Perhaps the apology was not for the content of CMs remarks but for the language used ie "Canute* like" and "grow up".
Would we have been happy if such remarks had been made about Charlton?
That's assuming an apology was made.
* Canute/Cnut gets a bad press as he didnt believe, according to a much later story, he could turn back the tide and was trying to show his fawning courtiers that he was not all powerful.
However, he did support mass immigration in boats, of the long variety, and create an early European union so wouldn't have been universally popular.
Charlton have now apologised to West Ham for Methven’s comments, according to the Guardian.
This doesn’t suggest he is authorised to speak for the club!
Do you believe everything you read in The Guardian? If so then I feel sorry for you
Grow up. Adult newspapers have ethical standards and no incentive or interest in making up minor lines about L1 clubs they don’t cover from one week to the next. I can’t speak for comics.
I won't be bothered when there's an overspend against what Methven pitched to the owners. They didn't buy believing they'd make money with the club in L1, so they know promotion is the 1st goal. Didn't make it this season. Learn and move onto the next.
I'd be worried if the losses made them lose interest, but is there evidence of that? It's very early days for them to be expecting to see a return on their investment, so I think they'll stick with it for the foreseeable.
I won't be bothered when there's an overspend against what Methven pitched to the owners. They didn't buy believing they'd make money with the club in L1, so they know promotion is the 1st goal. Didn't make it this season. Learn and move onto the next.
I'd be worried if the losses made them lose interest, but is there evidence of that? It's very early days for them to be expecting to see a return on their investment, so I think they'll stick with it for the foreseeable.
Agree that there is no evidence that they have lost interest but Sandgaard maintained his interest for a few seasons and spent money, often badly, before losing his interest pretty quickly.
The difference maybe that this is a group, not one individual, so any one owner dropping out wouldn't be automatically be the end of project and that TS was in it from the limelight as much as anything else where as the current owners have kept a fairly low profile.
Spoke to one of the owners, Warren Rosenfeld, last week and while I didn't question him in detail he was clearly about bring stability and continuity back to the club.
But we're still quite early into this regime. Let's see where we are in a few seasons time.
I love how everyone seems to think that a govt regulator is the answer. After all they've made a fantastic job of all the other things they regulate...
Easy jibe. What's your alternative answer?
There isn’t another answer unless the Premier League decides to suddenly become very generous which we know it won’t but I think @BrentfordAddick makes a decent point. Look at the publics perception of Ofgem and Ofwat to name but two regulators.
I love how everyone seems to think that a govt regulator is the answer. After all they've made a fantastic job of all the other things they regulate...
Easy jibe. What's your alternative answer?
A very fair question. I'm a believer in strong and effective government in the right places and it pains me to see what a mess is being made of things, at least in part because we have a government that doesn't really believe that there's a role for a strong state. I'm just not certain exactly what they are supposed to do.
I suppose we start by asking what the problem is. I think, tell me if I'm wrong, I think the problem is that there's an argument about to what extent some football clubs should subsidise other football clubs. I don't know where else that model can be found. If I open a third rate coffee shop on the High Street can I expect a better one to bung me a few quid every week to ensure that I keep going? It seems to my simple mind, that hasn't listened to the podcasts or read the books, that we have a ridiculous structure that cannot be kept going for ever and that we could easily be a victim of it. I think it started back when football clubs could keep all the gate money rather than split it with the visitors (for younger readers, there was sometimes laughter when crowds were announced at a number plainly much lower than the number of people actually in the ground) and since then we have been on a pathway of an elite that can set it own terms.
So what's my alternative answer. Continue to demonstrate to the "elite" that there's a point to the pyramid. Luton v Bournemouth was exciting because of the jeopardy. You can't have success without failure. Try to reconstruct transfers of Academy players so that there is a financial reason for smaller clubs, like us right now, to develop players.
But I think we should worry. The number of live music venues has fallen. There used to be dog tracks everywhere. I just don't understand how we can continue with loads of football clubs who are pretty much guaranteed to make a loss. I don't get how it can carry on, regardless of whether a government regulator is there. Do we say that clubs like ours are heritage assets and should be financially protected? Does there need to be a statutory role for government and if so, what is it aiming to do? Increase participation at grass routes, ensure that we have an elite, what?
And, when we were Prem League, did we say that we should be giving more money to teams that weren't? Genuine question.
