Poole Town Play Off Issue and Darlo

Open now for discussion of all things Darlo!

Moderators: mikkyx, uncovered

User avatar
Allan Quatermain
Posts: 982
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 1:01 pm
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Darlington
Contact:

Re: Poole Town Play Off Issue and Darlo

Post by Allan Quatermain » Wed Apr 12, 2017 7:17 am

Spyman wrote:
quaker4life wrote:The Arena is NOT an option.

It is not worth the long term risk for short term gain, we left for a reason it's gone and certain people need to let it go.
Quakerz wrote:You are a fool if you questioned whether the ground is up to Conf North standard. It is up to standard, end of. If it wasn't, we wouldn't have got the grading! There is no grey area.
If that makes me a fool so be it, couldn't care less just my perception at the time.
From what I remember, the reason we left is that we were kicked out because the guy that owned the stadium sold it to the rugby club.

It wasn't our choice to leave the Arena.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
My aging memory tells me that:

Staying at the Arena was an option however was ruled out very quickly as we simply couldn't afford to stay there based on the known finances and financial assumptions. At the point we left there, the Arena was still owned by Raj and paying rent for the use of it was (in theory at least) available to us. However, the FC was in administration and the Arena was always likely to be sold thus any lease could have been cancelled if the new owners wanted that to be the case.

In addition to the cost of the lease and ongoing expenses to keep it running, there was a considerable amount of money needed immediately to complete statutory maintenance on the infrastructure as the place reached it's 10th birthday.

So although it was the club's choice to leave, in reality staying wasn't an option.
Alun's promise to the fans: “I’ll make sure I’ll bring players in that are value for money and I want players that want to play for Darlington Football Club, want to progress and move up the league and show the fans that passion.”

lo36789
Posts: 10930
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:58 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Poole Town Play Off Issue and Darlo

Post by lo36789 » Wed Apr 12, 2017 7:29 am

piggy wrote:I get the point your making but I think to say in the event of us being promoted we'd be certain to get pumped week in week out, your doing the current squad and management a disservice. Also with regards to attendance you fail to mention that there would be many sides in the NL who would bring considerable support.
We would start with one of the smallest budgets in the league given we are fan funded, slashed by the 5 year season ticket amount, then slashed again for making the improvements for ground grading to avoid relegation. Oh and we are based out of a premium player cost region - we have South Shields to compete with now.

I can just imagine it being like the Craig Liddle period but worse because we don't have the distraction of administration. It would be impossible to avoid the focus being on getting beat week in week out on the pitch.

I am not convinced we would have made the play-offs anyway, Stockport have by far the best run in. If we do finish outside of the playoff places I can't help but think this will cloud perception and some will be adamant we would have made it but for this news.
Allan Quatermain wrote: At the point we left there, the Arena was still owned by Raj and paying rent for the use of it was (in theory at least) available to us.
No the Arena was owned by S&S after the took it as Houghton used it as a security for the debts he levied on the club. We were paying a peppercorn rent under RS to play there but still paying £10k-£15k pcm for utilities etc. Which to put into perspective is a hefty chunk of our annual revenue when you look at the accounts.

I really despair and it is difficult to have a proper discussion on anything when people just say "well we should have gone to the Arena" given the debate has been had so many times before, and it's not like the club haven't stated pretty much once a season - under various leadership - why it is not an option. I just think some people close their ears to stuff they don't want to hear sometimes.

Daidy
Posts: 108
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 9:50 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Poole Town Play Off Issue and Darlo

Post by Daidy » Wed Apr 12, 2017 8:07 am

lo36789 wrote:Some people have well and truly spit their dummies out. Suggestions that the whole board should just resign at the AGM regardless of having people voted into replace just screams knee-jerk - and perhaps it's fortunate someone who combusts so quickly isn't in charge of the club.


I wouldn't want nor expect the whole board to resign but surely you agree that somebody needs to take responsibility for what is quite frankly a calamitous error? It may be fortunate that someone who combusts so quickly isn't in charge of the club but perhaps it would be even more fortunate to have someone who failed to ensure they knew the ground grading rules sufficiently well when building a new ground not running the club too? I have to say I am struggling to find any confidence (and I am sure I am not alone in this) in the board going forward, taking huge decisions that will shape the future of the club for years to come, if something as simple as this has been cocked up.
lo36789 wrote:When we did the appeal for funding for 500seats it would have been a very strange caveat when we were in Division One North to put "but if we are in playoff contention in the BlueSquare North (it was called that at the time) we would need two stands totalling 500 seats to be eligible for Blue Square Prem promotion".

To all extents and purposes we expected to be in Evostik Prem on the move back.


Why would that have been a very strange caveat? It was far from inconceivable that we would be where we are currently and clearly would have had an impact not only on funding for the ground, but also on our approach to this season. It would have displayed some long-term strategic thinking which sadly has been missing over the past few years, and seemingly still is.

