|
Post by citycentresaint on Mar 29, 2015 16:17:03 GMT
Clarence Park has one of the best pitches in non league football it would be a travesty to change it to a 3G I am not disputing this. However how else are we going to generate a constant income.
|
|
|
Post by Saint on Mar 29, 2015 17:16:54 GMT
Jimmy Gray post match was very negative about the state of the pitch at the moment, which has come about as a result of playing several games a week on it (Youth, reserves, First XI training).
With 3G/4G, or maybe 3G/4G faculties next to any new ground, not only can you move those matches off the first team pitch, but also rent it out for extra cash.
However, I'm not sure turning the pitch at CP into 3G/4G would really solve much, especially if the rest of the ground won't be upgraded.
|
|
|
Post by westwalessaint on Mar 29, 2015 17:18:38 GMT
Clarence Park has one of the best pitches in non league football it would be a travesty to change it to a 3G I am not disputing this. However how else are we going to generate a constant income. Let's face it - we'll never reach our aspirations at CP. I've been watching the Saints there for over 50 years but they need a new ground. Is it a gamble - maybe/probably. However, if nobody does anything we can only aspire to the regional division of the Southern League.
|
|
|
Post by PaperSaint on Mar 29, 2015 19:55:51 GMT
Saint and westwalessaint you are both absolutely correct - today's top tiers of non-league football simply cannot be supported by a ground such as CP even with a 3G/4G pitch. If we want an aspirational club we need a ground - as much as I would love to see a modern eco-stadium at CP. I had to accept my dreams were unrealistic for a club of our potential - and the fact that the ground has benn left in a sorry state for too long making redevelopment as costly as a new stadium (and how do you fund that). The cricket club is now looking to create a social enterprise to bring in enough money to fund the £50k of works required to enable the pavilion to remain usable (and then generate sufficient money to maintain it - and that is a drop in the ocean compared to the level of investment CP would require.
|
|
|
Post by bob666 on Mar 30, 2015 1:05:12 GMT
Well want tier do we want to play at? If the club are losing about 100000 year I do see why it impossible for a new CP with upgraded facilities to support this. Also what is our potential? We do stand out at conference south level as a exceptional well supported so for me this is about it- the proposal for a 5000 seat stadium seems to define any logic (it just be empty and soulless). I understand their serious obsoletes to upgrading Clarence park but three points 1) The 'Friends of Clarence Park' have not got their own way with every decision relating the club. They did want the club to get a more secure lease - but the club was able to secure this. They rather their was not a semi-pro football team in CP but their is. I not suggesting they are not influential but they are not all powerful
2) In terms of legal constraints I think this is something the trust need to look into. My point is this almost everyone (with possible exception of individuals for this forum doing personal research) who looked at this issue in detail a priori favour a move - the owners, friends of CP etc. Also Sandy Wakington support seems to be tied up with local lib dem councillor position re the CP. I like the trust to hire a solicitor, I be happy to chip in to a fund, to have a look at the issue and give their assessment of possibility of redeveloping the park. I not talking about launching any action just taking a day or so to read the documents and giving a independent expert opinion. In a sense this could strengthen the position of the owners if he/she said 0% of meaningful redevelopment.
3) Why go to non-league football? If you simply look at the cost/quality equation it makes no sense whatsoever. Watford is not that much more expensive than St Albans and standard is vastly superior. It has to be about a sense of place. Ultimately I support St Albans because I grew up and continue to live in the city. So for me nothing (in relation to the club) is more important than insuring it remains in the city. This is infinitely more important than the level we play at.
|
|
|
Post by PaperSaint on Mar 30, 2015 7:30:13 GMT
It might be that the opinion would need to be obtained from a barrister rather than a solicitor but it could be worthwhile for the trust to do this
|
|
|
Post by Canary Saint on Mar 30, 2015 11:34:23 GMT
1)Well what tier do we want to play at? 3)Why go to non-league? Two very good questions and nobody will be surprised that I do not have the answers I'll just put up a possible scenario for if the club move to the airfield site. IF the additional facilities prove profitable then there could be as successful football team, but I cannot believe that this would be sufficient incentive to attract 1000+ (or even 400+) crowds to an out of the way soulless stadium. The club could in fact become just like Boreham Wood. Which is OK, if that is what a majority of the supporters want. Other scenarios are available.
