Apologies for being annoyed at some having a jossle over a fancy box ( for the record not people on here the Facebook group ) the man has taken us from a stable championship club to a average joe league 1 side, we will be lucky to scrape playoffs, but of course I'm not a charlton fan and only want the club to fail and should praise them for it.
25 years - of course remember it, but I'm not going to praise them, I would rather be in the championship as a stable club instead of where we are now with an exclusive Hummel kit - if I'm wrong and they have changed then I'll scoff humble pie, personally I think I'll be going hungry.
One season in the championship after being promot d,from league one after being down there for three seasons in of which one of those we finished in our lowest position ever does not make us a "stable club" does it? Under the tenure of Jeminez and Slater can you remember the pitch in which we played on and the firce criticism it came under especially the adandonmemt of the match in August due to a waterlogged pitch? Everything costs money as well as time, there are clubs in the championship and yes I can comment about this as I work within the game and am aware how long decisions can take to be made within football, you think you are there with a deal and drags for weeks if not months, then you think it is a dead deal for it all to be resurrected and done in twenty four hours. There are clubs that at this moment in time all appears to be going wonderfully well on the outside however when you get inside the club itself the ownership is awful, staff unhappy, things are being scrapped in which there is no future for the club however we are the complete opposite and we should be positive about our future as it looks a lot brighter than most clubs including those above us and we are the envy of many in terms of facilities and wages in which we spend.
Whilst I would question your pronouncement that our club is "the complete opposite" of others seemingly well run, even successful , I would be going over old ground , albeit waterlogged or, as in SE7 last season, frozen, so I'll merely ask you one thing.
Let's suppose you could ask a selection of supporters, across the board, from the other 91 clubs to describe Charlton Athletic FC, in one short phrase, as they currently view our club, what do you think would be the overall perception ?
"Well respected" ? " Family friendly" ? " Well run" ? " Successful" ?
Or maybe "the complete opposite" ?
Point taken, however would you not agree that the likes of Portsmouth, Newcastle, Leeds, plus many more have had shall we say controversial owners but the fans have still stuck by their teams, if you then draw a parallel to Aston Villa, Leyton Orient, Blackpool, Coventry, Blackburn and ourselves in the way our fans have reacted by the protesting of the board and staying away rather than supporting the team I think there is an argument there to support the team rather than rip it apart.
"Hundreds of angry Portsmouth supporters demonstrated yesterday before their side faced Sunderland in the FA Cup at Fratton Park. They blocked the main entrance into the director’s lounge, and called for the resignation of the rock-bottom club’s owners. Police and stewards were forced to erect a barrier around the main entrance.
Chief executive Peter Storrie did come out to collect a petition from the supporters and attempted to reason with them. But they soon turned on him and unleashed a torrent of abuse in his direction.
During Pompey’s 2-1 victory some home fans invaded the pitch. They confronted Pompey players and appeared to be trying to get to the area in front of the directors’ box."
"Leeds United fans plan to march in protest against the club owner Massimo Cellino through the city centre streets before Saturday’s home Championship game against Reading.
The fans’ group Time To Go Massimo will join other supporters opposed to the Italian’s ownership of the club at Leeds City Square before embarking on a march to Elland Road."
"A protest group is urging Newcastle fans to refuse to leave St James’ Park on Sunday one month after asking them to stay away.
The Ashley Out protest group has unveiled plans for a sit-in protest at St James’ following the final whistle on Sunday, writes Will Metcalfe in the Newcastle Chronicle.
Newcastle will take on West Ham in a game that could see them relegated for the second time in Mike Ashley’s tenure should Hull City beat Manchester United and the Magpies lose to West Ham.
The protest is the latest measure from the anonymous group which hopes to see Mr Ashley sell the club."
I guess it's a chicken & egg kind of question: what came first?
a. the toxic regime either left or had a complete strategic overhaul then the fans came back b. the fans started to support the toxic regime and things magically got better
Be interesting to see how many of the supporters boycotted matches, didn't buy season tickets, wore different colour scarfs, or did they still continue to support their teams in their numbers as well as vocally?
Newcastle were fantastic.
53000 week in week out supporting the Spell It Out in Black and White campaign.
Firstly no such number as hundred trillionth. Secondly, I am not deluded, it's more of a case that you are very bitter and do not and will not acknowledge orpther fans views and simply shoot them down. Thirdly who states that the atmospheres are better, CARD, no one else. Finally you have the audacity to call other fans happy clap and have shit thrown at them. Well after making that statement if confirms that you are bitter and go to games for the wrong reasons to protest and not support the team.
Is this true? If so, this is by far the most interesting point made on this thread so far! I'd have thought 100,000,000,000,000 would be called one hundred trillion? I'll readily admit to not being an expert when it comes to maths, though.
