News from Dorking FC and Meadowbank!

[Smudge]

Part of the press release :

 

In keeping with its determination to create a legacy for the whole community, the Board of Dorking FC will continue to search for the option that provides the maximum benefit to the town. The current Board were successful in taking the reins of Dorking FC on this basis, with the full agreement and support of Mole Valley District Council. Both parties have been engaged in very positive discussions ever since. Our plan is to provide a platform to support football in the community for decades to come, not to simply meet the aspirations of a single club.

 

Double edged comments.Both parties ambigous,which means?

[HTFCSUPPORTER]

Horley should be walking the CCL then

your right smudge..

what I would say is that on the whole we are a very young side

with 3 current youth team players in the squad along with 4 or5 that have played at youth level. Also all players are very local so the few supporters that we do get along at games know they are mainly watching a local horley team.

[Jeff Hamnett TSF]

Back page news in today's Dorking Advertiser (not on line yet)

 

Mole Valley Council are looking at a 4.1 million pound redevelopment of Meadowbank, inc complete replacement of all football facilities, 3G pitch, and new community leisure buildings.

Two council meetings in Jan will decide if this goes ahead.

 

Long way to go yet, of course.

[E&E Rich]

Just discovered this link while browsing:

 

http://www.molevalley.gov.uk/media/pdf/s/h/Item_7_-_The_Future_of_Dorking_Football_Ground__Meadowbank.pdf

 

 

The document is a few pages in length but clearly it brings into question the statement recently provided by DFC. It also confirms my thoughts that DFC clearly still have an issue regarding their near neighbours.

 

For those who can't be bothered to read the whole statement, the really interesting bit is listed below....

 

 

"From initial research there is a good demand for an artificial 3G playing surface in the

Dorking area. We have engaged with several appropriate local organizations who have

confirmed their initial interest in the project. From our engagement to date, five key

strategic reasons for the provision of a 3G pitch have emerged:

 

(I have just listed the first two as the others relate to small sided teams, schools and disability groups)

 

• Dorking FC does not currently have a home ground and has to ground

share outside of the District.

 

• Dorking Wanderers needs to improve its facilities. This option 2 will

enable the team to ground share for matches and training at

Meadowbank. Meadowbank will effectively be the home venue for both of

these adult teams."

 

Maybe Dorking FC would care to expand or maybe even retract their earlier statement, as it looks to be factually incorrect and is also potentially misleading, having painted DFCW in a poor light for saying they would be involved, when that is quite clearly confirmed in this document. I enclose the most relevant part of it below.

 

 

"To be clear, Dorking FC does not rule out the possibility of Dorking Wanderers or any other senior side playing matches at Meadowbank in some capacity, however we will not partner there with any club that does not demonstrably support our community football ethos or benefit our development as a social enterprise."

Edited December 31, 2014 by E&E Rich

[TRS]

Thanks for the link Rich, just waded through it. Another interesting point is that the rebuilt facility (if approved) won't be ready until the start of the 2016/7 season, so another 18 months at The New Defence for DFC I assume. Pleased with the idea of a 3G pitch in this instance, as we all know the problems with the pitch in recent seasons. It does seem sensible for Wanderers to share as well and I guess that in years to come the 2 clubs could possibly merge.

 

Sounds like the pitch will be relocated slightly (to the left as you look from the main stand) using the patch of ground between the fence behind the goal & the footpath. 

[nosher]

Blimey, Richard. How much are Wanderers paying you to push their agenda?

[Jeff Hamnett TSF]

The council are quoted in todays Dorking Ad  as saying no decisions have yet been reached regarding any other clubs or groups that will ultimately use any new facility alongside Dorking FC.

 

Goes to scrutiny Tuesday , a full meeting the week after, and even then details of the use of the facility will be decided later, if Ive read the Mole Valley info correctly.

[Smudge]

COMMUNITY is the key word,not Dorking FC.Easier to get Funding!!!!!!!!!!

[Dave Powell]

Just a thought. If this all goes ahead as planned, why don't Dorking share at Westhumble for the 18 months until both clubs can move into Meadowbank?

[Big J R]

So many variables, so many possibilities.

 

At the end of the day, it matters not what any clubs say they want.  The 'whip-hand', if you'll pardon the expression, will be very firmly held by Mole Valley District Council.

 

We all know how long planning permission issues can take to sort out to everyones satisfaction so I reckon with luck, and not too many arguments, we might get football at Meadowbank again by the 2016/17 season.

 

I speak as a retired LGO, so I do know just how long any local authority decisions can take to be reached.

 

HOWEVER, I am really pleased that things are moving forward and that a 3G IS on the agenda.

[E&E Rich]

I have one agenda Nosher and that is to support my own football club. If you really followed this forum you'd know that by now, but why not throw mud instead, it's so much easier...

