Non League Matters - The Continuation of Tonys english Football Site 



  Main Index MAIN
INDEX
Search Posts SEARCH
POSTS
Who's Online WHO'S
ONLINE
Log in LOG
IN

Home: Non-League Football Discussion: Restructuring Discussion:
Cost and Carbon Emissions Reductions by restructuring

 

First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All


Andy D
Chelsea Transfer Target

Jun 3, 2019, 12:47 PM

Posts: 4327
Location: Cheshire/Dorset
Team(s): 1874 Northwich, Forfar Athletic, Castleford RLFC, Lancashire CCC,

Post #26 of 32 (473 views)
Shortcut
Re: [geemickey] Cost and Carbon Emissions Reductions by restructuring [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately

Anything to reduce costs for clubs (especially those further down the pyramid) is a good thing, however as others have stated, reduced mileage will result in more travelling fans so the net effect will be negligible as far as carbon emissions are concerned. Plus, as a groundhopper who clocked up something like 700 miles this weekend watching two games, I can hardly comment on anyone's carbon footprint...Ö.



Rules of Groundhopping:

Rule 1 - There are no rules
Rule 2 - See rule 1.....



Reborn Yellow
Youth Team Regular


Jun 3, 2019, 12:56 PM

Posts: 179
Location: Notts Senior League Land
Team(s): Hucknall Town, Nottingham Forest

Post #27 of 32 (460 views)
Shortcut
Re: [geemickey] Cost and Carbon Emissions Reductions by restructuring [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately

Obviously fans want their clubs to be successful and move into higher leagues, which involves more travelling, and don't want to drop into lower leagues despite less travelling. Also it is nice to see new grounds. But I think five national divisions is too many and NLN is not far off being one. As two teams are promoted to the EFL there seems to be less need for a single step 1 league than before. I know the National League wants to stay national, but that comes at a cost in travelling.


Haywain
Reserve Team Regular

Jun 3, 2019, 5:34 PM

Posts: 646
Location: Luton
Team(s): Luton Town

Post #28 of 32 (364 views)
Shortcut
Re: [geemickey] Cost and Carbon Emissions Reductions by restructuring [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately


In Reply To
When I started this thread, I naively thought the majority of non-league fans would welcome structural changes that would lower costs for the clubs and themselves, as well as making it easier to follow their team at away games, whilst in the process doing something to reduce carbon emissions.

You didn't start this thread talking about costs for clubs, you started it with the words "If the govt was really serious about reducing carbon emissions,". Had you not used those words you may have received a more sympathetic hearing but, as you have now gathered, not a great deal of agreement.



Haywain - following the Hatters through thin and thin.


geemickey
Junior Team Sub

Jun 3, 2019, 9:30 PM

Posts: 26
Location:
Team(s):

Post #29 of 32 (294 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Haywain] Cost and Carbon Emissions Reductions by restructuring [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately

You probably refer to negative reaction to the idea of 'Govt involvement', rather than the subject of 'carbon emissions' Haywain ?
I wouldn't want Govt getting involved either, God help us, but it's unlikely changes would happen without some prompting. Not that things can ever be achieved with the odd hint of a knighthood here or a peerage there .....

My main concerns are costs to clubs and fans.
(I believe the UK is already doing well and will do even more in terms of carbon emissions reduction).

Without some changes, and bearing in mind the average age of non-league fans, the shortages of volunteer help and the rising costs including pay expectations of players, I fear for the future of the game at the level we love.


(This post was edited by geemickey on Jun 3, 2019, 9:33 PM)


Cris
Youth Team Star

Jun 4, 2019, 12:14 PM

Posts: 316
Location: Birmingham
Team(s): Bromsgrove Sporting

Post #30 of 32 (193 views)
Shortcut
Re: [geemickey] Cost and Carbon Emissions Reductions by restructuring [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately


In Reply To
You probably refer to negative reaction to the idea of 'Govt involvement', rather than the subject of 'carbon emissions' Haywain ?
I wouldn't want Govt getting involved either, God help us, but it's unlikely changes would happen without some prompting. Not that things can ever be achieved with the odd hint of a knighthood here or a peerage there .....

My main concerns are costs to clubs and fans.
(I believe the UK is already doing well and will do even more in terms of carbon emissions reduction).

Without some changes, and bearing in mind the average age of non-league fans, the shortages of volunteer help and the rising costs including pay expectations of players, I fear for the future of the game at the level we love.


Iím glad youíve changed your mind on government interference. Iím still confused about why you think these changes will have any material impact on carbon emissions, as has been repeatedly observed thereís an argument that theyíd actually go up not down.

At the level you began talking about L2 and National League almost all clubs are professional, run by professionals and travel costs are a very small proportion of costs. A change to regional leagues and the inevitable reduction in income would be a disaster for many of these clubs.

Iím not sure what the average age of non league fans is, so you have any statistics to suggest they are significantly older than the population as a whole?


pokal02
First Team Star

Jun 4, 2019, 12:38 PM

Posts: 2245
Location: Cockfosters
Team(s): Barnet, Cockfosters, Truro City, Udinese

Post #31 of 32 (184 views)
Shortcut
Re: [geemickey] Cost and Carbon Emissions Reductions by restructuring [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately

I think the carbon emission argument is a bit of a red herring here.

10 times the amount of unneccessary journeys would be saved by the drastic reduction of late postponements & abandonments.
EG:. For weather related issues making the decision 30 mins before the away team is due to travel, taking account of forecasts up to/during the game and sticking to it barring an unexpected severe deterioration in conditions, even if this means a few unneccessary postponements and some games played in less than ideal conditions.
(As hoppers, most of us avoid long trips to games in doubt but this option isn't on for players, officials and fans of the clubs involved).

End the practice of automatically abandoning the game when a player is deemed to be 'seriously injured', even after he has been moved from the pitch, subject to there being no risk to the player's safety or comfort. The same goes for floodlight failures - play on if 50% or more of the lights are working or if they can be fixed in a reasonable time.

I don't think there is the collective will to do it though.


Geoff
First Team Sub

Jun 4, 2019, 1:21 PM

Posts: 952
Location:
Team(s):

Post #32 of 32 (156 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Cris] Cost and Carbon Emissions Reductions by restructuring [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately

I donít have any statistics but, in my experience, the large majority of spectators at non-league grounds (particularly at steps 4 & below) have celebrated their 50th birthday (some, like me, so long ago that they canít actually recall it).
There are exceptions, when Iíve watched Hashtag this season, Iíve actually felt quite ancient but in general, in my late 60s I feel pretty typical.
This is sometimes seen as a problem as us oldies wonít be around for ever. I donít agree, their will other generations of old codgers coming along at regular intervals to replace us.
On the subject of Carbon Emissions how many cars journeys of, say, 200 miles does it take to produce as many emissions as a single transatlantic flight? Or to put it another way if no one in Britain travelled to football except by walking or cycling would it make a blind bit of difference to global warming?

First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All
 
 


free hit counters

Search for (options) HOSTED BY SUMMIT SOCCER v.1.2.3