I can't believe people are still going on about this. If there'd been this much interest in the womens team before then maybe they wouldn't have been chopped!
Personally, I really don't give a monkeys about them to be honest. Now can someone sink this subject, PLEEEEEAASSEEE?!!!!
The story was leaked to the press over the weekend and not by the club but by people who had been asked not to comment on it.
The redundency process was still going on and the final interviews were still being held. They was a statement on the OS last Friday that a further statement would be made this week. All this is in today's statement.
I'm sure Peter loved reading all the complaining (and some abusive) e-mails and letters as much as I did as well as not being able to give a full reply or respond to the press stories and calls from the press.
Yes, that's his job and what he get's paid to do but saying that he's only replying now because of the fuss is just plain wrong.
What bad publicity? Other than a few snippets on local news and a line or two in the papers - none of which were critical, just factual - the only "fuss" I've seen made is by people on here!
If most of our own fans don't really give a toss about the women's team then why on earth would anyone else? Some people love to get all moral and preach sometimes, don't they.
[cite]Posted By: Henry Irving[/cite]Oggy, did you read the statement?
The story was leaked to the press over the weekend and not by the club but by people who had been asked not to comment on it.
Hi Henry, like people do these days, I scanned the article at work while pretending to be working....(!) but fair enough, I could have Varney's comments more carefully.
Even though people about to be 'disposed of' were asked not to comment, it is only human nature that angry and disappointed people will speak out. The club should have been prepared for this.
The whole thing could, I'm sure, have been handled better - the club clearly underestimated the barrage of bad publicity,
and now seek to put it right.
Yes, they could have predicted that people would leak the story but could not pre-empt that by saying anything themselves for legal reasons.
Perhaps it could have been handled better by the people who leaked the story and by the press such as by getting their facts right and putting the story into the context of a whole raft of cuts across the club's departments.
How do you know that the club underestimated the barrage of bad publicity? Let's wait and see what reaction there is now the club's side of the story is out. I'm certainly eager to hear what the people who e-mailed me saying that they would no longer support the club have to say now.
There it is again. What have I missed - has a march to parliament been organised? Is Trevor McDonald going to be present his "Tonight" programme live from the Valley this week (where he will be mispronouncing his words in that really strange accent of his!)
Henry, has someone REALLY emailed you to say that they would no longer be supporting the club about this storm in a teacup? That's pathetic - I hope you gave them short shrift!
[cite]Posted By: Henry Irving[/cite]I'm certainly eager to hear what the people who e-mailed me saying that they would no longer support the club have to say now.
Anyone who said that clearly isn't a proper fan of Charlton then.
I'm proud of some of the off field stances the club has taken in the past, and cringed at some others, but in general the right though and idea has always been there.
I think one the thing the club could learn from this is just to get on with things in a more cute manner, rather than publicise so loudly as the bastion of all things righteous and the saviour of the game. Because when sad but necessary events like this happen, it leaves a little egg on face and there are plenty of people looking for a reason to highlight that.
All this controversy and strong feeling over the only area / unit of the club that could never have any direct or indirect impact on our first team, was supported by just 40 people, yet cost our club over £300k a year.
Absolute madness.
A lot of these complaints (not all) i'm convinced aren't anything to do with the women's team, but an excuse to have a pop at the board.
Much more of this nonesense from our board and it might come to the point where they either need to stand aside or maybe i finally need to take my support and financial commitment somewhere else.
My opinion is its time for him to go not the womens team. I never thought I’d say it but I refuse to support Charlton, I would have come to watch them as a non league team but not with a director Chief Executive like Varney in control.
I know that some people have a genuine feeling for the women's team and I feel for them and of course all those that are losing jobs or teams but so much comment seemed, IMHO, OTT and misplaced due, I believe, to the club doing the right thing and not making a statement until the redundency legalities were completed.
I shall be making my thoughts known through official channels in due course and I look forward to seeing what the club says officially, I'm sure it will show things in a better light.
