The Site
News Index
Search The Site
About The Site
The Season
Fixtures & Results
League Table
Player Profiles
06/07 Photo Gallery
The Club
Archive 92/93 to 19/20
Match Database
Away Fans Guide
The Terraces
E-mail List
Fun & Games
Daggers Dictionary

 The Poll

Daggers change of ownership: should we...

Stay as we are (Members Club)
Go with the East Consortium
Go with the Tamplin Consortium
Look for another solution

View Current Standings


To refuse to make a substitution and to persist with non-scoring big lump despite having free scoring legend (see "John" above) on the bench. (from Alan Mendham)




Next Match

17 April 2021
Solihull Moors
Vanarama National League 

Last Match

13 April 2021
Vanarama National League 
Won 2-0

     On This Day

In 1993,The Daggers beat Bath City 2-1 at Home in the GM Vauxhall Conference 

In 1994,The Daggers drew 2-2 with Northwich Victoria Away in the GM Vauxhall Conference 

In 1995,The Daggers beat Farnborough Town 3-1  Away in the GM Vauxhall Conference 

In 1997,The Daggers drew 1-1 with Hitchin Town at Home in the ICIS League Premier 

In 1999,The Daggers beat Hampton 2-1  Away in the Ryman League Premier 

In 2004,The Daggers lost 0-1 to Halifax Town at Home in the Nationwide Conference 

In 2006,The Daggers drew 2-2 with Canvey Island at Home in the Nationwide Conference 

In 2010,The Daggers beat Burton Albion 2-1 at Home in the Coca Cola League Two 

In 2017,The Daggers drew 2-2 with Sutton United at Home in the Vanarama National League 

In 2018,The Daggers lost 1-3 to Bromley Away in the Vanarama National League 



Har Har

Bring back Adam Crozier
by Hardy on 30/06/2003

When Adam Crozier was sacrificed by the FA for opposing the Premiership's money men, it was obvious what was coming next. The 2003/04 FA Cup Prize Fund shows how the FA now regard the lower leagues. Hardy looks at what it all means.

Come back Adam Crozier
When Adam Crozier (right, c Mike Hewitt/Getty Images) was forced out of the role of FA Chief Executive at the end of October 2002 the reason stated was his "autocratic style". The real reason was money, of course, the driver of everything in football these days.

Crozier was appointed to modernise the FA and one of his big changes was to spread the FA's income from the FA Cup more fairly, introducing a prize money system which allowed the vast income generated by the competition to be shared by all the clubs playing in it. Under the scheme pushed through by Crozier, clubs winning in the Preliminary round won 1,000, and clubs winning into the competition proper from the 4th Qualifying round won 20,000.

At the same time, prizes for the top clubs were vast, with the winners taking 2,000,000 and runners-up 1,000,000 plus guaranteed TV appearance money.

The scheme was only in place one season though as Crozier was sacrificed to the Premiership clubs ambitions, led by one of the usual suspects, Chelsea Chairman Ken Bates. The Daily Telegraph's summation of Crozier's downfall can be found here.

The FA announced the new structure of the prize fund for the coming season's FA Cup on the 23rd June, and surprise, surprise, it is the early rounds that are losing out.

FA Cup 2003/04
The new prize fund is detailed here. Comparing this with last season's, the fund in total has been reduced by a total of 1,964,750, all that money being saved by reducing the payments for progressing in the competition in rounds up to the 2nd round proper, therefore affecting only clubs in non-league and divisions two and three.

Prizes for later rounds, in the 3rd round onward, remain the same. The 3rd round is, of course, the point in the competition that Mr Bates club enters the fray.

Here is what that this means in practical terms is that a team like the Daggers. Last season they made 120,000 in prize money from reaching the 4th round. The four round wins made 20,000, 20,000, 30,000 and 50,000. The same run next season would make 87,500 (10,000, 12,500, 15,000 and 50,000). This is a reduction of 27%.

More realistically though, a run to the third round, which is still superb for a non-league team, would make 37,500 next season compared to 70,000 last. This is a cut of 32,500 or 46.5%.

The payments for televised matches in rounds one and two is also reduced by 50% to 50,000 per team as well, further limiting the opportunities for the same clubs effected by the reduction in prize money in these rounds.

The right to reply
My co-webmaster, Nelson, was incensed enough by this to write to the FA on the subject. On the 26th June he wrote:

Dear Sirs,

I see the FA have lived up to their name yet again and done precisely nothing to help the lower level of English football that it claims to protect.

Please can you explain to me how you can possibly justify reducing the prize money and television pool for the early rounds of the FA cup by such a massive amount and yet keep the later rounds' figures the same?

The FA Cup is a great opportunity for the smaller teams, including my club, to get one over on the "big guns" by pulling off a shock result. It is the early rounds that provide the best entertainment and drama. Some of the most memorable matches of recent times have been the giant killings and near shocks provided by the Division 3 and non-league sides over their more illustrious opponents. For many of these clubs, a win in the First Round proper is as far as they can realistically hope to get and the 7,500 of which they have now been deprived is a massive amount of money - For many clubs, that is a year's wages for one or two players! In contrast, a Club such as Liverpool, Manchester United or Newcastle United winning their Fourth Round tie Nets them exactly the same 75,000 that it would have earned them last season - You could have reduced that by 20,000 and the big clubs would barely have noticed.