 

As an interested and local council tax paying observer I have an interest in this particular situation, it is clear to me at least that a merger into some form of Dorking United is the way forward if the town intends to get back on the football map in a serious, progressive manner. By changing the name for both parties, you would both keep continuity of history without one or other gaining any "high ground" by retaining their name. This Is something I advocate at Epsom & Ewell, and also at Croydon too, despite the return to Mayfields for the Athletic.  

 

I have no idea whether either side want that and have no connection or axe to grind in either direction. My problem was with DFC coming out with a statement within a very short matter of time in direct response to DFCW statement about sharing Meadowbank, which was confirmed to be true in the MVDC statement. I doubt DFC have moved that quickly to do anything in the last ten years, yet when they do, the sole purpose is to throw the toys out of the pram because of the local rivals making waves that they have failed to match.

 

Sorry if you don't like my posts just because they are not what you want to hear. Clearly it's obvious that you are connected with DFC and do still have an agenda, which is a real pity. Now that certain people have departed DFC I thought there might be real progress. Unfortunately it appears that the same prejudice and hostility remains, but with an additional side-order of paranoia too.

Edited January 2, 2015 by E&E Rich

[nosher]

Really, Richard; is that the best you can come back with?

 

I am nothing to do with either club (thank God) but do you seriously expect a reasonable person to read the press releases followed by your emotional summing up and not see some disconnect?

 

If you're going to make claims as you've done then it's not unreasonable to expect them to be checked out.

[Carthorse]

The council are quoted in todays Dorking Ad  as saying no decisions have yet been reached regarding any other clubs or groups that will ultimately use any new facility alongside Dorking FC.

 

Goes to scrutiny Tuesday , a full meeting the week after, and even then details of the use of the facility will be decided later, if Ive read the Mole Valley info correctly.

Give me something to read when printing these next week!

[Big J R]

As someone who currently has no official position with Dorking F.C., may I just say that this thread is making very interested reading.

 

Yes  -  I do know a lot of the past 'history' involved in this discussion, so I'm glad not to be in a position to have to make any comment as such, even though I do have my own thoughts on the matter.

[E&E Rich]

Really, Richard; is that the best you can come back with?

 

I am nothing to do with either club (thank God) but do you seriously expect a reasonable person to read the press releases followed by your emotional summing up and not see some disconnect?

 

If you're going to make claims as you've done then it's not unreasonable to expect them to be checked out.

You're entitled to your opinion nosher, totally misguided though it is.

 

If you'd been on this forum for more than five minutes, you'd know that I have no interest in any other clubs. I spend around 40-45 hours a week on my own club as it is! 

Ask people here, they'll tell you that I am critical and also honest when required, even when it comes to my own team. I won't sugar coat it, or try to put some sort of spin on it. 

 

Some other clubs I like; Camberley and Molesey to name two. Some I dislike. I obviously won't name them here but will confirm that Dorking are NOT one of them. My comments are entirely neutral and based on a (brief) historical animosity towards another club based on the fact that they happen to play down the road. They sum up why DFC have plummeted from a high water mark twenty years ago.

 

Now, like with Epsom, much of the fault for the current predicament lies with those who are no longer around, but if you don't learn from earlier mistakes made, you are likely to repeat them. DFC's statement tells me that they haven't learned yet.

[Big J R]

You're entitled to your opinion nosher, totally misguided though it is.

 

If you'd been on this forum for more than five minutes, you'd know that I have no interest in any other clubs. I spend around 40-45 hours a week on my own club as it is! 

Ask people here, they'll tell you that I am critical and also honest when required, even when it comes to my own team. I won't sugar coat it, or try to put some sort of spin on it. 

 

Some other clubs I like; Camberley and Molesey to name two. Some I dislike. I obviously won't name them here but will confirm that Dorking are NOT one of them. My comments are entirely neutral and based on a (brief) historical animosity towards another club based on the fact that they happen to play down the road. They sum up why DFC have plummeted from a high water mark twenty years ago.

 

Now, like with Epsom, much of the fault for the current predicament lies with those who are no longer around, but if you don't learn from earlier mistakes made, you are likely to repeat them. DFC's statement tells me that they haven't learned yet.

 

 

Don't hold back E&E  !  Why not tell us what you REALLY think !!!!

Edited January 5, 2015 by Big J R

[Jeff Hamnett TSF]

I think you are reading and quoting the bits that support your view Rich.

 

I guess we all do that!

 

The whole of  Meadowbank will be vastly improved, and be a leisure area the town can be proud of, with Dorking FC at its heart.

The company running DFC is a community interest company,and no individual can take a profit.

The board believe the way forward for the football team, is to encourage and promote local younger players and show the kids in the youth setup they have an opportunity to represent the town in senior football.

 

Playing the right way and representing your club in the correct way is more important than results, although the belief is, if you do  the right things results will follow.

 

Several local clubs were named in the MVDC paper as possible clubs who may wish to play games at the new stadium, Wanderers are one of those, and it may be beneficial for them to use the ground as they progress.