You seem to have forgotten, or perhaps were never aware, how the Government White Paper has come into existence. It is the result of the Fan-Led Review, the biggest 'listening project" any UK government has ever undertaken with football fans, by a country mile. CAST were just one of many Supporters Trusts listened to as part of this review. Our own Lauren Kreamer found herself in a one-to-one with Nadine Dorries during the latter's tenure as Culture Secretary and seemed slightly stunned to find that Ms Dorries appeared to both "get it" and to support the broad thrust of proposals from fans for how to fix the problems. The Football Regulator per se was not the objective. It was seen as the toughest of several approachs to fixing the problem, and for a long time during the process there was no guarantee that this government in particular would adopt it, because it is generally susceptible to political ideology and lobbying which renders regulators impotent (this may have been what @BrentfordAddick had in mind).
I remain wary of becoming too optimistic about what this will bring us, because I am still in shock that this government of all of them in the last 30 years could be the one that finally decides that football is a national political issue. But bloody hell, if it goes through, it will be a text-book example of the very best of politics. A single constituency MP, herself a fan, sets the ball rolling, organises a really comprehensive consultation with both the electorate and professionals who understand the business of football; she then stands up to opponents in her own party, blowing her chances of a ministerial career, and facing down some pretty dark personal attacks from lobbyists, all the while battling with cancer too. I've never voted Tory in my life, but I'm sure glad that Tracey Crouch isn't standing in Eltham, otherwise I'd face an agonising decision😉 Sadly she won't be standing at all, but she can leave with her head held high, and ought to be welcomed in every stadium in the country when she pitches up following her Spurs. Far from government "interference" this is a text-book example of representative democracy. Or, to coin a phrase you may have once used yourself, "the will of the people"
Edit: written before I'd read @BrentfordAddick thoughtful response to my question which I'll answer asap.
And might Tracey Crouch be the first regulator? Fair play to her if so. I suppose the success of govt regulation depends partly on the identity of the regulator.
Never mind a Government-appointed regulator, WTF has the FA been doing since they created the Premier League 30+ years ago?
They've dropped the ball more often than our goalkeepers.
Excellent platform for me to answer @ BrentfordAddick.
The FA set up the FAPL out of spite in a petty rivalry with the Football League. Their decision to create the Premier League as a separate commercial entity is the single most stupid decision in modern professional football. It is the root cause of the situation across the whoĺe of Europe where top clubs get richer and the rest get poorer. If this had not happened neither would Abramovic, which means Parker would not…you get my drift.
It’s common to blame “Sky” but they didnt ask for this.They just wanted to buy the rights to show top league footie. They would not have much cared how a unified football pyramid distributed the money.
The Germans refused to go down that path, and that’s fan-led too. Owners of top clubs (and not so top clubs, I refer to Hannover 96 here) keep trying to change it but the fans stand firm thanks to 50+1, but also a sense of unity across tribal club lines which we sadly lack. Basically they all agree that the core customers for the Bundesliga are not legions of spotty teenagers in Bangkok placing their bets, but German fans who turn up each week. Like the 60,000 who turn up to watch Schalke despite them now facing relegation to the third division.
The definitive book on how this came about remains “Broken Dreams” by Tom Bower. I dont much care for him generally and he doesnt much care for football but this was so on the money. And yes, in a passing sentence he does confirm that indeed Richard Murray spoke up against the madness but had a max of three other club chairmen prepared to agree and vote with him.
Heard about this article on latest Price of Football pod yesterday https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-13188487/Premier-League-clubs-shot-EFL-deal.html Interesting to learn from the PoF pod that the FA have a vote at the Premier League table. There are 21 votes which can be cast, one for each club and one for the FA. In order for a motion to be adopted it needs a 2/3 (two thirds) majority, i.e. 14 votes. Disappointing to also learn that the FA hardly ever sit at the table and vote. The most sensible idea I heard is to merge all 3 organisations, the Prem, the FA and the EPL......... snowball in hells chance of that........ so the regulator seems to be all we have....... by we I don't mean Charlton, I mean football people. I'm sure having a regulator will get something done quicker than waiting for the Prem to get it sorted. I do hope the legislation has good teeth and doesn't get watered down too much. Also good that UEFA are (have? I'm not sure) setting financial limits for clubs who want to play in the Champions League etc. This will apparently force the Prem to have lower FFP spending limits than they might otherwise want....... the rich clubs won't get quite as rich as they'd like to be if they're not in European competitions.
But those UEFA rules also limit "smaller" club's spending so stopping them splashing the cash to break into the top level in Europe the way City and PSG have.
