• We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies from this website. Read more here

Exeter City Women 2022/23 Season

Red Bill

Active member
Joined
Dec 9, 2011
Messages
2,900
Unless there has been realignment of the training pitches at the C&F I think it would be logistically difficult to provide accomodation for a significant number of spectators there. Even if there was money to move the fences.

You'd also need planning permission to move the fence(s) and floodlights and put in specatator facilities (a small covered stand?) which would be problematic. You'd presumably also need extra toilets, maybe enlarged player facilities and a referees' room, more parking, etc and a range of other issues would also arise.

So IMO this is a non-starter.
I was going on the satellite image of the CH and from that there looks to be easily enough space to provide small seating units similar to the ones at WSM such as the stand units that Hants posted for example. Not convinced we would need planning permission to move or remove the fence on that side or the need to move floodlights. Even if we were to need PP, why would this be a problem and why would we not expect it to be granted? As for other facilities, a couple of blocks of portaloos and a tea hut don't seem too unachievable to me.

Women's football is rightly moving on John, it's time to stop looking for excuses not to properly support it. A couple of years ago you were dead against the women playing at SJP, you said there wasn't enough interest in the women's game and the pitch couldn't take it. I'd suggest that the 5000+ people who came to watch the 2 games there this season show that was incorrect. I'm sure you'll say that at the time you made those comments you were correct, however another way to look at it may be that your comments lacked foresight, ambition and genuine support for the women's game. At that time I commented that I thought your comments demonstrated a very conservative attitude towards those issues, that's small 'c', as in to conserve, to keep things the same, to prevent change. If my comments then were inaccurate, it's time to demonstrate that by being proactive and show willing to dedicate resources and money towards actively supporting the women's game and recognising that it might actually take some effort to do this.
 

Super Ronnie Jepson

Well-known Exeweb poster
Joined
Jan 18, 2005
Messages
8,269
Location
Tiverton
I was going on the satellite image of the CH and from that there looks to be easily enough space to provide small seating units similar to the ones at WSM such as the stand units that Hants posted for example. Not convinced we would need planning permission to move or remove the fence on that side or the need to move floodlights. Even if we were to need PP, why would this be a problem and why would we not expect it to be granted? As for other facilities, a couple of blocks of portaloos and a tea hut don't seem too unachievable to me.
IIRC in the original plans for the CH redevelopment there was a building included which was a spectator facility? Is this part of phase 2?
 

Red Bill

Active member
Joined
Dec 9, 2011
Messages
2,900
It's certainly mentioned in the supporters' Report as I quoted in an earlier post.
 

John William

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
10,009
Location
Undisclosed
I was going on the satellite image of the CH and from that there looks to be easily enough space to provide small seating units similar to the ones at WSM such as the stand units that Hants posted for example. Not convinced we would need planning permission to move or remove the fence on that side or the need to move floodlights. Even if we were to need PP, why would this be a problem and why would we not expect it to be granted? As for other facilities, a couple of blocks of portaloos and a tea hut don't seem too unachievable to me.

Women's football is rightly moving on John, it's time to stop looking for excuses not to properly support it. A couple of years ago you were dead against the women playing at SJP, you said there wasn't enough interest in the women's game and the pitch couldn't take it. I'd suggest that the 5000+ people who came to watch the 2 games there this season show that was incorrect. I'm sure you'll say that at the time you made those comments you were correct, however another way to look at it may be that your comments lacked foresight, ambition and genuine support for the women's game. At that time I commented that I thought your comments demonstrated a very conservative attitude towards those issues, that's small 'c', as in to conserve, to keep things the same, to prevent change. If my comments then were inaccurate, it's time to demonstrate that by being proactive and show willing to dedicate resources and money towards actively supporting the women's game and recognising that it might actually take some effort to do this.
This is outrageous.

I set out some observations about my understanding of the difficulties in creating spectator facilities which would enable playing the women's team's games at the Cat and Fiddle, based on observation on the ground and some knowledge of the discussions that surrounded the development there.

And you responded by making unwarranted, patronising and nasty ad hominem criticisms.

"Women's football is rightly moving on John, it's time to stop looking for excuses not to properly support it. A couple of years ago you were dead against the women playing at SJP, you said there wasn't enough interest in the women's game and the pitch couldn't take it. I'd suggest that the 5000+ people who came to watch the 2 games there this season show that was incorrect. I'm sure you'll say that at the time you made those comments you were correct, however another way to look at it may be that your comments lacked foresight, ambition and genuine support for the women's game. At that time I commented that I thought your comments demonstrated a very conservative attitude towards those issues, that's small 'c', as in to conserve, to keep things the same, to prevent change. If my comments then were inaccurate, it's time to demonstrate that by being proactive and show willing to dedicate resources and money towards actively supporting the women's game and recognising that it might actually take some effort to do this."

I can do without this sort of hypocritical emotional bullying.

I have no views and made no comment for or against the development of the women's team. I’m not trying to “prevent change”, what an ignorant assertion. I was only giving my views on the practicality of playing games at the C&F.

Moreover, I'm not trying to make excuses for anything. Why do I need to show foresight, by which you presumably mean agree with you because you say so? And it's not incumbent on me to be proactive about this or anything else just because you want to promote it.

It's true that the work Chas and others have made since the earlier discussions have got us to where the SJP pitch is now capable of hosting more games. Great. So make proposals to the Club about how many is appropriate. Put forward detailed designs about how hundreds of spectators can attend games played at the C&F.

I am now going to block you, as you seem incapable of facing up to the fact that other people may not agree with you.

Goodbye.
 

iscalad

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Aug 22, 2007
Messages
27,050
Location
Far away across the field
Game delayed to 2.30pm
 

Hants_red

Admin
Staff member
Joined
May 27, 2007
Messages
63,121
Location
League 1
 

Hants_red

Admin
Staff member
Joined
May 27, 2007
Messages
63,121
Location
League 1
City 1-0 up
 

Martin Weiler

Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2006
Messages
593
City Women win 2-0; Cardiff Ladies win 1-0 (v Selsey). So City narrow goal difference by one goal. Cardiff 2 games in hand and six points behind City. And a better goal difference of 3.
 

Spoonz Red E

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Apr 21, 2004
Messages
12,766
Location
Comfortably mid-table
Two more goals for Sarah Stacey and 26 now for the season.
Streets ahead of any other scorer in the FA Women's National League.
City pretty much on top throughout with most of the game in the Maidenhead half although they came at us more after the break and the worry was that being just 1-0 up and nerves could cost us.
Once the second goal went in we relaxed and played out strongly.

The Maidenhead keeper had a good game today with some brave saves and one great save to tip the ball over the from a close range shot in the first half.
That and a bit too much tension in our final deliveries meant we couldn't put as big a dent in the goal difference as we might have.
But we come out of today in a slightly better relative position than before.
10 cleans sheets for us now in the season (5 in the last 5)
 

JW57++

Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2022
Messages
342
City Women win 2-0; Cardiff Ladies win 1-0 (v Selsey). So City narrow goal difference by one goal. Cardiff 2 games in hand and six points behind City. And a better goal difference of 3.
If Cardiff win their two games in hand their better goal difference will be further increased. City Women’s best chance is that Cardiff drop points. Southampton may be the key team in deciding the champions.
 
Top