Martin Gray

Open now for discussion of all things Darlo!

Moderators: botrash, mikkyx, charlie, uncovered

roadrunner
Posts: 339
Joined: Sat Jul 18, 2009 7:15 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Martin Gray

Post by roadrunner » Wed Sep 06, 2017 8:47 am

Just listened to after match interview, Think he's realised we've reached our level and now going to play mind games to get this Yarm consortium in.
Mr Johnson seems to occupied with his new pub/restaurant he is opening near spennymoor wonder if the new venture will sponsor a match in the next few weeks.
On another note was speaking to Chorley members last night and they've just sold there ground to the council :lol:

bga
Posts: 1231
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2011 7:18 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Martin Gray

Post by bga » Wed Sep 06, 2017 9:33 am

roadrunner wrote:Just listened to after match interview, Think he's realised we've reached our level and now going to play mind games to get this Yarm consortium in.
Mr Johnson seems to occupied with his new pub/restaurant he is opening near spennymoor wonder if the new venture will sponsor a match in the next few weeks.
On another note was speaking to Chorley members last night and they've just sold there ground to the council :lol:
So have Chorley got a ground to move to when the Council build houses there!

User avatar
bertbanger
Posts: 431
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 10:18 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Martin Gray

Post by bertbanger » Wed Sep 06, 2017 11:16 am

we were always going to reach a ceiling from where significant investment is needed to kick on, and the NLN is that ceiling, the momentum of getting through the leagues was always going to slow down from this division onwards, there are big teams in this league relatively speaking with bigger budgets and better catchment areas, and we still have a core of players who were with us in the Northern League who IMO are playing at the tip of the pyramid their abilities allow them to.
Gray knows this and i for one and i hope i speak to the majority of fans understand this, he is doing the best job he could possibly do, unfortunately at the moment the team has had a bad run and seem short of both luck and confidence.

theres no need to get carried away and criticise the manager and panic, were doing alright for what we can achieve.

i always expected to find it difficult to get out this division, much more so than the previous ones

User avatar
Spyman
Posts: 11714
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:04 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Martin Gray

Post by Spyman » Wed Sep 06, 2017 11:48 am

Once we've funded the various ground improvements and the 5-year season tickets run out, I don't see why this has to be our ceiling. Our attendances are among the top end in the league - once we're on a level-playing field budget-wise without other priorities to finance then there's no reason we can't be promoted from this league.
On Sunday April 29, 2012 at 10:25 pm, Darlo Cockney wrote:Sadly some people have nothing better to do that invent rumours.

We will be playing at the arena again next season - fact.

Quakerz - if you actually attended games and spoke to people you might actually find our facts, rather than spreading s*** on this board.

DC

User avatar
Darlo_H
Posts: 1925
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 8:39 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Martin Gray

Post by Darlo_H » Wed Sep 06, 2017 11:53 am

There's hardly a rush until the ground improvements are fully funded and completed, as we couldn't go up anyway.

It would make sense to just maintain our place in the division away from a relegation battle with any funds available used to ensure that when we're in a position to go up we actually can.
Jazz Maverick wrote:If I win the 50/50 draw I'm going to use the money to pay a tramp to throw dog s*** at you.

LoidLucan
Posts: 2826
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:29 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Martin Gray

Post by LoidLucan » Wed Sep 06, 2017 11:54 am

It will probably take me a few more seasons before I'm psyched up for a drive to Dover!

Undercovered
Posts: 250
Joined: Sun May 15, 2016 1:35 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Martin Gray

Post by Undercovered » Wed Sep 06, 2017 11:56 am

Spyman wrote:Once we've funded the various ground improvements and the 5-year season tickets run out, I don't see why this has to be our ceiling. Our attendances are among the top end in the league - once we're on a level-playing field budget-wise without other priorities to finance then there's no reason we can't be promoted from this league.
:clap: :clap:

It's astonishing how many people don't want to think of things this way. All this talk of celilings is rubbish, whilst it may be our ceiling for this season it doesn't mean it will be for ever, even run under a sustainable model. Too many people think that we have a god given right to be in the league in 2 seasons time
Image

Undercovered
Posts: 250
Joined: Sun May 15, 2016 1:35 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Martin Gray

Post by Undercovered » Wed Sep 06, 2017 12:05 pm

Darlo_H wrote:There's hardly a rush until the ground improvements are fully funded and completed, as we couldn't go up anyway.

