Christen Press/Tobin Heath on United, Stoney, Zelem, the team and SJR

[jojojo]

Their YouTube conversation series has a long piece on their time at United. They talk about deciding to join us, snow ploughs, Casey Stoney, Katie Zelem and the other players. The draw of the United name and the job of arguing the case for workable training facilities having arrived muddy and wet from the training field.



We get their take on SJR's comments and United's "five year plan" as well.

Or if you want some edited highlights try this Twitter account:

 

[Ubik]

Their YouTube conversation series has a long piece on their time at United. They talk about deciding to join us, snow ploughs, Casey Stoney, Katie Zelem and the other players. The draw of the United name and the job of arguing the case for workable training facilities having arrived muddy and wet from the training field.



We get their take on SJR's comments and United's "five year plan" as well.

Or if you want some edited highlights try this Twitter account:

Not sure it can be summed up any better than that. I guess that's the moment Stoney thought screw it, I'm out.

Great to hear them talking about everything, thanks for posting!

 

[Rood]

Not watched the whole thing but the snippets are damning!

I guess not that surprising that things were poorly managed back in 2020/1 as the Women's team was only 2 years old but by now we should be coming towards the end of a 5 year plan

 

[Lightbringer]

Not watched the whole thing but the snippets are damning!

I guess not that surprising that things were poorly managed back in 2020/1 as the Women's team was only 2 years old but by now we should be coming towards the end of a 5 year plan

I listened to the whole thing and in general I am not that impressed by Press and Heath even though I liked them as players and persons.

They claim that now it seems that United again are building a new facility for the mens team while sidestepping the womens team.

But fail to mention that United just spent 10£ on the womens building.
---
As for Ratcliffes comments:

Ratcliffe was asked a specific question if Manchester Uniteds womens team was going to go the same route as Chelsea womens teams recently with the womens team operation independently, which as you know only been a concept in the WSL for a couple of weeks.

To that question Ratcliffe responded that they had not gotten into that kind of detail with the womens team yet - meaning he could not answer if they would go the Chelsea route. Actually it would have been strange if INEOS had decided on that only weeks after Chelsea was the first to do it with most of the people thats going to lead United in this new era now even have started to work yet because of gardening leave from other clubs.

What Ratcliffe said only means United is currently operating just as its been the last years, there has not been any change to that since INOES took over. A bigger analyze is obviously needed before they set out a new plan for the womens team IF there needs to be a new plan of course - I dont see why thats a given if you consider United was 2nd in attendance 1st in revenue made in the WSL!

If you are making podcast the very first thing they should have done is to at least present the current facts to the listeners and educate themselves, now they presented only information suiting their own agenda and thereby misleading their listeners, I am not even sure they know whats happening at United outside of some gossip going around, at least they did not say anything to make me believe they know the facts.
---
As for their complaints about their time at United, what were they suggesting? That United should have kicked out the academy from Carrington to send a message of womens worth and have the men and women share the mens building?
---
Final note: I did find it interesting to hear the stories even if it was not so happy stories for United :-)

 

[jojojo]

I listened to the whole thing and in general I am not that impressed by Press and Heath even though I liked them as players and persons.

They claim that now it seems that United again are building a new facility for the mens team while sidestepping the womens team.

But fail to mention that United just spent 10£ on the womens building.
---
As for Ratcliffes comments:

Ratcliffe was asked a specific question if Manchester Uniteds womens team was going to go the same route as Chelsea womens teams recently with the womens team operation independently, which as you know only been a concept in the WSL for a couple of weeks.

To that question Ratcliffe responded that they had not gotten into that kind of detail with the womens team yet - meaning he could not answer if they would go the Chelsea route. Actually it would have been strange if INEOS had decided on that only weeks after Chelsea was the first to do it with most of the people thats going to lead United in this new era now even have started to work yet because of gardening leave from other clubs.

What Ratcliffe said only means United is currently operating just as its been the last years, there has not been any change to that since INOES took over. A bigger analyze is obviously needed before they set out a new plan for the womens team IF there needs to be a new plan of course - I dont see why thats a given if you consider United was 2nd in attendance 1st in revenue made in the WSL!

If you are making podcast the very first thing they should have done is to at least present the current facts to the listeners and educate themselves, now they presented only information suiting their own agenda and thereby misleading their listeners.
---
As for their complaints about their time at United, what were they suggesting? That United should have kicked out the academy from Carrington to send a message of womens worth and have the men and women share the mens building?

The Chelsea context for SJR's reply was rather lost on the noise. It was an impossible question really because we don't actually know what Chelsea are trying to do or why! On the face of it, it could be anywhere between selling it off to actual new owner or some kind of management restructure combined with a tax/FFP magic trick.

In terms of United - I think Casey's concerns at the time were around broken promises. First the Cliff, then Carrington were "soon" - they'd already waited 2 and a half years by then. Having finally got a training pitch the portacabins weren't even in the right place - no showers, toilets etc. That would be the context that Christen would have been looking at.

The real question would be why had nothing happened in two and a half years? Why, when an emergency arose that forced United's hand to move them into Carrington - why did it take so long to even give them a functioning temporary base?

Things did get better. The following season at Carrington they got closer to a fully functional set of temporary building. By then Christen and Tobin had gone and Casey had given up believing promises so we lost her as well.

