The home of DFC

spen666 · Post by **spen666** » Mon Jan 16, 2017 1:25 pm

Darlogramps wrote:
don'tbuythesun wrote:Thank you once again Spen for your endless words of wisdom, haven't you a job to do or your own club to support/comment on?
Given he's libelled various people on here in the past, demonstrated that he has very little knowledge of the world of law he claims to work in and only posts to wind up Darlington fans, it's a wonder he's allowed to post here at all.

Then again, when the mods allow him to get away with it, we shouldn't be surprised.

So for now, we have to put up with his bitter, cauldron-stirring nonsense.

I am still waiting for anyone I have allegedly libelled to issue proceedings. I dare say I will be waiting a long time, because unlike you, I do know the law on libel.

If it is bitter cauldron stirring to suggest that both parties in negotiations start from what is best for their organisations and try to reach a negotiated settlement, then I am guilty.

It is stupid to suggest that those in charge do anything other than seek the best for their respective organisations.

spen666 · Post by **spen666** » Mon Jan 16, 2017 1:28 pm

loan_star wrote:With regard to the sign that the club already have, its a Vanarama sponsored sign paid for by Vanarama as part of their deal with the league. I'm sure they wont be happy about a sign that every club is meant to display is gathering dust where it gives them no exposure at all.
....

Is it a planning permission issue delaying/ preventing the erection of a sign?

The club would need planning permission even if they had consent of DRFC, to erect a sign adjacent to the highway

trevstanley · Post by **trevstanley** » Mon Jan 16, 2017 2:21 pm

As someone who isn't a "fan" of Darlington but someone who cares deeply about the club , has joined the DFCSG , weekly lottery and invested in shares in the club to help get the club back to where it should be both in terms of league status and geographical home , i am a little concerned with some of the issues raised since the return to Darlington. Its time the board were more open and honest on just what the agreements are and what (if any) restrictions have been placed on the Football Club by the rugby club.

Darlogramps · Post by **Darlogramps** » Mon Jan 16, 2017 3:05 pm

spen666 wrote:
Darlogramps wrote:
don'tbuythesun wrote:Thank you once again Spen for your endless words of wisdom, haven't you a job to do or your own club to support/comment on?
Given he's libelled various people on here in the past, demonstrated that he has very little knowledge of the world of law he claims to work in and only posts to wind up Darlington fans, it's a wonder he's allowed to post here at all.

Then again, when the mods allow him to get away with it, we shouldn't be surprised.

So for now, we have to put up with his bitter, cauldron-stirring nonsense.
I am still waiting for anyone I have allegedly libelled to issue proceedings. I dare say I will be waiting a long time, because unlike you, I do know the law on libel.

I knew I'd get you to bite! You can give it out but you can't take it.

Spen - people have quoted actual libel laws at you in the past and you still wouldn't accept you were in the wrong.

And of course, it is possible to make libellous comments about someone without them taking action. Mainly because they're unaware of the comments.

For instance, I could call Arnie Schwarzenegger something libellous on here. I hardly think Arnie and his associates would trawl the unofficial messageboard of an English non-league club.

But that doesn't mean the comment would be any less libellous.

Anyway, I'll not derail this thread any further. Knowing I've got under your skin and further exposed your legal ineptitude will do for now.

bga · Post by **bga** » Mon Jan 16, 2017 4:50 pm

al_quaker wrote:
loan_star wrote:
lo36789 wrote:But it's signs at the end of the day. I am sure if we bought a few pop up things we could throw them out but in terms of priority;
a) it's maybe not what we want to spend money on right now
b) it's definitely not the priority action right now
There is a sign there already made, provided by league sponsors Vanarama, but the club haven't been allowed to put it up.
From what I understand the rugby club don't want any permanent football club signage other than sponsor boards. They say the Vanarama sign can go up on match days but needs taking down after every match. The sign is too big to do that with and is not the sort that can be put up and down easily anyway.
It may not be a priority to you but there is a sizeable number of people who feel we should be able to have some sort of identification up showing that this is indeed our permanent home now.
Worrying really that there is this much issue with simply putting a sign up somewhere. I could understand their issue if we were wanting to replace all the rugby signs with football ones, but this just seems beyond petty. Obviously BM is the rugby club's, but there has to be some recognition that it's our home now too, otherwise bad feeling will develop. Clearly there are some within the rugby club who don't want us there. Real shame, but hopefully these issues can be overcome - for the benefit of both clubs.

No issue with rugby being played in the bar - hopefully the marquee will be more of a football bar (if of course the rugby club let us)

"No issue with rugby being played in the bar" hopefully they removed the table and chairs?

