|
Post by Churton Blue on Oct 22, 2020 18:42:10 GMT
Tracey Crouch is a Conservative MP who was the former Minister. She gave up her career as a Minister on a matter of priciple and as such has my utmost respect. Nigel Huddleston and has a lot of explaining to do. Principles Indeed . Tracey Crouch Member of Parliament for Chatham and Aylesford Tracey Elizabeth Anne Crouch is a British Conservative Party politician. She is Member of Parliament for Chatham and Aylesford, having gained the seat from Labour at the 2010 general election. She was appointed as Minister for Sport, Civil Society and Loneliness in 2017, but resigned in 2018 due to a delay over the introduction of reduced limits on the stakes of fixed odds betting terminals. She resigned because she promised that FOBT would have their stakes reduced by a certain date in betting shops. The Tory Government was knobbled by the vested interests of the gambling industry and rather than break her promise and do something she considered to be wrong she resigned. Totally not her fault and although I do not share her political point of view what she did is extremely rare and no matter what party she represents she has my respect for that. If only Oliver Dowden, Nigel Huddleston and those on the National League Board were of the same calibre. The article Tracey Crouch did for the Guardian is well worth a read. www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/nov/17/killing-machines-tracey-crouch-on-why-she-resigned-as-minister-over-fobts
|
|
|
Post by Anders on Oct 23, 2020 8:46:34 GMT
Following York yesterday, Kidderminster are now raising concerns as well.
|
|
|
Post by silverblue on Oct 23, 2020 9:30:58 GMT
Following York yesterday, Kidderminster are now raising concerns as well. We need to keep the pressure up over this. Fans from all clubs who have had a raw deal need to email MP's, newspapers, National League, Lottery, and local radio. The national league would love for this to just go away, let's make sure it doesn't
|
|
|
Post by Hoff Side on Oct 23, 2020 11:07:12 GMT
Having half an hour to spare this morning i have done some calculations (using figures from earlier in the thread) how i think the 10m should be divided between the clubs.
Total average spectators per week, total for all clubs - 90,937. x2 for monthly total 181,874
10m divided by 3 = £3,333333.33 per mth.
£3,333333.33 divided by 181,874 = £18.33 per spectator a mth.
Some examples using these figs. Notts County (5210 Ave. x 2) 10420 = £190,998 per mth Stockport 8684 = £159,177 Wrexham 8116 = £148,766
Chester 4038 = £74,016 Boreham wood 1448 = £26,541
Curzon Ashton 764 = £14,004 Oxford City 706 = £12,940 Hungerford 652 = £11,951
You mathematicians out there might correct these figures but i think they're about right. Also how much a club charges for admission may also have to be taken into consideration.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 23, 2020 11:17:27 GMT
Trawling the interweb for more on this scandal, here's a couple of articles I found on the BBC website which, I think, makes for interesting reading. The first is re. the NL allocation The second is a comment from a certain Mr Keates.
1. The National League is to distribute the government's £10m support package on an average attendance basis, meaning seven former Football League clubs will receive a larger sum.
Chesterfield, Hartlepool, Notts County, Stockport, Torquay, Wrexham and Yeovil will receive £95,000 a month, with the 16 other clubs receiving £84,000.
National League games are currently being played behind closed doors.
The first payments of National Lottery funds is scheduled for next week.
In National League North and South, the majority of clubs will get £30,000 a month, although Chester, Dulwich Hamlet, Hereford, Maidstone and York will receive £36,000 a month on the same distribution model basis
2. Wrexham boss Dean Keates says the £10m support package for National League clubs is "reassuring" during "uncertain times".
Games are currently being played behind closed doors due to Covid-19.
Clubs in the fifth and sixth tiers of English football are to receive National Lottery support to keep them afloat.
"It's good for us as a football club and I think common sense has been used how it's been split," Keates said.
Wrexham and six other former Football League club in the National League - Chesterfield, Hartlepool, Notts County, Stockport, Torquay and Yeovil - will receive £95,000 a month.
National League confirms funding split The clubs will receive a larger sum of based on average home attendances, with the 16 other clubs receiving £84,000.
"It's good for us going forward because they're uncertain times that every business is facing," Keates added.
