Will Duchatelet’s ears be pricking up.🤔
Comments
-
Seem to remember Sandgaard dipping into his pocket to update the facilities at SLSword65pf said:
Tell us then, pitches?, gym equip?, sports science?, changing facilities?, the building?SoundAsa£ said:
We are talking Sparrows Lane here…….just what ‘major’ improvements/updating have been made under the new ownership…..not much I think.Sword65pf said:
So they’re hasn’t been any improvements recently?, if you are so in the know maybe enlighten people instead of the condescending comment, I’m happy to be corrected if wrong.SoundAsa£ said:
Ermmmm……..that work was carried out sometime back when there was no suggestion that Sparrows Lane could ever be sold for housing development.Sword65pf said:
If there was the slightest chance of losing sparrows lane to the property market they wouldn’t bother improving the current facility , so I’d say the legal side of things are pretty clued up on all of this. These people at the club aren’t for pissing money up the wall.SoundAsa£ said:
I’m reffering to Sparrows Lane, not The Valley.Rothko said:
It’s got nothing to do with the Valley, it’s a change to who gets consulted and Sport Englands ability to veto developmentSoundAsa£ said:
Well yes and no.TelMc32 said:
I wonder if they’ll still be in charge after May, but don’t want to think of anyone else who might think alienating our fanbase - again - would be a good idea.shirty5 said:
Unless Greenwich Council want to once again be the biggest bunch of arseholes they was over 35 years ago then there is nothing to worry aboutSoundAsa£ said:I didn’t catch the whole of the piece on BBC news this morning but there was some mention of new legislation regarding freeing up playing fields and sports grounds for housing development.
I wonder will this in any way affect Sparrows Lane. 🫣
Airman/Prague one for you guys to ponder on maybe?
The Labour run council could not be that stupid could they
Surely it depends on what the legislation says…..it may openly allow sales of private sports grounds which were previously protected in one way or another.
I have no idea…..maybe I am worrying about nothing.🫤
So, sorry to say, your comment is somewhat irrelevant.I’m sure the club isn’t letting the place go to ruin. Not sure what point you are trying to make?1 -
Yes seem to remember that also, doesn’t mean there haven’t been improvements since.CaptainRobbo said:
Seem to remember Sandgaard dipping into his pocket to update the facilities at SLSword65pf said:
Tell us then, pitches?, gym equip?, sports science?, changing facilities?, the building?SoundAsa£ said:
We are talking Sparrows Lane here…….just what ‘major’ improvements/updating have been made under the new ownership…..not much I think.Sword65pf said:
So they’re hasn’t been any improvements recently?, if you are so in the know maybe enlighten people instead of the condescending comment, I’m happy to be corrected if wrong.SoundAsa£ said:
Ermmmm……..that work was carried out sometime back when there was no suggestion that Sparrows Lane could ever be sold for housing development.Sword65pf said:
If there was the slightest chance of losing sparrows lane to the property market they wouldn’t bother improving the current facility , so I’d say the legal side of things are pretty clued up on all of this. These people at the club aren’t for pissing money up the wall.SoundAsa£ said:
I’m reffering to Sparrows Lane, not The Valley.Rothko said:
It’s got nothing to do with the Valley, it’s a change to who gets consulted and Sport Englands ability to veto developmentSoundAsa£ said:
Well yes and no.TelMc32 said:
I wonder if they’ll still be in charge after May, but don’t want to think of anyone else who might think alienating our fanbase - again - would be a good idea.shirty5 said:
Unless Greenwich Council want to once again be the biggest bunch of arseholes they was over 35 years ago then there is nothing to worry aboutSoundAsa£ said:I didn’t catch the whole of the piece on BBC news this morning but there was some mention of new legislation regarding freeing up playing fields and sports grounds for housing development.
I wonder will this in any way affect Sparrows Lane. 🫣
Airman/Prague one for you guys to ponder on maybe?
