|
Darlo
Apr 13, 2017 10:15:13 GMT
Post by RealPaulScott on Apr 13, 2017 10:15:13 GMT
Well just been announced about Darlo not being able to play in play offs regardless! Thoughts?
|
|
|
Darlo
Apr 13, 2017 10:19:10 GMT
via mobile
Post by mozzer on Apr 13, 2017 10:19:10 GMT
It might work to our benefit should they take our place in the top five.
The last time a club ineligible for promotion finished in a playoff spot was in 2011 (Eastwood). The final playoff spot went to sixth place Nuneaton, so that should be the precedent for if Darlo make the top five.
|
|
|
Darlo
Apr 13, 2017 11:04:25 GMT
Post by christianwright94 on Apr 13, 2017 11:04:25 GMT
Slightly Ironic considering they still have their old 25,000 Darlington Arena in perfect nick. Perfect for the play offs.
|
|
|
Post by broughton12 on Apr 13, 2017 15:16:36 GMT
Tinpot i wouldnt normally gloat at another clubs missfortunes but ill make an exception this time round 😎
|
|
|
Post by tangerinedream on Apr 13, 2017 21:46:46 GMT
Maybe a little sorry for their genuine fans but rules is rules and it smacks of either amateurism or deliberate intent that they weren't aware of what was required. It's somewhat ironic that they were questioning whether or not our ground would be good enough on their fan's forum in the event of us clinching a promotion place. I would imagine that their inability to take their place in the play offs will very probably impact on the numbers who intend to travel to Moor Lane on the final game of the season. It'll be interesting to see how many of their 600 allocation they will now sell.
|
|
|
Darlo
Apr 13, 2017 22:18:56 GMT
via mobile
Post by returntosender on Apr 13, 2017 22:18:56 GMT
Maybe a little sorry for their genuine fans but rules is rules and it smacks of either amateurism or deliberate intent that they weren't aware of what was required. It's somewhat ironic that they were questioning whether or not our ground would be good enough on their fan's forum in the event of us clinching a promotion place. I would imagine that their inability to take their place in the play offs will very probably impact on the numbers who intend to travel to Moor Lane on the final game of the season. It'll be interesting to see how many of their 600 allocation they will now sell. It's to be hoped they don't beat us.
|
|
|
Post by urban0swine on Apr 14, 2017 7:35:34 GMT
One holds very little sorrow for our friends up in the north east. All clubs have a budget to work with, Darlington 1883's is larger than most. They've chosen to pay substantial wages and purchase players for sums well above the levels that is common place in the tier they played; think Cartman. A balance between on the field activity must be struck with off the field activity. One personally believes that getting the off the field structure right with robust processes makes for a solid foundation to advance the on the field capabilities. Failure to do so means a club is built on an unstable foundation, quick sand if you like; this time Darlington 1883 have been caught out. Let's not forget they swerved a points deduction last season despite system failures leading to fielding an eligible player. If Darlington 1883's appeal is successful, what message does that send out to those clubs that have operated within their budget having put out a competitive team on the field and built the infrastructure to support?
|
|
|
Darlo
Apr 14, 2017 9:52:21 GMT
via mobile
Post by broughton12 on Apr 14, 2017 9:52:21 GMT
One holds very little sorrow for our friends up in the north east. All clubs have a budget to work with, Darlington 1883's is larger than most. They've chosen to pay substantial wages and purchase players for sums well above the levels that is common place in the tier they played; think Cartman. A balance between on the field activity must be struck with off the field activity. One personally believes that getting the off the field structure right with robust processes makes for a solid foundation to advance the on the field capabilities. Failure to do so means a club is built on an unstable foundation, quick sand if you like; this time Darlington 1883 have been caught out. Let's not forget they swerved a points deduction last season despite system failures leading to fielding an eligible player. If Darlington 1883's appeal is successful, what message does that send out to those clubs that have operated within their budget having put out a competitive team on the field and built the infrastructure to support? Forgot about that points deduction last season great post
|
|
|
Post by Chris P. Bacon on Apr 14, 2017 15:20:18 GMT
Does this mean that Darlo could be relegated if they haven't met the grade or is it just applicable to the playoffs?
|
|
|
Post by philsbrotherswallet on Apr 14, 2017 18:27:43 GMT
Don't talk to me about substantial wages and transfer fees.
|
|
|
Post by vodkavic on Apr 14, 2017 18:39:15 GMT
Darlington fan here. A few points.