Season ticket box a gimmick by a failed regime. The real point is if KM and the regime really cared and understood they had ruined the club they would be trying to build bridges with those of us no longer financially supporting the club. They are not interested, it's the burger eaters, refreshment buyers, potential shoppers and dancers! they are interested in. Simple if KM went season tickets up 50% both go up 100%, it's that simple regime.
I this evening on social media have had my 11 year old son brought into an argument as well as my wife slagged off from a member of CARD. The same person has also made a statement that would have come from one of only two people. You both know who you are and the person that you have told in confidence has brought my young son into the argument which shows how low you have dropped. One of which is a friend of this said person on social media so all fingers point to you.
WIWALB, you've got history about this sort of thing haven't you, you've got form. Your `argument' in public starts to turn against you and you revert to nameless, foundationless and unsubstantiated `attacks' from other social media outlets. Stop all the innuendo nonsense and either put up or shut up.
You claim someone has `attacked' and `brought into an argument' your 11 year old son...on an external platform from this forum. So what the fuck has it got to do with this forum? Sod `its the same people' shit whilst virtually pointing at people. Thats a bollox argument and you know it. And if you INSIST on bringing it up on this forum, to try and drag this forum by de facto into it, have the fucking balls to name and quote what your grievances are about.
My guess is that you're not prepared to do that though.....which speaks volumes....because you've got nothing.
You've done this time and time and time again on this forum haven't you.....and you never learn.
I this evening on social media have had my 11 year old son brought into an argument as well as my wife slagged off from a member of CARD. The same person has also made a statement that would have come from one of only two people. You both know who you are and the person that you have told in confidence has brought my young son into the argument which shows how low you have dropped. One of which is a friend of this said person on social media so all fingers point to you.
Touched a nerve there. Fact is I don't and won't lie, especially when it comes to my son and family , you want a name I will give you a name.
PAM WRIGHT. A huge activist for CARD.
The same Pam Wright whom is friends with a leading member of CARD on here.
The reality is the posts were so insulting and toxic that the moderators removed the whole post.
So it's not a "bollox arguememt" as i will view and debate with anyone but there is a line in which you do not cross and bringing kids into it is going over that line. Previously PAM WRIGHT and will continue to highlight her name has publically slagged off the staff and new Liberal club, attacked my wife by making personal comments, and the posts made last night there is no way she could have known that information unless she was told by a third party and when I asked who told,you that and when it was she made up lies and dragged my son into it.
The reason this forum will and has been dragged into it is because two of the people as well as PAM WRIGHT post on here or read posts.
I want to challenge very strongly the idea that it's "a nice gesture". It isn't a nice gesture at all, it's a PR stunt. They are trying to bolster their damaged reputation by buying people off: Season ticket holders, who they know will be softer targets than lapsed attendees. This is the regime that has torn our club apart. They traded decent players for useless wannabes. They lied to fans. They drove people away. What they are doing now is the equivalent of giving your loved one a bunch of flowers after you've cheated on them. It stinks. It's just a manipulative ploy to try and fool people. And all for what? The cost of a scarf and a calendar, well whoopee do.
For those who think it's about building bridges, here's an idea. If they want to build bridges they should start by apologising. They should then produce a list of errors and formulate plans to ensure that they do not repeat them. They will not do that, because they are in denial about whose fault this mess is.
And as for all this Back the The Valley nonsense, it's sickening. They are not interested in that at all. We have an owner who has stated that competitive football is not important and a CEO who has said she does not care for the history of the club. They are piggy packing on this anniversary to try and gain brownie points. As @charltonkeston so eloquently put it, the PR company "are using some of my [our] best memories and associating them with the current vermin". Wake up, people. How many extra chances do this lot need?
But Stig, I think you're missing the point. It comes in a nice red box! - Oh alright then, I take it back they must be genuinely decent people who have learnt the error of their ways and are committed to change. Viva Duchatelet. Viva Meire. Viva The Regime.
You should award yourself the post of the month thing for that. Spot on fella.
It remains a competition for them, can they beat us. It's nothing to do with building bridges, which is all about humility and relationships building. It was the CEO who talked of a war, do we think her whole attitude has completely changed in a matter of months having been so entrenched for so long? Do we think Keohane suddenly likes us all?
Nothing's changed, they're just trying what's available to them to win.
Come on guys can we ease back here. It is a sound marketing job. Does it mean anything? Not really but we can have the good grace to accept it as a decent gesture toward our 25yr anniversary. Does it have any significance for the core values against which the current executive run the club? None, but it is a nice touch. Well done.
I am unsure if I have posted precisely the following prose before as I have no doubt drafted it many times to respond to those who seek to attack, defame, ridicule and or challenge fellow supporters.
The reason for the division & mistrust is simple.