User avatar
Allan Quatermain
Posts: 982
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 1:01 pm
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Darlington
Contact:

Re: Poole Town Play Off Issue and Darlo

Post by Allan Quatermain » Wed Apr 12, 2017 8:15 am

lo36789 wrote:
piggy wrote:I get the point your making but I think to say in the event of us being promoted we'd be certain to get pumped week in week out, your doing the current squad and management a disservice. Also with regards to attendance you fail to mention that there would be many sides in the NL who would bring considerable support.
We would start with one of the smallest budgets in the league given we are fan funded, slashed by the 5 year season ticket amount, then slashed again for making the improvements for ground grading to avoid relegation. Oh and we are based out of a premium player cost region - we have South Shields to compete with now.

I can just imagine it being like the Craig Liddle period but worse because we don't have the distraction of administration. It would be impossible to avoid the focus being on getting beat week in week out on the pitch.

I am not convinced we would have made the play-offs anyway, Stockport have by far the best run in. If we do finish outside of the playoff places I can't help but think this will cloud perception and some will be adamant we would have made it but for this news.
Allan Quatermain wrote: At the point we left there, the Arena was still owned by Raj and paying rent for the use of it was (in theory at least) available to us.
No the Arena was owned by S&S after the took it as Houghton used it as a security for the debts he levied on the club. We were paying a peppercorn rent under RS to play there but still paying £10k-£15k pcm for utilities etc. Which to put into perspective is a hefty chunk of our annual revenue when you look at the accounts.

I really despair and it is difficult to have a proper discussion on anything when people just say "well we should have gone to the Arena" given the debate has been had so many times before, and it's not like the club haven't stated pretty much once a season - under various leadership - why it is not an option. I just think some people close their ears to stuff they don't want to hear sometimes.
Yes, good point - the ownership would have been as you said.

However, I wasn't suggesting we should move back to the Arena, it is a non-starter, just pointing out that remaining at the Arena was an option at the point we made the decision to leave.

It was only a couple of weeks ago I was looking through the financial projections produced (by those with much more business acumen than I) to make the decision to leave.
Alun's promise to the fans: “I’ll make sure I’ll bring players in that are value for money and I want players that want to play for Darlington Football Club, want to progress and move up the league and show the fans that passion.”

SwansQuaker83
Posts: 696
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 4:46 pm
Team Supported: Swansea (and Darlo of course)

Re: Poole Town Play Off Issue and Darlo

Post by SwansQuaker83 » Wed Apr 12, 2017 8:20 am

Daidy wrote:
lo36789 wrote:Some people have well and truly spit their dummies out. Suggestions that the whole board should just resign at the AGM regardless of having people voted into replace just screams knee-jerk - and perhaps it's fortunate someone who combusts so quickly isn't in charge of the club.


I wouldn't want nor expect the whole board to resign but surely you agree that somebody needs to take responsibility for what is quite frankly a calamitous error? It may be fortunate that someone who combusts so quickly isn't in charge of the club but perhaps it would be even more fortunate to have someone who failed to ensure they knew the ground grading rules sufficiently well when building a new ground not running the club too? I have to say I am struggling to find any confidence (and I am sure I am not alone in this) in the board going forward, taking huge decisions that will shape the future of the club for years to come, if something as simple as this has been cocked up.
lo36789 wrote:When we did the appeal for funding for 500seats it would have been a very strange caveat when we were in Division One North to put "but if we are in playoff contention in the BlueSquare North (it was called that at the time) we would need two stands totalling 500 seats to be eligible for Blue Square Prem promotion".

To all extents and purposes we expected to be in Evostik Prem on the move back.


Why would that have been a very strange caveat? It was far from inconceivable that we would be where we are currently and clearly would have had an impact not only on funding for the ground, but also on our approach to this season. It would have displayed some long-term strategic thinking which sadly has been missing over the past few years, and seemingly still is.
I must admit I never actually looked at the ground gradings document, I mean it wasnt my job to do so... But when you read it, it's very clear... So if they hadnt anticipated all this when we were in Evo One, why didnt they make this clear well before now? Start of the season maybe? Before anyone knew how we'd do and before any talk from MG of promotion.

It's either incompetence or they knew and kept quiet... I dont know which I find worse to be honest.

SwansQuaker83
Posts: 696
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 4:46 pm
Team Supported: Swansea (and Darlo of course)

Re: Poole Town Play Off Issue and Darlo

Post by SwansQuaker83 » Wed Apr 12, 2017 8:21 am

SwansQuaker83 wrote:
Daidy wrote:
lo36789 wrote:Some people have well and truly spit their dummies out. Suggestions that the whole board should just resign at the AGM regardless of having people voted into replace just screams knee-jerk - and perhaps it's fortunate someone who combusts so quickly isn't in charge of the club.