In response to those who have said that no-one outside the club gives a toss, that it's only us on here who are discussing it etc: Apart from my own family I probably spoke at any length to a sum total of five people yesterday and three of them - neither of whom are Charlton fans - brought up the closure of the women's section without prompting from me and they thought it was appalling and, on the face of it, a massive error of judgement.
Sorry but i can't help myself making further comments - those who have been saying that its a bad thing consider this. If it was announced in the papers that "As a result of relegation Charlton Athletic have decided to shut down parts of it marketing, finance and matchday staff saving almost £300k"
Now the above may (or already is happening) but i can guarantee that not nearly as much outcry would have been generated and many people will have accepted this as a result of relegation. The only reason that this particular debate has happened (in my opinion) is because it is fashionable to be rather politically correct as it refers to a "minority" in terms of the sporting world.
People need to understand tough decisions need to be made and actioned and this is what has happened. Yes its a shame and i feel sorry for all the staff concerned within the women's set up, and i will offer the same sentiments to people in other areas of the club who lose their jobs as a result of the relegation.
I wonder if a number of people who are feeling so strongly about keeping the women's set up feel as strongly about other areas of the club such as the hospitality staff etc. I would hope so otherwise it is very contradictory.
[cite]Posted By: C_f_W[/cite]I shall be making my thoughts known through official channels in due course and I look forward to seeing what the club says officially, I'm sure it will show things in a better light.
In response to those who have said that no-one outside the club give a toss, apart from my own family I probably spoke at length to a sum total of four people yesterday and two of them - neither of whom are Charlton fans - brought up the closure of the women's section and thought it was appalling and on the face of it, a massive error of judgement.
The fact that no-one gave a toss is largely borne out by the fact that no-one ever went to see them. It's a tiny minority of people who will care about this, I don't think I know one person who could care less. And I know at least 10 or 11 people ;-)
As far as I can see other than a tiny storm in a teacup this will have no negative impact on the club whatsoever. It's not sexist, it's just fact that women's football is a minority sport of interest to very few. The game should be open to all, it should be there to be enjoyed by all who want to participate or spectate and I'd never argue against that. This doesn't mean that I want to watch them do it and it certainly doesn't mean that this should be subsidised by a club desperately trying to cope with an astronomical drop in income.
FWIW, my thoughts on this having absolutely ZERO to do with political correctness, sexism or anything of the sort - until reading the above comments it hadn't even entered my head.
It's easy to substantiate an argument by drawing comparisons with other areas of the buisiness such as the marketing dept etc, and it's a fair point, it might not strike as much of a chord. The whys and wherefores aside, I think there are two reasons it does strike more of a chord:
1. It's the closure of a footballing section. We're a football club, football is 'core business' (regardless of who's playing it)and a cull there appear to have more impact.
2. In the scheme of things womens football is small fry, it's accepted by even the most staunch supporter of women's football but relatively our team is the second most team the game in this country has ever seen and to kill off something that successful will always create waves.
[cite]Posted By: C_f_W[/cite]FWIW, my thoughts on this having absolutely ZERO to do with political correctness, sexism or anything of the sort - until reading the above comments it hadn't even entered my head.
It's easy to substantiate an argument by drawing comparisons with other areas of the buisiness such as the marketing dept etc, and it's a fair point, it might not strike as much of a chord. The whys and wherefores aside, I think there are two reasons it does strike more of a chord:
1. It's the closure of a footballing section. We're a football club, football is 'core business' (regardless of who's playing it)and a cull there appear to have more impact.
2. In the scheme of things womens football is small fry, it's accepted by even the most staunch supporter of women's football but relatively our team is the second most team the game in this country has ever seen and to kill off something that successful will always create waves.
Fair play to you C_f_W, you make two good points. Again, just my opinion but they're just not strong enough for people to be criticising the board on this one. See where you're coming from though.
[cite]Posted By: C_f_W[/cite]
to kill off something that successful will always create waves.
But its not successful though, that is the crux of the matter.
