The K's In Point

Return to front page

Newest article: Re: Imagine new appointment in December by Cardiff KsYesterday 21:53Yesterday at 21:53:26view thread

Oldest article: Isthmian League - Premier Division results by Football Web Pages10/9/2022 15:00Sat Sep 10 15:00:57 20224 people dislike this 4 peopleview thread

MenuSearch

Next thread: Fair play to Walton & Hersham by reximus11/5/2023 15:56Thu May 11 15:56:59 2023view thread

Football Web Pages

By Taimour (WeHateWombles)9/5/2023 03:54Tue May 9 03:54:16 2023

Views: 3138

Gary Ekins on FWP (and the state of Ks)

https://audioboom.com/posts/8297279-the-d-k-a-reposs-non-league-show-08-05-23-with-gary-ekins?utm_campaign=detailpage&utm_content=retweet&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter

Also, unmentioned by Gary, he built the current Ks website!

reply to this article | return to the front page

8 people like this 8 people   

Re: Football Web Pages

By KsOllie9/5/2023 09:27Tue May 9 09:27:45 2023In response to Football Web PagesTop of thread

Views: 2948

Video from below, very good watch


[url][https://youtu.be/GNd-w8n2xA4/url]

reply to this article | return to the front page

2 people like this 2 people   

Re: Football Web Pages

By FOLEY9/5/2023 19:53Tue May 9 19:53:26 2023In response to Re: Football Web PagesTop of thread

Views: 1848

Good interview

But again athletics track mentioned lol

reply to this article | return to the front page

   8 people dislike this 8 people

Re: Football Web Pages

By SDG (SDG (Ks))9/5/2023 20:23Tue May 9 20:23:56 2023In response to Re: Football Web PagesTop of thread

Views: 1826

What is 'lol' about it? Every alternative the board have come up with has fallen at the first hurdle. The only arguably better idea anyone else has had has been Kingston Uni, which relies on them wanting us. Even the board have now finally put tbe track on their shortlist to discuss with the Council.

Your point against it the other day appeared to be that you think it's too narrow. But given all tracks are a standard size and shape it's no narrower than any of the thousands of other athletics stadiums that host football worldwide, two of them in our own league.

reply to this article | return to the front page

7 people like this 7 people   

Re: Football Web Pages

By FOLEY9/5/2023 20:43Tue May 9 20:43:07 2023In response to Re: Football Web PagesTop of thread

Views: 1778

My may concern is taking corners one step I reckon and that cannot be widened as you will be on the track

Maybe I am wrong who knows

Stands and bar no issue as we would have to build that anywhere else.

Running on a pitch falling down hols etc is a concern but sure that can be sorted

Me personally don't like grounds with athletics tracks round them

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person   1 person dislikes this 1 person

Re: Football Web Pages

By SDG (SDG (Ks))9/5/2023 20:56Tue May 9 20:56:21 2023In response to Re: Football Web PagesTop of thread

Views: 1803

There'd be as much room as to take a corner as there is at Enfield, Hornchurch, etc. If you look on Google Maps there's as much room as there is at the football ground next door.

It's fair to debate the pitch quality (no 3G), the sightlines from outside the track, that we wouldn't own the site; and whether they're compromises we can or can't accept in exchange for something that is a) in Kingston and b) deliverable.

We should have been able to have that debate a long time ago, instead too many people (and I don't mean you here) have tried to shut that debate down over the years by declaring the track to be impossible when it clearly isn't.

reply to this article | return to the front page

6 people like this 6 people   

Re: Football Web Pages

By Mike (The.Cat)9/5/2023 21:17Tue May 9 21:17:21 2023In response to Re: Football Web PagesTop of thread

Views: 1775

I was one of thrm but with age comes wisdom, or maybe just willing to compromise

And while the stadium itself might not be ideal, and it is a big place when you have 200 people rattling around in it, it is a good compromise. It’s sustainable and it’s community use too. It’s also unlikely to face much opposition because it’s an existing one

