Source: Twohundred Percent
In amongst all of the filth and fury of this week, one simple truism has remained unchallenged: it has to be like this. Although modern fashion likes to talk of football supporters as if we are “valued customers” or even – God forbid – “stake-holders”, the truth of the matter is that, by and large, we’re not. Customers wouldn’t put up with being treated in the way that football supporters are as a matter of routine. They’d take their business elsewhere. Stake-holders wouldn’t tolerate perpetual hyper-inflation and the implication that, somehow, we owe those that deliver the game to us a debt of gratitude rather than the other way around.
As such, the relationship between a football club and a supporter of a football club might be be more akin to the relationship between a drug dealer and a junkie. They feed our addiction. They charge what they can get away with – and we don’t even know what the upper limit of that pricing policy might be yet – and we grumble, but we still turn out in our millions. If we complain too loudly, there is a reasonable chance that we will simply be cast asunder, in the full knowledge that there are plenty of others that will take our place. We are divided and conquered, beaten into submission. We are treated with such suspicion by the authorities that it is not difficult to start to feel like criminals, even if all we are doing is partaking of a pastime.
Our clubs are administered, broadly speaking, by dolts and fools who chase pots of fools gold at the end of non-existent rainbows, and when the inevitable conclusion of attempting to run something as a business whilst blithely disregarding many of the fundamental principles of running a successful business – rule number one: keep costs under control! – plays out to a the brink of a financial cataclysm, they throw their hands in the air, find someone else to blame and, if they are unable to rescue the train wreck that they have caused, sneak out through the back door. Indeed, such is the brass neck if the sort of person that involves themselves in this sort of behaviour that they will often turn up at another club a few months down the line, full of the same platitudes and empty promises. The administrators, meanwhile, do nothing or next to nothing. Sometimes they are one and the same. Sometimes they are merely in their thrall. The end result remains depressingly familiar and we are told – ad nauseum – that “this is the way that things are”, as if there is some sort of cosmic alignment that places the job lot of the football supporter into a similar territory to the laws of gravity or thermodynamics.
It isn’t, of course, and there is proof all around us. Late last night, FC United of Manchester, the high water mark of the alternative vision of what football clubs in this country could be like, announced what their supporters have been waiting to hear for a considerable amount of time – this club, playing in the Premier Division of the Northern Premier League, six divisions below the gaudy opulence of the Premier League, has reached its target of £1.6m towards building a home of its own in the Moston area of the city of Manchester. The money has been raised through a Community Share scheme, through the club working closely with Co-ops UK. Such schemes are designed to enable co-operative organisations to raise finance from their communities to support development without having to refer back traditional methods of funding such as borrowing from banks. The £1.6m figure was critical for the club, because it was this amount that they had to raise in order to obtain funding through grants for the other £3m required to complete the facility. It is now hoped that work will be able to start on the new ground soon.
As regular readers of this site and those that keep a close eye on non-league football will already be aware, FC United of Manchester have a history of lateral thinking that other football clubs would do well to follow. This is a club that was borne – in part – from disillusionment with football’s status quo and a burning belief that there had to be a better way. To understand the club requires something of a shift of perception. The traditional football supporters’ perspective of winning at all costs has, to a point, been sacrificed to make a club of which its supporters can be proud. It is a football club that is built upon principles that would be considered almost perverse elsewhere. Ticket prices are kept down in order to make their matches as affordable as possible. The supporters trust model of ownership is rigorously managed, and ideas such as slashing season ticket prices but requesting donations from supporters are indicative of a club that will do things differently. Moreover, the atmosphere at Gigg Lane – the clubs home away from home since its formation in 2004 – is unlike anything that would usually be seen or heard at anything the level of football at which they play. It is a truly extraordinary, run by remarkable, committed, passionate people.
In spite of all the bad news, then, we can still find nuggets to celebrate in football. We should be delighted for FC United of Manchester, and we should be awe-struck at their achievement in raising this amount of money. An enormous amount of hard work has gone into getting this money raised, and we can say with a degree of certainty that it has been raised by the right people, for the right reasons and for a project that couldn’t be in safer hands. One journey has ended, but another one will begin when the shovel hits the ground at the site of the new ground for the first time and work starts on building this club’s future. We’ve said it before and we’ll say it again – it couldn’t have happened to a nicer bunch of people – living, breathing proof that no, it doesn’t have to be like that.
Showing posts with label Twohundred Percent. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Twohundred Percent. Show all posts
Sunday, March 18, 2012
Friday, October 28, 2011
Second Time Lucky: A New Home For FC United Of Manchester, This Time?
Source: Twohundred Percent
This time. Perhaps this time. FC United of Manchester have been once bitten and can certainly be forgiven for being twice shy over their planning application for a new ground of their own, to be built in the Moston area of the city. Their previous attempt to do exactly this in Newton Heath ended in failure after government cuts slashed their hopes, but this time there should be no such concerns. This afternoon, Manchester City Council approved their planning application for the new ground, which will also house a community centre and training facilities, and the well of hope amongst their support base, which had been tempered by their previous disappointment, can begin to hope again.
