Pure DFC Archive

I think I have understood this right, but in £300m government handout to sport yesterday football received £28m, with £11m going to steps 1 and 2 and the rest going further down the pyramid and womens football. Will be interesting to see how this lot is divied up, is this further grant an indicatoor of no fans in grounds for the season?

Can someone advise I thought the funding was in place until Christmas then was going to be reviewed.

Has anyone seen anything else?

The first part of the £10m has been distributed, with £30k or £36k lump sums to teams in NLN and NLS, but it could have been much more or much less for individual clubs if based more accurately on average attendances. This caused many complaints of unfairness. A review was conducted by David Bernstein highlighting the unfairness, but it seems to have been filed away by the National League and not shared with the clubs. Bernstein has pushed for it to be shared and for Jan & Feb instalments to be more fairly distributed.

This article from last week's Times explains in more depth, (might only be fully accessible if a subscriber).

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/inve ... -mj2gcmqtl

Also seen articles implying that the NL Board members from smaller attended clubs may have favoured their own clubs when deciding the distribution.

BrianL wrote: ↑Sun Jan 10, 2021 10:20 am
Also seen articles implying that the NL Board members from smaller attended clubs may have favoured their own clubs when deciding the distribution.

.... like good old Uncle Jim from Dover for example?!!

The National League apparently will not be able to adopt the distribution model put forward by the independent review panel chaired by David Bernstein.
This is because the revised distribution recommendation in the National League's own words will see, 'ten clubs' funding drop from £84,000 to £12,000 with short notice when they would have "a reasonable expectation to recieve it", which I can only deduce from that means another generous payment.
I wonder what the likes of Hereford and the other clubs who instigated the independent review will make of that?
Not only does it appear the National League have acknowledged some clubs have recieved more than their fair share, in some cases making them more financially better off than they otherwise would have been during the course of a normal season, but they are going to jolly well get away with too.

It's been an absolute joke the way they have distributed the money, whoever came up with how the funds are allocated is an idiot.

It surely couldn't have been difficult to work out match day revenue lost (attendances etc) and allocate it based on that rather than what division you are in.

Park Life wrote: ↑Sun Jan 10, 2021 12:20 pm It's been an absolute joke the way they have distributed the money, whoever came up with how the funds are allocated is an idiot.

It surely couldn't have been difficult to work out match day revenue lost (attendances etc) and allocate it based on that rather than what division you are in.

Not idiots Steve, just a few people with unbelievable levels of self interest over fellow member clubs. I just can't believe how they have got away with it. Utterly shameful!

Still, Uncle Jim never did do shame, did he?

The NL board will never admit that they have made an error........total shambles!!

the futures white wrote: ↑Mon Jan 11, 2021 1:09 pm The NL board will never admit that they have made an error........total shambles!!

Shambles is one description. Some might say it's downright fraudulent use of public money for self interest!

I understand funding for NL clubs is suggested as a loan rather than a grant.

If true I can't see the season being played out, very few clubs will take loans without knowing when possible income streams are likely to be reinstated, e.g. the return of fans and hire of facilities.

See Olly Bayliss Twitter - several chairmen giving their views.