|
Post by headstone on Sept 11, 2020 8:22:19 GMT
Hornchurch was the site of the club's first ever relegation. We had to beat them, and also Aveley (possibly) had to win away to Hastings, which was never going to happen, but it did! However, our performance was pretty dire, despite the improvement in the previous few matches when Jay had taken over and given us a chance. The best thing about Hornchurch is that it is quicker to get to than Sittingbourne (depending on which way you go, obviously).
|
|
|
Post by porkystone on Sept 11, 2020 8:32:49 GMT
Hornchurch was the site of the club's first ever relegation. We had to beat them, and also Aveley (possibly) had to win away to Hastings, which was never going to happen, but it did! However, our performance was pretty dire, despite the improvement in the previous few matches when Jay had taken over and given us a chance. The best thing about Hornchurch is that it is quicker to get to than Sittingbourne (depending on which way you go, obviously). Opening a can of juicy worms, surely the first relegation came at the end of the 1894 / 5 season, when a totally outclassed MUFC finished 9th out of 9 in the Kent League and were excluded from the following season ?
|
|
|
Post by sword65 on Sept 11, 2020 8:36:11 GMT
Nice neat little ground too. I'm not a fan of running tracks round pitches, but this time it looked OK (although actually watching it, as opposed to on TV, might be different - I remember the ends at London Road, where you seemed miles away from the action). The ground felt strangely familiar, even though I don't think I've ever been there. I thought at first it was reminding me of London Road, but that was much more open, and had the terraces at both ends. Too many trees too! Then it clicked - Stompond Lane (ex-W&H), not only my first ever football match, but also the site of two of the only three times I've represented my school at sport (running, in this case). Sad that Stompond Lane is no longer used for football (if anything?), and W&H have to play in that awful, sterile 'stadium' they share with Casuals. IMHO Bridge Avenue is one of the better Essex Grounds we've visited through the years, some mighty & feisty battles there, mainly @ Isthmian Premier Level. Who'll ever forget the infamous ' Rook ' game ? Has ( used to have ? ) its own resident DJ to fire up the punters pre game, what's not to like there. Also got a good bar though the barmaid at the time had a mouth on it. I asked if I could have a can of London pride and received a brilliantly blonde Essex reply " of course you can my f**king lovely but I am not pulling your f**king ring piece, you will have to pull the fucker yourself as I've just had my f**king nails done and I ain't breaking them for you or no other fucker"🤣
|
|
|
Post by stonelacro on Sept 11, 2020 11:27:15 GMT
IMHO Bridge Avenue is one of the better Essex Grounds we've visited through the years, some mighty & feisty battles there, mainly @ Isthmian Premier Level. Who'll ever forget the infamous ' Rook ' game ? Has ( used to have ? ) its own resident DJ to fire up the punters pre game, what's not to like there. Also got a good bar though the barmaid at the time had a mouth on it. I asked if I could have a can of London pride and received a brilliantly blonde Essex reply " of course you can my f**king lovely but I am not pulling your f**king ring piece, you will have to pull the fucker yourself as I've just had my f**king nails done and I ain't breaking them for you or no other fucker"🤣 And what's she say?
|
|
|
Post by jdl on Sept 12, 2020 0:12:38 GMT
IMHO Bridge Avenue is one of the better Essex Grounds we've visited through the years, some mighty & feisty battles there, mainly @ Isthmian Premier Level. Who'll ever forget the infamous ' Rook ' game ? Has ( used to have ? ) its own resident DJ to fire up the punters pre game, what's not to like there. Also got a good bar though the barmaid at the time had a mouth on it. I asked if I could have a can of London pride and received a brilliantly blonde Essex reply " of course you can my f**king lovely but I am not pulling your f**king ring piece, you will have to pull the fucker yourself as I've just had my f**king nails done and I ain't breaking them for you or no other fucker"🤣 I've got a new game - I read the post before I look at the poster's name, to see if I can guess who it is. I get yours right 100%!
|
|
|
Post by jdl on Sept 12, 2020 0:14:19 GMT
Hornchurch was the site of the club's first ever relegation. We had to beat them, and also Aveley (possibly) had to win away to Hastings, which was never going to happen, but it did! However, our performance was pretty dire, despite the improvement in the previous few matches when Jay had taken over and given us a chance. The best thing about Hornchurch is that it is quicker to get to than Sittingbourne (depending on which way you go, obviously). Opening a can of juicy worms, surely the first relegation came at the end of the 1894 / 5 season, when a totally outclassed MUFC finished 9th out of 9 in the Kent League and were excluded from the following season ? [checks nws isn't lurking] But do the Wilderness Years count?
|
|
|
Post by headstone on Sept 12, 2020 8:34:31 GMT
You can only be relegated if there's a lower level division to be relegated into, exclusion the next season ain't relegation, ask Bury.
