Dorking Wandering
The Dorking Wanderers FC Fans Forum
Back at Meadowbank for potentially our only home game in a 35 day period as we face Salisbury again in an FA Cup replay.
Marc was reluctant to reveal injury news again in today's update but suggested they took a "few" injuries on Saturday. Gallagher limped off late on so is likely to miss the game and Marc also announced after the game that Carter and Camp were unlikely to return. In a weekly update a couple of weeks ago, Marc did reveal that Francomb was back in 10 days which would suggest he may be in contention for a return to the squad in some form tomorrow though.
Predictions:
Dorking 1-0 Salisbury (Prior)
982 att.
Phillips
Annesley Storey Vincent
Muitt Taylor Pybus Lewis
McShane
Prior Rutherford
Subs: Craig, Francomb, Norville-Williams, Moore, Hebert, Sullivan, Straker
Dorking (2) 3 Salisbury (1) 2 Rutherford, Prior, McShane
856 (52 from Wiltshire)
Dorking to win with a fast out the blocks start. Att 1004 if it gets announced.
"Why would I leave to join a League Two club? We're going there anyway!" - Marc White
2-1 Dorking. Rutherford and Lewis. Attendance 987. 79 from Salisbury.
Aldershot at home await in the next round for the winner
winnable game providing we get through
I'll have a Guinness
winnable game providing we get through
Love the optimism Steve
Always got the glass half full David. Unless my Guinness is in it 🤣🤣
I'll have a Guinness
2-1 home win, Prior and Muitt. Attendance probably around the 900 mark
Had a look at Aldershot fans reactions to the draw on X and shotsweb (their forum)
A lot of them are very pessimistic about their chances should they face us, which surprised me. Some were even saying if they lose a few more they might give their manager the boot! Which I thought was crazy as Tommy Widdrington won them the FA Trophy Final at Wembley last season, and is very experienced in management, and at getting a tune out of a modest budget at Shots.
Anyway goes to show, you never know, maybe it's not such a terrible draw after all.
I also saw a few comments about how rubbish our ground is for them. I guess they are one of only a few clubs to have brought a huge following onto the shallow away end. There must be something we can do in the future to improve it for away fans - not just the roof we haven't yet put on, but the shallowness of it....it can't be good for our takings if a significant % of fans who would normally come just sack it off because it's a rubbish experience? Could we give them some of the space along the side around to the away dugout? I am not a huge fan of gimmicks like free beer kitty's but we need to go on a charm offensive!
"Why would I leave to join a League Two club? We're going there anyway!" - Marc White
I also saw a few comments about how rubbish our ground is for them. I guess they are one of only a few clubs to have brought a huge following onto the shallow away end. There must be something we can do in the future to improve it for away fans - not just the roof we haven't yet put on, but the shallowness of it....it can't be good for our takings if a significant % of fans who would normally come just sack it off because it's a rubbish experience? Could we give them some of the space along the side around to the away dugout? I am not a huge fan of gimmicks like free beer kitty's but we need to go on a charm offensive!
Yes, it's a problem that hasn't arisen since our relegation and one that will resurface as we progress again. For me, the shallowness and not the roof is the issue - the view really is poor with any more than a half decent crowd in that end.
Not sure whether putting them round the dugout side is wise - we don't really want to restrict our numbers, and we don't ideally want almost half the ground with away fans at the touchline either.
Isn't the problem that if we make that end steeper somehow then the capacity reduces thus affecting our EFL/NL ambitions?
Very tricky one.
The steepness was all to do with the houses behind the ground (ie behind the little woodland) and their views into the distance towards Box Hill...
So each step is twice as deep (in other words when capacity was calculated, each flat step has two rows of people on it.
It achieved the capacity that the ground grading people demanded, but as a consequence it delivers very poor views, as it is effectively gives a view that is worse than a regular terrace should do, as there are 5 steps rather than 11 that it should normall be for the capacity.
This was the design statement wording: " The 750 mm depth of each step represents a special dispensation against the standard 350 mm depth (as set out in the Sports Ground Safety Authority’s Guide to Safety at Sports Grounds) that has been afforded to the club. This allows two persons to stand on each level which ensures that any structure that is set out at this end of the ground is as low as possible to overcome any significant impact on lines of site for the residential accommodation to that end of the ground. Had the 350 mm depth been imposed then 11 steps would have been required which would have raised this structure by a further 450 mm to 825 mm. "
The club had little alternative really. And other mitigations were made too, such as the removal of the back of the covered away terrace, to stop fans banging it.
So yes, very tricky one.
If anyone is interested, this is the latest planning application - to retain the new uncovered seats: https://molevalley-publicportal.statmap.co.uk/horizoNext/publicportal/planningapplications/128320 - one local resident has already objected despite there being a tall acoustic barrier between their property and the stand 🤔 It gives an idea of the local opposition to any sort of stadium improvement proposal.
With careful management of where spectators are dispersed around the ground, the shallowness of the away end terrace should only ever be an issue when there is a near capacity crowd in attendance.
"Why would I leave to join a League Two club? We're going there anyway!" - Marc White
Said it many times before but we should have been looking at a new site and new ground a long time ago. There are far too many limitations at Meadowbank and it has just become more hassle than it is worth.
Said it many times before but we should have been looking at a new site and new ground a long time ago. There are far too many limitations at Meadowbank and it has just become more hassle than it is worth.
I agree there are numerous limitations, but none which can't be worked around with time, a lot of patience and plenty of money, but the location is gold dust.
And the alternative is probably something out of town like Westhumble (not Westhumble itself as it is AONB and green belt land), and good luck getting permission for a stadium in this part of the world, as nobody wants it on their doorstep!
Each side of Meadowbank has it's own unique constraints and challenges, but the potential is there, particularly if you include and re-purpose the big hulk of the soft play/office building. The Council have accepted the ground does have scope to increase to 5k capacity, which is the EFL required figure, so it's probably not going to hold us back.
"Why would I leave to join a League Two club? We're going there anyway!" - Marc White
It all looks good on paper but we can't possibly have a ground in the EFL where one end can't have a fence more than 6 feet tall and a few steps that are a few millimetres off the floor and another side that can't have a few seats because someone is worried that people will bang on a nearby fence...
