Berks and Bucks senior cup 2022/23

[tmesis]

Windsor 0 Bracknell 8
Only took 30 secs approx for Bracknell to highlight the difference in class as they opened the scoring with a slick move. Bracknell included a fair sprinkling of 1st team regulars and were 3-0 up at half time. The only real good scoring chance the home team had was a missed penalty in the 2nd half.

Bracknell having a good start to the season and seem to be going places. Plus a televised cup game against Ipswich to boost the coffers. Shame they don't actually play in Bracknell (Sandhurst) i believe, not sure what's going on there, but must affect their attendances.

Bracknell are owned by Kane Steinborne-Busse and his wife/daughter/sister is listed as owning Sandhurst Town. Basically the long and short of it is that Bracknell want to progress up the pyramid (think their goal really is to be a National League side) and they couldn’t do that at Larges Lane so they sold it for housing and now share “down the road” at Bottom Meadow in Sandhurst where there is room to progress in the league ground wise. The club aims to return to Bracknell as soon as they have a new ground though am unsure exactly where they are on that currently.

Larges Lane was so out of the way, despite being very central, that I think a good number of people in the town had no idea the town even had a football club.

[Four Of Clubs]

Result of tonight`s match played at Thatcham- AFC Aldermaston 2 Shrivenham 5 - it must have been some match as Aldermaston had 2 sent off in the 1st half.

Shrivy were 5-0 up too! - I nearly went but -
a) was too wet 'n horrible
b) beers beckoned (as I'm 'off' tmrw)

[Nameless]

Windsor 0 Bracknell 8
Only took 30 secs approx for Bracknell to highlight the difference in class as they opened the scoring with a slick move. Bracknell included a fair sprinkling of 1st team regulars and were 3-0 up at half time. The only real good scoring chance the home team had was a missed penalty in the 2nd half.

Bracknell having a good start to the season and seem to be going places. Plus a televised cup game against Ipswich to boost the coffers. Shame they don't actually play in Bracknell (Sandhurst) i believe, not sure what's going on there, but must affect their attendances.

Bracknell are owned by Kane Steinborne-Busse and his wife/daughter/sister is listed as owning Sandhurst Town. Basically the long and short of it is that Bracknell want to progress up the pyramid (think their goal really is to be a National League side) and they couldn’t do that at Larges Lane so they sold it for housing and now share “down the road” at Bottom Meadow in Sandhurst where there is room to progress in the league ground wise. The club aims to return to Bracknell as soon as they have a new ground though am unsure exactly where they are on that currently.

How far down the pyramid does the concept of someone ‘owning’ a club go ? Obviously no one ‘owns’ your average park team, someone like Woodley United who have moved a little way up the pyramid don’t have an owner.

[YorkshireRoyal99]

Bracknell having a good start to the season and seem to be going places. Plus a televised cup game against Ipswich to boost the coffers. Shame they don't actually play in Bracknell (Sandhurst) i believe, not sure what's going on there, but must affect their attendances.

Bracknell are owned by Kane Steinborne-Busse and his wife/daughter/sister is listed as owning Sandhurst Town. Basically the long and short of it is that Bracknell want to progress up the pyramid (think their goal really is to be a National League side) and they couldn’t do that at Larges Lane so they sold it for housing and now share “down the road” at Bottom Meadow in Sandhurst where there is room to progress in the league ground wise. The club aims to return to Bracknell as soon as they have a new ground though am unsure exactly where they are on that currently.

How far down the pyramid does the concept of someone ‘owning’ a club go ? Obviously no one ‘owns’ your average park team, someone like Woodley United who have moved a little way up the pyramid don’t have an owner.

I think it depends on the club. By definition, everyone has an "owner" I suppose, but it's just about who puts the money in. My local clubs, Steeton and Silsden, who are semi-pro, with the former being at the bottom of the pyramid, have "owners" as in, a company willing to fund the club. I'm presuming that's what you mean?

[Nameless]

Bracknell are owned by Kane Steinborne-Busse and his wife/daughter/sister is listed as owning Sandhurst Town. Basically the long and short of it is that Bracknell want to progress up the pyramid (think their goal really is to be a National League side) and they couldn’t do that at Larges Lane so they sold it for housing and now share “down the road” at Bottom Meadow in Sandhurst where there is room to progress in the league ground wise. The club aims to return to Bracknell as soon as they have a new ground though am unsure exactly where they are on that currently.

