What are the standards

[BOROMAN]

FC Risden did not make it....... bad luck boys keep trying.

 

Southend Manor have no stands or cover???

 

Clapton is probably in a mess

Hullbridge might as well have no cover (no offence intended Enrico)

Yet White Ensign's ground (which has a couple of small little covered stands) and is quite neat is not up to standard I am told.

 

The whole qualifiction of grounds seems a complete mess........ or am I missing something?

[Brewerytown]

I think the Essex standards are far stricter than other counties. On our F.A. Cup and vase trips we have come across grounds that would have no chance of getting a qualification in Essex

[BensonNum2]

We have applied to go essex senior but we were rejected and i dont really know why mate

[Krooner]

Quote:

Brewerytown said:
I think the Essex standards are far stricter than other counties. On our F.A. Cup and vase trips we have come across grounds that would have no chance of getting a qualification in Essex

Not higher than the CCL mate. A team with a 100 seater stand have been relegated because their ground isnt good enough. 2 Million they spent on it.

[TB&G]

Quote:

Krooner said:

Quote:

Brewerytown said:
I think the Essex standards are far stricter than other counties. On our F.A. Cup and vase trips we have come across grounds that would have no chance of getting a qualification in Essex

Not higher than the CCL mate. A team with a 100 seater stand have been relegated because their ground isnt good enough. 2 Million they spent on it.

I'm not normally given to swearing but I think that the ground grading criteria below conference P/N/S levels is a LOAD OF ABSOLUTE CRAP and a bl**dy disgrace.

And I would be quite happy to stand up in front of Barry Appleby and whoever at the FA and tell them this to their faces and why I think it is so. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/argue.gif" alt="" />

Doesn't it ever occur to them that many of the clubs at Step 4 and below have no ambition to go any higher and, even if they do, they do not have the financial backing or income to survive.

[Krooner]

It is a tough one TBG. I agree in principle but I do think there has to be some sort of criteria. I agree the criteria is a little too tough at the moment but the days of fighting you way around a pitch in mud should be gone.

[BensonNum2]

The pitch has nothing to do with it if it did southend manor would have been chucked out of the senior league ages ago

[TB&G]

Couldn't agree more with what you say about mud but surely the covered and seating requirements are totally unecessary. As most clubs (metaphorically) are of the 'one man and his dog' variety all they need to supply is fencing all around the perimeter and hard standing all round a roped off pitch, one turnstyle and adequate changing facilities plus ( if they can afford and want it) a licensed club premises.

[Krooner]

Quote:

Trueblueandgold said:
Couldn't agree more with what you say about mud but surely the covered and seating requirements are totally unecessary. As most clubs (metaphorically) are of the 'one man and his dog' variety all they need to supply is fencing all around the perimeter and hard standing all round a roped off pitch, one turnstyle and adequate changing facilities plus ( if they can afford and want it) a licensed club premises.

I think that is fair enough but I would have say you should have to have a small stand (50) and a small piece of covered terracing. There is always a chance of getting a big club. When AFC Wimbledon came into the CCL and were in it for 2 years some clubs couldnt cope and had to play their games as neutral venues. If you are a senior club you should be able to host whoever you have and I think this is the basis of ground criteria. I

[coach et 64]

Quote:

BOROMAN said:
FC Risden did not make it....... bad luck boys keep trying.

Southend Manor have no stands or cover???

Clapton is probably in a mess
Hullbridge might as well have no cover (no offence intended Enrico)
Yet White Ensign's ground (which has a couple of small little covered stands) and is quite neat is not up to standard I am told.

The whole qualifiction of grounds seems a complete mess........ or am I missing something?

it doesn't belong to white ensign.it's the headquarter of the southend borough combination and they didn't allow them to fence it around.Hullbridge will have a new 180 seats stand in place by next summer and the fence around. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

[PORTENCROSS]

Quote:

BOROMAN said:
FC Risden did not make it....... bad luck boys keep trying.

Southend Manor have no stands or cover???