In the attempt to build a football ground near a residential area, the club ran into vocal opposition, which was represented at this afternoon’s meeting. Attempts to reach out to this group failed and it was rumoured that the “no” group had been using tactics to secure signatures for a petition which may have been considered underhand. If true, this was probably a mistake on the part of the campaigners to adopt this tactic. It certainly gave the impression of a group willing to descend to whatever level they could in order to win this debate on points rather than relying of depending on the merits of their case.
As things turned out, it was an irrelevance. The Charity Commission, who had the final say over a covenant held over the land, confirmed that they had no objections to the proposed development. There had been a feeling of optimism amongst the supporters of the club that their case was water-tight, but the celebrations didn’t start until the announcement was made and for some the champagne may even remain on ice until a spade hits the ground at the site and the foundations begin to be dug out. It is also worth pointing out that the club doesn’t yet have all of the money in place to complete the construction of the ground. As such, the innovative Community Share Scheme, which has already raised around £1.5m, needs to step up another gear.
The good news for the club is that it has the volunteer base to be able to achieve this. If there is one thing that FC United of Manchester represents more than anything else, it is that people can and will join together for a cause that they believe in, and that they can create a football club of which they can be proud. There have been obstacles in their way at every turn since their formation in 2005, of which the end of their hopes of securing a home of their own at Ten Acres Lane was possibly the biggest of all. The club has, however, continued to work diligently and competently towards securing their new ground and today’s decision is an absolute vindication of all of the work that they have put in over the last few years or so.
There may be some that are wondering this evening why this new ground is so important for this club. After all, they have been ground-sharing at Gigg Lane, a ground with excellent facilities, for the last six and a half years. Setting aside the fact that Gigg Lane will always be somebody else’s home, there is a practical imperative for the club to build a home of its own as well. It costs the club in excess of £100,000 per year to rent the ground for league matches, and they also occasionally have to move matches to other venues – such as Stalybridge Celtic’s Bower Fold – when Bury need to use it. In spite of regularly achieving excellent crowds for the level at which they play, they have been struggling financially in recent years in no small part because they will not compromise on a founding principle of keeping ticket prices as affordable as they can. The future prosperity and wellbeing of the club was in no small part dependent upon today’s decision.
For now, there is little else to say other than congratulations to all those at the club that have put in such a tremendous effort to make this project happen. It is also to be hoped that previous objections and disagreements are set to one side, and that the club does everything possible within its power to demonstrate to objectors what benefits this venue can bring to their neighbourhood. There is no reason whatsoever to believe that this won’t happen – this is a unique football club, one which will ensure that it maximises every opportunity that the new facility offers them. If the last six years or so have been an adventure for those that have given their all for this club, then the future this evening looks considerably brighter. And it couldn’t have happened to a nicer bunch of people.
By Ian
This time. Perhaps this time. FC United of Manchester have been once bitten and can certainly be forgiven for being twice shy over their planning application for a new ground of their own, to be built in the Moston area of the city. Their previous attempt to do exactly this in Newton Heath ended in failure after government cuts slashed their hopes, but this time there should be no such concerns. This afternoon, Manchester City Council approved their planning application for the new ground, which will also house a community centre and training facilities, and the well of hope amongst their support base, which had been tempered by their previous disappointment, can begin to hope again.
In the attempt to build a football ground near a residential area, the club ran into vocal opposition, which was represented at this afternoon’s meeting. Attempts to reach out to this group failed and it was rumoured that the “no” group had been using tactics to secure signatures for a petition which may have been considered underhand. If true, this was probably a mistake on the part of the campaigners to adopt this tactic. It certainly gave the impression of a group willing to descend to whatever level they could in order to win this debate on points rather than relying of depending on the merits of their case.
As things turned out, it was an irrelevance. The Charity Commission, who had the final say over a covenant held over the land, confirmed that they had no objections to the proposed development. There had been a feeling of optimism amongst the supporters of the club that their case was water-tight, but the celebrations didn’t start until the announcement was made and for some the champagne may even remain on ice until a spade hits the ground at the site and the foundations begin to be dug out. It is also worth pointing out that the club doesn’t yet have all of the money in place to complete the construction of the ground. As such, the innovative Community Share Scheme, which has already raised around £1.5m, needs to step up another gear.
The good news for the club is that it has the volunteer base to be able to achieve this. If there is one thing that FC United of Manchester represents more than anything else, it is that people can and will join together for a cause that they believe in, and that they can create a football club of which they can be proud. There have been obstacles in their way at every turn since their formation in 2005, of which the end of their hopes of securing a home of their own at Ten Acres Lane was possibly the biggest of all. The club has, however, continued to work diligently and competently towards securing their new ground and today’s decision is an absolute vindication of all of the work that they have put in over the last few years or so.
There may be some that are wondering this evening why this new ground is so important for this club. After all, they have been ground-sharing at Gigg Lane, a ground with excellent facilities, for the last six and a half years. Setting aside the fact that Gigg Lane will always be somebody else’s home, there is a practical imperative for the club to build a home of its own as well. It costs the club in excess of £100,000 per year to rent the ground for league matches, and they also occasionally have to move matches to other venues – such as Stalybridge Celtic’s Bower Fold – when Bury need to use it. In spite of regularly achieving excellent crowds for the level at which they play, they have been struggling financially in recent years in no small part because they will not compromise on a founding principle of keeping ticket prices as affordable as they can. The future prosperity and wellbeing of the club was in no small part dependent upon today’s decision.
