I do worry that when Sandgaard is told 'no' about something, it just makes him more determined to plough on with it.
Well that hasn’t been the case so far with his tenure. In fact he’s listened to the fans and changed decisions a few times . Personally I can’t see the issue with the name change unless it’s just that he didn’t consult the team that’s the problem ?
Spill the beans Pico. What's actually going on behind the scenes? Weve got our owner acting imo stupidly on this matter, but I'm asking myself why his acting like this.
In ten years time, the word woman will be deemed derogatory and the permanently offended will be telling us to use lady again and what a bad person you are if you don’t. There are so many things in the world that require change. I don’t understand why people don’t channel their energy into real things rather than tosh like this.
And the Charlton Women's team isn't one of them
So if it did not require change why did TS go to full time from part time? Why did TS need to bring it in house for the first time in 14 years
Fair cop.
And the name of the Charlton Women's team isn't one of them
I have no strong views on a team I personally have no affiliation with. I understand the argument and I can see both sides point of view.
A genuine question here. Is it acceptable to have Ladies Day at the racing or should that be changed to Womens Day? (ignore whether we should be horse racing in the first instance). I'm just trying to understand all instances of acceptability or non acceptability.
For those of us who are pretty ignorant of the relevant facts could someone in the know tell us, or give us a "best guess" on;
- the average attendance at a home league game - 280 over the 4 home games with attendances announced - how much it costs to get in £10 for adults, £5 for OAP’s and Children - the number of season ticket holders - No idea - how much a season ticket costs - £60 adults, £30 OAP’s and Children - the sort of dough the players are getting, on average, now the club has gone professional - No idea - how much it is all likely to cost to bank roll the womens team for a year - No idea
Just interested in getting some facts out there as I dont really have much idea on any of the above.
I have no strong views on a team I personally have no affiliation with. I understand the argument and I can see both sides point of view.
A genuine question here. Is it acceptable to have Ladies Day at the racing or should that be changed to Womens Day? (ignore whether we should be horse racing in the first instance). I'm just trying to understand all instances of acceptability or non acceptability.
Bit of a different situation with ascot. Rather than changing the name from ladies to women's day, they replaced the ladies with women, and I always look forward to the photos every year of drunken women having fist fights, passing out and taking a dump in the carpark (maybe less of that one...)
I have no strong views on a team I personally have no affiliation with. I understand the argument and I can see both sides point of view.
A genuine question here. Is it acceptable to have Ladies Day at the racing or should that be changed to Womens Day? (ignore whether we should be horse racing in the first instance). I'm just trying to understand all instances of acceptability or non acceptability.
The way it was explained to me is that it's not that there's no place for the term "ladies" per se, but it's inappropriate in a professional context due to the 'ladylike', 'little lady' connotations.
So you'll see 'women in business', 'women in tech', 'businesswoman of the year' etc, but ladies is rarely if ever used these days. Likewise in professional sport, and it's notable that clubs are intentionally changing their names away from ladies - Chelsea, Arsenal, City, Birmingham among many in recent times, all with the same explanation. Only we are turning the clock back, because a man says the ladies should get back in their box as the decision has been made. Sigh.
For those of us who are pretty ignorant of the relevant facts could someone in the know tell us, or give us a "best guess" on;
- the average attendance at a home league game - 280 over the 4 home games with attendances announced - how much it costs to get in £10 for adults, £5 for OAP’s and Children - the number of season ticket holders - No idea - how much a season ticket costs - £60 adults, £30 OAP’s and Children - the sort of dough the players are getting, on average, now the club has gone professional - No idea - how much it is all likely to cost to bank roll the womens team for a year - No idea
Just interested in getting some facts out there as I dont really have much idea on any of the above.
In the region of £600k gross now professional, less whatever sponsorship, FA money and the like they receive. I'd estimate it's costing TS half that.
We don't have any high profile players, my guess is between £20 and £25k salaries on average with maybe some appearance/win bonus's but likely slightly less for a few of the younger players.
I have no strong views on a team I personally have no affiliation with. I understand the argument and I can see both sides point of view.
A genuine question here. Is it acceptable to have Ladies Day at the racing or should that be changed to Womens Day? (ignore whether we should be horse racing in the first instance). I'm just trying to understand all instances of acceptability or non acceptability.
The way it was explained to me is that it's not that there's no place for the term "ladies" per se, but it's inappropriate in a professional context due to the 'ladylike', 'little lady' connotations.
So you'll see 'women in business', 'women in tech', 'businesswoman of the year' etc, but ladies is rarely if ever used these days. Likewise in professional sport, and it's notable that clubs are intentionally changing their names away from ladies - Chelsea, Arsenal, City, Birmingham among many in recent times, all with the same explanation. Only we are turning the clock back, because a man says the ladies should get back in their box as the decision has been made. Sigh.