I wouldn't want nor expect the whole board to resign but surely you agree that somebody needs to take responsibility for what is quite frankly a calamitous error? It may be fortunate that someone who combusts so quickly isn't in charge of the club but perhaps it would be even more fortunate to have someone who failed to ensure they knew the ground grading rules sufficiently well when building a new ground not running the club too? I have to say I am struggling to find any confidence (and I am sure I am not alone in this) in the board going forward, taking huge decisions that will shape the future of the club for years to come, if something as simple as this has been cocked up.
lo36789 wrote:When we did the appeal for funding for 500seats it would have been a very strange caveat when we were in Division One North to put "but if we are in playoff contention in the BlueSquare North (it was called that at the time) we would need two stands totalling 500 seats to be eligible for Blue Square Prem promotion".

To all extents and purposes we expected to be in Evostik Prem on the move back.


Why would that have been a very strange caveat? It was far from inconceivable that we would be where we are currently and clearly would have had an impact not only on funding for the ground, but also on our approach to this season. It would have displayed some long-term strategic thinking which sadly has been missing over the past few years, and seemingly still is.
I must admit I never actually looked at the ground gradings document until yesterday, I mean it wasnt my job to do so... But when you read it, it's very clear... So if they hadnt anticipated all this when we were in Evo One, why didnt they make this clear well before now? Start of the season maybe? Before anyone knew how we'd do and before any talk from MG of promotion.

It's either incompetence or they knew and kept quiet... I dont know which I find worse to be honest.

piggy
Posts: 785
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 11:22 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Poole Town Play Off Issue and Darlo

Post by piggy » Wed Apr 12, 2017 8:26 am

lo36789 wrote:
piggy wrote:I get the point your making but I think to say in the event of us being promoted we'd be certain to get pumped week in week out, your doing the current squad and management a disservice. Also with regards to attendance you fail to mention that there would be many sides in the NL who would bring considerable support.
We would start with one of the smallest budgets in the league given we are fan funded, slashed by the 5 year season ticket amount, then slashed again for making the improvements for ground grading to avoid relegation. Oh and we are based out of a premium player cost region - we have South Shields to compete with now.

I can just imagine it being like the Craig Liddle period but worse because we don't have the distraction of administration. It would be impossible to avoid the focus being on getting beat week in week out on the pitch.

I am not convinced we would have made the play-offs anyway, Stockport have by far the best run in. If we do finish outside of the playoff places I can't help but think this will cloud perception and some will be adamant we would have made it but for this news.
Allan Quatermain wrote: At the point we left there, the Arena was still owned by Raj and paying rent for the use of it was (in theory at least) available to us.
No the Arena was owned by S&S after the took it as Houghton used it as a security for the debts he levied on the club. We were paying a peppercorn rent under RS to play there but still paying £10k-£15k pcm for utilities etc. Which to put into perspective is a hefty chunk of our annual revenue when you look at the accounts.
There are exceptions, Braintree made the play offs last year despite being part time. I think many of the squad are good enough to compete in the NL, I wouldn't contemplate a scenario like when we had drew Broughton and untried youngsters back in 2012 under Lids.

Anyway my original point was that if we finish in the top five the lads have earnt a crack at promotion. To have it taken away on a technicality is gut wrenching. The progress on the pitch since 2012 has been staggering. Unfortunately we haven't been able to keep up off the pitch.

lo36789
Posts: 10930
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:58 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Poole Town Play Off Issue and Darlo

Post by lo36789 » Wed Apr 12, 2017 8:29 am

SwansQuaker83 wrote:I must admit I never actually looked at the ground gradings document, I mean it wasnt my job to do so... But when you read it, it's very clear...
If you looked in the ground grading rules then there is no issue. Our problem is National League competition rules.

The standard on the FA ground grading is that you have permission to extend to the level above, and you complete appropriate works by 1st April the following season (that is when all paperwork is submitted / collated by the FA).

It just happens that the NL competition have an additional rule beyond that. When we made our initial plans we weren't in the National League - we were 2 promotions off National League - so maybe I think it was an understandable oversight to base things on FA ground grading rather than the competition rules of a competition you need 2 successive promotions to be competing in.

Vodka_Vic
Posts: 2473
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 10:27 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Poole Town Play Off Issue and Darlo

Post by Vodka_Vic » Wed Apr 12, 2017 8:33 am

I think if someone knew and kept quiet would be worse. I'd like to know if this only came out because the Poole Town story broke. If not, would people be none the wiser?
There are two other possibilities, that the club was given duff information by someone from the NL, in which case we would need this in writing for any appeal.
The fourth possibility, and the only one with any hope, is that we knew about the rule and have been in discussion with the NL for some time about giving us special,dispensation around this rule given our unique circumstances, and this is what the 'discussions' are about, with the club staying quiet about the matter because discussions are at a delicate stage. This is what I'm clinging to. After all, it appears that North Ferriby fell short and were given special dispensation.

