|
|
Post by baboonfish on Feb 7, 2018 15:50:43 GMT
I don't think anybody's answered Amberchoc's question. I'm not entirely sure (and am happy to be corrected), but my understanding is that any National League club finishing in a play-off position has to then take part in the play-offs. It's not open to a club to opt out because it doesn't want to take up its 3G pitch. The only basis on which a club might be excluded from the play-offs is if its ground falls significantly short of the EFL's grading standards (which are to do with things like number of seats and turnstiles, not the nature of the pitch). The National League ethos is built around offering viable promotees to the EFL. The presumption is that if you're doing better than treading water in the NL then you must be prepared to do whatever's necessary to take the step up. I seem to recall it was mentioned somewhere that clubs have to 'apply' to be in the play-offs some time in March. We could not apply for the play-offs, in which case the place would go to the team finishing 8th. Not sure if that applies to promotion in general. For me the debate rages on pointlessly. Everything being said has been said more than once before in another thread and its rather tiresome. Nearly everyone's opinion seems to be either ignoring actual facts or based on the ludicrous assumption we would actually win the playoffs, which with our play off record is a very wild assumption. As superb as this team has been this year we are not really ready for league football yet (although we could probably hold our own) and if we were to win the league outright, which is indeed a fair possibility, it would make a mockery of the stronger full-time squads, and would throw a lot of weight behind the argument that its a very weak division this season. In reality I feel the gap between all but the top teams in League 1 to the top few teams in the South/North is narrowing every year, and that if you threw them all in a hypothetical 'megaleague' the final placements would be extremely mixed. If we are still in contention for the title come the last 8 or so games, and IF we get through the first round of play-offs, the debate would be worth opening up again, but only with the full compliment of facts acknowledged (i.e. no more talks of 'groundshares' that arent allowed). |
|
|
|
Post by backhome2016 on Feb 7, 2018 18:05:13 GMT
Why oh why do so many threads on this forum bring out the posters who belittle others for what they have written? If you don't agree, fine, debate your thoughts courteously. If you find a thread 'tiresome' or 'pointless' don't read it - stay away from it. The rest of us obviously do want to read others thoughts and put our own across, however naive or misguided they might be.
My opinion (for that is all it is, right or wrong) is that what is at stake if promotion is achieved is having to break up the very business/footballing/community model that has propelled the club into the successful position in which it now finds itself. It works! Yes, the club have signed an undertaking to abide by the NL rules, but I wouldn't mind betting that it was signed with the assumption that it was safe to do so as we wouldn't be serious promotion candidates for a good few seasons - time enough for the 3G argument to be settled.
I feel for Dos, the backroom staff and the players. Damned if they do and damned if they don't.
|
|
|
|
Post by Big Al on Feb 7, 2018 18:31:29 GMT
I don't get the argument that this shouldn't be discussed because it's all hypothetical/ we are useless in play offs etc etc. The fact is whether we like to admit it or not we are in with a very real chance of finishing in a promotion position and should be planning and forming contingency plans and I feel comfortable that is exactly what the club are doing.
In my opinion we signed the agreement at the start of the year and were not forced to do so as someone asserted earlier in this thread. We knew the rules and agreed to abide by them. I can't believe that anyone at the Club went into the season without the faith and belief that we could finish very high up the league so we were eyes open to the potential issue.
As a further thought I have read that some believe if we were to rip up the pitch our financial security and successful business model would break down. I would argue that a double relegation with our best players undoubtedly departing almost immediately, sponsors prepared to pay less and,yes, a collapse in season ticket and match day sales would be even more harmful.
Can't believe there are some on here actually suggesting we throw matches. If we achieve what must have been and still is our goal I.e. Promotion then if necessary the pitch has to be restored to grass
|
|
|
|
Post by meddles on Feb 7, 2018 18:38:08 GMT
Should we gain promotion, let's not rip the pitch up. We should just gently roll it up, ready to be relaid when the EFL eventually see sense!  |
|
|
|
Post by baboonfish on Feb 7, 2018 21:18:01 GMT
Why oh why do so many threads on this forum bring out the posters who belittle others for what they have written? If you don't agree, fine, debate your thoughts courteously. If you find a thread 'tiresome' or 'pointless' don't read it - stay away from it. The rest of us obviously do want to read others thoughts and put our own across, however naive or misguided they might be. My opinion (for that is all it is, right or wrong) is that what is at stake if promotion is achieved is having to break up the very business/footballing/community model that has propelled the club into the successful position in which it now finds itself. It works! Yes, the club have signed an undertaking to abide by the NL rules, but I wouldn't mind betting that it was signed with the assumption that it was safe to do so as we wouldn't be serious promotion candidates for a good few seasons - time enough for the 3G argument to be settled. I feel for Dos, the backroom staff and the players. Damned if they do and damned if they don't. I havent belittled anyone mate, its just very boring to read the same old ideas and opinions that have been mooted by different people in different threads about the same thing, especially when many of the ideas and opinions are simply ignoring basic FACTS! Lets groundsahre?! - no, its not allowed Lets turn down promotion - not allowed Lets throw games - highly illegal and not allowed Etc etc. If anyone has anything NEW to add (I read the posts just INCASE), I'm like Gary Lineker and Dumbo's illicit offspring, i.e. ALL EARS!! But assuming not please do your research before wheeling out more of the same old jizzy offerings. |
