Harrogate Town

Open now for discussion of all things Darlo!

Moderators: mikkyx, uncovered

al_quaker
Posts: 5942
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 2:51 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Harrogate Town

Post by al_quaker » Sat Feb 25, 2017 7:47 pm

11 v 11 we would have won that - pretty good performance from us considering the situation. Scott's challenge looked a red at the time, and it looks like it's cost us. Having said that, the officiating performance was one of the most inept I've ever seen - some of the decisions in the second half were mind boggling. Despite this, credit to the players for keeping going and nearly forcing a point. Ed looks a solid keeper, and Falkingham looks very good at RB.

On to BM - good to see a proper pie hut installed. However, the pitch is still atrocious, our sign hasn't reappeared, and BM still doesn't feel even close to being a proper home for us. The rugby posts were going up again as quick as they could possibly do it - apparently there's a woman's match on it tomorrow, so who knows what state the pitch will be in for Wednesday night. It's looking increasingly like we've signed up to an atrocious deal - some serious answers need to be provided before the next fundraising call, otherwise it's going to be a very tough sell indeed.

QUAKERMAN2
Posts: 2826
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 8:43 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Harrogate Town

Post by QUAKERMAN2 » Sat Feb 25, 2017 8:02 pm

Will be tough to get into the playoffs as Stockport and Halifax have strengthened lately and look more consistent than us.Not sure if MG knows his best side but I felt today was crying out for Gillies to come on for Syers who had a poor game IMO and contrary to popular opinion would still like to see Hardy partnered with Cartman for a few games to see how they gel.Today's result was harsh, we battled well and they did not really cause us problems but Scott let the team down today with that stupid tackle which has cost us 3 points we cannot afford to lose.Have to win Wednesday, our home form at BM is poor and that "pitch" is hardly helping .Here's hoping its fit for football after the ladies haven played Rugby on it tomorrow...will Wilkinson and Co allow our groundsman to work on it to try and make it suitable for kicking a round ball or let it grow another 4 inches before we get the nod to cut it.

Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk

Undercovered
Posts: 250
Joined: Sun May 15, 2016 1:35 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Harrogate Town

Post by Undercovered » Sat Feb 25, 2017 8:26 pm

Our groundsman? Who is that exactly?
Image

darlodog
Posts: 92
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2013 10:36 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Harrogate Town

Post by darlodog » Sat Feb 25, 2017 8:32 pm

There are several grounds men one of them does all the boro training pitches at rockliffe so know what he's talking about.

Undercovered
Posts: 250
Joined: Sun May 15, 2016 1:35 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Harrogate Town

Post by Undercovered » Sat Feb 25, 2017 8:35 pm

al_quaker wrote:It's looking increasingly like we've signed up to an atrocious deal - some serious answers need to be provided before the next fundraising call, otherwise it's going to be a very tough sell indeed.
Guess when there are no realistic alternatives you have to go with what there is. It could be better of course but unless someone has £5 million spare we're stuck. If fans aren't willing to finance further work then we'll just end up where we are. That's the thing with a fan owned club, we'll end up with what we're willing to create.
Image

Undercovered
Posts: 250
Joined: Sun May 15, 2016 1:35 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Harrogate Town

Post by Undercovered » Sat Feb 25, 2017 8:35 pm

darlodog wrote:There are several grounds men one of them does all the boro training pitches at rockliffe so know what he's talking about.
That'll be the rugby clubs groundsman then.
Image

QUAKERMAN2
Posts: 2826
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 8:43 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Harrogate Town

Post by QUAKERMAN2 » Sat Feb 25, 2017 8:38 pm

Thought Gary Ventrass (I think that's his name) was our groundsman .

Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk

Beano
Posts: 1461
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2009 11:33 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Harrogate Town

Post by Beano » Sat Feb 25, 2017 8:41 pm

QUAKERMAN2 wrote:Will be tough to get into the playoffs as Stockport and Halifax have strengthened lately and look more consistent than us.Not sure if MG knows his best side but I felt today was crying out for Gillies to come on for Syers who had a poor game IMO and contrary to popular opinion would still like to see Hardy partnered with Cartman for a few games to see how they gel.Today's result was harsh, we battled well and they did not really cause us problems but Scott let the team down today with that stupid tackle which has cost us 3 points we cannot afford to lose.Have to win Wednesday, our home form at BM is poor and that "pitch" is hardly helping .Here's hoping its fit for football after the ladies haven played Rugby on it tomorrow...will Wilkinson and Co allow our groundsman to work on it to try and make it suitable for kicking a round ball or let it grow another 4 inches before we get the nod to cut it.

Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk
I would absolutely love us to try Cartman and Hardy together.

al_quaker
Posts: 5942
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 2:51 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Harrogate Town

Post by al_quaker » Sat Feb 25, 2017 8:43 pm

Undercovered wrote:
al_quaker wrote:It's looking increasingly like we've signed up to an atrocious deal - some serious answers need to be provided before the next fundraising call, otherwise it's going to be a very tough sell indeed.
Guess when there are no realistic alternatives you have to go with what there is. It could be better of course but unless someone has £5 million spare we're stuck. If fans aren't willing to finance further work then we'll just end up where we are. That's the thing with a fan owned club, we'll end up with what we're willing to create.
Fully aware of that, and it's painfully obvious the rugby club were too.

As an example, I'm not putting any money in to a pitch improvement fund unless we get some assurances over the use and care of the pitch. Otherwise we'd just be chucking money away.

Craig09
Posts: 445
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 7:51 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Harrogate Town

Post by Craig09 » Sat Feb 25, 2017 8:44 pm

We were the far better team today with 11 i bet it would of been a different story. Gary brown looks very shakey at the back and is lacking pace. One person who i thought stood out was josh faulkingham, personally i thought he was man of the match today. He read the game really well and put a good solid shift in

QUAKERMAN2
Posts: 2826
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 8:43 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Harrogate Town

Post by QUAKERMAN2 » Sat Feb 25, 2017 8:57 pm

Any future fundraising will be seriously affected until such time as DFC directors convince fans that DRFC will not be allowed to call all the shots which rightly or wrongly appears to be the case with all these snippets of information coming out.Why would fans fund a new playing surface if the rugby club allows a bunch of women to play on it in addition to its own senior team.No chance I'm afraid.

Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk

User avatar
loan_star
Posts: 7105
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 9:01 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Harrogate Town

Post by loan_star » Sat Feb 25, 2017 9:00 pm

al_quaker wrote:
Undercovered wrote:
al_quaker wrote:It's looking increasingly like we've signed up to an atrocious deal - some serious answers need to be provided before the next fundraising call, otherwise it's going to be a very tough sell indeed.
Guess when there are no realistic alternatives you have to go with what there is. It could be better of course but unless someone has £5 million spare we're stuck. If fans aren't willing to finance further work then we'll just end up where we are. That's the thing with a fan owned club, we'll end up with what we're willing to create.
Fully aware of that, and it's painfully obvious the rugby club were too.

As an example, I'm not putting any money in to a pitch improvement fund unless we get some assurances over the use and care of the pitch. Otherwise we'd just be chucking money away.
Same here, pointless spending a load on a pitch to have them playing every rugby game under the sun on there. We were apparently given assurances it would be the mens first team only sharing the pitch yet they have the bloody women on there in the morning.

As for the groundsman, Gary Ventress won't work with them, they had a meeting and he walked out and said they couldn't be worked with allegedly!

quakerste
Posts: 1519
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 7:07 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Harrogate Town

Post by quakerste » Sat Feb 25, 2017 9:01 pm

For me our downturn in form coincided with Folkingham losing his place in the midfield. He offers so much more than Scott I can't believe it has taken him this long to get back into the team.

Hopefully on Wednesday night we will see Hunter at right back and folkingham back in midfield. Scott has been a good servant to the club but I'm afraid to say this is a level to far.

The Golden Hairclip
Posts: 321
Joined: Thu May 03, 2012 7:45 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Harrogate Town

Post by The Golden Hairclip » Sat Feb 25, 2017 9:01 pm

How much for a decent artificial pitch?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

QUAKERMAN2
Posts: 2826
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 8:43 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Harrogate Town

Post by QUAKERMAN2 » Sat Feb 25, 2017 9:07 pm

Spot on quakerste, I think MG will go for that lineup, got to agree re Scotty, a level too far and that tackle was uncalled for, crazy.

Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk

Undercovered
Posts: 250
Joined: Sun May 15, 2016 1:35 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Harrogate Town

Post by Undercovered » Sat Feb 25, 2017 9:09 pm

quakerste wrote:For me our downturn in form coincided with Folkingham losing his place in the midfield. He offers so much more than Scott I can't believe it has taken him this long to get back into the team.

Hopefully on Wednesday night we will see Hunter at right back and folkingham back in midfield. Scott has been a good servant to the club but I'm afraid to say this is a level to far.