For now, there is little else to say other than congratulations to all those at the club that have put in such a tremendous effort to make this project happen. It is also to be hoped that previous objections and disagreements are set to one side, and that the club does everything possible within its power to demonstrate to objectors what benefits this venue can bring to their neighbourhood. There is no reason whatsoever to believe that this won’t happen – this is a unique football club, one which will ensure that it maximises every opportunity that the new facility offers them. If the last six years or so have been an adventure for those that have given their all for this club, then the future this evening looks considerably brighter. And it couldn’t have happened to a nicer bunch of people.
By Ian
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
FC United’s FA Cup Dilemma
Source: Twohundred Percent
When the dust settled after a weekend of FA Cup Fourth Qualifying Round matches that were watched by over 40,000 people, one tie from the First Round draw stood out from the rest: Rochdale vs FC United of Manchester. It could hardly more apposite that FCUM earned their first appearance in the competition proper of the FA Cup in this of all months. The name of Manchester United has been dragged through the mud by the Wayne Rooney transfer debacle – an event that may have woken many up to the colossal lack of soul at the heart of Premier League football. The protest, meanwhile, goes on at Gigg Lane but such success brings new debates to be had for a club that is a protest against much of what is wrong with modern football.
It is hardly surprising that a cross-town derby featuring a club that is a story in itself should be attractive to television companies, and so it was that Rochdale vs FC United of Manchester was selected as the Friday night match to be shown live on ESPN at the end of next week. For many FCUM supporters, this created something of a dilemma. The concept of “3pm Saturdays” has become something of a rallying call for the club over the years, a protest against the sale of football’s soul to television companies. In December 2007, the club urged its supporters to boycott their Boxing Day league match at Curzon Ashton after the kick-off time was moved to lunchtime against the wishes of both competing clubs in order that it may be shown live over the internet.
What, some might wonder, is the difference this time around? Is the only difference between this and the Curzon match the amount of money being offered, does the soul of FCUM have a price? The answer to this is less straightforward than a simple denounciation of the club selling its supporters an principles down the river, of course, but it won’t stop many from trying. In the case of the Rochdale match, FCUM had the option to turn down the television money and insist that the match was played on the Saturday afternoon of the First Round weekend if they wished. However, the trust board didn’t have long to make a decision and it was agreed with Rochdale that prices would be reduced to a very affordable £10 and that the game would take place on the Friday night. It’s not ideal and it has not pleased all of their supporters, but sometimes compromise rather than intransigence is the prudent way to run a show, and this isn’t just about the money. It’s about the biggest match in the club’s history and about having the opportunity to show their club off on a national stage in way that not many members of the Evostik League Premier Division will ever get to.
The protest against televised football was more nuanced than just being against televised football and in favour of kicking off at three o’clock on a Saturday afternoon. It was about supporters, en masse, being inconvenienced upon the whims of a television company. The Guardian chose to show up what it considered to be inconsistency in the club’s policies in its Fiver column this afternoon, but they chose to overlook that both FCUM and Curzon objected to the match in December 2007 and that this match was moved to a time that was enormously inconvenient to supporters of both clubs for no return. FCUM are going to to get this sort of nonsense in increasing measures should they become more successful. There will be plenty that will seek to deny them any right to any sort of commercial activity and mis-quoting the club’s constitution, as if they alone should put their principles ahead of the well-being of their club. That this should even need to be stated about a club that has any principles at all at a time when the moral stock of English football could hardly be said to be lower, however, seems surprising to say the least.
So, the match will go ahead on Friday 5th November and some people will probably use this as a stick to beat them over the head with. None of this is particularly surprising. What we should pause to remember, however, is that FCUM supporters, should enough of them be sufficiently outraged by the decision that the democratically elected Trust Board that runs their club has made on their behalf. It was undoubtedly not an easy decision for them to make, but it was a decision that had to be made exceptionally quickly and, if enough supporters do feel strongly enough over this matter to wish to stand against the existing board at the next elections, they can do. That’s how democracy work. It seems unlikely, however, that General Manager Andy Walsh will be replaced any time soon. Most importantly of all, a strong, articulate debate is being had amongst the supporters of the club itself and, if it sees fit, a resolution to the club’s constitution could be passed to state that they should never get involved in such a venture again. Their club, as they say themselves, their rules.
When the dust settled after a weekend of FA Cup Fourth Qualifying Round matches that were watched by over 40,000 people, one tie from the First Round draw stood out from the rest: Rochdale vs FC United of Manchester. It could hardly more apposite that FCUM earned their first appearance in the competition proper of the FA Cup in this of all months. The name of Manchester United has been dragged through the mud by the Wayne Rooney transfer debacle – an event that may have woken many up to the colossal lack of soul at the heart of Premier League football. The protest, meanwhile, goes on at Gigg Lane but such success brings new debates to be had for a club that is a protest against much of what is wrong with modern football.