It cost 300k a year with no return, no spectators, no known sponsorship interest and no signs of growth. And with other clubs pulling the plug on their teams, it is obvious that women's football tried to grow too quickly at top level. It needs serious FA guiding on how to grow at a sustainable rate, not financially struggling men's football clubs giving them a sympathetic hand out to subsidise them. That's not only patronising to a certain extent, it will not help the long-term growth of the women's game in this country.
Look at men's football in the US. They went about trying to grow it in an unorganic way 30 years ago, chucking money at it when it did not have the support or the structure to sustain it. Women's football has gone in a similar fashion; it desperately needs to regroup and restructure, or alternatively it should be EVERY men's clubs requirement to devote resources towards the growth of a women's network.
[cite]Posted By: Henry Irving[/cite]Yes they did. From two different e-mails.
Much more of this nonesense from our board and it might come to the point where they either need to stand aside or maybe i finally need to take my support and financial commitment somewhere else.
My opinion is its time for him to go not the womens team. I never thought I’d say it but I refuse to support Charlton, I would have come to watch them as a non league team but not with a director Chief Executive like Varney in control.
I know that some people have a genuine feeling for the women's team and I feel for them and of course all those that are losing jobs or teams but so much comment seemed, IMHO, OTT and misplaced due, I believe, to the club doing the right thing and not making a statement until the redundency legalities were completed.
Henry, I have just been involved in a difficult but essential redundancy exercise which affected the local community in which I live. As a board we were completely bound by confidentialilty and the process and could not speak our publically until the process was complete. Those who were affected by it and their supporters leaked it out in a particularly damaging and biased way. I understand how Reg and board members must feel. Those who criticise must understand that sometimes you just cannot speak out.
Posted By: Henry Irving I'm certainly eager to hear what the people who e-mailed me saying that they would no longer support the club have to say now.
Henry I did not email advising withdrawal of my support for Charlton after the decision to axe the ladies section but I am a strong critic of the decision.
Maybe my values are old fashioned but by supporting the ladies section club for the period it has and especially after the acrimonious acquisition of Croydon Ladies the club has a commitment to support. I am sure the board will have given the issue no little consideration before making a decision, but the issue should not have been on the table.
I appreciate most Charlton supporters and for that matter most of the board of directors may not see the decision important in relation to the focus on the clubs league side. In isolation the view we pay our money and we want to see the league side succeed is more than reasonable.
It may well be the decision to take on a Ladies Section in the first place was wrong but the club brand in community terms alone achieved intangible benefits from its involvment but to close down a primary channel for women to access the top level of the game was never going to be in the clubs interests.
Downsize, put in place other ownership, do whatever, but to simply walk away is a direct kick in the teeth for those who worked hard to support the women’s club and those the club had enthused to participate in womens football at any level.
Charlton chose to step into this relative grass roots level of the game - no one forced it to - so the decision to axe the ladies section sends the wrong message betraying a real lack of understanding of the grass roots of the game.
I spent 20yrs with Spartan, Metropolitan, Kent & Sussex league clubs most of which were semi pro. The effort of those club boards, players, families & friends to keep those clubs going was exceptional. A few had benevolent chairman who would ultimately pick up the tab but most needed everyone’s contribution to survive. Charlton Ladies Section is no different.
You make some very valid points and are entitled to your views. However I disagree.
You say that the club had to make difficult decisions re:cuts but the women's team should not even be on the table for discussion. Why should the women's team have such protection when every other dept has been cut and staff made redundant? You may argue it is a higher priority than say the men's first team, the boys acedemy or the ticket office (though I would disagree on all three) but to say that the women's team can not even be considered for cuts when all other areas have been is, IMHO, perverse.
Perhaps as you say the club should never have taken on the women's team or should have made it run on a break even budget but having done so surely does not mean it should continue regardless of changing situations. More foolish to keep on paying money you can not afford than to accept the situation and act, however reluctantly.
You ask why can not the team be downsized or have ownership switched. As the club statement says, and I'm assuming you read the statement before posting, the club tried to switch the women's team to the Charitable trust but could not and is still looking for a sponsor. That none has been forthcoming not just for Charlton but for the women's game as a whole shows that, rightly or wrongly, companies to not see it as a sound marketing investment.
