League restarts 6 February

Open now for discussion of all things Darlo!

Moderators: mikkyx, uncovered

lo36789
Posts: 9223
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:58 pm
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Liverpool

Re: League restarts 6 February

Post by lo36789 » Mon Feb 01, 2021 9:25 am

Look at divisions below they are even worse. It really isn't unique to the NL in terms of completion / outcome for the season.

Personally, and we aren't affected by this.

If NL completes then relegate the 3 teams who are due to be relegated. If NLN / NLS do not complete promote whoever is top on PPG and then complete the playoffs with who is left. We aren't in the mix we don't deserve to be but those who have performed this season do.

I get the argument that there hasnt been enough games to warrant PPG the alternative is nobody goes up so I am not sure "well if I can't have it nobody can" is a particularly mature argument.

That would leave NLN / NLS short of 6 teams for the new season to get to the aspired 24 teams that was meant to be in from this season.

So apply the same formula to the trident leagues, but do it over the two seasons where an outcome hasn't been arrived at. Whoever is top of each trident league on PPG over the last 2 seasons is promoted, and either play some playoffs in April / May or promote second place on PPG.

No relegation from NLN/NLS but promotion to it and reward for teams who have performed.

That would then create 6 vacancies at Step 3, but there is also due to be another division created at that level anyway to create the balanced pyramid. So apply the same formula in Step 4 / 5 / 6 (PPG over two seasons to promote the best performing teams but no relegation applied)

There are those who will miss out by a whisker and will argue they have been unfairly treated - but the alternative would be nobody gets promoted so really they havnt lost anything.

Old Git
Posts: 895
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 9:09 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: League restarts 6 February

Post by Old Git » Mon Feb 01, 2021 10:03 am

Surely if the NL continues and the NLN and NLS finish the obvious solution is to have no relegation from the NL. They will still be one club short next season but that can be rectified then when hopefully things are back to normal. Trying to reorganise the pyramid in the middle of this mess just adds to the problem.

onewayup
Posts: 2072
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 6:02 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: League restarts 6 February

Post by onewayup » Mon Feb 01, 2021 10:28 am

It's a unique and catastrophic situation made worse by the national league management's handling
Of it, from the original funding through to not having a plan B should we end up where we are,
They had no for thought in what happens if ??, clueless,
You cannot trust what they say, any voting could be skewed to their way of thinking, to make it appear the right way, the national league management have lost credibility throughout all the team's in their jurisdiction, organisational skills big fat ZERO.

en passant
Posts: 415
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2015 10:17 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: League restarts 6 February

Post by en passant » Mon Feb 01, 2021 10:43 am

I see that it is transfer deadline day today. There will be millions being spent in the top echelons of football. According to teletext Man City are offering £15m to buy a couple of 17 year olds, who will probably never feature in their first team for at least a year or two. For the same money three whole leagues could finish their season without having a single club go to the wall.
And whilst clubs at our level struggle to work out how they will manage to get through to the end of the season without risking their very existence, there are many column inches written in the national press about the inadequacies of VAR, but hardly a word about the crisis in lower league football.
Does it seem strange that these things can happen in what we think of as our 'national' game?

onewayup
Posts: 2072
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 6:02 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: League restarts 6 February

Post by onewayup » Mon Feb 01, 2021 10:52 am

YES , it just shows how out of kilter the national games management is with the Game itself, old school fraternity, needs new younger blood who are with what is happening up to date, with all the leagues with in the pyramid of our national sport.

spen666
Posts: 1985
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 9:12 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: League restarts 6 February

Post by spen666 » Mon Feb 01, 2021 10:54 am

onewayup wrote:
Mon Feb 01, 2021 10:28 am
It's a unique and catastrophic situation made worse by the national league management's handling
Of it, from the original funding through to not having a plan B should we end up where we are,
They had no for thought in what happens if ??, clueless,
You cannot trust what they say, any voting could be skewed to their way of thinking, to make it appear the right way, the national league management have lost credibility throughout all the team's in their jurisdiction, organisational skills big fat ZERO.
Not sure that the facts fit your post.

It was the NL Clubs who voted to start the season

It was the NL clubs who never thought beyond the funding for the first 3 months.

The blame, if any at the door of the NL management is in relation to how they distributed the initial grants. Irrespective of that point, we would still be where we are now in regards to future funding.

The NL clubs were naive in voting to start the season with no agreement for funding in place beyond the first 3 months.


It may be convenient to blame the NL Management, but it's the clubs that were naive enough to have no long term thinking, no agreement for funding beyond the first three months, and no plan B.