I’d definitely back it - and also it’s closer so I could go to a home game more then once a season

reply to this article | return to the front page

2 people like this 2 people   

Re: Football Web Pages

By FOLEY9/5/2023 21:00Tue May 9 21:00:06 2023In response to Re: Football Web PagesTop of thread

Views: 1799

Okay fair point and noted

Suppose all we can do is wait and see

reply to this article | return to the front page

2 people like this 2 people   

Re: Football Web Pages

By Lesmundo9/5/2023 23:39Tue May 9 23:39:44 2023In response to Re: Football Web PagesTop of thread

Views: 1754

While we dont currently have any solutions, one thing the club could look at is buying some movable seated stands. Whatever plan we use surely these could be of use in multiple ways.

1) While I think the Athletics track is going to be a much trickier solution than people think, we would certainly need something like this were we to make this work.

2) If by some miracle we do get a permanent site that's ours it's something we would also need there.

3) This could help us with a temporary groundshare at another ground that doesn't have the right ground grading but is in the borough. It's been done by others.

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person   

Re: Football Web Pages

By Gary (gekins)10/5/2023 20:28Wed May 10 20:28:26 2023In response to Re: Football Web PagesTop of thread

Views: 1698

one thing the club could look at is buying some movable seated stands

It's certainly an idea. I assume you're offering to keep them in your garden until such time as there's somewhere to put them?

reply to this article | return to the front page

2 people like this 2 people   2 people dislike this 2 people

Re: Football Web Pages

By Lesmundo10/5/2023 22:09Wed May 10 22:09:31 2023In response to Re: Football Web PagesTop of thread

Views: 1666

I know I've maybe jumped the gun with regards to that, but temporarily adding to a smaller ground in a better location that we could maybe move on from is more the kind of idea. Playing a couple seasons with this type of ground share must be better than Mitcham, and other teams have done this.

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person   

Re: Football Web Pages

By jon tolley11/5/2023 08:14Thu May 11 08:14:02 2023In response to Re: Football Web PagesTop of thread

Views: 1676

IMO it’s the short-termism that got us into this mess.

I can see how temporarily joining somewhere else (if that place existed) would be better for the next couple of seasons but that would further rinse any money from this ever decreasing pot for a new ground

I’m convinced we would not be at Mitcham now had we not fallen for the Lovelace lie.

reply to this article | return to the front page

2 people like this 2 people   

Re: Football Web Pages

By Lesmundo11/5/2023 16:17Thu May 11 16:17:58 2023In response to Re: Football Web PagesTop of thread

Views: 1564

The thing is, say we get a go ahead with the Athletics track, a lot of work will be required to meet the ground grading. This work would have to take place during the season so as not to disrupt the Athletics. This means we are looking at at least two seasons until we could use this option.

From the look of it we would need to build/install:

A new seated stand (temporary)
A new covered terrace (temporary)
A new club house
New changing rooms with physio room
New dugouts
A separate toilet block
Whatever alterations are required to the pitch
Relaying pitch surface/drainage.

People need to think about how to do this because it is going to cost a lot of money, and at best case two more seasons of ground sharing. And that's if they even want us.

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person   

Re: Football Web Pages

By SDG (SDG (Ks))11/5/2023 17:26Thu May 11 17:26:09 2023In response to Re: Football Web PagesTop of thread

Views: 1596

Yes, I think we all need to be highly concerned about money and there's no way we're getting anything anywhere within two years, probably much longer.

The sad reality is that for any option the ~£1m we had in 2018 when the Casuals option fell through would have gone so much further than £650k or whatever it is we have left would go at today's prices. We're burning through the Womble money and the years wasted on Goals and Lovelace are a tragedy.

Broadly yes, that's about what the track would need except the seated stand (the current one is fine for step 2). But given the board were happy to start with just a muddy horse field, look at what it *wouldn't* need. Buying land, laying a pitch from scratch, barriers round the pitch and site, car park, access road, connecting to utilities, floodlights, press box, PA system...

That, plus the difficulty of getting planning permission for something new when nearly every bit of green space in the RBK is MOL or green belt, is why the track is so much more realistic than the pipe dreams the board and Supporters Club have come up with so far.