The Labour run council could not be that stupid could they
Surely it depends on what the legislation says…..it may openly allow sales of private sports grounds which were previously protected in one way or another.
I have no idea…..maybe I am worrying about nothing.🫤
So, sorry to say, your comment is somewhat irrelevant.I’m sure the club isn’t letting the place go to ruin. Not sure what point you are trying to make?0 -
https://inews.co.uk/sport/football/the-valley-charlton-athletic-battle-4070542
Most football fans think they have a special connection with their stadium – unless you are a West Ham supporter – but in the case of Charlton and The Valley it is especially true.
As Heather McKinlay of the Charlton Athletic Supporters Trust (CAST) points out, the Addicks are the only EFL club who have been forced to leave their ground before fighting a long and ultimately successful battle to return.
AFC Wimbledon came close, but their Cherry Red Records Stadium is adjacent to the old Plough Lane, whereas The Valley is the same ground that became derelict in the 1980s.
“There are some things in life that are worth fighting for, and Charlton fans proved that The Valley is one of them,” McKinlay says.
Charlton returned to The Valley in 1992, but have not owned it since 2019, when much-reviled former owner Roland Duchatelet sold the club to a consortium called East Street Investments (ESI). That proved to be even more disastrous.
0 -
Three years later, the club was acquired by an American group, Global Football Partners, who have been far more stable. Nathan Jones’ side returned to the Championship for the first time in five years this season, but Charlton’s property assets remain owned by Duchatelet.JustFloydRoad said:https://inews.co.uk/sport/football/the-valley-charlton-athletic-battle-4070542Most football fans think they have a special connection with their stadium – unless you are a West Ham supporter – but in the case of Charlton and The Valley it is especially true.
As Heather McKinlay of the Charlton Athletic Supporters Trust (CAST) points out, the Addicks are the only EFL club who have been forced to leave their ground before fighting a long and ultimately successful battle to return.
AFC Wimbledon came close, but their Cherry Red Records Stadium is adjacent to the old Plough Lane, whereas The Valley is the same ground that became derelict in the 1980s.
“There are some things in life that are worth fighting for, and Charlton fans proved that The Valley is one of them,” McKinlay says.
Charlton returned to The Valley in 1992, but have not owned it since 2019, when much-reviled former owner Roland Duchatelet sold the club to a consortium called East Street Investments (ESI). That proved to be even more disastrous.
While still beholden to Duchatelet, Charlton succeeded in extending their lease at The Valley and their Sparrows Lane training ground in New Eltham to 15 years last month, which has given the club more security. However, fans will not be truly content until they own the ground.“We would certainly like the ownership of the club to be reunited with the ground, but extending the lease is a positive step,” McKinlay says. “We were getting concerned as there were only 10 years left to run, so this takes the immediate pressure off. It’s much better than nothing.”With the lease originally granted to East Street by Duchatelet ticking down in recent years, Charlton had been approached by property developers offering alternative sites for a new stadium, but this has not been pursued. The club were determined to make The Valley their long-term home, and while they would like to buy it, they have yet to make an offer to Duchatelet.“The relationship with the landlord is good,” a club source said. “We’d like to buy the ground, but there’s no immediate rush. We have never made a bid.“The lease extension was negotiated without any pain, and 15 years is better than 10. Roland is in no rush either. He knows he could be sitting on a potentially valuable asset, particularly if we get promoted to the Premier League.