How far down the pyramid does the concept of someone ‘owning’ a club go ? Obviously no one ‘owns’ your average park team, someone like Woodley United who have moved a little way up the pyramid don’t have an owner.

I think it depends on the club. By definition, everyone has an "owner" I suppose, but it's just about who puts the money in. My local clubs, Steeton and Silsden, who are semi-pro, with the former being at the bottom of the pyramid, have "owners" as in, a company willing to fund the club. I'm presuming that's what you mean?

Not really. The vast majority of clubs have no ‘owner’. I’ve been involved with grass roots clubs and the idea that anyone ‘owns’ then makes no sense. But there must be a point at which ‘ownership’ becomes a thing.
Just not sure when it kicks in, businesses putting money in is sponsorship rather than ownership.

[Dirk Gently]

How far down the pyramid does the concept of someone ‘owning’ a club go ? Obviously no one ‘owns’ your average park team, someone like Woodley United who have moved a little way up the pyramid don’t have an owner.

I think it depends on the club. By definition, everyone has an "owner" I suppose, but it's just about who puts the money in. My local clubs, Steeton and Silsden, who are semi-pro, with the former being at the bottom of the pyramid, have "owners" as in, a company willing to fund the club. I'm presuming that's what you mean?

Not really. The vast majority of clubs have no ‘owner’. I’ve been involved with grass roots clubs and the idea that anyone ‘owns’ then makes no sense. But there must be a point at which ‘ownership’ becomes a thing.
Just not sure when it kicks in, businesses putting money in is sponsorship rather than ownership.

At the lowest level they are actually "football clubs" - legally a "non-incorporated corporation" owned by its members. At some stage they become a limited company (or equivalent, maybe an Industrial and Provident Society), at which point there is a much better defined "ownership."

I think once they own property there's a requirement to have a proper ownership structure.

[YorkshireRoyal99]

How far down the pyramid does the concept of someone ‘owning’ a club go ? Obviously no one ‘owns’ your average park team, someone like Woodley United who have moved a little way up the pyramid don’t have an owner.

I think it depends on the club. By definition, everyone has an "owner" I suppose, but it's just about who puts the money in. My local clubs, Steeton and Silsden, who are semi-pro, with the former being at the bottom of the pyramid, have "owners" as in, a company willing to fund the club. I'm presuming that's what you mean?

Not really. The vast majority of clubs have no ‘owner’. I’ve been involved with grass roots clubs and the idea that anyone ‘owns’ then makes no sense. But there must be a point at which ‘ownership’ becomes a thing.
Just not sure when it kicks in, businesses putting money in is sponsorship rather than ownership.

Yeah, that's grass roots though, I'm on about the lowest depths of semi-pro football, where both clubs I've mentioned are owned by private limited companies, who put money in and own certain facilities e.g. the grounds they play at. That's why I think it's just a club-by-club basis rather than it being introduced at a certain level, particularly once you get into semi-pro levels. I suppose you could say the "level" is semi-pro, whereas grass roots you probably don't see "ownership" of a club.

[Nameless]

I think it depends on the club. By definition, everyone has an "owner" I suppose, but it's just about who puts the money in. My local clubs, Steeton and Silsden, who are semi-pro, with the former being at the bottom of the pyramid, have "owners" as in, a company willing to fund the club. I'm presuming that's what you mean?

Not really. The vast majority of clubs have no ‘owner’. I’ve been involved with grass roots clubs and the idea that anyone ‘owns’ then makes no sense. But there must be a point at which ‘ownership’ becomes a thing.
Just not sure when it kicks in, businesses putting money in is sponsorship rather than ownership.

At the lowest level they are actually "football clubs" - legally a "non-incorporated corporation" owned by its members. At some stage they become a limited company (or equivalent, maybe an Industrial and Provident Society), at which point there is a much better defined "ownership."

I think once they own property there's a requirement to have a proper ownership structure.

It’s that ‘at some stage’ bit.
And of course having some kind of structure doesn’t mean you have ‘an owner’. I guess it’s the thing with Bracknell and Sandhurst being ‘owned’ by named individuals that raised my interest. There are Football League teams who aren’t owned by a named person and I’d find it interesting to know how the ‘ownership’ changes down the steps and why.