However, they probably wont be able to play there until season 2016/2017 and so can't get promoted this way until 2017/2018 if their league position warrants it.

Are they going to want to wait that long for Ryman football, and will the money and enthusiasm last that long?

I doubt it.

Carry on at an improved Westhumble ground more likely in my view.

 

Is it likely that clubs with such different philosophies will make a good merger?

I don't think so.

 

So I no longer see a merger as being in either clubs interests, and have reservations about a groundshare being in either clubs interest.

 

As regards the current board's press releases, they seem fair accurate and balanced to me, and consistent with MVDCs releases.

You can read what you like into them Rich, but you can expect Nosher ( who I dont know!) and I to occasionally question your conclusions.

[Smudge]

You're entitled to your opinion nosher, totally misguided though it is.

 

If you'd been on this forum for more than five minutes, you'd know that I have no interest in any other clubs. I spend around 40-45 hours a week on my own club as it is! 

Ask people here, they'll tell you that I am critical and also honest when required, even when it comes to my own team. I won't sugar coat it, or try to put some sort of spin on it. 

 

Some other clubs I like; Camberley and Molesey to name two. Some I dislike. I obviously won't name them here but will confirm that Dorking are NOT one of them. My comments are entirely neutral and based on a (brief) historical animosity towards another club based on the fact that they happen to play down the road. They sum up why DFC have plummeted from a high water mark twenty years ago.

 

Now, like with Epsom, much of the fault for the current predicament lies with those who are no longer around, but if you don't learn from earlier mistakes made, you are likely to repeat them. DFC's statement tells me that they haven't learned yet.

 

Rich,people do not like HONEST comments,all they care about in the main is there own Club.Agree with you re Dorking,if they really cared about football in the town,they would work in close cooperation with the Wanderers,like a groundshare their next year.But alas Dorking have their own agenda,which is Youth based,run by people with a Youth background,they only care about their plan,its called Egoism,if the truth be told.

[E&E Rich]

I take your comments on board tsf and fully understand that the two clubs may well have different views on where they go in the future.

 

However, it is a pity that DFC's statement wasn't a bit more even handed like your comments are. I am aware that DFC haven't liked DFCW since 2010 when we were arranging the Dave Wilson Trophy. Dorking had offered us the use of Meadowbank. It made sense to invite Molesey who were the holders and we suggested DFCW be approached with the idea that a big local derby might be beneficial to both the gate (for us) and the bar and publicity (for DFC). It was dismissed out of hand and we were given no doubt that if we invited them, that Meadowbank may no longer be available. This incredibly blinkered and short sighted view for what was a Memorial competition forced our hand and we invited Bookham instead, who ironically then won the tournament!

 

I very much doubt from what I've seen and read recently that anything has really changed here and I defend the quotes I placed earlier. I haven't really drawn any conclusions as the quotes did that for me. I also enclosed the link for the whole thread so that people who wanted to could see for themselves. IF DFC don't want a merger that is fine, but ultimately a bit of class might have been the way forward instead of an inflammatory statement directly contradicting DFCW who were actually right after all as the MVDC link above proved. Instead you are trying to spin things around to suit when actually a retraction or even a clarification of that part of your statement would have gone so much further. It most definitely wasn't "fair, accurate or balanced".

 

I would also take issue with your presumptions on DFCW. You seem to think it wouldn't work based on assumptions you've made about what you think their plans are. It looks like DFCW have stated in their press release that they are prepared to ground share, so I'd stick to clearing up the mess your club's statement has made rather than guessing what other clubs are up to.

 

BJR I see so many similarities with problems that have happened at my club over the years. I have been far more critical of some people at my club, more than you will ever realise. Clubs with a great tradition like Dorking and Epsom should really be playing at a higher level alongside some of the clubs that we used to meet back in the fifties who represent similar sized towns. DFC had an opportunity to do well in the nineties but having done the hard work to get up to the Ryman Premier, threw it all away again as Epsom did a decade earlier. Were both clubs punching above their weight? Maybe, but both should still really be of a Ryman League standard and off the field issues are the reason why both are no longer at that level.

 

You either learn from that or you don't. Have DFC learned? Far be it for me to draw conclusions, I'll leave that to others to decide.

[Jeff Hamnett TSF]

Wanderers initial statement wasn't entirely accurate was it though Rich, hence the DFC response.

 

Look Wanderers and Marc White should be congratulated for what they have achieved, Crawley league to brink of Ryman in what, ten years, and a ground at Westhumble that people said couldn't happen. Bloody well done.

 

 

What is pissing me off though is the great news about Meadowbank and the rec is being forgotten on here because  a few posters still want to look at politics within Dorking football, and overly analyse a couple of tweets and press releases.

 

 

Wanderers might ground share at Meadowbank, they might not, if it suits everyone , it will probably happen. End of.

 

The great news is  FOOTBALL will return to Meadowbank, and its not going to be a carpark , and there isnt going to be a road from one corner flag to the other!