So if TS decided to rename CAFC Woolwich West Dynamic we'd accept that? Owners do not own the club, just the assets
The comments he has made on social media and SLP about playing staff being here temporarily and therefore not having a legitimate voice are concerning.
I'll take the flak but I agree with Ben on this one, Sandgaard has invested alot to make the women's team a professional club, he can just as easily remove that funding and they can go back to working second jobs, or they can just accept that they are his employees. The women's team will never generate the money it costs to run it and most of the people up in arms about this change would never go to even watch them play. It's a ridiculous battle people have chosen to fight.
Another view is that it's a ridiculous battle he's chosen to fight. Why change the name that was universally accepted to one that's creating this conflict? It's counter productive but his male ego can't back down.
If he ever decides to rename the men's team to something pathetic and embarrassing, I trust you'll get the issue then.
Our attitude to the women's team is appalling. Of course he can describe it as a non-issue whilst the male majority dismiss it like this.
I've been wondering what name change would upset me the most.
I suspect "The Charlton Tigers" or "The Charlton Giants" would cause uproar.
But I'm thinking more of something a lady woman might choose
The Charlton Beefcakes. The Charlton Hunks. The Charlton StudMuffins.
Or something more akin to what he's doing to the ladies, such as
The Little Boys of Charlton Charlton Darlings Charlton Mansplainers
Whilst I agree the name change is utterly ridiculous, so are these comparisons.
So if TS decided to rename CAFC Woolwich West Dynamic we'd accept that? Owners do not own the club, just the assets
The comments he has made on social media and SLP about playing staff being here temporarily and therefore not having a legitimate voice are concerning.
Got no opinion on this (although would really like to know why TS is so adamant on the change), but changing the name of one of its teams, is nothing like changing the name of the physical Club imo. I think the fact its the women's team and a bloke making the change, just adds to the controversy.
So if TS decided to rename CAFC Woolwich West Dynamic we'd accept that? Owners do not own the club, just the assets
The comments he has made on social media and SLP about playing staff being here temporarily and therefore not having a legitimate voice are concerning.
It’s a women’s football team, not the Harlem Globetrotters.
“We’ve had a lot of conversations internally. Does this conflict with being the most progressive club in all of England when it comes to EDI (equality, diversity and inclusion)? There is absolutely no conflicts with that. I think it’s just as good as the word women – I consider maybe a little more respectful, if there is any difference.
There’s his reason, TS thinks it’s more respectful.
“Respect the players by ignoring them”
But then the counter argument is that, he's the one coughing up and funding what is, presumably, a loss making team so he'll make, what he considers to be a minor change in their name, to make it sound marginally more respectful. And let's be honest, it's not usually the players who rebel against such things, it's the fans.
Thats not necessarily my opinion, just another way to look at it, but reckon it's a matter of principles for both sides in this argument
So if TS decided to rename CAFC Woolwich West Dynamic we'd accept that? Owners do not own the club, just the assets
The comments he has made on social media and SLP about playing staff being here temporarily and therefore not having a legitimate voice are concerning.
I have already stated that the name change is wrong. However I do agree with TS that is nothing to do with the players. For example the current first team had a team bonding session with Adkins on pre season and decided this season we would be known as Charlton Reds would we accept it.
No is the answer, players come and go, supporters are the club and the only people who should be consulted on a name change
In ten years time, the word woman will be deemed derogatory and the permanently offended will be telling us to use lady again and what a bad person you are if you don’t. There are so many things in the world that require change. I don’t understand why people don’t channel their energy into real things rather than tosh like this.
I can't imagine any female footballers would want the team to be known as 'ladies' yet TS decides to continue with the change - it makes no sense. He seems awfully out of touch and determined to get his own way.
I can't imagine any female footballers would want the team to be known as 'ladies' yet TS decides to continue with the change - it makes no sense. He seems awfully out of touch and determined to get his own way.
As Slade used to say, just be patient Hoofy, in ten years time he'll be seen as a visionary.
I can't imagine any female footballers would want the team to be known as 'ladies' yet TS decides to continue with the change - it makes no sense. He seems awfully out of touch and determined to get his own way.
As Slade used to say, just be patient Hoofy, in ten years time he'll be seen as a visionary.
For a man leading a global business I'm quite amazed by his decision.
In ten years time, the word woman will be deemed derogatory and the permanently offended will be telling us to use lady again and what a bad person you are if you don’t. There are so many things in the world that require change. I don’t understand why people don’t channel their energy into real things rather than tosh like this.
