The demise of Sandhurst Town

[pauls]

sandhurst had loads of people behind the scene that had been there for years and a few on here will know them well,but one by one they all left and guess who was the reason??!!

[Stanley Wainwright]

Good post GF as well as your ideas I also think some clubs (on the football side of things ) are being run by people who are way way out of their comfort zone and get into a no win situation,they try to change things that a lot of hard working people have put together and end up losing the real people of their clubs,as soon as this starts to happen then they will lose the respect that has been built up over many years by a lot of loyal members,once this happens the club (on the football side of things )can never recover and they slide down the leagues and in some cases completely dissapear.

The football side of things and the actual running of a football club are one in the same thing. The main constraint on how strong a team is at the end of the day is the amount of money available to it. There are exceptions to this of course with the likes of Guernsey and South Park.

There are many clubs where a chairman has thrown money at a team to get success and sometimes that is achieved but they then usually disappear leaving the next chairman/chairmen with the debt to sort out. I know of quite a few clubs that are trying to sort out the debt of a free spending chairman which occurred more than a decade ago.

Clubs are now asking permission to drop down from the leagues that they are playing in and this has to be because they can no longer afford to play at that level. Example of teams dropping down last year were Winchester and Warlingham.

Generally, the majority of clubs disappear because of their debts. This is a generalisation of what I think and as I don’t know the history of Sandhurst I am not saying that this is their case.

[duncs]

You've got just about everything wrong mate,for a start most of the clubs at this level struggle because of what the officials charge,Winchester is a team i know nothing about but they were in a higher league with loads of travelling and better players who were semi pro,why did Warlingham bow out ?

[Stanley Wainwright]

You've got just about everything wrong mate,for a start most of the clubs at this level struggle because of what the officials charge,Winchester is a team i know nothing about but they were in a higher league with loads of travelling and better players who were semi pro,why did Warlingham bow out ?

That's right they do struggle to pay the officials but I bet most clubs have a bigger budget for their team then what they pay the officials. I assume that Warlingham dropped because they could not afford to pay for the ground share that they needed to play at a higher level.

[duncs]

there are only a handful of teams with a budget some even pay to play,was it the chairmans idea to groundshare or the clubs if it was the chairmans solely i would be surprised,i will however admit to knowing 1 club in this league who are well in the red but are still paying their players,now that is ridiculous.

[Terrence Collina]

Thatcham Town have resigned from the Southern League because they have admitted they cannot afford to stay there.  Apparantely they tried to do it last year as well.  Suspect they will either go back to the Wessex or into the Hellenic

[pearcey no.1]

Thatcham has a great set up,thats a shame.

 

Maybe its time for smaller and more localised leagues,hopefully reducing costs to clubs and players.

 

To get back on topic,10 yrs ago when I 1st joined this level of football cobham and Sandhurst were decwnt clubs with high aspirations,dorking were a lge above.now dorking are homeless,cobham are struggling and so is sandhurst,clubs at this level should loom at them and make sure they don't follow suit.spelthorne is a great example as is knaphil of a local club progressing nicely with set ups.there are lessons to be learnt from from both sets of clubs good and bad.

[pauls]

agre with what you say pearcey,the clubs like knaphill spellthorne eversley another progressive club  have committes but the dorkings cobham sandhurst have a chairmain that wants to do it all and in sandhursts case no committee at all and thats where the problem lies,football is getting harder and harder nice set ups like thatcham get very small gates loads of travelling and the days of people having a few drinks in the bar thus creating revenue have gone,so lots of clubs will struggle to survive

[Bailer]

I have been involved with both Westfield and Knaphill recently and both have chairman that have their critics (mainly people from other clubs), but both are passionate about their clubs and without them they wouldn’t be where they are. I know both committees very well and without them the Chairmen wouldn’t have a chance. I get the feeling that both clubs are considered lucky to have the facilities that they have, but both clubs have had to fight tooth and nail to get to where they are.

 

I haven’t been at a club where a one person has tried to do it all, but in my opinion a club can only be as good as their Chairman, and a Chairman only as good as the people that supports them! If Sandhurst have got to a point where everyone behind the scenes is leaving, then it cannot be a good thing and is only likely to go one way!

 

I have been involved at a club as a player and a manager, and the amount of time that takes up can be mammoth, but at least I get to enjoy the involvement of match days. The people who volunteer as a Chairman, part of the committee and helping out at clubs, generally do it for the love of the club and a thank you at the end of season presentation, some don’t even get to watch the football. To be honest, it’s not something that I would consider at this point as I have other aspirations, but do admire those that do.