Your comparison with grass roots football is also flawed. The women's team plays in a national, not a local league, and contains a number of internationals. Even the travel budget would stretch most men's clubs in the Spartan and other leagues you mention . There are also quite stringent ground requirements as I understand it. It is not even a local team as players travel from as far a field as Birmingham.
I sincerely hope that something can be saved and the team continue in some form. However if you are asking that £300k is chopped off another budget and more core staff sacked so that can happen then I say you are wrong.
The other point to stress is that the grass roots and community activity has, in the large part, been protected through the setting up some years ago of the Charitable trust. This is able to access different funds from local, central and transnational sources and means that the coaching in schools and community group (for boys and girls), the summer events, the educational work with young people, the work with the mentally ill and many others continues. See below.
http://shop.cafc.co.uk/newsview.ink?nid=30920&newstype=c Awards won
http://shop.cafc.co.uk/newsview.ink?nid=30837&newstype=c Community work continues
http://shop.cafc.co.uk/newsview.ink?nid=30617&newstype=c Big community scheme
problem with all of this is, is that it appears to have been mishandled, and then spun to cover up using corporate bull**** to hide behind.
Why announce 16m cuts in the first place, I don't see how that is so different to the club publicising that the women's tean is regrettably under threat, both such statements would result in job cuts. You might even find that publicising the plight of the ladies might have saved them..
[cite]Posted By: razil[/cite]problem with all of this is, is that it appears to have been mishandled, and then spun to cover up using corporate bull**** to hide behind.
Why announce 16m cuts in the first place, I don't see how that is so different to the club publicising that the women's tean is regrettably under threat, both such statements would result in job cuts. You might even find that publicising the plight of the ladies might have saved them..
Explain? Not clear what you mean by "mishandled" or "spun" or "corporate bullshit".
THe big difference re: your second para is a general statement and specifics. There is a legal process that has to be gone thru with redundencies. Saying there will be cuts and they will be cuts in your dept are quite different.
I need to go shower, but for starters what harm would there have been in saying the womens team was in jepordy? Such announcements are made throughout industry without affecting redundancy requirements.
Sorry - Off it - not quite yet - Henry I apologize if my comments were unclear but there appears to be some misinterpretation
Henry: You say that the club had to make difficult decisions re:cuts but the women's team should not even be on the table for discussion. Why should the women's team have such protection when every other dept has been cut and staff made redundant? You may argue it is a higher priority than say the men's first team, the boys acedemy or the ticket office (though I would disagree on all three) but to say that the women's team can not even be considered for cuts when all other areas have been is, IMHO, perverse"
Grapevine: Clever positioning Henry but point was that the AXING of the ladies section should not have been on the table. Like any other aspect of the club it needed to face cutbacks. So I do NOT argue it must be held above other parts of the club. No-one is talking about axing academy or first teams.
Henry: Perhaps as you say the club should never have taken on the women's team or should have made it run on a break even budget but having done so surely does not mean it should continue regardless of changing situations. More foolish to keep on paying money you can not afford than to accept the situation and act, however reluctantly.
Grapevine: Sounds reasonable - as the club did not grasp the fundamentals of how to run/ finance this aspect of the club it has the right to simply walk away. Did the club advise those it invited to join in this section it was to be run merely at the whim of a club which had no long term interest? Was this not precisely the fear expressed by those at Croydon who opposed the clubs involvement?
Henry: You ask why can not the team be downsized or have ownership switched. As the club statement says, and I'm assuming you read the statement before posting, the club tried to switch the women's team to the Charitable trust but could not and is still looking for a sponsor. That none has been forthcoming not just for Charlton but for the women's game as a whole shows that, rightly or wrongly, companies to not see it as a sound marketing investment.
Grapevine: Clearly it can be downsized PV’s statement indicates a budget reduction to 100k. Regarding a sponsor, when did the club make the decision to axe the section? When did they advise the principles of the section? Did they warn of its potential closure, or invite those in the section to come up with solutions? Were they given a chance to be party to decisions regarding its future? Henry do you make my point for me? Are you saying the club just saw this dalliance as a bad marketing investment? It would certainly explain the decision.