Full Article text c&p from: https://www.reddit.com/r/CharltonAthletic/comments/1paj91z/duchatelet_is_in_no_rush_charltons_stadium_battle/0 -
The point I’m trying to make is that you stated our owners would never have spent any money on development without first knowing Sparrows Lane wasn’t ever going to be sold for housing development……well it’s just possible that this ‘might not now’ be the case.Sword65pf said:
Tell us then, pitches?, gym equip?, sports science?, changing facilities?, the building?SoundAsa£ said:
We are talking Sparrows Lane here…….just what ‘major’ improvements/updating have been made under the new ownership…..not much I think.Sword65pf said:
So they’re hasn’t been any improvements recently?, if you are so in the know maybe enlighten people instead of the condescending comment, I’m happy to be corrected if wrong.SoundAsa£ said:
Ermmmm……..that work was carried out sometime back when there was no suggestion that Sparrows Lane could ever be sold for housing development.Sword65pf said:
If there was the slightest chance of losing sparrows lane to the property market they wouldn’t bother improving the current facility , so I’d say the legal side of things are pretty clued up on all of this. These people at the club aren’t for pissing money up the wall.SoundAsa£ said:
I’m reffering to Sparrows Lane, not The Valley.Rothko said:
It’s got nothing to do with the Valley, it’s a change to who gets consulted and Sport Englands ability to veto developmentSoundAsa£ said:
Well yes and no.TelMc32 said:
I wonder if they’ll still be in charge after May, but don’t want to think of anyone else who might think alienating our fanbase - again - would be a good idea.shirty5 said:
Unless Greenwich Council want to once again be the biggest bunch of arseholes they was over 35 years ago then there is nothing to worry aboutSoundAsa£ said:I didn’t catch the whole of the piece on BBC news this morning but there was some mention of new legislation regarding freeing up playing fields and sports grounds for housing development.
I wonder will this in any way affect Sparrows Lane. 🫣
Airman/Prague one for you guys to ponder on maybe?
The Labour run council could not be that stupid could they
Surely it depends on what the legislation says…..it may openly allow sales of private sports grounds which were previously protected in one way or another.
I have no idea…..maybe I am worrying about nothing.🫤
So, sorry to say, your comment is somewhat irrelevant.I’m sure the club isn’t letting the place go to ruin. Not sure what point you are trying to make?
How could anyone have known in advance what the future might bring…..you stated that it’s not going to happen because they knew ‘at that time’ that it wouldn’t be possible but things can change.
So not relevant.
Anyway…..that’s all I have to say about your illogical post without me banging my head repeatedly and vigorously on the desk.
0 -
That’s chicken feed of the kind of work needed on simple upkeep, a year on year necessity and not major works.fenaddick said:
Well they ripped up and replaced the training pitches and are currently upgrading the facilities for the women’s team. They haven’t done anything for the men’s team buildings because that work was already doneSoundAsa£ said:
We are talking Sparrows Lane here…….just what ‘major’ improvements/updating have been made under the new ownership…..not much I think.Sword65pf said:
So they’re hasn’t been any improvements recently?, if you are so in the know maybe enlighten people instead of the condescending comment, I’m happy to be corrected if wrong.SoundAsa£ said:
Ermmmm……..that work was carried out sometime back when there was no suggestion that Sparrows Lane could ever be sold for housing development.Sword65pf said:
If there was the slightest chance of losing sparrows lane to the property market they wouldn’t bother improving the current facility , so I’d say the legal side of things are pretty clued up on all of this. These people at the club aren’t for pissing money up the wall.SoundAsa£ said:
I’m reffering to Sparrows Lane, not The Valley.Rothko said:
It’s got nothing to do with the Valley, it’s a change to who gets consulted and Sport Englands ability to veto developmentSoundAsa£ said:
Well yes and no.TelMc32 said:
I wonder if they’ll still be in charge after May, but don’t want to think of anyone else who might think alienating our fanbase - again - would be a good idea.shirty5 said:
Unless Greenwich Council want to once again be the biggest bunch of arseholes they was over 35 years ago then there is nothing to worry aboutSoundAsa£ said:I didn’t catch the whole of the piece on BBC news this morning but there was some mention of new legislation regarding freeing up playing fields and sports grounds for housing development.
I wonder will this in any way affect Sparrows Lane. 🫣
Airman/Prague one for you guys to ponder on maybe?