It would make sense to just maintain our place in the division away from a relegation battle with any funds available used to ensure that when we're in a position to go up we actually can.
That's what we should have done if we had any kind of joined up strategy. As it is we've now ploughed money into the playing budget and ok we could cut it but it's far more risky doing it mid season

Again it's the clamour for everything now, rather than growing at a pace we can sustain
Image

Yarblockos
Posts: 612
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2015 9:19 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Martin Gray

Post by Yarblockos » Wed Sep 06, 2017 12:35 pm

Undercovered wrote:
Darlo_H wrote:There's hardly a rush until the ground improvements are fully funded and completed, as we couldn't go up anyway.

It would make sense to just maintain our place in the division away from a relegation battle with any funds available used to ensure that when we're in a position to go up we actually can.
That's what we should have done if we had any kind of joined up strategy. As it is we've now ploughed money into the playing budget and ok we could cut it but it's far more risky doing it mid season

Again it's the clamour for everything now, rather than growing at a pace we can sustain
I agree, it been a series of very, very short term plans. The move to BM was planned no further than getting it up the minimum requirements, for example. Building the seats as they are and the tin shed as it is are incompatible with a long term need to reach the required capacity if we were ever return to the FL. I was hoping things would change with Johnson taking control.

User avatar
Spyman
Posts: 11714
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:04 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Martin Gray

Post by Spyman » Wed Sep 06, 2017 1:02 pm

Undercovered wrote:
Spyman wrote:Once we've funded the various ground improvements and the 5-year season tickets run out, I don't see why this has to be our ceiling. Our attendances are among the top end in the league - once we're on a level-playing field budget-wise without other priorities to finance then there's no reason we can't be promoted from this league.
:clap: :clap:

It's astonishing how many people don't want to think of things this way. All this talk of celilings is rubbish, whilst it may be our ceiling for this season it doesn't mean it will be for ever, even run under a sustainable model. Too many people think that we have a god given right to be in the league in 2 seasons time
Of course, promotion, if and when it happens, brings with it further ground improvement that will need priority.

I hope that regardless of whether we go up or not this season or next that there is still fundraising for ground improvements beyond those needed for the Conference National. Even if a return to League 2 is a long way off, if at all, it would be helpful to be as far along the way to funding the ground improvements needed as we can before we actually need to address it.
On Sunday April 29, 2012 at 10:25 pm, Darlo Cockney wrote:Sadly some people have nothing better to do that invent rumours.

We will be playing at the arena again next season - fact.

Quakerz - if you actually attended games and spoke to people you might actually find our facts, rather than spreading s*** on this board.

DC

Yarblockos
Posts: 612
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2015 9:19 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Martin Gray

Post by Yarblockos » Wed Sep 06, 2017 1:11 pm

Spyman wrote:
Undercovered wrote:
Spyman wrote:Once we've funded the various ground improvements and the 5-year season tickets run out, I don't see why this has to be our ceiling. Our attendances are among the top end in the league - once we're on a level-playing field budget-wise without other priorities to finance then there's no reason we can't be promoted from this league.
:clap: :clap:

It's astonishing how many people don't want to think of things this way. All this talk of celilings is rubbish, whilst it may be our ceiling for this season it doesn't mean it will be for ever, even run under a sustainable model. Too many people think that we have a god given right to be in the league in 2 seasons time
Of course, promotion, if and when it happens, brings with it further ground improvement that will need priority.

I hope that regardless of whether we go up or not this season or next that there is still fundraising for ground improvements beyond those needed for the Conference National. Even if a return to League 2 is a long way off, if at all, it would be helpful to be as far along the way to funding the ground improvements needed as we can before we actually need to address it.
There are no plans for how BM would be upgraded to meet FL standards, the board admitted this at the fans forum last year. There were no plans beyond getting BM to meet the absolute minimum requirements for entering NLN. This is why the tin shed and seats were built as they were. They would have to be pulled down in order to expand the ground to FL standard. I think the overriding view was that getting back into the FL is so unlikely that it would only happen through the generosity of a sugar daddy, and that person would presumably pay for the ground upgrades and pulling down existing structures. You can look at it as an absence of joined up thinking and planning (which will cost long-term), or you could look at it as being realistic.

al_quaker
Posts: 5340
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 2:51 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Martin Gray

Post by al_quaker » Wed Sep 06, 2017 1:16 pm

Yarblockos wrote:
Spyman wrote:
Undercovered wrote:
Spyman wrote:Once we've funded the various ground improvements and the 5-year season tickets run out, I don't see why this has to be our ceiling. Our attendances are among the top end in the league - once we're on a level-playing field budget-wise without other priorities to finance then there's no reason we can't be promoted from this league.
:clap: :clap:

It's astonishing how many people don't want to think of things this way. All this talk of celilings is rubbish, whilst it may be our ceiling for this season it doesn't mean it will be for ever, even run under a sustainable model. Too many people think that we have a god given right to be in the league in 2 seasons time
Of course, promotion, if and when it happens, brings with it further ground improvement that will need priority.