Incorrect, it was actually when Falkingham was in the team. Scott replaced him and we had a brief upturn in form.
Image

al_quaker
Posts: 5942
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 2:51 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Harrogate Town

Post by al_quaker » Sat Feb 25, 2017 9:10 pm

If we're going to spend a lot of money on the pitch, I personally would be in favour of an agreement along the lines of 20 (for example - number pulled out of thin air) rugby matches played on the main pitch per season, and the rest on outside pitches. Then the rugby club can decide which of their teams play on that pitch.

But based on everything which seems to have come out about the deal so far, I've no idea if the rugby club would agree to something like that. I'm starting to get the impression they want to view us as people who rent the pitch for 90 mins every couple of weeks, and nothing more. If that is the case, it is a real shame for us, and I think it's a shame for them too

Undercovered
Posts: 250
Joined: Sun May 15, 2016 1:35 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Harrogate Town

Post by Undercovered » Sat Feb 25, 2017 9:11 pm

QUAKERMAN2 wrote:Thought Gary Ventrass (I think that's his name) was our groundsman .

Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk
He stopped at Bishop as the rugby club have their own
Image

User avatar
HarrytheQuaker
Posts: 3148
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 3:57 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Harrogate Town

Post by HarrytheQuaker » Sat Feb 25, 2017 9:12 pm

What's the thought on the crowd...

Sent from my SM-G928F using Tapatalk

User avatar
loan_star
Posts: 7105
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 9:01 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Harrogate Town

Post by loan_star » Sat Feb 25, 2017 9:13 pm

Undercovered wrote:
QUAKERMAN2 wrote:Thought Gary Ventrass (I think that's his name) was our groundsman .

Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk
He stopped at Bishop as the rugby club have their own
Gray wanted him to come to BM as well but he didn't want to work with their ground staff, difference of opinions proving too much.

User avatar
loan_star
Posts: 7105
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 9:01 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Harrogate Town

Post by loan_star » Sat Feb 25, 2017 9:14 pm

HarrytheQuaker wrote:What's the thought on the crowd...

Sent from my SM-G928F using Tapatalk
About 600 more than we would have got in Bishop.

User avatar
theoriginalfatcat
Posts: 6717
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 7:40 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Harrogate Town

Post by theoriginalfatcat » Sat Feb 25, 2017 9:38 pm

It's been ages since I've seen such a poor Ref - some things are a matter of opinion and the Ref is closer than us to the action etc etc, but he couldn't even make sure that free kicks were taken from their correct position - that would be from about the location of the so called offence, quite simple to enforce, if you're paying attention.

Their third goal came from a prime example of this, but it happened a lot throughout the game. :thumbdown:
Profile pic ↗️
Feethams the Panda. 28 Jan 2012.
Now extinct!

Darlo_Pete
Posts: 14080
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:13 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Harrogate Town

Post by Darlo_Pete » Sat Feb 25, 2017 10:09 pm

Scott ruined the game for us, with 11 on the pitch, we'd have won today. Thought Falkingham should have been MOTM, he had a great game at right back.

Undercovered
Posts: 250
Joined: Sun May 15, 2016 1:35 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Harrogate Town

Post by Undercovered » Sat Feb 25, 2017 10:20 pm

Darlo_Pete wrote:Scott ruined the game for us, with 11 on the pitch, we'd have won today. Thought Falkingham should have been MOTM, he had a great game at right back.
Pity he wasn't as accomplished at CM and totally lost his man for their second
Image

lo36789
Posts: 10928
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:58 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Harrogate Town

Post by lo36789 » Sat Feb 25, 2017 10:37 pm

al_quaker wrote:If we're going to spend a lot of money on the pitch, I personally would be in favour of an agreement along the lines of 20 (for example - number pulled out of thin air) rugby matches played on the main pitch per season, and the rest on outside pitches. Then the rugby club can decide which of their teams play on that pitch.

But based on everything which seems to have come out about the deal so far, I've no idea if the rugby club would agree to something like that. I'm starting to get the impression they want to view us as people who rent the pitch for 90 mins every couple of weeks, and nothing more. If that is the case, it is a real shame for us, and I think it's a shame for them too
I find it unlikely the rugby team will be up for restricting themselves to 20 games when we expect a minimum 26/27 per season. 21 league games, 3 friendlies and the 3 cup games where we will be knocked out in the first round (FA Cup / FA Trophy / County Cup).

