That’s a fair point & that’s a good point about the FA. If anyone’s funding it, it should be them. When you look at what the premier league & England games generate they could comfortably afford to back women’s teams at a lower level.
Does it matter the reason - they are losing money on a far greater scale and those with far bigger money and bigger crowds have far bigger debts and losses.
If this really is an FA issue as claimed, than it's absolutely ridiculous on their part. Could BFC go ahead and give us the really specific details of what's required that we don't have? That'd save us all the speculation. Regardless, this is sad.
The Prem fund a big portion of our academy for example, as part of the EPPP. You’d like to think the WSL would be helping the smaller women’s clubs out similarly. But seemingly not.
The idea of having a women’s team is laudable. However, the footballing landscape has changed over recent years, to such an extent that now, even down in League 1 it revolves entirely around money. And we don't have that much - it seems. Most of our supporters want our first team to compete as best they can in this ridiculous player wage dominated sport. If I’m paying for a season ticket, I don’t mind funding an academy that might unearth a gold nugget and provide a return on my investment, however remote that might presently seem. When it comes to a women’s team that I will never have the slightest interest in, I’d prefer to have an option to tick a box confirming whether I’ll either pay towards them too for an extra fee, or whether I won’t. I suspect that the extra fee fund would be somewhat Spartan, but at least it would represent the financial level of support that a bfc women’s team ought to get from bfc supporters as a whole. The scrapping of the women's team won't cause consternation amongst the vast majority of supporters because the vast majority have no interest in it at all. If the owners wish to have a women’s team, that should be up to them. Which it still is. And they don’t. Which I understand.
It does because there’s the possibility of success & riches with the men’s team, however unlikely it may seem which there isn’t with the women’s team.
I don't understand the pitch issue. The teams they were playing against weren't in the football.league so i don't understand how their facilities can be better?
In terms of consternation I was referring to the financial link, rather than the discontinuation of the women’s team itself. A lot of the reactionary comment centred on club finances and the worry that brings. I think there’s even a thread on here regards exactly that. I completely hear you otherwise. I wouldn’t disagree at all. The club has told us repeatedly how skint it is. And they’ve pulled the plug. Let’s hope any cash saved is spent wisely. Because it’s disappointing - to me anyway - that something for young Barnsley supporting girls to aspire to has come and gone faster than my hairline.
I’ve been thinking about this it’s important to understand we haven’t saved any cash, (bar very minimal running costs) we’ve just decided not to spend a whole lot more providing the correct standard of ground.
What I find strange about all this is that the "other lot" Barnsley Womens FC, who are totally independent and homeless, are thriving at the same level and can even afford to rent the Olympic Legacy Park in Sheffield as their temporary home. They seem to have loads of sponsors, and have even pulled off a deal with Globe Coaches to provide free coach travel for their fans to next season's "home" games. How many sponsors did Barnsley FC women have? Apart from JAQ I can't think of any. Once again they appear to have gone into this half-****.
I'm expecting other news coming out...the owners are not fit for purpose...teams go into administration and find buyers...I'd sooner to rid these idiots.
It was an idea that wasn't going to work without long term investment from the board and a successful men's team to provide some of that investment alongside the board. I'm guessing it was pushed for by JAQ and the other board members enabled her. It's another self inflicted wound and just another in a long line of bad decisions taken by a board that have **** all football business knowledge and appear to have run out of money to cover the loses caused by their bad decisions.
Never understood this argument. The club is losing money because the owners are putting in money to cover the losses in order to try and boost the quality of the squad. Do I think that money is badly spent? Yes, but that comes after the decision to run at a loss.
I genuine don't know, but were the players paid at all? Not suggesting for a minute that they should or shouldn't, but want to understand (outside of facilities) if this has any bearing in the decision..
They don’t know what they’re doing. They can’t even get the correct number of players for each position. Look how many central midfielders we started the season with. They’re putting out press releases telling us how great & highly rated Yoganathan & Bland are yet they had 7 senior pros in front of them when the season started. At the same time we only had one left wing back & one left footed centre back after loaning Shepherd out. Loaning Lofthouse out to bring Dexter in. Failure to sign a centre forward. Goalkeeping shambles. Putting out press releases telling us how our previous managers failed because they didn’t play pressing football yet none of the ten (I’m exaggerating) centre backs on the books can sprint. They shouldn’t be losing so much money. It’s madness.