People associate with, belong to, support or follow an organisation which shares their interests and their values. We all have different value sets. Each is as valid as the next.
There are many who enjoy their football by participating in a shared social experience with family & friends. They number millions across the football pyramid. It is an entirely legitimate value set. I shared a very modest playing career with very many good people in such environments. Many smaller clubs survive on their commitment.
Yet in their football clubhouse/ dressing room it was a matter of sporting competition as everyone sought to compete to succeed individually & collectively at the highest level of the game they could achieve. Regardless of the social aspect if you were unable to contribute as a player, coach or manager you (were) moved on.
So a very significant number of people have the belief professional football is a competitive sporting environment challenging you & your team to be "the best you can be". Their clubs focus has to be on their first team being the best it could be no matter the financial necessities of the business. They will have accepted the departure of any number of "star" players on the basis bills needed to be paid, but that funds were reinvested in the team for it to be the best it could be. It too is an entirely valid value set.
It is not a matter of glory hunting or fair weather support as very many will have supported the club in lower reaches of the league for decades. It is a basic matter of trust we all share the same aspiration the same ambition and are all on the same page.
People might argue Gliksten ultimately betrayed that trust but he had been trying to walk away for years
People might argue the Sunleys manipulated that trust, despite providing several years at the top of the game, by moving the club away from its roots.
People might argue Slater & Jiminez simply cut and run
Yet throughout each administration there was the belief in the unity of supporting the club's first team to compete..... to be the best it could be.
No one disputes the club under this executive has spent the investors money. The clubs' balance sheet bears witness to such expenditure. The "off the field" infrastructure developments at the stadium and training ground have merit but the latter is way beyond the club ability to repay. If the club is burdened with debt and debt interest it can only repay through players sales who will ultimately be the beneficiary - the club or the investor? The investor increases his asset value while the club carries the burden of repayment.
Our investor through his own endeavours is cash rich. The club provides a ready channel for his surplus cash, to secure a notable freehold asset, charge a rate of return on his investment, position the debt as a revenue generating asset, retain 100% control and sit back and wait.
Please remember much of the debt has been created by this executives' own ineptitude. To those who argue the debt is of no consequence why for another close season do we wait for players to leave before the Manager has any opportunity to do the job he was supposedly recruited to do. The debt should have been restructured 2yrs ago. Today it sits like a millstone round the neck of the business impacting every trading decision. Just how much of the Lookman revenue has been reinvested in the team?
Against such a background people simply do not believe under this regime the club share the same value set.
Despite the niceties of a season ticket box the challenge for many is under this regime every single squad constructed has fallen (sometimes considerably) short of making the club the best it can be. They can legitimately argue every single head coach from Powell to Slade has been undermined by the lack of strength, depth, local market experience and or balance needed for them to do their job.
It is not a question of bad luck. Injuries are part & parcel of the industry. You build in resilience to overcome them, as you do with loss of form, as you do with unforeseen personal circumstances. Every sporting organisation faces those challenges.
We can argue for as long as you like about the current position but by the benchmarks they set of being a competitive Championship club, (with PL ambitions whatever that actually means) this regime has failed to deliver. They created the expectation.
Nobody ever sets out to fail but by the manner in which they have managed the administration of the club people simply no longer trust either their ability to do the job in hand or indeed in many instances their motivation.
Now you can believe it is all about to change and you are entitled to such belief. By the same token others are entitled to be sceptical.
Anecdotal evidence remains the operation of the club today as being an investors’ industry experiment in financial opportunity. The figures indicate, despite the occasional bright spot, the experiment has some way to go.
As a consequence very many have decided this is not what they signed up for. Some have chosen to emotionally move on or in many cases to simply walk away. They are already gone. Others have sought as best they can to fight to restore their values to the club they love. Not in response to the calls from some mythical destructive Svengali as this call is personal. It comes from one place. It comes from within.
You may and some do argue good riddance. Such is also their prerogative but the job of a successful "people organisation", which pretty much describes a football club, is to be as inclusive of as many value sets as possible. If you choose only to serve those who agree with your values then you actually become an exclusive rather than an inclusive organisation. It is a very narrow path to follow and one pretty much on the road to nowhere.
Potentially generations of supporters have already been lost. Any appeal to their loyalty to return means nothing because for them their loyalty belongs to something that no longer exists. Just what do you think you are asking them to return to? Whatever administrative changes have taken place the core values of this executive remain.
In this industry what price the road to financial opportunity if the stadium is only 1/3rd full to see it.
I suggest we do not have far to look to understand what the future holds. STVV have been under the stewardship of this investor for 13yrs. They pay to rent their ground. They pay percentage points on attendance, transfer and media revenues.