Each and every club that voted to start the season are partially responsible for where we are now. [ Does anyone know which clubs voted to start the season?]

en passant
Posts: 415
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2015 10:17 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: League restarts 6 February

Post by en passant » Mon Feb 01, 2021 11:35 am

spen666 wrote:
Mon Feb 01, 2021 10:54 am
onewayup wrote:
Mon Feb 01, 2021 10:28 am
It's a unique and catastrophic situation made worse by the national league management's handling
Of it, from the original funding through to not having a plan B should we end up where we are,
They had no for thought in what happens if ??, clueless,
You cannot trust what they say, any voting could be skewed to their way of thinking, to make it appear the right way, the national league management have lost credibility throughout all the team's in their jurisdiction, organisational skills big fat ZERO.
Not sure that the facts fit your post.

It was the NL Clubs who voted to start the season

It was the NL clubs who never thought beyond the funding for the first 3 months.

The blame, if any at the door of the NL management is in relation to how they distributed the initial grants. Irrespective of that point, we would still be where we are now in regards to future funding.

The NL clubs were naive in voting to start the season with no agreement for funding in place beyond the first 3 months.


It may be convenient to blame the NL Management, but it's the clubs that were naive enough to have no long term thinking, no agreement for funding beyond the first three months, and no plan B.

Each and every club that voted to start the season are partially responsible for where we are now. [ Does anyone know which clubs voted to start the season?]
Making the same statement twice in your post does not make your argument stronger. But you assume that the clubs acted in reckless self interest when you present no evidence of what they were given to vote upon. (I am assuming that that you were not present at the meeting where this was discussed and don't have the minutes of that meeting to refer to). All the information that I have seen suggests it was the League who, wrongly, believed that the Government had not only promised to fund the first 3 months, but would extend the grants to a point in the future when fans could be returned to grounds. If they reassured clubs that this would be so, what fault can be laid at the door of the clubs? If you say that clubs should have seen written proof of this promise, then surely this equally applies to the League who should have done so before reassuring the clubs. This does not seem to avoid the onus being on the League to have checked their facts and get some written evidence of how the season was to continue should fans continue to be excluded beyond December.
Onewayup is saying that we should distrust what the League tells us, and you seem to be agreeing with him as, in your view, the clubs should not have accepted what they were being told on the extension of grants.

onewayup
Posts: 2072
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 6:02 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: League restarts 6 February

Post by onewayup » Mon Feb 01, 2021 2:24 pm

That's the facts as i see them, basically the clubs started the league on assurance that more funding would follow if needed, that was a lie as the club's have now found out,
It was a designed lie to procure the start of the season, the original funding was as almost everyone was aware was for lost turnstiles revenues, again another lie the national league management distributed on an unfathomable basis.
That is why I say that they cannot be trusted without everything they say being written down in cast iron guarantees.my concerns are for the all clubs continuation under the national leagues jurisdiction .
After all the shenanigans from the national league management. What would you expect of them,

eddie-rowles
Posts: 251
Joined: Fri Jan 24, 2014 7:51 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: League restarts 6 February

Post by eddie-rowles » Mon Feb 01, 2021 5:39 pm

no vote yet no one got a clue what is going on, this is really sickening for players and fans

User avatar
theoriginalfatcat
Posts: 4865
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 7:40 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: League restarts 6 February

Post by theoriginalfatcat » Mon Feb 01, 2021 6:13 pm

spen666 wrote:
Mon Feb 01, 2021 10:54 am
onewayup wrote:
Mon Feb 01, 2021 10:28 am
It's a unique and catastrophic situation made worse by the national league management's handling
Of it, from the original funding through to not having a plan B should we end up where we are,
They had no for thought in what happens if ??, clueless,
You cannot trust what they say, any voting could be skewed to their way of thinking, to make it appear the right way, the national league management have lost credibility throughout all the team's in their jurisdiction, organisational skills big fat ZERO.
Not sure that the facts fit your post.

It was the NL Clubs who voted to start the season

It was the NL clubs who never thought beyond the funding for the first 3 months.

The blame, if any at the door of the NL management is in relation to how they distributed the initial grants. Irrespective of that point, we would still be where we are now in regards to future funding.

The NL clubs were naive in voting to start the season with no agreement for funding in place beyond the first 3 months.


It may be convenient to blame the NL Management, but it's the clubs that were naive enough to have no long term thinking, no agreement for funding beyond the first three months, and no plan B.