|
|
|
Post by porkystone on Sept 12, 2020 8:44:03 GMT
You can only be relegated if there's a lower level division to be relegated into, exclusion the next season ain't relegation, ask Bury. There, knew that would fire people up ! Just for information: ' FINAL TABLE KENT LEAGUE (DIVISION 1) 1894-95 ============================================ 1. Chatham 16-25 (55-23) 11 3 2 Champions ------------------------------------------------------- 2. RETB Chatham 16-21 (50-23) 8 5 3 3. Folkestone 16-19 (30-29) 8 3 5 4. Sheppey United 16-17 (37-28) 8 1 7 5. Gravesend United 16-17 (54-33) 6 5 5 6. Sittingbourne 16-16 (30-37) 7 2 7 7. Ashford United 16-14 (35-41) 6 2 8 8. Dartford 16-12 (30-39) 5 2 9 ------------------------------------------------------- 9. Maidstone United 16- 3 (14-84) 1 1 14 Relegated Total: 144-144 (335-337) 60 24 60 Champions: Chatham Promoted: Swanscombe Newly admitted: Northfleet, Woolwich Arsenal II (London) and New Brompton ' Not much fun watching that !
|
|
|
Post by jdl on Sept 12, 2020 12:59:13 GMT
GD 14-84??
Jesus. My eldest lad's Barming side did better than that in their worst season!
|
|
|
Post by Tstone on Sept 12, 2020 13:34:55 GMT
You can only be relegated if there's a lower level division to be relegated into, exclusion the next season ain't relegation, ask Bury. There, knew that would fire people up ! Just for information: ' FINAL TABLE KENT LEAGUE (DIVISION 1) 1894-95 ============================================ 1. Chatham 16-25 (55-23) 11 3 2 Champions ------------------------------------------------------- 2. RETB Chatham 16-21 (50-23) 8 5 3 3. Folkestone 16-19 (30-29) 8 3 5 4. Sheppey United 16-17 (37-28) 8 1 7 5. Gravesend United 16-17 (54-33) 6 5 5 6. Sittingbourne 16-16 (30-37) 7 2 7 7. Ashford United 16-14 (35-41) 6 2 8 8. Dartford 16-12 (30-39) 5 2 9 ------------------------------------------------------- 9. Maidstone United 16- 3 (14-84) 1 1 14 Relegated Total: 144-144 (335-337) 60 24 60 Champions: Chatham Promoted: Swanscombe Newly admitted: Northfleet, Woolwich Arsenal II (London) and New Brompton ' Not much fun watching that ! How is there a difference between total goals for and total goals against?
|
|
|
Post by porkystone on Sept 12, 2020 14:40:27 GMT
How is there a difference between total goals for and total goals against? This happens consistently right up to 1920 ! ? Must be that scores are collated from different sources, and presented as such in the media ( ? newspapers ) at the time. Even so, seems odd !
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2020 17:17:59 GMT
There, knew that would fire people up ! Just for information: ' FINAL TABLE KENT LEAGUE (DIVISION 1) 1894-95 ============================================ 1. Chatham 16-25 (55-23) 11 3 2 Champions ------------------------------------------------------- 2. RETB Chatham 16-21 (50-23) 8 5 3 3. Folkestone 16-19 (30-29) 8 3 5 4. Sheppey United 16-17 (37-28) 8 1 7 5. Gravesend United 16-17 (54-33) 6 5 5 6. Sittingbourne 16-16 (30-37) 7 2 7 7. Ashford United 16-14 (35-41) 6 2 8 8. Dartford 16-12 (30-39) 5 2 9 ------------------------------------------------------- 9. Maidstone United 16- 3 (14-84) 1 1 14 Relegated Total: 144-144 (335-337) 60 24 60 Champions: Chatham Promoted: Swanscombe Newly admitted: Northfleet, Woolwich Arsenal II (London) and New Brompton ' Not much fun watching that ! How is there a difference between total goals for and total goals against? I suppose that if you've got thirteen people reporting scores via post, the sums might not add up during a season? These days it must take some attention to stay on top of things.
|
|
|
Post by hongkongstone on Sept 13, 2020 3:04:42 GMT
You can only be relegated if there's a lower level division to be relegated into, exclusion the next season ain't relegation, ask Bury. There, knew that would fire people up ! Just for information: ' FINAL TABLE KENT LEAGUE (DIVISION 1) 1894-95 ============================================ 1. Chatham 16-25 (55-23) 11 3 2 Champions ------------------------------------------------------- 2. RETB Chatham 16-21 (50-23) 8 5 3 3. Folkestone 16-19 (30-29) 8 3 5 4. Sheppey United 16-17 (37-28) 8 1 7 5. Gravesend United 16-17 (54-33) 6 5 5 6. Sittingbourne 16-16 (30-37) 7 2 7 7. Ashford United 16-14 (35-41) 6 2 8 8. Dartford 16-12 (30-39) 5 2 9 ------------------------------------------------------- 9. Maidstone United 16- 3 (14-84) 1 1 14 Relegated Total: 144-144 (335-337) 60 24 60 Champions: Chatham Promoted: Swanscombe Newly admitted: Northfleet, Woolwich Arsenal II (London) and New Brompton ' Not much fun watching that ! Whatever happened to the Woolwich Arsenal that replaced us?
|
|
|
Post by Bernie on Sept 13, 2020 6:19:50 GMT
|
|