Isn’t there a thing in women’s football that the teams with biggest crowds get the licences to play hence they all exaggerate how many people are there

Compared to their owning (mens) clubs then, or lowly L1/L2/non-league clubs, you miserable pedant ;-)

The usual of what Colette ?

Papers - they sell STs for womens' games. Tenner a pop (or something VERY cheap compared to the usual) but that's what gets counted.

Saw the woman police officer who was in the gantry for the first half yesterday after getting out of the ground. When she confirmed if was her, told her the first half was so boring, our male fans spent the most part giving admiring glances in her direction. She laughed and said 'thank you'.

on the ‘London puts us at a disadvantage argument’, it seems to me that the average 18-30 male would much rather be based in and around London than say Plymouth or Sunderland. I’d guess that for every player thinking about paying down their mortgage, there’s another thinking about the nightlife / proximity to friends and family / etc

Reverse gender insensitivity.

OI - the announced crowd for the Chelsea Ladies match was 2501. Given they don't open the far side either the rest of the ground was 80 per cent full or the crowd figure was somewhat exaggerated. I went to a Chelsea Ladies match last season where the actual crowd was 450 but the announced crowd was 1300

Fat shaming.

Serena Williams getting her big knickers in a twist today about equality. If she wants equality then play best of 5 sets at winbledon for the same money as men not 3

You can call him old if you want Pete, Pete. He’s a lot bigger than me :)

Could the DT SGM go on the calendar for Thursday? It may be an important meeting.

TF - Where is such a guarantee? A deal with Old Nick?

Having looked at the average attendance chart for last season then it does suggest that increased gates at NPL (if that’s what it brings) is no guarantee of any upward movement in the pyramid. Bradford topped the chart and are struggling. Our lack of boom and bust approach should work in our favour but ‘size of club’ wise we’re about where we should be.

Originally I thought it was going to be done as a Community Shares Enterprise Investment Scheme that gave you tax benefits and theoretically an intention to pay the capital back after a number of years (the way FCUM raised money for their stadium). That looked far more attractive.

We can’t really afford plough Lane OI . No shit . People think it’s going to make us championship ffs

We could have given Chelsea a million and told them to give them a five year lease . Then it wouldn’t have been our prints all over it

Do you know we didn't have to CW? It is supposition whether the two ticks would have got through if we had been as tough as legally possible. Now the worrying thing is we seem to be wanting to raise money on standard shares, which in the past we were told was effectively throwing your money away.

We could have kept LTB and K’s would have been equally as fucked. I’ve only just realised this.

It was certainly convenient that their directors said they wanted to move out.

Giving them a million quid when we don’t have to seems more ridiculous to me

We fucked them over . I don’t really care because you can’t make an omelette without breaking eggs but all the anti k stuff on here is ridiculous

We didn’t kill Ks they committed suicide

Except thete are far more players based in The SE/London

Pete- in the early days we were looking for local part-time players, and the local pool was huge. We now have a smaller pool to look at, who need full-time money, and for what we are paying, they can earn the same but live better in other parts of the country.