Each and every club that voted to start the season are partially responsible for where we are now. [ Does anyone know which clubs voted to start the season?]
The clubs voted to start the season based on the info given to them. There is an interesting little video on Ollie Bayliss's Twitter page where he explains things briefly to Robbie Savage. Ollie (he is the mole that just keeps on digging) says that the problem is between the government and the League. Apparently they've both been scrabbling through paperwork trying to pin the blame on each other while the clubs are left in a stressful limbo.

The clubs aren't to blame, I think you're wrong.
Mr Singh said this " I'm not expecting to get back any of the money I've already put in, I'm prepared to write it off for the future of the club. I'm not hanging in to make any kind of financial gain in the short or long term - if someone was prepared to come in and take the club off my hands, I'd be more than willing to discuss it"

Tamworth matchday programme 26 Nov 2011

spen666
Posts: 1985
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 9:12 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: League restarts 6 February

Post by spen666 » Mon Feb 01, 2021 6:21 pm

theoriginalfatcat wrote:
Mon Feb 01, 2021 6:13 pm
spen666 wrote:
Mon Feb 01, 2021 10:54 am
onewayup wrote:
Mon Feb 01, 2021 10:28 am
It's a unique and catastrophic situation made worse by the national league management's handling
Of it, from the original funding through to not having a plan B should we end up where we are,
They had no for thought in what happens if ??, clueless,
You cannot trust what they say, any voting could be skewed to their way of thinking, to make it appear the right way, the national league management have lost credibility throughout all the team's in their jurisdiction, organisational skills big fat ZERO.
Not sure that the facts fit your post.

It was the NL Clubs who voted to start the season

It was the NL clubs who never thought beyond the funding for the first 3 months.

The blame, if any at the door of the NL management is in relation to how they distributed the initial grants. Irrespective of that point, we would still be where we are now in regards to future funding.

The NL clubs were naive in voting to start the season with no agreement for funding in place beyond the first 3 months.


It may be convenient to blame the NL Management, but it's the clubs that were naive enough to have no long term thinking, no agreement for funding beyond the first three months, and no plan B.

Each and every club that voted to start the season are partially responsible for where we are now. [ Does anyone know which clubs voted to start the season?]
The clubs voted to start the season based on the info given to them. There is an interesting little video on Ollie Bayliss's Twitter page where he explains things briefly to Robbie Savage. Ollie (he is the mole that just keeps on digging) says that the problem is between the government and the League. Apparently they've both been scrabbling through paperwork trying to pin the blame on each other while the clubs are left in a stressful limbo.

The clubs aren't to blame, I think you're wrong.

The clubs are to partly to blame in my view for voting to start a season without ensuring plans were in place to finance it fully. They didn't think beyond the first 3 months.

What business commits itself to a season of business with only funding agreed for half of it? Clubs were naive, over optimistic and failed to think through the consequences of voting to start the season without contingency plans.

If clubs had refused to start season, then:
1. Either government would have been forced to commit to a plan for the full season of funding or
2. Season doesn't start and therefore we lose season, but clubs are not spending money on wages etc as players are furloughed.

Immediately the clubs voted to start the season, they lost any bargaining chip they may have had to get government to fund the full season. Government were not pinned down by the clubs and can now wriggle out of it because of that.

m62exile
Posts: 2201
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 2:11 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: League restarts 6 February

Post by m62exile » Mon Feb 01, 2021 6:33 pm

spen666 wrote:
theoriginalfatcat wrote:
Mon Feb 01, 2021 6:13 pm
spen666 wrote:
Mon Feb 01, 2021 10:54 am
onewayup wrote:
Mon Feb 01, 2021 10:28 am
It's a unique and catastrophic situation made worse by the national league management's handling
Of it, from the original funding through to not having a plan B should we end up where we are,
They had no for thought in what happens if ??, clueless,
You cannot trust what they say, any voting could be skewed to their way of thinking, to make it appear the right way, the national league management have lost credibility throughout all the team's in their jurisdiction, organisational skills big fat ZERO.
Not sure that the facts fit your post.

It was the NL Clubs who voted to start the season

It was the NL clubs who never thought beyond the funding for the first 3 months.

The blame, if any at the door of the NL management is in relation to how they distributed the initial grants. Irrespective of that point, we would still be where we are now in regards to future funding.

The NL clubs were naive in voting to start the season with no agreement for funding in place beyond the first 3 months.


It may be convenient to blame the NL Management, but it's the clubs that were naive enough to have no long term thinking, no agreement for funding beyond the first three months, and no plan B.