You've said before without 3G and/or being football specific it would be harder to get Football Foundation money which is fair enough. But the whole thing still has to be a fraction of the price of a Lovelace.

There are probably two ways you could go - either do it on the cheap ourselves (bearing in mind teams in our league have things like changing rooms and boardrooms in portacabins); or, bearing in mind the Council have publicly acknowledged the site needs improving, try to go in with them/the new school/CRE regeneration/Sport England on a wider improvement to also benefit athletics and the gym. That would get a better end product but of course add time and uncertainty.

reply to this article | return to the front page

6 people like this 6 people   

Re: Football Web Pages

By Nick Garland11/5/2023 09:42Thu May 11 09:42:03 2023In response to Re: Football Web PagesTop of thread

Views: 1702

Given that CCFC said that K’s could no longer play at KGF where would K’s have been playing if it had not been for the Lovelace ‘lie’?

reply to this article | return to the front page

3 people like this 3 people   1 person dislikes this 1 person

Re: Football Web Pages

By Taimour (WeHateWombles)11/5/2023 13:06Thu May 11 13:06:50 2023In response to Re: Football Web PagesTop of thread

Views: 1598

Casuals reapproached Ks to extend the deal and the Board weren't interested because mitcham was cheaper and Lovelace was blinding them.

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person   

Re: Football Web Pages

By Nick Garland11/5/2023 14:07Thu May 11 14:07:33 2023In response to Re: Football Web PagesTop of thread

Views: 1639

K’s being initially told to find somewhere else to play had nothing to do with it?

reply to this article | return to the front page

2 people like this 2 people   2 people dislike this 2 people

Re: Football Web Pages

By Taimour (WeHateWombles)11/5/2023 22:13Thu May 11 22:13:45 2023In response to Re: Football Web PagesTop of thread

Views: 1520

No one is saying it had "nothing" to do with it.

reply to this article | return to the front page

   

Re: Football Web Pages

By Paddy (Paddy1)11/5/2023 08:25Thu May 11 08:25:33 2023In response to Re: Football Web PagesTop of thread

Views: 1643

Even if as a majority of fans we didn't accept the dream of Lovelace the directors would have still done this regardless. History tells us they don't actually care or listen to anyone or their opinions unless they are a 'yes man'.

reply to this article | return to the front page

1 person likes this 1 person   1 person dislikes this 1 person

Re: Football Web Pages

By Suom Ynona11/5/2023 10:58Thu May 11 10:58:00 2023In response to Re: Football Web PagesTop of thread

Views: 1659

I wonder if there's going to be an end of season interview with some/all of the directors for them to give us some updates. I'm not talking about any "we've sent an email to the council, aren't we great" update either. Hopefully an update on where the Imperial Fields Hoops will be playing next season and the likely venue for the next few seasons, how they anticipate season ticket sales will be during the close season, plans to increase sponsorship revenue (not from the supporters club), what marketing has been done etc. Just the usual stuff that we always want updates on. Is there any update on from the supporters club for their site visit scheduled for this month with members of the board? Surely no other club treats its fans as poorly as this group of directors?! It is truly awful.

reply to this article | return to the front page

4 people like this 4 people   1 person dislikes this 1 person

Re: Football Web Pages

By supahoops711/5/2023 16:16Thu May 11 16:16:03 2023In response to Re: Football Web PagesTop of thread

Views: 1565

Yes, isn't this 'site visit' supposed to be taking place around now?
I'm a supporters club member and have been for many years.
I've never been to an AGM and have never/not received a personal invite to anything related to potential ground developments. The SC commitee have removed themselves from commenting on this site and set up on facebook.
I simply don't do facebook. There simply must be a 'coming together' of the board, SC and KBH to underpin the future of our club. There is so much well meaning, knowledge and ultimately power in all three to propel Kingstonian football club in the right direction. I hope that an Extraordinary meeting can be called in this close season to consider this?

reply to this article | return to the front page

8 people like this 8 people   

Previous thread: Kingston Beer Festival by LiamKs11/5/2023 20:09Thu May 11 20:09:02 2023view thread