?
I'm looking at this as someone unable to attend or join in the protests. The one game I made was the cup game v Scunthorpe so a somewhat different atmosphere that day. My view from afar has been that the vast majority are anti-Duchatalet. Am I wrong?
The vast majority are definitely anti RD even amongst those of who still attend. It is also safe to assume that those who don't now attend aren't happy with him either.
"It's actually an exciting time to be a Charlton supporter and the vast majority are sick to death of the futile and self-destructive protests by a small group of militant agitators." says Nigel Williamson
This opens another question: what do people believe the split between the pro and anti-Roland factions to be? I read CL, no other forum and quit the Facebook group some time ago. I follow a few Charlton fans on Twitter, all of whom seem to be in the CARD camp. Yet here's a guy claiming the vast majority of fans are in support of the regime. And if it's such an exciting time to be a Charlton fan, why are attendances so low?
I'm looking at this as someone unable to attend or join in the protests. The one game I made was the cup game v Scunthorpe so a somewhat different atmosphere that day. My view from afar has been that the vast majority are anti-Duchatalet. Am I wrong?
People like incorruptible don't need to bother with silly annoying little things like facts or evidence or reality to back up what they choose to believe. If they believe it and keep repeating it it must be true in their minds. Just don't expect any in depth discussions with anything substantive to back themselves up with.
IA is ex Times , or so he told me, he certainly knows some of my old contacts there. Re: ACV, I think that Rod is a bit wide of the mark with the valuation, possibly after a rebuild with 'add ons'. But as AB has already posted cannot see this as a reason, but we are talking RD here!...... Perhaps this is some 'project' to work with the fans and the mentioned anniversaries, good luck with that one, if KM and RD are involved simply not interested.
Nigel Williamson (aka IncorruptibleAddick) has replied on the Sunday Times' site to Liddle's article as follows:-
I've supported Charlton since 1966 and most supporters do not recognise this description of "the apparent destruction of this once great club".
The "worry" over the future of "Charlton’s beautiful and historic ground" is a figment of Mr Liddle's imagination. Does it have anything to do with the fact that he's a supporter of Millwall, a club that not so long ago sold its own "historic ground" and moved to a new site? Mr Liddle's team visit The Valley in 14 days time. He will be made welcome but he will see a very different and far more positive picture than the one he so luridly paints here.
For the record, the ground celebrates its centenary as Charlton Athletic's home in 2019 and plans are already well advanced for the club to mark the anniversary with a series of commemorative events. Two years after that in 2021, Charlton will still be at the Valley to celebrate another significant anniversary - the centenary of the club's admission to the Football League. Far from the club being "in the hands of people who have no sense of the community history", it is exactly that community history which the programme of anniversary events currently will honour and celebrate.
It's actually an exciting time to be a Charlton supporter and the vast majority are sick to death of the futile and self-destructive protests by a small group of militant agitators. The owner has pumped millions into the club, which was facing the prospect of administration when he rescued it. The club has just appointed an inspirational young manager, the team sits six points off a play-off place and two new signings were in place before the January transfer window had even opened.
Mr Liddle's close interest in his own club's oldest rival is appreciated. But the narrative he tries to present here is just plain wrong.
Everybody is entitled to voice their own opinion as Nigel has done.
However I won't take lessons in 'support' from a so called longstanding fan and member of Kent County Cricket Club whom decanted in high dudgeon to Sussex CCC because of disenchantment with Roland and Meire the hierarchy of Kent at the time.
Maybe if the Roland Nigel appears to like so much leaves he will revert to type when the new regime takes over and buy a season ticket at Crystal Palace.
Nigel Williamson (aka IncorruptibleAddick) has replied on the Sunday Times' site to Liddle's article as follows:-
I've supported Charlton since 1966 and most supporters do not recognise this description of "the apparent destruction of this once great club".
