The number one Darlington FC fan's website
https://www.darlofc.co.uk:443/forum/
https://www.darlofc.co.uk:443/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=33302
In NLS that may be be necessary given Hungerford & Poole are non compliantDarlobaz79 wrote:The rules allow the 6th or 7th place team to compete in the play-offs should any of the teams in the play-off positions not be allowed to participate.
But after yesterday it is Poole or Hungerford for the last play off position with Hampton & Richmond waiting to take their place. Whether the appeals are successful or not, Wealdstone won't be in the play-offstheoriginalfatcat wrote:Wealdstone are the 4th team to be caught up in this 500 seats/playoff saga.
A quick look on their fans forum (stones net.forum) finds a ten page thread entitled "playoff dream" which started on 8th March.
It is full of misunderstandings,gossip,clandestine plans and dodgy info re Poole, Hungerford and themselves.
It seems that in the Conference South, the FA rules have started a kind of playoff of stadiums situation between 3 teams. Wealdstone possibly trying the Shaun Cambell approach of banging in the seats pronto!
I wonder how realistic the Shaun Campbell approach was ever likely to be? Was he going to come in at the last minute and save the day again? Of course, it begs the question that if the board had revealed their predicament back in February when they first knew, it might have enabled someone to come forward as a saviour. Could it be done in 7 days? Logistically I'm not sure it was possible.theoriginalfatcat wrote:Wealdstone are the 4th team to be caught up in this 500 seats/playoff saga.
A quick look on their fans forum (stones net.forum) finds a ten page thread entitled "playoff dream" which started on 8th March.
It is full of misunderstandings,gossip,clandestine plans and dodgy info re Poole, Hungerford and themselves.
It seems that in the Conference South, the FA rules have started a kind of playoff of stadiums situation between 3 teams. Wealdstone possibly trying the Shaun Cambell approach of banging in the seats pronto!
There's no doubt that the board found themselves in a very tricky position. We all have differing views but personally I would have preferred the board to have to have done just that.Yarblockos wrote: it begs the question that if the board had revealed their predicament back in February when they first knew, it might have enabled someone to come forward as a saviour.
The Non League Paper said "this week."Darlo_Pete wrote:I believe it will be heard on Wednesday.
I thought the seats had to be in place 31st March.I wonder how realistic the Shaun Campbell approach was ever likely to be? Was he going to come in at the last minute and save the day again? Of course, it begs the question that if the board had revealed their predicament back in February when they first knew, it might have enabled someone to come forward as a saviour. Could it be done in 7 days? Logistically I'm not sure it was possible.
They did!! S.C. wanted to go for it, and get them in anyway, to call the F.A's bluff!Makka Pakka wrote:I thought the seats had to be in place 31st March.I wonder how realistic the Shaun Campbell approach was ever likely to be? Was he going to come in at the last minute and save the day again? Of course, it begs the question that if the board had revealed their predicament back in February when they first knew, it might have enabled someone to come forward as a saviour. Could it be done in 7 days? Logistically I'm not sure it was possible.
See I could see this working if it wasn't the temporary seats.theoriginalfatcat wrote:They did!! S.C. wanted to go for it, and get them in anyway, to call the F.A's bluff!
Audacious...
lo36789 wrote:See I could see this working if it wasn't the temporary seats.theoriginalfatcat wrote:They did!! S.C. wanted to go for it, and get them in anyway, to call the F.A's bluff!
Audacious...
If between 31st March and appeal day you built a permanent structure it would be interesting as the rule is clearly there to mean you are ready from day 1 of a potential national league season...well you are.
It does bring into question what relevant the 31st March has - it should really be by final game of normal league season.
Last time at Wembley we were told relegation to the NL and a name change was compulsory.bga wrote:Is it a good omen that last time we appeared at Wembley we won?
loan_star wrote:Last time at Wembley we were told relegation to the NL and a name change was compulsory.bga wrote:Is it a good omen that last time we appeared at Wembley we won?
Who knows what new stupidities will be devised for promotions in coming seasons, so best get promoted and then try to improve the facilities.Feethams 1966 wrote:An alternative view. We've all blamed ourselves (i.e. the club) for unawareness of a significant rule change last year which went unnoticed.
Any appeal should take in to account how this change was communicated. It can't have been well promoted because it didn't appear on the radar till now. Those in charge of the game don't have a good track record of organising it; witness the well documented shambles from the very top.
If it's true that the top team in our league are given a year's extension to get their ground sorted, why?
If for health & safety reasons, then what's good for them should be good for the other promoted side too.
Furthermore I disagree that "driving along in third gear" is better than being promoted now. I respect the opinions of those who disagree but this concept makes the assumption that promotion is a given next season. It isn't, and I'd rather peddle within the lower reaches of the National League rather than go through it all again to get there.
Another way: would you rather pass your driving test now or take more lessons and have a crack at it next year?
To deny the players' achievements is to fail to acknowledge the lung bursting efforts they have given since August, and to waste a year of their short careers.
Finally I wouldn't have liked to be the one who gave the news to MG that his efforts weren't counting this season. Or to the players, then us. There must have been disbelief at every level, and quite a few sleepless night's I'd hazard.
Wonder if he managed to place a bet on the outcome of our Appeal before he was banned?darlo2k wrote:FA don't seem to be in a good mood today, Joey Barton's just received an 18 month ban:
http://www.thefa.com/home/news/2017/apr ... ned-260417
Yes, but isn't it only at THIS level that they ask clubs to speculate on reaching the playoffs by spending money doing all the upgrades by March of that same season, and at all other levels clubs are given until March of the following season?spen666 wrote:lo36789 wrote:See I could see this working if it wasn't the temporary seats.theoriginalfatcat wrote:They did!! S.C. wanted to go for it, and get them in anyway, to call the F.A's bluff!
Audacious...
If between 31st March and appeal day you built a permanent structure it would be interesting as the rule is clearly there to mean you are ready from day 1 of a potential national league season...well you are.
It does bring into question what relevant the 31st March has - it should really be by final game of normal league season.
Presumably 31st March is date so that issues can be sorted out before play offs etc start.
What would happen if date of last game had been used? Then Darlington and the others appeal...play offs would have to be postponed...fixtures could not be compiled...league AGMs could not be held and clubs would not know which divisions they would be in next season. Remember the FA move some clubs according to league boundaries...imagine for example Rushden compiling a squad to play in NPL 1 South and picking players based North of Rushden and then finding they are instead in the Southern League and having to travel to south coast with players based as far north as say Sheffield
31 March date applies at all levels of the pyramid
The three appeals were consolidated i.e. heard together.darlo reborn wrote:They have probably fallen asleep listening to the same thing three times