User avatar
feethams
Posts: 198
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 7:12 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Poole Town Play Off Issue and Darlo

Post by feethams » Wed Apr 12, 2017 8:36 am

Some people on here really ought to have a think about what they are saying. Owners of the past were 'incompetent' and idiots. People like Houghton and Singh who shafted this club well and truly - all whilst taking a hefty wage and driving around in flash cars and pretending they cared for the club when all they wanted to do was line their own pockets.

The current owners, (who for all we know have not done anything wrong) - are VOLUNTEERS. They are people who stepped up and gave a sh*t when we as a club needed them.

If it is the board that has made an error, then yes it is bad, but it's not for us all to start moaning and pointing the finger and requesting a public hanging - it's time for us to come together as a club, and work it out.

If some people spent their time & energy trying to help, rather than just getting frustrated - perhaps we could achieve something. If the club does need money, why don't we get a pledge account set up or something similar - regardless of what the plan is, having some money building might as well be a start.

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

Re: Poole Town Play Off Issue and Darlo

Post by al_quaker » Wed Apr 12, 2017 8:40 am

lo36789 wrote: It just happens that the NL competition have an additional rule beyond that. When we made our initial plans we weren't in the National League - we were 2 promotions off National League - so maybe I think it was an understandable oversight to base things on FA ground grading rather than the competition rules of a competition you need 2 successive promotions to be competing in.
While that may be true at the time of the original fundraising, the community share issue was the back end of last season(?) when it was likely we were going to be in the conference north this season. Additionally, we've been in and around the playoffs all season.

Have we only just found out about this rule? Literally google FA ground grading B, and the first document which comes up mentions the 500 seats for eligibility for promotion rule.

If we have known for a while, then that raises a whole load of other questions, but as has been mentioned there is a sliver of hope with the terminology of "discussions are ongoing"

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

Re: Poole Town Play Off Issue and Darlo

Post by al_quaker » Wed Apr 12, 2017 8:45 am

feethams wrote:Some people on here really ought to have a think about what they are saying. Owners of the past were 'incompetent' and idiots. People like Houghton and Singh who shafted this club well and truly - all whilst taking a hefty wage and driving around in flash cars and pretending they cared for the club when all they wanted to do was line their own pockets.

The current owners, (who for all we know have not done anything wrong) - are VOLUNTEERS. They are people who stepped up and gave a sh*t when we as a club needed them.

If it is the board that has made an error, then yes it is bad, but it's not for us all to start moaning and pointing the finger and requesting a public hanging - it's time for us to come together as a club, and work it out.

If some people spent their time & energy trying to help, rather than just getting frustrated - perhaps we could achieve something. If the club does need money, why don't we get a pledge account set up or something similar - regardless of what the plan is, having some money building might as well be a start.
I don't think (m)any are accusing the board of malice. However, it looks like there may have been a massive cock-up. While I'm sure everyone is grateful to those who give up their time to run the club, and volunteers should be given more slack than paid employees, being a volunteer doesn't make one above questioning and accountability if things have gone wrong (and like you say, for all the anger and disappointment yesterday brought, things may still work out OK).

Everyone wants the best for the club, but if we don't know there's an issue how can we help? One good thing which may come out of all of this is that there is a chance to look at how the club communicates with those who own it. Legitimate questioning isn't "sniping" - fans care about the club, they want the best for the club, and sometimes they can raise valid points.
Last edited by al_quaker on Wed Apr 12, 2017 8:46 am, edited 1 time in total.

spen666
Posts: 2296
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 9:12 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Poole Town Play Off Issue and Darlo

Post by spen666 » Wed Apr 12, 2017 8:45 am

feethams wrote:Some people on here really ought to have a think about what they are saying. Owners of the past were 'incompetent' and idiots. People like Houghton and Singh who shafted this club well and truly - all whilst taking a hefty wage and driving around in flash cars and pretending they cared for the club when all they wanted to do was line their own pockets.

The current owners, (who for all we know have not done anything wrong) - are VOLUNTEERS. They are people who stepped up and gave a sh*t when we as a club needed them.

If it is the board that has made an error, then yes it is bad, but it's not for us all to start moaning and pointing the finger and requesting a public hanging - it's time for us to come together as a club, and work it out.

If some people spent their time & energy trying to help, rather than just getting frustrated - perhaps we could achieve something. If the club does need money, why don't we get a pledge account set up or something similar - regardless of what the plan is, having some money building might as well be a start.

