Lenny Rider
Well-known member
- Sep 15, 2010
- 5,427
Surely they could be allowed 600 fans like the Leagues directly below them, rather than using cash that could go elsewhere?
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Football] Eastbourne Borough FC receiving Govt funding along with the rest of the NL Clubs
- Thread starter Lenny Rider
- Start date
Just stop paying players at that level
Lenny Rider
Well-known member
- Sep 15, 2010
- 5,427
- Thread starter
- #6
Bold Seagull
strong and stable with me, or...
They did, playoffs too.
600 spectators around a NL ground is safer than 600 at the tiers below given the stadium are usually bigger with larger terraces etc. 600 round a football pitch is actually very spread out. Eastbourne Borough has enough terrace and seating for 600 people to be 2m apart, so it’s a bit barmy we can be in a supermarket indoors at 3pm on a Saturday, but not outside spread out watching a game of football.
What and expect local players to turnout and play for their local team for the fun of it, hanging around buying food & drinks after and enjoying themselves? What an incredibly novel idea, I like it.
Ludicrous and a bit barmy are terms used to aim cheap shots at the Covid rules. Same being used in Manchester, Liverpool etc “I live on one side of the street and I can’t..... but he lives opposite me and he can........”, etc, etc. Look, there has to be rules and boundaries and sometimes it works for you and sometimes it doesnt (ask Pickford and Dunk) but to keep ridiculing the rules does no one any good. If people could be relied on to be sensible and use common sense We wouldn’t need so many rules
METALMICKY
Well-known member
- Jan 30, 2004
- 6,059
And you forgot to add the little bit of pride of playing for your home town team.
Never mind Eastbourne Borough I was surprised to learn that players at Eastbourne United all get paid not a bad match fee.
Bold Seagull
strong and stable with me, or...
I've just scrolled back....posts do say ludicrous and a bit barmy....who knew.
No one has suggested they would break said rules, or that they're unreasonable, just discussing their application. Are you suggesting we revert to such a state of subjugation that we cannot even discuss rules?
Last edited:
yxee
Well-known member
I've just scrolled back, no one has said ludicrous or barmy.
No one has suggested they would break said rules, or that they're unreasonable, just discussing their application. Are you suggesting we revert to such a state of subjugation that we cannot even discuss rules?
You did say barmy in your previous post referring to supermarket rules v stadiums.
I've just scrolled back, no one has said ludicrous or barmy.
No one has suggested they would break said rules, or that they're unreasonable, just discussing their application. Are you suggesting we revert to such a state of subjugation that we cannot even discuss rules?
See post #2 and post #7 (yours I believe)
Bold Seagull
strong and stable with me, or...
Oh yeah, I said a "bit barmy". I didn't mean outright barmy obviously, that would be barmy.
Oh yeah, I said a "bit barmy". I didn't mean outright barmy obviously, that would be barmy.
Ha ha!