Two and a half years later we moved into our "real" facility and lost it after 6 months. Easy for the club and for us as long term fans to talk about temporary workarounds to take the long view. For some of our players we're entering our seventh season of temporary solutions, that's a big chunk of their careers.

 

[Lightbringer]

The Chelsea context for SJR's reply was rather lost on the noise. It was an impossible question really because we don't actually know what Chelsea are trying to do or why! I the face of it, it could be anywhere between selling it off to actual new own gets and a tax/FFP magic trick.

In terms of United - I think Casey's concerns at the time were around broken promises. First the Cliff, then Carrington were "soon" - they'd already waited 2 and a half years by then. Having finally got a training pitch the portacabins weren't even in the right place - no showers, toilets etc.

The real question would be why had nothing happened in two and a half years? Why, when an emergency arose that forced United's hand to move them into Carrington - why did it take so long to even give them a functioning temporary base?

Things did get better. The following season at Carrington they got closer to a fully functional set of temporary building. By then Christen and Tobin had gone and Casey had given up believing promises so we lost her as well.

Two and a half years later we moved into our "real" facility and lost it after 6 months. Easy for the club and for us as long term fans to talk about temporary workarounds to take the long view. For some of the players temporary solutions have been a big chunk of their careers.

Yes, the Chelsea thing should be discussed everywhere in the womens world of football but its largely been met with a "okay" and nothing more than that :-)

Yeah, to clarify I was not questioning Stoney or her experience at United at all. Was the Leigh Sports Village pitch unplayable in winter during the 2018-19 and 2019-20 season as well? Or did the 2020-21 season bring a more heavy winter? Or was it just that Press and Heath were at United and never had dealt with snow and weather challenges like that before? Is there still no heating of the surface at Leigh Sports Village? Or has that been added either by the rugby team or United?

Yeah, its definitely a valid question why The Cliff restoration never started, if it was covid or just neglect by the club or a combination. Same for Stoney leaving, is it possible that Stoney wanted to escalate Uniteds plan too quickly and that United were simply not prepared for that? Rather than it being a complete train wreck plan by United. Stoney seems like a very stubborn individual so if she does something she wants to GO ALL IN! In that sense I have a feeling it would have been better to have as a coach now or in a year, but obviously that will never happen.

You know I have been angry at the club for not investing more etc, but I just like to keep it realistic and not just scream BLOODY MURDER, kick out the men and academy and let the women have it all because the FA banned womens football at FA arenas for many years. I get all that, but United is still a business where then mens team bring in 99% of the revenue and the women 1% at the moment.

As I am emotionally more invested and engaged in the women side, I would give the women preference! But I am not a business owner

PS. I would love to read an investigative book about Uniteds womens journey thus far with sources from former players, coaches, employees etc, as I would like to know the full and true story :-)

 

[jojojo]

Yes, the Chelsea thing should be discussed everywhere in the womens world of football but its largely been met with a "okay" and nothing more than that :-)

Yeah, to clarify I was not questioning Stoney or her experience at United at all. What I was going to ask? Was the Leigh Sports Village pitch unplayable in winter in the 2018-19 and 2019-20 season as well? Or did the 2020-21 season bring a more heavy winter? Or was it just that Press and Heath were at United and never had dealt with snow and weather challenges like that before? Is there still no heating of the surface at Leigh Sports Village? Or has that been added either by the rugby team or United?

Yeah, its definitely a valid question why The Cliff restoration never started, if it was covid or just neglect by the club or a combination. Same for Stoney leaving, is it possible that Stoney wanted to escalate Uniteds plan too quickly and that United were simply not prepared for that? Rather than it being a complete train wreck plan by United. Stoney seems like a very stubborn individual so if she does something she wants to GO ALL IN! In that sense I have a feeling it would have been better to have as a coach now or in a year, but obviously that will never happen.

You know I have been angry at the club for not investing more etc, but I just like to keep it realistic and not just scream BLOODY MURDER, kick out the men and academy and let the women have it all because the FA banned womens football at FA arenas for many years.

I get all that, but United is still a business where then mens team bring in 99% of the revenue and the women 1% at the moment.


As I am emotionally more invested and engaged in the women side, I would give the women preference! But I am not a business owner


PS. I would love to read an investigative book about Uniteds womens journey thus far with sources from former players, coaches, employees etc, as I would like to know the full and true story :-)

LSV - a big chunk of the time they trained on the public pitches there (not the stadium) so different surfaces etc. Not impossible to use for most of the season but yes, easy to lose them in bad weather - or to Leigh RL (who are the primary tenants) or local tournaments.

All get round-able with us changing training schedules etc (or getting the snow ploughs out) but not great. The problems came to a head with COVID. Once Leigh RL came back to training the women lost access to the stadium changing rooms and a big chunk of the public ones as well, plus of course the best training pitch. They just ran out of work-arounds - hence trying to use the Cliff for gym training.

No one's realistically expecting them to kick out the men from Carrington while their block gets renovated. It's more the assumption that it's better to move the women than the U21s, U18s or some of the Academy. Maybe it wasn't assumed? Maybe they know how/where to move the women's team and the logistics make more sense. Maybe another promise has been made and will be delivered in a timely way. Still I get why Christen would see this as more of the same.