The "worry" over the future of "Charlton’s beautiful and historic ground" is a figment of Mr Liddle's imagination. Does it have anything to do with the fact that he's a supporter of Millwall, a club that not so long ago sold its own "historic ground" and moved to a new site? Mr Liddle's team visit The Valley in 14 days time. He will be made welcome but he will see a very different and far more positive picture than the one he so luridly paints here.
For the record, the ground celebrates its centenary as Charlton Athletic's home in 2019 and plans are already well advanced for the club to mark the anniversary with a series of commemorative events. Two years after that in 2021, Charlton will still be at the Valley to celebrate another significant anniversary - the centenary of the club's admission to the Football League. Far from the club being "in the hands of people who have no sense of the community history", it is exactly that community history which the programme of anniversary events currently will honour and celebrate.
It's actually an exciting time to be a Charlton supporter and the vast majority are sick to death of the futile and self-destructive protests by a small group of militant agitators. The owner has pumped millions into the club, which was facing the prospect of administration when he rescued it. The club has just appointed an inspirational young manager, the team sits six points off a play-off place and two new signings were in place before the January transfer window had even opened.
Mr Liddle's close interest in his own club's oldest rival is appreciated. But the narrative he tries to present here is just plain wrong.
Everybody is entitled to voice their own opinion as Nigel has done.
However I won't take lessons in 'support' from a so called longstanding fan and member of Kent County Cricket Club whom decanted in high dudgeon to Sussex CCC because of disenchantment with Roland and Meire the hierarchy of Kent at the time.
Maybe if the Roland Nigel appears to like so much leaves he will revert to type when the new regime takes over and buy a season ticket at Crystal Palace.
Brilliant post; @Stig a strong candidate for the first 'post of week' 2017 .
Couldn't make it up really. A millwall supporter writes a good article in a major newspaper highlighting our plight, only for a so called Charlton fan to respond with a total load of bollox supporting the regime. What a cock
Nigel Williamson (aka IncorruptibleAddick) has replied on the Sunday Times' site to Liddle's article as follows:-
I've supported Charlton since 1966 and most supporters do not recognise this description of "the apparent destruction of this once great club".
The "worry" over the future of "Charlton’s beautiful and historic ground" is a figment of Mr Liddle's imagination. Does it have anything to do with the fact that he's a supporter of Millwall, a club that not so long ago sold its own "historic ground" and moved to a new site? Mr Liddle's team visit The Valley in 14 days time. He will be made welcome but he will see a very different and far more positive picture than the one he so luridly paints here.
For the record, the ground celebrates its centenary as Charlton Athletic's home in 2019 and plans are already well advanced for the club to mark the anniversary with a series of commemorative events. Two years after that in 2021, Charlton will still be at the Valley to celebrate another significant anniversary - the centenary of the club's admission to the Football League. Far from the club being "in the hands of people who have no sense of the community history", it is exactly that community history which the programme of anniversary events currently will honour and celebrate.
It's actually an exciting time to be a Charlton supporter and the vast majority are sick to death of the futile and self-destructive protests by a small group of militant agitators. The owner has pumped millions into the club, which was facing the prospect of administration when he rescued it. The club has just appointed an inspirational young manager, the team sits six points off a play-off place and two new signings were in place before the January transfer window had even opened.
Mr Liddle's close interest in his own club's oldest rival is appreciated. But the narrative he tries to present here is just plain wrong.
Everybody is entitled to voice their own opinion as Nigel has done.
However I won't take lessons in 'support' from a so called longstanding fan and member of Kent County Cricket Club whom decanted in high dudgeon to Sussex CCC because of disenchantment with Roland and Meire the hierarchy of Kent at the time.
Maybe if the Roland Nigel appears to like so much leaves he will revert to type when the new regime takes over and buy a season ticket at Crystal Palace.
Someone needs to post this on the Times site. Actually this Nigel sycophant does not write in the form of an opinion Len, he doesn't say "I think..." he states that "most supporters do not recognise..." as if it were fact. Yes he IS entitled to an opinion, but when it's a lie it needs to be pointed out to the Times reading public that he is full of shit.