|
|
|
Post by davymac55 on Mar 30, 2015 11:58:43 GMT
There is every possibility that Borehamwood will get promoted with average crowds of one man and his dog. Nearly 600 there on Saturday for a relatively local derby with Hemel-plenty of away fans id imagine. Yet crowd still ,less than ours and almost 3x the last home crowd. If we were in their position that game would surely have had a crowd of 1000+ no probs. So my point? Borehamwood are funded by Arsenal. New stand built by them. So it is not just the ground and facilities that fund them, it is another club. Take away the £250000 approx. that they get from Arsenal, and even with their ground facilities, they would probably be in financial bother as they do not have a base support that would fund them at this level. All of this is conjecture based on some info but you can draw comparisons with us. Several points. A new ground would not necessarily mean bigger crowds. That is built on results. We do not need a ground with a capacity of more than 5000. If we were to have a pitch conversion 3/4 G there is no guarantee that it would be profitable. There are lots of training facilities nearby. Any move is to be funded by housing/conf centre but there is no plan for a hotel. Why would anyone use a conf centre that has no overnight facilities? Once we move from Clarence Park(if) we are subject to the vagaries of the economy. Look at Rushden. The current owners cannot continue to bank roll the club without some hope of a return, and soon. We are likely to end up staying at The Park and to continue with our ongoing battles with the nimby population who want to live in St Albans but don't want to support it. (There is a council meeting tomorrow about the ramp in the park). It is my belief that a move from the Park would be almost fatal if it is not built on the success of the club. And we cant stay where we are without a council that supports us. catch 22.
|
|
|
Post by PaperSaint on Mar 30, 2015 17:22:15 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Canary Saint on Mar 30, 2015 19:05:14 GMT
I do not know who Denzel is either but what he actually said was: "If we're in the bottom four in terms of player budget maybe we should increase ticket prices. Any idea where we are in that league table? If the owners walk out, who'll be left in charge? The club secretary?" I think the price rise reference was slightly tongue in cheek implying that by the owners' logic City would be higher in the league if they did so. Also he does not actually suggest that higher ticket prices will keep city at the park. I will reserve judgement on whether or not Denzel is a "bright spark".
|
|
|
Post by PaperSaint on Mar 30, 2015 19:30:03 GMT
My comments were also mean't to be tongue in cheek there....given the contentious issue of ticket prices. However, I do think the comments were asking where we are in the league table of ticket prices (top I believe) - and the pricing issue also for me comes back to the problem we currently have at CP - how do we finance a team at Conference South level without major changes?
|
|
|
Post by PaperSaint on Mar 30, 2015 19:49:40 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Hatboy on Mar 30, 2015 20:28:54 GMT
I do not know who Denzel is either but what he actually said was: "If we're in the bottom four in terms of player budget maybe we should increase ticket prices. Any idea where we are in that league table? If the owners walk out, who'll be left in charge? The club secretary?"I think the price rise reference was slightly tongue in cheek implying that by the owners' logic City would be higher in the league if they did so. Also he does not actually suggest that higher ticket prices will keep city at the park. I will reserve judgement on whether or not Denzel is a "bright spark". Urgh the Chairman
|
|
|
Post by PaperSaint on Mar 30, 2015 20:57:39 GMT
There is every possibility that Borehamwood will get promoted with average crowds of one man and his dog. Nearly 600 there on Saturday for a relatively local derby with Hemel-plenty of away fans id imagine. Yet crowd still ,less than ours and almost 3x the last home crowd. If we were in their position that game would surely have had a crowd of 1000+ no probs. So my point? Borehamwood are funded by Arsenal. New stand built by them. So it is not just the ground and facilities that fund them, it is another club. Take away the £250000 approx. that they get from Arsenal, and even with their ground facilities, they would probably be in financial bother as they do not have a base support that would fund them at this level. All of this is conjecture based on some info but you can draw comparisons with us. Several points. A new ground would not necessarily mean bigger crowds. That is built on results. We do not need a ground with a capacity of more than 5000. If we were to have a pitch conversion 3/4 G there is no guarantee that it would be profitable. There are lots of training facilities nearby. Any move is to be funded by housing/conf centre but there is no plan for a hotel. Why would anyone use a conf centre that has no overnight facilities? Once we move from Clarence Park(if) we are subject to the vagaries of the economy. Look at Rushden. The current owners cannot continue to bank roll the club without some hope of a return, and soon. We are likely to end up staying at The Park and to continue with our ongoing battles with the nimby population who want to live in St Albans but don't want to support it. (There is a council meeting tomorrow about the ramp in the park). It is my belief that a move from the Park would be almost fatal if it is not built on the success of the club. And we cant stay where we are without a council that supports us. catch 22. I do agree with a lot that you say - and I'm not sure 5000 seater is realistically going to be what they actually want but it is the type of opening gambit you make - aim high, negotiate and settle for something less... I'm not convinced that we would end up with such a small support if we moved either. Certainly, when I talk to parents at St Albans City Youth their main concern is the state of CP and do say they would be more likely to take their kids to a new ground (or re-developed CP). The problem with staying at CP is we need to re-develop it which - given its increasingly sorry state - will cost a few million £ and who is going to fund that - especially when we have a council which includes councillors who don't even know we exist (or as one prospective cllr candidate said to me on the doorstep today - the problem with footballers is that they are misogynistic and poor role models for our society...!!)
|
|
|
Post by westwalessaint on Mar 30, 2015 21:22:48 GMT
Do you think the candidate understands the meaning of the word 'misogynistic'? I doubt it very much. Still, it's a long word that might sound impressive to some! Incidentally, was the candidate a woman? Lol.
|
|
|
Post by citycentresaint on Apr 1, 2015 12:00:06 GMT
Local council are clueless.