No matter the "excitement" of the day the primary exercise here is not to produce a successful football team, such an eventuality is merely a "possible" by-product of using a football club to prove you can make money from the game. If such provides you with a vehicle for your social needs then it is a decision for you. I and I expect the majority can respect your position.
In which case kindly have the good grace to acknowledge for many others the club today as once their vehicle for supporting the pursuit of sporting excellence, one they have followed for decades, is little more than an empty shell.
The responsibility for that rests in one place alone and it most certainly is not in the hearts and minds of the clubs supporters.
I want to challenge very strongly the idea that it's "a nice gesture". It isn't a nice gesture at all, it's a PR stunt. They are trying to bolster their damaged reputation by buying people off: Season ticket holders, who they know will be softer targets than lapsed attendees. This is the regime that has torn our club apart. They traded decent players for useless wannabes. They lied to fans. They drove people away. What they are doing now is the equivalent of giving your loved one a bunch of flowers after you've cheated on them. It stinks. It's just a manipulative ploy to try and fool people. And all for what? The cost of a scarf and a calendar, well whoopee do.
For those who think it's about building bridges, here's an idea. If they want to build bridges they should start by apologising. They should then produce a list of errors and formulate plans to ensure that they do not repeat them. They will not do that, because they are in denial about whose fault this mess is.
And as for all this Back the The Valley nonsense, it's sickening. They are not interested in that at all. We have an owner who has stated that competitive football is not important and a CEO who has said she does not care for the history of the club. They are piggy packing on this anniversary to try and gain brownie points. As @charltonkeston so eloquently put it, the PR company "are using some of my [our] best memories and associating them with the current vermin". Wake up, people. How many extra chances do this lot need?
But Stig, I think you're missing the point. It comes in a nice red box! - Oh alright then, I take it back they must be genuinely decent people who have learnt the error of their ways and are committed to change. Viva Duchatelet. Viva Meire. Viva The Regime.
You should award yourself the post of the month thing for that. Spot on fella.
It remains a competition for them, can they beat us. It's nothing to do with building bridges, which is all about humility and relationships building. It was the CEO who talked of a war, do we think her whole attitude has completely changed in a matter of months having been so entrenched for so long? Do we think Keohane suddenly likes us all?
Nothing's changed, they're just trying what's available to them to win.
Surely CARD know the club are going to try these sort of things though. And we're doing ourselves no favours, because a few on here are saying nice touch etc there being told there being won over. I'm a renewing season ticket holder and can make my own mind up on what the club are doing. Were making a big thing of the season ticket box.
I want to challenge very strongly the idea that it's "a nice gesture". It isn't a nice gesture at all, it's a PR stunt. They are trying to bolster their damaged reputation by buying people off: Season ticket holders, who they know will be softer targets than lapsed attendees. This is the regime that has torn our club apart. They traded decent players for useless wannabes. They lied to fans. They drove people away. What they are doing now is the equivalent of giving your loved one a bunch of flowers after you've cheated on them. It stinks. It's just a manipulative ploy to try and fool people. And all for what? The cost of a scarf and a calendar, well whoopee do.
For those who think it's about building bridges, here's an idea. If they want to build bridges they should start by apologising. They should then produce a list of errors and formulate plans to ensure that they do not repeat them. They will not do that, because they are in denial about whose fault this mess is.
And as for all this Back the The Valley nonsense, it's sickening. They are not interested in that at all. We have an owner who has stated that competitive football is not important and a CEO who has said she does not care for the history of the club. They are piggy packing on this anniversary to try and gain brownie points. As @charltonkeston so eloquently put it, the PR company "are using some of my [our] best memories and associating them with the current vermin". Wake up, people. How many extra chances do this lot need?
But Stig, I think you're missing the point. It comes in a nice red box! - Oh alright then, I take it back they must be genuinely decent people who have learnt the error of their ways and are committed to change. Viva Duchatelet. Viva Meire. Viva The Regime.
Grapevine speaks for me. If the regime could engage with those points, and having been to STTV I doubt they would want to. Grapevine rightly invokes the present situation of STTV and it is truly chilling, there was a post published on here yesterday by big in Brazov from an STTV supporter which is worth revisiting. If any regime apologists can engage with what Grapevine has written, then they will also be engaging with what many supporters feel, but who can't put it as well. There is a cold cynicism demonstrated by this regime however much they dress up this or that moment like the season ticket thing, and despite continual declarations that they have changed it isn't believed or trusted by many of us. I repeat for the umpteenth time, if this regime has genuinely changed prove it on the pitch, In the sporting arena, by winning over and over again.
@clb74 I don't think it's about sales, it's about face. By giving something to season ticket holders, they are helping to give a voice to those who take a softer view of the regime. Thereby making it more difficult for the anti-regimers to organise against them. Looking at the responses to it on here, I'd say the PR guys have played a blinder.