Post by **loan_star** » Mon Jan 16, 2017 4:59 pm

spen666 wrote:
loan_star wrote:With regard to the sign that the club already have, its a Vanarama sponsored sign paid for by Vanarama as part of their deal with the league. I'm sure they wont be happy about a sign that every club is meant to display is gathering dust where it gives them no exposure at all.
....

Is it a planning permission issue delaying/ preventing the erection of a sign?

The club would need planning permission even if they had consent of DRFC, to erect a sign adjacent to the highway

Its a sign to attach to the fence that surrounds the ground, not for the main road.

spen666 · Post by **spen666** » Tue Jan 17, 2017 8:36 am

loan_star wrote:
spen666 wrote:
loan_star wrote:With regard to the sign that the club already have, its a Vanarama sponsored sign paid for by Vanarama as part of their deal with the league. I'm sure they wont be happy about a sign that every club is meant to display is gathering dust where it gives them no exposure at all.
....

Is it a planning permission issue delaying/ preventing the erection of a sign?

The club would need planning permission even if they had consent of DRFC, to erect a sign adjacent to the highway
Its a sign to attach to the fence that surrounds the ground, not for the main road.

Very different matter that. Can't see any reason why it is not allowed.

All the groundshares here in Essex/ East London have signs like this for tenant club as well as host clubs.

Hopefully this is a snagging issue and will be quickly resolved

lo36789 · Post by **lo36789** » Tue Jan 17, 2017 9:30 am

spen666 wrote:All the groundshares here in Essex/ East London have signs like this for tenant club as well as host clubs.

Can sort of understand why the rugby club wouldn't want photos of their games in front of it but not that much...

At the same time I thought signs of that sort could just be cable tied to the fence? Have we proposed putting the board up for games and removing it after the game.

spen666 · Post by **spen666** » Tue Jan 17, 2017 10:52 am

lo36789 wrote:
spen666 wrote:All the groundshares here in Essex/ East London have signs like this for tenant club as well as host clubs.
Can sort of understand why the rugby club wouldn't want photos of their games in front of it but not that much...

At the same time I thought signs of that sort could just be cable tied to the fence? Have we proposed putting the board up for games and removing it after the game.

I can't see any good reason not to allow this sort of sign.

It is after all the current home of SFC and not just a one off game.

If RFC object to sign for reasons you state, then surely they will also object to playing in front of Tin Shed and seats.

super_les_mcjannet · Post by **super_les_mcjannet** » Tue Jan 17, 2017 11:11 am

I think the Rugby Club will gradually learn to share a lot more as time goes by, I do think they are very nervous of being taken over by the Football Club and they have members who will no doubt be against the whole thing.

They want to still feel like they own the ground which of course they do, we feel we want to be more of a partnership than just using the facilities which we massively paid for. Somehow slowly we need to come towards each other which I think will happen but over time not instantly.

Opening the bar for now has certainly helped until the Marquee is available when the bar will be back to DFC members (unless that changes).

Current issues for me are,
The pitch - By all accounts wasn't worked on much after a Rugby game before Sat's game, now the two board need to come to an understanding on how we somehow get a better pitch for football (hard currently as the pitch isn't the best for football). Summer will help if as planned it gets a lot of work done but still needs looking after better.
Positives though we got a game on the other day when other matches were being postponed all around us including Heritage Park.

The catering - Still seems very amateur, tables out not sure how warm things are, the Rugby Club are trying but not sure they have the experience to pull this off. This is why a Burger van does the job because they actually do it as a job and need to make as much as possible so serve what people want, warm & fast.

Seating/Standing - I think the last game was probably perfect in terms of viewing for everyone, you could probably say the game before was ok but anywhere near capacity and it's not a good experience. No short term fix though, needs plans (we have), finance & planning permission.

Signage - This probably comes back to time and convincing the Rugby Club we want everyone to know it's our home and where DFC play but we don't want to take it all away form them.

Darlo_Pete · Post by **Darlo_Pete** » Tue Jan 17, 2017 1:33 pm

There are plenty of examples, were rugby clubs and football teams play on the same pitch, so hopefully things will improve after this season has finished.

H1987 · Post by **H1987** » Wed Jan 18, 2017 10:55 pm

It all seems a bit of a fuss over nothing to me. Let's just be patient, rather than jumping to be at the rugby club and pointing the finger.

Facilities, the club have said they're taking feedback on board. I do hope some is sourced from here, as it's largely been constructive. Things like catering are included in that. (Perhaps they could invest in their own food truck, it'd sharp pay for itself).

Stuff like putting rugby on in the bar when it's full of football fans... Did anyone ask to have the football on? I have a hard time believing they'd not obey the wishes of paying customers in such a scenario. If they refuse, people will simply vote with their feet. If it's a non rugby game day, as I imagine the vast majority of our games are, they'll surely make a pretty penny if they advertise to show the 5 o clock premiership game for football fans, of which you have a few thousand in close proximity!

darlodog · Post by **darlodog** » Thu Jan 19, 2017 7:21 pm

H1987 wrote:It all seems a bit of a fuss over nothing to me. Let's just be patient, rather than jumping to be at the rugby club and pointing the finger.

