Football League AGM rule change on relocation

[JimGNFC]

Surprised no-one else picked up on this article on the site below:

 

http://gillingham.rivals.net

 

Football League AGM rule change on relocation

 

By Alan Liptrott

Date: 10/6/2005

 

Football League chairmen voted at their AGM in Chester to change the rules in an effort to stop another Franchise FC farce. The rule relating to Clubs moving their ground has been strengthened to include a list of criteria that the League's Board must be satisfied with before it would grant consent

 

The new rule states that the Board must be satisfied that the granting of permission:

 

a) Would be consistent with the objects of The League as set out in the Memorandum of Association

 

Would be appropriate having in mind the relationship (if any) between the locality with which by its name or otherwise the applicant Club is traditionally associated and that in which such Club proposes to establish its ground

 

c) Would not adversely affect such Club's Officials, players, supporters, shareholders, sponsors and others having an interest in its activities

 

d) Would not have an adverse effect on visiting Clubs;

 

e) Would not adversely affect Clubs having their registered ground in the immediate vicinity of the proposed location

 

f) Would enhance the reputation of The League and promote the game of association football generally

 

Gills moving to Ebbsfleet, would surely be at odds to c) and more importantly e) i.e. GNFC

 

The Reporter also seems to be questioning if Gillinghams plans for a move to the borough are on hold? (Page 4)

 

Relegation is rumoured to have cost them £700,000 .

[Hempstead Gaz]

Gills fail on each point. If true, they will not be allowed to move.

Brilliant news.

[American FLEET FAN No1]

The FA are an unfathomable organisation, the Fleet are a small club..........Don't expect any favours from the FA!

[Hempstead Gaz]

I wonder if this has come about to prevent Man Utd relocating to somewhere more "exotic" - such as London, Newcastle or Gillingham.

[Slartibartfast]

If Scally ever had any genuine plans to relocate outside of Gillingham they were scuppered long ago when the government was forced to back down on the super-casino bill. No Stanley Leisure means no stadium.

Most Gillingham fans will tell you that Scally only ever used the threat of a move to try and get his local council to support a new ground in Gillingham.

[Hempstead Gaz]

I wonder what the Scally's reaction would be if a premiership club put in plans to relocate to the Medway towns. It would make ggod sense - large untapped population, good transport infrastructure and presently devoid of a club worth supporting. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

[Bernard]

Quote:

AmericanFLEETFANNo1 said:
The FA are an unfathomable organisation, the Fleet are a small club..........Don't expect any favours from the FA!

For once, I agree with AFF. I doubt the FA will take too much consideration as regards the effects upon GNFC and even less the effects upon Dartford. If Gillingham's move gains significant ground, I feel only a protest on behalf of our fans would do much to swing the FA's decision, sadly.

[jc]

Quote:

Bernard said: I doubt the FA will take too much consideration as regards the effects upon GNFC and even less the effects upon Dartford. If Gillingham's move gains significant ground, I feel only a protest on behalf of our fans would do much to swing the FA's decision, sadly.

But even then, they still fail on point - so that's something to cling on to.

Quote:

JimGNFC said:The Reporter also seems to be questioning if Gillinghams plans for a move to the borough are on hold? (Page 4)

To be fair, that article told us nothing new really - it was a rather obvious one, based entirely on the news that they had been relegated.