I hope that regardless of whether we go up or not this season or next that there is still fundraising for ground improvements beyond those needed for the Conference National. Even if a return to League 2 is a long way off, if at all, it would be helpful to be as far along the way to funding the ground improvements needed as we can before we actually need to address it.
There are no plans for how BM would be upgraded to meet FL standards, the board admitted this at the fans forum last year. There were no plans beyond getting BM to meet the absolute minimum requirements for entering NLN. This is why the tin shed and seats were built as they were. They would have to be pulled down in order to expand the ground to FL standard. I think the overriding view was that getting back into the FL is so unlikely that it would only happen through the generosity of a sugar daddy, and that person would presumably pay for the ground upgrades and pulling down existing structures. You can look at it as an absence of joined up thinking and planning (which will cost long-term), or you could look at it as being realistic.
Or perhaps it could be looked at that we were working with the available funds? i.e. the ground was built to the minimum standard as that is all we could afford.

When Johnston first came in he mentioned about the club owning it's own ground as a long term aim. It would be interesting to see if this goes anywhere (I doubt it has so far as there are plenty of more pressing concerns to sort out I'm sure)

Yarblockos
Posts: 612
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2015 9:19 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Martin Gray

Post by Yarblockos » Wed Sep 06, 2017 1:26 pm

al_quaker wrote: Or perhaps it could be looked at that we were working with the available funds? i.e. the ground was built to the minimum standard as that is all we could afford.
Yes, that's a short-term plan. The long-term plan would be to wait until you had the funds to get BM up to a higher standard (or finding another venue) which would probably mean playing somewhere else for a good few seasons. Other clubs have done that, and its a pretty rotten existence, but eventually they were in a position to move into a reasonable standard ground. I would also that having a smaller playing budget would also be part of a long-term plan. We figured we didn't have time to wait and had to move back to the town ASAP. However, the decision has been made now and we have to work with what we have.

al_quaker
Posts: 5340
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 2:51 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Martin Gray

Post by al_quaker » Wed Sep 06, 2017 1:35 pm

Yarblockos wrote:
al_quaker wrote: Or perhaps it could be looked at that we were working with the available funds? i.e. the ground was built to the minimum standard as that is all we could afford.
Yes, that's a short-term plan. The long-term plan would be to wait until you had the funds to get BM up to a higher standard (or finding another venue) which would probably mean playing somewhere else for a good few seasons. Other clubs have done that, and its a pretty rotten existence, but eventually they were in a position to move into a reasonable standard ground. I would also that having a smaller playing budget would also be part of a long-term plan. We figured we didn't have time to wait and had to move back to the town ASAP. However, the decision has been made now and we have to work with what we have.
That long term plan you are suggesting (staying out of Darlo for more years + groundsharing somewhere further away than Bishop Auckland) certainly wouldn't have been without risks to the club though.

Still, like you say, the decision is made. We're at BM, the stands are built as they are, so let's make the best of it.

H1987
Posts: 1144
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 4:14 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Martin Gray

Post by H1987 » Wed Sep 06, 2017 1:59 pm

There's little point in dwelling on it now, but really the Tinshed should have been built a couple of steps deeper (with an additional railing in there), and the seated stand should have been a couple of rows deeper too. As it, it leaves us in a bind long term. There's literally no point in dwelling on it though. The goals right now;

Get the extra seats built
Get a terrace built

Both will improve the experience visiting BM, which frankly creaks when we have a decent sized crowd. Even with the improvements such as moving the dug outs, there was people complaining at the Spenny game again. If we need to cut the playing budget to do it, i support that. We need to win more fans back to become sustainable. Charging 14 quid for hard standing that is a few deep isn't on imho.

Quakerz
Posts: 20959
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:32 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Martin Gray

Post by Quakerz » Wed Sep 06, 2017 2:19 pm

Yep, seats are first priority and then more terracing.

It looks like the club are only going to address the extra terracing when we've actually been promoted because only then will we will be able to access more grant money.

As it stands you can have up to 250k matched funding at this level minus what grants you've had in the previous 5 years. As we've pretty much had the full 250k already, there is no more funding that can be accessed at this level for the next few seasons until previous grants become more than 5 years old.

If for example we got promoted next year, then as a conference national club we would be entitled to up to 400k matched funding - minus whatever funding we have already had in the last 5 years (250k).

