Kajima FC

If "you" cant afford to pay to play football, then there are other options in life, theres plenty of teams that play for free, you dont have to play under a lwague or council, this is a step up from a free or cheap game of football, you can play 5 a side a lot cheaper than this, the point is, if you are upgrading to play in the alliance with fa rules etc etc, then you know what you are signing for before you do so, you know it costs a certain amount of cash, so find an alternative, if you cant afford to play league football, it costs me around £139 a month for my council tax bill, so if i couldn't afford to pay it, then i would downgrade my house, and find something within my budget, thats the trouble with our life styles, we all want other people to pay for the things, folk have got used to having things on credit, spending money which they haven't got, whats wrong with saying hang on a minute, i cant afford this, instead of i want iwant, and i'm having it.

back to Kajima - sad to see them go, Mike Neevesy is a good bloke, and they were always easy to deal with last season. I guess it shows how many sides (not just new) rely on finances but it shows just how much commitment guys like Mike put in and shows how many players lack the same. Are the vultures circling for your player yet Mike?

Polska legend II wrote:

Are the vultures circling for your player yet Mike?

It will cost them £25 per player, payable to me at my address.

Aussie Owl wrote:

Polska legend II wrote:

Are the vultures circling for your player yet Mike?

It will cost them £25 per player, payable to me at my address.

Well dont bother, cuz they cant afford to play, so why would you want them.

Polska legend II wrote:

Widds - I don't deal with the pitch costs for Polska but have heard rumblings the council are now treating pitch fees very differently (Kev Skeemer said the same thing) - are you saying this applies to all council pitches?

If it does I think it is time to make a stand because this is not good or clever. Granted I know they lost a lot of money from a club I won't name last season but not fair to tar all clubs with the same brush?

It is for Oadby and Wigston council Mark. You either pay each time you use a pitch (losing out on the VAT exemption offer), or you pay for a block of ten as soon as you play your first game. So either you lose £10 per game (say £200 per season on league games) or you have to find £400 after just 90 minutes football.

I asked for ten days extra to pay up (basically a Friday, Sunday, Sunday) which would have contributed a further £132 to the cause in subs, but i was told we would lose our pitch if we didnt pay this Sunday. At the moment we have about £150 in the coffers...its genuinely going to be very tight. I am hoping that we get most outstanding monies in, and that the council see sense and give us 7 extra days to raise the final part of the money...

Don't think we should level that at all of them Hellboy without knowing the circumstances. In every club there are some genuine players who pay their way

Agreed, and some of them let their team mates down real bad, so they are the ones my comments are aimed at.

Widds wrote:

Polska legend II wrote:

Widds - I don't deal with the pitch costs for Polska but have heard rumblings the council are now treating pitch fees very differently (Kev Skeemer said the same thing) - are you saying this applies to all council pitches?

If it does I think it is time to make a stand because this is not good or clever. Granted I know they lost a lot of money from a club I won't name last season but not fair to tar all clubs with the same brush?

It is for Oadby and Wigston council Mark. You either pay each time you use a pitch (losing out on the VAT exemption offer), or you pay for a block of ten as soon as you play your first game. So either you lose £10 per game (say £200 per season on league games) or you have to find £400 after just 90 minutes football.

I asked for ten days extra to pay up (basically a Friday, Sunday, Sunday) which would have contributed a further £132 to the cause in subs, but i was told we would lose our pitch if we didnt pay this Sunday. At the moment we have about £150 in the coffers...its genuinely going to be very tight. I am hoping that we get most outstanding monies in, and that the council see sense and give us 7 extra days to raise the final part of the money...

seems to me pay as you play is the better option?

Polska legend II wrote:

rocket ledge wrote:

our pitch for saff lounge has gone up a tenner a game and we have to pay up front, then we get 3 home games in a row

surely games should be levelled off home and away to start with

virtually impossible i'd say Tommy because of lack of pitches and large fixture lists. Priority is getting the games played because there isn't much choice where we play our football these days

yep i understand that but a simple phone call to the said clubs secretary to make sure it doesnt make a team fold is surely quite easy

Hellboy wrote:

If "you" cant afford to pay to play football, then there are other options in life, theres plenty of teams that play for free, you dont have to play under a lwague or council, this is a step up from a free or cheap game of football, you can play 5 a side a lot cheaper than this, the point is, if you are upgrading to play in the alliance with fa rules etc etc, then you know what you are signing for before you do so, you know it costs a certain amount of cash, so find an alternative, if you cant afford to play league football, it costs me around £139 a month for my council tax bill, so if i couldn't afford to pay it, then i would downgrade my house, and find something within my budget, thats the trouble with our life styles, we all want other people to pay for the things, folk have got used to having things on credit, spending money which they haven't got, whats wrong with saying hang on a minute, i cant afford this, instead of i want iwant, and i'm having it.

