18 replies to this topic

[Eastside Urchin]

To stop or at least fight the scourge of non league and lower league football,which is games being shown live in pubs/clubs and Internet at 3pm
For me,this will end up sending many clubs over the edge as many non league fans also support premier league clubs,I just feel that the non league game doesn't seem to be too concerned about this when I believe it should,discuss!

[missunderstood]

Eastside Urchin, on 10 October 2011 - 11:25 AM, said:

To stop or at least fight the scourge of non league and lower league football,which is games being shown live in pubs/clubs and Internet at 3pm
For me,this will end up sending many clubs over the edge as many non league fans also support premier league clubs,I just feel that the non league game doesn't seem to be too concerned about this when I believe it should,discuss!

Really do agree with you on this, but as long as Hornchurch, and others continue to show Sky matches in your clubhouses its difficult to take your suggestion seriously. Seems a bit like asking turkeys to vote for Christmas to me.

[RalphC]

Can't see this having a massive impact and as missunderstood says clubs can always compete with the pubs.

Should clubs aim to only break even on the bar?  If prices were cheaper than the local, then more will come to the match, even if initially they simply drink in the club.

I often find clubs (Hornchurch included) being on the pricey side.

If they initially come in because of the cheap beer, hopefully they will quickly become fans

[Eastside Urchin]

Our prices are actually in line with the majority of clubs in our league,some places it's well over £3 a pint while at a few clubs and I mean a few it's a bit cheaper.
Our burgers etc are among the cheapest and we charge £9 adults to get in when over half the league are charging £10 some £11 to sit.
Apparently the reason we have a reasonably high bar costs are because we are not affiliated to a brewery,we buy it all wholesale which puts the prices up a wee bit,I have been told that no brewery wanted to give us credit because of past problems but not sure if this is completely true!!
As for 3pm football being shown,we did do this last season but that facility has been withdrawn now.We do however have premier league goofy on before & after games and we have noticed an increase in custom before games in the bar.
In our area,if west ham or arsenal are on in any of the pubs,then they are rammed but the fact of the matter is that the premier league apparently aren't allowed to show live games in the uk at 3pm on Saturday's because of the detrimental effect it has on all the other leagues if they did this so to say it will have no effect is somewhat burying our heads in the sand

[missunderstood]

Eastside Urchin, on 10 October 2011 - 04:02 PM, said:

Our prices are actually in line with the majority of clubs in our league,some places it's well over £3 a pint while at a few clubs and I mean a few it's a bit cheaper.
Our burgers etc are among the cheapest and we charge £9 adults to get in when over half the league are charging £10 some £11 to sit.
Apparently the reason we have a reasonably high bar costs are because we are not affiliated to a brewery,we buy it all wholesale which puts the prices up a wee bit,I have been told that no brewery wanted to give us credit because of past problems but not sure if this is completely true!!
As for 3pm football being shown,we did do this last season but that facility has been withdrawn now.We do however have premier league goofy on before & after games and we have noticed an increase in custom before games in the bar.
In our area,if west ham or arsenal are on in any of the pubs,then they are rammed but the fact of the matter is that the premier league apparently aren't allowed to show live games in the uk at 3pm on Saturday's because of the detrimental effect it has on all the other leagues if they did this so to say it will have no effect is somewhat burying our heads in the sand

Its not just the 3pm game thats the problem, the earlier game leaves very little time to travel to a match,  and not everyone wants to sit in a bar for more than two hours and pay more than double what you would pay in a supermarket for a few drinks.

[Eastside Urchin]

Ok solution,early game starts at 12 noon,leaves an hour for people to travel

[Eastside Urchin]

Also Alan,not everyone has to drink and not everyone does,especially at lunchtime.
The primary object of this is to get people through the gates not into the bar although most clubs would obviously like both

[missunderstood]

Eastside Urchin, on 10 October 2011 - 08:13 PM, said:

Ok solution,early game starts at 12 noon,leaves an hour for people to travel

Its not an OK solution at all. Even a noon KO would not leave enough time for away supporters to get to most games. The only solution that would benefit non league football would be if all live televised games were banned until 745pm. It wont happen of coarse because Sky only care about their profit margins, and couldn't give a sh1t about us. How ironic that although sky is killing non league football, a huge number of clubs and supporters still subscribe to their services.