It is hardly surprising that a cross-town derby featuring a club that is a story in itself should be attractive to television companies, and so it was that Rochdale vs FC United of Manchester was selected as the Friday night match to be shown live on ESPN at the end of next week. For many FCUM supporters, this created something of a dilemma. The concept of “3pm Saturdays” has become something of a rallying call for the club over the years, a protest against the sale of football’s soul to television companies. In December 2007, the club urged its supporters to boycott their Boxing Day league match at Curzon Ashton after the kick-off time was moved to lunchtime against the wishes of both competing clubs in order that it may be shown live over the internet.
What, some might wonder, is the difference this time around? Is the only difference between this and the Curzon match the amount of money being offered, does the soul of FCUM have a price? The answer to this is less straightforward than a simple denounciation of the club selling its supporters an principles down the river, of course, but it won’t stop many from trying. In the case of the Rochdale match, FCUM had the option to turn down the television money and insist that the match was played on the Saturday afternoon of the First Round weekend if they wished. However, the trust board didn’t have long to make a decision and it was agreed with Rochdale that prices would be reduced to a very affordable £10 and that the game would take place on the Friday night. It’s not ideal and it has not pleased all of their supporters, but sometimes compromise rather than intransigence is the prudent way to run a show, and this isn’t just about the money. It’s about the biggest match in the club’s history and about having the opportunity to show their club off on a national stage in way that not many members of the Evostik League Premier Division will ever get to.
The protest against televised football was more nuanced than just being against televised football and in favour of kicking off at three o’clock on a Saturday afternoon. It was about supporters, en masse, being inconvenienced upon the whims of a television company. The Guardian chose to show up what it considered to be inconsistency in the club’s policies in its Fiver column this afternoon, but they chose to overlook that both FCUM and Curzon objected to the match in December 2007 and that this match was moved to a time that was enormously inconvenient to supporters of both clubs for no return. FCUM are going to to get this sort of nonsense in increasing measures should they become more successful. There will be plenty that will seek to deny them any right to any sort of commercial activity and mis-quoting the club’s constitution, as if they alone should put their principles ahead of the well-being of their club. That this should even need to be stated about a club that has any principles at all at a time when the moral stock of English football could hardly be said to be lower, however, seems surprising to say the least.
So, the match will go ahead on Friday 5th November and some people will probably use this as a stick to beat them over the head with. None of this is particularly surprising. What we should pause to remember, however, is that FCUM supporters, should enough of them be sufficiently outraged by the decision that the democratically elected Trust Board that runs their club has made on their behalf. It was undoubtedly not an easy decision for them to make, but it was a decision that had to be made exceptionally quickly and, if enough supporters do feel strongly enough over this matter to wish to stand against the existing board at the next elections, they can do. That’s how democracy work. It seems unlikely, however, that General Manager Andy Walsh will be replaced any time soon. Most importantly of all, a strong, articulate debate is being had amongst the supporters of the club itself and, if it sees fit, a resolution to the club’s constitution could be passed to state that they should never get involved in such a venture again. Their club, as they say themselves, their rules.
Saturday, September 11, 2010
FC United’s Ten Acres Love Story Comes Of Age
Source: Twohundred Percent
On Wednesday night, FC United of Manchester lost 4-1 to Bradford Park Avenue in the Northern Premier League. It was a bitterly disappointing result against a team with whom they have built up something of a rivalry over the last couple of years, but as most that support FC United are concerned it’s all about the long game and this is a game that they are still well-placed to win. A couple of years ago, Bradford’s owner Bob Blackburn announced ambitious (to the point of absurd) plans for his club to move from their distinctly unsatisfactory Horsfall Stadium to a new, 20,000 capacity stadium. Nothing ever came of those plans, but FC United have been getting on with the job of doing what Blackburn has been unable thus far to manage for his club – identifying a site for a new ground and getting the plans in place to actually build it.
The plans were revealed to club members several weeks ago but were made public at the end of last week, and very impressive they are as well. The new ground will be built at Ten Acres Lane in Newton Heath, the original birthplace of Manchester United. The 5,000 capacity ground will be true to their commitment to their local community, and will also function as what the club hopes will be a “multi-function community space”. Mas que un football ground, if you like. The plan has the backing of the local council, and the club has stated that one of the most important functions of it is that “the site needs to work for 365 days a year and not just for the thirty odd days that we play matches”.
Recognition of this as an extra revenue stream is something that many clubs often seem to overlook. An average football ground of any size only really comes to life on match days and. although in recent years clubs have made strides towards trying to maximise their revenue on non-match days, there are still a large number of grounds that sit empty for twelve or thirteen days out of fourteen throughout the winter and get used even less during the summer. It obvious to anybody looking in from the outside that operating a “profit” of any sort is as far from the raison d’être of FC United of Manchester as it is possible to be, but increased revenue will obviously increase the club’s stability and if it can be tied to benefiting the local community then it is difficult to see how anyone will lose out once it is finished and open.
