This was brewing last week on Twitter and I was befuddled then. I am befuddled now. im not entirely sure what the issue is between using ladies instead of women or vice versa.
having said that it has certainlyProvoked a reaction so it might have been better asking the question as opposed to just doing it
Me neither to be honest but if all the team & Women (almost typed ladies) management have told sandgaard that it's not on why isn't he listening ( & why isn't JJ manager?)
I personally don't give a shit either way. I support Charlton mens team. If I happen to see that the "Ladies" team won 10-0, my reaction is the same to them losing 10-0. I can't understand why people think you support the mens team, so therefore have some feeling towards the women's game. I find it annoying when the media keep intergrating it all under the same banner and injecting their news into the general mens football articles and this includes clubs doing it. I really enjoy listening to Charlton Live podcast, but every now and then they start banging on about the womens team and playing interviews of players and managers. It's not what their audience is there for. Let them have their own pod. I know I'll probably get slated for saying this, but I'll be shocked if even 5% of the users here bother following the girls game. To me, Women's football to a different sport that I have no interest in.............
That’s fine that you don’t support them. But that’s not really the issue here is it. We are discussing it here because the team you don’t support is owned by the owner of the team you do support and he is making a change which goes against the team you don’t support wishes… and the story has made the press and the story will mainly be negative. Even if you don’t care about women’s football, it’s just not a good look from TS.
Yes it's really less about the ladies/women differentiation and a whole lot more about TS ignoring everyone underneath him complaining about a decision he's making. Then ploughing on with the decision regardless.
Not everything needs to be changed. Sometimes bad decisions happen and you need to humble enough to recognise you aren't always going to make the right decision. Just like Addicks to Victory instead of RRR, he needs to realise he's messed up and change it back/undo his decision.
I'm not gonna get into the ins and outs of what is the right or wrong word to use and what is offensive in what context and what isn't because its not my place.
What is very telling is that almost every club that was using ladies has at some point in the last 15 years moved to using women. A few remain using ladies. Not a single club has moved from using women to ladies.
That in itself shows this would be a significant backwards step.
I'm very grateful to TS for getting the women's club back under the same umbrella as the men's. It's a big part of making us feel like a proper club again. Likewise making the women team professional is huge. But get that ego in check.
But it isn’t known as the gentleman’s team is it? When have you known it as that?
A very weird move by him. Completely unnecessary.
But the team was Charlton Ladies team before the club disbanded it.
It was then reformed as Charlton Women's team wasn't it?
To move it back to Ladies probably in Sandgaard's head brings it back under the umbrella as it once was.
(I am fairly certain that's how it became the Women's team).
Dazzler / AFKA etc - just think about the word "ladylike" and all the restrictive connotations it carries about what a woman should or shouldn't do. When women's football was banned by the FA in 1921 might it have been because it wasn't considered ladylike ?
Language matters, quite apart from the fact that the current women's team have expressed a clear desire to continue to be referred to as women
By the same token, isn’t “men” an abbreviation of gentlemen? Because there are connotations with that term and they certainly don’t apply to the majority of footballers.
No. Men is not an abbreviation of gentlemen.
Absolutely. Given the way abbreviations come into being, that would imply that the word 'gentleman' existed before 'man' which is quite clearly not the case.
Gentleman = man + gentle/gentile or 'man of noble birth'. There is some weird history there but the point is that 'man' is not an abbreviation.
Because it’s outdated and archaic and the women’s team have asked not to be called that. But I suppose a middle-aged man knows better.
Is it..?,I’ve never heard a speech start with Woman & Gentleman before…🤔,anyways if the Woman’s team don’t like it I agree with them it shouldn’t be changed…
Setting and situation is important to the language used. A term can be deemed correct in a formal setting but offensive in a more professional one.
I personally don't give a shit either way. I support Charlton mens team. If I happen to see that the "Ladies" team won 10-0, my reaction is the same to them losing 10-0. I can't understand why people think you support the mens team, so therefore have some feeling towards the women's game. I find it annoying when the media keep intergrating it all under the same banner and injecting their news into the general mens football articles and this includes clubs doing it. I really enjoy listening to Charlton Live podcast, but every now and then they start banging on about the womens team and playing interviews of players and managers. It's not what their audience is there for. Let them have their own pod. I know I'll probably get slated for saying this, but I'll be shocked if even 5% of the users here bother following the girls game. To me, Women's football to a different sport that I have no interest in.............
