Nivag
Well-Known Member
I'd wish they'd sign me and then stick me on Furlough, I could do with some money.
Dulwich Hamlet and Coronavirus
- Thread starter TonyWalt
- Start date
Bugpowder Dust
Well-Known Member
Further to comments about the settled team and possible moving players on, I took a quick look at appearances over last 9 games:
Starting X1 - Used Sub - Unused Sub
Grainger 9 – 0 - 0
Barnes 9 - 0 - 0
Timlin 9 - 0 - 0
Taylor 9 - 0 - 0
Ming 9 - 0 - 0
Moore 8 - 1 - 0
Mills 7 - 2 - 0
McGregor 6 – 2 - 1
Allassani 6 - 3 - 0
Debrah 4 - 3 - 1
Sammut 4 - 0 - 5
Vint 5 - 0 - 0
Embalo 3 - 1 - 2
Hyde 2 - 6 - 1
Higgs 3 - 1 - 0
Blackman 2 - 0 - 0
Henry 1 - 2 - 2
Balarabe 1 - 1 - 1
Clayden 1 - 0 - 0
Barbosa 1 - 2 - 4
Agahatise 0 - 1 - 2
Masampu 0 - 1 - 0
White 0 - 0 - 1
Youth team cup subs:
Splatt 0 - 0 - 1
Thomas, K 0 - 0 - 1
Acheampong 0 - 0 - 1
Thomas, L 0 - 0 - 1
Did not feature:
Pardington
Ojo
David
Martin
Some of these have already left the club, but just from looking at the list in descending order you can see 9 players who are now pretty much out of the picture (ie Blackman through to White).
Really good to see a clear core of starting players emerging.
Starting X1 - Used Sub - Unused Sub
Grainger 9 – 0 - 0
Barnes 9 - 0 - 0
Timlin 9 - 0 - 0
Taylor 9 - 0 - 0
Ming 9 - 0 - 0
Moore 8 - 1 - 0
Mills 7 - 2 - 0
McGregor 6 – 2 - 1
Allassani 6 - 3 - 0
Debrah 4 - 3 - 1
Sammut 4 - 0 - 5
Vint 5 - 0 - 0
Embalo 3 - 1 - 2
Hyde 2 - 6 - 1
Higgs 3 - 1 - 0
Blackman 2 - 0 - 0
Henry 1 - 2 - 2
Balarabe 1 - 1 - 1
Clayden 1 - 0 - 0
Barbosa 1 - 2 - 4
Agahatise 0 - 1 - 2
Masampu 0 - 1 - 0
White 0 - 0 - 1
Youth team cup subs:
Splatt 0 - 0 - 1
Thomas, K 0 - 0 - 1
Acheampong 0 - 0 - 1
Thomas, L 0 - 0 - 1
Did not feature:
Pardington
Ojo
David
Martin
Some of these have already left the club, but just from looking at the list in descending order you can see 9 players who are now pretty much out of the picture (ie Blackman through to White).
Really good to see a clear core of starting players emerging.
Pink Panther
Well-Known Member
I assume Blackman is still injured as he started in two wins and went off injured in the second. I believe Barbosa and Henry were both out injured but have featured more recently, including a start for the former in the most recent match. We know Clayden and Masampu have gone, it looks like Balarabe and Aghatise have too, and White had just been loaned to Carshalton again when the lower league fixtures were suspended.
baleboy_93
Well-Known Member
Blackman is still at club, and will be for rest of season I believe, he was at Hampton on Monday.
pompeydunc
Well-Known Member
Former Wolves winger signs for Dulwich Hamlet
Dulwich Hamlet have signed former Wolves winger Andrew Jay Harris-Sealy. The National League South side have agreed a sell-on with the 22-year-old’s previous club Farnborough.londonnewsonline.co.uk
“We’re looking to add another three or four to the changing room in the next week or two but we have to look at moving boys on or furloughing them.”
Good grief!!!
Is it even legal to add to your workforce while furloughing staff doing the same role? I presume it must be, if being said publicly. This is a loophole that deserves shutting immediately by HMT, or whichever department is overseeing it.
Paula_G
Flitting in & out like Tinkerbell on Meth
Thought that there was a “cut off” date for furloughed employees so that only those employed before a certain date were actually eligible for it anyway? I know the initial cut off date was in March for the original furlough scheme then extended to late June but not sure whether that has changed for the last one which (I believe) cut the government contribution to 60% which presumably also increases the stress on club finances.
pompeydunc
Well-Known Member
Anyone know whether our home matches versus Maidstone and Slough will go ahead? I guess that will depend on the last time the player with COVID in our squad last interacted closely with other members of the squad, and count ten days from that point (unless there are further cases discovered)....or for relevant contacts to have negative tests.