Well said

Daidy
Posts: 108
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 9:50 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Poole Town Play Off Issue and Darlo

Post by Daidy » Wed Apr 12, 2017 8:52 am

feethams wrote:Some people on here really ought to have a think about what they are saying. Owners of the past were 'incompetent' and idiots. People like Houghton and Singh who shafted this club well and truly - all whilst taking a hefty wage and driving around in flash cars and pretending they cared for the club when all they wanted to do was line their own pockets.

The current owners, (who for all we know have not done anything wrong) - are VOLUNTEERS. They are people who stepped up and gave a sh*t when we as a club needed them.

If it is the board that has made an error, then yes it is bad, but it's not for us all to start moaning and pointing the finger and requesting a public hanging - it's time for us to come together as a club, and work it out.

If some people spent their time & energy trying to help, rather than just getting frustrated - perhaps we could achieve something. If the club does need money, why don't we get a pledge account set up or something similar - regardless of what the plan is, having some money building might as well be a start.
I'm sorry but this whole line fails to wash with me any more. Some people cannot give their time for a number of reasons (location, personal issues etc) but this doesn't mean that those in charge don't have a level of accountability to the fans (owners).

They are being entrusted with large sums of money which has been directly handed over or fundraised by fans and they have a responsibility to run the football club, which is a business, to a certain standard of competency.

We all have to wait and see what the outcome of this is but if it does end up that we are denied a place in the play-offs because someone running the club didn't check the national league rules, then that falls short of standards of competency to my mind. This is why we have elections to the board, to ensure that the club is being run to a decent and competent level whilst we entrust them to handle large financial decisions which will affect the future of the club.

Agree with your points though about everyone needing to come together once we know the final decision to either sort it out, or agree a roadmap of where the football needs to go/be over the course of the next five years. And of course it is utterly ridiculous to mention them in the same breath as Singh/Houghton etc but I can't recall anyone doing that on the thread thus far.

User avatar
QuakerPete
Posts: 1196
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 11:51 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Poole Town Play Off Issue and Darlo

Post by QuakerPete » Wed Apr 12, 2017 9:07 am

Daidy wrote:
feethams wrote:Some people on here really ought to have a think about what they are saying. Owners of the past were 'incompetent' and idiots. People like Houghton and Singh who shafted this club well and truly - all whilst taking a hefty wage and driving around in flash cars and pretending they cared for the club when all they wanted to do was line their own pockets.

The current owners, (who for all we know have not done anything wrong) - are VOLUNTEERS. They are people who stepped up and gave a sh*t when we as a club needed them.

If it is the board that has made an error, then yes it is bad, but it's not for us all to start moaning and pointing the finger and requesting a public hanging - it's time for us to come together as a club, and work it out.

If some people spent their time & energy trying to help, rather than just getting frustrated - perhaps we could achieve something. If the club does need money, why don't we get a pledge account set up or something similar - regardless of what the plan is, having some money building might as well be a start.
I'm sorry but this whole line fails to wash with me any more. Some people cannot give their time for a number of reasons (location, personal issues etc) but this doesn't mean that those in charge don't have a level of accountability to the fans (owners).

They are being entrusted with large sums of money which has been directly handed over or fundraised by fans and they have a responsibility to run the football club, which is a business, to a certain standard of competency.

We all have to wait and see what the outcome of this is but if it does end up that we are denied a place in the play-offs because someone running the club didn't check the national league rules, then that falls short of standards of competency to my mind. This is why we have elections to the board, to ensure that the club is being run to a decent and competent level whilst we entrust them to handle large financial decisions which will affect the future of the club.

Agree with your points though about everyone needing to come together once we know the final decision to either sort it out, or agree a roadmap of where the football needs to go/be over the course of the next five years. And of course it is utterly ridiculous to mention them in the same breath as Singh/Houghton etc but I can't recall anyone doing that on the thread thus far.
I've no problem with new, better qualified, more able people coming in to engance the football club at any time - and that is in no way a criticism of any present or past officials and volunteers. That is the nature of any business wanting to grow and improve and indeed the club have previously requested those with boardroom skills to come forward. However, it requires those new people to be available and willing to work under similar circumstances. People's perceptions that heads must roll, before the facts are established, would only create a power vacuum to the club's detriment and destabilisation.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Daidy
Posts: 108
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 9:50 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Poole Town Play Off Issue and Darlo

Post by Daidy » Wed Apr 12, 2017 9:22 am

QuakerPete wrote:
Daidy wrote:
feethams wrote:Some people on here really ought to have a think about what they are saying. Owners of the past were 'incompetent' and idiots. People like Houghton and Singh who shafted this club well and truly - all whilst taking a hefty wage and driving around in flash cars and pretending they cared for the club when all they wanted to do was line their own pockets.

The current owners, (who for all we know have not done anything wrong) - are VOLUNTEERS. They are people who stepped up and gave a sh*t when we as a club needed them.