In the case of Ten Acres Lane, it seems likely that getting the ground built in the first place might prove to be the biggest hurdle that has to be overcome. It is expected to cost £5m, of which the club estimates it can find £1.5m in grants, which leaves £3.5m left to find. It has had a “Ground Development Fund” open for a couple of years, and this has already raised just short of £300,000, but the club itself estimates that it needs £500,000 in order to actually be able to undertake to start building work. No-one, of course, will benefit if the club over-stretches itself but what we know about FC United of Manchester is that none of those in charge of the running of the club are going to do anything that will seriously impact upon the clubs existence. They are in safe hands in the form of the club’s Trust Board.
With £3.5m to find, the obvious thing to do would be to seek lending from financial institutions, but the club believes that there is a viable alternative to this in the form of Community Shares. These will be offered by the club for a minimum amount of £200 and it is hoped that they will offer investors a small return, but financial gain isn’t the aim of the exercise. The aim is to find the money without getting sucked into the interest charges and administration costs of a “traditional” financial deal – to find another way of getting this built without sacrificing the soul of the club to the discredited world of finance. No extra voting rights will come to those that join the scheme – the club will remain one member, one vote – and, in this respect, nothing at the club will change. The opportunity to demonstrate that it can be done, however, is a massive one.
We have noted on this site before that FC United are financially hamstrung by the cost of their groundshare at Bury’s Gigg Lane, which is a constant drain on their finances and means that, no matter how impressive their attendance figures continue to look, their club is unable to spend the money that many might expect that they could afford on players. The opportunity to break out of this particular straitjacket could go on to see them fulfil their potential as a club. The next stage is to go on to the planning process, and it is hoped that they could be in their new ground in around three years’ time. What we can say for certain is that if there is any club that can make this happen it is this one and that if they can provide a template for another way of making this sort of project happen, their decisions and initiative will have benefited the whole of football. We look forward to visiting them at their new home when it is ready.
More information on the Community Shares initiative is available here.
Further information on the new ground, along with artists impressions of it, is available here.
On Wednesday night, FC United of Manchester lost 4-1 to Bradford Park Avenue in the Northern Premier League. It was a bitterly disappointing result against a team with whom they have built up something of a rivalry over the last couple of years, but as most that support FC United are concerned it’s all about the long game and this is a game that they are still well-placed to win. A couple of years ago, Bradford’s owner Bob Blackburn announced ambitious (to the point of absurd) plans for his club to move from their distinctly unsatisfactory Horsfall Stadium to a new, 20,000 capacity stadium. Nothing ever came of those plans, but FC United have been getting on with the job of doing what Blackburn has been unable thus far to manage for his club – identifying a site for a new ground and getting the plans in place to actually build it.
The plans were revealed to club members several weeks ago but were made public at the end of last week, and very impressive they are as well. The new ground will be built at Ten Acres Lane in Newton Heath, the original birthplace of Manchester United. The 5,000 capacity ground will be true to their commitment to their local community, and will also function as what the club hopes will be a “multi-function community space”. Mas que un football ground, if you like. The plan has the backing of the local council, and the club has stated that one of the most important functions of it is that “the site needs to work for 365 days a year and not just for the thirty odd days that we play matches”.
Recognition of this as an extra revenue stream is something that many clubs often seem to overlook. An average football ground of any size only really comes to life on match days and. although in recent years clubs have made strides towards trying to maximise their revenue on non-match days, there are still a large number of grounds that sit empty for twelve or thirteen days out of fourteen throughout the winter and get used even less during the summer. It obvious to anybody looking in from the outside that operating a “profit” of any sort is as far from the raison d’être of FC United of Manchester as it is possible to be, but increased revenue will obviously increase the club’s stability and if it can be tied to benefiting the local community then it is difficult to see how anyone will lose out once it is finished and open.
In the case of Ten Acres Lane, it seems likely that getting the ground built in the first place might prove to be the biggest hurdle that has to be overcome. It is expected to cost £5m, of which the club estimates it can find £1.5m in grants, which leaves £3.5m left to find. It has had a “Ground Development Fund” open for a couple of years, and this has already raised just short of £300,000, but the club itself estimates that it needs £500,000 in order to actually be able to undertake to start building work. No-one, of course, will benefit if the club over-stretches itself but what we know about FC United of Manchester is that none of those in charge of the running of the club are going to do anything that will seriously impact upon the clubs existence. They are in safe hands in the form of the club’s Trust Board.
With £3.5m to find, the obvious thing to do would be to seek lending from financial institutions, but the club believes that there is a viable alternative to this in the form of Community Shares. These will be offered by the club for a minimum amount of £200 and it is hoped that they will offer investors a small return, but financial gain isn’t the aim of the exercise. The aim is to find the money without getting sucked into the interest charges and administration costs of a “traditional” financial deal – to find another way of getting this built without sacrificing the soul of the club to the discredited world of finance. No extra voting rights will come to those that join the scheme – the club will remain one member, one vote – and, in this respect, nothing at the club will change. The opportunity to demonstrate that it can be done, however, is a massive one.