The Labour run council could not be that stupid could they
Surely it depends on what the legislation says…..it may openly allow sales of private sports grounds which were previously protected in one way or another.
I have no idea…..maybe I am worrying about nothing.🫤
So, sorry to say, your comment is somewhat irrelevant.0 -
If you call a million pounds on pitches chicken feed I’d love to see your bank accountSoundAsa£ said:
That’s chicken feed of the kind of work needed on simple upkeep, a year on year necessity and not major works.fenaddick said:
Well they ripped up and replaced the training pitches and are currently upgrading the facilities for the women’s team. They haven’t done anything for the men’s team buildings because that work was already doneSoundAsa£ said:
We are talking Sparrows Lane here…….just what ‘major’ improvements/updating have been made under the new ownership…..not much I think.Sword65pf said:
So they’re hasn’t been any improvements recently?, if you are so in the know maybe enlighten people instead of the condescending comment, I’m happy to be corrected if wrong.SoundAsa£ said:
Ermmmm……..that work was carried out sometime back when there was no suggestion that Sparrows Lane could ever be sold for housing development.Sword65pf said:
If there was the slightest chance of losing sparrows lane to the property market they wouldn’t bother improving the current facility , so I’d say the legal side of things are pretty clued up on all of this. These people at the club aren’t for pissing money up the wall.SoundAsa£ said:
I’m reffering to Sparrows Lane, not The Valley.Rothko said:
It’s got nothing to do with the Valley, it’s a change to who gets consulted and Sport Englands ability to veto developmentSoundAsa£ said:
Well yes and no.TelMc32 said:
I wonder if they’ll still be in charge after May, but don’t want to think of anyone else who might think alienating our fanbase - again - would be a good idea.shirty5 said:
Unless Greenwich Council want to once again be the biggest bunch of arseholes they was over 35 years ago then there is nothing to worry aboutSoundAsa£ said:I didn’t catch the whole of the piece on BBC news this morning but there was some mention of new legislation regarding freeing up playing fields and sports grounds for housing development.
I wonder will this in any way affect Sparrows Lane. 🫣
Airman/Prague one for you guys to ponder on maybe?
The Labour run council could not be that stupid could they
Surely it depends on what the legislation says…..it may openly allow sales of private sports grounds which were previously protected in one way or another.
I have no idea…..maybe I am worrying about nothing.🫤
So, sorry to say, your comment is somewhat irrelevant.0 -
Sorry if I’m not living up to you’re high intellectual expectations, hope the head is ok.👍SoundAsa£ said:
The point I’m trying to make is that you stated our owners would never have spent any money on development without first knowing Sparrows Lane wasn’t ever going to be sold for housing development……well it’s just possible that this ‘might not now’ be the case.Sword65pf said:
Tell us then, pitches?, gym equip?, sports science?, changing facilities?, the building?SoundAsa£ said:
We are talking Sparrows Lane here…….just what ‘major’ improvements/updating have been made under the new ownership…..not much I think.Sword65pf said:
So they’re hasn’t been any improvements recently?, if you are so in the know maybe enlighten people instead of the condescending comment, I’m happy to be corrected if wrong.SoundAsa£ said:
Ermmmm……..that work was carried out sometime back when there was no suggestion that Sparrows Lane could ever be sold for housing development.Sword65pf said:
If there was the slightest chance of losing sparrows lane to the property market they wouldn’t bother improving the current facility , so I’d say the legal side of things are pretty clued up on all of this. These people at the club aren’t for pissing money up the wall.SoundAsa£ said:
I’m reffering to Sparrows Lane, not The Valley.Rothko said:
It’s got nothing to do with the Valley, it’s a change to who gets consulted and Sport Englands ability to veto developmentSoundAsa£ said:
Well yes and no.TelMc32 said:
I wonder if they’ll still be in charge after May, but don’t want to think of anyone else who might think alienating our fanbase - again - would be a good idea.shirty5 said:
Unless Greenwich Council want to once again be the biggest bunch of arseholes they was over 35 years ago then there is nothing to worry aboutSoundAsa£ said:I didn’t catch the whole of the piece on BBC news this morning but there was some mention of new legislation regarding freeing up playing fields and sports grounds for housing development.