 

Going back to Sandhurst, I hope they do manage to get things back on track as it’s always been a decent place to go and play. I don’t think that the CCL can afford to lose too many more sides. With the ground regs in place it is becoming harder and harder for clubs to progress through the leagues, so the only result will be going back to one CCL league as there was before. I am not sure anyone is keen to see that happen!?

[Closey92]

If you was going to sack Salv, it should of been done last year when things were not going as planned, signing over 100 players for first and reserve teams didn't help, loaning players that didn't want to be there didn't help and the chairmans relationship with the manager and all involved didn't help! The decision to sack him was not down to results, it was down to a falling out between Salv and Tony. The reason for Sandhurst's demise is down to not having a stable relationship between chairman/manager and manager/players. There was a lack of respect all round. In my opinion.

[Terrence Collina]

Sandhurst gave me my CCL debut 16 years ago and it is not nice to see them where they are now and I can't see them coming back to the prem any time soon and that opinion is not based on what the chairman has/hasn't done, but that as already pointed out. there is no social scene anymore.  Gone are the days where players will stay forever drinking as no-one is local anymore and some places like Sandhurst don't have the clubhouse to rent out for events.  The amount of football on the TV now keeps people at home and most players (not all!) are premadonnas who won't play for the love of the game, but for a couple of quid in a brown envelope only to bugger off once a game is finished.  It is also harder to find sponsors to support the increasing costs of running a team at any level.  In reality what do sponsors get from putting money into any form of sponsorship?  I am certainly not going to take an EE phone contract out just because they sponsor Wembley Stadium.

[thevoiceofreason]

Maybe a touch of realism might help in some quarters. If you are only going to make a pittance at the gate, no sugar daddy or alternative source of income, why would you be paying players to play?

 

For every story of clubs who have had a meteoric rise, there are as many where they have come crashing down to earth with a bump afterwards. Proving you have a team capable of playing at a higher level is decided by league tables. Proving you have the stability, infrastructure and finance to do so is entirely different. The clamour for multiple promotions from feeder leagues is fine, but if only some or none of the candidates can demonstrate to the higher league they are going to bring added value to it, rather than the opposite, then why should they compromise on standards?

Edited April 20, 2014 by thevoiceofreason

[duncs]

Maybe a touch of realism might help in some quarters. If you are only going to make a pittance at the gate, no sugar daddy or alternative source of income, why would you be paying players to play?

 

For every story of clubs who have had a meteoric rise, there are as many where they have come crashing down to earth with a bump afterwards. Proving you have a team capable of playing at a higher level is decided by league tables. Proving you have the stability, infrastructure and finance to do so is entirely different. The clamour for multiple promotions from feeder leagues is fine, but if only some or none of the candidates can demonstrate to the higher league they are going to bring added value to it, rather than the opposite, then why should they compromise on standards?

 

Maybe a touch of realism might help in some quarters. If you are only going to make a pittance at the gate, no sugar daddy or alternative source of income, why would you be paying players to play?

 

For every story of clubs who have had a meteoric rise, there are as many where they have come crashing down to earth with a bump afterwards. Proving you have a team capable of playing at a higher level is decided by league tables. Proving you have the stability, infrastructure and finance to do so is entirely different. The clamour for multiple promotions from feeder leagues is fine, but if only some or none of the candidates can demonstrate to the higher league they are going to bring added value to it, rather than the opposite, then why should they compromise on standards?

You are right VOR but some clubs are run by people who have no interest or history at that club,so to them it is not as important as the guys who have the club in their blood,some narrow minded people say  the classic get out line of move on and let it go when it really is not that easy,as for money and sugar daddies i hope that some of these clubs that have won nothing take a look at the team that won this league clubs at this level cannot afford to be hung out to dry any longer,fact.

[ellers]

It seems to be that over the last few years clubs in Division One have been paying players, some have reportedly been paying hundreds a week, which to me seems ridiculous, may be when Spencer was at Chertsey in the Prem other clubs thought that they had to try and keep up with the Jonesy's, what people fail to realise is that you have to build a club that is self sufficient and not reliant on a sugar daddy, as that is suicidal, if a sugar Daddy does come a long then get him to spend money on the club facilities and not the players, then you will progress naturally on the pitch.

 

Combined Counties football is not Semi Pro IMO, however some clubs are run very well indeed, Dave Freeman and his committee at Knaphill FC have built a fantastic club, it really is as professionally run as possible and they should be applauded for it, I was at Spelthorne on Saturday and they seem very well organised as well.

 

Next season at Staines Lammas we hope to have a dedicated and active committee in place, Steve Honey has decided to come back to the club which is brilliant news and my aim is to bring back as many die hard Lammas people as possible, Jason Hall, Pete Walsh, Pete Crowder are three others who are coming back to the club which is also great news.

