The Next 6 Months?

Dorking's claim against the vote - Stop the steal!

Chairman  was on BBC TV at 7.30 today. Unfortunately I was having a battle with the cat at same time so may have misheard but thought he said we have been set back 2 years.  Whether that means future progress will now be 2 years behind or  we  are now back to 2019 levels.

On the NL forum Tiger Roar wrote:-

The beautiful irony of living in a backward City like Gloucester where the football team is top but won't get promoted and the rugby team is bottom and won't get relegated.

Peter Newman wrote:Chairman  was on BBC TV at 7.30 today. Unfortunately I was having a battle with the cat at same time so may have misheard but thought he said we have been set back 2 years.  Whether that means future progress will now be 2 years behind or  we  are now back to 2019 levels.  

Whose chairman, Peter? Ours, Dorking's or the NL's?

comrade powell wrote:

Peter Newman wrote:Chairman  was on BBC TV at 7.30 today. Unfortunately I was having a battle with the cat at same time so may have misheard but thought he said we have been set back 2 years.  Whether that means future progress will now be 2 years behind or  we  are now back to 2019 levels.  

Whose chairman, Peter? Ours, Dorking's or the NL's?

It was "ours", Nick said Bath City FC development was set back two years (I think) but it was a very brief part of probably a longer interview. (I was only half awake).

Could Our IT technical "whizz kids" find the BBC West news bulletin and post it for us?

Finance aside, it can only be a positive that sports teams who are not being frequently Covid tested are not mixing given the players, younger and without underlying conditions generally I imagine, wont be getting their vaccines for a while yet.

A pretty fair summary of the past six months...

https://twohundredpercent.net/national-league-divided-decided/

Martin
I changed the wording of my previous posting as, on reading it back, it could have been interpreted as our chairman was battling with a cat.
Anyway it was our chairman speaking and myself having a problem with the cat!

Peter Newman wrote:Chairman  was on BBC TV at 7.30 today. Unfortunately I was having a battle with the cat at same time so may have misheard but thought he said we have been set back 2 years.  Whether that means future progress will now be 2 years behind or  we  are now back to 2019 levels.  

Having listened to the very brief piece, I think Nick was saying that if we had been forced to play on and take out a loan, then that scenario would have set us back 2 years.
Meanwhile, Gloucester and Dorking have set legal wheels in motion.
It Ain't Over Yet.

Nick certainly came across better than the deluded vice chair at Glos.

I think the Gloucester chairman is trying to outdo his opposite number at Dorking in the 'pain in the backside' stakes. Perhaps they could play each other continuously until they bore each other to death (instead of just the rest of us!).  

Will be interesting to see what the basis for their legal action is. Dartford have chimed in on the basis that the overall vote (Steps 1 and 2) was in favour of continuing so perhaps that will be their approach. Seems irrelevant though, as that wasn't the basis for the resolutions.

Luton Roman wrote:While I agree that a hell of a lot of hard work and money has ensured we play at a reasonable level I'm not convinced that we can progress a lot further and I wonder what your realistic ambitions are for the Club?

Interesting to consider:

Short term - Covid recovery, ensure we have a club, and that they are in the NLS next season;
Medium term - ground redevelopment, clear the debt;
Long term - needs an honest assessment of how far the community model can take the club. We have done well to reach the play offs in the last 2 seasons, though well beaten in both, and never really looking like a side ready for the next level. Our record against the top teams in the division has not been good, exceptions aside like Torquay at home. To make and sustain promotion will need investment. Those paragons AFC Wimbledon and now Wrexham have conceded that community models can only take you so far.

Wrexham have sold out it's true, but AFC Wimbledon remain 75% community-owned since 2003 and competing in League One for a fifth season?

But your wider point is well taken. I suggest that a helpful next step would be for the club to share its estimates on what the footballing costs would be at each rung of the ladder we would need to climb - e.g. top five NLS, survival NL, midtable NL (full time?), top 5 NL, midtable EFL2 etc.

Then as owners we can have an informed discussion about how much we can grow our revenue base under the current ownership model.

We would also be able to assess whether any new potential "investors" would actually grow the revenue base in a sustainable way to meet those increased costs, rather than simply injecting short-term funds to create the impression of progress etc.

It would also be worth looking at how AFC Wimbledon and Germany's 50+1 clubs manage to attract significant minority investment without giving up majority democratic ownership. I think sometimes the community ownership debate is framed as either/or, when in practice clubs often have blended forms of ownership.

OliverH wrote:

Luton Roman wrote:While I agree that a hell of a lot of hard work and money has ensured we play at a reasonable level I'm not convinced that we can progress a lot further and I wonder what your realistic ambitions are for the Club?

Interesting to consider:

Short term - Covid recovery, ensure we have a club, and that they are in the NLS next season;
Medium term - ground redevelopment, clear the debt;
Long term - needs an honest assessment of how far the community model can take the club. We have done well to reach the play offs in the last 2 seasons, though well beaten in both, and never really looking like a side ready for the next level. Our record against the top teams in the division has not been good, exceptions aside like Torquay at home. To make and sustain promotion will need investment. Those paragons AFC Wimbledon and now Wrexham have conceded that community models can only take you so far.

