Tony's Non-League Forum: Non-League Football: Restructuring: Darlington: Page 4


	MAIN INDEX	SEARCH POSTS	WHO'S ONLINE	LOG IN

Home: Non-League Football: Restructuring:
Darlington

1 2 3 4

View All

HarryC
First Team Sub

May 26, 2012, 2:06 PM

Posts: 997
Location: Fleet
Team(s): Fleet, Aldershot, Chelsea

Post #76 of 99 (2088 views)
Shortcut

Re: [petermiller36] Darlington [In reply to]	Can't Post or

Have never seen a team get unreprieved, so a 23 team division would be result, but believe if Darlington wanted to appeal they would have to find another ground to play at with a higher grading, so very unlikely, anyway. Existing set up was also looking for a very large sum of money to be able to run next season (that may have supposed being at step 3 or 4) but they may be unlikely to get such a large investment at step 5/6 level, if they still need that to even start the season.

wishmaster3211
First Team Regular

May 26, 2012, 3:58 PM

Posts: 1335
Location: A small town in north Wiltshire.
Team(s): Calne Town, Darlington, Hibernian, Rosenborg, Sussex CCC, Wiltshire CCC

Post #77 of 99 (2018 views)
Shortcut

Re: [HarryC] Darlington [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

In Reply To

Dont worry, I dont see Ware getting unrepreived. the answer must be in what happened with Chester?

As to Darlington, their only grounds for Appeal is that they are NOT a "Phoenix Club" in so far as they bought certain of the debts and responsibilities of the old Club, and its name.

Personally I dont think this cuts it due to the quote earlier in this thread, but I remain to be convinced as to why on earth the same ruling doesn't apply to kettering....perhaps the FA will enlighten us all at some point....

"You can't score runs in the Pavilion, you've got to stay in and grind them down"

Checkout my Facebook page "Proper Football Grounds"

facebook.com/paul.fergusson

Steelback
First Team Star

May 26, 2012, 6:28 PM

Posts: 1634
Location:
Team(s):

Post #78 of 99 (1942 views)
Shortcut

Re: [wishmaster3211] Darlington [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

In Reply To

Thats Darlington's mistake, don't they know that you don't ask the F.A.? You ask Chester & Merthyr Town as they're the ones who decide what leagues teams are placed in!

Follow their model, don't pay your debts whilst blaming everyone but Santa Claus & themselves of course, then place yourselves at Step 4 & buy two promotions with the money that should have repayed the debts with, simples!

Northamptonshire CCC still unbeaten this season

Unicorn
Reserve Team Star

May 26, 2012, 6:28 PM

Posts: 910
Location: Kent
Team(s): Arsenal and Kent League

Post #79 of 99 (1942 views)
Shortcut

Re: [wishmaster3211] Darlington [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

The only statement i can find seems to accept the decision.
There seems to be no talk at all of an appeal apart from disgruntled people on forums.

Ballboy and water carrier.

HarryC
First Team Sub

May 26, 2012, 6:39 PM

Posts: 997
Location: Fleet
Team(s): Fleet, Aldershot, Chelsea

Post #80 of 99 (1932 views)
Shortcut

Re: [Steelback] Darlington [In reply to]	Can't Post or

One of the other threads on Darlington (in general) mentions name change to Darlington 1883. Which would imply even more reason to treat them as a "newco".

wishmaster3211
First Team Regular

May 26, 2012, 9:13 PM

Posts: 1335
Location: A small town in north Wiltshire.
Team(s): Calne Town, Darlington, Hibernian, Rosenborg, Sussex CCC, Wiltshire CCC

Post #81 of 99 (1870 views)
Shortcut

Re: [HarryC] Darlington [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

In Reply To

One of the other threads on Darlington (in general) mentions name change to Darlington 1883. Which would imply even more reason to treat them as a "newco".

The intention was NOT to be a newco, or they wouldnt have taken on �200k of debts! They are only talking about that because the FA have apparently stated they are unhappy about them keeping the name, even though they paid for it!!

"You can't score runs in the Pavilion, you've got to stay in and grind them down"

Checkout my Facebook page "Proper Football Grounds"

facebook.com/paul.fergusson

Beano
Reserve Team Regular

May 26, 2012, 10:58 PM

Posts: 539
Location: Hayes, Middlesex
Team(s):

Post #82 of 99 (1801 views)
Shortcut

Re: [wishmaster3211] Darlington [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

In Reply To

I did touch on some of this on the General Forum. The difference between Darlington and Chester is that, after Chester and (more pertinently, Ilkeston) reformed, The FA changed the rules about reformed clubs to specify that the highest level a Phoenix Club could restart at was Step 5, or must take a two-step demotion (whichever results in the lowest placing). That rule didn't exist when Chester reformed.

hawkwind
First Team Regular

May 27, 2012, 1:40 AM

Posts: 1275
Location:
Team(s):

Post #83 of 99 (1739 views)
Shortcut

Re: [Beano] Darlington [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

In Reply To

I must admit I find it increasingly difficult to follow decisions made by the FA/Leagues-Committee/Conference because of inconsistency. Two examples among many: Horsham YMCA promoted despite finishing outside of a promotion position (Witham Town not reprieved) yet Wellingborough refused; the very different approach of the Conference to the difficulties Rushden & Diamonds and Wrexham faced last summer.