Or they are beginning a season of celebrating a return to the Valley....
Was the whole quote not “I shouldn’t say it, but I’m not fussed about the club history. We should cherish it, but not at any price.”
@clb74 I don't think it's about sales, it's about face. By giving something to season ticket holders, they are helping to give a voice to those who take a softer view of the regime. Thereby making it more difficult for the anti-regimers to organise against them. Looking at the responses to it on here, I'd say the PR guys have played a blinder.
Or they are beginning a season of celebrating a return to the Valley....
Was the whole quote not “I shouldn’t say it, but I’m not fussed about the club history. We should cherish it, but not at any price.”
"The glorious past of this club? I do not care. The training of young players is the main wealth of Belgian clubs" "Now you understand why I fell in love with this club?" Exclaims Katrien Meire
I want to challenge very strongly the idea that it's "a nice gesture". It isn't a nice gesture at all, it's a PR stunt. They are trying to bolster their damaged reputation by buying people off: Season ticket holders, who they know will be softer targets than lapsed attendees. This is the regime that has torn our club apart. They traded decent players for useless wannabes. They lied to fans. They drove people away. What they are doing now is the equivalent of giving your loved one a bunch of flowers after you've cheated on them. It stinks. It's just a manipulative ploy to try and fool people. And all for what? The cost of a scarf and a calendar, well whoopee do.
For those who think it's about building bridges, here's an idea. If they want to build bridges they should start by apologising. They should then produce a list of errors and formulate plans to ensure that they do not repeat them. They will not do that, because they are in denial about whose fault this mess is.
And as for all this Back the The Valley nonsense, it's sickening. They are not interested in that at all. We have an owner who has stated that competitive football is not important and a CEO who has said she does not care for the history of the club. They are piggy packing on this anniversary to try and gain brownie points. As @charltonkeston so eloquently put it, the PR company "are using some of my [our] best memories and associating them with the current vermin". Wake up, people. How many extra chances do this lot need?
But Stig, I think you're missing the point. It comes in a nice red box! - Oh alright then, I take it back they must be genuinely decent people who have learnt the error of their ways and are committed to change. Viva Duchatelet. Viva Meire. Viva The Regime.
Aaah bless, you didn't get one then?
Oh great. Another smart arse quip from somebody who would rather sit on their arse and whistle Dixie whilst our saviours drive our support away in droves. Everything's great ennit, if you ignore it.
Thanks. I have seen two versions like the one I quoted one where the word 'cherish' was replaced with 'pamper'. These were so close to each other I thought they must be close to her translated words.
Happy to be corrected. Can someone post the whole quote please
The whole quote is as in my caption. The bit about cherishing it was a later addition once she'd realised that she'd put her foot in it.
I believe the original quote is in L'Echo, but I can't get it at the moment. They are telling me I've had my 5 free views for the month (cynical me, I don't believe that either).
Happy to be corrected. Can someone post the whole quote please
The whole quote is as in my caption. The bit about cherishing it was a later addition once she'd realised that she'd put her foot in it.
I believe the original quote is in L'Echo, but I can't get it at the moment. They are telling me I've had my 5 free views for the month (cynical me, I don't believe that either).
Problem is there were two, the original one and then the oops I have fucked up one.
At the end of the day, Hummel have produced a nice kit that reflects our history and the season ticket boxes are a welcome nod to the 25 year anniversary. I dont believe the SMT have had any input in either but those within the club that were involved should be happy with both. Certainly neither is worthy of ridicule or sniping.
There are times a plenty to have a go at our owners, I just don't think the season ticket box is one of them
Agreed, it's sour grapes when the moaner is somebody that didn't get a box and it must be music to the ears of the SMT. Definitely an own goal to moan about these boxes if you are clearly anti-regime because it makes you look petty.
And if by some chance there is season ticket holder that did receive one that is also moaning about it then the simple answer is for them to send it back.
I want to challenge very strongly the idea that it's "a nice gesture". It isn't a nice gesture at all, it's a PR stunt. They are trying to bolster their damaged reputation by buying people off: Season ticket holders, who they know will be softer targets than lapsed attendees. This is the regime that has torn our club apart. They traded decent players for useless wannabes. They lied to fans. They drove people away. What they are doing now is the equivalent of giving your loved one a bunch of flowers after you've cheated on them. It stinks. It's just a manipulative ploy to try and fool people. And all for what? The cost of a scarf and a calendar, well whoopee do.
For those who think it's about building bridges, here's an idea. If they want to build bridges they should start by apologising. They should then produce a list of errors and formulate plans to ensure that they do not repeat them. They will not do that, because they are in denial about whose fault this mess is.