"Everyone can put it in the back of their mind knowing that the wages are going to get paid.
"We'd like to have the fans and we'd like this not to be happening like the hand-outs that the government are having to give through the lottery.
"But it's not happening so far this current season, so it's good for us knowing that club's sustainable over the next few months."
|
|
|
Post by Churton Blue on Oct 23, 2020 11:32:01 GMT
Having half an hour to spare this morning i have done some calculations (using figures from earlier in the thread) how i think the 10m should be divided between the clubs. Total average spectators per week, total for all clubs - 90,937. x2 for monthly total 181,874 10m divided by 3 = £3,333333.33 per mth. £3,333333.33 divided by 181,874 = £18.33 per spectator a mth. Some examples using these figs. Notts County (5210 Ave. x 2) 10420 = £190,998 per mth Stockport 8684 = £159,177 Wrexham 8116 = £148,766 Chester 4038 = £74,016 Boreham wood 1448 = £26,541 Curzon Ashton 764 = £14,004 Oxford City 706 = £12,940 Hungerford 652 = £11,951 You mathematicians out there might correct these figures but i think they're about right. Also how much a club charges for admission may also have to be taken into consideration. If only the National League Board had spent that much time on it. Fairness is extremely important and you have proved it can be done. There is a another very serious issue depending on who actually came up with the methodology for allocating the money and who agreed to it. Those people who sit on the NL Board own the clubs they represent and therefore have a vested financial interest. If they were responsible for this it looks like blatant corruption as there is no way the allocation to each club reflects the criteria set out by Government Ministers. The main Minister involved has a club in his Constituency that has benefited unfairly from the allocation. If he has agreed the methodology then he should resign. Hopefully the right questions can be asked by people with some influence as what should have been something very positive ie external funding for non league football clubs, has been spoiled by the actions of people who it appears can not be trusted.
|
|
|
Post by jimianto on Oct 23, 2020 11:59:09 GMT
Following York yesterday, Kidderminster are now raising concerns as well. From Neil Male - Kiddie's CEO First and foremost, I would like to join all National League clubs in showing our gratitude to the National Lottery, the DCMS and all those involved in procuring vital grants to help National League Clubs survive. “However, the distribution of these funds and the way in which that distribution has been calculated has left us as a Board extremely concerned. I have this morning written to my counterpart, National League CEO Michael Tattersall seeking urgent clarification on how those sums were reached. This is not about greed or grabbing for money, it is about livelihoods and the long-term stability and success of a football club that has continued on a challenging journey only with the assurances of support that must now be forthcoming in the ways it was promised. “I will not enter public debate, conjecture or criticism of anybody, that’s not my style of working and that benefits nobody. However, my fear is that, as a full-time club that was given concrete assurances about the commencement of the season, we are going to fall short in the support we receive. We would be failing in our duty to let that happen.” Looks like the pressure is continuing. I'm amazed the NL haven't come out with an interim statement about the objections from the clubs who have questioned the funding allocation.
|
|
|
Post by nytram on Oct 23, 2020 14:48:46 GMT
No one has mentioned season ticket holders who have paid for their ticket and not asked for a refund. I assume that what was on the questionnaire sent to all clubs. Where does that come into the equation. So all these figures being given about average attendance doesn't matter because it's about 'lost revenue'. This could fiasco go on till next year
|
|
|
Post by muffinthemule on Oct 23, 2020 15:05:06 GMT
If this is sent back to the NL board for redistribution and they give the clubs a vote to ratify the outcome then you can bet that the National division will vote in their own interests and accept what is on offer now and stuff the North and South divisions
|
|
|
Post by mcseal on Oct 23, 2020 15:09:09 GMT
No one has mentioned season ticket holders who have paid for their ticket and not asked for a refund. I assume that what was on the questionnaire sent to all clubs. Where does that come into the equation. So all these figures being given about average attendance doesn't matter because it's about 'lost revenue'. This could fiasco go on till next year I don't see why season ticket money should come into this. They are all entitled to refunds for the period they are not allowed to see games. They may choose not to pursue a refund and effectively donate the money to the club. But as matchday income is concerned it should be viewed as nil.
