Ground Grading/Improvements

[duncs]

WTF are you on Fat Fecker,are you one of the idiots who can't discuss a thread without being rude,i'll ask again and see this time if someone can come up with a valid reason for groundsharing, because so far its just been a load of bullsh1t and i for one am not convinced in any way shape or form

[Weeble]

Originally Posted By: duncs

WTF are you on Fat Fecker,are you one of the idiots who can't discuss a thread without being rude,i'll ask again and see this time if someone can come up with a valid reason for groundsharing, because so far its just been a load of bullsh1t and i for one am not convinced in any way shape or form

Ur better than that m8...1 valid reason is that sometimes the financial gain ..for the holding club...can help on the budget front alar Windsor...They have been able to up their budget this year and it has done them no harm and their pitch and facilities have not done us much harm either....

[eefc supporter]

Blimey, I have tried but I'll now withdraw from the fray on this one . If weeble wants to argue this one with you up to lay by level that's his look out but you're obviously not easily moved by other peoples thoughts .

 

Just a word on giving it out and taking it though . I originally joined in because of words like "parasite" and "taking the p1ss" being used about our club. If my mild sarcasm re timewasting upset you ,I'm sorry and you're right I'm not the slimmest.

[Fat Boy]

I'm on alot less than you are clearly. There have been several valid reasons for ground sharing on this thread but you have chosen to ignore them.

 

Whether your convinced or not matters not one jot. The FA rules are there, at this level and above. Luckily some people can think outside the box, rather than condemning 20 or so clubs in the South alone to the rubbish bin.

[Weeble]

Im not the slimmest either....

[Jeff Hamnett TSF]

reasons for groundsharing?

 

so the tenant club can play at a higher level than would otherwise be the case.

 

so the landlord club can benefit financially.

 

why is that wrong?

 

because the landlord club can decide which potential tenant clubs can take advantage of this and which cant.

 

and the tenant club is indebted to the landlord club morally financially and any other way you want.

 

 

[Two Ton Ted]

Originally Posted By: thespursfan

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?

Well, in our case the council wouldn't allow further development at the ground, so we source another site and the council say fine go ahead, then the council refuse a football ground to be built on that site. It's now a private sports club.

Then we find another site and get outline planning permission but the council allow the owners (the government, natch) to sell to another private sports club at a vastly inflated price with exactly the same plans apart from a football not being there.

It is only recently the council have changed their attitudes to football, with grateful thanks to the local mp, that we now have a large sniff of finally building a home back in the borough.

If only we played at a council owned facility with a peppercorn rate.

[Two Ton Ted]

Originally Posted By: duncs

yes but eefc it is not a good argument that you want to keep your old team going what about the teams that have thier own grounds and want to get thier teams going,weebs remind me again why BGFC don't use thier own pitch and also eefc isn't ground sharing for 16 years taking the p1ss.

If it involves keeping a club alive with a proud history, no, bo11ocks, in fact. Ask AFC Wimbledon, Corinthian-Casuals Enfields, Hendon etc.

Yes, that's a bite.

[Big J R]

Originally Posted By: thespursfan

reasons for groundsharing?

so the tenant club can play at a higher level than would otherwise be the case.

so the landlord club can benefit financially.

why is that wrong?

because the landlord club can decide which potential tenant clubs can take advantage of this and which cant.

and the tenant club is indebted to the landlord club morally financially and any other way you want.

Surely, that depends on the terms of the ground share agreement, Spursey.

There is one hell of a difference of what is being charged and what exactly is included in the agreement for that charge by the host-clubs these days.

No, I'm not going into specifics. No Names - No Pack Drill.

Nuff Said ?

[Jeff Hamnett TSF]

Epsom could have built two or three grounds with the rent they have paid over 16 years EEFC said.

 

if any landlord clubs aren't benefitting financially from letting their ground out they would be daft.

 

 

 

[Big J R]

My point exactly.

[bomaya]

Originally Posted By: 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......

Lots of people told Mick last season to ignore the cups and stick to the league. But he carried on trying to win all the senior competitions that we were able to and only failed with the FA Vase. He won the league, the league cup and the surrey senior cup and you don't do that by thinking the cups will ruin any league hopes.

[Weeble]

No what I meant was cups are nice to have but the standing of a club can only be heigtened by promotion....

[valeient]

The reason that RPV had to move thier dugouts was because they blocked the view of people sitting in the stand. I now wonder if Horley will be made to move theirs as they have the same problem. Also, RPV had to install hand towel dispensers next to every wash basin. How many other clubs have had to do this. One rule for the poor another for the wealthy who have to climb over barriers to reach the pitch.

[Big J R]

Originally Posted By: valeient

The reason that RPV had to move thier dugouts was because they blocked the view of people sitting in the stand. I now wonder if Horley will be made to move theirs as they have the same problem.

Not exactly valieint. Maybe Horleys's dugouts just slightly 'cover' the last line of seats with the dugouts, but have you looked at thier overall facilities ??

[bomaya]

Originally Posted By: Weeble

No what I meant was cups are nice to have but the standing of a club can only be heigtened by promotion....

Gotcha. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

[Brooks]

Originally Posted By: Alb Ee's

yes but eefc it is not a good argument that you want to keep your old team going what about the teams that have thier own grounds and want to get thier teams going,weebs remind me again why BGFC don't use thier own pitch and also eefc isn't ground sharing for 16 years taking the p1ss.

If it involves keeping a club alive with a proud history, no, bo11ocks, in fact. Ask AFC Wimbledon, Corinthian-Casuals Enfields, Hendon etc.


What proud history have AFC Wimbledon got they are a new club.

[duncs]

still no valid replys I fel sorry for Hartley and Cobham at least they have thier own grounds,I don't know anyone at Cobham but I know a lot of people at Hartley and I know how bloody hard they have worked to get thier ground up to CCL premier standard its cost that club committee a lot of money and effort to get them where they are

[Green Pea]

[duncs]

what am I working with GP a load of kids? give me a decent reply and lets get on with it