Clapton is probably in a mess
Hullbridge might as well have no cover (no offence intended Enrico)
Yet White Ensign's ground (which has a couple of small little covered stands) and is quite neat is not up to standard I am told.

The whole qualifiction of grounds seems a complete mess........ or am I missing something?

If you click onto the undernoted web-site, you will be able to read exactly what all our clubs will require in terms of membership of our Premier Division " F " grade. This criteria MUST be in place by season 2007/2008. All those clubs mentioned in Forum postings have been in constant touch with us and stands, covers and essential maintenance are either or are about to be underway before the season starts on 12th August. Obviously it will help tremendously to have a first division at Step 6 ( Olympian League is Step 7 ) and talks are on-going with the FA to secure that dream !


http://www.thefa.com/NR/rdonlyres/85E0D795-FBBD-4C75-A89A-4A23D032D44E/90799/GradeFJune06.pdf

If you have a problem with the above - the Grading sheet is on the F A site under " Ground grading ".

Hope this makes things a bit clearer - happy reading !

[TB&G]

Quote:

Krooner said:

Quote:

Trueblueandgold said:
Couldn't agree more with what you say about mud but surely the covered and seating requirements are totally unecessary. As most clubs (metaphorically) are of the 'one man and his dog' variety all they need to supply is fencing all around the perimeter and hard standing all round a roped off pitch, one turnstyle and adequate changing facilities plus ( if they can afford and want it) a licensed club premises.

I think that is fair enough but I would have say you should have to have a small stand (50) and a small piece of covered terracing. There is always a chance of getting a big club. When AFC Wimbledon came into the CCL and were in it for 2 years some clubs couldnt cope and had to play their games as neutral venues. If you are a senior club you should be able to host whoever you have and I think this is the basis of ground criteria. I

Sure but apart from AFCW and FC United and a couple of others around our level who brings with them more than 50 or so supporters? Also AFCW have moved on now so the requirement doesn't exist any more from a league game point of view.

To have to pay for and install all those extra facilities on the assumption that you may reach the 3rd round of the FA cup or something similar and get a home fixture some time in the future surely is to sketchy a possibility to justify all that expenditure on upgrading your ground which will sit there and rot away for most of its existence.

[Krooner]

Quote:

Trueblueandgold said:

Quote:

Krooner said:

Quote:

Trueblueandgold said:
Couldn't agree more with what you say about mud but surely the covered and seating requirements are totally unecessary. As most clubs (metaphorically) are of the 'one man and his dog' variety all they need to supply is fencing all around the perimeter and hard standing all round a roped off pitch, one turnstyle and adequate changing facilities plus ( if they can afford and want it) a licensed club premises.

I think that is fair enough but I would have say you should have to have a small stand (50) and a small piece of covered terracing. There is always a chance of getting a big club. When AFC Wimbledon came into the CCL and were in it for 2 years some clubs couldnt cope and had to play their games as neutral venues. If you are a senior club you should be able to host whoever you have and I think this is the basis of ground criteria. I

Sure but apart from AFCW and FC United and a couple of others around our level who brings with them more than 50 or so supporters? Also AFCW have moved on now so the requirement doesn't exist any more from a league game point of view.

To have to pay for and install all those extra facilities on the assumption that you may reach the 3rd round of the FA cup or something similar and get a home fixture some time in the future surely is to sketchy a possibility to justify all that expenditure on upgrading your ground which will sit there and rot away for most of its existence.

Again you are right TBG. Just out of interest of the sides with poor facilities in the ESL, how many of them pay their players ?

[TB&G]

I have absolutely no idea Krooner.

 

I believe that it varies from season to season as backers/sponsors move in and out.

 

To my knowledge we do not pay any players any playing fees at Romford.

 

This is a matter of simple economics as we rent our ground season by season from the Ford Motor Company and they pick up all the club bar and burger bar revenues into the bargain.

 

This is why you have seen so much chat on our website re own ground facilities etc and why we cannot get promotion even if we attain a final promotion position in the ESL.

[zody]

but we are also looking to change this aswell, the season after next, <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />