www.altyfans.co.uk
General Category => Altrincham FC First Team => Topic started by: Saughall Robin on February 01, 2021, 10:29:48 AM
-
I believe there is a National League meeting with Clubs today to determine the options for continuing (or not) the season.
When are we likely to hear the outcome?
What do we think that outcome will be?
I'll open by suggesting that the NLN & NLS will opt for curtailment and the National will opt for playing on fearful of losing the promotion places.
Having said that, there will be several NL clubs who would struggle if that happened - Kings Lynn, Dover and Wealdstone have already said as much. A couple more, if they have doubts, could swing things the other way.
-
I believe there is a National League meeting with Clubs today to determine the options for continuing (or not) the season.
When are we likely to hear the outcome?
What do we think that outcome will be?
I'll open by suggesting that the NLN & NLS will opt for curtailment and the National will opt for playing on fearful of losing the promotion places.
Having said that, there will be several NL clubs who would struggle if that happened - Kings Lynn, Dover and Wealdstone have already said as much. A couple more, if they have doubts, could swing things the other way.
I guess, they will vote today, once they know the options. I really hope the NL continues even with lack of funding as previously promised.
-
Latest from PA. Interesting that the clubs say it will cost the Government more in furlough, etc if the league has to stop than it would cost it to pay the grants.
NATIONAL LEAGUE PURSUE MINUTES OF KEY FUNDING MEETING CALLED BY DCMS
By Jamie Gardner, PA Chief Sports Reporter
The National League has asked for the minutes of a key meeting called by Government last November where it claims assurances were given that it would not have to pay back coronavirus crisis funding.
The 66 clubs in the National League and the North and South divisions below it are set to vote this week on whether or not to cut the season short, after learning that £11million due to be offered as part of the Government's Sports Winter Survival Package would be in the form of loans rather than grants.
It is understood each of the three leagues will take separate votes over whether to play on, with a resolution set to be sent to clubs in the first part of this week.
In correspondence seen by the PA news agency, the National League claims it was told at a meeting called by the Department of Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) on November 17 that "the second tranche of monies for January/February/March 2021 would be on the same principles as the initial tranche ie grants".
National League clubs were supported through the period between October and December of last year by a Government-brokered commercial deal with the National Lottery which did not involve any repayment, but they are now very concerned about their ability to make ends meet.
Scott Priestnall, the chairman and owner of National League side Yeovil, told the PA news agency: "We have consistently asked for minutes of that meeting and it's strange that DCMS, on such a high-profile meeting where £10million was being handed over effectively, that there aren't minutes to that meeting.
"We have asked consistently for these minutes and they haven't provided them."
The National League says it has pointed out to DCMS that the cost of curtailment and placing staff on furlough at 66 clubs would be a bigger hit to the taxpayer - £14million - than to pay £11million in grants.
Priestnall says DCMS's response was that furlough related to "a different department".
DCMS said in a statement last month: "It is untrue to suggest funding to the National League was ever promised as all grants and they have been unable to substantiate this claim."
Sports minister Nigel Huddleston told the clubs in a letter last week that the loans are "extremely low interest" and "on lengthy repayment terms of up to 20 years".
He has said grants will be available to those in most urgent need of support and added: "We will not let clubs go to the wall."
Priestnall, who revealed his club need £750,000 in order to complete the season, says he will vote to continue the season but expects it to be a close ballot, even in the highest division.
"There sits another issue - if there is a small majority that want to continue the league - let's say 65 per cent - what happens to the 35 per cent who said they didn't want to play?" Priestnall said.
"Do we force them to play, do we force them to take loans, do we tell them they don't have to play, and if they don't have to play what happens to their points?"
-
Ollie Bayliss has tweeted the resolutions but I don't know how to link to Twitter
-
https://twitter.com/Ollie_Bayliss/status/1356338888890068993?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet
Click on the partial view of the resolution document to open fully.
-
Looking more and more like shutdowns for the NLN & NLS and up in the air for our league.
My guess is we'll carry on.
But it doesn't seem like we're going to come to a decision any time soon! 😉
-
Not so sure Saughall Robin. The first resolution requires 75% to say yes for it to be carried. Can't remember where I read that but it's because it's a special resolution rather than an ordinary resolution.
If the 75% isn't reached then it's straight to resolution 4 which is a vote by all teams on whether or not to close everything down.
-
28 days for them to send back their replies wasn't it?
Will enough games have been played by then to decide the season on ppg by then? (And can we be 7th on ppg by then? :) )
-
28 days to reply takes us to March,leaving just March and April and maybe 1 week in May to play,seems a bit late in the day to be talking about cancelling the league.We as fans could help with donations of clubs that we support,Alty did it for the play off last season,so why cannot other club fans do it for their teams?
-
Although there are 28 days to reply I would suggest that the vast majority of boards have already made their decisions. Delaying will only incur unnecessary costs for those that want to call it a day. I think we will have a result before Saturdays games.
-
Not so sure Saughall Robin. The first resolution requires 75% to say yes for it to be carried. Can't remember where I read that but it's because it's a special resolution rather than an ordinary resolution.
If the 75% isn't reached then it's straight to resolution 4 which is a vote by all teams on whether or not to close everything down.
Yes but the NLN and NLS only have 4 votes each so it will be close
-
Bit mad that NLN & NLS only have 4 votes each imho.
I do think that it should be a league decision not a divisional decision. But hey ho
-
Resolution flow chart: https://www.wokingfc.co.uk/img/n/NL%20Resolutions.jpg
-
A lot could depend on how the 4 or 8 votes in the nln are created, is it just 4 voices or do they survey their members and turn the proportions into votes. If 1 fails then the possibility of all fail or all remain is troublesome
-
No idea how the positioning/determination of the 4/8 votes happens. It just adds to what is a messy situation.
-
And wrexham are planning to abstain because they aren't eligible for loans.
-
And wrexham are planning to abstain because they aren't eligible for loans.
They potentially may vote in this round; as it's not a loan-vote. Simply, should clubs vote separately and should the season continue or end (regardless of how it is fundeD).
-
Now it turns out they may be eligible for grants from the FAW
-
AFC Fylde in their statement saying they want to continue https://www.afcfylde.co.uk/club-statement-our-views-on-the-current-position/ (https://www.afcfylde.co.uk/club-statement-our-views-on-the-current-position/) outline the loans are for 20 years at 2% with a 4 year payment holiday upfront and that they are available to cover players' wages. They can also be used as a hybrid with grants or of course failing that clubs can access 100% grants in cases of extreme hardship.
Surely any Board with a handle on their budget should be able to deal with a fixed interest 20 year repayment loan for half a season's running costs, elite or not.
-
AFC Fylde in their statement saying they want to continue https://www.afcfylde.co.uk/club-statement-our-views-on-the-current-position/ (https://www.afcfylde.co.uk/club-statement-our-views-on-the-current-position/) outline the loans are for 20 years at 2% with a 4 year payment holiday upfront and that they are available to cover players' wages. They can also be used as a hybrid with grants or of course failing that clubs can access 100% grants in cases of extreme hardship.
Surely any Board with a handle on their budget should be able to deal with a fixed interest 20 year repayment loan for half a season's running costs, elite or not.
True.
-
"
Priestnall, who revealed his club need £750,000 in order to complete the season, says he will vote to continue the season but expects it to be a close ballot, even in the highest division.
£750,000??? Wow!!
-
"
Priestnall, who revealed his club need £750,000 in order to complete the season, says he will vote to continue the season but expects it to be a close ballot, even in the highest division.
£750,000??? Wow!!
and they got £250000 parachute payment !!
-
"
Priestnall, who revealed his club need £750,000 in order to complete the season, says he will vote to continue the season but expects it to be a close ballot, even in the highest division.
£750,000??? Wow!!
++
and they got £250000 parachute payment !!
Makes you wonder doesn't it. Just doing the figures on gate income alone, assuming 3000 average paying £15 average each then that's just under 1m for 22 home league games. That's being generous with the figures on gates and gate income too.
-
Is it just me or does resolution 4 on our website story make no sense. a) it says conditional on resolution one being passed when I think it means the opposite and b) there is no mention of the national league at all - as written it says that the NL continues and the NL clubs get a majority say in whether or not NLN and NLS continue - that can't be right!
-
Is it just me or does resolution 4 on our website story make no sense. a) it says conditional on resolution one being passed when I think it means the opposite and b) there is no mention of the national league at all - as written it says that the NL continues and the NL clubs get a majority say in whether or not NLN and NLS continue - that can't be right!
Oh, you are quite right. The National League website states that Resolution 4 is conditional on Resolution 1 NOT being passed, which makes more sense.
Either somebody has messed up the cutting and pasting or noticed something was wrong after posting the original statement!
https://www.thenationalleague.org.uk/national-league-statement-written-resolutions-65069 (https://www.thenationalleague.org.uk/national-league-statement-written-resolutions-65069)
-
Is it just me or does resolution 4 on our website story make no sense. a) it says conditional on resolution one being passed when I think it means the opposite and b) there is no mention of the national league at all - as written it says that the NL continues and the NL clubs get a majority say in whether or not NLN and NLS continue - that can't be right!
Oh, you are quite right. The National League website states that Resolution 4 is conditional on Resolution 1 NOT being passed, which makes more sense.
Either somebody has messed up the cutting and pasting or noticed something was wrong after posting the original statement!
https://www.thenationalleague.org.uk/national-league-statement-written-resolutions-65069 (https://www.thenationalleague.org.uk/national-league-statement-written-resolutions-65069)
That version also includes NL stopping in resolution 4 which also makes more sense
-
By those numbers it only takes eight NL clubs to make sure resolution 1 fails and then, should the eight N/S votes opt for ending the season, the same eight NL clubs could vote with them to end the season for all three leagues. :-\
-
Who would those 8 be though? Those in relegation threat would probably vote for resolution one as the nln and nls are more likely to close down so they become safe. Those in with a playoff shout will want to carry on and best shot at that is resolution 1 as well so only those who think they are safe and have nothing to play for would vote against one, and some of them might do the right thing and let nln and nls decide for themselves
-
Who would those 8 be though? Those in relegation threat would probably vote for resolution one as the nln and nls are more likely to close down so they become safe. Those in with a playoff shout will want to carry on and best shot at that is resolution 1 as well so only those who think they are safe and have nothing to play for would vote against one, and some of them might do the right thing and let nln and nls decide for themselves
I think the teams in the NL who want to void the season are more worried about going bankrupt than being relegated.
-
I think the teams in the NL who want to void the season are more worried about going bankrupt than being relegated.
Not sure that would be true looking at how much money everyone got compared with what they would have got from gate receipts
https://onedrive.live.com/view.aspx?resid=CF550DA7DC4F6A38!4489&ithint=file%2cxlsx&authkey=!AGE3dhxpRJzLlDQ (https://onedrive.live.com/view.aspx?resid=CF550DA7DC4F6A38!4489&ithint=file%2cxlsx&authkey=!AGE3dhxpRJzLlDQ)
-
Twitter (Price of Football) suggests that sanctions against clubs who refuse to play this weekend
-
Fylde are calling out their Step 2 colleagues' humbug given several are prepared to play in the Trophy this week-end but not the League.
"A joint statement signed by Guiseley AFC was published on Wednesday, 3rd, February, that stated clubs were in support of the re-commencement of the season, ‘but only when there is a fully-funded Covid testing programme in place.... After further discussion, Guiseley AFC informed us that the decision to withdraw from Saturday’s fixture was unrelated to safety and was, in fact, for financial reasons."
"As it stands, two of the teams who are signatories to Guiseley’s joint statement are prepared to play in their FA Trophy fixtures this Saturday, but have the hypocrisy to declare themselves unavailable to fulfil their league fixtures on the following Tuesday."
"We sincerely hope that the National League take a tough line on those taking this stance, as we believe cherry-picking which fixtures to fulfil is bringing the game into disrepute and severely damaging the integrity of the competition."
https://www.afcfylde.co.uk/club-statement-an-update-on-the-guiseley-afc-fixture-and-the-integrity-of-the-competition/
-
Also in the statement its inferred that they had a meeting and refusal to play wasnt raised despite the clubs being there. I know its a very tough situation but you have a democratic process or you dont. So in future when all this is done and dusted, is it ok for a club going through financial difficulties to just refuse to play?
-
from when the deadline is reached we will have about 4/6 weeks to go so why are they voting on not finishing the season,this seems madness to me at this stage.
-
Fylde are calling out their Step 2 colleagues' humbug given several are prepared to play in the Trophy this week-end but not the League.
"A joint statement signed by Guiseley AFC was published on Wednesday, 3rd, February, that stated clubs were in support of the re-commencement of the season, ‘but only when there is a fully-funded Covid testing programme in place.... After further discussion, Guiseley AFC informed us that the decision to withdraw from Saturday’s fixture was unrelated to safety and was, in fact, for financial reasons."
"As it stands, two of the teams who are signatories to Guiseley’s joint statement are prepared to play in their FA Trophy fixtures this Saturday, but have the hypocrisy to declare themselves unavailable to fulfil their league fixtures on the following Tuesday."
"We sincerely hope that the National League take a tough line on those taking this stance, as we believe cherry-picking which fixtures to fulfil is bringing the game into disrepute and severely damaging the integrity of the competition."
https://www.afcfylde.co.uk/club-statement-an-update-on-the-guiseley-afc-fixture-and-the-integrity-of-the-competition/
Is it not clear to them that for struggling clubs a few games in a competition where prize money is on the table is more desirable than taking loans to play the rest of the season?
-
Also in the statement its inferred that they had a meeting and refusal to play wasnt raised despite the clubs being there. I know its a very tough situation but you have a democratic process or you dont. So in future when all this is done and dusted, is it ok for a club going through financial difficulties to just refuse to play?
Well quite. Not to labour the point, but assuming Fylde aren't deliberately releasing false info', 20 year fixed term finance at 2% with a 4 year payment holiday isn't made available to businesses like NLN football clubs every day. It's equivalent to a repayment mortgage on a house - hardly the financial suicide I've seen quoted. Clubs are essentially saying we're a community asset, our supporters' mental health benefits from seeing their teams in action, as long as the tax payer cops for the bill 100%. Perhaps we'll see Red Star King's Lynn next year?
-
from when the deadline is reached we will have about 4/6 weeks to go so why are they voting on not finishing the season,this seems madness to me at this stage.
The season isn't scheduled to finish until May 29th, Harold.
-
It depends what the criteria attached to the loan are. Can anyone get a loan or just those clubs that have already spent all the money they had in their bank accounts. Some clubs are already heavily indebted, Boston being one example.
I notice that one club, Billericay, have said they will fulfill their fixture this weekend by playing non-contracted players and under 23s. Their first team remains on Furlough.
-
Fylde are calling out their Step 2 colleagues' humbug given several are prepared to play in the Trophy this week-end but not the League.
"A joint statement signed by Guiseley AFC was published on Wednesday, 3rd, February, that stated clubs were in support of the re-commencement of the season, ‘but only when there is a fully-funded Covid testing programme in place.... After further discussion, Guiseley AFC informed us that the decision to withdraw from Saturday’s fixture was unrelated to safety and was, in fact, for financial reasons."
"As it stands, two of the teams who are signatories to Guiseley’s joint statement are prepared to play in their FA Trophy fixtures this Saturday, but have the hypocrisy to declare themselves unavailable to fulfil their league fixtures on the following Tuesday."
"We sincerely hope that the National League take a tough line on those taking this stance, as we believe cherry-picking which fixtures to fulfil is bringing the game into disrepute and severely damaging the integrity of the competition."
https://www.afcfylde.co.uk/club-statement-an-update-on-the-guiseley-afc-fixture-and-the-integrity-of-the-competition/
Funny how Haythornthwaite is keen to continue this season, yet he was so keen to null and void last season.
I wonder what the difference is.
-
It's all hypocrisy and self-interest. In all honesty though, we'd probably have voted to end the season had we been bottom.
-
It's all hypocrisy and self-interest. In all honesty though, we'd probably have voted to end the season had we been bottom.
That’s the main gist of it.. Round here Telford have voted to end the season they are playing sh*t .... no brainer for them and other clubs down the bottom half
-
Thanks Brian
-
Fylde are calling out their Step 2 colleagues' humbug given several are prepared to play in the Trophy this week-end but not the League.
"A joint statement signed by Guiseley AFC was published on Wednesday, 3rd, February, that stated clubs were in support of the re-commencement of the season, ‘but only when there is a fully-funded Covid testing programme in place.... After further discussion, Guiseley AFC informed us that the decision to withdraw from Saturday’s fixture was unrelated to safety and was, in fact, for financial reasons."
"As it stands, two of the teams who are signatories to Guiseley’s joint statement are prepared to play in their FA Trophy fixtures this Saturday, but have the hypocrisy to declare themselves unavailable to fulfil their league fixtures on the following Tuesday."
"We sincerely hope that the National League take a tough line on those taking this stance, as we believe cherry-picking which fixtures to fulfil is bringing the game into disrepute and severely damaging the integrity of the competition."
https://www.afcfylde.co.uk/club-statement-an-update-on-the-guiseley-afc-fixture-and-the-integrity-of-the-competition/
Funny how Haythornthwaite is keen to continue this season, yet he was so keen to null and void last season.
I wonder what the difference is.
Whose being hypocrites now?