And as for all this Back the The Valley nonsense, it's sickening. They are not interested in that at all. We have an owner who has stated that competitive football is not important and a CEO who has said she does not care for the history of the club. They are piggy packing on this anniversary to try and gain brownie points. As @charltonkeston so eloquently put it, the PR company "are using some of my [our] best memories and associating them with the current vermin". Wake up, people. How many extra chances do this lot need?
But Stig, I think you're missing the point. It comes in a nice red box! - Oh alright then, I take it back they must be genuinely decent people who have learnt the error of their ways and are committed to change. Viva Duchatelet. Viva Meire. Viva The Regime.
Aaah bless, you didn't get one then?
It is absolutely not sour grapes. Sour grapes is being jealous because someone has got something that they haven't. I can assure you that there is no jealously at all in this. Here is the logic behind my argument:
1. The current regime have demonstrated themselves to be incompetent at running our football club. 2. As well as their general lack of ability, they have insulted fans and stated that neither the club's history nor competitive football are important to them. 3. Their lack of ability and duplicitous behaviour means that I no longer trust them. 4. I do not believe that Charlton Athletic will be successful or inclusive all the time that they are the owners. 5. Therefore, the best thing for the club would be for Duchatelet to sell up and go. 6. As he has shown little desire to leave, I believe that the fans should put every pressure on him to go. 7. The regime can make it more difficult for fans to argue and organise against them, if there are a layer of fans who believe them to be benevolent. 8. The box and it's content may well be very nice, however I do not believe that they were given in the spirit of generosity. Rather they are a sop to try and curry favour with a number of fans, thus making public critique more difficult. 9. I do not hold this against anyone at Hummel. In fact, I think they've done a grand job. 10. If any other owners of our club had done this, I would praise them. 11. However, as I do not believe that the current regime has anything in it's hearts other than self-interest, I do not believe that this is a kind gesture. Rather, it is a cynical move. 12. My concern is not that people have a box and I don't. My concern is that that by getting a box, some people will take a softer view of the regime and will be less inclines and/or less able to carry on the fight against them. 13. I therefore wish to make it clear to people, that I do not believe the recent activities to be a positive move.
I do not wish do be in a state of tension with other Charlton fans. We all support the same club and whatever else we think, that is something that we have in common. It will be great one day when we can put all this behind us. However, I am not of the view that a desire for harmony amongst fans should be at the expense of rational debate or logical argument. I have therefore stated very clearly why I think the current activities of the club are not positive. If you can see errors in my facts or flaws in my logic, I would be very happy for you to point them out. But please, do not imply that my argument is borne out of jealously. To do so, is not very becoming of you and is unhelpful to adult debate.
That link gives the quote as "I should not say it, but I do not care about the club's history. We need the pampering, but not at any price."
And that's the problem with translation. I can read that two ways. It could mean I'm not paying an over the top price or I'm not paying any price. I'm inclined to believe the history of Charlton means little or nothing to a group of people who wouldn't of even known the whereabouts of that London suburb 6 weeks prior to their tenure. So I think not paying sod all would be the value put on our history. More interesting for me is the importance of young talent and the Belgian clubs model for their academies ( with the exception of may be 2 or 3).I get the feeling they are there to supply the bigger leagues and the cloobs resign themselves to this and never being able to compete any higher other than making the numbers up in various competitions.
Comments
53000 week in week out supporting the Spell It Out in Black and White campaign.
The real point is if KM and the regime really cared and understood they had ruined the club they would be trying to build bridges with those of us no longer financially supporting the club.
They are not interested, it's the burger eaters, refreshment buyers, potential shoppers and dancers! they are interested in.
Simple if KM went season tickets up 50% both go up 100%, it's that simple regime.
Touched a nerve there. Fact is I don't and won't lie, especially when it comes to my son and family , you want a name I will give you a name.PAM WRIGHT. A huge activist for CARD.
The same Pam Wright whom is friends with a leading member of CARD on here.
The reality is the posts were so insulting and toxic that the moderators removed the whole post.
So it's not a "bollox arguememt" as i will view and debate with anyone but there is a line in which you do not cross and bringing kids into it is going over that line.
Previously PAM WRIGHT and will continue to highlight her name has publically slagged off the staff and new Liberal club, attacked my wife by making personal comments, and the posts made last night there is no way she could have known that information unless she was told by a third party and when I asked who told,you that and when it was she made up lies and dragged my son into it.
The reason this forum will and has been dragged into it is because two of the people as well as PAM WRIGHT post on here or read posts.
It remains a competition for them, can they beat us. It's nothing to do with building bridges, which is all about humility and relationships building. It was the CEO who talked of a war, do we think her whole attitude has completely changed in a matter of months having been so entrenched for so long? Do we think Keohane suddenly likes us all?
Nothing's changed, they're just trying what's available to them to win.