[Nameless]

I think it depends on the club. By definition, everyone has an "owner" I suppose, but it's just about who puts the money in. My local clubs, Steeton and Silsden, who are semi-pro, with the former being at the bottom of the pyramid, have "owners" as in, a company willing to fund the club. I'm presuming that's what you mean?

Not really. The vast majority of clubs have no ‘owner’. I’ve been involved with grass roots clubs and the idea that anyone ‘owns’ then makes no sense. But there must be a point at which ‘ownership’ becomes a thing.
Just not sure when it kicks in, businesses putting money in is sponsorship rather than ownership.

Yeah, that's grass roots though, I'm on about the lowest depths of semi-pro football, where both clubs I've mentioned are owned by private limited companies, who put money in and own certain facilities e.g. the grounds they play at. That's why I think it's just a club-by-club basis rather than it being introduced at a certain level, particularly once you get into semi-pro levels. I suppose you could say the "level" is semi-pro, whereas grass roots you probably don't see "ownership" of a club.

Semi pro is a bit meaningless isn’t it ? Players get paid a long way down the pyramid and paying a player isn’t anything to do with who owns the club.
If a club is in itself a limited company then the company doesn’t put any money into the club, it just’s runs the club as a business.

[Dirk Gently]

Not really. The vast majority of clubs have no ‘owner’. I’ve been involved with grass roots clubs and the idea that anyone ‘owns’ then makes no sense. But there must be a point at which ‘ownership’ becomes a thing.
Just not sure when it kicks in, businesses putting money in is sponsorship rather than ownership.

At the lowest level they are actually "football clubs" - legally a "non-incorporated corporation" owned by its members. At some stage they become a limited company (or equivalent, maybe an Industrial and Provident Society), at which point there is a much better defined "ownership."

I think once they own property there's a requirement to have a proper ownership structure.

It’s that ‘at some stage’ bit.
And of course having some kind of structure doesn’t mean you have ‘an owner’. I guess it’s the thing with Bracknell and Sandhurst being ‘owned’ by named individuals that raised my interest. There are Football League teams who aren’t owned by a named person and I’d find it interesting to know how the ‘ownership’ changes down the steps and why.

The FA's Owners & Directors rules applies as below, so once you get to these levels you presumably need nominated owners/directors.

“Club” means any association football club that is from time to time, a member of any of The National League, The Southern Football League Limited, The Isthmian Football League Limited, The Northern Premier League Limited, The FA Women’s Super League and The FA Women’s Championship.

[Nameless]

Sandhurst don’t play in any of those leagues so for some reason they are owned by a company, whilst Woodley in the same league are just a member’s club (or were when I was involved).
Not expecting definitive answers, just find it interesting !

[YorkshireRoyal99]

Not really. The vast majority of clubs have no ‘owner’. I’ve been involved with grass roots clubs and the idea that anyone ‘owns’ then makes no sense. But there must be a point at which ‘ownership’ becomes a thing.
Just not sure when it kicks in, businesses putting money in is sponsorship rather than ownership.

Yeah, that's grass roots though, I'm on about the lowest depths of semi-pro football, where both clubs I've mentioned are owned by private limited companies, who put money in and own certain facilities e.g. the grounds they play at. That's why I think it's just a club-by-club basis rather than it being introduced at a certain level, particularly once you get into semi-pro levels. I suppose you could say the "level" is semi-pro, whereas grass roots you probably don't see "ownership" of a club.

Semi pro is a bit meaningless isn’t it ? Players get paid a long way down the pyramid and paying a player isn’t anything to do with who owns the club.
If a club is in itself a limited company then the company doesn’t put any money into the club, it just’s runs the club as a business.

Well no semi-pro isn't a bit meaningless because that's "a level". The level below Steeton, who play at the very bottom standard of semi-professional, is then amateur where some players get paid, others don't. However, at amateur level, playing players usually comes through sponsorships given to the club, whereas in the case of Steeton (and Silsden who I have mentioned), they both have "owners", in the sense of a private limited company owns the club.