I have completely the opposite perspective, I would support a Charlton Athletic tiddlywinks team. I go and watch the mens team home and away, but I’m always interested in how all of the teams that represent our club are doing.
One of the big things he did when coming in was relaunch the ‘Womens’ Team. Why on earth would he now want to rebrand it as ‘Ladies’? Mad.
And for men who keep asking what difference it makes? It’s not up to you because you’re not female, sorry but that’s the plain truth of it.
At the end of the day, if the girls who play for the team that’s branded under ‘Charlton’ don’t want it to be changed because it isn’t appropriate, then don’t fecking change it, end of discussion.
So presumably women should have no opinion on the men’s team either, because you know, you’re not male....?
I personally don't give a shit either way. I support Charlton mens team. If I happen to see that the "Ladies" team won 10-0, my reaction is the same to them losing 10-0. I can't understand why people think you support the mens team, so therefore have some feeling towards the women's game. I find it annoying when the media keep intergrating it all under the same banner and injecting their news into the general mens football articles and this includes clubs doing it. I really enjoy listening to Charlton Live podcast, but every now and then they start banging on about the womens team and playing interviews of players and managers. It's not what their audience is there for. Let them have their own pod. I know I'll probably get slated for saying this, but I'll be shocked if even 5% of the users here bother following the girls game. To me, Women's football to a different sport that I have no interest in.............
similar to you, I have zero interest in the women’s game, but that’s the same zero interest I have in Men’s rugby or formula one or golf. They’re all sports I have no time for. However, I think with football, to elevate the female game, it in itself has had to attach it to the men’s game to generate publicity and interest, until which point it can stand on its own for popularity and commercial viability
Given I don’t follow women’s football, I have no idea if that popularity is at that point, but it’s certainly becoming more mainstream, and that can only be a good thing. If it helps elevate the profile of the women’s game, then what is the harm of them using Charlton, the Charlton I/we follow to do that.
Charlton TV covers a lot more than just the first team. Last night there was the bit on the LGBQT+ work of the community trust. If we’re talking/discussing these initiatives, then what harm the women’s team getting coverage. We’ve got Curbs’ Santa bag or some sort of silly thing they’re also doing at the moment (which I am not knocking). Just using it as a point that between 7-10 is a lot of time to fill on air with content. As much as I love the men’s team, it can’t all be about the miniature of team tactics and Curbs, Minto and the studio guest analysing the 2-0 win up at Gateshead.
Exactly. It’s time to get rid of the extra verbiage. Nobody is going to confuse the two teams. Instead of arguing about which word to use we should be setting an example and get rid of it completely.
People are allowed to wonder why its offensive to use the word ladies. I still don't really understand it, but judging by peoples reaction, and our women's team then it appears it is. Seems all very unnecessary.
I'm not gonna get into the ins and outs of what is the right or wrong word to use and what is offensive in what context and what isn't because its not my place.
What is very telling is that almost every club that was using ladies has at some point in the last 15 years moved to using women. A few remain using ladies. Not a single club has moved from using women to ladies.
That in itself shows this would be a significant backwards step.
I'm very grateful to TS for getting the women's club back under the same umbrella as the men's. It's a big part of making us feel like a proper club again. Likewise making the women team professional is huge. But get that ego in check.
14 of the 22 teams playing in the ‘Women’ FA cup on Sunday were ladies. The bigger teams are defo mainly women though.
One of the big things he did when coming in was relaunch the ‘Womens’ Team. Why on earth would he now want to rebrand it as ‘Ladies’? Mad.
And for men who keep asking what difference it makes? It’s not up to you because you’re not female, sorry but that’s the plain truth of it.
At the end of the day, if the girls who play for the team that’s branded under ‘Charlton’ don’t want it to be changed because it isn’t appropriate, then don’t fecking change it, end of discussion.
So presumably women should have no opinion on the men’s team either, because you know, you’re not male....?
You're misframing the issue.
It is about the name of the team. The name of an institution, undergoing an unsolicited change, in what most of the subjects (i.e. women, and players in the women's team) consider to be a backward direction. Your comment is so mind-bogglingly obtuse that I don't really know where to start with my refutation.