Each and every club that voted to start the season are partially responsible for where we are now. [ Does anyone know which clubs voted to start the season?]
The clubs voted to start the season based on the info given to them. There is an interesting little video on Ollie Bayliss's Twitter page where he explains things briefly to Robbie Savage. Ollie (he is the mole that just keeps on digging) says that the problem is between the government and the League. Apparently they've both been scrabbling through paperwork trying to pin the blame on each other while the clubs are left in a stressful limbo.

The clubs aren't to blame, I think you're wrong.

The clubs are to partly to blame in my view for voting to start a season without ensuring plans were in place to finance it fully. They didn't think beyond the first 3 months.

What business commits itself to a season of business with only funding agreed for half of it? Clubs were naive, over optimistic and failed to think through the consequences of voting to start the season without contingency plans.

If clubs had refused to start season, then:
1. Either government would have been forced to commit to a plan for the full season of funding or
2. Season doesn't start and therefore we lose season, but clubs are not spending money on wages etc as players are furloughed.

Immediately the clubs voted to start the season, they lost any bargaining chip they may have had to get government to fund the full season. Government were not pinned down by the clubs and can now wriggle out of it because of that.
A lovely theory that the clubs shouldn’t have voted to start the season until you realise that the clubs never had a vote to start the season.

They were informed it was starting by the National League board.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

User avatar
theoriginalfatcat
Posts: 4865
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 7:40 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: League restarts 6 February

Post by theoriginalfatcat » Mon Feb 01, 2021 6:47 pm

https://www.change.org/p/department-for ... e_petition


I found this on Ollie's Twitter page.
Mr Singh said this " I'm not expecting to get back any of the money I've already put in, I'm prepared to write it off for the future of the club. I'm not hanging in to make any kind of financial gain in the short or long term - if someone was prepared to come in and take the club off my hands, I'd be more than willing to discuss it"

Tamworth matchday programme 26 Nov 2011

Darlofan97
Posts: 4641
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 1:44 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: League restarts 6 February

Post by Darlofan97 » Mon Feb 01, 2021 7:38 pm

m62exile wrote:
Mon Feb 01, 2021 6:33 pm
spen666 wrote:
theoriginalfatcat wrote:
Mon Feb 01, 2021 6:13 pm
spen666 wrote:
Mon Feb 01, 2021 10:54 am
onewayup wrote:
Mon Feb 01, 2021 10:28 am
It's a unique and catastrophic situation made worse by the national league management's handling
Of it, from the original funding through to not having a plan B should we end up where we are,
They had no for thought in what happens if ??, clueless,
You cannot trust what they say, any voting could be skewed to their way of thinking, to make it appear the right way, the national league management have lost credibility throughout all the team's in their jurisdiction, organisational skills big fat ZERO.
Not sure that the facts fit your post.

It was the NL Clubs who voted to start the season

It was the NL clubs who never thought beyond the funding for the first 3 months.

The blame, if any at the door of the NL management is in relation to how they distributed the initial grants. Irrespective of that point, we would still be where we are now in regards to future funding.

The NL clubs were naive in voting to start the season with no agreement for funding in place beyond the first 3 months.


It may be convenient to blame the NL Management, but it's the clubs that were naive enough to have no long term thinking, no agreement for funding beyond the first three months, and no plan B.

Each and every club that voted to start the season are partially responsible for where we are now. [ Does anyone know which clubs voted to start the season?]
The clubs voted to start the season based on the info given to them. There is an interesting little video on Ollie Bayliss's Twitter page where he explains things briefly to Robbie Savage. Ollie (he is the mole that just keeps on digging) says that the problem is between the government and the League. Apparently they've both been scrabbling through paperwork trying to pin the blame on each other while the clubs are left in a stressful limbo.

The clubs aren't to blame, I think you're wrong.

The clubs are to partly to blame in my view for voting to start a season without ensuring plans were in place to finance it fully. They didn't think beyond the first 3 months.

What business commits itself to a season of business with only funding agreed for half of it? Clubs were naive, over optimistic and failed to think through the consequences of voting to start the season without contingency plans.

If clubs had refused to start season, then:
1. Either government would have been forced to commit to a plan for the full season of funding or
2. Season doesn't start and therefore we lose season, but clubs are not spending money on wages etc as players are furloughed.

Immediately the clubs voted to start the season, they lost any bargaining chip they may have had to get government to fund the full season. Government were not pinned down by the clubs and can now wriggle out of it because of that.
A lovely theory that the clubs shouldn’t have voted to start the season until you realise that the clubs never had a vote to start the season.

They were informed it was starting by the National League board.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The evening before the first game before the season, may I add.

Clubs were told by the National League board that funding had been sourced and would be provided following lost revenue forecasts being sent in by clubs for a 6-month period (October - March). Clubs were then instructed that the season would be commencing.