|
|
|
Post by backhome2016 on Feb 7, 2018 21:26:08 GMT
Why oh why do so many threads on this forum bring out the posters who belittle others for what they have written? If you don't agree, fine, debate your thoughts courteously. If you find a thread 'tiresome' or 'pointless' don't read it - stay away from it. The rest of us obviously do want to read others thoughts and put our own across, however naive or misguided they might be. My opinion (for that is all it is, right or wrong) is that what is at stake if promotion is achieved is having to break up the very business/footballing/community model that has propelled the club into the successful position in which it now finds itself. It works! Yes, the club have signed an undertaking to abide by the NL rules, but I wouldn't mind betting that it was signed with the assumption that it was safe to do so as we wouldn't be serious promotion candidates for a good few seasons - time enough for the 3G argument to be settled. I feel for Dos, the backroom staff and the players. Damned if they do and damned if they don't. I havent belittled anyone mate, its just very boring to read the same old ideas and opinions that have been mooted by different people in different threads about the same thing, especially when many of the ideas and opinions are simply ignoring basic FACTS! Lets groundsahre?! - no, its not allowed Lets turn down promotion - not allowed Lets throw games - highly illegal and not allowed Etc etc. If anyone has anything NEW to add (I read the posts just INCASE), I'm like Gary Lineker and Dumbo's illicit offspring, i.e. ALL EARS!! But assuming not please do your research before wheeling out more of the same old jizzy offerings. I rest my case |
|
|
|
Post by Andy K on Feb 9, 2018 9:32:39 GMT
|
|
|
|
3G pitch
Feb 9, 2018 10:32:01 GMT
via mobile
Post by mca on Feb 9, 2018 10:32:01 GMT
Seems things have shifted a bit in the last week. I was under the impression if we went up, We had a plan because there's no way SUFC could pass the chance to play league football, now the talk seems to be of the (rightful) injustice of being put down a division. Both arguments are very strong and I wouldn't wanna be the one making the decision. For me, perfect timeline would be , lose the final(day out at Wembley), efl voted yes and we win the division by 15 points next season. Too much to ask?
|
|
|
|
Post by baboonfish on Feb 9, 2018 14:27:57 GMT
I havent belittled anyone mate, its just very boring to read the same old ideas and opinions that have been mooted by different people in different threads about the same thing, especially when many of the ideas and opinions are simply ignoring basic FACTS! Lets groundsahre?! - no, its not allowed Lets turn down promotion - not allowed Lets throw games - highly illegal and not allowed Etc etc. If anyone has anything NEW to add (I read the posts just INCASE), I'm like Gary Lineker and Dumbo's illicit offspring, i.e. ALL EARS!! But assuming not please do your research before wheeling out more of the same old jizzy offerings. I rest my case Water tight. Columbo himself would be proud! Jeez I hope you aint a defence lawyer  |
|
amberchoc
1st team Player
Blessed is the person who having nothing to say abstains from giving us wordy evidence of the fact.
Posts: 1,502 
|
Post by amberchoc on Feb 9, 2018 18:46:34 GMT
If that's your idea of watertight, remind me not to get in a boat with you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Amber Aleman on Feb 11, 2018 16:50:08 GMT
Many of you will have seen the interview with Dos on page 3 of today's NLP, the main subject of which is the 3G dilemma.
The interview does provide some helpful clarification for Sutton supporters. The main points that I took from it are as follows.
1. In the event of Sutton finishing in a promotion position, the club would be committed to taking the step up to the EFL.
2. The club is exploring a number of options to resolve the pitch issue.
3. One option is to use the services of a "top sports barrister" (presumably to advise on a legal challenge to the existing NL/EFL rules).
4. The possibility of a groundshare is also being considered (though that would be subject to the EFL's agreement).
5. If grass is put down at GGL, it would be on top of the 3G surface (which would be given a protective covering) so that this could be returned to use at a future date.
6. If the 3G is no longer avaialable at GGL, Sutton would aim to establish another 3G facility nearby so that the community model could be sustained.
|
|
|
|
Post by Del on Feb 11, 2018 17:06:12 GMT
Yes a friend of mine wrote in suggesting that it is possible to to lay a grass pitch on top of our surface with a double layer of membrane underneath.It can then be removed in the future . Cost i understand would be very reasonable.
|
|
|
|
3G pitch
Feb 11, 2018 18:52:17 GMT
via mobile
Post by mca on Feb 11, 2018 18:52:17 GMT
Many of you will have seen the interview with Dos on page 3 of today's NLP, the main subject of which is the 3G dilemma. The interview does provide some helpful clarification for Sutton supporters. The main points that I took from it are as follows. 1. In the event of Sutton finishing in a promotion position, the club would be committed to taking the step up to the EFL. 2. The club is exploring a number of options to resolve the pitch issue. 3. One option is to use the services of a "top sports barrister" (presumably to advise on a legal challenge to the existing NL/EFL rules). 4. The possibility of a groundshare is also being considered (though that would be subject to the EFL's agreement). 5. If grass is put down at GGL, it would be on top of the 3G surface (which would be given a protective covering) so that this could be returned to use at a future date. 6. If the 3G is no longer avaialable at GGL, Sutton would aim to establish another 3G facility nearby so that the community model could be sustained. Perfect response from the club. If everything goes swimmingly (promotion and a yes vote) , then it's only a 1 season solution needed. Can't believe we wouldn't be allowed a ground share for 1 year or laying grass on the 3g seems the obvious thing to do. Full steam ahead |
|
|
|
3G pitch
Feb 11, 2018 19:15:50 GMT
via mobile
Post by garethl on Feb 11, 2018 19:15:50 GMT
Can’t imagine option 4 would be allowed. They won’t want to set any sort of precedent on that. Easier to agree a year’s dispensation on the 3G if a ‘yes’ vote materialises. Otherwise back to the get grass down and suspend community operations at GGL for a minimum of one season.
|
|
|
|
Post by cheshire on Feb 14, 2018 15:19:50 GMT
|
|