[Eastside Urchin]

You are picking at straws Alan.
The concern of clubs is mainly getting home supporters through the turnstiles not away fans,not saying away fans are unimportant as they are but they tend to be the more passionate supporters of their club,who do not care for premier league football over there non league side and will travel anyway.
Home fans given an hour will more than easily be able to make the game.

[missunderstood]

Eastside Urchin, on 10 October 2011 - 09:55 PM, said:

You are picking at straws Alan.
The concern of clubs is mainly getting home supporters through the turnstiles not away fans,not saying away fans are unimportant as they are but they tend to be the more passionate supporters of their club,who do not care for premier league football over there non league side and will travel anyway.
Home fans given an hour will more than easily be able to make the game.

The main concern of every non league club should be to massively improve the financial integrity of football at our level. Problem is that no club ever wants to work with other clubs to improve the situation, probably because are so terrified that the other club may do slightly better out of any potential deal.

Its not just about getting home supporters through the turnstyles, apart from improving the financial side, the main priority should be to attract kids, families, and any potential supporter who may well be a disillusioned fan of one of the bigger clubs.  Trouble is  when suggestions are made in good faith to improve things, they are either ignored, or rejected because the dinosaurs that run non league football like being  big fish in a small pool, and nothing ever gets done.

[AK11]

One of the main problems I've found, in general, is that clubs are quite 'precious' when it comes to change.

Example - a friend of mine was recently interested in getting involved with a side near Gloucester.  He met the 'chairman' (who didn't seem to happy with the responsibilities of running a club, and just did it because nobody else would) and the 'board' (who were volunteers) and outlined his plans.  They said they'd contact him to let him know what their decision would be.

The club didn't even bother to reply to him, and it was only after he had made six calls to the club that finally the bar girl (of all people) told him that they weren't interested in making changes and that the club would 'soldier on'.

Bottom line is this club has sank down the leagues, and may even withdraw from their league at the end of this season.

Missunderstood makes a very telling comment 'Trouble is when suggestions are made in good faith to improve things, they are either ignored, or rejected because the dinosaurs that run non league football like being big fish in a small pool, and nothing ever gets done.' Change may be a dirty word, but sometimes clubs have to go for it or risk being cut adrift playing in menial leagues to even more menial crowds.  There you have the self-defeating circle.

There are loads of common sense ways to help promote a club within the community - pre-season charity matches, using the clubhouse as an internet cafe on non-match days, more activities for children and more gigs/concerts in the clubhouse.  Don't just use the clubhouse for bingo (as most do here), a bit of imagination never hurt anybody.

[missunderstood]

AK11, on 2 February 2012 - 11:36 AM, said:

One of the main problems I've found, in general, is that clubs are quite 'precious' when it comes to change.

Example - a friend of mine was recently interested in getting involved with a side near Gloucester.  He met the 'chairman' (who didn't seem to happy with the responsibilities of running a club, and just did it because nobody else would) and the 'board' (who were volunteers) and outlined his plans.  They said they'd contact him to let him know what their decision would be.

The club didn't even bother to reply to him, and it was only after he had made six calls to the club that finally the bar girl (of all people) told him that they weren't interested in making changes and that the club would 'soldier on'.

Bottom line is this club has sank down the leagues, and may even withdraw from their league at the end of this season.

Missunderstood makes a very telling comment 'Trouble is when suggestions are made in good faith to improve things, they are either ignored, or rejected because the dinosaurs that run non league football like being big fish in a small pool, and nothing ever gets done.' Change may be a dirty word, but sometimes clubs have to go for it or risk being cut adrift playing in menial leagues to even more menial crowds.  There you have the self-defeating circle.

There are loads of common sense ways to help promote a club within the community - pre-season charity matches, using the clubhouse as an internet cafe on non-match days, more activities for children and more gigs/concerts in the clubhouse.  Don't just use the clubhouse for bingo (as most do here), a bit of imagination never hurt anybody.