It isn't the clubs' responsibility to source, agree and then sign-off on this funding, that is the National League's job. It's a failure of governance from the National League to not adequately arrange this for its member clubs.

The funding was never paid directly to clubs from the provider (Camelot), as it wasn't up to the individual clubs to source and agree funding. If it was up to clubs then they would never have started the season knowing loans would cover January - March.

JE93
Posts: 1490
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2009 2:48 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: League restarts 6 February

Post by JE93 » Mon Feb 01, 2021 8:49 pm

Statement from the national league on resolutions.

The National League has distributed resolutions this evening for Member Clubs to consider the outcome of the 2020/21 season.

The resolutions are formed of four parts: one Special Resolution and three Ordinary Resolutions based on the outcome of the first. A Special Resolution requires a 75% majority to be passed, whereas an Ordinary Resolution requires a more than 50% majority. Resolution 1 and 4 votes will be counted under prescribed voting conditions. Resolution 2 and 3 will be counted with one vote per Member Club.

Should Resolution 1 pass, Resolution 2 and 3 will be counted, with Resolution 4 disregarded. Should Resolution 1 be voted against, Resolution 4 will be counted, with Resolution 2 and 3 votes disregarded.

Under The National League’s Articles of Association, Member Clubs have 28 days to return voting submissions.

The resolutions are as follows:

Resolution 1 (All Clubs)

That Resolution 2 about whether to end the 2020/21 Playing Season of The National League (Step 1) be taken only by Clubs in the National League and that Resolution 3 about whether to end the 2020/21 Playing Season of the National League North and the National League South (Step 2) be taken only by Clubs that play in the National League North or the National League South with votes cast for Resolution 3 being counted on a one member, one vote basis for National League North and National League South Clubs.

Resolution 2 (National League Only)

That, conditional upon Resolution 1 being passed, the 2020/21 Playing Season of the National League (Step 1) shall immediately end on the date this Resolution 2 is passed and be declared null and void and subject to the approval of The Football Association, those Regulations that provide for promotion and relegation to and from Step 1 be suspended for the 2020/21 Playing Season.

Resolution 3 (National League North and South Only)

That, conditional upon Resolution 1 being passed, the 2020/21 Playing Season of the National League North and the National League South (Step 2) shall immediately end on the date this Resolution 3 is passed and be declared null and void and subject to the approval of The Football Association those Regulations that provide for promotion and relegation to and from Step 2 be suspended for the 2020/21 Playing Season.

Resolution 4 (All Clubs)

That, conditional upon Resolution 1 being passed, the 2020/21 Playing Season of the National League North and the National League South (Step 2) shall immediately end on the date this Resolution 3 is passed and be declared null and void and subject to the approval of The Football Association those Regulations that provide for promotion and relegation to and from Step 2 be suspended for the 2020/21 Playing Season.


Clubs have 28 days to respond to the resolutions. No instructions on what happens in the mean time regarding NLN and NLS clubs playing and how this is financed.

lo36789
Posts: 9223
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:58 pm
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Liverpool

Re: League restarts 6 February

Post by lo36789 » Mon Feb 01, 2021 9:09 pm

I am sure they have made a mistake.

Resolution 4 reads "conditional on resolution 1 being passed..." but in the preamble states that resolution 4 is for if resolution 1 is voted against.

It also references resolution 3. They have done an absolutely bodged job on the copy and paste and resolution 4 is basically nonsense. I hope the actual papers voted on are correct!

Vote 1. Do the different steps decide their own outcome? Needs 75% to pass, but are under prescribed conditions which means NL are 1 member one vote, NLN and NLS are 4 votes for the whole division.

Vote 2. Assuming that it is decided each step votes for its own outcome. The step 1 clubs decide whether to null and void. 50% wins it.

Vote 3. Same as above but for step 2. 50% wins it.

Vote 4. If there isn't a 75% vote in favour of each division choosing their own outcome the step 1 clubs get to decide if our season is null and voided. Step 1 clubs will get 66% of the vote to decide that. They will be one member one vote we are 4 votes per division.

Edit: just found the actual voting paper. Vote 4 would be a 75% vote to end all divisions.
Last edited by lo36789 on Mon Feb 01, 2021 9:22 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Old Git
Posts: 895
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 9:09 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: League restarts 6 February

Post by Old Git » Mon Feb 01, 2021 9:12 pm

Any chance the National League could put the statement in plain English!

spen666
Posts: 1985
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 9:12 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: League restarts 6 February

Post by spen666 » Mon Feb 01, 2021 9:19 pm

lo36789 wrote:
Mon Feb 01, 2021 9:09 pm
I am sure they have made a mistake.