Surely with most things relating to how people identify self determination should be the main factor. If the players and coaching staff and other main stake holders want to be identified with the term ‘women’ not ‘ladies’ TS would seem very silly to go against that in my view.
On another note it is an interesting discussion as to whether you support the team or the club. I would be lying if I said that the results of the men’s team don’t mean far more to me than any of the others, but that doesn’t mean I won’t take pride in the progress and success of academy teams, the women’s team the upbeats and any other team that represents our club. And as a father of two daughters, I perhaps recognise the benefit of a women’s team more than I would have done in my younger days. It is important for kids growing up to have role models in all areas of interest that they can relate to and not feel that certain fields are excluded to them from the start.
I would like to understand why he wants to change the name in the first place? Let alone ignore the wishes of the Women’s team to not have it changed, the bad publicity will likely stop him from doing that, but it shouldn’t take a backlash to not make bad decisions.
Yes he pays the bills, but so far his decision making for such a multi-millionaire is strange, the hesitancy to appoint Jackson, the hesitancy to sack Adkins, the Roddy appointment, playing his song on full volume, his son being appointed in the club, not having a CEO in charge while he is in the US. He is not being advised badly, he is just making poor decisions, he should step out of the limelight, keep paying the bills and coming to the games but let someone more experienced take over the running of the club in general.
He has made many good choices too of course, and he saved us from oblivion and not that anything he is doing is as bad as the last owners but the Sandgaard vanity show is getting a little bit tiresome, for me at least.
Did you know that on the 31st January 1963 the MCC ruled that all 1st class cricketers were nominally professional (or effectively players) and with this 'Gentlemen' ceased to exist.
I’ll bet he doesn’t change the name/ changes it back to women I mean he’s so green behind the ears with some of this guff , he needs a Peter Varney type character to guide him . Put you money back in your pocket and go do something with less hassle Thomas , how can you be asked to burn your money on a load of chuff
I doubt many in women’s football agree that this is ‘much ado about nothing’ AFKA with all due respect.
It’s surprising that TS would back women’s football at Charlton with hard cash on one hand, and attempt to make a change which will be viewed as antagonistic and retrogressive on the other. Most bizarre.
‘Charlton Women are set to rebrand as ‘Charlton Ladies’ in a shock decision that its players have labelled “insulting.”
The move to drop the moniker ‘women’ in favour of ‘ladies’ is understood to have been driven by Charlton’s owner, Thomas Sandgaard, the Danish-American businessman who agreed to a historic takeover of the women’s side in February this year.
A senior source at the club said the decision has sparked outrage among players, who branded the move “insulting” and “derogatory” in a club meeting with Sandgaard last Friday.
Karen Hills, who took over the championship side earlier this year and enjoyed a successful playing career with the Addicks between 2001 and 2007, is also said to be staunchly opposed to the idea.
Such are the players’ frustrations that they have reportedly drafted a letter to the Professional Footballers’ Association in a last-ditch attempt to block the name change, although Charlton have already listed the women’s team as the ‘Ladies’ Team’ on its official club website.’
I cannot see a single reason for doing this other than he can because he's the owner. It's a terrible decision and another example that the people advising him are at times inept. We need an experienced CEO in place to offer advice to prevent this type of thing happening. Addicks to victory at the end of a win being another load of bollox. If he refuses to listen then I'm afraid it's all about his ego.
I cannot see a single reason for doing this other than he can because he's the owner. It's a terrible decision and another example that the people advising him are at times inept. We need an experienced CEO in place to offer advice to prevent this type of thing happening. Addicks to victory at the end of a win being another load of bollox. If he refuses to listen then I'm afraid it's all about his ego.
Blaming people that advise him assumes it’s not his idea. Evidence so far suggests TS doesn’t listen to advice.
Comments
Not everything needs to be changed. Sometimes bad decisions happen and you need to humble enough to recognise you aren't always going to make the right decision. Just like Addicks to Victory instead of RRR, he needs to realise he's messed up and change it back/undo his decision.
What is very telling is that almost every club that was using ladies has at some point in the last 15 years moved to using women. A few remain using ladies. Not a single club has moved from using women to ladies.
That in itself shows this would be a significant backwards step.
I'm very grateful to TS for getting the women's club back under the same umbrella as the men's. It's a big part of making us feel like a proper club again. Likewise making the women team professional is huge. But get that ego in check.