Paula_G
Flitting in & out like Tinkerbell on Meth
I’d say it’s a safe (ish) bet that Maidstone on Tuesday is off given that the Tonbridge game wasn’t notified by them as postponed until yesterday. Looks like Slough fits into that ten day window though of course (as you say) we don’t know when the Dulwich player or other staff member concerned returned their positive test. By the by that. All I can add is for speedy and uncomplicated recovery for the individual concerned...
AveryDave
Well-Known Member
Best bet is to keep an eye on Maidstone and Slough's Twitter feeds, tend to find out more about what's going on at the club from the opposition these days.
AveryDave
Well-Known Member
Thank you for confirming on that liamdhfc, really appreciate you doing so on what is a sensitive subject.
The real position is obviously at odds with what Gavin is quoted as suggesting in the SLP article - so was he misquoted? Or didn't he understand how the club was administering the playing budget? Or have the club changed their position on wanting to use furlough to supplement player salaries?
Whatever, it seems to have generated some confusion at best if not some ill will towards the club for suggesting they're using public funds to pay players they don't want any more, which you've got to feel could all have been avoided.
And personally, it's further frustration that on one of the rare occasions the supporters get to hear from the manager, it's seemingly inaccurate.
Paula_G
Flitting in & out like Tinkerbell on Meth
Just been reading how badly this virus has hit Havant & Waterlooville and sure many other clubs have similar tales to tell that the fans never hear How the pandemic has ripped through Havant & Waterlooville FC – but football still goes on ...
Pink Panther
Well-Known Member
The funding scandal rumbles on. (Article may be behind a paywall, I think it was one of a small number of free articles per month for me.)
www.thetimes.co.uk
I'm not impressed by the remark that "most clubs aren't complaining". If an employer decided to cut the wages of a quarter of it staff and divide the money among the rest it's possible most people wouldn't complain about that, but it wouldn't mean it was acceptable or that no one had a legitimate grievance.
Investigation urged into distribution of Lottery money to National League clubs
The culture secretary has been urged to launch an investigation into alleged conflicts of interest over the distribution of millions of pounds of Lottery money
www.thetimes.co.uk
I'm not impressed by the remark that "most clubs aren't complaining". If an employer decided to cut the wages of a quarter of it staff and divide the money among the rest it's possible most people wouldn't complain about that, but it wouldn't mean it was acceptable or that no one had a legitimate grievance.
Last edited:
pompeydunc
Well-Known Member
The funding scandal rumbles on. (Article may be behind a paywall, I think it was one of a small number of free articles per month for me.)
Investigation urged into distribution of Lottery money to National League clubs
The culture secretary has been urged to launch an investigation into alleged conflicts of interest over the distribution of millions of pounds of Lottery money
I'm not impressed by the remark that "most clubs aren't complaining". If an employer decided to cut the wages of a quarter of it staff and divide the money among the rest it's possible most people wouldn't complain about that, but it wouldn't mean it was acceptable or that no one had a legitimate grievance.
Can you copy and paste it Pink Panther ?
Pink Panther
Well-Known Member
The culture secretary has been urged to launch an investigation into alleged conflicts of interest over the distribution of millions of pounds of Lottery money to National League clubs.
The £10 million was a rescue package to help clubs affected by the Covid crisis and was announced by Oliver Dowden in November, with the understanding that it would be distributed according to clubs’ lost gate receipts.
Instead, the National League board decided its own distribution formula based on a flat rate which has left some clubs with hundreds of thousands of pounds less than they were expecting. After initial criticism, the National League commissioned David Bernstein, the former FA chairman, to lead an independent review of the financial distribution but his findings — which are understood to have echoed some criticisms — have not been shared with the clubs.
Duncan Hart, a London FA council member and member of the Dulwich Hamlet Supporters’ Trust, has now written to Dowden asking him to step in and ensure that the next three-month block of funding, worth £11 million, is distributed differently.
Hart says that five of the nine National League board members were from clubs that benefited significantly more from the package than they would have done if it had been split according to expected gate receipts.
The letter states that Notts County received £287,000 less than they would have received if the formula had been based on average attendances, while Boreham Wood were “overcompensated” by £170,000.
“At the very least there is a clear conflict of interest for a board comprised of a small selection of National League member clubs to be charged with deciding how funding is allocated to all member clubs,” Hart writes.
CHAIRMAN BRIAN BARWICK DID NOT RESPOND WHEN ASKED TO COMMENT
Andrew Graham, the vice-chairman of Hereford FC, said he backed the calls made in Hart’s letter.
“It’s unacceptable that this is £10 million of public money and we don’t even know what the terms of reference were for the distribution model,” he said. “We were led to believe the package would cover each club’s lost gate receipts but that failed to happen.
