Play-offs - a bit nearer now?

Seems likely that Poole Town won't enter the play-offs so we are effectively 4 points off now a place now

Poole town have almost completed the ground upgrade - http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/sport/15163044.__39_Hearts_in_mouths__39__at_Poole_Town_despite_ground_upgrade_works/ - so do they need more for the Conference National?

Does anybody know the position of Hungerford who may be in a similar position with their ground i.e. Not up to national league standard so seems rather pointless in them contesting a play off match.

Beau Nash wrote:Poole town have almost completed the ground upgrade - http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/sport/15163044.__39_Hearts_in_mouths__39__at_Poole_Town_despite_ground_upgrade_works/ - so do they need more for the Conference National?

That is my understanding. They have just about completed the work that will allow them to remain in the NLS but will not be doing any further work required to play in the NL.

The Ground Updates and The Newsletter thread on their forum gives the clear view this is the case. I am not sure how official it is though and as Hampton showed a few years back there are ways around the rules.

No idea about Hungerford's situation.

Can't help thinking those penalty misses are going to be costly in the final reckoning. Even if we had only scored the one against Hampton we would be just one point behind them with a better goal difference.

Don't forget we missed pens home and away v Hampton. And those missed at Ebbsfleet and Maidenhead. I saw them all!! That would have given us 5 more points and we would be above Hampton.

and if Max o Leary hadn't saved those penalties. and if... and if.. sadly we can only go on actual results from matches played

yuffie wrote:

Beau Nash wrote:Poole town have almost completed the ground upgrade - http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/sport/15163044.__39_Hearts_in_mouths__39__at_Poole_Town_despite_ground_upgrade_works/ - so do they need more for the Conference National?

That is my understanding. They have just about completed the work that will allow them to remain in the NLS but will not be doing any further work required to play in the NL.

The Ground Updates and The Newsletter thread on their forum gives the clear view this is the case. I am not sure how official it is though and as Hampton showed a few years back there are ways around the rules.

No idea about Hungerford's situation.

How big is the required facilities leap between NLS and NL ?

Surely you can get promoted to the NL and then do the required work within your first season there - just like Poole have done playing this year in NLS with a ground that didn't meet the standards at the start of the season, but does now.

One of the requirements I think you need is a minimum 1000 seats.

Surely they'll have to move in that case? Can barely fit in 1,000 people there let alone seats.

I'm guessing they've just progressed far quicker than expected.

They could go all-seater on the proviso that everybody brings their own fold up picnic chair.

SteveBradley wrote:

yuffie wrote:

Beau Nash wrote:Poole town have almost completed the ground upgrade - http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/sport/15163044.__39_Hearts_in_mouths__39__at_Poole_Town_despite_ground_upgrade_works/ - so do they need more for the Conference National?

That is my understanding. They have just about completed the work that will allow them to remain in the NLS but will not be doing any further work required to play in the NL.

The Ground Updates and The Newsletter thread on their forum gives the clear view this is the case. I am not sure how official it is though and as Hampton showed a few years back there are ways around the rules.

No idea about Hungerford's situation.

How big is the required facilities leap between NLS and NL ?

Surely you can get promoted to the NL and then do the required work within your first season there - just like Poole have done playing this year in NLS with a ground that didn't meet the standards at the start of the season, but does now.

Here is the ground grading requirements for Non League: http://www.thefa.com/get-involved/player/clubs-leagues/ground-grading
Just skimming through it, the main differences between A (NL) and B (NLS) are that a ground needs an extra 1,000 in capacity and 250 more seats to be eligible for NL.

Just a guess but maybe the reason they don't allow clubs to do the Poole trick at the next level is that with the NL effectively being Division 5, hosting the likes of Tranmere, Lincoln etc is a very different ball game to the teams in our league. Perhaps is to do with perceived safety risks of having more basic grounds in at that level albeit temporarily..

turnstyle13 wrote:They could go all-seater on the proviso that everybody brings their own fold up picnic chair.

Or borrow one from the adjoining school...

When big Axe doesn't play we lose?

pete mac wrote:When big Axe doesn't play we lose?

True. An undisputed fact. Hopefully we can turn it around tomorrow night. Keep the faith. Big Chas will have to fill those Icelandic boots.

Remember when York managed to get their fixture with us called off because they had international call ups. 'Sorry, Gosport + Wealdstone...'

Timbo_b-o-a wrote:

SteveBradley wrote:

yuffie wrote:

Beau Nash wrote:Poole town have almost completed the ground upgrade - http://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/sport/15163044.__39_Hearts_in_mouths__39__at_Poole_Town_despite_ground_upgrade_works/ - so do they need more for the Conference National?

That is my understanding. They have just about completed the work that will allow them to remain in the NLS but will not be doing any further work required to play in the NL.

The Ground Updates and The Newsletter thread on their forum gives the clear view this is the case. I am not sure how official it is though and as Hampton showed a few years back there are ways around the rules.

No idea about Hungerford's situation.

How big is the required facilities leap between NLS and NL ?

Surely you can get promoted to the NL and then do the required work within your first season there - just like Poole have done playing this year in NLS with a ground that didn't meet the standards at the start of the season, but does now.

Here is the ground grading requirements for Non League: http://www.thefa.com/get-involved/player/clubs-leagues/ground-grading
Just skimming through it, the main differences between A (NL) and B (NLS) are that a ground needs an extra 1,000 in capacity and 250 more seats to be eligible for NL.

Just a guess but maybe the reason they don't allow clubs to do the Poole trick at the next level is that with the NL effectively being Division 5, hosting the likes of Tranmere, Lincoln etc is a very different ball game to the teams in our league. Perhaps is to do with perceived safety risks of having more basic grounds in at that level albeit temporarily..

Did Billericay do anything to improve their ground for the season they spent in NL South btw (2012/13 ?) ? It was poor, so would be surprised if they weren't under instructions to improve it if they stayed up.

Watched Dulwich Hamlet beat our old friends Havant 3-0 last night. They played badly but still put them to the sword. Poor form by Havant, who would've gone top of the Ryman with a game in hand if they'd won.

Dulwich have 4 games in hand now, are only 4pts off a play-off place, an their form is good. I'd say they'll make the play-offs, but whether they can finally break their hoodoo and win promotion that way is a very different matter !