Gentleman = man + gentle/gentile or 'man of noble birth'. There is some weird history there but the point is that 'man' is not an abbreviation.
Given I don’t follow women’s football, I have no idea if that popularity is at that point, but it’s certainly becoming more mainstream, and that can only be a good thing. If it helps elevate the profile of the women’s game, then what is the harm of them using Charlton, the Charlton I/we follow to do that.
Charlton TV covers a lot more than just the first team. Last night there was the bit on the LGBQT+ work of the community trust. If we’re talking/discussing these initiatives, then what harm the women’s team getting coverage. We’ve got Curbs’ Santa bag or some sort of silly thing they’re also doing at the moment (which I am not knocking). Just using it as a point that between 7-10 is a lot of time to fill on air with content. As much as I love the men’s team, it can’t all be about the miniature of team tactics and Curbs, Minto and the studio guest analysing the 2-0 win up at Gateshead.
It is about the name of the team. The name of an institution, undergoing an unsolicited change, in what most of the subjects (i.e. women, and players in the women's team) consider to be a backward direction. Your comment is so mind-bogglingly obtuse that I don't really know where to start with my refutation.
On another note it is an interesting discussion as to whether you support the team or the club. I would be lying if I said that the results of the men’s team don’t mean far more to me than any of the others, but that doesn’t mean I won’t take pride in the progress and success of academy teams, the women’s team the upbeats and any other team that represents our club. And as a father of two daughters, I perhaps recognise the benefit of a women’s team more than I would have done in my younger days. It is important for kids growing up to have role models in all areas of interest that they can relate to and not feel that certain fields are excluded to them from the start.
Yes he pays the bills, but so far his decision making for such a multi-millionaire is strange, the hesitancy to appoint Jackson, the hesitancy to sack Adkins, the Roddy appointment, playing his song on full volume, his son being appointed in the club, not having a CEO in charge while he is in the US. He is not being advised badly, he is just making poor decisions, he should step out of the limelight, keep paying the bills and coming to the games but let someone more experienced take over the running of the club in general.
He has made many good choices too of course, and he saved us from oblivion and not that anything he is doing is as bad as the last owners but the Sandgaard vanity show is getting a little bit tiresome, for me at least.
I sense any objection is a generational thing.
People my age don't give a toss about names.
You know why?
Because it doesn't bloody well matter.
https://gentlemenplayers.com/our-history/
I repeat.
There is no upside to this change, only unhappy players, coaches sponsors plus reputational damage.
And if as some claim names don't matter, why is the name being changed?
Will you be equally indifferent when the men's team becomes Charlton Chargers? It's just a name.
I mean he’s so green behind the ears with some of this guff , he needs a Peter Varney type character to guide him .
Put you money back in your pocket and go do something with less hassle Thomas , how can you be asked to burn your money on a load of chuff
I doubt many in women’s football agree that this is ‘much ado about nothing’ AFKA with all due respect.
It’s surprising that TS would back women’s football at Charlton with hard cash on one hand, and attempt to make a change which will be viewed as antagonistic and retrogressive on the other. Most bizarre.
‘Charlton Women are set to rebrand as ‘Charlton Ladies’ in a shock decision that its players have labelled “insulting.”
The move to drop the moniker ‘women’ in favour of ‘ladies’ is understood to have been driven by Charlton’s owner, Thomas Sandgaard, the Danish-American businessman who agreed to a historic takeover of the women’s side in February this year.
A senior source at the club said the decision has sparked outrage among players, who branded the move “insulting” and “derogatory” in a club meeting with Sandgaard last Friday.
Karen Hills, who took over the championship side earlier this year and enjoyed a successful playing career with the Addicks between 2001 and 2007, is also said to be staunchly opposed to the idea.
Such are the players’ frustrations that they have reportedly drafted a letter to the Professional Footballers’ Association in a last-ditch attempt to block the name change, although Charlton have already listed the women’s team as the ‘Ladies’ Team’ on its official club website.’
It's a terrible decision and another example that the people advising him are at times inept.
We need an experienced CEO in place to offer advice to prevent this type of thing happening.
Addicks to victory at the end of a win being another load of bollox.
If he refuses to listen then I'm afraid it's all about his ego.