Henry: Your comparison with grass roots football is also flawed. The women's team plays in a national, not a local league, and contains a number of internationals. Even the travel budget would stretch most men's clubs in the Spartan and other leagues you mention. There are also quite stringent ground requirements as I understand it. It is not even a local team as players travel from as far a field as Birmingham.
Grapevine: Grass-roots are not about location or jurisdiction. They are about the standard, structure & development. In terms of playing standard the ladies game is still in its infancy. If the club has challenges with its structure & costs, others will as well. A mature approach is to work with others to restructure the program, its requirements etc., not throw the baby out with bathwater.
Thanks for the attachments on the work of the charitable trust but I view the intended inference as disingenuous. Where do lasses with ability progress to? Once through local coaching programs where next, back to the kitchen? Perhaps each program should pass out US College prospectus?
Henry I respect your points and the club for all it HAS achieved but this is a bad decision with the aroma of a corporate knee jerk reaction. Skills to manage retrenchment really do differ from those managing expansion.
You may feel that axing should not have been on the table but it was. As was axing whole other departments and sections. No, axing the men's team was not on the table for the obvious reason that it remains the cash cow of the business and has funded the women's team since the latter's inception.
I know I'm not going to change your mind as to this being a bad decision. That's fine. What I do object to is you claiming that this was a "knee jerk reaction" or a "daliance" by the board when you have no evidence of that.
It was a detailed and drawn out process that began many months ago before relegation but when that was clearly a likely outcome. Because you are unhappy with the outcome it does not mean that the process was not carried out thoroughly and with full consideration of the ramifications.
Comments
Personally, I really don't give a monkeys about them to be honest. Now can someone sink this subject, PLEEEEEAASSEEE?!!!!
It's a pity though, that the club didn't release the news first, rather than let the media leak the news for shock value and bad press.
And, call me cynical, but Varney is responding only because of the barrage of bad publicity.
Let's hope that sponsorship negotiations can be successfully concluded, the Women's team retained and put on a more cost effective footing.
The story was leaked to the press over the weekend and not by the club but by people who had been asked not to comment on it.
The redundency process was still going on and the final interviews were still being held. They was a statement on the OS last Friday that a further statement would be made this week. All this is in today's statement.
I'm sure Peter loved reading all the complaining (and some abusive) e-mails and letters as much as I did as well as not being able to give a full reply or respond to the press stories and calls from the press.
Yes, that's his job and what he get's paid to do but saying that he's only replying now because of the fuss is just plain wrong.
If most of our own fans don't really give a toss about the women's team then why on earth would anyone else? Some people love to get all moral and preach sometimes, don't they.
It's done now. Move on.
Hi Henry, like people do these days, I scanned the article at work while pretending to be working....(!) but fair enough, I could have Varney's comments more carefully.
Even though people about to be 'disposed of' were asked not to comment, it is only human nature that angry and disappointed people will speak out. The club should have been prepared for this.
The whole thing could, I'm sure, have been handled better - the club clearly underestimated the barrage of bad publicity,
and now seek to put it right.
Perhaps it could have been handled better by the people who leaked the story and by the press such as by getting their facts right and putting the story into the context of a whole raft of cuts across the club's departments.
How do you know that the club underestimated the barrage of bad publicity? Let's wait and see what reaction there is now the club's side of the story is out. I'm certainly eager to hear what the people who e-mailed me saying that they would no longer support the club have to say now.
There it is again. What have I missed - has a march to parliament been organised? Is Trevor McDonald going to be present his "Tonight" programme live from the Valley this week (where he will be mispronouncing his words in that really strange accent of his!)
Anyone who said that clearly isn't a proper fan of Charlton then.
I'm proud of some of the off field stances the club has taken in the past, and cringed at some others, but in general the right though and idea has always been there.
I think one the thing the club could learn from this is just to get on with things in a more cute manner, rather than publicise so loudly as the bastion of all things righteous and the saviour of the game. Because when sad but necessary events like this happen, it leaves a little egg on face and there are plenty of people looking for a reason to highlight that.
All this controversy and strong feeling over the only area / unit of the club that could never have any direct or indirect impact on our first team, was supported by just 40 people, yet cost our club over £300k a year.
Absolute madness.
A lot of these complaints (not all) i'm convinced aren't anything to do with the women's team, but an excuse to have a pop at the board.
Much more of this nonesense from our board and it might come to the point where they either need to stand aside or maybe i finally need to take my support and financial commitment somewhere else.
My opinion is its time for him to go not the womens team. I never thought I’d say it but I refuse to support Charlton, I would have come to watch them as a non league team but not with a director Chief Executive like Varney in control.
I know that some people have a genuine feeling for the women's team and I feel for them and of course all those that are losing jobs or teams but so much comment seemed, IMHO, OTT and misplaced due, I believe, to the club doing the right thing and not making a statement until the redundency legalities were completed.
In response to those who have said that no-one outside the club gives a toss, that it's only us on here who are discussing it etc: Apart from my own family I probably spoke at any length to a sum total of five people yesterday and three of them - neither of whom are Charlton fans - brought up the closure of the women's section without prompting from me and they thought it was appalling and, on the face of it, a massive error of judgement.
Now the above may (or already is happening) but i can guarantee that not nearly as much outcry would have been generated and many people will have accepted this as a result of relegation. The only reason that this particular debate has happened (in my opinion) is because it is fashionable to be rather politically correct as it refers to a "minority" in terms of the sporting world.
People need to understand tough decisions need to be made and actioned and this is what has happened. Yes its a shame and i feel sorry for all the staff concerned within the women's set up, and i will offer the same sentiments to people in other areas of the club who lose their jobs as a result of the relegation.
I wonder if a number of people who are feeling so strongly about keeping the women's set up feel as strongly about other areas of the club such as the hospitality staff etc. I would hope so otherwise it is very contradictory.
The fact that no-one gave a toss is largely borne out by the fact that no-one ever went to see them. It's a tiny minority of people who will care about this, I don't think I know one person who could care less. And I know at least 10 or 11 people ;-)
As far as I can see other than a tiny storm in a teacup this will have no negative impact on the club whatsoever. It's not sexist, it's just fact that women's football is a minority sport of interest to very few. The game should be open to all, it should be there to be enjoyed by all who want to participate or spectate and I'd never argue against that. This doesn't mean that I want to watch them do it and it certainly doesn't mean that this should be subsidised by a club desperately trying to cope with an astronomical drop in income.
It's easy to substantiate an argument by drawing comparisons with other areas of the buisiness such as the marketing dept etc, and it's a fair point, it might not strike as much of a chord. The whys and wherefores aside, I think there are two reasons it does strike more of a chord:
1. It's the closure of a footballing section. We're a football club, football is 'core business' (regardless of who's playing it)and a cull there appear to have more impact.
2. In the scheme of things womens football is small fry, it's accepted by even the most staunch supporter of women's football but relatively our team is the second most team the game in this country has ever seen and to kill off something that successful will always create waves.
Fair play to you C_f_W, you make two good points. Again, just my opinion but they're just not strong enough for people to be criticising the board on this one. See where you're coming from though.
But its not successful though, that is the crux of the matter.
It cost 300k a year with no return, no spectators, no known sponsorship interest and no signs of growth. And with other clubs pulling the plug on their teams, it is obvious that women's football tried to grow too quickly at top level. It needs serious FA guiding on how to grow at a sustainable rate, not financially struggling men's football clubs giving them a sympathetic hand out to subsidise them. That's not only patronising to a certain extent, it will not help the long-term growth of the women's game in this country.
Look at men's football in the US. They went about trying to grow it in an unorganic way 30 years ago, chucking money at it when it did not have the support or the structure to sustain it. Women's football has gone in a similar fashion; it desperately needs to regroup and restructure, or alternatively it should be EVERY men's clubs requirement to devote resources towards the growth of a women's network.