[Nameless]

Yeah, that's grass roots though, I'm on about the lowest depths of semi-pro football, where both clubs I've mentioned are owned by private limited companies, who put money in and own certain facilities e.g. the grounds they play at. That's why I think it's just a club-by-club basis rather than it being introduced at a certain level, particularly once you get into semi-pro levels. I suppose you could say the "level" is semi-pro, whereas grass roots you probably don't see "ownership" of a club.

Semi pro is a bit meaningless isn’t it ? Players get paid a long way down the pyramid and paying a player isn’t anything to do with who owns the club.
If a club is in itself a limited company then the company doesn’t put any money into the club, it just’s runs the club as a business.

Well no semi-pro isn't a bit meaningless because that's "a level". The level below Steeton, who play at the very bottom standard of semi-professional, is then amateur where some players get paid, others don't. However, at amateur level, playing players usually comes through sponsorships given to the club, whereas in the case of Steeton (and Silsden who I have mentioned), they both have "owners", in the sense of a private limited company owns the club.

Didn’t they get rid of the amateur / pro distinction decades ago ?
None of the leagues are defined by whether players get paid. My local team play in National South where some teams get paid, some don’t. You don’t get stopped from getting promoted because you don’t pay players (it might make it harder though).

[Dirk Gently]

Sandhurst don’t play in any of those leagues so for some reason they are owned by a company, whilst Woodley in the same league are just a member’s club (or were when I was involved).
Not expecting definitive answers, just find it interesting !

Do Woodley own land, property or significant assets? It's sound legal advice to form a company (or another incorporated body) as soon as you start to own significant stuff.

[YorkshireRoyal99]

Semi pro is a bit meaningless isn’t it ? Players get paid a long way down the pyramid and paying a player isn’t anything to do with who owns the club.
If a club is in itself a limited company then the company doesn’t put any money into the club, it just’s runs the club as a business.

Well no semi-pro isn't a bit meaningless because that's "a level". The level below Steeton, who play at the very bottom standard of semi-professional, is then amateur where some players get paid, others don't. However, at amateur level, playing players usually comes through sponsorships given to the club, whereas in the case of Steeton (and Silsden who I have mentioned), they both have "owners", in the sense of a private limited company owns the club.

Didn’t they get rid of the amateur / pro distinction decades ago ?
None of the leagues are defined by whether players get paid. My local team play in National South where some teams get paid, some don’t. You don’t get stopped from getting promoted because you don’t pay players (it might make it harder though).

Yeah I know they don't stop you from getting promoted, but as you've said, it makes it harder. I wasn't suggesting leagues are defined by whether players get paid or not, it was more a point of ownership. My point was I don't know any team below semi-professional level that are "under ownership" if you like, but a couple of my local clubs, Steeton who play at the lowest level of semi-professional football, are "under ownership" officially.

Also I don't know whether they did get rid of the amateur/semi-professional distinction, they are just terms commonly used at my level. Whether that's historic or whether is still applies now. A quick search on Wikipedia mentions the full-time/part-time distinction, but that more applies to National League/Football League clubs. Wikipedia references part-time as being semi-professional and full-time being classed as professional, but I don't know where that sits within the lower depths of non-league football.

[Dirk Gently]

Also, as soon as an individual puts significant sums into a club, they'll want to do it through a limited company or an incorporated body, otherwise their money just goes into a members' club and is legally then the property of all the membership. It makes sense to put money in and get shares back so they have something for their money - including control. Although we talk of club "owners", very few have 100% of the ownership - most just have a majority shareholding.

[Royals and Racers]

Busy night of 1st round action with 4 matches taking place- i`m off to a new ground for me Buckingham Athletic who are playing Flackwell Heath.

[DarOv]

Also, as soon as an individual puts significant sums into a club, they'll want to do it through a limited company or an incorporated body, otherwise their money just goes into a members' club and is legally then the property of all the membership. It makes sense to put money in and get shares back so they have something for their money - including control. Although we talk of club "owners", very few have 100% of the ownership - most just have a majority shareholding.

That is why there are so many offshore companies through which businessmen conduct their business. Because to do it any other way would be a loss.

[Sutekh]

When's the draw for the next round?

[Royals and Racers]

When's the draw for the next round?

Whenever it is it should be live on social media again- hopefully with sound this time
Likely to be either this Friday before Maidenhead play Slough next Tuesday (15th)or after that game a week on Friday.
Of course the round after next(QF`s) is the big one when the mighty Royals enter the fray !!!