We have noted on this site before that FC United are financially hamstrung by the cost of their groundshare at Bury’s Gigg Lane, which is a constant drain on their finances and means that, no matter how impressive their attendance figures continue to look, their club is unable to spend the money that many might expect that they could afford on players. The opportunity to break out of this particular straitjacket could go on to see them fulfil their potential as a club. The next stage is to go on to the planning process, and it is hoped that they could be in their new ground in around three years’ time. What we can say for certain is that if there is any club that can make this happen it is this one and that if they can provide a template for another way of making this sort of project happen, their decisions and initiative will have benefited the whole of football. We look forward to visiting them at their new home when it is ready.
More information on the Community Shares initiative is available here.
Further information on the new ground, along with artists impressions of it, is available here.
Friday, March 26, 2010
FC United Coming Home?
Source: Twohundred Percent
Posted by Chris on Mar 26, 2010 in Latest, Non-League
Someone in FC United’s offices at Hope Mill in Manchester is very good at burying bad news. On Wednesday night the team suffered their heaviest ever defeat, 1-5, handed out by rivals, league leaders, and all round terrible bastards Bradford Park Avenue. Supporters could be forgiven for waking up Thursday morning and feeling a little bit glum.
But instead of long faces, hangdog expressions, and a forum full of idiots clogging the place up with their ill-targeted rants, there was a collective expulsion of noise, a primal belch that sounded a lot like “OHMYGODOHMYGODOHMYGOD!”
Rumours had been flying for a long time over the proposed location of FC United’s new ground. According to cabbies and internet railway enthusiasts, the club would eventually find itself playing in Newton Heath, the spiritual and original home of Manchester United. Each new rumour sent fans scurrying on to Google maps, surveying the area for available land. But due to the nature of these things, no official announcement could be made.
Until Thursday morning.
It was a joyous morning. The sort of morning that can clear your fuzzy head and make you forget what a considerable beating you got the night before. In my inbox sat an email from ‘the FC United good news dept.’ with the subject ‘FCUM ANNOUNCE LOCATION OF PROPOSED STADIUM’. Just like that. It was in uppercase as it’s not the sort of news you can say quietly. I tried saying it quietly to the girlfriend but ended up bellowing it full blast in to her face. She somehow maintained her sang froid and asked me if I wanted owt from the shops. I didn’t.
It turns out the cabbies and internet railway enthusiasts were right all along. The proposed site is set to be in Newton Heath, less than half a mile away from Bank Street, Manchester United (then Newton Heath LYR)’s first ever ground. The site is a council owned sports centre on Ten Acres Lane. And while the links to the history of Manchester United are romantic for a team primarily run for and by Manchester United fans, it’s all just a beautiful coincidence.
According to FC United General Manager Andy Walsh, the primary concern was to have a ground within three miles of the city centre. Not only to make the prospect of attending a game more inviting to local people, but to ensure the club has a community to support. It’s a core belief of the club, locked in to the club constitution: “The club will develop strong links with the local community and strive to be accessible to all, discriminating against none.” At the same time that FC United fans were receiving the good news, leaflets were being posted through letterboxes in the Ten Acres Lane area letting the population know that this was as much for them, as it was for us.
The ground itself is to be a 5000 capacity, with seven to eight hundred seats, costing in the region of £3.5million. It’s a modest size, but a realistic one. Should FC United ever reach Conference National level or above, it doesn’t take a Roald Dahl-like imagination to see the place full. In the Northern Premier League, stuck out in Bury, crowds have leveled out at the 2000 mark. But the record attendance remains the 6023 that saw the North West Counties League division 2 trophy presented to the team in 2006. Aside from the ground, there are to be sports facilities for the local area, an all weather 3G pitch, changing rooms, sports and community hall, and whatever else it is felt is needed. Walsh was keen to stress that this side of things was a blank page, and that local residents had as much a say in what they want there as anyone else.
The giddiness was temporarily punctuated by the reality that this is only a proposed site. That planning permission and the consent of the locals is still required to make this a goer. But when have football fans ever let fact get in the way of a good goon? Regardless of future politicking, this is the first important step to building FC United a new home. Now there’s just the small case of raising the £3.5 million needed to complete the dream.
Posted by Chris on Mar 26, 2010 in Latest, Non-League
Someone in FC United’s offices at Hope Mill in Manchester is very good at burying bad news. On Wednesday night the team suffered their heaviest ever defeat, 1-5, handed out by rivals, league leaders, and all round terrible bastards Bradford Park Avenue. Supporters could be forgiven for waking up Thursday morning and feeling a little bit glum.
But instead of long faces, hangdog expressions, and a forum full of idiots clogging the place up with their ill-targeted rants, there was a collective expulsion of noise, a primal belch that sounded a lot like “OHMYGODOHMYGODOHMYGOD!”
Rumours had been flying for a long time over the proposed location of FC United’s new ground. According to cabbies and internet railway enthusiasts, the club would eventually find itself playing in Newton Heath, the spiritual and original home of Manchester United. Each new rumour sent fans scurrying on to Google maps, surveying the area for available land. But due to the nature of these things, no official announcement could be made.
Until Thursday morning.