They have got through before UEFA closed the door behind them so now much harder for anyone to breakthrough.
Seems to me that the only leverage EFL have over PL is the fact that so many of the PL trainee superstars play for a season or two in the lower divisions. So if push comes to shove (and EFL can unite) they should all refuse to take any of the PL development players, unless EFL receives money to take them. PL could send them to Europe/Overseas, but that looks more expensive and risky to me (I've no idea of the employment rules etc except for 3 month rule for EEC). Otherwise EFL just have to beg and hope Government intervenes
I have been listening to the podcast: Where's the Money Gone?. It is co-presented by our very own Charlie Methven. A bunch of you are across this already. But I have to say I have found it very interesting..
For those that haven't listened to it, Charlie is a sharper tool than I had foolishly assumed him to be. Despite being Etonian etc he appears to have had a lifelong interest as a fan and put voluntary hours into football over the years.
At the start of each pod the two co-hosts talk a bit about their respective clubs' fortunes on the Saturday. Well they did up until Appleton was sacked and it's been radio silence on that since. Probably wise.
There are some interesting glimpses into Charlton related matters or perspectives throughout the pod.
If you are to believe everything or every philosophy that he espouses, Charlieboy is probably not a negative influence on the club in my opinion.
One of the episodes they have a company rep of the fan experience company that Charlton are getting advice from. They talk a lot of sense and they talk about the need to balance the needs of the traditional or 'legacy' fans and the need to make experiences and content that resonates with new markets.
Anyway whether you like him or not you should have a listen.
Latest episode: Methven reckons Charlton has a competitive advantage when the regulations come in limiting salary expenditure. Good feeder academies become a critical asset and we have one.
I have been listening to the podcast: Where's the Money Gone?. It is co-presented by our very own Charlie Methven. A bunch of you are across this already. But I have to say I have found it very interesting..
For those that haven't listened to it, Charlie is a sharper tool than I had foolishly assumed him to be. Despite being Etonian etc he appears to have had a lifelong interest as a fan and put voluntary hours into football over the years.
At the start of each pod the two co-hosts talk a bit about their respective clubs' fortunes on the Saturday. Well they did up until Appleton was sacked and it's been radio silence on that since. Probably wise.
There are some interesting glimpses into Charlton related matters or perspectives throughout the pod.
If you are to believe everything or every philosophy that he espouses, Charlieboy is probably not a negative influence on the club in my opinion.
One of the episodes they have a company rep of the fan experience company that Charlton are getting advice from. They talk a lot of sense and they talk about the need to balance the needs of the traditional or 'legacy' fans and the need to make experiences and content that resonates with new markets.
Anyway whether you like him or not you should have a listen.
Comments
Would we have been happy if such remarks had been made about Charlton?
That's assuming an apology was made.
* Canute/Cnut gets a bad press as he didnt believe, according to a much later story, he could turn back the tide and was trying to show his fawning courtiers that he was not all powerful.
However, he did support mass immigration in boats, of the long variety, and create an early European union so wouldn't have been universally popular.
I'd be worried if the losses made them lose interest, but is there evidence of that? It's very early days for them to be expecting to see a return on their investment, so I think they'll stick with it for the foreseeable.
The difference maybe that this is a group, not one individual, so any one owner dropping out wouldn't be automatically be the end of project and that TS was in it from the limelight as much as anything else where as the current owners have kept a fairly low profile.
Spoke to one of the owners, Warren Rosenfeld, last week and while I didn't question him in detail he was clearly about bring stability and continuity back to the club.
But we're still quite early into this regime. Let's see where we are in a few seasons time.
I suppose we start by asking what the problem is. I think, tell me if I'm wrong, I think the problem is that there's an argument about to what extent some football clubs should subsidise other football clubs. I don't know where else that model can be found. If I open a third rate coffee shop on the High Street can I expect a better one to bung me a few quid every week to ensure that I keep going? It seems to my simple mind, that hasn't listened to the podcasts or read the books, that we have a ridiculous structure that cannot be kept going for ever and that we could easily be a victim of it. I think it started back when football clubs could keep all the gate money rather than split it with the visitors (for younger readers, there was sometimes laughter when crowds were announced at a number plainly much lower than the number of people actually in the ground) and since then we have been on a pathway of an elite that can set it own terms.