-
I suspect that resolution 1 will go ahead splitting the leagues into 2, and then the nln and nls will stop and we will carry on. Good for us but it does question the validity and fairness of the league when those at the bottom will no longer get relegated, will they really try and will they just furlough their expensive players thus making it a distinct advantage if you have yet to play those teams
-
It also affects the teams below NLN / NLS. No promotions. Aren't those leagues paused at the moment rather than cancelled?
-
Dover chairman has resigned from the NL Board
http://www.doverathletic.com/news/chairman-resigns-from-national-league-board/ (http://www.doverathletic.com/news/chairman-resigns-from-national-league-board/)
-
Good for him to sticking to his convictions, but I take it that will be a vote against continuing?
-
What the Dover chairman says is right. The funding of lower echelons clubs through COVID should have been sorted before the season even started, there is enough money slushing around at the higher levels to support the clubs who can’t survive in the current situation.
The votes will go in accordance with where said clubs are in league, ie clubs with a chance of playoffs will vote to continue whilst the clubs down the bottom who are fighting relegation will vote to terminate the season.
Vaccines are great in helping to eliminate the risks of COVID,but be assured things ain’t gonna be anything like normal (full capacity grounds) for a long time to come. The financing of clubs is going to be difficult.
-
One can certainly hope that the vaccines are "great" (and the pharmaceutical companies are exempt from liability if they're not...)
But if they are going to put life on hold every time a new variant comes along until they have a vaccine for it, we could be here a long time. And the vaccine pushers will get very rich...
And if "vaccine passports" are needed to attend sporting events as has been suggested, inevitably there will be those who are unwilling to take these experimental "vaccines" and thus will not attend matches under these circumstances. We are certainly getting the hard sell from the pharmaceutical companies.
-
One can certainly hope that the vaccines are "great" (and the pharmaceutical companies are exempt from liability if they're not...)
But if they are going to put life on hold every time a new variant comes along until they have a vaccine for it, we could be here a long time. And the vaccine pushers will get very rich...
And if "vaccine passports" are needed to attend sporting events as has been suggested, inevitably there will be those who are unwilling to take these experimental "vaccines" and thus will not attend matches under these circumstances. We are certainly getting the hard sell from the pharmaceutical companies.
(https://media.giphy.com/media/xTcf1gUpg87E5lNK2A/giphy.gif)
You seem to have forgotten the location of your off-topic thread.
-
One can certainly hope that the vaccines are "great" (and the pharmaceutical companies are exempt from liability if they're not...)
But if they are going to put life on hold every time a new variant comes along until they have a vaccine for it, we could be here a long time. And the vaccine pushers will get very rich...
And if "vaccine passports" are needed to attend sporting events as has been suggested, inevitably there will be those who are unwilling to take these experimental "vaccines" and thus will not attend matches under these circumstances. We are certainly getting the hard sell from the pharmaceutical companies.
No vaccine passports. These are not experimental vaccines. The flu vaccine changes each year. I have one every year, it's a doddle.
-
A Bacofoil helmet would be much more effective though. Love it
-
One can certainly hope that the vaccines are "great" (and the pharmaceutical companies are exempt from liability if they're not...)
But if they are going to put life on hold every time a new variant comes along until they have a vaccine for it, we could be here a long time. And the vaccine pushers will get very rich...
And if "vaccine passports" are needed to attend sporting events as has been suggested, inevitably there will be those who are unwilling to take these experimental "vaccines" and thus will not attend matches under these circumstances. We are certainly getting the hard sell from the pharmaceutical companies.
Any passport would be an affront to any sort of freedom for vaccines that even the authorities tell us do not stop us catching or spreading the virus and I worry about the short time it took to develop them (normally about 5 years) and the no-liability clause for the big pharma*, but if ppl like Profs Tim Spector and Sunetra Gupta are happy with the vacc that will do for me.
*Astra Zeneca are not making profits from this as theirs costs about £3 a dose!
Having said that, my ex had the vacc a couple of weeks ago and the last time I saw her she looked grotesque and deformed with warts and sores....then I remembered she always looked like that!
-
Kettering Town chairman has revealed he is to attend a disciplinary after not fulfilling their fixture against Chester. Looks like they are going to be the guinea pigs
-
Interesting statement by Wealdstone. The chairman states that they want to null and void but then goes on to say that they have voted for 1, 2 and 4. I think that will most likely result in 75% being achieved for resolution 1 meaning Tier 1 get to vote for their own destiny at which point more than 50% will vote to carry on.