|
|
|
Post by nytram on Oct 23, 2020 15:30:56 GMT
Yep it is being a donation to the club. I'll better not ask about the income from streaming. Let's just keep it simple to an average attendance. Hey maybe the National League board could do the same. The only way forward. All other options are to complicated or corrupt.
|
|
|
Post by dmcnally on Oct 23, 2020 17:39:56 GMT
Chris Matheson update - “ I have written to the Secretary of State at the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport to express widespread concerns regarding the recent process of the allocation of monies from the recent National Lottery fund. I welcome the 10m grant aid provided by The National Lottery, however, the apparent unfair allocation of financial support means that some clubs will receive far more than they could have justifiably expected and others, such as Chester FC, will receive far less. This will significantly affect clubs that rely on fans paying to enter the ground and will place them under immense financial strain. Chester FC is a fan-owned club and will face serious financial difficulties if a fairer distribution of the funds is not allocated.” /?extid=0&d=n
|
|
|
Post by CH2 on Oct 23, 2020 18:53:29 GMT
Notts County CEO has also voiced concerns:
We had hoped that our share of the well-publicised £10million funding package kindly made available by the National Lottery would have gone a long way to making up the shortfall.
But, while we appreciate the Government, FA and National League’s efforts in securing this funding, the allocation of the monies does not accord with the criteria set out earlier this month, when Government made it clear it should be used to subsidise clubs for their lost gate revenue.
How can it be right, therefore, that we receive only £11,000 per month more than the likes of Boreham Wood, Wealdstone and Weymouth despite our average attendances being more than five times theirs? They and a host of other clubs are now actually in a stronger financial position than they would have been if crowds were permitted at matches and, as a result, have gained an unfair competitive advantage over clubs like ours who have been left significantly worse off. The allocation is profoundly flawed to the extent that it seriously and adversely impacts the very integrity of the competition.
All clubs were asked to provide the league with financial information at the end of September and to specifically detail their estimated lost gate revenue. While we understand these figures are merely indicative, alongside average attendances over say a two-year period they should have provided enough information to enable the league to work out a sensible banding of teams rather than adopting this purely arbitrary system.
If the funds were distributed in an optimal way, it is conceivable that all clubs could have received close to their lost gate receipts for the first three months of the season, with further potential to replace other lost revenue streams with live streaming and creative sponsorship and marketing initiatives.
In a letter to the league I have offered to provide a number of options for a more considered and structured distribution based on various scenarios using the above information. I am yet to receive a response!
On Monday I will be speaking with Lilian Greenwood MP to ask for her support, alongside other MPs, in demanding the National League revisit their decision and distribute these very welcome funds in a manner which meets their mandated use. While we are of course grateful to receive this help and accepting of the fact we may not recover all our losses, we cannot accept other clubs profiting from the grant while many others are left short. I would like to thank Lilian in advance for her support and assistance in this matter.
|
|
|
Post by midfieldgeneral on Oct 24, 2020 23:34:59 GMT
Could clubs mount a joint legal challenge?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2020 1:19:15 GMT
Could clubs mount a joint legal challenge? Really hope we join others in doing this, doubt it will work given how the funding has been calculated to divide and conquer with giving money to the bulk of lower supported clubs. But the bigger (ex league) clubs in these divisions banding together as a unit is the only chance we have of at the very least getting an explanation. Personally think it's too late to change the monies now but at least we can get an admission from the NL about why and what they did.
|
|
|
Post by lincolnexile on Oct 25, 2020 9:14:54 GMT
Could clubs mount a joint legal challenge? Really hope we join others in doing this, doubt it will work given how the funding has been calculated to divide and conquer with giving money to the bulk of lower supported clubs. But the bigger (ex league) clubs in these divisions banding together as a unit is the only chance we have of at the very least getting an explanation. Personally think it's too late to change the monies now but at least we can get an admission from the NL about why and what they did. The big problem is that the club, as is the case with other unhappy clubs, can’t be seen as being ungrateful. I think our board has been sensible with their attitude regarding the funding by saying they thank the National Lottery but question the distribution. Hopefully if enough clubs complain the National League will reassess the distribution but I wouldn’t hold my breath given their previous record.