Facilities, the club have said they're taking feedback on board. I do hope some is sourced from here, as it's largely been constructive. Things like catering are included in that. (Perhaps they could invest in their own food truck, it'd sharp pay for itself).

Stuff like putting rugby on in the bar when it's full of football fans... Did anyone ask to have the football on? I have a hard time believing they'd not obey the wishes of paying customers in such a scenario. If they refuse, people will simply vote with their feet. If it's a non rugby game day, as I imagine the vast majority of our games are, they'll surely make a pretty penny if they advertise to show the 5 o clock premiership game for football fans, of which you have a few thousand in close proximity!

Really agree with your words here, we are three games and it's much improved already. Chatting to a member of the DRFC committee there will be a static concession unit next to the tin shed. People have to remember the rugby club are all volunteers like ourselves there's no paid staff and I think people forget that.

lo36789 · Post by **lo36789** » Thu Jan 19, 2017 9:11 pm

And another thing sorted tonight. Car park for blue badge holders has been moved. I do hope those on twitter pointing fingers in various directions feel adequately stupid. All it took was feedback through the right channels and action.

princes town · Post by **princes town** » Thu Jan 19, 2017 10:04 pm

I've found the rugby committee helpful. My only doubt about the facility is what the scope for us to establish additional income streams other than board advertising and match day gate receipts. A possible investment would be a 4g pitch albeit an expensive one.

On a separate point, the Gloucester fans I spoke to were very impressed with the new ground. The word that has been uttered more often than not is scope by home and away fans.

lo36789 · Post by **lo36789** » Thu Jan 19, 2017 10:12 pm

princes town wrote:I've found the rugby committee helpful. My only doubt about the facility is the scope for us to establish additional income streams other than board advertising.

Suspect hospitality makes a fair bit but is a limited audience capacity.

Beyond that it is people through the gate, purchasing merchandise, programmes and 50:50 tickets. That is where the money is for a club like us. That fact it is in Darlington is that scope.

Post by **loan_star** » Fri Jan 20, 2017 12:32 pm

lo36789 wrote:And another thing sorted tonight. Car park for blue badge holders has been moved. I do hope those on twitter pointing fingers in various directions feel adequately stupid. All it took was feedback through the right channels and action.

Sorted in a fashion yes, our players have given up their spaces in the main car park for the disabled to use. No backing down from the rugby club. Criticism is fairly given to those that have forced this move in my opinion.

al_quaker · Post by **al_quaker** » Fri Jan 20, 2017 1:03 pm

loan_star wrote:
lo36789 wrote:And another thing sorted tonight. Car park for blue badge holders has been moved. I do hope those on twitter pointing fingers in various directions feel adequately stupid. All it took was feedback through the right channels and action.
Sorted in a fashion yes, our players have given up their spaces in the main car park for the disabled to use. No backing down from the rugby club. Criticism is fairly given to those that have forced this move in my opinion.

Glad I'm not the only one to spot this. The end result is sorted, which is the most important thing, but the way it has been sorted is indicative of the relationship between the two clubs.

It's quite frankly a disgrace that this happened in the first place to be honest. Who thought it was reasonable to make blue badge holders park in the further away of the 2 car parks?!

Maurice_Peddelty · Post by **Maurice_Peddelty** » Fri Jan 20, 2017 1:24 pm

loan_star wrote:
lo36789 wrote:And another thing sorted tonight. Car park for blue badge holders has been moved. I do hope those on twitter pointing fingers in various directions feel adequately stupid. All it took was feedback through the right channels and action.
Sorted in a fashion yes, our players have given up their spaces in the main car park for the disabled to use. No backing down from the rugby club. Criticism is fairly given to those that have forced this move in my opinion.

Why not contact someone in the know and check the facts?

Darlo_Pete · Post by **Darlo_Pete** » Fri Jan 20, 2017 1:38 pm

It's sad that the players are having to give up their car park spaces, but a great gesture from them.

Robbie Painter · Post by **Robbie Painter** » Fri Jan 20, 2017 1:43 pm

Maurice_Peddelty wrote:
loan_star wrote:
lo36789 wrote:And another thing sorted tonight. Car park for blue badge holders has been moved. I do hope those on twitter pointing fingers in various directions feel adequately stupid. All it took was feedback through the right channels and action.
Sorted in a fashion yes, our players have given up their spaces in the main car park for the disabled to use. No backing down from the rugby club. Criticism is fairly given to those that have forced this move in my opinion.
Why not contact someone in the know and check the facts?

Suggests you know the facts - please fill us in...

