Ground Grading/Improvements

[Green Pea]

Back to topic, I read yesterday that the league had recommended to the FA that all clubs currently in the Premier Division should be awarded a Grade F. One of the very first things the criteria states is -

 

"It must be possible for spectators to view the match, either standing or seated, for the full length of at least 3 sides of the playing area. Where one side is designated as spectator-free, measures must be in place to ensure there is no unauthorised access."

 

- I've never once been able to view a match at Guildford City from either end or the dugouts side and as soon as I've tried I've been told to get back behind the fence so how does The Spectrum qualify?

 

Shortly followed by -

 

"There must be a permanent fixed barrier of sound construction (e.g. concrete and steel) and free from all sharp edges surrounding the pitch on all sides which may be occupied by spectators. Ideally, the height should not exceed 1.1 metres."

 

- Again I don't recall The Spectrum meeting this criteria, isn't there a hill surrounding one end, some athletic nets the other and just a fixed barrier on one side.

 

This isn't a dig at Guildford City as a club, I'm just confused how the Spectrum passes this grading without work and expense that others have had to endure...

[Teflon]

Because when the ground is part of an athletic track there is a different set of guidelines and what Guildford have meets that.

 

[Green Pea]

Thanks for clearing that up Teffs, didn't bother reading any further

[Teflon]

You dont know what your missing GP, great bedtime reading

[eefc supporter]

Duncs... I'll try again .During the 16 years we've been groundsharing one of the frustrations is we've paid enough rent to have built 2 or 3 grounds.When we've had a good manager and a good team as under AdaHill and this season we've done well. When we haven't we've been rubbish... It's got nothing to do with groundsharing.

 

Also exactly how is putting up with a situation long term that is a distinct disadvantage to our club constitute taking the p!ss.

 

Better let you get on with your timewasting dvd... Section 1 "Standing as still as Gilbert and George and letting the other team get the ball for your throw on.". cue music

[Green Pea]

Wasting your time eefc.

 

I will stick my neck on the line and predict that within the next 5 years at least 2 current CCL clubs will either not be able to afford the council leasehold payments on "their" grounds, will be entering a groundshare in order to survive or will just cease existing at this level.

[Jeff Hamnett TSF]

groundsharing often means both clubs are competing against each other for the same sponsorship, gate income, bar money, players, youth sides.

 

they should only be allowed short term, up to 2 seasons whilst the incoming club sorts its new ground, gets the old one upgraded or whatever problem sorted that stops them playing at their existing ground.

[Big J R]

A little birdy told me this morning that Mole Valley District Council have chucked Fetcham FC off their ground, for 'Breach of Lease Agreement' !!

 

Hmmm !

[Teflon]

That's crazy !!!!!

[Teflon]

What have they "done wrong" BJR

[eefc supporter]

Re your points on groundsharing I can only talk about the situation I know most well and few of your points stand up to any analysis.

 

Re clubhouse income Banstead get it and it increases their bar takings having twice as many games. Our sponsorship has been sought and gained from within Epsom and Ewell Borough which is where we have continue to strive to return to .Players etc well Epsom is quite close to Banstead so that will happen anyway.

 

So there is no advantage to groundsharing in our experience

so there's no need for rules limiting it. People will always look for some reason in others situations to explain their own . Still I expect you to keep niggling on about it on an irregular basis.

 

And the only other alternative is for clubs to fold which nobody wants,do they ?

 

Weeble it wasn't the cups it was your consistency that has burnt everybody else off. I wouldn't have swapped that result at Gander Green Lane for anything because what our team has achieved this year will be talked about for many year to come.

[Jeff Hamnett TSF]

Eefc , Im against groundsharing, and as you say its given EEFC no advantage but cost a load of money, which eats into any money you need to get your own ground.

Apart from maintaining senior status I assume you are against it too.

 

The club didnt need to fold when it sold its ground but once it couldnt get its own senior ground it should have moved to whatever league would have them using a pitch they could get.

 

 

[bomaya]

Originally Posted By: Green Pea

Back to topic, I read yesterday that the league had recommended to the FA that all clubs currently in the Premier Division should be awarded a Grade F. One of the very first things the criteria states is -

"It must be possible for spectators to view the match, either standing or seated, for the full length of at least 3 sides of the playing area. Where one side is designated as spectator-free, measures must be in place to ensure there is no unauthorised access."

Well I think this rule might be why RPV had to move their dugouts that I mentioned earlier.

[eefc supporter]

No, I'm not against it. If it's good enough for Inter and AC Milan why shouldn't we be able to cope with it at this level of football. Now I'd much prefer us to have our own ground again in terms of our own identity but what we have at present benefits both parties and it's far better than ceasing to exist.

[bomaya]

Originally Posted By: Weeble

eefc.... The cups have done for u...I said to Mick Sullivan last yr cups are nice but the league well its everything

Well he clearly didn't listen to you then!

[Two Ton Ted]

Originally Posted By: thespursfan

The club didnt need to fold when it sold its ground but once it couldnt get its own senior ground it should have moved to whatever league would have them using a pitch they could get.

Without getting into the full details on here, EEFC would not have moved out in the first place if we didn't know that our planned new ground was to be rejected. We were in the same situation as Horsham, basically.

There is no advantage in EEFC groundsharing, we have no income whatsover than from the 30 or so regulars who pay at the gate. The fact we still exist at all is to lauded.

If we were given the benevolence of the council the same way other clubs benefit from their local authorities, then we would be in our own ground years ago.

I can understand the FA opposing clubs leaving their grounds to groundshare solely to win promotion, and rules are in place to prevent that.

[Jeff Hamnett TSF]

its always the bloody council, never the ones that sold the ground for redevelopment without being damned sure the new ground was sorted.

 

guildford, epsom, horsham how many more?

[Weeble]

Originally Posted By: bomaya

Originally Posted By: Weeble

eefc.... The cups have done for u...I said to Mick Sullivan last yr cups are nice but the league well its everything

Well he clearly didn't listen to you then!

He did and he agreed......

[Weeble]

Originally Posted By: eefc supporter

Re your points on groundsharing I can only talk about the situation I know most well and few of your points stand up to any analysis.

Re clubhouse income Banstead get it and it increases their bar takings having twice as many games. Our sponsorship has been sought and gained from within Epsom and Ewell Borough which is where we have continue to strive to return to .Players etc well Epsom is quite close to Banstead so that will happen anyway.

So there is no advantage to groundsharing in our experience
so there's no need for rules limiting it. People will always look for some reason in others situations to explain their own . Still I expect you to keep niggling on about it on an irregular basis.

And the only other alternative is for clubs to fold which nobody wants,do they ?

Weeble it wasn't the cups it was your consistency that has burnt everybody else off. I wouldn't have swapped that result at Gander Green Lane for anything because what our team has achieved this year will be talked about for many year to come.

I am pleased for you and the CCL that you went so far in a senior comp..but still feel that it took its toll on u with so many cup games..more chance for injury suspensions and fatigue...Look forward to a beer with u when u come over ...Regards Weebs....

[Big J R]

Originally Posted By: Teflon

What have they "done wrong" BJR

Teffers and I have discussed this on the 'dog 'an bone'.

Far better than spreading more gloom, doom and despondancy on here !