|
|
|
Post by muffinthemule on Oct 25, 2020 11:35:31 GMT
How many clubs does it take to propose a Vote of No Confidence in this inept National League Board? Every decision they take seems to be controversial and weighted heavily towards the top division. ( where most of their clubs are placed).If clubs are really bothered they should get together to fight.
|
|
|
Post by Lobster on Oct 25, 2020 11:54:12 GMT
Could clubs mount a joint legal challenge? Really hope we join others in doing this, doubt it will work given how the funding has been calculated to divide and conquer with giving money to the bulk of lower supported clubs. But the bigger (ex league) clubs in these divisions banding together as a unit is the only chance we have of at the very least getting an explanation. Personally think it's too late to change the monies now but at least we can get an admission from the NL about why and what they did. Changing it now would be pretty unfair if we're being honest. You can't really announce that some clubs are getting x amount and then go back and you've revised the figures and they're getting a lot less. Boreham Wood are an entity of their own, but with the likes of Curzon and Hungerford, it's not their fault they're doing well out of the deal. But an explanation would be nice, or an admission that they clocked it up and will review how they do it should it happen again.
|
|
|
Post by agl on Oct 25, 2020 12:04:21 GMT
Really hope we join others in doing this, doubt it will work given how the funding has been calculated to divide and conquer with giving money to the bulk of lower supported clubs. But the bigger (ex league) clubs in these divisions banding together as a unit is the only chance we have of at the very least getting an explanation. Personally think it's too late to change the monies now but at least we can get an admission from the NL about why and what they did. Changing it now would be pretty unfair if we're being honest. You can't really announce that some clubs are getting x amount and then go back and you've revised the figures and they're getting a lot less. Boreham Wood are an entity of their own, but with the likes of Curzon and Hungerford, it's not their fault they're doing well out of the deal. But an explanation would be nice, or an admission that they clocked it up and will review how they do it should it happen again. Or an announcement of top up funding, in recognition of the mess they've mafe
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2020 12:07:06 GMT
Although a little off topic, and I’d have posted in the Marine thread but there seems to be no mention of the club making over £13,000 from the mini cup run during a pandemic
|
|
|
Post by agl on Oct 25, 2020 12:34:54 GMT
Although a little off topic, and I’d have posted in the Marine thread but there seems to be no mention of the club making over £13,000 from the mini cup run during a pandemic Hopefully this wasn't included in the budget, so might help keep Weeks etc for a bit longer. Remains to be seen how hard the bail out shortfall affects planning. I assume the board will wait to see if there's any comeback from the representations being made by MPs, fans etc, but I'm not holding my breath. Doubt we will see fans in grounds at our level before the end of the season. Meanwhile, at the step below, my nearby non league club Lewes are increasing capacity from 450 to 500 after satisfying themselves that they can operate safely at that number
|
|
|
Post by bing on Oct 25, 2020 12:47:56 GMT
Changing it now would be pretty unfair if we're being honest. You can't really announce that some clubs are getting x amount and then go back and you've revised the figures and they're getting a lot less. Boreham Wood are an entity of their own, but with the likes of Curzon and Hungerford, it's not their fault they're doing well out of the deal. But an explanation would be nice, or an admission that they clocked it up and will review how they do it should it happen again. Or an announcement of top up funding, in recognition of the mess they've mafe It's pretty unfair as it is as the league announced the money would be linked to lost revenue through having no fans.
|
|
|
Post by Lobster on Oct 25, 2020 13:07:35 GMT
Or an announcement of top up funding, in recognition of the mess they've mafe It's pretty unfair as it is as the league announced the money would be linked to lost revenue through having no fans. Agree, but realistically you can't announce someone is getting £80K or £90K and then say you've changed your mind, however badly you've messed up. They have to either apologise or find more funding. I suspect they will do nothing though, or come out with some mealy-mouthed "explanation" that misses the point.