Why do the FA persist in claiming to support Grass Roots football and yet persist in giving it the rawest deal it can get away with?

The FA replied on the 27th, quick enough to make it probably a stock reply. They said:

The FA at their annual summer FA Council meeting in Torquay on Saturday 21st June, confirmed a number of changes to the prize funds of FA competitions for season 2003/04.

Prize funds from the First Round Qualifying Round of The FA Cup, through to the Second Round proper have been regrettably reduced as part of the wide-ranging budget cuts that The FA have been making over the past six months.

In season 2001/02, vast increases in prize money were made throughout The FA Cup, which on average saw clubs able to win ten to twelve times the amount previously available per round in season 2000/01; for example, a club winning a third round qualifying tie earnt 10,000 in 2002/03, compared to just 800 in season 2000/01.

From next season, the prize funds in the earlier rounds have been reduced, but will still be on average five to six times what they were in season 2000/01: using the same example, a club winning a third round qualifying tie will now earn 5,000.

The FA are more than mindful that the clubs who will stand to most lose from these reductions will be those below The Football League, and to offset some of the potential losses from last season, The FA have announced that the prize funds for the country's flagship cup competitions in non-league football are to be boosted by more than 600,000.

The substantial increase in winnings for The FA Trophy and FA Vase in partnership with Carlsberg, will be introduced in the 2003-04 season.

The total prize fund for The FA Trophy will increase by 406,000 from 225,000 to 631,000 and for The FA Vase will rise by 197,000 from 153,000 to 350,000.

The increase in prize money for these two competitions will ensure the status and prestige of both competitions is maintained, and more importantly reward clubs who progress through six or seven rounds to win one of these two respective Finals.

The FA Trophy and The FA Vase are the premier domestic cup competitions for clubs outside the Football League, yet a club last season who won seven games in The FA Vase, accrued 12,900 and in The FA Trophy, 27,850.

The new prize funds for both competitions will now better reward clubs for their progress in these competitions, and with the new prize fund structure, last season's winners would now receive 30,700 and 92,800 respectively.

The FA believes it has a duty to support all levels of the game, and in 2000, became a funding partner of The Football Foundation, along with The FA Premier League and Government.

Since the end of 2000, The Football Foundation's Football Stadia Improvement Fund has provided over 13million to clubs in the Nationwide Conference and below for football facility improvements, and The FA has also provided cumulative grants of approximately 1.2million to leagues and clubs outside the Football League, through equipment and administration support.

The FA also recognises that clubs in Divisions 2 and 3 of The Football League may face a maximum reduction of 22, 500 through reductions in The FA Cup prize funds at rounds 1 and 2.

However, in the past two years, The FA has been centralising a grants system to The Football League - in partnership with The Football Foundation and The FA Premier League - for investment in ground facilities and clubs' centres of excellence, grants which have helped these clubs through a particularly difficult financial period.

The grants have also helped clubs continue providing coaching, education and social inclusion schemes for thousands of young people.

If you would like further information on the breakdown of prize funds for these competitions, and for the early round draws of all FA competitions on Saturday 5th July, log on to

Any further questions please feel free to call me, as I would be more then happy to discuss this matter with you.

The FA Trophy
So in a nutshell the FA are saying that because the prize fund pre-Crozier was so poor, we should all shut up moaning and be happy with the reductions that they have made. They are also throwing in the sop of increased prizes in their "minor" competitions the FA Trophy and FA Vase as some kind of compensation to the non-league game.

This last one simply does not add up. To make the shortfall in prize money for a trip to the third round of the FA Cup up from the FA Trophy a Conference club would have to make it to the final. The 2003/04 prize fund for the Trophy is here.

A run to the last four would net the Daggers 22,000, while an appearance in the final guarantees 38,000 just about making up for the cut in the money for getting through to the 3rd round in the FA Cup. Winning the FA Trophy, the FA's second most prestigious knockout competition, is deemed the same value as winning an FA Cup 3rd round game, 50,000.

An alternative?
Well the FA is short of cash at the moment despite the huge popularity of the game of football. Of course, the major reason for this is the Wembley farce, a problem largely of the FA's own making, and also involving the poison dwarf Ken Bates (left, c Ben Radford/Getty Images) himself, of course.

All that said though, we can understand the need to save a little money on the FA Cup. How about this though? Instead of affecting so many of the smaller clubs, why not reduce the prize money to the two clubs in the final who will already have made a fortune from their FA Cup run from TV, gate and prize money money from earlier rounds. Also bear in mind that the losing finalists last season, Southampton, gained a place in the UEFA cup from just reaching the cup final last season through the fact that Arsenal qualified for the Champions League.

The total saved by the reductions in the FA Cup prize fund this season is 1,964,750, all spread between the clubs in non-league and Divisions 2 and 3. Alternatively reducing the winners prize money to say 1m and the runners up to 600,000 (from 2m and 1m) saves 1,400,000 to be spent elsewhere and effects just two clubs, both of whom are virtually certain to have made a fortune out of earlier games.

Just a thought but a waste of time though, as who is one of the clubs who have featured in four of the last ten FA Cup finals? Why Ken Bates' Chelsea of course (1994, 1997, 2000 & 2002).

 is an independent website and the views expressed are not necessarily those of Dagenham & Redbridge Football Club