If it is the board that has made an error, then yes it is bad, but it's not for us all to start moaning and pointing the finger and requesting a public hanging - it's time for us to come together as a club, and work it out.

If some people spent their time & energy trying to help, rather than just getting frustrated - perhaps we could achieve something. If the club does need money, why don't we get a pledge account set up or something similar - regardless of what the plan is, having some money building might as well be a start.
I'm sorry but this whole line fails to wash with me any more. Some people cannot give their time for a number of reasons (location, personal issues etc) but this doesn't mean that those in charge don't have a level of accountability to the fans (owners).

They are being entrusted with large sums of money which has been directly handed over or fundraised by fans and they have a responsibility to run the football club, which is a business, to a certain standard of competency.

We all have to wait and see what the outcome of this is but if it does end up that we are denied a place in the play-offs because someone running the club didn't check the national league rules, then that falls short of standards of competency to my mind. This is why we have elections to the board, to ensure that the club is being run to a decent and competent level whilst we entrust them to handle large financial decisions which will affect the future of the club.

Agree with your points though about everyone needing to come together once we know the final decision to either sort it out, or agree a roadmap of where the football needs to go/be over the course of the next five years. And of course it is utterly ridiculous to mention them in the same breath as Singh/Houghton etc but I can't recall anyone doing that on the thread thus far.
I've no problem with new, better qualified, more able people coming in to engance the football club at any time - and that is in no way a criticism of any present or past officials and volunteers. That is the nature of any business wanting to grow and improve and indeed the club have previously requested those with boardroom skills to come forward. However, it requires those new people to be available and willing to work under similar circumstances. People's perceptions that heads must roll, before the facts are established, would only create a power vacuum to the club's detriment and destabilisation.
Agree with all of this. I don't want heads to roll just because of a mistake and a knee-jerk reaction could do more harm than good. However, this appears to be a pretty major oversight and I do think we shouldn't just be willing to accept as basic an error as this as par for the course because we have a reliance on the majority of staff at the club being volunteers.

jonn
Posts: 170
Joined: Sat Aug 24, 2013 2:01 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Poole Town Play Off Issue and Darlo

Post by jonn » Wed Apr 12, 2017 9:27 am

If the FL can be persuaded to waive the March 31 deadline rule if we can show we'll have 500 covered seats by the start of next season, we need a speedy decision on how we might accomplish this.
Desperate times demand desperate measures. We have an appropriate covered area already - the Tin Shed. Could we section off part of it and install 280 seats? We could surely raise the cost of that in no time.

SwansQuaker83
Posts: 696
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 4:46 pm
Team Supported: Swansea (and Darlo of course)

Re: Poole Town Play Off Issue and Darlo

Post by SwansQuaker83 » Wed Apr 12, 2017 9:27 am

lo36789 wrote:
SwansQuaker83 wrote:I must admit I never actually looked at the ground gradings document, I mean it wasnt my job to do so... But when you read it, it's very clear...
If you looked in the ground grading rules then there is no issue. Our problem is National League competition rules.
Taken from the FA website, grade B ground grading document:

"To qualify for promotion to the national league by winning the North/South championship and for the club to participate in the play off matches, the club must achieve a Category B grading together with 500 seats undercover by 31st March in each season"

http://www.thefa.com/get-involved/playe ... nd-grading

pretty cut and dry to me...

super_les_mcjannet
Posts: 5995
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 8:41 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Poole Town Play Off Issue and Darlo

Post by super_les_mcjannet » Wed Apr 12, 2017 9:36 am

jonn wrote:If the FL can be persuaded to waive the March 31 deadline rule if we can show we'll have 500 covered seats by the start of next season, we need a speedy decision on how we might accomplish this.
Desperate times demand desperate measures. We have an appropriate covered area already - the Tin Shed. Could we section off part of it and install 280 seats? We could surely raise the cost of that in no time.
The forum on the 21st April was/is going to advise how we will get beyond 500 seats.

lo36789
Posts: 10930
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:58 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Poole Town Play Off Issue and Darlo

Post by lo36789 » Wed Apr 12, 2017 9:36 am

Daidy wrote:This is why we have elections to the board, to ensure that the club is being run to a decent and competent level whilst we entrust them to handle large financial decisions which will affect the future of the club.
You have hit the nail on the head there though. That is how they are held accountable.

They are elected based on their pitch and they are re-elected based on what they do in role. What is telling is that for as long as the club has existed, as far as I am aware, there have been more seats available on the board than applicants for positions.

We can't change that because it suits in this circumstance. I suspect it is going to be quite difficult to pin point an individual for this anyway. I think the current board inherited plans for a ground that was badged as "meeting Conference North requirements".

Do we need to establish a means to utilise remote skill set is probably a wider debate. Do we have any fans who hold executive positions in the city managing budgets which are hundreds of times the size of ours with transferable skillsets.
Last edited by lo36789 on Wed Apr 12, 2017 9:44 am, edited 1 time in total.