The point is not about offense nor what is derogatory. The point is that in certain circumstances the women involved (and women more generally) prefer some terms than others depending on whether it is a formal or professional setting.
In this case the women involved want to be called what they see as the professional term and what the industry standard.
If nothing else the direction of travel shows this is wrong. So many teams have moved from ladies to women but none the other way round. If nothing else it's an obvious backwards step away from the industry standard.
If he is set on a rebrand then one which would be a forward step would be to drop the gendered term completely and just have the team as Charlton Athletic.
So, this has just become another tedious chapter in the culture wars with the usual suspects on each side.
I suppose TS's mistake was agreeing to fund the loss making ladies side in the first place. Women's football is one of the fulminating frontlines of the culture wars and thus it is always going to be more trouble than it is worth. Whatever he does will never be enough.
A lose-lose situation, and one that he has to keep throwing money at whilst being crucified for it. He only has to take a look at this thread, where his inner thoughts and motivations have been divined by the all-knowing priests of the new religion and he has been found guilty of sexism, narcissism and much else, on the basis of their unique powers of mind reading.
Heretics will not be tolerated, after all. I don't know why he bothers. The sense of entitlement on show is staggering.
I have no strong views on a team I personally have no affiliation with. I understand the argument and I can see both sides point of view.
A genuine question here. Is it acceptable to have Ladies Day at the racing or should that be changed to Womens Day? (ignore whether we should be horse racing in the first instance). I'm just trying to understand all instances of acceptability or non acceptability.
I'm a man so wouldn't want to state as fact but the key issue does seem to be setting and situation.
Racing generally is seen as a formal event so I would guess that ladies being the more formal term is appropriate. Sports (not just football) are professional places and the more professional term is women.
So, this has just become another tedious chapter in the culture wars with the usual suspects on each side.
I suppose TS's mistake was agreeing to fund the loss making ladies side in the first place. Women's football is one of the fulminating frontlines of the culture wars and thus it is always going to be more trouble than it is worth. Whatever he does will never be enough.
A lose-lose situation, and one that he has to keep throwing money at whilst being crucified for it. He only has to take a look at this thread, where his inner thoughts and motivations have been divined by the all-knowing priests of the new religion and he has been found guilty of sexism, narcissism and much else, on the basis of their unique powers of mind reading.
Heretics will not be tolerated, after all. I don't know why he bothers. The sense of entitlement on show is staggering.
What the actual fuck.
The boomer energy is strong with this one.
Using 'Boomer' doesn't really move any argument along either. Just another lazy generalisation.
Comments
What's actually going on behind the scenes?
Weve got our owner acting imo stupidly on this matter, but I'm asking myself why his acting like this.
And the name of the Charlton Women's team isn't one of them
I understand the argument and I can see both sides point of view.
A genuine question here.
Is it acceptable to have Ladies Day at the racing or should that be changed to Womens Day? (ignore whether we should be horse racing in the first instance).
I'm just trying to understand all instances of acceptability or non acceptability.
So you'll see 'women in business', 'women in tech', 'businesswoman of the year' etc, but ladies is rarely if ever used these days. Likewise in professional sport, and it's notable that clubs are intentionally changing their names away from ladies - Chelsea, Arsenal, City, Birmingham among many in recent times, all with the same explanation. Only we are turning the clock back, because a man says the ladies should get back in their box as the decision has been made. Sigh.
In the region of £600k gross now professional, less whatever sponsorship, FA money and the like they receive. I'd estimate it's costing TS half that.
We don't have any high profile players, my guess is between £20 and £25k salaries on average with maybe some appearance/win bonus's but likely slightly less for a few of the younger players.
^^^^^^^^^ N A I L O N H E A D ^^^^^^^^^^^^
The comments he has made on social media and SLP about playing staff being here temporarily and therefore not having a legitimate voice are concerning.
It's going to be called the Charlton carpet munchers.
When signing for the club did the players know TS was intending to change the name from women to ladies?
Thats not necessarily my opinion, just another way to look at it, but reckon it's a matter of principles for both sides in this argument
No is the answer, players come and go, supporters are the club and the only people who should be consulted on a name change
He's shown that he will do whatever he wants because he 'owns the club', sounds very Rolandy.
In this case the women involved want to be called what they see as the professional term and what the industry standard.
If nothing else the direction of travel shows this is wrong. So many teams have moved from ladies to women but none the other way round. If nothing else it's an obvious backwards step away from the industry standard.
If he is set on a rebrand then one which would be a forward step would be to drop the gendered term completely and just have the team as Charlton Athletic.
The boomer energy is strong with this one.
Racing generally is seen as a formal event so I would guess that ladies being the more formal term is appropriate. Sports (not just football) are professional places and the more professional term is women.