Printable View
Interesting times ahead in English football, it looks like. AFC Wimbledon and FC United of Manchester both won their play offs to get promoted, to Conference South and the Uniond Premier respectively. Both have crowds large enough to get into the English League, and now there's AFC Liverpool starting up next season.
English football is a rarity in that it has no B teams in the league pyramid (rightly so, IMO). In ten years though, how many fans' teams will it have?
Interesting, FCUM have never failed to get promoted, though this was the first year they didn't go up as champions. Of course MK Dons were promoted as well
Will this be a good thing or a bad thing Stu?Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
In my opinion, its brilliant for football.
Same here, delighted for both clubs, especially FC United, to turn your back on a club you've supported all your life because you don't like the way the club is now being run must have been hard, glad to see it's starting pay off for them. I wonder if we will ever see rivalries between FC United, AFC Wimbledon and FC Liverpool, the inevitable FC City and whoever else joins the party? FC Liverpool vs FC United would be something else I think, and AFC Wimbledon being the established club among the lot would be funny when you think of where all these clubs came or are coming fromQuote:
Originally Posted by SligoBrewer
On the one hand, you've got football coming back into the hands of the people to an ever-growing extent and all that. On the other hand, you may well have existing clubs - usually the sole senior club in an area - pushed down the order by places already represented.Quote:
Originally Posted by SligoBrewer
Like it or not, the English are probably the best supporters in the world, and to see them challenging the system in such a drastic and dramatic manner can only be good for football.
Overall, it'll be very good, I reckon. I don't think it'll be 100% straightforward as that - there'll be some problems, losers and downsides - but it'll definitely make for an interesting period.
If these "disillusioned" fans had wanted to, there are plenty of other Manchester clubs to support. Even in rebellion they are bought by the brand.
And if they didn't want to just start supporting Oldham and the rest after years of mocking?Quote:
Originally Posted by GavinZac
Support their club, in good times and bad. Don't go running off to form a new club because you dont like the transient ownersQuote:
Originally Posted by jebus
Sound familiar?
AFCL specifically note that their new club is for those who have been priced out of supporting Liverpool, with the resulting problem that the hugely traditional father-and-son support has gone out of the club. There's obviously various reasons behind FCUM, but this is one of the major ones (obviously Glazer is there too). Most fans of the clubs are still fans of the "original" club too. Don't see a problem with it.
As for "plenty of other Manchester clubs to support", I assume if Arkaga up prices to E50 a ticket and fill out every week (don't laugh), you'll up and support Cobh?
No, I'll support Cork City. Worst case scenario I'll keep supporting them on telly (presumably if we're charging €50 a ticket theres a market there for TV coverage) and go watch Rockmount live.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Thing is, the English traditional football supporting psyche is completely geared towards going to the game. So watching half the games on telly isn't an option.
It seems AFC Liverpool are joining in the pyramid at level 10. Wimbledon are at level 6 and FCUM are at 7. Wimbledon are not far away from the football league (level 4) now.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
I think it is great for football. When, not if, it happens, MK Dons V AFC Wimbledon will be a great grudge match.
I don't think MK Dons would view it the same way as pretty much every other team, including above all AFC Wimbledon.
Not at allQuote:
Originally Posted by GavinZac
FCUM visited AFC in a preseason friendly this year - as far as I know, it has not been the first. Both sets of fans have a lot of time for one another because they really are by for and of the fans. Went to watch AFC in a league game earlier in the season - good atmosphere and tremenduous home support. Owing to the wealth among the fans (the old Wimbledon was known for having the wealthiest fans in the league owing to location of the club in Merton), they should continue to rise, maybe not next year, but probably the following one.Quote:
Originally Posted by jebus
I have time for AFC Wimbledon because they were genuinely screwed out of their club (although, that said, if the fans had cared enough to put their money where their mouths were, they could have actually stopped the move to MK). But I don't have time for FC United or AFC Liverpool. They're just fake clubs formed by fans throwing their toys out of their prams because they don't like their club's new owners (presumably because they happen to be American - can anyone actually tell me what Glazer has done that's so bad? Or Hicks for that matter - ok, he's made some mildly threatening remarks about Benitez, but are the Liverpool fans really that insecure and pathetic that they'll put their hatred of one man before their club loyalty?)
Also, one thing I find ironic is that according to some in this thread AFC Liverpool has been formed in protest at rising prices and commercialisation of football, yet look at their home page. 'Advertise here'. 'Become a member for just £35'. What a bunch of hypocrites.
Agreed and agreed. A lot of fans of other clubs still harbour resentment towards MK Dons for the way in which they 'skipped' the pyramid in gaining their League place - time to grow up and move on, people, especially since there are now Football League rules in place to prevent such a reoccurrence of what is - effectively - franchising, i.e. the American model.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cymro
How about loading nearly £600 million of debt onto MUFC to fund the takeover? The Glazer family only paid £350 million of their own money out of the total £950 million purchase price to secure ownership. Legal but very immoral, and fans of 'the brand' are paying for the shortfall (and will do so for a long time to come) through the increased costs of their season tickets and/or merchandise purchases.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cymro
At last, someone using 'ironic', in a footballing context, in its proper sense. Gold star for you Cymro. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Cymro
:ball: PP
Ticket and merchandise prices have been soaring for years now anyway. I honestly think the outrage was more a xenophobic anti-American thing, but that's just my personal view. In any case, the financial meltdown the breakaways had claimed would happen hasn't materialised, so they really are just looking like silly kids who've thrown their toys out of the pram.