Darlington and their supporters deserve some reward for: having raised sufficient funds to complete last season; and attempting to tackle their debts. Yet the powers that be propose to punish them greater than Chester City, Ilkeston Town and King's Lynn - all three metamorphosing into true new completely debt free clubs, and none punished to the extent proposed for Darlington.

The past few years have demonstrated that the authorities can break/bend the rules when it suits them. I just get the impression (hopefully I am mistaken) that the CIC route that Darlington have chosen isn't flavour of the moment with the FA/Leagues-Committee/Conference and even Supporters Direct.

rainjar
First Team Regular

May 27, 2012, 6:55 AM

Posts: 1382
Location:
Team(s):

Post #84 of 99 (1721 views)
Shortcut

Re: [hawkwind] Darlington [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

I think it comes down to legal and technical details rather than the morality of it.

If a new legal entity is formed, then it would appear:

If it part of a solvent re-structuring, it is the same club.
If it part of an insolvent re-structuring, it is a re-formed/new club.

In the event of insolvency:

If it is dealt with by the existing legal entity, such as a CVA, it is the same club.
If there is a liquidation and a new club formed, or a new legal entity is formed as a result of an insolvent re-structuring, it is a re-formed/new club

Once you move away from payment of 100& of the debt, whether in a CVA or by a new legal entity, how much of the existing debt is paid (if at all) doesn't appear to make any difference. Again, it is the legal obligation to pay. A CVA offering to pay 10%, when accepted, creates a legal obligation to pay, even if the club in fact fails to pay anything.

Football Insights

(This post was edited by rainjar on May 27, 2012, 6:56 AM)

Beano
Reserve Team Regular

May 27, 2012, 8:21 AM

Posts: 539
Location: Hayes, Middlesex
Team(s):

Post #85 of 99 (1682 views)
Shortcut

Re: [hawkwind] Darlington [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

In Reply To

Darlington and their supporters deserve some reward for: having raised sufficient funds to complete last season; and attempting to tackle their debts. Yet the powers that be propose to punish them greater than Chester City, Ilkeston Town and King's Lynn - all three metamorphosing into true new completely debt free clubs, and none punished to the extent proposed for Darlington.

While I agree with you that Darlington probably do deserve to be placed higher than they have been because they have made some effort to pay some of their debt, the fact is that they are being dealt with under a different set of rules to that which was in place when the three clubs you mentioned went bust. My personal view is that, had it not been for the fact that the rules were changed last year, Darlington would have been no lower than Step 4. The rules were altered precisely because the "new" Ilkeston FC were able to reform at Step 4 at the expense of clubs who had paid their bills because there was a vacancy at that level There also needed to be clarity and a consistent approach to reformed clubs. It's unfortunate that Darlington's situation has occurred so soon after the change but it's not The FA's fault and comparing the placement of Darlington with that of Chester is, because of the new regulations, like comparing apples with oranges.

In Reply To

The past few years have demonstrated that the authorities can break/bend the rules when it suits them. I just get the impression (hopefully I am mistaken) that the CIC route that Darlington have chosen isn't flavour of the moment with the FA/Leagues-Committee/Conference and even Supporters Direct.

I don't think it's the "CIC route" that is the issue here: I think it's more to do with the fact that DFC appear to have chosen to "pick and choose" which debts they will repay which, as far as my experience would suggest, is against the regulations about transferring the club's FA / League memberships from one entity to another.

Swindon Addick
Youth Team Star

May 27, 2012, 11:23 AM

Posts: 347
Location: Swindon
Team(s): Cambridge City, Charlton Athletic

Post #86 of 99 (1604 views)
Shortcut

Re: [Beano] Darlington [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

There's an important point Beano is making here, and it would simplify the debate a lot if people would get their heads round it. The reason Darlington are being treated more harshly than many other clubs before them if that the rules were toughened up this year.

Since members of this forum (including me) were among the loudest complaining that the old rule was too lenient, we should hardly complain about what's happening now. For those who've forgotten, the old rule of thumb for a club which either liquidated or exited administration without a CVA was at least two divisions, but three if the second division down was the higher division of a two-step league. Which is exactly what happened to Chester, once their appeal had been granted.