Great post AK11, unfortunately the dinosaurs are still controlling all aspects of our game and progressive thinkers become so disillusioned they just give up, and are lost to the non league game forever.

IMO if lower league football is to survive we need far fewer clubs, better facilities, clubs forced to become family friendly, and clubs to either merge or groundshare.

[Eastside Urchin]

While I agree with most of what you say,some clubs struggle because they simply don't have funds available to stage events in the first place.
Its ok trying to rely on the same old fans week in or week out but you need more than that and many clubs have decrepit old clubhouses not fit for animals let alone dogs,some can't afford to do them up.Many would welcome new ideas into clubs

[Eastside Urchin]

Alan,why do you constantly go on about grounshares or merging??
Clubs and fans DO NOT want this.
Clubs need to find their realistic level.Players in the Non league game should not be paid.At least not till ryman/unibond premier etc or maybe conference south/north
If clubs are to pay players there should be a cap on it.If any club is found breaching these rules then the owners of the clubs should face harsh penalties.
The FA should actively help fans to take control of clubs via trusts etc
The only clubs that go bust are those that chase the dream too hard or are run poorly

[AK11]

I agree with you, Eastside - the clubhouse at the club I mentioned is not well looked after and has holes in the back (rat infestation anybody?)

Not sure I agree with less clubs - I think we need more especially in leagues like the Ridgeons, Hellenic, Western and Combined Counties as these leagues are 'understocked' with clubs.  If the WMRL (West Midlands Regional League) can house 22 teams then I don't see why other leagues can't have some 'uniformality'.

Have heard that a few Welsh clubs might try to switch to the English leagues this summer...could be interesting.

[missunderstood]

Eastside Urchin, on 2 February 2012 - 01:30 PM, said:

Alan,why do you constantly go on about grounshares or merging??
Clubs and fans DO NOT want this.
Clubs need to find their realistic level.Players in the Non league game should not be paid.At least not till ryman/unibond premier etc or maybe conference south/north
If clubs are to pay players there should be a cap on it.If any club is found breaching these rules then the owners of the clubs should face harsh penalties.
The FA should actively help fans to take control of clubs via trusts etc
The only clubs that go bust are those that chase the dream too hard or are run poorly

Hornchurch do groundshare, with an athletics club, and its unlikely you could afford to pay the full cost if the athletics club ever folded. It will be interesting to hear your views when you have to start paying the almost 100% rent rise the council announced a few months ago.

[Eastside Urchin]

Alan,the club are still in discussions with the council with regards to rent increase.The amount proposed is ridiculously high but i think the club accept it was low in the first place.They don't mind paying more but at the going rate and from what i understand the council are very understanding.
Yes we do groundshare with an athletics club but your arguements with regards to groundsharing and everyone elses idea of groundsharing are between two football clubs,but you continually use us and the athletics club as a groundshare,which in real terms is correct but with regards to football clubs has nothing to do with anything,plenty of football clubs share with athletics clubs,this is not a problem,two football clubs sharing is,games are played at unsociable times which is not fair on football fans.

[missunderstood]

Eastside Urchin, on 3 February 2012 - 12:47 AM, said:

Alan,the club are still in discussions with the council with regards to rent increase.The amount proposed is ridiculously high but i think the club accept it was low in the first place.They don't mind paying more but at the going rate and from what i understand the council are very understanding.
Yes we do groundshare with an athletics club but your arguements with regards to groundsharing and everyone elses idea of groundsharing are between two football clubs,but you continually use us and the athletics club as a groundshare,which in real terms is correct but with regards to football clubs has nothing to do with anything,plenty of football clubs share with athletics clubs,this is not a problem,two football clubs sharing is,games are played at unsociable times which is not fair on football fans.

The two Milan clubs seem to be doing OK sharing the same ground.

[Eastside Urchin]

Those grounds were built for world cups,what you are mainly suggesting is clubs merging or groundsharing,one set of fans would lose their identity completely,not many would follow a new club.