Daidy
Posts: 108
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 9:50 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Poole Town Play Off Issue and Darlo

Post by Daidy » Wed Apr 12, 2017 9:40 am

lo36789 wrote:
Daidy wrote:This is why we have elections to the board, to ensure that the club is being run to a decent and competent level whilst we entrust them to handle large financial decisions which will affect the future of the club.
You have hit the nail on the head there though. That is how they are held accountable.

They are elected based on their CV and they are re-elected based on what they do in role.

We can't change that because it suits in this circumstance - I suspect it is going to be quite difficult to pin point an individual for this anyway. I think the current board inherited plans for a ground that was badged as "meeting Conference North requirements".
Completely agree.

That's why I am not calling for anyone to be 'fired' or 'replaced' immediately, but when the time comes after the year is up. I do feel it is in the best interests of the club if someone does take ownership of this mistake though. I don't think a round of passing the buck would go down well with anyone.

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

Re: Poole Town Play Off Issue and Darlo

Post by al_quaker » Wed Apr 12, 2017 9:44 am

super_les_mcjannet wrote:
jonn wrote:If the FL can be persuaded to waive the March 31 deadline rule if we can show we'll have 500 covered seats by the start of next season, we need a speedy decision on how we might accomplish this.
Desperate times demand desperate measures. We have an appropriate covered area already - the Tin Shed. Could we section off part of it and install 280 seats? We could surely raise the cost of that in no time.
The forum on the 21st April was/is going to advise how we will get beyond 500 seats.
That's interesting - cat A is 500 seats, so beyond 500 seats is looking towards football league standard. I have my own dream of what BM would look like as a football league ground, so it would be interesting to see what the club's plans are.

Shame that this situation has arisen, as until this point it's been a very successful season on and off the pitch.

User avatar
Darlobaz79
Posts: 1168
Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2010 12:17 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Poole Town Play Off Issue and Darlo

Post by Darlobaz79 » Wed Apr 12, 2017 9:46 am

SwansQuaker83 wrote:
lo36789 wrote:
SwansQuaker83 wrote:I must admit I never actually looked at the ground gradings document, I mean it wasnt my job to do so... But when you read it, it's very clear...
If you looked in the ground grading rules then there is no issue. Our problem is National League competition rules.
Taken from the FA website, grade B ground grading document:

"To qualify for promotion to the national league by winning the North/South championship and for the club to participate in the play off matches, the club must achieve a Category B grading together with 500 seats undercover by 31st March in each season"

http://www.thefa.com/get-involved/playe ... nd-grading

pretty cut and dry to me...
Except that a category B status means
'1.3 Capacity
The Stadium must have a minimum capacity of 3,000 calculated by a competent person in accordance with the guidance given in the Guide to Safety at Sports Grounds (Green Guide). There must also be potential to increase the capacity to 4,000 in the future and a Club must, by the 31st March following the date of inspection, demonstrate how this capacity can be achieved."

North Ferriby were allowed to compete with a capacity of just 2,700...does this offer any hope?

super_les_mcjannet
Posts: 5995
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 8:41 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Poole Town Play Off Issue and Darlo

Post by super_les_mcjannet » Wed Apr 12, 2017 9:48 am

al_quaker wrote:
super_les_mcjannet wrote:
jonn wrote:If the FL can be persuaded to waive the March 31 deadline rule if we can show we'll have 500 covered seats by the start of next season, we need a speedy decision on how we might accomplish this.
Desperate times demand desperate measures. We have an appropriate covered area already - the Tin Shed. Could we section off part of it and install 280 seats? We could surely raise the cost of that in no time.
The forum on the 21st April was/is going to advise how we will get beyond 500 seats.
That's interesting - cat A is 500 seats, so beyond 500 seats is looking towards football league standard. I have my own dream of what BM would look like as a football league ground, so it would be interesting to see what the club's plans are.

Shame that this situation has arisen, as until this point it's been a very successful season on and off the pitch.
When I say beyond I would assume we would pick up the planning permission of the extra 298 seats or whatever number it was. Taking us to just short of 600 seats.

SwansQuaker83
Posts: 696
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 4:46 pm
Team Supported: Swansea (and Darlo of course)

Re: Poole Town Play Off Issue and Darlo

Post by SwansQuaker83 » Wed Apr 12, 2017 9:57 am

Darlobaz79 wrote:
SwansQuaker83 wrote:
lo36789 wrote:
SwansQuaker83 wrote:I must admit I never actually looked at the ground gradings document, I mean it wasnt my job to do so... But when you read it, it's very clear...
If you looked in the ground grading rules then there is no issue. Our problem is National League competition rules.
Taken from the FA website, grade B ground grading document:

"To qualify for promotion to the national league by winning the North/South championship and for the club to participate in the play off matches, the club must achieve a Category B grading together with 500 seats undercover by 31st March in each season"

http://www.thefa.com/get-involved/playe ... nd-grading

pretty cut and dry to me...
Except that a category B status means
'1.3 Capacity
The Stadium must have a minimum capacity of 3,000 calculated by a competent person in accordance with the guidance given in the Guide to Safety at Sports Grounds (Green Guide). There must also be potential to increase the capacity to 4,000 in the future and a Club must, by the 31st March following the date of inspection, demonstrate how this capacity can be achieved."