Quakerz · Post by **Quakerz** » Fri Jan 20, 2017 2:12 pm

Exactly - it would be irresponsible not to post the actual facts, because not doing so will keep the rumour mill going, and that won't do the relationship between the RFC and FC any good...

Maurice_Peddelty · Post by **Maurice_Peddelty** » Fri Jan 20, 2017 2:24 pm

Quakerz wrote:Exactly - it would be irresponsible not to post the actual facts, because not doing so will keep the rumour mill going, and that won't do the relationship between the RFC and FC any good...

Unlike posting opinions? The new car park was needed by dfc but the surface is obviously not suitable for blue badge holders. dfc have found a solution to the problem & the new car park is still for the use of dfc

Robbie Painter · Post by **Robbie Painter** » Fri Jan 20, 2017 3:02 pm

Maurice_Peddelty wrote:
Quakerz wrote:Exactly - it would be irresponsible not to post the actual facts, because not doing so will keep the rumour mill going, and that won't do the relationship between the RFC and FC any good...
Unlike posting opinions? The new car park was needed by dfc but the surface is obviously not suitable for blue badge holders. dfc have found a solution to the problem & the new car park is still for the use of dfc

So there was no disagreement with the rugby club then?

Quakerz · Post by **Quakerz** » Fri Jan 20, 2017 3:48 pm

Maurice_Peddelty wrote:
Quakerz wrote:Exactly - it would be irresponsible not to post the actual facts, because not doing so will keep the rumour mill going, and that won't do the relationship between the RFC and FC any good...
Unlike posting opinions?

What do you mean by that exactly?

All I was saying was that if someone posts an opinion or claimed fact which you know to be untrue - then it is better to post the true facts - rather than let forum readers' judgement be clouded by said untruths.

As we know, it's a sensitive time and people are hanging on to every little thing posted regarding to the DFC/DRFC relationship, and it's hard to know what is true.

If you or anyone can dismiss a rumour with a fact, it all helps.

Maurice_Peddelty · Post by **Maurice_Peddelty** » Fri Jan 20, 2017 4:29 pm

Loan star started it with his opinion. I am just glad that a solution has been found for the blue badge holders.

Post by **loan_star** » Fri Jan 20, 2017 4:51 pm

Maurice_Peddelty wrote:Loan star started it with his opinion. I am just glad that a solution has been found for the blue badge holders.

Well from what I heard the rugby club said that if the blue badge holders use that car park then the rugby club should get the money from them, not DFC.
The football club disagreed and the rugby club said well they cant park there then.
If what I have been told is wrong then so be it but I heard this from a reliable source (who isnt in the press before people jump to conclusions).

Emdubya · Post by **Emdubya** » Fri Jan 20, 2017 4:57 pm

Maurice_Peddelty wrote:Loan star started it with his opinion. I am just glad that a solution has been found for the blue badge holders.

Yes,a solution has been found but once again the football club has had to give up on something else.l

Post by **loan_star** » Fri Jan 20, 2017 5:08 pm

Maurice_Peddelty wrote:
Quakerz wrote:Exactly - it would be irresponsible not to post the actual facts, because not doing so will keep the rumour mill going, and that won't do the relationship between the RFC and FC any good...
Unlike posting opinions? The new car park was needed by dfc but the surface is obviously not suitable for blue badge holders. dfc have found a solution to the problem & the new car park is still for the use of dfc

I'd also question whether it really is an issue of the surface type. The RFC car park isnt in the best of condition but the new car park is only compacted hardcore so not exactly ideal for wheelchairs either. Which brings us back to the more likely reason for the change....

HarrytheQuaker · Post by **HarrytheQuaker** » Sat Jan 28, 2017 7:59 pm

Where's the 2000+ brigade now as I've said before we will just get the hardcore I'm affraid... Didn't look good when people started leaving after 65 mins, can't see the floaters coming back..Get back to Darlo and we will get 2500 + yeah right!!! Shame because I will be there every home game supporting the club I love

Darlo Uncovered

The home of DFC

Re: The home of DFC

Re: The home of DFC

Re: The home of DFC

Re: The home of DFC

Re: The home of DFC

Re: The home of DFC

Re: The home of DFC

Re: The home of DFC

Re: The home of DFC

Re: The home of DFC

Re: The home of DFC

Re: The home of DFC

Re: The home of DFC

Re: The home of DFC

Re: The home of DFC

Re: The home of DFC

Re: The home of DFC

Re: The home of DFC

Re: The home of DFC

Re: The home of DFC

Re: The home of DFC

Re: The home of DFC

Re: The home of DFC

Re: The home of DFC

Re: The home of DFC

Re: The home of DFC

Re: The home of DFC

Re: The home of DFC

Re: The home of DFC

Re: The home of DFC