Sandy Walkington does seem to behind the club though.
Unfortunately I think the expenses fraudster Anne Main will get back in again.
Don't know what Kerry Pollard's view is on the club.
Be good to see the club going forward, but at the moment things seem to be stagnating.
COYS
|
|
|
Post by casper on Apr 1, 2015 16:43:45 GMT
The council and councillors are currently in purdah, which is a legal requirement of the election process. This restricts them from making new announcements which may influence the outcome of the elections. Don't expect any comments until mid May. Nothing to stop you asking any candidates their views though.
|
|
|
Post by PaperSaint on Apr 1, 2015 19:33:03 GMT
Kerry Pollard attended a meeting with some supporters a few weeks ago and accepted that CP offers a very limited future for the club and offered assistance in promoting the club.
|
|
|
Post by minty on Apr 2, 2015 3:16:46 GMT
|
|
|
Post by EFMTFTV on Apr 2, 2015 17:40:42 GMT
Kerry Pollard attended a meeting with some supporters a few weeks ago and accepted that CP offers a very limited future for the club and offered assistance in promoting the club. Which is another good reason to vote Labour
|
|
|
Post by Hatboy on Apr 2, 2015 20:07:24 GMT
What's the other one ?
|
|
|
Post by citycentresaint on Apr 3, 2015 0:48:15 GMT
Kerry Pollard attended a meeting with some supporters a few weeks ago and accepted that CP offers a very limited future for the club and offered assistance in promoting the club. Which is another good reason to vote Labour St Albans is going to way of Harpenden and becoming a safe Conservative seat. If the expenses fraudster, Anne Main, can get in, it is not surprising. Area is being gentrified, so is not really a surprise. COYS
|
|
|
Post by COYS on Apr 3, 2015 4:57:36 GMT
Which is another good reason to vote Labour St Albans is going to way of Harpenden and becoming a safe Conservative seat. If the expenses fraudster, Anne Main, can get in, it is not surprising. Area is being gentrified, so is not really a surprise. COYS Gentrified? You are aware that this is St. Albans you're talking about?! It's hardly Harlem
|
|
|
Post by citycentresaint on Apr 3, 2015 9:33:14 GMT
St Albans is going to way of Harpenden and becoming a safe Conservative seat. If the expenses fraudster, Anne Main, can get in, it is not surprising. Area is being gentrified, so is not really a surprise. COYS Gentrified? You are aware that this is St. Albans you're talking about?! It's hardly Harlem Yes I am aware of that having lived here all my life. But it was a Labour seat for a number of years and did once have pockets of affordable housing. Lots of people who were brought up in the area are being forced to move away due to the rapid increase in house prices.
|
|
|
Post by Boomer on Apr 3, 2015 13:06:33 GMT
Gentrified? You are aware that this is St. Albans you're talking about?! It's hardly Harlem Lots of people who were brought up in the area are being forced to move away due to the rapid increase in house prices. That has been the case for the past 30/40 years to a lesser or greater degree but I have to agree that, in very recent times, the situation has worsened dramatically. For the record - since the current St. Albans constituency was created 130 years ago in 1885, the Conservatives have held office for 115 of those years, Labour 13 and the Liberals 2.
|
|
|
Post by casper on Apr 3, 2015 13:40:52 GMT
Constituency boundaries have been changed in recent years, with Harpenden now in with Hitchin. St Albans isn't the safe Conservative seat it once was.
|
|
|
Post by Boomer on Apr 3, 2015 14:34:46 GMT
Very true.
|
|
|
Post by PaperSaint on Apr 16, 2015 6:41:00 GMT
|
|
yellowalf
Saints Reserve Team Player
Posts: 301
|
Post by yellowalf on Apr 16, 2015 10:37:41 GMT
Including an interesting comment from thurrock-baz: "They have already confused the issue, after posting a statement on their official club website and issued a press release, it was revealed that they had yet to meet with the council to discuss a relocation back into Grays. This was confirmed by the "owner" at a fans forum on Tuesday where he stated "We are jumping ahead a bit as we haven't yet spoken to the council". Yet less than 24 hours later, after both "The Enquirer" and "YourThurrock" had reported this, the "owner" went online criticising them, and saying the Grays FC had in fact, already met with the council ? (had they forgotten this small fact ?). Also on the forum, the "owner" in answer to a question about weather the pitch would be artificial grass, he said "depends on what land we get and how much a PARTNER who builds it pays". " I wonder how long that comment stays on the site!
|
|