As you said it was out of thin air. If we said 30 from what I understand their men's team only play 14 home games a season, their women's probably less plus their charity game.

Basically think we are using the pitch more than they do.

User avatar
loan_star
Posts: 7105
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 9:01 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Harrogate Town

Post by loan_star » Sat Feb 25, 2017 10:50 pm

al_quaker wrote:I'm starting to get the impression they want to view us as people who rent the pitch for 90 mins every couple of weeks, and nothing more. If that is the case, it is a real shame for us, and I think it's a shame for them too
That indeed appears to be the case. We have use of the facilities between 12 and 6 and then we are expected to be off site.
We have given the rugby club a lifeline and yet they are trying to squeeze as much out of us as possible with as little give from their side in return. They have us by the bollocks and don't we just know it. Personally I won't spend anything down there that doesn't directly benefit DFC. No pie, no drink. Rather buy some 50/50s knowing that all profit goes to DFC and not that lot. I thought that they had made an effort to be more welcoming following the early problems but things have gone on during the last couple of weeks to make me realise there are major issues still going on.

darlo reborn
Posts: 1603
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 8:41 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Harrogate Town

Post by darlo reborn » Sat Feb 25, 2017 10:51 pm

I think if we had still been at Bishop the crowds would be about the same as I feel we would have won more games as the pitch allowed us to play better but if we are going to succeed we have to sort the pitch and the relationship with the rugby club out.

User avatar
Robbie Painter
Posts: 2289
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 8:37 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Harrogate Town

Post by Robbie Painter » Sat Feb 25, 2017 10:54 pm

lo36789 wrote:
al_quaker wrote:If we're going to spend a lot of money on the pitch, I personally would be in favour of an agreement along the lines of 20 (for example - number pulled out of thin air) rugby matches played on the main pitch per season, and the rest on outside pitches. Then the rugby club can decide which of their teams play on that pitch.

But based on everything which seems to have come out about the deal so far, I've no idea if the rugby club would agree to something like that. I'm starting to get the impression they want to view us as people who rent the pitch for 90 mins every couple of weeks, and nothing more. If that is the case, it is a real shame for us, and I think it's a shame for them too
I find it unlikely the rugby team will be up for restricting themselves to 20 games when we expect a minimum 26/27 per season. 21 league games, 3 friendlies and the 3 cup games where we will be knocked out in the first round (FA Cup / FA Trophy / County Cup).

As you said it was out of thin air. If we said 30 from what I understand their men's team only play 14 home games a season, their women's probably less plus their charity game.

Basically think we are using the pitch more than they do.
Mike Wilkinson went into detail when the deal was first announced at a fans forum about how it would only be mens 1st team playing on the main pitch and how few games they actually played. He even said he'd be happy to play on another pitch in event of fixture clashes etc!

We might be playing on it more but we'll also be paying a very large amount of £££ to upgrade the surface so before we agree to any investment I'd hope that we'd lock down exactly which teams will play on it and perhaps even more importantly who will maintain it.

Otherwise we are just wasting money.

Undercovered
Posts: 250
Joined: Sun May 15, 2016 1:35 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Harrogate Town

Post by Undercovered » Sat Feb 25, 2017 11:04 pm

Looking at things from a slightly different angle, how much damage is the rugby doing to the surface and how much is it just that the surface when originally laid was sub standard? When we first played on the pitch there had just been one rugby game in months and it was still awful.
Image

User avatar
Breedon
Posts: 1840
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 11:10 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Harrogate Town

Post by Breedon » Sat Feb 25, 2017 11:38 pm

None of the goals we shipped today can be put down to being a man light, they were all an example of why we have such problems. Every goal was very soft and very avoidable. Goal 1 Ferguson gets shouldered off the ball, goes over and the lad waltzes in to square it for a tap in, far too weak. Goal 2 Galbraith gives the lad 3 yards on the edge of the box when he needs to be tight, the guy has time for several touches and time to assess his options before slipping in the lad to score. Goal 3 is another set piece mess.

Even with 10 men we were the better side I thought. Always a threat and as usual the lads up top did their job. Same issues, whether we play well or not, we're always capable of shipping 2 or 3 soft goals and we can't set our strikers a 2 or 3 goal target every time to get something from each game. Well, we can and for the most part are, but we wont trouble the playoff picture.

On the bright side, we've got a lot of very good potential for next season, but some harsh decisions will need to be made on sentimental favourites being replaced if we want to kick on.

Post Reply