Firstly, the Darlington Arena is now owned by Mowden Park Rugby club. The running costs are simply too high (utility bills etc) and as it's 15 years old then it's starting to rust and would need 6 figure sums to carry out the maintenance required. We can't ground share for a number of reasons, mainly that they have to play on a Saturday at 3pm to in their league. Secondly, we are appealing but not hopeful. Thirdly, if we did finish 5 th and you 6 th then you would get our last spot. Fourthly, it certainly wasn't deliberate Fifthly, the reason anyone was wondering about Moor Lane passing is because ground improvements started so late. They did a remarkable job of getting it ready in time, but they left it late. Also, we can't get relegated. Our ground is Grade B rated, but we haven't satisfied this extra 250 seats rule. Basically, to get a Grade B rating, you need a 300 capacity and 250 seats, but then tagged on to this there is a special rule whereby to be eligible for promotion then you actually need 500 seats and this is where we fall short. Sixthly, the extra 250 seats rule to be eligible for promotion is NOT covered by FSIF grants, so any club would have to fund it themselves. This is in the region of £150,000 and because we are fan owned we have to raise all money ourselves. The rule is only at Step 2 and is very unfair to any club starting out and wanting to progress. The FA simply should not sanction any rules regarding ground grading which are out of step with FSIF grant regulations. Poole Town have been held back as well. Genuine football fans would understand this. Regarding buying players who are too good for the league etc. Obviously money is not a problem to Salford City and you have in the main done the same. Also, as fans you had your stadium funded for you. We didn't. You have benefactors, which is very nice for you as Salford fans, but never take this for granted. I hope you are never put in a position, which we were 5 years ago, where our 'benefactor' pulled out and held us to ransom and we were kicked in the teeth and demoted to Step 5. By the grace of God and all that. Best of luck in the play-offs. You have two very gifted and up and coming managers too which you should also never take for granted. Vic
|
|
|
Darlo
Apr 14, 2017 19:29:43 GMT
Post by tangerinedream on Apr 14, 2017 19:29:43 GMT
Darlington fan here. A few points. Firstly, the Darlington Arena is now owned by Mowden Park Rugby club. The running costs are simply too high (utility bills etc) and as it's 15 years old then it's starting to rust and would need 6 figure sums to carry out the maintenance required. We can't ground share for a number of reasons, mainly that they have to play on a Saturday at 3pm to in their league. Secondly, we are appealing but not hopeful. Thirdly, if we did finish 5 th and you 6 th then you would get our last spot. Fourthly, it certainly wasn't deliberate Fifthly, the reason anyone was wondering about Moor Lane passing is because ground improvements started so late. They did a remarkable job of getting it ready in time, but they left it late. Also, we can't get relegated. Our ground is Grade B rated, but we haven't satisfied this extra 250 seats rule. Basically, to get a Grade B rating, you need a 300 capacity and 250 seats, but then tagged on to this there is a special rule whereby to be eligible for promotion then you actually need 500 seats and this is where we fall short. Sixthly, the extra 250 seats rule to be eligible for promotion is NOT covered by FSIF grants, so any club would have to fund it themselves. This is in the region of £150,000 and because we are fan owned we have to raise all money ourselves. The rule is only at Step 2 and is very unfair to any club starting out and wanting to progress. The FA simply should not sanction any rules regarding ground grading which are out of step with FSIF grant regulations. Poole Town have been held back as well. Genuine football fans would understand this. Regarding buying players who are too good for the league etc. Obviously money is not a problem to Salford City and you have in the main done the same. Also, as fans you had your stadium funded for you. We didn't. You have benefactors, which is very nice for you as Salford fans, but never take this for granted. I hope you are never put in a position, which we were 5 years ago, where our 'benefactor' pulled out and held us to ransom and we were kicked in the teeth and demoted to Step 5. By the grace of God and all that. Best of luck in the play-offs. You have two very gifted and up and coming managers too which you should also never take for granted. Vic Cheers Vic. I have no real gripe against Darlo as a club but unfortunately the antics and general loutish behaviour of some of the foul mouthed knuckle draggers that you've brought to Moor Lane over the last three seasons means that any misfortune that befalls your club will be met with either precious little or absolutely no sympathy at all from Salford supporters.
In any case, given the way we're presently performing I think it more than likely that we'll be meeting up again next season!
|
|
|
Darlo
Apr 15, 2017 8:49:59 GMT
Post by vodkavic on Apr 15, 2017 8:49:59 GMT
cheers Tangerine. Know you've been on our board before and you've been a fan for years. Was told something potentially very interesting yesterday. When Eastwood Town were barred from playing in the play-offs a few years ago, the team finishing 2nd got a bye, so the 6th placed side weren't promoted up to 5th. Re:Gainsborough. They nearly beat us and have been playing well for weeks now with a new manager, so they were due to beat someone. Interesting what Jonno said after the game yesterday, that he's been experimenting with different formations due to a loss of form. Just what we have been doing during our bad run. Both our clubs even struggled to beat Alty, so there really are no easy games in this league.
|
|
|
Darlo
Apr 15, 2017 15:12:55 GMT
Post by tangerinedream on Apr 15, 2017 15:12:55 GMT
Was told something potentially very interesting yesterday. When Eastwood Town were barred from playing in the play-offs a few years ago, the team finishing 2nd got a bye, so the 6th placed side weren't promoted up to 5th. If that is again the case this time around then surely we would have had an announcement to have already been made regarding such a situation. I wouldn't have thought such a scenario would be kept from us until the conclusion of the normal season!
|
|
|
Darlo
Apr 15, 2017 15:59:44 GMT
via mobile
Post by asalfordfan on Apr 15, 2017 15:59:44 GMT
Was told something potentially very interesting yesterday. When Eastwood Town were barred from playing in the play-offs a few years ago, the team finishing 2nd got a bye, so the 6th placed side weren't promoted up to 5th. If that is again the case this time around then surely we would have had an announcement to have already been made regarding such a situation. I wouldn't have thought such a scenario would be kept from us until the conclusion of the normal season!That's not true. Eastwood finished 4th but weren't allowed to participate in the playoffs. As such, Nuneaton whom finished 6th were given the playoff spot instead!
|
|