What does it even have to do with this thread?
So many threads on here descend into pointless arguments these days. Where's a moderator when you need one?!
I am unsure if I have posted precisely the following prose before as I have no doubt drafted it many times to respond to those who seek to attack, defame, ridicule and or challenge fellow supporters.
The reason for the division & mistrust is simple.
People associate with, belong to, support or follow an organisation which shares their interests and their values. We all have different value sets. Each is as valid as the next.
There are many who enjoy their football by participating in a shared social experience with family & friends. They number millions across the football pyramid. It is an entirely legitimate value set. I shared a very modest playing career with very many good people in such environments. Many smaller clubs survive on their commitment.
Yet in their football clubhouse/ dressing room it was a matter of sporting competition as everyone sought to compete to succeed individually & collectively at the highest level of the game they could achieve. Regardless of the social aspect if you were unable to contribute as a player, coach or manager you (were) moved on.
So a very significant number of people have the belief professional football is a competitive sporting environment challenging you & your team to be "the best you can be". Their clubs focus has to be on their first team being the best it could be no matter the financial necessities of the business. They will have accepted the departure of any number of "star" players on the basis bills needed to be paid, but that funds were reinvested in the team for it to be the best it could be. It too is an entirely valid value set.
It is not a matter of glory hunting or fair weather support as very many will have supported the club in lower reaches of the league for decades. It is a basic matter of trust we all share the same aspiration the same ambition and are all on the same page.
People might argue Gliksten ultimately betrayed that trust but he had been trying to walk away for years
People might argue the Sunleys manipulated that trust, despite providing several years at the top of the game, by moving the club away from its roots.
People might argue Slater & Jiminez simply cut and run
Yet throughout each administration there was the belief in the unity of supporting the club's first team to compete..... to be the best it could be.
No one disputes the club under this executive has spent the investors money. The clubs' balance sheet bears witness to such expenditure. The "off the field" infrastructure developments at the stadium and training ground have merit but the latter is way beyond the club ability to repay. If the club is burdened with debt and debt interest it can only repay through players sales who will ultimately be the beneficiary - the club or the investor? The investor increases his asset value while the club carries the burden of repayment.
Our investor through his own endeavours is cash rich. The club provides a ready channel for his surplus cash, to secure a notable freehold asset, charge a rate of return on his investment, position the debt as a revenue generating asset, retain 100% control and sit back and wait.
Please remember much of the debt has been created by this executives' own ineptitude. To those who argue the debt is of no consequence why for another close season do we wait for players to leave before the Manager has any opportunity to do the job he was supposedly recruited to do. The debt should have been restructured 2yrs ago. Today it sits like a millstone round the neck of the business impacting every trading decision. Just how much of the Lookman revenue has been reinvested in the team?
Against such a background people simply do not believe under this regime the club share the same value set.
Despite the niceties of a season ticket box the challenge for many is under this regime every single squad constructed has fallen (sometimes considerably) short of making the club the best it can be. They can legitimately argue every single head coach from Powell to Slade has been undermined by the lack of strength, depth, local market experience and or balance needed for them to do their job.
It is not a question of bad luck. Injuries are part & parcel of the industry. You build in resilience to overcome them, as you do with loss of form, as you do with unforeseen personal circumstances. Every sporting organisation faces those challenges.
We can argue for as long as you like about the current position but by the benchmarks they set of being a competitive Championship club, (with PL ambitions whatever that actually means) this regime has failed to deliver. They created the expectation.
Nobody ever sets out to fail but by the manner in which they have managed the administration of the club people simply no longer trust either their ability to do the job in hand or indeed in many instances their motivation.
Now you can believe it is all about to change and you are entitled to such belief. By the same token others are entitled to be sceptical.
Anecdotal evidence remains the operation of the club today as being an investors’ industry experiment in financial opportunity. The figures indicate, despite the occasional bright spot, the experiment has some way to go.
As a consequence very many have decided this is not what they signed up for. Some have chosen to emotionally move on or in many cases to simply walk away. They are already gone. Others have sought as best they can to fight to restore their values to the club they love. Not in response to the calls from some mythical destructive Svengali as this call is personal. It comes from one place. It comes from within.
You may and some do argue good riddance. Such is also their prerogative but the job of a successful "people organisation", which pretty much describes a football club, is to be as inclusive of as many value sets as possible. If you choose only to serve those who agree with your values then you actually become an exclusive rather than an inclusive organisation. It is a very narrow path to follow and one pretty much on the road to nowhere.
Potentially generations of supporters have already been lost. Any appeal to their loyalty to return means nothing because for them their loyalty belongs to something that no longer exists. Just what do you think you are asking them to return to? Whatever administrative changes have taken place the core values of this executive remain.
