• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

National League Meeting | 13/07/2023

The League don’t get a say in TV company choices and TV companies don’t pay much attention to what’s going on in non league football.
Pretty sure TNT Sports pays a lot of attention to what's going on in the NL, as they are coughing up money to show the NL games live.
 
Last edited:
Pretty sure TNT Sports pay a lot of attention to what's going on in the NL, as they are coughing up money to show the NL games live.
If we don't turn up on the day then D&R could just split in half and have a low energy 6-a-side game. Either that or the players could run around and do skids in the centre circle, climb trees, fall into streams or fight each other while the coaches stand around smoking. We've all been involved in such fixtures as kids. Would make okay telly, maybe a bit niche
 
Very good. I would also have referred to our understanding there is at least one offer on the table that would resolve the situation. You would like to think the NL are aware of this- probably mentioned in the f2f meeting. The key thing he is not delaying for lack of a buyer and that is a critical point..
 
I can’t see the league publishing anything.
If you publish you are boxing yourself into a corner. Deadlines are broken so often in life in loads of different things.
Ie, the sale could go to the wire. The club and buyer could -provide concrete evidence it is going through, but the payments could be 24 hours after the leagues ultimatum. They may be ‘happy’ to extend by a day but this becomes more difficult if they have gone public.
Our licence/membership is subject to the conditions, so they have already been backed into a corner to a degree. When making a statement and definitive deadline they can state that xyz must be competed by x date. Failure to complete will result in y consequence (expulsion) unless the league is provided with sufficient supporting documentation that is acceptable to amend x date.

There are means and ways of ensuring this is enforced but also giving themselves some legal loophole should it require an additional 24 hours like an emergency appeal process etc.

The long and the short of it, Martin doesn’t respond unless there is a hardline drawn in the sand, ala accounts being filed etc.
 
Very good. I would also have referred to our understanding there is at least one offer on the table that would resolve the situation. You would like to think the NL are aware of this- probably mentioned in the f2f meeting. The key thing he is not delaying for lack of a buyer and that is a critical point..
Although it is a critical point, as I pointed out earlier I think it's outside of their remit to require an owner of a club to sell.

They therefore have to stick to their remit (regulating the integrity of the competition) by asking clubs to pay their bills and prepare the team and ground properly for the season.

Obviously if the owner's only way of doing this is to sell the club, then so be it....
 
Very good. I would also have referred to our understanding there is at least one offer on the table that would resolve the situation. You would like to think the NL are aware of this- probably mentioned in the f2f meeting. The key thing he is not delaying for lack of a buyer and that is a critical point..
I'm sure he's been intouch with the NL in advance himself, and spun them a BS story like he does the judges each time. What he has going for him, and will use to his advantage and take credit for no doubt, is our own huge away support, which the league will I am sure factor. Victims of our own success you may say. He knows this and will suggest a deal is close, but can't disclose details, bla, bla bloody, bla, all the while we all carry on suffering.
 
Although it is a critical point, as I pointed out earlier I think it's outside of their remit to require an owner of a club to sell.

They therefore have to stick to their remit (regulating the integrity of the competition) by asking clubs to pay their bills and prepare the team and ground properly for the season.

Obviously if the owner's only way of doing this is to sell the club, then so be it....
Its not that they would *require* the club to sell but rather to understand the context that he is not selling now because he doesn't want to not because he has no offers. Therefore they would be even more comfortable enforcing their rules. Naturally they would set a deadline to comply not to sell...
 
Am not sure how public they will be after the meeting. Getting any details about the embargo has been a challenge. They might believe it's between them and the club.
 
Back
Top