Opinons

[jertzee]

Kingstonian arguably have the best of both worlds, and as far as landlords go we are probably the best landlords for any team that groundshares in this country.

 

Kingstonian do not pay any rent, whatsoever. Nil.

K's get to keep all the money they make from the bar.

When AFCW have made changes to the ground they have kept the clolour scheme in red and white.

K's do not pay any money for the upkeep of the ground (as they would if AFCW were not there).

K's now have League standard floodlights etc etc that they would not have if AFCW were not there.

There is a roof over all 4 sides of the ground now.

 

Can any side groundsharing say they have as good a deal as that?

[Chris Clapham]

I had an interesting chat with a Godalming Town official on Saturday re Badshot Lea playing there.

It is a mutual arrangement that neither club can do without at this stage and there is a good working partnership.

 

My only concern re groundsharing is how clubs can afford it?

Badshot Lea obviously have found a way as have others in the CCL.

How long any club can sustain this with minimal income from football is debatable.

 

In an ideal world, it would be great if EVERY club had their own ground. But the lethargy of some local authorities means this appears impossible.

 

What I don't like is players from clubs who groundshare criticising facilities of other clubs, and clubs in general, when they have none of their own (I think Teffers amongst others call them BTK's on here).

I do make allowances for the fact that most players have no real loyalty to clubs at this level and are not knowledgable of what it takes simply to survive as a club in these turbulent times.

Edited November 29, 2011 by Chris Clapham

[jertzee]

I do make allowances for the fact that most players have no real loyalty to clubs at this level and are not knowledgable of what it takes simply to survive as a club in these turbulent times.

 

Surely it is down to the lcubs to let them know?

If you sign for a club and they say, expenses only, or a very low payment then surely it doesn't take much to say "Thats all we can afford...."

Surely must beat "Only paying you expenses because you're [censored] but better than what we have".

[newby marvel]

I had an interesting chat with a Godalming Town official on Saturday re Badshot Lea playing there.

It is a mutual arrangement that neither club can do without at this stage and there is a good working partnership.

 

My only concern re groundsharing is how clubs can afford it?

Badshot Lea obviously have found a way as have others in the CCL.

How long any club can sustain this with minimal income from football is debatable.

 

In an ideal world, it would be great if EVERY club had their own ground. But the lethargy of some local authorities means this appears impossible.

 

What I don't like is players from clubs who groundshare criticising facilities of other clubs, and clubs in general, when they have none of their own (I think Teffers amongst others call them BTK's on here).

I do make allowances for the fact that most players have no real loyalty to clubs at this level and are not knowledgable of what it takes simply to survive as a club in these turbulent times.

WORCESTER PARK SHARED YOUR GROUND FOR A SEASON DIDNT THEY HOW DID THAT GO?

[Chris Clapham]

I do make allowances for the fact that most players have no real loyalty to clubs at this level and are not knowledgable of what it takes simply to survive as a club in these turbulent times.

 

Surely it is down to the lcubs to let them know?

If you sign for a club and they say, expenses only, or a very low payment then surely it doesn't take much to say "Thats all we can afford...."

Surely must beat "Only paying you expenses because you're [censored] but better than what we have".

 

I am confused by this Jertzee?

Our players know the financial restrictions we have re paying them or not but if you asked them how much it costs to run a club (per week say) they wouldn't have a Danny!

[Chris Clapham]

I had an interesting chat with a Godalming Town official on Saturday re Badshot Lea playing there.

It is a mutual arrangement that neither club can do without at this stage and there is a good working partnership.

 

My only concern re groundsharing is how clubs can afford it?

Badshot Lea obviously have found a way as have others in the CCL.

How long any club can sustain this with minimal income from football is debatable.

 

In an ideal world, it would be great if EVERY club had their own ground. But the lethargy of some local authorities means this appears impossible.

 

What I don't like is players from clubs who groundshare criticising facilities of other clubs, and clubs in general, when they have none of their own (I think Teffers amongst others call them BTK's on here).

I do make allowances for the fact that most players have no real loyalty to clubs at this level and are not knowledgable of what it takes simply to survive as a club in these turbulent times.

WORCESTER PARK SHARED YOUR GROUND FOR A SEASON DIDNT THEY HOW DID THAT GO?

 

Not sure I was at CWUFC then? What season? I know they have played some end of season games at Wibbandune when the cricket has kicked in at Green Lane. Think they went OK!

[bomaya]

I'm sure we had this debate before but anyway, TSF, what if MV Council had kicked Dorking out of Meadowbank? Would you have been happy if your club had folded rather than try and groundshare somewhere else?

 

PS. Mole Valley lost River Lane as they were sticthed up by Leatherhead.

Edited November 29, 2011 by bomaya

[Jeff Hamnett TSF]

i think its been covered, but imo if MVDC had kicked DFC LTD out of meadowbank and they groundshared outside Dorking, they woudnt be Dorking FC.

 

I also feel ( Im in a minority) that had MVDC Kicked the club off then another club would have moved in as Dorking (town?) FC.

 

 

That might have been Dorking Wanderers , it may have been a new club emerging from one of the youth setups.

 

 

A football club is more than just a name or a company or a team.

 

 

I would have looked on any new club playing at Meadowbank called Dorking anything, being watched by Dorking people, with local players , sponsors etc etc as my Dorking.

 

A Dorking FC wearing green and white hoops and a cockerel on the shirt playing "home" games at say South Park would have had no interest to me.