|
|
|
Post by Harry Lime on Oct 25, 2020 13:35:22 GMT
It's pretty unfair as it is as the league announced the money would be linked to lost revenue through having no fans. Agree, but realistically you can't announce someone is getting £80K or £90K and then say you've changed your mind, however badly you've messed up. They have to either apologise or find more funding. I suspect they will do nothing though, or come out with some mealy-mouthed "explanation" that misses the point. Doubt any club has actually made any key decisions over money going forward, based on the last few days. Only announced late last week, and no money yet received. It should be corrected. Suspect they won't change anything though, as you say. Don't think they've the balls to admit they're wrong ( some people may believe they're too corrupt to admit it)
|
|
|
Post by superman on Oct 25, 2020 14:26:01 GMT
Common sense would be to go with current allocation for month 1, admit revision needed and apply new distribution in months 2 and 3. You will never please everybody, but the opportunity is there to even things up. Sadly NL and common sense frequently don’t go together.
|
|
|
Post by stavros on Oct 25, 2020 17:32:15 GMT
The rather suspicious link between Oliver Dowden and Borehamwood, and the way they have benefitted in all this seems very underplayed to me. Then again, what the people of this country are willing to readily accept by way of Government corruption is a bit mad as well
|
|
|
Post by agl on Oct 25, 2020 17:37:51 GMT
The rather suspicious link between Oliver Dowden and Borehamwood, and the way they have benefitted in all this seems very underplayed to me. Then again, what the people of this country are willing to readily accept by way of Government corruption is a bit mad as well I think a few people are on the case. Whether it leads anywhere is another matter but the link between Dowden and Borehamwood stinks imo.
|
|
|
Post by bing on Oct 25, 2020 19:49:15 GMT
The rather suspicious link between Oliver Dowden and Borehamwood, and the way they have benefitted in all this seems very underplayed to me. Then again, what the people of this country are willing to readily accept by way of Government corruption is a bit mad as well Not been underplayed by me - I've sent him about 10 tweets! Good point above about revisiting after month one. Didn't think of that. Would still be annoying, but a way to redress the balance
|
|
|
Post by oldboneze on Oct 27, 2020 7:28:48 GMT
She is Wirral South MP incidentally, so is worth contacting for any fans we have living there. I've emailed Justin Madders, MP for Ellesmere Port and Neston.
Letter written by Justin Madders to the Sports Minister. Be interesting to see the reply.
"I am writing on behalf of the above constituent, who recently contacted me regarding the recent allocation of funds to National League Football Clubs to assist in covering lost gate revenue.
I understand that the allocation of such funds was completed by the National League board. I am aware that football clubs were asked to submit a financial questionnaire to estimate lost revenue however, it remains unclear what formula has been used to distribute the funding as the outcomes for clubs are quite different. For example, the monthly funding ranges from £95000 to £36000. Locally, Chester Football Club are at the lower end of the scale with a monthly payment of £36000.
I am aware of the attached spreadsheet which details the amount allocated per month to each club based upon the average number of spectators at home games in the 2019/20 season. The figures suggest that those with the highest losses are receiving some of the lowest levels of funding.
I would be grateful if you could outline what the Government intend to do to look into the distribution of the funding by the National League Board to ensure there is transparency and fairness.
Yours sincerely Justin Madders"
|
|
|
Post by chesterken on Oct 27, 2020 8:27:36 GMT
I've emailed Justin Madders, MP for Ellesmere Port and Neston.
Letter written by Justin Madders to the Sports Minister. Be interesting to see the reply.
"I am writing on behalf of the above constituent, who recently contacted me regarding the recent allocation of funds to National League Football Clubs to assist in covering lost gate revenue.
I understand that the allocation of such funds was completed by the National League board. I am aware that football clubs were asked to submit a financial questionnaire to estimate lost revenue however, it remains unclear what formula has been used to distribute the funding as the outcomes for clubs are quite different. For example, the monthly funding ranges from £95000 to £36000. Locally, Chester Football Club are at the lower end of the scale with a monthly payment of £36000.
I am aware of the attached spreadsheet which details the amount allocated per month to each club based upon the average number of spectators at home games in the 2019/20 season. The figures suggest that those with the highest losses are receiving some of the lowest levels of funding.
I would be grateful if you could outline what the Government intend to do to look into the distribution of the funding by the National League Board to ensure there is transparency and fairness.
Yours sincerely Justin Madders"
Well done Ob.
|
|