In this industry what price the road to financial opportunity if the stadium is only 1/3rd full to see it.
I suggest we do not have far to look to understand what the future holds. STVV have been under the stewardship of this investor for 13yrs. They pay to rent their ground. They pay percentage points on attendance, transfer and media revenues.
No matter the "excitement" of the day the primary exercise here is not to produce a successful football team, such an eventuality is merely a "possible" by-product of using a football club to prove you can make money from the game. If such provides you with a vehicle for your social needs then it is a decision for you. I and I expect the majority can respect your position.
In which case kindly have the good grace to acknowledge for many others the club today as once their vehicle for supporting the pursuit of sporting excellence, one they have followed for decades, is little more than an empty shell.
The responsibility for that rests in one place alone and it most certainly is not in the hearts and minds of the clubs supporters.
And we're doing ourselves no favours, because a few on here are saying nice touch etc there being told there being won over.
I'm a renewing season ticket holder and can make my own mind up on what the club are doing.
Were making a big thing of the season ticket box.
Grapevine rightly invokes the present situation of STTV and it is truly chilling, there was a post published on here yesterday by big in Brazov from an STTV supporter which is worth revisiting.
If any regime apologists can engage with what Grapevine has written, then they will also be engaging with what many supporters feel, but who can't put it as well.
There is a cold cynicism demonstrated by this regime however much they dress up this or that moment like the season ticket thing, and despite continual declarations that they have changed it isn't believed or trusted by many of us.
I repeat for the umpteenth time, if this regime has genuinely changed prove it on the pitch, In the sporting arena, by winning over and over again.
“I shouldn’t say it, but I’m not fussed about the club history. We should cherish it, but not at any price.”
"The glorious past of this club? I do not care.
The training of young players is the main wealth of Belgian clubs"
"Now you understand why I fell in love with this club?" Exclaims Katrien Meire
Everything's great ennit, if you ignore it.
I believe the original quote is in L'Echo, but I can't get it at the moment. They are telling me I've had my 5 free views for the month (cynical me, I don't believe that either).
http://drinkingduringthegame.blogspot.co.uk/2015/10/katrien-oops.html?m=1
At the end of the day, Hummel have produced a nice kit that reflects our history and the season ticket boxes are a welcome nod to the 25 year anniversary. I dont believe the SMT have had any input in either but those within the club that were involved should be happy with both. Certainly neither is worthy of ridicule or sniping.
With regards to the running of my football club
Roland Out
1. The current regime have demonstrated themselves to be incompetent at running our football club.
2. As well as their general lack of ability, they have insulted fans and stated that neither the club's history nor competitive football are important to them.
3. Their lack of ability and duplicitous behaviour means that I no longer trust them.
4. I do not believe that Charlton Athletic will be successful or inclusive all the time that they are the owners.
5. Therefore, the best thing for the club would be for Duchatelet to sell up and go.
6. As he has shown little desire to leave, I believe that the fans should put every pressure on him to go.
7. The regime can make it more difficult for fans to argue and organise against them, if there are a layer of fans who believe them to be benevolent.
8. The box and it's content may well be very nice, however I do not believe that they were given in the spirit of generosity. Rather they are a sop to try and curry favour with a number of fans, thus making public critique more difficult.
9. I do not hold this against anyone at Hummel. In fact, I think they've done a grand job.
10. If any other owners of our club had done this, I would praise them.
11. However, as I do not believe that the current regime has anything in it's hearts other than self-interest, I do not believe that this is a kind gesture. Rather, it is a cynical move.
12. My concern is not that people have a box and I don't. My concern is that that by getting a box, some people will take a softer view of the regime and will be less inclines and/or less able to carry on the fight against them.
13. I therefore wish to make it clear to people, that I do not believe the recent activities to be a positive move.
I do not wish do be in a state of tension with other Charlton fans. We all support the same club and whatever else we think, that is something that we have in common. It will be great one day when we can put all this behind us. However, I am not of the view that a desire for harmony amongst fans should be at the expense of rational debate or logical argument. I have therefore stated very clearly why I think the current activities of the club are not positive. If you can see errors in my facts or flaws in my logic, I would be very happy for you to point them out. But please, do not imply that my argument is borne out of jealously. To do so, is not very becoming of you and is unhelpful to adult debate.
It could mean I'm not paying an over the top price or I'm not paying any price. I'm inclined to believe the history of Charlton means little or nothing to a group of people who wouldn't of even known the whereabouts of that London suburb 6 weeks prior to their tenure. So I think not paying sod all would be the value put on our history.
More interesting for me is the importance of young talent and the Belgian clubs model for their academies ( with the exception of may be 2 or 3).I get the feeling they are there to supply the bigger leagues and the cloobs resign themselves to this and never being able to compete any higher other than making the numbers up in various competitions.