Henry, I have just been involved in a difficult but essential redundancy exercise which affected the local community in which I live. As a board we were completely bound by confidentialilty and the process and could not speak our publically until the process was complete. Those who were affected by it and their supporters leaked it out in a particularly damaging and biased way. I understand how Reg and board members must feel. Those who criticise must understand that sometimes you just cannot speak out.
ccc. first team
reserves
youth
???
I'm certainly eager to hear what the people who e-mailed me saying that they would no longer support the club have to say now.
Henry I did not email advising withdrawal of my support for Charlton after the decision to axe the ladies section but I am a strong critic of the decision.
Maybe my values are old fashioned but by supporting the ladies section club for the period it has and especially after the acrimonious acquisition of Croydon Ladies the club has a commitment to support. I am sure the board will have given the issue no little consideration before making a decision, but the issue should not have been on the table.
I appreciate most Charlton supporters and for that matter most of the board of directors may not see the decision important in relation to the focus on the clubs league side. In isolation the view we pay our money and we want to see the league side succeed is more than reasonable.
It may well be the decision to take on a Ladies Section in the first place was wrong but the club brand in community terms alone achieved intangible benefits from its involvment but to close down a primary channel for women to access the top level of the game was never going to be in the clubs interests.
Downsize, put in place other ownership, do whatever, but to simply walk away is a direct kick in the teeth for those who worked hard to support the women’s club and those the club had enthused to participate in womens football at any level.
Charlton chose to step into this relative grass roots level of the game - no one forced it to - so the decision to axe the ladies section sends the wrong message betraying a real lack of understanding of the grass roots of the game.
I spent 20yrs with Spartan, Metropolitan, Kent & Sussex league clubs most of which were semi pro. The effort of those club boards, players, families & friends to keep those clubs going was exceptional. A few had benevolent chairman who would ultimately pick up the tab but most needed everyone’s contribution to survive. Charlton Ladies Section is no different.
Grapevine49
You make some very valid points and are entitled to your views. However I disagree.
You say that the club had to make difficult decisions re:cuts but the women's team should not even be on the table for discussion. Why should the women's team have such protection when every other dept has been cut and staff made redundant? You may argue it is a higher priority than say the men's first team, the boys acedemy or the ticket office (though I would disagree on all three) but to say that the women's team can not even be considered for cuts when all other areas have been is, IMHO, perverse.
Perhaps as you say the club should never have taken on the women's team or should have made it run on a break even budget but having done so surely does not mean it should continue regardless of changing situations. More foolish to keep on paying money you can not afford than to accept the situation and act, however reluctantly.
You ask why can not the team be downsized or have ownership switched. As the club statement says, and I'm assuming you read the statement before posting, the club tried to switch the women's team to the Charitable trust but could not and is still looking for a sponsor. That none has been forthcoming not just for Charlton but for the women's game as a whole shows that, rightly or wrongly, companies to not see it as a sound marketing investment.
Your comparison with grass roots football is also flawed. The women's team plays in a national, not a local league, and contains a number of internationals. Even the travel budget would stretch most men's clubs in the Spartan and other leagues you mention . There are also quite stringent ground requirements as I understand it. It is not even a local team as players travel from as far a field as Birmingham.
I sincerely hope that something can be saved and the team continue in some form. However if you are asking that £300k is chopped off another budget and more core staff sacked so that can happen then I say you are wrong.
The other point to stress is that the grass roots and community activity has, in the large part, been protected through the setting up some years ago of the Charitable trust. This is able to access different funds from local, central and transnational sources and means that the coaching in schools and community group (for boys and girls), the summer events, the educational work with young people, the work with the mentally ill and many others continues. See below.
http://shop.cafc.co.uk/newsview.ink?nid=30920&newstype=c Awards won
http://shop.cafc.co.uk/newsview.ink?nid=30837&newstype=c Community work continues
http://shop.cafc.co.uk/newsview.ink?nid=30617&newstype=c Big community scheme
Why announce 16m cuts in the first place, I don't see how that is so different to the club publicising that the women's tean is regrettably under threat, both such statements would result in job cuts. You might even find that publicising the plight of the ladies might have saved them..