But we signed up to the pitch, and then this year, after two years of paying all our bills, they have changed the way its operating, which has impacted on the team, the same as it has others.
Its all very well saying go and play on the park with your mates etc, but if teams do that, then the parks are not used, council cant afford their upkeep and we lose the parks to development etc.

Also, surely people have the right to play on parks...granted we pay for them as well, but why shouldnt people on low income be allowed to play in a league? Are you saying that those people who cant afford £60 or £70 shouldnt be allowed to play in leagues? I only ask because you were saying the other day how unfair it is that its only the rich that can compete in the olympics...(i hang on every word you say and take it in )

Unfortunately fella, i think you are taking a very simplistic view on this situation....just my opinion

Hellboy wrote:

Agreed, and some of them let their team mates down real bad, so they are the ones my comments are aimed at.

does it then come down to the age old question: do you sacrifice the need for financial sense for a 'good' player or group of players who will get you results? I'd love to see how many 'good' players out there are getting away with murder simply because their managers don't want to lose their talents to another side.

rocket ledge wrote:

Polska legend II wrote:

rocket ledge wrote:

our pitch for saff lounge has gone up a tenner a game and we have to pay up front, then we get 3 home games in a row

surely games should be levelled off home and away to start with

virtually impossible i'd say Tommy because of lack of pitches and large fixture lists. Priority is getting the games played because there isn't much choice where we play our football these days

yep i understand that but a simple phone call to the said clubs secretary to make sure it doesnt make a team fold is surely quite easy

I think thats the club secs responsibility, otherwise it would involve 90 odd phone calls, plus me and you would always say 'no, we will fold' and get some away games first lol

rocket ledge wrote:

Polska legend II wrote:

rocket ledge wrote:

our pitch for saff lounge has gone up a tenner a game and we have to pay up front, then we get 3 home games in a row

surely games should be levelled off home and away to start with

virtually impossible i'd say Tommy because of lack of pitches and large fixture lists. Priority is getting the games played because there isn't much choice where we play our football these days

yep i understand that but a simple phone call to the said clubs secretary to make sure it doesnt make a team fold is surely quite easy

good point and I take what you are saying, but I guess the onus will always be on the clubs - we know on average it costs about £1200 a season to run a club - trouble is most of us generate that over the course of each week, and don't expect to have to find most of it before the season has barely started! That isn't the leagues fault though, once again I blame a lack of pitches and playing facilities - it may well be that teams have no option but to play at home for a few weeks running - simply because away pitches may be taken up or just not available. So it could be either playing at home or not at all - and then that would lead to fixture congestion at the end of the season

Widds wrote:

rocket ledge wrote:

Polska legend II wrote:

rocket ledge wrote:

our pitch for saff lounge has gone up a tenner a game and we have to pay up front, then we get 3 home games in a row

surely games should be levelled off home and away to start with

virtually impossible i'd say Tommy because of lack of pitches and large fixture lists. Priority is getting the games played because there isn't much choice where we play our football these days

yep i understand that but a simple phone call to the said clubs secretary to make sure it doesnt make a team fold is surely quite easy

I think thats the club secs responsibility, otherwise it would involve 90 odd phone calls, plus me and you would always say 'no, we will fold' and get some away games first lol

simply don't think there are the facilities to split fixtures home and away each week. i know of very few pitches that aren't shared each week

we can pay 85 quid a month or the full whack by september the 30th

Polska legend II wrote:

good point and I take what you are saying, but I guess the onus will always be on the clubs - we know on average it costs about £1200 a season to run a club - trouble is most of us generate that over the course of each week, and don't expect to have to find most of it before the season has barely started! That isn't the leagues fault though, once again I blame a lack of pitches and playing facilities - it may well be that teams have no option but to play at home for a few weeks running - simply because away pitches may be taken up or just not available. So it could be either playing at home or not at all - and then that would lead to fixture congestion at the end of the season

I'm sure Kajima wouldn't complain about that

Polska legend II wrote:

Hellboy wrote:

Agreed, and some of them let their team mates down real bad, so they are the ones my comments are aimed at.

does it then come down to the age old question: do you sacrifice the need for financial sense for a 'good' player or group of players who will get you results? I'd love to see how many 'good' players out there are getting away with murder simply because their managers don't want to lose their talents to another side.