It was a joyous morning. The sort of morning that can clear your fuzzy head and make you forget what a considerable beating you got the night before. In my inbox sat an email from ‘the FC United good news dept.’ with the subject ‘FCUM ANNOUNCE LOCATION OF PROPOSED STADIUM’. Just like that. It was in uppercase as it’s not the sort of news you can say quietly. I tried saying it quietly to the girlfriend but ended up bellowing it full blast in to her face. She somehow maintained her sang froid and asked me if I wanted owt from the shops. I didn’t.
It turns out the cabbies and internet railway enthusiasts were right all along. The proposed site is set to be in Newton Heath, less than half a mile away from Bank Street, Manchester United (then Newton Heath LYR)’s first ever ground. The site is a council owned sports centre on Ten Acres Lane. And while the links to the history of Manchester United are romantic for a team primarily run for and by Manchester United fans, it’s all just a beautiful coincidence.
According to FC United General Manager Andy Walsh, the primary concern was to have a ground within three miles of the city centre. Not only to make the prospect of attending a game more inviting to local people, but to ensure the club has a community to support. It’s a core belief of the club, locked in to the club constitution: “The club will develop strong links with the local community and strive to be accessible to all, discriminating against none.” At the same time that FC United fans were receiving the good news, leaflets were being posted through letterboxes in the Ten Acres Lane area letting the population know that this was as much for them, as it was for us.
The ground itself is to be a 5000 capacity, with seven to eight hundred seats, costing in the region of £3.5million. It’s a modest size, but a realistic one. Should FC United ever reach Conference National level or above, it doesn’t take a Roald Dahl-like imagination to see the place full. In the Northern Premier League, stuck out in Bury, crowds have leveled out at the 2000 mark. But the record attendance remains the 6023 that saw the North West Counties League division 2 trophy presented to the team in 2006. Aside from the ground, there are to be sports facilities for the local area, an all weather 3G pitch, changing rooms, sports and community hall, and whatever else it is felt is needed. Walsh was keen to stress that this side of things was a blank page, and that local residents had as much a say in what they want there as anyone else.
The giddiness was temporarily punctuated by the reality that this is only a proposed site. That planning permission and the consent of the locals is still required to make this a goer. But when have football fans ever let fact get in the way of a good goon? Regardless of future politicking, this is the first important step to building FC United a new home. Now there’s just the small case of raising the £3.5 million needed to complete the dream.
Monday, March 01, 2010
Match Of The Week: FC United of Manchester 3-3 North Ferriby United
Source: Twohundred Percent
The concern that had been aired during the week was that the “Beyond The Debt” rally could be scuppered by the weather. As the tenants at Bury’s Gigg Lane, FC United of Manchester suffer more postponements than most but on Saurday, even though the pitch is in a poor condition, the predicted rain has managed to hold off for long enough to ensure that the game goes ahead. In an exceptionally tight Unibond League Premier Division, FC United have gone from being relegation contenders to being in a position to be able to view the play-offs on the horizon. Five straight wins have taken them into the top half of the table.
Today, though, lies a big challenge. North Ferriby United survive on crowds that are roughly one-tenth the size of the crowd here today, but they are in fourth place in the Unibond League Premier Division with games in hand on all three of the teams above them in the table. They seem likely to grab one of the play-off places and could yet win the Unibond League championship this season. Within five minutes of the start of the match, they have taken the lead. United defender Ludovic Quistin and Davidson tussle for the ball on the right-hand side of the penalty area. It seems that the referee may to penalty to North Ferriby but Quiston wraps his foot around the ball and rolls it wide of Sam Ashton and a foot over the line before it can be scrambled away.
Ferriby are strong and well organised, and seem likely to be able to repel anything that the home side throw at them. FCUM’s clearest chances of the first half fall in quick succession to Jerome Wright and Ben Deegan. Wright’s shot is well blocked by the Ferriby goalkeeper, who recovers excellently to stop the follow up from Deegan. Two minutes from half-time, though, Ferriby extend their lead. A ball down the right hand side is perfectly controlled by Russell Fry, who flicks the ball back across the goal for Mark Whitehouse to touch the ball in from close range to double their lead. The half-time whistle blew with FCUM facing their first league defeat since the middle of December.
Whatever manager Karl Marginson says to the players during the half-time break seems to have the desired effect upon the players. FCUM start the second half with renewed purpose and vigour and, for the first time in the match start to properly test the visiting defence. Some clumsy defending sees the ball poked wide to Phil Marsh, and Marsh sends over an inch perfect cross that Deegan can jump for and head comfortably wide of Wilson to pull the score back to 2-1. With the home side now well in control of the game, an equaliser starts to feel inevitable and it isn’t long before it comes. A corner from the right hand side is swung over towards the near post and defender David Chadwick hurls himself at the ball, heading it powerfully into the net to make the score 2-2.
Ferriby are, however, quickly allowed a route back into the match and after seventy-one minutes they retake the lead. The FCUM defence, largely untested in the second half, seems to be half asleep as Davidson gets some space on the right hand side and crosses for Chris Bolder to head in from close range at the far post. Still though, FCUM push forward in the hope of an equaliser and when another cross from the right had side is deflected away from Ben Deegan by a defender’s arm, the referee is quick to point to the penalty spot. Phil Marsh took the resulting penalty, but his shot is a poor one and was comfortably saved by Wilson. With eleven minutes to play, though, history repeats itself. Carlos Roca bursts into the penalty area and is clumsily tripped by Kevin Larvin. Larvin in sent off for his troubles, and this time Ben Deegan makes no mistake, sending Wilson the wrong way to bring the sides level again.