As Beano also pointed out, Darlo haven't paid their club's debts. They've paid some, and well done to them for trying, but all they got for their �200k was a bit of time to try to sort out a CVA. If they'd got a CVA, they'd still have been kicked out of the Conference, but like Kettering they'd have ended up at step 3.

I'm normally one of the first to complain when the FA are inconsistent, but accusing them of inconsistency when the rules have changed in the mean time is a tad unfair.

Round 1: Cambridge City 0-0 MK Dons
Round 4: QPR 2-4 MK Dons

Haywain
Youth Team Star

May 27, 2012, 6:42 PM

Posts: 366
Location: Luton
Team(s): Luton Town

Post #87 of 99 (1497 views)
Shortcut

Re: [Swindon Addick] Darlington [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

The problem with the FA treatment of Darlington, is that in treating them as a new club, they are discouraging the idea of (any club) paying anything at all in the event of failing to agree a CVA in future. This, no matter how it is looked at, is to the detriment of the creditors.

Haywain - following the Hatters through thin and thin.

wishmaster3211
First Team Regular

May 28, 2012, 12:10 AM

Posts: 1335
Location: A small town in north Wiltshire.
Team(s): Calne Town, Darlington, Hibernian, Rosenborg, Sussex CCC, Wiltshire CCC

Post #88 of 99 (1357 views)
Shortcut

Re: [Haywain] Darlington [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

The above post is how I see it. Frankly I think the 10% CVA is maybe worse than what Darlo have done, at least they tried to pay off more.

Incidentally they didnt pick and choose which debts to pay off.

The Chairman, who had stated he would not stand in the way of the Fans taking over the Club and would wipe the slate clean on the 800k "loan" (Fleetwood and Crawley fans take note) then wouldnt sign the CVA.

It is solely the Chairmans "Loan" (how big can I make those commas to emphasise my sarcasm?) that stuffed the CVA the other debts were manageable and indeed some have been taken on by the CIC.

He also refuses to sign over the "football share"...I wonder what he plans to do with that? Set up a rival Club? Maybe move them to a large town without a Senior Non League Club and enter the Conference a la MK Dons?

"You can't score runs in the Pavilion, you've got to stay in and grind them down"

Checkout my Facebook page "Proper Football Grounds"

facebook.com/paul.fergusson

burrow
Youth Team Sub

May 28, 2012, 4:43 PM

Posts: 136
Location: Chester
Team(s): Chester FC

Post #89 of 99 (1187 views)
Shortcut

Re: [wishmaster3211] Darlington [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

When Chester FC started as a Phoenix club they were originally placed in a step 5 league. They then appealed on this descision and the FA put them into step 4.

All these different languages the world over yet there is only one when you laugh or cry. burrow

blackdouglas
First Team Star

May 28, 2012, 5:40 PM

Posts: 2344
Location: Northwood, Middlesex
Team(s): See signature for clubs & 2013/14 projection links

Post #90 of 99 (1142 views)
Shortcut

Re: [wishmaster3211] Darlington [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

Quote

He also refuses to sign over the "football share"...I wonder what he plans to do with that? Set up a rival Club? Maybe move them to a large town without a Senior Non League Club and enter the Conference a la MK Dons?

"Darlo Uncovered" is tweeting that Raj Singh did in fact sign the Football Share over to the new owners, so I guess they are appealing that they shouldn't have been treated as a phoenix club.

Northwood, Threave Rovers, Arsenal, Watford, Rochdale, Rangers (the real ones, NOT qpr), queen of the south and a few others.

Pyramid Allocations for the 2013/14 season as published by the FA on May 17th http://bit.ly/18QoFvt
How I would've allocated the clubs for 2013/14 http://bit.ly/OS8GoJ

burrow
Youth Team Sub

May 28, 2012, 7:11 PM

Posts: 136
Location: Chester
Team(s): Chester FC

Post #91 of 99 (1083 views)
Shortcut

Re: [blackdouglas] Darlington [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

I think this is new news but Darlington have appointed Martin Gray as Manager.

All these different languages the world over yet there is only one when you laugh or cry. burrow

Unicorn
Reserve Team Star

May 29, 2012, 7:03 AM

Posts: 910
Location: Kent
Team(s): Arsenal and Kent League

Post #92 of 99 (957 views)
Shortcut

Re: [blackdouglas] Darlington [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

In Reply To

Quote

"Darlo Uncovered" is tweeting that Raj Singh did in fact sign the Football Share over to the new owners, so I guess they are appealing that they shouldn't have been treated as a phoenix club.

Listening to Mike Appleby on the non league programme last night there seems little point in appealing.
He did not seem interested in the football share at all.
His main points were that no CVA had been agreed by the old company and the FA would continue to view them as a new club.
And that the ground they intend to use (Shildon?) only had grade F at 31st March 2012.
Its hard to see a way around the ground issue so appealing even if successful on the new club/old club issue seems a waste of time and money to me.