So promotion to the national league as it stands would allow us to access a further 150k in grant money, there's 300k if we raise the other half. There's your terrace at the open end plus what other jobs need doing for category A.
Image

“Everybody knows where that club is going now, so I’m out of the way. They can carry on, it’s their club, they can keep it." - Raj Singh, 2017

Quakerz
Posts: 20959
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:32 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Martin Gray

Post by Quakerz » Wed Sep 06, 2017 2:22 pm

One other thing I have noticed about the hardstanding is that the area between the dug outs and player entrance actually slopes slightly downwards away from the fence. This makes it hard for even tall people to see if they are behind someone.

Whereas the hard standing between the dugouts and tin shed actually varies between level and sloping slightly upwards towards the turnstiles. This gives people a slightly better view.
Image

“Everybody knows where that club is going now, so I’m out of the way. They can carry on, it’s their club, they can keep it." - Raj Singh, 2017

lo36789
Posts: 8051
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:58 pm
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Liverpool

Re: Martin Gray

Post by lo36789 » Wed Sep 06, 2017 3:05 pm

Yarblockos wrote:There were no plans beyond getting BM to meet the absolute minimum requirements for entering NLN.
The thing is you know that isn't true but you have said it. It was quite clearly stated that the plans are there to get us to Category A which is I think 4,000 + plans for 5,000.

What we didn't have was the standards for FL. We have the plan to get into the FL as you can get promoted on the NL grading but not one that will make us stay there beyond 1 year.

As Quakerz states. The matched funding from getting to the NL will give us the means to pay to get to that grading. I assume (might be wrong) there is further matched funding available in getting FL status - I mean you would expect that it will be longer than 5 years until we need that so we might have access to the full provision as well.

Part of our problem is we came through so quickly we were building all aspects of ground grading requirements based on a provision for NLN. Most clubs would have a 5 year gap so would have incremental availability of funding.

H1987
Posts: 1144
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 4:14 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Martin Gray

Post by H1987 » Wed Sep 06, 2017 4:46 pm

Tis true, we've just never seen the plans for the next stage, other than at some point it's been mentioned at a fans forum a terrace will go in the unoccupied end.

If we don't go up (and lets face it, it looks very, very unlikely this year), i'd still like to see us start building that terrace. Even if it's just a small one behind the goal initially, which can then be expanded along and have a roof added later. Not really from a grading or capacity perspective, but just from a simple desire for people to have a better view, better all around experience and get people coming back.

Yarblockos
Posts: 612
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2015 9:19 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Martin Gray

Post by Yarblockos » Wed Sep 06, 2017 5:54 pm

lo36789 wrote:
Yarblockos wrote:There were no plans beyond getting BM to meet the absolute minimum requirements for entering NLN.
The thing is you know that isn't true but you have said it. It was quite clearly stated that the plans are there to get us to Category A which is I think 4,000 + plans for 5,000.

What we didn't have was the standards for FL. We have the plan to get into the FL as you can get promoted on the NL grading but not one that will make us stay there beyond 1 year.

As Quakerz states. The matched funding from getting to the NL will give us the means to pay to get to that grading. I assume (might be wrong) there is further matched funding available in getting FL status - I mean you would expect that it will be longer than 5 years until we need that so we might have access to the full provision as well.

Part of our problem is we came through so quickly we were building all aspects of ground grading requirements based on a provision for NLN. Most clubs would have a 5 year gap so would have incremental availability of funding.
4,000 is needed to reach Category A, but you also have to show how it is feasible to increase capacity to 5,000. Is there a plan on how to achieve 5,000? You would not build the tin shed and the seats as part of a plan to get the ground up to that standard.

Bear in mind that the original plans were drawn up before the pipe issue was brought to light. There have never been any plans to get BM to FL standards, and if there were, then the pipe has scuppered them. In the FL you need 2,000 seats and a capacity of 5,000. With the existing seating and tin shed as it is there is simply not enough room to put in 2,000 seats plus the extra terracing.

HarryCharltonsCat
Posts: 934
Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 8:06 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Martin Gray

Post by HarryCharltonsCat » Wed Sep 06, 2017 5:58 pm

Spyman wrote:Once we've funded the various ground improvements and the 5-year season tickets run out, I don't see why this has to be our ceiling. Our attendances are among the top end in the league - once we're on a level-playing field budget-wise without other priorities to finance then there's no reason we can't be promoted from this league.
Being the highest supported hasn't helped Stockport or FCUM get out of here.