Resolution 4 reads "conditional on resolution 1 being passed..." but in the preamble states that resolution 4 is for if resolution 1 is voted against.

It also references resolution 3. They have done an absolutely bodged job on the copy and paste and resolution 4 is basically nonsense. I hope the actual papers voted on are correct!

Vote 1. Do the different steps decide their own outcome? Needs 75% to pass, but are under prescribed conditions which means NL are 1 member one vote, NLN and NLS are 4 votes for the whole division.

Vote 2. Assuming that it is decided each step votes for its own outcome. The step 1 clubs decide whether to null and void. 50% wins it.

Vote 3. Same as above but for step 2. 50% wins it.

Vote 4. If there isn't a 75% vote in favour of each division choosing their own outcome the step 1 clubs get to decide if our season is null and voided. Step 1 clubs will get 66% of the vote to decide that. They will be one member one vote we are 4 votes per division.
Think there is a typo in JE93s post.

Resolution 4 says conditional upon resolution 1 NOT being passed in photos of it on social media

joejaques
Posts: 2888
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 10:36 am
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Milford Haven

Re: League restarts 6 February

Post by joejaques » Mon Feb 01, 2021 9:20 pm

Old Git wrote:
Mon Feb 01, 2021 9:12 pm
Any chance the National League could put the statement in plain English!
Erm, yes, but, if, maybe, dunno. :roll:
Image

lo36789
Posts: 9223
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:58 pm
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Liverpool

Re: League restarts 6 February

Post by lo36789 » Mon Feb 01, 2021 9:23 pm

spen666 wrote:
Mon Feb 01, 2021 9:19 pm
lo36789 wrote:
Mon Feb 01, 2021 9:09 pm
I am sure they have made a mistake.

Resolution 4 reads "conditional on resolution 1 being passed..." but in the preamble states that resolution 4 is for if resolution 1 is voted against.

It also references resolution 3. They have done an absolutely bodged job on the copy and paste and resolution 4 is basically nonsense. I hope the actual papers voted on are correct!

Vote 1. Do the different steps decide their own outcome? Needs 75% to pass, but are under prescribed conditions which means NL are 1 member one vote, NLN and NLS are 4 votes for the whole division.

Vote 2. Assuming that it is decided each step votes for its own outcome. The step 1 clubs decide whether to null and void. 50% wins it.

Vote 3. Same as above but for step 2. 50% wins it.

Vote 4. If there isn't a 75% vote in favour of each division choosing their own outcome the step 1 clubs get to decide if our season is null and voided. Step 1 clubs will get 66% of the vote to decide that. They will be one member one vote we are 4 votes per division.
Think there is a typo in JE93s post.

Resolution 4 says conditional upon resolution 1 NOT being passed in photos of it on social media
Farsley have posted the exact same thing.

It's not JE93s post...it is the press release from the NL clearly has a typo...

lo36789
Posts: 9223
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:58 pm
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Liverpool

Re: League restarts 6 February

Post by lo36789 » Mon Feb 01, 2021 9:25 pm

Reading this.

If the clubs who don't want to null and void in Step 2 are clever about it they should vote against resolution 1. That would make that resolution passing with 75% unlikely.

It would then require 75% in favour of null and void for resolution 4 which again is unlikely given most Step 1 club positions.

The top 8 clubs in NL can guarantee the outcome they want by voting against resolution 1 and against resolution 4 and they remove the risk of other clubs in their division getting to stop them with resolution 2.

8 clubs would be 25.8% of the total vote. That would mean that 75% was not hit for resolution 1. Which would mean a move to resolution 4 and the same outcome.

jjljks
Posts: 2159
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2015 10:25 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: League restarts 6 February

Post by jjljks » Mon Feb 01, 2021 10:16 pm

Quite clearly written by the same type of lawyers who drafted the Brexit agreement (the double Dutch sort). It is really depressing as NL management just not realising the urgency of clubs' financial situations. WTF do they think some clubs will do in the 28 days of voting with little or no income?

Darlopartisan
Posts: 999
Joined: Sat Jul 22, 2017 12:49 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: League restarts 6 February

Post by Darlopartisan » Mon Feb 01, 2021 10:18 pm

Well that’s cleared things up.

User avatar
theoriginalfatcat
Posts: 4865
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 7:40 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: League restarts 6 February

Post by theoriginalfatcat » Mon Feb 01, 2021 10:31 pm

Old Git wrote:
Mon Feb 01, 2021 9:12 pm
Any chance the National League could put the statement in plain English!