Wrexham have sold out it's true, but AFC Wimbledon remain 75% community-owned since 2003 and competing in League One for a fifth season?

But your wider point is well taken. I suggest that a helpful next step would be for the club to share its estimates on what the footballing costs would be at each rung of the ladder we would need to climb - e.g. top five NLS, survival NL, midtable NL (full time?), top 5 NL, midtable EFL2 etc.

Then as owners we can have an informed discussion about how much we can grow our revenue base under the current ownership model.

We would also be able to assess whether any new potential "investors" would actually grow the revenue base in a sustainable way to meet those increased costs, rather than simply injecting short-term funds to create the impression of progress etc.

It would also be worth looking at how AFC Wimbledon and Germany's 50+1 clubs manage to attract significant minority investment without giving up majority democratic ownership. I think sometimes the community ownership debate is framed as either/or, when in practice clubs often have blended forms of ownership.

AFCW still have 75% trust ownership but the former CEO of Asos has a 10% shareholding following investment since May last year which got the new stadium over the line. It apparently came from issuing unallocated shares, so a win:win, keep control and get money in. As you rightly say that type of blended ownership could be an attractive option to at least consider how it might work.

Surprised by the number of clubs in our division voting to continue. Given the financial difficulties experienced by a number of clubs in the NL division like Dover it is like turkeys voting for christmas.
Don't understand the gloucester guy's point at all. It just smacks of rampant self interest.

I think at one of the recent ‘zoom’ meetings Nick Blofeld said that the redevelopment ‘Plan B’ would give us a ground to NL standard but not EFL so that would limit our ambitions in the short to medium term.

With all the carnage going on in the NL at the moment about loans versus grants I thought it a bit ironic that the DCMS has been making much today about the grants being dished out by Sport England as part of the Sport Winter Survival Plan.

As an aside, I've been wondering… When a season is declared Null And Void, do the goals scored still count on the players' records? I can't imagine that they wouldn't, but I've never seen it either confirmed or denied anywhere. Anyone have any idea?




==========================================================

Hey readers! My debut novel, Bugger Banksy, is available now from the link below!

https://www.earthislandbooks.com/product-page/bugger-banksy-by-roy-d-hacksaw

Roy D Hacksaw wrote:As an aside, I've been wondering… When a season is declared Null And Void, do the goals scored still count on the players' records? I can't imagine that they wouldn't, but I've never seen it either confirmed or denied anywhere. Anyone have any idea?




==========================================================

Hey readers! My debut novel, Bugger Banksy, is available now from the link below!

https://www.earthislandbooks.com/product-page/bugger-banksy-by-roy-d-hacksaw

Don't. Get. Me. Started.

I can understand reasons for either conclusion. That's all I'm saying for now! We have five months to fight it out - I've even emailed Opta to ask what the standard practise would be. Resolution One would require 75% of the forum to confirm either way whether the fans get to decide or I do...

What happens to goals scored in abandoned games  these days? Is that not a similar situation.
Some time ago didn't Denis Law score something like 5 goals in a match that was abandoned and I believe were discounted.

We’ve had three matches abandoned in my lifetime I think. None of them are included in the records. One cost Kaid Mohamed a goal.

IF those NLS/N sides that wish to carry on were permitted  to form a recognised legue then perhaps the champions could be promoted  so to make the National league upto 24. Depending on Dover situation maybe the top 2 could be promoted.

It would then mean total NLS/N would have a combined total of 42 clubs so how about inviting  Maccesfield & Bury to join  to fill the 2 vacant places.

IF this new league was allowed then one of the requirements should be that  all participants be required to  return their grant money as, obviously, since they  are desperate to play without crowds they  never really needed it in the first place. This returned  grant money should then be attributed to the non-participating clubs on an equitable baisis.

I reckon keep it simple - null and void is null and void. It’s all over. Ridiculous threats of legal challenges are a complete waste of money which of course the lawyers will love. Let’s focus on making us competitive next season and watch from afar as the moneybags of Dorking and Gloucester et al throw their cash away and waste their energy

Peter Newman wrote:What happens to goals scored in abandoned games  these days?  Is that not a similar situation.
Some time ago didn't Denis Law score something like 5 goals in a match that was abandoned and I believe were discounted.

I remember this from his autobiography.
He scored 6 goals for Man City v Luton in an FA cup tie, 1961 that was abandoned due to the pitch becoming a quagmire with City leading 6-2. Scored in the rerun but City lost 3-1. So scored 7 in a cup tie but ended up on the losing side. Great story so who cares whether credited with those goals in the records.

If the season is ‘null and void’ presumably Donovan won’t have to serve the third game of his suspension when we eventually restart because he can’t have been sent off in a game that didn’t take place!

As for this idea that the clubs that are prepared to continue should form a revised league with promotion at the end of it must be a non-starter. To do so would be unfair on the clubs like us who want to play on but aren’t prepared to in the present circumstances.

Kings Lynn of NL now saying they probably won't play on after the next two fixtures. Presumably they are not prepared to take the loan.