 

Regarding another point re income, I dont know the figures but if Bookham can afford it and their own ground then its not bundles. maybe playing reserve fixtures woud get near that figure with all the playing benefits..

 

Who knows if Bookham will continue if they stay in coco 1, maybe they will drop to the elite league and play at Bookham.

[bomaya]

Do you have to pay rent on the Christie Rec or do they own it?

[Jeff Hamnett TSF]

owned by mole valley dc I believe!

[Mewcenary]

I remember officiating at Bookham v Dorking and the referee turned up at Bookham, instead of the groundshare at Dorking. Fun times :-)

[bomaya]

So just to close this hypothetical circle, if Dorking had been kicked out and Mole Valley SCR had moved into Meadowbank playing in front of Dorking people but not wearing green and white, would you have supported them?

[Gsy_Spurs]

What are the typical financial arrangements for players in CCL1 and Premier? Pay subs to join the club? Pay nothing? Or have expenses covered? If so what does that typically include? Have a set amount per game paid? I'm very curious.

[bomaya]

There's not going to be a set answer to that GS, you will have some clubs paying absolutely nothing and charging players subs (for the kit/officials etc) each month to play. On the other end of the scale some clubs (mainly in the Prem) will be paying players to play over and above expenses. And IME usually you offer players a fee per week, so one game, two games, or even no games, they get a set amount and it is paid monthly. Sometimes at this level, clubs will offer bonuses either instead of wages or on top. For instance, earlier this season I know Horley were paying out a win bonus rather than a wage and this was working a little too well! Some strikers might be on a goal bonus, think what Ross Allen could be earning even only playing for a different Step 6 side.

[Non League Nigel]

It varies GSY

 

A lot of clubs in both divisions pay and pay well. There are a few instances where the budget is provided by the manager rather than the club. Some clubs are lucky to have rich chairman on the other hand whilst some do well over the bar

At our club we dont pay anyone- The first team dont have to pay but the reserves do pay £3 a game. our next aim is to have enough income so we dont have to charge reserve players next season. All players have to pay for their own tracksuit and polo tops.

Again there are some lucky clubs that can afford to hand out equipment for free.

[Jeff Hamnett TSF]

So just to close this hypothetical circle, if Dorking had been kicked out and Mole Valley SCR had moved into Meadowbank playing in front of Dorking people but not wearing green and white, would you have supported them?

 

hypothetical it is, but interesting! ( to me anyway...)

 

Had Mole Valley scr been granted a lease , then my understanding was that they would have had to be a committee run club, with local prominent people forming it.

 

They would probably also have had to adopted the name Dorking into their already encyclopaedic moniker.

 

It is likely that some Dorking players would have been in the side.

 

If all that happened then they wouldnt be MVSCR any more and would morph into Dorking 2011 fairly quickly.

 

So yes I would support that club. Wearing green and white stripes or not, which is a fairly new kit anyway.

 

its all happened before. Guildford City FC played there in the southern league and I watched them, became guildford and dorking united then back to dorking. .

 

so if any new setup started they could probably claim to have been formed in 1802 or whatever as much as the current set up.

 

However if Mole Valley had decided that Mole Valley Fc was acceptable then it would take some time but again yes I think I would support them.

 

reality is our current club setup won the court case, is Dorking Football club, plays at Meadowbank and I support them.

[CW1975]

It varies GSY

 

A lot of clubs in both divisions pay and pay well. There are a few instances where the budget is provided by the manager rather than the club. Some clubs are lucky to have rich chairman on the other hand whilst some do well over the bar

At our club we dont pay anyone- The first team dont have to pay but the reserves do pay £3 a game. our next aim is to have enough income so we dont have to charge reserve players next season. All players have to pay for their own tracksuit and polo tops.

Again there are some lucky clubs that can afford to hand out equipment for free.

 

We are the same this season NLN. Players paid subs last season and many seasons before as far as I am aware.

[Big J R]

I remember officiating at Bookham v Dorking and the referee turned up at Bookham, instead of the groundshare at Dorking. Fun times :-)

 

 

We're still gigglin' over that one, Mewee !

[Big J R]

Nice to see DFC creeping into the equation again. (All your fault GD !)

 

HOWEVER,,,, This thread is about OPINIONS.

 

Now when I was a lad, many seasons ago, we used to have this luvvly French bloke with a black and white striped jumper and a berry on his head, riding a bike.

 

He used to come round and deliver however many opinions you wanted, right to your door !

 

 

Pardon - (Excuse me 'Er Indoors is interupting !!)

 

OH SORRY FOLKS, they were ONIONS !

 

Silly me !

Edited November 29, 2011 by Big J R

[NICE GUY]

Groundsharing seems to work quite nicely in Italy and with some big clubs to boot. If a purpose built ground was built and shared by 2 clubs then what is so wrong with that? We played Epsom & Ewell at the weekend and they have been effectively homeless for 17 years which is a dreadful state of affairs. But I know talking to their Chairman on Saturday that they are doing what they can to move back. If a groundshare keeps a football club alive rather than disappear altogether then that has to be a good thing.

 

 

So are we saying that since selling off their land 17 years ago, they have all that money and haven't got their own new ground, so where's all the money gone, in groundsharing ? One would think now that the money they got for their ground will have been used to the extent that they cannot afford to get a new ground now,so they are now in limbo and forever be a groundsharer ?

 

If the money for their ground was invested well, then that maybe a different story......but 17 years !!!!.