Update: 1) Well done the women's team, three wins out of three so far this season. Competing well to get into the WSL, as they were last year 2) Jeff Stelling will doubtless be strung up for saying on Talk Sport that he isn't interested in women's football. He was moaning (in a light-hearted manner) that he gets confused when Sports TV announces a big player move for a Club, then he realises they are talking about the women's team of that Club. You might find this a bit surprising coming from me, but I do agree with Jeff. How many times I have glanced at the headline bar on SSN to see something 'big' being flagged up regarding a top Prem team, then realised a few seconds later that it is the women's team they are on about. And how many times have I seen goals and fixtures and results flagged up on SSN, and again been confused because they turn out to be information about women's team matches. Surely Jeff and I cannot be the only football fans who are annoyed by this. Like Jeff (I am guessing) I have nothing against the women's game. But broadcasters and Football itself should address this lack of identification between the two branches of the sport. However, I guess all that will happen is Jeff will get lynched by the equality warriors' brigade.
Live WSL football on BBC1 now; Match of the Day Live - Tottenham v Arsenal. On this Saturday every WSL and Womens' Championship match will be played at the main ground of the Clubs.
Are 606 Members aware of the bum deal the SMT did over the Valley pitch ? In return for securing a near £1m grant for the pitch from the football authorities, the SMT agreed that the women’s team had to play all of their home games on the Valley pitch for the next ten years. Whatever you think of women’s football, this cannot be a good thing for the playing surface on which the only team that matters has to perform. Once again yesterday the pitch looked very poor. The thinking of the football authorities is that by playing in a “proper stadium” each week, the women’s team gets more gravitas and status, and will grow. The evidence at CAFC is the opposite, home attendances are always in the very low 100s, despite £10 tickets & kids getting in for free. This is another stupid and counter productive decision by Methven & Co.
First up, I would rather have women playing football on the Valley pitch than a rugby team tearing it up every other weekend. A female football player weighs (on average) two thirds to three quarters of the weight of a male footballer. They will therefore do less damage to the surface than the men's team will. Personally I don't think the extra groundskeeping involved outweighs the £1m grant. Second up, I don't really care what state the Valley pitch is in. It belongs to a Belgian businessman. It's nothing to do with CAFC anymore. Frankly the same goes for the rest of the stadium - until the day it belongs to Charlton Athletic Football Club again.
Firstly it doesn't matter how heavy the people playing on the pitch are. The act of playing on it will affect it. The Women should not be playing on the surface,it will only get worse. Of course the pitch has something to do with Charlton. We play on it. Despite people trying to big up the Women's game hardly anyone is interested, just look at the crowds. The CAFC women could play at Welling United and the ground would still be empty. The CAFC Women's team is costing a lot of money, money that would be better spent elsewhere.
Well said. The Women’s team costs the club £800,000 a year , money that would be far better spent elsewhere. They get attendances of 150-300. People are not interested in watching them, even for a £10. Of course it affects the pitch @lardiman , they wear boots with studs ?
To be fair to Methven he has gone on record as saying he sees the women’s team as a drain on resources. He stated it’s the will of the investors
Methven was happy enough to take a £750,000 payment for the (****) pitch in return for guaranteeing the women can play on it for the next 10 years. I doubt the investors even knew.
Just for the record I did not claim that the women playing on the Valley pitch would not damage it at all. Simply that they would damage it less because they are lighter on average. A self-evident truth based on simple physics. I'm sorry that nobody else here seems to place any value on promoting women's football in our community. But that's the way it is I guess. I am proud that our investors do see value in it. Well done the Cayman boys PS: I seriously doubt CAFC will still be playing at the Valley in ten years time.
I still think that we will be playing at the Valley in ten years time. Do you watch the Women at the Valley? If not why not?
For the same reason I don't watch the men's team. I'm too ill to consider attending. If I wasn't poorly I would think about it.
This is the crux of the issue. The SMT diverted £800,000 a year towards the Women’s team for one reason only - they wanted WSL status, and thought it would be a money spinner. You can hype it and subsidise all you want, but the bottom line is that even with very cheap / free match tickets AND with games played on the Valley pitch, next to nobody is watching it. Why ?
Wouldn’t you rather see that £800,000 a year spent on buying us better players so we can finally get out of L1 ? Given the binary choice, I believe 99.9% of our fanbase would.
Except that the money won't be spent that way. It would be wasted on a crock. I don't see the value of putting dozens of staff & female players out of work, and abandoning the Club's commitment to equality of opportunity in football, in exchange for one more useless male player.
