Surely it must be clear now under Conference Rules Whether they qualfiy?
There must be a stipulation that by a certain time work must have started on a task that will bring the grounfd up to scratch and that the plans jave been approved.
It makes a mockery of the league when with 4-5 games to go and after Easter just 2 or 3 that teams don't know whether 6th or 7th place (if Maidenhead come 6th) will qualify for a place in the play offs.
From Welling's perspective we must do everything within our power to win the two Easter matches as if Bath drop points that would virtually guarantee a top 7 finish
It seems to me a shmae that the club aren't making more of this as surely that would make for greater interest in the club and bigger corwds in these last tow home league games. Or is that they already know that Hampton & R have met the criteria.
Thing is its out of our hands and we would not be in the play offs on merit just by the failings of others. Obviously I'd be delighted if we crept in at the expense of Hampton but at the end of the day we have fallen slightly short this season. And if Hampton do fail we aren't even guaranteed to fill their place. Im sure a few seasons ago when Lewes failed their ground grading the highest placed team got a bye to the final - I may have got that totally wrong mind!
Personally I feel that if we keep the majority of this squad and add some quality and experience then i dont see why we could not mount a serious challenge next year. I get the impression some people see this season as all or nothing. Rome wasn't built in a day and all that.
There are a number of aspects of running a club which aside from having a good team on the pitch, include ensuring you comply with the rules on ground grading if you want to be promoted and being financially sound.
Over time Welling have continually improved the stadium so it meets the criteria, whereas other clubs have effectively ignored the rules and spent money on the team and then hope to get thorugh with a nudge and a wink at the end of the season and a scrambled together ground improvement scheme.
From the pyramid info site it states that the capacity needs to be 4000 with a plan in palce to acheive 5000. Hampton's is 3000, why should they be allowed to participate in the play offs or be promoted when they haven't met the criteria with 3 weeks to go in the season???
The sooner a harsher line is taken on this the better for all participants.
This is a link to the Ground Grading Requirements page on Tony Kempster's site. It's not just capacity that counts, but loads of other criteria too. There's no way that Hampton meet all of the criteria for Conference National - they certainly don't have 8 turnstiles for instance.
Looking at all the requirements (recommended for insomniacs), I wonder whether PVR meets all of them too - 12 places for the press? Parking for 4 visiting directors? Maybe they can carpool...
I've no idea whether Hampton & Richmond have met the criteria, but it is well known that Maidenhead have not. The rules on placings have been amended since the Lewes scenario (when their ground was not accepted and a bye given to the 2nd place club straight to the play off final). Now, if a club fails to meet the criteria (for entry into the play offs) then the sixth placed club can take their place in the play off. If two clubs fail to meet the criteria then the senth placed club can also take place in the play off. This is as far as the exceptions will go. It is not however clear what would occur in H&R finished top (as they would not technically be in a play off position), but hopefully common sense would then prevail and the second placed club would be promoted plus the winner of the play offs. The alternative would be that both "play off finalists" would be promoted.
I would agree that ground grading decisions should be clear by now but the wheels do move rather slowly.
As far as we go we don't have the 8 turnstiles but I'm sure any Club would be given leeway on what are, in relative terms, minor works like the number of turnstiles provided they could demonstrate that the work would be completed well before the commencement of the new season. After all what Club would spend precious money on such an improvement unless they were certain it was needed.
When it comes to matters such as ground capacity however these are likely to be heavy both in times of cost and timescale (not only in terms of the actual construction work but things like planning permission etc.) and there would not be scope for leeway.
As has been said its out of our hands anyway. What we need to be doing is to be getting behind the team, who have exceeded the start of season expectations of most if not all of us, to encourage them to achieve the best finish to the season that they can. There are always things to play for even if you are not in the playoff or relegation zones and they would include the standing of the club, professional pride and last but not least to provide quality entertainment to those who have spent their hard earned through the turnstiles throughout the season.
__________________
YOUTH are the future
****
"The worst thing you can do is make a committment and not meet it and I understand that." Barrie Hobbins 14 August 2010
There have been a considerable number of posts on the BSS forum regarding Hamptons ground. One of the contentions being the local planning authority (London Borough of Richmond) has yet to give permission for the new stand. A number of objections have been made to the council by local professional people (doctor professor and so on before I get a rude comment). But according to postings made on the BSS forum planning permission needed to be in place by 1st April for the ground grading to be secured.