North Ferriby were allowed to compete with a capacity of just 2,700...does this offer any hope?
I can only assume this is our angle for appeal, it certainly seems to set a precedent.

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

Re: Poole Town Play Off Issue and Darlo

Post by Darlo_Pete » Wed Apr 12, 2017 10:12 am

If things do go Pete Tong and we are not allowed to compete in the play-offs, assuming we qualify, then raising funds from the fans is going to be quite a challenge.

Quakerz
Posts: 20958
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:32 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Poole Town Play Off Issue and Darlo

Post by Quakerz » Wed Apr 12, 2017 10:18 am

People will be pissed off but the fundraising angle will be cut and dried - "we HAVE to raise money to have 500 seats by April 1st 2018 otherwise the same will happen again"

So I think fans would raise the money.
Image

“Everybody knows where that club is going now, so I’m out of the way. They can carry on, it’s their club, they can keep it." - Raj Singh, 2017

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

Re: Poole Town Play Off Issue and Darlo

Post by al_quaker » Wed Apr 12, 2017 10:22 am

super_les_mcjannet wrote: When I say beyond I would assume we would pick up the planning permission of the extra 298 seats or whatever number it was. Taking us to just short of 600 seats.
Oh OK that makes more sense - me getting carried away :lol:

It's far far down the list of priorities at the moment, and also would be a case of very long term thinking, but it would be interesting to know whether there have been any thoughts that far ahead. The pipe running through BM makes it tricky to see where we'd squeeze 2000 seats in as one ultimately needs if one is aiming for steady FL membership without something drastic happening to some of the existing structures.

Anyway, we digress, and I've entered into the realms of fantasy as we're an incredibly long way from this even being a relevant discussion!

Vodka_Vic
Posts: 2473
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 10:27 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Poole Town Play Off Issue and Darlo

Post by Vodka_Vic » Wed Apr 12, 2017 10:22 am

jonn wrote:If the FL can be persuaded to waive the March 31 deadline rule if we can show we'll have 500 covered seats by the start of next season, we need a speedy decision on how we might accomplish this.
Desperate times demand desperate measures. We have an appropriate covered area already - the Tin Shed. Could we section off part of it and install 280 seats? We could surely raise the cost of that in no time.
Don't think this would be a starter. What if we promised this and didn't deliver? The fixtures would already be out. Our best hope is that there is special dispensation. If we were given an extended deadline to get to the 500 seats it would have to be before the fixtures were out, so I'm guessing any extension would be mid-June.

Vodka_Vic
Posts: 2473
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 10:27 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Poole Town Play Off Issue and Darlo

Post by Vodka_Vic » Wed Apr 12, 2017 10:33 am

Darlobaz79 wrote:
SwansQuaker83 wrote:
lo36789 wrote:
SwansQuaker83 wrote:I must admit I never actually looked at the ground gradings document, I mean it wasnt my job to do so... But when you read it, it's very clear...
If you looked in the ground grading rules then there is no issue. Our problem is National League competition rules.
Taken from the FA website, grade B ground grading document:

"To qualify for promotion to the national league by winning the North/South championship and for the club to participate in the play off matches, the club must achieve a Category B grading together with 500 seats undercover by 31st March in each season"

http://www.thefa.com/get-involved/playe ... nd-grading

pretty cut and dry to me...
Except that a category B status means
'1.3 Capacity
The Stadium must have a minimum capacity of 3,000 calculated by a competent person in accordance with the guidance given in the Guide to Safety at Sports Grounds (Green Guide). There must also be potential to increase the capacity to 4,000 in the future and a Club must, by the 31st March following the date of inspection, demonstrate how this capacity can be achieved."

North Ferriby were allowed to compete with a capacity of just 2,700...does this offer any hope?
There are plans to get to Category A status. Malcolm Cundick said that in his interview in December. To get Category B status we'll have had to have shown the FA those plans one would assume at the time. A few people have mentioned that the 500 seats for the play-offs must have been mentioned at this time too. Not necessarily, as the 500 seats for the play-offs is a National League rule, so,wouldn't be relevant to the FA for ground grading. This is another hope, that we can challenge this arcane rule on the basis that it is out of step with the rest of the pyramid.

Post Reply