I too would appreciate someone clever putting this into a concise form, as in - what does it probably mean for us, i simply don't understand it.
Mr Singh said this " I'm not expecting to get back any of the money I've already put in, I'm prepared to write it off for the future of the club. I'm not hanging in to make any kind of financial gain in the short or long term - if someone was prepared to come in and take the club off my hands, I'd be more than willing to discuss it"

Tamworth matchday programme 26 Nov 2011

User avatar
divas
Posts: 13161
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 1:38 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: League restarts 6 February

Post by divas » Mon Feb 01, 2021 10:34 pm

lo36789 wrote:
Mon Feb 01, 2021 9:25 pm
Reading this.

If the clubs who don't want to null and void in Step 2 are clever about it they should vote against resolution 1. That would make that resolution passing with 75% unlikely.

It would then require 75% in favour of null and void for resolution 4 which again is unlikely given most Step 1 club positions.

The top 8 clubs in NL can guarantee the outcome they want by voting against resolution 1 and against resolution 4 and they remove the risk of other clubs in their division getting to stop them with resolution 2.

8 clubs would be 25.8% of the total vote. That would mean that 75% was not hit for resolution 1. Which would mean a move to resolution 4 and the same outcome.
Exactly, the voting bias will mean tactical voting by Step 1 as above which will result in NLN/S continuing with no regard given to what the majority of NLN/S want.

lo36789
Posts: 9223
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 10:58 pm
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Liverpool

Re: League restarts 6 February

Post by lo36789 » Mon Feb 01, 2021 10:44 pm

I personally think it means our division continues and the vote to null and void will not be passed.

Resolution 1 is needed as currently the league requires any special resolutions to be ratified by 75% of the votes (Step 1 23 votes. Step 2 4 votes per division). This vote is to decide do the divisions decide their own outcome.

Resolution 2. Only applies if resolution 1 is passed. Is for NL clubs to decide if their season is null and voided. It would need 50% or 12 votes to pass.

Resolution 3. Only applied if resolution 1 is passed. Is for Step 2 clubs to decide if their season is null and voided. It would need 50% or 22 votes across NLN/NLS to pass.

Resolution 4. Only applies if resolution 1 is not passed. Is for all clubs to decide if both divisions are null and voided. It would need 50% to pass but is under normal voting conditions ie (Step 1 23 votes. Step 2 4 votes per division)

I personally think that NL clubs will vote against resolution 1. As long as 8 clubs vote against it then it would fail (if the top 8 who want to continue vote against this then they guarantee they keep the power).

At that point if 16 Step 1 clubs voted against curtailing that would mean that the season will not be null and voided - and basically clubs will have to either forfeit, fundraise or take loans.

JE93
Posts: 1490
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2009 2:48 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: League restarts 6 February

Post by JE93 » Mon Feb 01, 2021 10:49 pm

theoriginalfatcat wrote:
Mon Feb 01, 2021 10:31 pm
Old Git wrote:
Mon Feb 01, 2021 9:12 pm
Any chance the National League could put the statement in plain English!

I too would appreciate someone clever putting this into a concise form, as in - what does it probably mean for us, i simply don't understand it.
In simple terms as possible.

Vote 1 is a vote on whether the National League and National League North/South should be decided separately. It requires 75% votes in favour to pass. NL clubs have 1 vote each, NLN and NLS clubs have 4 votes per league.

Vote 2 will apply if resolution 1 passes. It will be a vote of National League clubs (one vote each) whether to end the season immediately. Would require a 50%+ majority to pass.

Vote 3, same as vote 2 but for National League North and National League South. Each club would get one vote and it would take a 50%+ majority to pass.

Vote 4 only applies if clubs vote against the first vote and therefore the leagues would be decided together. All clubs in the national league, national league north and national league South would be asked to vote on whether the season should be ended immediately. National league voting rules would apply so national league teams get one vote each, NLN and NLS get 4 votes per league. A 50%+ majority would be required.

User avatar
theoriginalfatcat
Posts: 4865
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 7:40 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: League restarts 6 February

Post by theoriginalfatcat » Mon Feb 01, 2021 11:21 pm

JE93 wrote:
Mon Feb 01, 2021 10:49 pm
[quote=theoriginalfatcat post_id=473100 time=<a href="tel:1612218707">1612218707</a> user_id=376]
[quote="Old Git" post_id=473089 time=<a href="tel:1612213976">1612213976</a> user_id=21927]
Any chance the National League could put the statement in plain English!