Thats like saying a naughty child should get what they want, and if you are a bad manager by letting them get away with it, then thats the managers fault, plus, its OK the managers not wanting to lose the talent, but if its caused that team to fold, and left them in debt, then i would personally forego the talent, and have fun with my reliable greatful and paying players.

I agree, just saying that I think there are many that get away with it!

Widds wrote:

Hellboy wrote:

If "you" cant afford to pay to play football, then there are other options in life, theres plenty of teams that play for free, you dont have to play under a lwague or council, this is a step up from a free or cheap game of football, you can play 5 a side a lot cheaper than this, the point is, if you are upgrading to play in the alliance with fa rules etc etc, then you know what you are signing for before you do so, you know it costs a certain amount of cash, so find an alternative, if you cant afford to play league football, it costs me around £139 a month for my council tax bill, so if i couldn't afford to pay it, then i would downgrade my house, and find something within my budget, thats the trouble with our life styles, we all want other people to pay for the things, folk have got used to having things on credit, spending money which they haven't got, whats wrong with saying hang on a minute, i cant afford this, instead of i want iwant, and i'm having it.

But we signed up to the pitch, and then this year, after two years of paying all our bills, they have changed the way its operating, which has impacted on the team, the same as it has others.
Its all very well saying go and play on the park with your mates etc, but if teams do that, then the parks are not used, council cant afford their upkeep and we lose the parks to development etc.

Also, surely people have the right to play on parks...granted we pay for them as well, but why shouldnt people on low income be allowed to play in a league? Are you saying that those people who cant afford £60 or £70 shouldnt be allowed to play in leagues? I only ask because you were saying the other day how unfair it is that its only the rich that can compete in the olympics...(i hang on every word you say and take it in )

Unfortunately fella, i think you are taking a very simplistic view on this situation....just my opinion

Well the parks are used if people are playing football on them, regardless of whether they pay a league or not, the spaces wont be lost cuz its not just the footballers that use them, and if you are on a low income then no you cant be wasting your benefits on leisure activities that are chargable, if you are on benefits then try to do something to help pay towards your hobby, this is why mainly only the rich do compete in the olypics.

So you think its ok that only the rich compete in Olympic sports?

Widds wrote:

Neevsey wrote:

good luck widds i just dont think some of our players believed my statement three months ago that we would fold with no money if they didnt get serious

Yeah, people sometimes forget you are not a pro club, the players are the club. We have a pretty good bunch if i am honest, but we had one bellend last season who wouldnt give his strip back and kept messing me about, to the extent i had to get Malc involved as i just wanted to belt him. The lad moaned on Facebook about us chasing him for the kit and did we think we were man u, chasing him...i explained Man U wouldnt have been fussed about a £40 kit....bless

I had a player refusing to return kit last season, So i waited until pre season started and invited him to play in a game.
He turned up with THE kit, cost us a goal and then signed for a team in LSL.

Well i got what i wanted. MY KIT back!!

Quote :

we can pay 85 quid a month or the full whack by september the 30th

Sounds familiar Ty, not on Knighton Park are you mate??

S&G Sec wrote:

Quote :

we can pay 85 quid a month or the full whack by september the 30th

Sounds familiar Ty, not on Knighton Park are you mate??

Nah kev on western park mate was quite shocked to see that the pitch fees have been cut in price by nearly £100.

Widds wrote:

So you think its ok that only the rich compete in Olympic sports?

Exactly the opposite, however it is only rich people that can afford to do it, apart from a few lucky people, thats just the way this country works. The class system stinks.

tysmith c.n.f.c wrote:

S&G Sec wrote:

Quote :

we can pay 85 quid a month or the full whack by september the 30th

Sounds familiar Ty, not on Knighton Park are you mate??

Nah kev on western park mate was quite shocked to see that the pitch fees have been cut in price by nearly £100.

There you go, shop around, haggle, get the best price possible, dont just sit there blaming everybody else.

hell boy you seem to have a bad taste in your mouth for whatever reason
yes we have players available to go, ones who pay their way by the way hell boy
and yes people have been in touch. spose that makes them a bad secretary hell boy
do me a favour and chill we are the tean thats been forced to go but look at the discussions it has caused, we wont be the last
aussie whats the 25 for

Our first pitch om western park was horri £500 for the season had the biggest slope ever (ask webbys) and we went through 5 match balls in one game one was borrowed from another pitch all ended up poped went through a fair few balls thats season!!!