Mario
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2015 5:26 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Martin Gray

Post by Mario » Wed Sep 06, 2017 6:15 pm

I like Martin Gray and what he has done for DFC. He has been brilliant and I hope he is around for a good few years to come.

My only criticism of him is that he tinkers with the formation too much and does not play players in their best position.

tezza
Posts: 972
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2011 10:25 am
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Darlington
Contact:

Re: Martin Gray

Post by tezza » Wed Sep 06, 2017 7:45 pm

Roadrunner has pulled you lot all over the place.
with the exception of the last poster who actually mentions MG.

He seems intent on opening old wounds, and making half baked claims of inside info.

Rising to his bait feeds him further.

SwansQuaker83
Posts: 691
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 4:46 pm
Team Supported: Swansea (and Darlo of course)

Re: Martin Gray

Post by SwansQuaker83 » Wed Sep 06, 2017 8:53 pm

lo36789 wrote:
Yarblockos wrote:There were no plans beyond getting BM to meet the absolute minimum requirements for entering NLN.
The thing is you know that isn't true but you have said it. It was quite clearly stated that the plans are there to get us to Category A which is I think 4,000 + plans for 5,000.

What we didn't have was the standards for FL. We have the plan to get into the FL as you can get promoted on the NL grading but not one that will make us stay there beyond 1 year.

As Quakerz states. The matched funding from getting to the NL will give us the means to pay to get to that grading. I assume (might be wrong) there is further matched funding available in getting FL status - I mean you would expect that it will be longer than 5 years until we need that so we might have access to the full provision as well.

Part of our problem is we came through so quickly we were building all aspects of ground grading requirements based on a provision for NLN. Most clubs would have a 5 year gap so would have incremental availability of funding.
A lot of things were quite clearly stated, like how we had a ground to go up last year, and how they failed to notice the 2016 amendment, which wasn't actually a 2016 amendment, more like 2008. They were asked at the forum about this and they refused to go into it...

If they could describe how BM could get up to standard then perhaps people would be more willing to invest to meet the next step... they could see the finished article... as it is there is a lot of uncertainty around BM being a long term solution, and the funding had stagnated...

If they have plans to achieve a FL ground then let's hear them, even if they're rough...

lo36789
Posts: 8051
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:58 pm
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Liverpool

Re: Martin Gray

Post by lo36789 » Wed Sep 06, 2017 9:14 pm

No again - that wasn't what was said.

What was said was there are plans to get a Cat A (NL) ground. Nothing beyond that. The fact of the matter is to have plans for Cat A means eligibility for promotion to FL. There would be a problem at that point as we would be relegated within a year unless there was a redeisgn of tin shed / existing stand is made 'bigger'.

But that fact is at that point once you hit FL you have just guaranteed yourself £2.1m of income plus another 2 years of parachute payments (even if you get relegated) - plus you have an extra amount of matched funding.

dickdarlington
Posts: 1473
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 12:12 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Martin Gray

Post by dickdarlington » Wed Sep 06, 2017 9:28 pm

There is one important aspect to consider. One which can not be under stated. WE DO NOT OWN THE GROUND WE'RE DISCUSSING!

The ground can be developed to a 5K capacity with 2000 seats, within the current foot print, even considering the pipe. However, beyond the seats extension, it is vital that each further step is calculated to a bigger picture.

But, all of this needs to be conducted with the approval and support of the landlords. The relationship is still rather frosty to say the least. Has anyone considered that maybe such open statements about what need to come next might make things more difficult, of noses are put out further.

lo36789
Posts: 8051
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:58 pm
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Liverpool

Re: Martin Gray

Post by lo36789 » Wed Sep 06, 2017 9:47 pm

Relationships still frosty? I've not even heard roadrunner make up rumours about rugby club relationships so they can't be that topical.

moz1963
Posts: 88
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 11:22 am
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Richmond

Re: Martin Gray

Post by moz1963 » Wed Sep 06, 2017 9:54 pm

An unsettled back 4 due to injury has not helped, don't press the panic button yet!

Darlo_Pete
Posts: 11858
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:13 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Martin Gray

Post by Darlo_Pete » Thu Sep 07, 2017 5:52 am

moz1963 wrote:An unsettled back 4 due to injury has not helped, don't press the panic button yet!
When can the panic button be pressed?

lo36789
Posts: 8051
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:58 pm
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Liverpool

Re: Martin Gray

Post by lo36789 » Thu Sep 07, 2017 6:02 am

Darlo_Pete wrote:
moz1963 wrote:An unsettled back 4 due to injury has not helped, don't press the panic button yet!
When can the panic button be pressed?
Relegation zone in February.

Post Reply