“We have since seen clubs which usually have smaller attendances poaching strikers from what used to be seen as the bigger clubs, it’s farcical.”
Bernstein sent an open letter to the National League chairman Brian Barwick, the former FA chief executive, before Christmas expressing his unhappiness at the failure to share his report with the clubs and noting that there had been no response to his concerns about conflicts of interest and poor governance. Bernstein told The Times: “We have had a very poor response to our report from the National League and it has not been circulated to the clubs, and nor has there been any sign of a change of governance. The model they came up with to distribute the money appeared extremely arbitrary. “I would hope the government will listen to this. The funding and distribution for the January to March money really needs to be dealt with more independently. When it comes to dealing with public money it needs to be allocated properly and with visibility.”
It is understood the government is considering its response to the complaints.
Barwick, who was appointed OBE in the new year honours, did not respond when contacted by The Times.
In the National League’s top division clubs were allocated £95,000 or £84,000, and £36,000 or £30,000 in the two regional divisions. It meant York City, with an average attendance of 2,700 in National League North, received £108,000 for October to December instead of £297,000 if allocated solely on gate receipts. Boreham Wood, with an average attendance of 724 in the National League, received £252,000 instead of £79,000.
Hart’s letter to Dowden states that Aldershot Town, Dagenham & Redbridge, Solihull Moors, Barnet and Dover Athletic all received substantially more money than if the cash had been distributed according to average usual attendances, and that those clubs all have representatives on the National League board. There is no suggestion of any wrongdoing on the part of any club.
Mark Ives, who took over as the National League’s interim general manager on January 1, said that Bernstein’s report would be shared with the clubs “sooner rather than later”.
“The vast majority of clubs have not complained about the distribution,” he said.
Ives added that the funding distribution model chosen by the board had not been put together by any club representative and took into account clubs would have some similar fixed costs such as pitch maintenance and utility bills.
pompeydunc
Well-Known Member
The culture secretary has been urged to launch an investigation into alleged conflicts of interest over the distribution of millions of pounds of Lottery money to National League clubs.
The £10 million was a rescue package to help clubs affected by the Covid crisis and was announced by Oliver Dowden in November, with the understanding that it would be distributed according to clubs’ lost gate receipts.
Instead, the National League board decided its own distribution formula based on a flat rate which has left some clubs with hundreds of thousands of pounds less than they were expecting. After initial criticism, the National League commissioned David Bernstein, the former FA chairman, to lead an independent review of the financial distribution but his findings — which are understood to have echoed some criticisms — have not been shared with the clubs.
Duncan Hart, a London FA council member and member of the Dulwich Hamlet Supporters’ Trust, has now written to Dowden asking him to step in and ensure that the next three-month block of funding, worth £11 million, is distributed differently.
Hart says that five of the nine National League board members were from clubs that benefited significantly more from the package than they would have done if it had been split according to expected gate receipts.
The letter states that Notts County received £287,000 less than they would have received if the formula had been based on average attendances, while Boreham Wood were “overcompensated” by £170,000.
“At the very least there is a clear conflict of interest for a board comprised of a small selection of National League member clubs to be charged with deciding how funding is allocated to all member clubs,” Hart writes.
CHAIRMAN BRIAN BARWICK DID NOT RESPOND WHEN ASKED TO COMMENT
Andrew Graham, the vice-chairman of Hereford FC, said he backed the calls made in Hart’s letter.
“It’s unacceptable that this is £10 million of public money and we don’t even know what the terms of reference were for the distribution model,” he said. “We were led to believe the package would cover each club’s lost gate receipts but that failed to happen.
“We have since seen clubs which usually have smaller attendances poaching strikers from what used to be seen as the bigger clubs, it’s farcical.”
Bernstein sent an open letter to the National League chairman Brian Barwick, the former FA chief executive, before Christmas expressing his unhappiness at the failure to share his report with the clubs and noting that there had been no response to his concerns about conflicts of interest and poor governance. Bernstein told The Times: “We have had a very poor response to our report from the National League and it has not been circulated to the clubs, and nor has there been any sign of a change of governance. The model they came up with to distribute the money appeared extremely arbitrary. “I would hope the government will listen to this. The funding and distribution for the January to March money really needs to be dealt with more independently. When it comes to dealing with public money it needs to be allocated properly and with visibility.”
It is understood the government is considering its response to the complaints.
Barwick, who was appointed OBE in the new year honours, did not respond when contacted by The Times.
In the National League’s top division clubs were allocated £95,000 or £84,000, and £36,000 or £30,000 in the two regional divisions. It meant York City, with an average attendance of 2,700 in National League North, received £108,000 for October to December instead of £297,000 if allocated solely on gate receipts. Boreham Wood, with an average attendance of 724 in the National League, received £252,000 instead of £79,000.