Good on Liddle for continuing to champion the cause of a major rival though.
Nigel Williamson is a minor writer for Uncut music magazine - as a subscriber to that magazine since day one it galls me that someone with such an obnoxious view is in part earning money from me.
I recall on here he was ridiculed and humiliated in a series of one-sided arguments with Henry Irving - he either huffed off to the other site or was possibly banned from here, and his pro-regime stance is fuelled by his hatred of HI & the way he was painfully embarassed on here.
You've gotta use the winky / smiley emojis @SoundAsa£ mate. Space, colon then you get a drop down to chose which one you want or type in the emotion name and you'll get other choices
Can't understand why I was sacked as assistant to the People's Moderator formerly of Grove Park can you?
I can't find this article amongst Rod Liddle's contributions to my electronic version of today's Times otherwise I would have written in opposition to the views of this Nigel Williamson character because from my perspective his views on the ruinous stewardship of the club by Duchatelet and his statements about the opinions of the majority of the fans are utterly bizarre. I've never heard of him but he is obviously well known to some posters here otherwise I would have assumed he is the latest hired PR hack writing under a false name.
And Nigel what's the point of your comment that you've been going to the Valley since 1966? Are you trying to beef up the authority of your unrepresentative views? As it seems to matter to you, perhaps you should consider that many protesters have been going quite a lot longer than you.
I can't find this article amongst Rod Liddle's contributions to my electronic version of today's Times otherwise I would have written in opposition to the views of this Nigel Williamson character because from my perspective his views on the ruinous stewardship of the club by Duchatelet and his statements about the opinions of the majority of the fans are utterly bizarre. I've never heard of him but he is obviously well known to some posters here otherwise I would have assumed he is the latest hired PR hack writing under a false name.
And Nigel what's the point of your comment that you've been going to the Valley since 1966? Are you trying to beef up the authority of your unrepresentative views? As it seems to matter to you, perhaps you should consider that many protesters have been going quite a lot longer than you.
Anything Liddle says is usually noisy and populist - he writes for Murdoch doesn't he? His comments in this piece are interesting in that he can't quite square the apparent difference between Duchatelet the successful global businessman, Duchatelet the hit and miss owner of football clubs and Duchatelet's seemingly unambitious assumptions about why people go to football matches in the first place (to have a nice time - the results aren't that important).
If Liddle actually did some high powered research (IE looked up a few things on his lap top) he might notice that the answer is that Duchatelet has under estimated, consistently, the strength and depth of UK football outside the Premiership and how closely allied most supporters are to their clubs success or failure, compared to say, Hungary, where even top flight clubs play in front of 3,000-5,000 crowds regularly. Of course we don't all expect Charlton to win every week, but nor do we expect them to lose every week either. And that doesn't = we'd be happy with every season being season of a mid table mediocrity. We want to club to do well, be secure and challenge for promotion or a cup final at the very minimum at least 50% of the time, as against 0% of the time now.
If Duchatelet loses interest (which he may in the next 5 years, given his comments about retiring) I'd be careful who he sells the club to......we could easily slide into having a fantastically wealthy oligarch owner who announces changes to the name + first team strip.
However, the comments about the value of the ground come as no surprise albeit they make no allowance for affordable housing, community infrastructure levy payments and the likelihood of a valid consent (low).
If you want a proper value for anything don't talk to an estate agent.
The ACV status doesn't require the owner to provide another ground - although the planning system as a whole might, and almost certainly one in the borough. The cost of providing such a stadium if it has to be financed out of the sale of the old one makes the property transaction very marginal at best.
A sale of the club (with The Valley) as a football club is likely to be more profitable to the owner than a property deal, which is the best protection we have, along with the fraught, risky and very lengthy process entailed in redevelopment. For similar reasons it makes little sense to put the club out of business.