If they had voted against resolution 1 along with Dover and the teams in National North there is a better chance that resolution 1 would fail in which case resolution 4 would come in to play and Wealdtone would have far more allies from Tier 2.
Can anyone remember whether its one member one vote for resolution 4 or is it back to Tier 1 clubs having a greater say?
-
Sounds hopeful for the season carrying on but you never know some clubs could have voted the way they werent expected to .
-
One can certainly hope that the vaccines are "great" (and the pharmaceutical companies are exempt from liability if they're not...)
But if they are going to put life on hold every time a new variant comes along until they have a vaccine for it, we could be here a long time. And the vaccine pushers will get very rich...
And if "vaccine passports" are needed to attend sporting events as has been suggested, inevitably there will be those who are unwilling to take these experimental "vaccines" and thus will not attend matches under these circumstances. We are certainly getting the hard sell from the pharmaceutical companies.
(https://media.giphy.com/media/xTcf1gUpg87E5lNK2A/giphy.gif)
You seem to have forgotten the location of your off-topic thread.
I suppose you don't have shares in a pharmaceutical company by any chance? You certainly seem keen to defend them, "London" Alty.
You want to trust the corrupt pharmaceutical industry, that's up to you. But some people would inevitably not sign up to such a scheme, which would hit crowds.
I still maintain that it will be some years, if ever, until crowds ((which had been falling anyway) get back to pre-2020 levels.
And I still maintain that vaccines/Covid etc. is fair game as long as this nonsense is wrecking our season. I'm not the only one commenting on it as you well know. What about the person who said "vaccines are great" - or could it be that you just want to stop people expressing views you disagree with? I heard that's quite popular in London so I suppose I shouldn't be surprised
-
One can certainly hope that the vaccines are "great" (and the pharmaceutical companies are exempt from liability if they're not...)
But if they are going to put life on hold every time a new variant comes along until they have a vaccine for it, we could be here a long time. And the vaccine pushers will get very rich...
And if "vaccine passports" are needed to attend sporting events as has been suggested, inevitably there will be those who are unwilling to take these experimental "vaccines" and thus will not attend matches under these circumstances. We are certainly getting the hard sell from the pharmaceutical companies.
No vaccine passports. These are not experimental vaccines. The flu vaccine changes each year. I have one every year, it's a doddle.
It may be a doddle, but the fact remains they have been rushed out, people will assume (probably correctly) that any long term effects can't be known yet, and of course, it has been reported that the companies producing them are exempt from liability. Some people will not take them for these and other reasons - I know there is reportedly a deal of suspicion in the "BAME" community for example. And I am only saying what I've heard elsewhere on vaccine passports (which I don't think can realistically be ruled out, and which would inevitably hit crowds to a greater or lesser degree).
-
You are absolutely right Hugh. With regards to anything there are going to be a spectrum of views and everyone is entitled to their opinion. If people stay away from football because of fears associated with Covid it will be a shame but ultimately it will affect all clubs in respect of gate receipts. The knock on effect is they will have less income to pay players. There will still be the same number of players wanting to be professionals so one way or another they will have to accept a reduced wage.
As an aside there is an article in the Sunday Times today regarding smart motorways. Outrage is expressed because LAST YEAR 14 people lost their lives as a result of crashes involving stranded cars. I haven't looked up the Covid death toll TODAY but it will be circa 500. It puts things in to perspective. I would like football to be able to have crowds sooner rather than later but I fear there is a way to go yet.
-
I suppose there may be some doubt now though about whether the "pure" pyramid (1-2-4-8-16) will still go ahead - which would be a pity, as it would have made it easier for North East clubs to progress up the pyramid - look at how well Morpeth were doing!
I'm still not convinced that getting rid of emergency lanes during peak times is a good idea - admittedly not something one would have to worry about in my native Aberdeen!
-
I suppose there may be some doubt now though about whether the "pure" pyramid (1-2-4-8-16) will still go ahead - which would be a pity, as it would have made it easier for North East clubs to progress up the pyramid - look at how well Morpeth were doing!
I'm still not convinced that getting rid of emergency lanes during peak times is a good idea - admittedly not something one would have to worry about in my native Aberdeen!
On Cumbrae emergency lanes are just "lanes!"
You've said some very pertinent stuff on this and other threads.
-
On some of these Scottish islands, "A" roads are single track roads with passing places!
-
On some of these Scottish islands, "A" roads are single track roads with passing places!
It's a different world!