Hart’s letter to Dowden states that Aldershot Town, Dagenham & Redbridge, Solihull Moors, Barnet and Dover Athletic all received substantially more money than if the cash had been distributed according to average usual attendances, and that those clubs all have representatives on the National League board. There is no suggestion of any wrongdoing on the part of any club.
Mark Ives, who took over as the National League’s interim general manager on January 1, said that Bernstein’s report would be shared with the clubs “sooner rather than later”.
“The vast majority of clubs have not complained about the distribution,” he said.
Ives added that the funding distribution model chosen by the board had not been put together by any club representative and took into account clubs would have some similar fixed costs such as pitch maintenance and utility bills.
I understand that Hart chap had the letter he sent to DCMS leaked (the cc list included FA, London FA, Camelot, local MPs and David Bernstein)...
pompeydunc
Well-Known Member
He's between a rock and a hard place, as CEO he answers to the Board and Chair of the National League! He has a good reputation from FA Discipline days.
Pink Panther
Well-Known Member
I accept that he's come late to the table and bears no responsibility for the division of funds, but he refers to fixed costs that are similar for most clubs being taken into account. That's not what clubs were led to believe in the first place, we were told the funding was to compensate for lost gate receipts. The Hungerfords and the Concords and the Borehamwood will always have to find the money for pitch maintenance and utility bills, the same as the Maidstone's or Notts County or ourselves. (In fact in Borehamwood's case it's probably subsidised by Arsenal.)
YTC
Human Man
Update on where we are with COVID right now: CLUB STATEMENT - COVID POSTPONEMENTS
Unsure if football will be going ahead after 8pm tonight, but if it does our next scheduled game is Billericay a week Saturday.
Unsure if football will be going ahead after 8pm tonight, but if it does our next scheduled game is Billericay a week Saturday.
Paula_G
Flitting in & out like Tinkerbell on Meth
View attachment 247109View attachment 247109
Not very likely by the looks of it... No team games unless the club has its own bubble. Premiership clubs seems to be the only level at which that is feasible.
Last edited:
I'm surprised a manager commented on the club's business model off the pitch. I believe there were discussions about furlough with regard to players where step 3 clubs had agreed to take them on loan already but then pulled out when their season was suspended. However, that has not happened.
All financial decisions are made by the board with the Chairman having the final say. His financial management is second to none and the club is in no danger whilst the current board is in place.
I assure you that the club operates entirely legally and does nothing that could be seen as evading statutory requirements.
In respect of other clubs being quicker with information, some of that has been released before confirmed as agreed by the League of with our opponents.
Last edited:
T Corcoran
Well-Known Member
Not sure if this effects us but it looks like Step 3 and 4 could be null and void
Pink Panther
Well-Known Member
It doesn't affect us, it only affects the leagues below ours. The same thing happened last year, leagues below were null and void while ours was decided by points per game and play-offs although once again there would be no relegation from our division. (Of course there haven't been as many matches played this time, not enough to decide promotion, so there must be a possibility that our season will be null and void but that will require a separate decision by the National League and/or FA.)
scousedom
Well-Known Member
I can’t believe this wasn’t done. It was so obvious this season would be affected and yet the League started the season with no stated plan for how to end it / decide it when it was interrupted. It’s understandable that last year was decided on the hop, but for it to happen this year is mind-numbingly stupid.
Pink Panther
Well-Known Member
The way the National League has been managed during the last ten months has been embarrassing.
Paula_G
Flitting in & out like Tinkerbell on Meth
It would appear that a letter has gone out to the National League clubs in relation to the initial distribution of funding to them if this article is correct. “The National League have now hit back, saying the panel recommended increased funding to 24 clubs in December with 30 clubs receiving less than they had done in the previous two months.
In 10 cases, it would have seen distribution going from an expected £84,000 down to £12,000. ‘This variation, at such a late stage, was simply not practical or legally possible,’ said Ives in his letter to clubs.”
Curiously not seen any official from anywhere on this yet... Havant & Waterlooville admit uncertainty over next financial aid package is ‘very worrying’
In 10 cases, it would have seen distribution going from an expected £84,000 down to £12,000. ‘This variation, at such a late stage, was simply not practical or legally possible,’ said Ives in his letter to clubs.”
Curiously not seen any official from anywhere on this yet... Havant & Waterlooville admit uncertainty over next financial aid package is ‘very worrying’
Al Cunningham
Brockley Hamlet
I see we still have 16 Home league games to fit in this season. That is usually the case in early September.
pompeydunc
Well-Known Member
So change nothing and perpetuate something that it woefully inadequate. Should have made at least some amendments, but instead did nothing, which seems to be the NL's default mode.
Camelot are refusing to do anything about it as well.