Six. Hundred. Million. Pounds. In. Debt.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cymro
Furthermore, it's all new debt; that which the club never had before and all to further the ambitions of a distant sporting oligarch. Enough to make the most ardent internationalist turn firmly against the new kids on the block.
After all, the MUFC family seems pretty good at assimilating people from all over the globe, so I find the anti-American theory a little dubious. Still, just my opinion too... :)
Yet... no matter how long it takes, a crash will surely happen; the longer the boom goes on, the harder the fall will be.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cymro
:ball: PP
I think that was just the straw that broke the camel's back. The problems have been building up for a decade - sitting at games, being thrown out and banned for standing, dead atmosphere, can't afford to bring the next generation of fans along. That's essentially what the fans of both clubs have gone after.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cymro
Before Glazer took over and made the club his own, the club was a public company which meant the fans had a share (however small) in the club. Thats why the fans felt that their club had been taken away from them rather than just passing from one rich owner to another.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cymro
Add to this the debt put on the club, the almost instant rise in ticket prices (before Glazer, UTD's ticket prices were quite reasonable compared to alot of premiership clubs), the rumour that the ground was to be renamed and also Glazers record in the NFL (threatening to move his franchise elsewhere, rising ticket prices) and you have the reasons why FC United was formed.
I have alot of time for all fans clubs and their supporters. Clubs should be owned by the fans not by foreign billionaires with no sentimental attachment to the club who are willing to risk the clubs future in order to make a profit.
OK, but I do tend to think that there are plenty of local clubs that couyld have done with their support and that a new club based on the old club is basically just going to end up more or less the same as it anyway - eventually they'll all become full-time professional clubs and will act like businesses because it's the only way of moving up the pyramid, which ultimately will be the goal of the fans as the club rises and gains more support.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Clubs should ideally be owned by their fans I guess, but that's a very idealistic view and ignores the harsh realities of football. Nearly all clubs at all levels are board and chairman-run, from the Premiership and Championship right down to the semi-professional non-league pyramid. As long as money is involved, football clubs will rarely be truly democratic. MyFootballClub is a classic example of how unworkable such a club model is, in that I don't think anyone's seriously expecting Ebbsfleet not to encounter real admistrative problems now they've made the switch.
I don't think you can call Ebbsfleet "unworkable" because you think it'll pan out that way.
Ultimately, a club is its fans. That's why you can't just go to a different club and pretend it'll be the same. That's why a group of fans from the same background and with the same history getting together makes sense.
Of course the problems you mentioned will be encountered. But that's no reason to dismiss the whole thing. Fan culture in England is dying at the top level, and something like this can help it a lot.
I just can't see how Ebbsfleet, in spite of the cash boost they'll recieve from the move, will develop the necessary settled and motivated squad mentality to compete over the course of the season. How can you hope to be properly organised when the manager has practically no power and several thousand fans (many of whom will likely never watch the team) pick players over the internet? It'll end in tears, in my opinion.
Because AFCW has a chairman, same as any other club, does not mean it is constituted in the same way, far from it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cymro
Re finances. I don't know of any club that the mantra 'money cures all problems' is not on top of the agenda :)
As it stands now AFC W have refused to relinquish control should investors want to buy themselves in.
"the Board would like to make it clear that it doesnot accept that giving up some control was necessary in order to make progress. Rather, the Board would be willing to consider and discuss what level of influence a potential investor would require,provided that this did not include giving up control of the club"
If that policy were to be changed, then the general body of the membership would have to agree to it at an AGM.
Irrelevant. You're putting down one team based on what you think will happen to another.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cymro
Stu, I was merely drawing a paralell. My point is that it's very difficult to successfully run a football club based on a democratic model where the club isn't owned by the chairman and board but instead owned directly by the fans.
Perhaps the most democratic model that might work is the fans electing the board and chairman, who then run the club. But I can't see thousands of fans co-owning and running a club, hence no truly democratic model will work.
I'm not necessarily saying that AFC Wimbledon/FC United/AFC Liverpool etc will fail, merely that their protests will not lead to them getting full control over their club, like some of them think they should.
Anyway, you challenged me on Ebbsfleet rather than the other clubs in your previous post, by saying "I don't think you can call Ebbsfleet "unworkable" because you think it'll pan out that way.". Hence, I was really more talking about Ebbsfleet than the other 'fans clubs'.
Isn't that how all members' clubs operate?Quote:
Originally Posted by Cymro
I don't think you can call it undemocratic as it's effectively the same way as democratic countries operate (government elected by the people run the country).
Yes, and we all know people never moan about the government.......;)
AFC Wimbledon are 3 points clear at the top of the Blue Square South with two games to go. They are away to second placed Hampton & Richmond this weekend. A draw for Wimbledon will all but guarantee their promotion to the Blue Square Premier as they are 13 goals better off on goal difference.
Meanwhile FC United, also with two games to go, lie one point outside the playoff spots in the Northern (Unibond) Premier League.
Both MK Dons and Bury Town, both linked to either fan club, are in the play-off positions of their league Divisions aswell.
I was happy Wimbledon moved to where they are now, they were looking for Virgin terrority for many years. And were a great example of an anti-establishment club. BUt I couldn't support them because of their threat to Dublin.
The team you shouldn't be supporting is MK Dons, not AFC Wimbledon. It was the former Wimbledon owners who made that threat, and followed it through in a way by moving to Milton Keynes. It's got nothing to do with AFCW.
AFC Wimbledon are as good as promoted (3 points and 13 goals ahead of 2nd place with one game left) to the Blue Square Premier so congratulations to them!
FC United just missed out on the play-off spots today. However, as expected AFC Wimbledon have won the Blue Square South.