 

A dedicated committee is extremely important and Decisions should be collective and not by one individual, I hope Sandhurst will be ok and I am sure that they will be, it's a great place to go and watch football and they should be able to attract local players easily enough.

[Smudge]

Phil,good post but alas there is one fault,you need your own ground first of all.If you look at the Clubs that have progressed in CCL over the past few seasons.

 

1.None groundshare

2.Have a decent social side to the Club

3.Have decent junior set ups

4.Have an eye for a buck i.e. Getting Football Grant Funding to improve facilities.

 

Many long standing CCL Clubs have not improved anything ,some pitches are still poor,in fact Eversley and California,Knaphill,Spelthorne Sports,Westfield,Bedfont Sports,Hanworth Villa,South Park,put many to shame.Yet bar Westfield none of the others,were CCL Clubs 6 years  ago.

[@BedfontFeltham]

This season has been the worst for "big time" players at step 6. I personally have taken abuse from a number of players that cannot handle rejection, being left on the bench or out the squad. Players use twitter as a way to abuse us volunteers and they have no clue about wot goes into running a club. the Players turning up 45mins late for training and games. Most recently we dropped a player to the bench in the cup final v Lammas. Said player got dressed the minute we named the team, told anyone who was willing to listen that we were all Kent's apart from JB and Garry Hedges ( prob because they would of given him a slap) then went and sat in the stands and continued to tell everyone that he was gonna punch me all over the gaff after the game and that he is gonna go mad when Lammas score. All this while my friend who I invited down from MK Dons (scout) was sitting behind him and while he was wearing our club track suit.

 

Why am I telling you all this?? Simply it's not the demise of sandhurst town put the actual demise of nonleague football as we know it.

 

Recently I have seen so much abuse/bullying on social network sites that it has made me question:- is it really worth all the grief??

 

Regards Daniel.

[Stanley Wainwright]

there are only a handful of teams with a budget some even pay to play,was it the chairmans idea to groundshare or the clubs if it was the chairmans solely i would be surprised,i will however admit to knowing 1 club in this league who are well in the red but are still paying their players,now that is ridiculous.

I have always known a handful to be no more than five so you are wrong there (many more). I don’t know who at Warlingham made the decision, all I know is they used the ground share to get to a higher level. You must know a little of Winchester’s history. Steve Beeks joined as manager straight from Cove about a month into the season after buying the CCL title the previous season during the golden age of buying/ attempting to buy the title. One successful team from this era, Wallingford, dropped like a stone when they lost their money man. I’m not surprised there is a club in debt and paying their players especially if they have had some success in the past. Sometimes the committees feel pressurised to chase former glory from the older members/former players at the club but all this does is get the club into further trouble. The first thing any club in debt should do is to get a good chairman and pay off the debt as soon as possible because burying your head in the sand will only lead to the demise of the club.

[duncs]

I have always known a handful to be no more than five so you are wrong there (many more). I don’t know who at Warlingham made the decision, all I know is they used the ground share to get to a higher level. You must know a little of Winchester’s history. Steve Beeks joined as manager straight from Cove about a month into the season after buying the CCL title the previous season during the golden age of buying/ attempting to buy the title. One successful team from this era, Wallingford, dropped like a stone when they lost their money man. I’m not surprised there is a club in debt and paying their players especially if they have had some success in the past. Sometimes the committees feel pressurised to chase former glory from the older members/former players at the club but all this does is get the club into further trouble. The first thing any club in debt should do is to get a good chairman and pay off the debt as soon as possible because burying your head in the sand will only lead to the demise of the club.

you are mistaking the expenses for petrol that players have to sign for with a budget that you have to pay tax on the 2 things are completely different,there are not to many people who would be a chairman of a non league club to pump their money into it, what planet are you on ?

[Stanley Wainwright]

you are mistaking the expenses for petrol that players have to sign for with a budget that you have to pay tax on the 2 things are completely different,there are not to many people who would be a chairman of a non league club to pump their money into it, what planet are you on ?

No I'm not. If the petrol money is done properly it does not equate to much because firstly it must be a realistic value per mile. Secondly it is travelling from the home club's ground to the away club's ground only. Any other petrol money, for instance travelling to home ground or to training ground is considered as a wage. Many clubs are lucky that the taxman does not visit them because they would be in for a real shock. Did I say that the chairman would put money into the club. You do get some that will put some money in but others will not as they will rely on a good business sense that will cut out wastefulness and promote the club to get additional revenue. Don't get the last bit of your post. At the moment I'm on planet Earth, what planet are you on?

[duncs]

you lost me there SW all the clubs i been involved with tell the players how much they will get for travelling even if they only travel a couple of miles, it is of course a way of paying but if signed for is allowed by the tax man as expenses,can you tell me any names of chairmen who put money in to their club ?