I wonder will this in any way affect Sparrows Lane. 🫣
Airman/Prague one for you guys to ponder on maybe?
The Labour run council could not be that stupid could they
Surely it depends on what the legislation says…..it may openly allow sales of private sports grounds which were previously protected in one way or another.
I have no idea…..maybe I am worrying about nothing.🫤
So, sorry to say, your comment is somewhat irrelevant.I’m sure the club isn’t letting the place go to ruin. Not sure what point you are trying to make?
How could anyone have known in advance what the future might bring…..you stated that it’s not going to happen because they knew ‘at that time’ that it wouldn’t be possible but things can change.
So not relevant.
Anyway…..that’s all I have to say about your illogical post without me banging my head repeatedly and vigorously on the desk.
on reflection I was trying to be polite, but reading you’re reply again, you sound like a right twat, in my original post all I was emphasising was that a lot of money had been spent if they knew it was being pissed up the wall because someone at a desk decided they wanted to build some flats.0 -
“Out of sight, out of mind” is probably how most fans now see Roland the Rat. But like any truly committed pantomime villain, he still lurks in the background, less Bond villain these days, more silent landlord who won't fix the boiler.
In many ways he resembles a Rachman-style landlord: absent, exploitative, and somehow still managing to have a negative impact without ever being seen. As a club, we've become a two-headed beast, owners of the team, tenants of The Valley and Sparrows Lane. Not exactly a model of stability, unless you're running a dodgy timeshare. Since 2019, when Charlton was split and Roland became our landlord, it’s felt like successive owners are treating the club like a casino. Minimal stake, spin the wheel, roll the dice, and hope to fluke the jackpot aka the promised holy land of the Premier League. If it doesn't come off? No worries, cash out and move on.
What we actually need is painfully obvious: a serious wealthy owner to reunite the club, the ground, and the training ground , one Charlton, under one vision, with an actual plan. Brentford, Fulham and Palace have all managed it. Palace are now expanding, Brentford a new stadium, Fulham upgraded The Cottage, meanwhile we're still arguing whether owning our own stadium “really matters” (spoiler: it does).
Yes, The Valley being on a mid-term lease might sound manageable, but fundamentally it’s a problem. You can pretend it’s fine, but its not, one can understand why this doesn't get fans beating the drum, as a fanbase we have been long suffering under a historic relationship with rotten owners way back in the mists of the Thames to the Gilkenson family era.
Here’s hoping one day we land a wealthy, ambitious & decent owner who actually gets it. History suggests that’s rare, given our long list of crooks, chancers, cowboys and conmen, but then again, Charlton fans have never been accused of lacking hope… or patience. Charlton have huge potential just needs a person(s) to realise this and invest and bring our club back together and once and for all get rid of the smelly Brussels sprout.