Ballboy and water carrier.

London Harrier
First Team Star

May 29, 2012, 7:55 AM

Posts: 1780
Location: North London
Team(s): Kidderminster Harriers, Wingate & Finchley

Post #93 of 99 (937 views)
Shortcut

Re: [wishmaster3211] Darlington [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

In Reply To

The Chairman, who had stated he would not stand in the way of the Fans taking over the Club and would wipe the slate clean on the 800k "loan" (Fleetwood and Crawley fans take note) then wouldnt sign the CVA.

It is solely the Chairmans "Loan" (how big can I make those commas to emphasise my sarcasm?) that stuffed the CVA the other debts were manageable and indeed some have been taken on by the CIC.

And herein is the single biggest problem facing football today.

It never fails to amaze me when fans continually call for the board to pump money into a club, without realising that at some point, the board will want their money back. The idea of an altruistic collection of people funding a club ad infinitum is romantic nonsense. Granted, there are some examples lower down the leagues of chairman single handedly keeping clubs afloat whilst wanting nothing in return, but these are the exception to the rule.

The sooner the single benefactor model is abolished out and replaced with the 50 + 1 rule , the better.

Vote for your favourite football grounds at 100 British Grounds To Visit Before You Die

wishmaster3211
First Team Regular

May 29, 2012, 10:19 AM

Posts: 1335
Location: A small town in north Wiltshire.
Team(s): Calne Town, Darlington, Hibernian, Rosenborg, Sussex CCC, Wiltshire CCC

Post #94 of 99 (871 views)
Shortcut

Re: [London Harrier] Darlington [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

In Reply To

I totally agree. I lost interest in Darlington years ago at the first admin, as I saw all this coming. Said at the time I would start following them if the became a fans club only.

Unfortunately even now several of the fans are clueless about FA Rules and non league in general, this being a contributory factor in what has happened to them.

"You can't score runs in the Pavilion, you've got to stay in and grind them down"

Checkout my Facebook page "Proper Football Grounds"

facebook.com/paul.fergusson

wishmaster3211
First Team Regular

May 29, 2012, 10:21 AM

Posts: 1335
Location: A small town in north Wiltshire.
Team(s): Calne Town, Darlington, Hibernian, Rosenborg, Sussex CCC, Wiltshire CCC

Post #95 of 99 (870 views)
Shortcut

Re: [Unicorn] Darlington [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

In Reply To

Quote

"Darlo Uncovered" is tweeting that Raj Singh did in fact sign the Football Share over to the new owners, so I guess they are appealing that they shouldn't have been treated as a phoenix club.

I found out on here that Shildon wasn't graded and then posted this would bite them back.

That said they maintain that "in talks with the FA they had assurances they would be given time to bring it up to standard".

"You can't score runs in the Pavilion, you've got to stay in and grind them down"

Checkout my Facebook page "Proper Football Grounds"

facebook.com/paul.fergusson

shotsforme
Youth Team Sub

Jun 6, 2012, 2:47 PM

Posts: 121
Location: broadstairs
Team(s): Dartford/ Dover

Post #96 of 99 (641 views)
Shortcut

Re: [wishmaster3211] Darlington [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

Darlo forum now stating they are going to appeal and hope to be placed at step 4.

Unicorn
Reserve Team Star

Jun 6, 2012, 3:36 PM

Posts: 910
Location: Kent
Team(s): Arsenal and Kent League

Post #97 of 99 (607 views)
Shortcut

Re: [shotsforme] Darlington [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

It will be interesting. A new rule being challenged the first time it is applied.
Now they are playing at Bishop Auckland the ground grading issue is taken out of the equation.

Ballboy and water carrier.

stourboy
First Team Star

Jun 6, 2012, 3:38 PM

Posts: 1460
Location: Loughborough Uni
Team(s): Stourbridge FC, Sheffield Wednesday, Barrow Town

Post #98 of 99 (603 views)
Shortcut

Re: [Unicorn] Darlington [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

Yep, all is not resolved it seems at Steps 1-4....what's new!

Will be very interesting to see how this pans out and if a precedent/firm ruling will be set.

Last new ground (74): City Ground, Nottingham Forest v Huddersfield Town 19/02/2013
Last game (329): Stourbridge v Cambridge City 06/04/2013

exile
Junior Team Regular

Jun 6, 2012, 4:53 PM

Posts: 34
Location: kendal
Team(s):

Post #99 of 99 (549 views)
Shortcut

Re: [stourboy] Darlington [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

Northern League fixtures have already been published with Darlington included.

First fixture is Bishop Auckland away!!

1 2 3 4

View All

Search for (options)

HOSTED BY SOCCERLINKS v.1.2.3