It might be more attractive to the club if a mini-OS style agreement was made. Club retains some proceeds of the sale of the land in exchange for a new stadium leased at a peppercorn rent funded by the Council and the developers buying the Valley. Particularly post-EC when the State Aid rules may no longer apply.
However I agree that it's a difficult business case to make for all parties.
Nigel has a Wikipedia entry for those who want to know who he is. I'm sure he's a nice enough guy away from the forums, but for such an experienced journalist and eloquent writer I don't get why he persists with a reductive and often poorly reasoned forum debating style when he could engage far more deeply with those with whom he disagrees. Seems more obsessed with condescension and dismissal than debate, frankly. He's pro-regime, anti-CARD, anti-Trust, anti-CL and anti just about any individual that puts their head above the parapet.
There's nothing stopping the Trust reapplying for ACV and given there is now a precedent no reason why the council shouldn't grant it.
The only 'power' ACV status would have is over the freehold of the ground being sold which would then need to be notified to the group holding the interest who could then bid
Another area concerns me and it may be something the Trust should be monitoring and that is any alteration to the existing freehold which if there is a parcelling up or sell off of any parts it should surely me made aware of - I worry the council will not feel obliged to do this given their lack of knowledge and approach to ACV in the first place. Perhaps the Trust could approach the council to gain assurances in this regard.
Wise words Razil, and something that should be monitored on a regular basis. By the way you have to book up and make an appointment at the contact centre. I spoke to the two planning officers who have divided the RBG into two districts or had 18 months ago, one for the training ground and the other for the Valley. I also requested that they contact myself at the time any significant planning application or change of use, so far they have failed to do so? The ACV extends to the full boundary of the Valley, so that includes the shop, despite this being not directly in control of the club, as that seems to be leased out, Also the NHS call centre!..... We have been over this subject several times, my conversations with the then ward councillors, and community leaders was fully supportive of the club remaining at the Valley. It also included MP's, and even the then FA chairman , and good old Boris. Obviously the characters have changed, and policies and building at the back of the Valley has and is happening ( Remember the Mews development?) Not sure I trust the RBG planners, and certainly the current regime than the time I could walk across the Valley,! . S.E.9 was very effective in discussions we had at the time with the council.
Nigel has a Wikipedia entry for those who want to know who he is. I'm sure he's a nice enough guy away from the forums, but for such an experienced journalist and eloquent writer I don't get why he persists with a reductive and often poorly reasoned forum debating style when he could engage far more deeply with those with whom he disagrees. Seems more obsessed with condescension and dismissal than debate, frankly. He's pro-regime, anti-CARD, anti-Trust, anti-CL and anti just about any individual that puts their head above the parapet.
Wise words Razil, and something that should be monitored on a regular basis. By the way you have to book up and make an appointment at the contact centre. I spoke to the two planning officers who have divided the RBG into two districts or had 18 months ago, one for the training ground and the other for the Valley. I also requested that they contact myself at the time any significant planning application or change of use, so far they have failed to do so? The ACV extends to the full boundary of the Valley, so that includes the shop, despite this being not directly in control of the club, as that seems to be leased out, Also the NHS call centre!..... We have been over this subject several times, my conversations with the then ward councillors, and community leaders was fully supportive of the club remaining at the Valley. It also included MP's, and even the then FA chairman , and good old Boris. Obviously the characters have changed, and policies and building at the back of the Valley has and is happening ( Remember the Mews development?) Not sure I trust the RBG planners, and certainly the current regime than the time I could walk across the Valley,! . S.E.9 was very effective in discussions we had at the time with the council.
It took us 7 years to get back into Floyd Road - and that just involved returning to the existing use without significant re-development for other purposes.
The Gaelic Athletic Association sports ground in New Eltham could be a useful example here of how long it would take anyone to get a redevelopment of the the Valley up and running if the 'line' was to relocate the club elsewhere and redevelop it's former ground for housing. In the case of the GAA: 25 years.
