Printable View
With all the news about Shamrock Rovers 400 club lately and the "new" United plus AFC Wimbledon etc - here's an interesting article in Saturday's Guardian some of you might like to read.
It's obviously written by someone involved in bringing the game back to the fans etc but is encouraging to those of us despairing at the plcs, spolied footballers, agents etc who are soiling such a great game. Here it is:
http://football.guardian.co.uk/comme...543838,00.html
What do you think???
I thought that Rushden and Diamonds were a plaything for rich millionaire (Max Griggs is it?). It seems he willingly tranferred the club to them? Is the jist of this article that it is the way forward not just for collapsing clubs? It does certainly have it's advantages for example bringing the club closer to its fans and the community. However does a supporter's trust have the necessary know how and investment to drive a club further than safe existence? I'm still not quite sure how they work. Barcelona themselves are owned by the fans but elect an adminstration though that in itself leads to extravagant election promises and unstable finances. I think at least the likes of FC United and AFC Wimbledon have shown fans an alternative to putting up with whatever happens at their own club and perhaps if they are successful enough will avert some things which are to the detriment of fans in the future by serving as a warning to the people who run clubs.
Just in case Rovers fans claim to have invented fans owning clubs aswell, Bohemians has been owned by the fans for well over a century. Which is longer than the greatest club in the world, FC Barcelona.