COYA's
1 -
You are quite rude for somebody that doesn’t have a clue what they are talking about.SoundAsa£ said:
The point I’m trying to make is that you stated our owners would never have spent any money on development without first knowing Sparrows Lane wasn’t ever going to be sold for housing development……well it’s just possible that this ‘might not now’ be the case.Sword65pf said:
Tell us then, pitches?, gym equip?, sports science?, changing facilities?, the building?SoundAsa£ said:
We are talking Sparrows Lane here…….just what ‘major’ improvements/updating have been made under the new ownership…..not much I think.Sword65pf said:
So they’re hasn’t been any improvements recently?, if you are so in the know maybe enlighten people instead of the condescending comment, I’m happy to be corrected if wrong.SoundAsa£ said:
Ermmmm……..that work was carried out sometime back when there was no suggestion that Sparrows Lane could ever be sold for housing development.Sword65pf said:
If there was the slightest chance of losing sparrows lane to the property market they wouldn’t bother improving the current facility , so I’d say the legal side of things are pretty clued up on all of this. These people at the club aren’t for pissing money up the wall.SoundAsa£ said:
I’m reffering to Sparrows Lane, not The Valley.Rothko said:
It’s got nothing to do with the Valley, it’s a change to who gets consulted and Sport Englands ability to veto developmentSoundAsa£ said:
Well yes and no.TelMc32 said:
I wonder if they’ll still be in charge after May, but don’t want to think of anyone else who might think alienating our fanbase - again - would be a good idea.shirty5 said:
Unless Greenwich Council want to once again be the biggest bunch of arseholes they was over 35 years ago then there is nothing to worry aboutSoundAsa£ said:I didn’t catch the whole of the piece on BBC news this morning but there was some mention of new legislation regarding freeing up playing fields and sports grounds for housing development.
I wonder will this in any way affect Sparrows Lane. 🫣
Airman/Prague one for you guys to ponder on maybe?
The Labour run council could not be that stupid could they
Surely it depends on what the legislation says…..it may openly allow sales of private sports grounds which were previously protected in one way or another.
I have no idea…..maybe I am worrying about nothing.🫤
So, sorry to say, your comment is somewhat irrelevant.I’m sure the club isn’t letting the place go to ruin. Not sure what point you are trying to make?
How could anyone have known in advance what the future might bring…..you stated that it’s not going to happen because they knew ‘at that time’ that it wouldn’t be possible but things can change.
So not relevant.
Anyway…..that’s all I have to say about your illogical post without me banging my head repeatedly and vigorously on the desk.4 -
Sponsored links:
-
Like Mr. Papadopoulos in EastEnders.TootingRedArmy said:“Out of sight, out of mind” is probably how most fans now see Roland the Rat. But like any truly committed pantomime villain, he still lurks in the background, less Bond villain these days, more silent landlord who won't fix the boiler.
In many ways he resembles a Rachman-style landlord: absent, exploitative, and somehow still managing to have a negative impact without ever being seen. As a club, we've become a two-headed beast, owners of the team, tenants of The Valley and Sparrows Lane. Not exactly a model of stability, unless you're running a dodgy timeshare. Since 2019, when Charlton was split and Roland became our landlord, it’s felt like successive owners are treating the club like a casino. Minimal stake, spin the wheel, roll the dice, and hope to fluke the jackpot aka the promised holy land of the Premier League. If it doesn't come off? No worries, cash out and move on.
What we actually need is painfully obvious: a serious wealthy owner to reunite the club, the ground, and the training ground , one Charlton, under one vision, with an actual plan. Brentford, Fulham and Palace have all managed it. Palace are now expanding, Brentford a new stadium, Fulham upgraded The Cottage, meanwhile we're still arguing whether owning our own stadium “really matters” (spoiler: it does).
Yes, The Valley being on a mid-term lease might sound manageable, but fundamentally it’s a problem. You can pretend it’s fine, but its not, one can understand why this doesn't get fans beating the drum, as a fanbase we have been long suffering under a historic relationship with rotten owners way back in the mists of the Thames to the Gilkenson family era.
Here’s hoping one day we land a wealthy, ambitious & decent owner who actually gets it. History suggests that’s rare, given our long list of crooks, chancers, cowboys and conmen, but then again, Charlton fans have never been accused of lacking hope… or patience. Charlton have huge potential just needs a person(s) to realise this and invest and bring our club back together and once and for all get rid of the smelly Brussels sprout.
COYA's
0 -
Yup…..FFS I certainly spat my dummy out somewhat,…..which I do from time to time, I’ll be 78 in a few weeks time and sad to say my patience wears a bit thin at times.🥹
0