Explain? Not clear what you mean by "mishandled" or "spun" or "corporate bullshit".
THe big difference re: your second para is a general statement and specifics. There is a legal process that has to be gone thru with redundencies. Saying there will be cuts and they will be cuts in your dept are quite different.
sink baby, sink!
Henry:
You say that the club had to make difficult decisions re:cuts but the women's team should not even be on the table for discussion. Why should the women's team have such protection when every other dept has been cut and staff made redundant? You may argue it is a higher priority than say the men's first team, the boys acedemy or the ticket office (though I would disagree on all three) but to say that the women's team can not even be considered for cuts when all other areas have been is, IMHO, perverse"
Grapevine:
Clever positioning Henry but point was that the AXING of the ladies section should not have been on the table. Like any other aspect of the club it needed to face cutbacks. So I do NOT argue it must be held above other parts of the club. No-one is talking about axing academy or first teams.
Henry:
Perhaps as you say the club should never have taken on the women's team or should have made it run on a break even budget but having done so surely does not mean it should continue regardless of changing situations. More foolish to keep on paying money you can not afford than to accept the situation and act, however reluctantly.
Grapevine:
Sounds reasonable - as the club did not grasp the fundamentals of how to run/ finance this aspect of the club it has the right to simply walk away. Did the club advise those it invited to join in this section it was to be run merely at the whim of a club which had no long term interest? Was this not precisely the fear expressed by those at Croydon who opposed the clubs involvement?
Henry:
You ask why can not the team be downsized or have ownership switched. As the club statement says, and I'm assuming you read the statement before posting, the club tried to switch the women's team to the Charitable trust but could not and is still looking for a sponsor. That none has been forthcoming not just for Charlton but for the women's game as a whole shows that, rightly or wrongly, companies to not see it as a sound marketing investment.
Grapevine:
Clearly it can be downsized PV’s statement indicates a budget reduction to 100k. Regarding a sponsor, when did the club make the decision to axe the section? When did they advise the principles of the section? Did they warn of its potential closure, or invite those in the section to come up with solutions? Were they given a chance to be party to decisions regarding its future? Henry do you make my point for me? Are you saying the club just saw this dalliance as a bad marketing investment? It would certainly explain the decision.
Henry:
Your comparison with grass roots football is also flawed. The women's team plays in a national, not a local league, and contains a number of internationals. Even the travel budget would stretch most men's clubs in the Spartan and other leagues you mention. There are also quite stringent ground requirements as I understand it. It is not even a local team as players travel from as far a field as Birmingham.
Grapevine:
Grass-roots are not about location or jurisdiction. They are about the standard, structure & development. In terms of playing standard the ladies game is still in its infancy. If the club has challenges with its structure & costs, others will as well. A mature approach is to work with others to restructure the program, its requirements etc., not throw the baby out with bathwater.
Thanks for the attachments on the work of the charitable trust but I view the intended inference as disingenuous. Where do lasses with ability progress to? Once through local coaching programs where next, back to the kitchen? Perhaps each program should pass out US College prospectus?
Henry I respect your points and the club for all it HAS achieved but this is a bad decision with the aroma of a corporate knee jerk reaction. Skills to manage retrenchment really do differ from those managing expansion.
Grapevine 49
You may feel that axing should not have been on the table but it was. As was axing whole other departments and sections. No, axing the men's team was not on the table for the obvious reason that it remains the cash cow of the business and has funded the women's team since the latter's inception.
I know I'm not going to change your mind as to this being a bad decision. That's fine. What I do object to is you claiming that this was a "knee jerk reaction" or a "daliance" by the board when you have no evidence of that.
It was a detailed and drawn out process that began many months ago before relegation but when that was clearly a likely outcome. Because you are unhappy with the outcome it does not mean that the process was not carried out thoroughly and with full consideration of the ramifications.