Widds wrote:

So you think its ok that only the rich compete in Olympic sports?

hell yeah widds .. let us poor folk kick the pig bladder around on sundays

Neevsey wrote:

hell boy you seem to have a bad taste in your mouth for whatever reason

the same reason as my dog .

tysmith c.n.f.c wrote:

Our first pitch om western park was horri £500 for the season had the biggest slope ever (ask webbys) and we went through 5 match balls in one game one was borrowed from another pitch all ended up poped went through a fair few balls thats season!!!

Were they Stanno ones???

the goalie wrote:

Widds wrote:

So you think its ok that only the rich compete in Olympic sports?

hell yeah widds .. let us poor folk kick the pig bladder around on sundays

But not in competitive leagues though...!!! Getting too expensive!!

Widds wrote:

the goalie wrote:

Widds wrote:

So you think its ok that only the rich compete in Olympic sports?

hell yeah widds .. let us poor folk kick the pig bladder around on sundays

But not in competitive leagues though...!!! Getting too expensive!!

yeah has too be a fifa approved offical size and weight pig bladder lol

Aussie Owl wrote:

Polska legend II wrote:

Are the vultures circling for your player yet Mike?

It will cost them £25 per player, payable to me at my address.

Having just gone through folding before the new season with Gutho I do have some big issues with the way fines are dished out to folding clubs.

Basically, we got of scot free as no players had been signed before the deadline, so there were no players to fine. Had we signed players on, based on other peoples word. My understanding is those honest players who signed a form in good faith would have been fined to the high heavens.

The same in this instance it seems Mike (and the genuine other members of his team) are now going to have to fork out an additional £25 on top of what they have already lost in getting ready for the new season should they wish to play football again, whilst the lads who made promises etc can walk away freely presuming they hadn't signed on the dotted line.

The league don't give any grace to those member of clubs who plough there own money and effort in week after week. So it begs the question why would they bother to do it? I spoke with Mike before the season start, and even flogged him all my old Gutho kit / balls etc I had, and I know he went to great lengths personally to try everything he could to keep the club going. So im saddened for him that it hasnt succeeded.

I had my own reasons for keeping Gutho going, I dread to think how much it actual cost me in the end. That was with a decent set of lads who almost always paid. But as Widds has pointed out, you are almost always trying to recover loses. Throw in an odd semi / cup final (not that this should be a complaint) and it adds on another £100 per season who have to find.

I know Hellboy's point is sort of valid that if lads want to play, they should stump up, but if your faced with the choice of making 9 lads who have played before the game start with 9 or start with 11 and let 2 who haven't paid play, what do you think most lads would pick?

I suggest most would want 11 to play, to make the game the enjoyable experience it should be.

I WAS TOLD THE FINE WAS 250 SPREAD AMONGST ALL THE SIGNED ON PLAYERS
SO IM HOPING IT ISNT 25 AS THATS OVER THE TOP. IVE 3 NEW LADS WHO HAVENT KICKED A BALL YET AND WHO PAID TO SIGN ON SO LETS HOPE COMMON SENSE PREVAILS
I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS SCOUSE

ps nothing hell boy has said regarding this is reality he is in cloud cuckoo land
black is black or white is white, wel,l as you say scouse, that dont happen in football and yes
i have three lads who didnt sign a form and wont be fined.

I have to say that if you have walked away scotto then i hope some sort of grace is handed out to my decent lads as we got the siginings done to help Morley and not incur a fine of
10.00 GBP???? bit better than 25 each

so that would mean you had 10 players signed on if its £25 each?

Mike - think you will find it is irrelevant if they have kicked a ball or not, last season has nothing to do with this seasons fine. So the league rule will be that the fine is split equally between all those signed.

Interestingly, it's only players, if you have a sec / manager etc who haven't signed they also don't get fined despite being listed on club registration form.

I could have of course got this all wrong, but that was my understanding.

the goalie wrote:

Widds wrote:

the goalie wrote:

Widds wrote:

So you think its ok that only the rich compete in Olympic sports?

hell yeah widds .. let us poor folk kick the pig bladder around on sundays

But not in competitive leagues though...!!! Getting too expensive!!

yeah has too be a fifa approved offical size and weight pig bladder lol

If you do happen to play NRI in one of the cups, you could always steal one of theirs maybe, when no ones looking of course, some players do things like that, dont you know?

I think the fines can get passed back to players who signed on last season. Not sure what the scenario is though.

don't think that is enforcable

Fines can't be given to players who signed last season only the players from this.