So what's my alternative answer. Continue to demonstrate to the "elite" that there's a point to the pyramid. Luton v Bournemouth was exciting because of the jeopardy. You can't have success without failure. Try to reconstruct transfers of Academy players so that there is a financial reason for smaller clubs, like us right now, to develop players.
But I think we should worry. The number of live music venues has fallen. There used to be dog tracks everywhere. I just don't understand how we can continue with loads of football clubs who are pretty much guaranteed to make a loss. I don't get how it can carry on, regardless of whether a government regulator is there. Do we say that clubs like ours are heritage assets and should be financially protected? Does there need to be a statutory role for government and if so, what is it aiming to do? Increase participation at grass routes, ensure that we have an elite, what?
And, when we were Prem League, did we say that we should be giving more money to teams that weren't? Genuine question.
You seem to have forgotten, or perhaps were never aware, how the Government White Paper has come into existence. It is the result of the Fan-Led Review, the biggest 'listening project" any UK government has ever undertaken with football fans, by a country mile. CAST were just one of many Supporters Trusts listened to as part of this review. Our own Lauren Kreamer found herself in a one-to-one with Nadine Dorries during the latter's tenure as Culture Secretary and seemed slightly stunned to find that Ms Dorries appeared to both "get it" and to support the broad thrust of proposals from fans for how to fix the problems. The Football Regulator per se was not the objective. It was seen as the toughest of several approachs to fixing the problem, and for a long time during the process there was no guarantee that this government in particular would adopt it, because it is generally susceptible to political ideology and lobbying which renders regulators impotent (this may have been what @BrentfordAddick had in mind).
I remain wary of becoming too optimistic about what this will bring us, because I am still in shock that this government of all of them in the last 30 years could be the one that finally decides that football is a national political issue. But bloody hell, if it goes through, it will be a text-book example of the very best of politics. A single constituency MP, herself a fan, sets the ball rolling, organises a really comprehensive consultation with both the electorate and professionals who understand the business of football; she then stands up to opponents in her own party, blowing her chances of a ministerial career, and facing down some pretty dark personal attacks from lobbyists, all the while battling with cancer too. I've never voted Tory in my life, but I'm sure glad that Tracey Crouch isn't standing in Eltham, otherwise I'd face an agonising decision😉 Sadly she won't be standing at all, but she can leave with her head held high, and ought to be welcomed in every stadium in the country when she pitches up following her Spurs. Far from government "interference" this is a text-book example of representative democracy. Or, to coin a phrase you may have once used yourself, "the will of the people"
Edit: written before I'd read @BrentfordAddick thoughtful response to my question which I'll answer asap.
They've dropped the ball more often than our goalkeepers.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-13188487/Premier-League-clubs-shot-EFL-deal.html
Interesting to learn from the PoF pod that the FA have a vote at the Premier League table. There are 21 votes which can be cast, one for each club and one for the FA. In order for a motion to be adopted it needs a 2/3 (two thirds) majority, i.e. 14 votes. Disappointing to also learn that the FA hardly ever sit at the table and vote.
The most sensible idea I heard is to merge all 3 organisations, the Prem, the FA and the EPL......... snowball in hells chance of that........ so the regulator seems to be all we have....... by we I don't mean Charlton, I mean football people.
I'm sure having a regulator will get something done quicker than waiting for the Prem to get it sorted. I do hope the legislation has good teeth and doesn't get watered down too much.
Also good that UEFA are (have? I'm not sure) setting financial limits for clubs who want to play in the Champions League etc. This will apparently force the Prem to have lower FFP spending limits than they might otherwise want....... the rich clubs won't get quite as rich as they'd like to be if they're not in European competitions.
They have got through before UEFA closed the door behind them so now much harder for anyone to breakthrough.
For those that haven't listened to it, Charlie is a sharper tool than I had foolishly assumed him to be. Despite being Etonian etc he appears to have had a lifelong interest as a fan and put voluntary hours into football over the years.
At the start of each pod the two co-hosts talk a bit about their respective clubs' fortunes on the Saturday. Well they did up until Appleton was sacked and it's been radio silence on that since. Probably wise.
There are some interesting glimpses into Charlton related matters or perspectives throughout the pod.
If you are to believe everything or every philosophy that he espouses, Charlieboy is probably not a negative influence on the club in my opinion.
One of the episodes they have a company rep of the fan experience company that Charlton are getting advice from. They talk a lot of sense and they talk about the need to balance the needs of the traditional or 'legacy' fans and the need to make experiences and content that resonates with new markets.
Anyway whether you like him or not you should have a listen.