Comments
Re: ACV, I think that Rod is a bit wide of the mark with the valuation, possibly after a rebuild with 'add ons'. But as AB has already posted cannot see this as a reason, but we are talking RD here!......
Perhaps this is some 'project' to work with the fans and the mentioned anniversaries, good luck with that one, if KM and RD are involved simply not interested.
However I won't take lessons in 'support' from a so called longstanding fan and member of Kent County Cricket Club whom decanted in high dudgeon to Sussex CCC because of disenchantment with
Roland and Meirethe hierarchy of Kent at the time.Maybe if the Roland Nigel appears to like so much leaves he will revert to type when the new regime takes over and buy a season ticket at Crystal Palace.
A millwall supporter writes a good article in a major newspaper highlighting our plight, only for a so called Charlton fan to respond with a total load of bollox supporting the regime.
What a cock
Good on Liddle for continuing to champion the cause of a major rival though.
I recall on here he was ridiculed and humiliated in a series of one-sided arguments with Henry Irving - he either huffed off to the other site or was possibly banned from here, and his pro-regime stance is fuelled by his hatred of HI & the way he was painfully embarassed on here.
Can't understand why I was sacked as assistant to the People's Moderator formerly of Grove Park can you?
And Nigel what's the point of your comment that you've been going to the Valley since 1966? Are you trying to beef up the authority of your unrepresentative views? As it seems to matter to you, perhaps you should consider that many protesters have been going quite a lot longer than you.
If Liddle actually did some high powered research (IE looked up a few things on his lap top) he might notice that the answer is that Duchatelet has under estimated, consistently, the strength and depth of UK football outside the Premiership and how closely allied most supporters are to their clubs success or failure, compared to say, Hungary, where even top flight clubs play in front of 3,000-5,000 crowds regularly. Of course we don't all expect Charlton to win every week, but nor do we expect them to lose every week either. And that doesn't = we'd be happy with every season being season of a mid table mediocrity. We want to club to do well, be secure and challenge for promotion or a cup final at the very minimum at least 50% of the time, as against 0% of the time now.
If Duchatelet loses interest (which he may in the next 5 years, given his comments about retiring) I'd be careful who he sells the club to......we could easily slide into having a fantastically wealthy oligarch owner who announces changes to the name + first team strip.
However, the comments about the value of the ground come as no surprise albeit they make no allowance for affordable housing, community infrastructure levy payments and the likelihood of a valid consent (low).
If you want a proper value for anything don't talk to an estate agent.
Cripes, it works!
I've found a menopause one
However I agree that it's a difficult business case to make for all parties.
The only 'power' ACV status would have is over the freehold of the ground being sold which would then need to be notified to the group holding the interest who could then bid
Another area concerns me and it may be something the Trust should be monitoring and that is any alteration to the existing freehold which if there is a parcelling up or sell off of any parts it should surely me made aware of - I worry the council will not feel obliged to do this given their lack of knowledge and approach to ACV in the first place. Perhaps the Trust could approach the council to gain assurances in this regard.
The ACV extends to the full boundary of the Valley, so that includes the shop, despite this being not directly in control of the club, as that seems to be leased out, Also the NHS call centre!.....
We have been over this subject several times, my conversations with the then ward councillors, and community leaders was fully supportive of the club remaining at the Valley. It also included MP's, and even the then FA chairman , and good old Boris.
Obviously the characters have changed, and policies and building at the back of the Valley has and is happening ( Remember the Mews development?)
Not sure I trust the RBG planners, and certainly the current regime than the time I could walk across the Valley,! .
S.E.9 was very effective in discussions we had at the time with the council.
The Gaelic Athletic Association sports ground in New Eltham could be a useful example here of how long it would take anyone to get a redevelopment of the the Valley up and running if the 'line' was to relocate the club elsewhere and redevelop it's former ground for housing. In the case of the GAA: 25 years.