Have the F.A.?

[Smudge]

In their long and industrious History,ever returned an Appeal Fee to a Club besides Guildford City.And if they have,what sparks this generosity,are they afraid to say we Mucked Up,we are sorry we got it wrong,because through personal experience,the word SORRY is not in any Dictionary they use.

[Farnborough fc manager]

They gave us the appeal fee back two years ago re the Stuart Bamford affair so it is not that uncommon

[Smudge]

They gave us the appeal fee back two years ago re the Stuart Bamford affair so it is not that uncommon

 

 

I presume you lost the Appeal?

[Farnborough fc manager]

We lost in name but won our appeal fee, costs and there was no fine or penalty-we therefore won in all but name

[Smudge]

Sounds about right.They must always be shown to be correct even when they are wrong.

[Krooner]

Did they write the letter on a beer mat CT

[Tucks1]

I hear that its not all dead and buried yet in a big way. As i understand another club gained promotion after their works were completed after the 31st march. Guildford I suspect will take this further.

[Tucks1]

Just to add. I have it on good authority that Guildford have a solid case and have now concrete evidence that several clubs works were completed after the deadline of March 31st. These clubs have now been granted promotion . Guildford's promotion appeal was turned down due to the fact their work on a turnstile was not complete by the 31st March but was completed on April 4th. I hear that the evidence they have is very strong and is compelling in their favour.......WATCH THIS SPACE!!

Edited May 9, 2011 by Tucks1

[SurreysFinest]

Where does this leave Chertsey, can't really plan for next season fully till they know. Also CT any comment on the rumour regarding your whole squad leaving?

[VPCTFC]

Just to add. I have it on good authority that Guildford have a solid case and have now concrete evidence that several clubs works were completed after the deadline of March 31st. These clubs have now been granted promotion . Guildford's promotion appeal was turned down due to the fact their work on a turnstile was not complete by the 31st March but was completed on April 4th. I hear that the evidence they have is very strong and is compelling in their favour.......WATCH THIS SPACE!!

 

Interesting.

I've had a little look around to see what I can find.

 

Coalville Town - passed the grading in 2009 or earlier.

Crawley Down - passed this year. Announced on March 31st.

Farsley - playing in the Conference North two seasons ago so an A or B graded ground.

Hythe Town - passed the grading in 2008.

Leiston - grading confirmed on March 31st this year.

New Mills - passed the grading in 2009 or earlier.

Poole Town - not visited until April 5th but the last job that was needed as part of the grading was completed on March 31st according to their forum (they have the photos to prove it!). Work after that was cosmetic rather than grading related.

St. Neots already had the grading - confirmed in January.

Chalfont St. Peter - passed the grading in 2009 or earlier.

Enfield - were groundsharing with Enfield Town who are in Ryman League already.

 

So I'd say the only question mark is over Poole.

Poole were denied the grading last year by the FA's interpretation of one word. The fence around the ground must be permanent, Poole's wasn't - it was put in place for each game and then taken down again afterwards or something. They passed on everything else. This year they have put a permanent fence up even though they'll be moving to a new ground in two years.

 

How accurate all this info is I don't know. I got it from a few different websites. I think gradings last for three seasons so some of these teams may have had to be visited again this year but, seeing as the gradings are a bit less stringent now than three years ago, I can't see a club passing then failing now.

Edited May 9, 2011 by VPCTFC

[Tucks1]

I think VP it may go a bit further than teams who have applied for promotion. Over 50 teams had required ground gradings not for just step 4 but across the board. From what i understand a vast amount of there teams did not have their ground grading passed until way after the 31st march. With works still being carried out on there grounds when they got the nod. My feeling is that Guildford must have something to go on.

[VPCTFC]

Fair point Tucks, I didn't think about other levels.

There's always something stupid going on with ground gradings at some level somewhere in the country.

The stupidest this season is Eastwood Town being denied a place in the Conference North play-offs because they have their 500 seats in three stands instead of two. This rule only comes into play for teams in the play-offs or those in the automatic promotion spots - the other teams in the league don't have to have it.

Hampton & Richmond managed to wangle their way into the play-offs a couple of seasons ago despite, in some people's opinions, not having the correct seating arrangements. It's not what you know, it's who you know.

It's a mess every season and it's a mess created by the FA as they can't word their documents properly. They leave too much open to interpretation.

[Krooner]

Of course they do VP so that they can explain away their anomolies. Bear in mind we have had a team promotoed from the CCL who didnt even officially apply.

[Smudge]

The F.A. are losing their grip on what has long been a standing dish,to any footie fan.The F.A. Cup I see is this Saturday,used to be the only game that anyone could watch,MAGICAL.This weekend there are Premier games,Play Offs,on the same day,A disgrace,what is this Country coming too,about time us supporters told them so.