ContinueWe use cookies to ensure that you get the best experience on our website; if you continue without changing your settings - or dismiss this message - we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies on

Return to front page

Newest article: Re: SOAP by Don of CaddingtonYesterday 20:27Yesterday at 20:27:35view thread

Oldest article: Disastrous start for new home by jacaranda22/7/2013 17:36Mon Jul 22 17:36:39 2013view thread


Reply to "Re: Gateshead"

You must log in or register before you can post an article

return to the front page

Re: Gateshead

By rwakeley21/5/2019 18:39Tue May 21 18:39:41 2019In response to Re: Gateshead

Views: 843

I'm agree one hundred percent with regards to the league places devised by ChrisHFC. I advocate this would even the costs whilst maintaining a traditional essence to the environment. One niggle I have remains un-known. I want to know, what, if any, restrictions there have been in terms of player recruitment as a result of our re-location. The knock-on effects with regards to player pool and quality are key considerations.
Touching on the Met. One thing stood out early doors last season. I noted their gaffer tweeted that he was completely satisfied with his squad going in. A good indicator as the season developed.
Just for larks, I cast my eye over the new recruits. Blackfields and Langley was interesting. I typed that into Google Maps and half the English Channel appeared! It comes to something when the Spanish Amarda has a greater chance of reaching the place than what I do!
That's football, I guess!