I too would appreciate someone clever putting this into a concise form, as in - what does it probably mean for us, i simply don't understand it.
[/quote]

In simple terms as possible.

Vote 1 is a vote on whether the National League and National League North/South should be decided separately. It requires 75% votes in favour to pass. NL clubs have 1 vote each, NLN and NLS clubs have 4 votes per league.

Vote 2 will apply if resolution 1 passes. It will be a vote of National League clubs (one vote each) whether to end the season immediately. Would require a 50%+ majority to pass.

Vote 3, same as vote 2 but for National League North and National League South. Each club would get one vote and it would take a 50%+ majority to pass.

Vote 4 only applies if clubs vote against the first vote and therefore the leagues would be decided together. All clubs in the national league, national league north and national league South would be asked to vote on whether the season should be ended immediately. National league voting rules would apply so national league teams get one vote each, NLN and NLS get 4 votes per league. A 50%+ majority would be required.
[/quote]

Thanks. I’ve got it.

To me this means step one plays on and with step 2 it could go either way.

Of course clubs still don’t know the detail of the emergency type grants. Are they easy or hard to get? How much will they be worth? For how long? And, what about if the South vote primarily to play and the North vote primarily to stop?
Mr Singh said this " I'm not expecting to get back any of the money I've already put in, I'm prepared to write it off for the future of the club. I'm not hanging in to make any kind of financial gain in the short or long term - if someone was prepared to come in and take the club off my hands, I'd be more than willing to discuss it"

Tamworth matchday programme 26 Nov 2011

Richie_darlo
Posts: 25
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 11:10 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: League restarts 6 February

Post by Richie_darlo » Tue Feb 02, 2021 2:20 am

[/quote]


The clubs are to partly to blame in my view for voting to start a season without ensuring plans were in place to finance it fully. They didn't think beyond the first 3 months.

What business commits itself to a season of business with only funding agreed for half of it? Clubs were naive, over optimistic and failed to think through the consequences of voting to start the season without contingency plans.

If clubs had refused to start season, then:
1. Either government would have been forced to commit to a plan for the full season of funding or
2. Season doesn't start and therefore we lose season, but clubs are not spending money on wages etc as players are furloughed.

Immediately the clubs voted to start the season, they lost any bargaining chip they may have had to get government to fund the full season. Government were not pinned down by the clubs and can now wriggle out of it because of that.[/quote]
A lovely theory that the clubs shouldn’t have voted to start the season until you realise that the clubs never had a vote to start the season.

They were informed it was starting by the National League board.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
[/quote]

As usual this gobshite goes silent as soon as his nonsense is pointed out. Guaranteed his agenda is that Spenny could afford to complete the season without grants, and we couldn't, so we as a supporter-owned club are somehow responsible for the position we find ourselves in during a global pandemic (and generally, in some unspecified way, inferior to a glorified Evenwood United).

Here's a suggestion - why don't you, "spen666", fuck right off until you can actually engage in good faith with a serious discussion rather than pretending to be sincere but actually making snide digs that you think nobody will understand because you're so much more intelligent than everybody else? And since you're evidently incapable of doing so, why not just fuck off permanently?

It is utterly offensive to suggest that DJ and the rest of the incredibly capable, committed and hardworking volunteers running this club were "naive, over optimistic and failed to think through the consequences of voting to start the season without contingency plans". I would say the same if it was a Darlo fan making the criticism, but at least I would do so in the knowledge it was misguided rather than motivated by petty spite. I can't speak for the management of other clubs at our level, but what on earth he thinks gives him the right to take it upon himself to assume the reasoning, motivation and ability of their chairmen and boards, and then to criticise it in those terms, is completely beyond me.

It's truly pathetic. He probably thinks that he's won because he got a reaction from a Darlo fan. But I'm not the one spending alarming amounts of my time trolling supporters of a non-league football team.

Richie_darlo
Posts: 25
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 11:10 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: League restarts 6 February

Post by Richie_darlo » Tue Feb 02, 2021 2:40 am

As to the substance of the discussion, I endorse the analysis others have posted above. It invites an absolute clusterfuck where the NL national clubs work out that they can force through the completion of the season at both their and our level.

Whether resolution 1 has to be a special resolution such that the NL's hands are tied, I can't say. But if at arguably the worst point of a global pandemic, during a national lockdown, they can't find a way of resolving this issue then that looks to me like a serious problem of governance. These aren't laws that are incapable of being changed: they're rules about non-league football. In normal times I'd be the first to say that that doesn't mean they shouldn't be applied; but these, fairly obviously, aren't normal times.

Post Reply