With a one man advantage and late in the game on a heavy, difficult pitch, it would have been unsurprising to see FCUM go on to win the match, but they fail to fully take advantage of their extra man, and even this advantage melts away when Rob Nugent is sent off with four minutes left to play after picking up a second yellow card. At full-time, then, there is a feeling of mixed emotion for the home supporters, who may be relieved at having picked up a point against one of the best teams in their division after having been two goals down at half-time yet still disappointed at the fact that, level at 3-3 and with a (albeit brief) one man advantage, the team couldn’t quite find within themselves to go on and win the match. Still, though, the unbeaten run continues and small possibility of a play-off place at the end of the season will remain just about in view as long as this run continues.
There is really no link to be had between the quality of football to be seen in a match and the notion of the supporter ownership of football clubs. If there was, though, this would have been a pretty good advertisement for it, with six goals, two sendings off, two penalties and a comeback from what seemed like an almost impossible position to rescue a point and preserve an unbeaten run. And all for an entrance fee of £7.50. As prices continue to rise at Old Trafford, Gigg Lane might find that there is a bit more interest in FC United of Manchester matches if this level of entertainment can be maintained through to the end of the season.
The concern that had been aired during the week was that the “Beyond The Debt” rally could be scuppered by the weather. As the tenants at Bury’s Gigg Lane, FC United of Manchester suffer more postponements than most but on Saurday, even though the pitch is in a poor condition, the predicted rain has managed to hold off for long enough to ensure that the game goes ahead. In an exceptionally tight Unibond League Premier Division, FC United have gone from being relegation contenders to being in a position to be able to view the play-offs on the horizon. Five straight wins have taken them into the top half of the table.
Today, though, lies a big challenge. North Ferriby United survive on crowds that are roughly one-tenth the size of the crowd here today, but they are in fourth place in the Unibond League Premier Division with games in hand on all three of the teams above them in the table. They seem likely to grab one of the play-off places and could yet win the Unibond League championship this season. Within five minutes of the start of the match, they have taken the lead. United defender Ludovic Quistin and Davidson tussle for the ball on the right-hand side of the penalty area. It seems that the referee may to penalty to North Ferriby but Quiston wraps his foot around the ball and rolls it wide of Sam Ashton and a foot over the line before it can be scrambled away.
Ferriby are strong and well organised, and seem likely to be able to repel anything that the home side throw at them. FCUM’s clearest chances of the first half fall in quick succession to Jerome Wright and Ben Deegan. Wright’s shot is well blocked by the Ferriby goalkeeper, who recovers excellently to stop the follow up from Deegan. Two minutes from half-time, though, Ferriby extend their lead. A ball down the right hand side is perfectly controlled by Russell Fry, who flicks the ball back across the goal for Mark Whitehouse to touch the ball in from close range to double their lead. The half-time whistle blew with FCUM facing their first league defeat since the middle of December.
Whatever manager Karl Marginson says to the players during the half-time break seems to have the desired effect upon the players. FCUM start the second half with renewed purpose and vigour and, for the first time in the match start to properly test the visiting defence. Some clumsy defending sees the ball poked wide to Phil Marsh, and Marsh sends over an inch perfect cross that Deegan can jump for and head comfortably wide of Wilson to pull the score back to 2-1. With the home side now well in control of the game, an equaliser starts to feel inevitable and it isn’t long before it comes. A corner from the right hand side is swung over towards the near post and defender David Chadwick hurls himself at the ball, heading it powerfully into the net to make the score 2-2.
Ferriby are, however, quickly allowed a route back into the match and after seventy-one minutes they retake the lead. The FCUM defence, largely untested in the second half, seems to be half asleep as Davidson gets some space on the right hand side and crosses for Chris Bolder to head in from close range at the far post. Still though, FCUM push forward in the hope of an equaliser and when another cross from the right had side is deflected away from Ben Deegan by a defender’s arm, the referee is quick to point to the penalty spot. Phil Marsh took the resulting penalty, but his shot is a poor one and was comfortably saved by Wilson. With eleven minutes to play, though, history repeats itself. Carlos Roca bursts into the penalty area and is clumsily tripped by Kevin Larvin. Larvin in sent off for his troubles, and this time Ben Deegan makes no mistake, sending Wilson the wrong way to bring the sides level again.
With a one man advantage and late in the game on a heavy, difficult pitch, it would have been unsurprising to see FCUM go on to win the match, but they fail to fully take advantage of their extra man, and even this advantage melts away when Rob Nugent is sent off with four minutes left to play after picking up a second yellow card. At full-time, then, there is a feeling of mixed emotion for the home supporters, who may be relieved at having picked up a point against one of the best teams in their division after having been two goals down at half-time yet still disappointed at the fact that, level at 3-3 and with a (albeit brief) one man advantage, the team couldn’t quite find within themselves to go on and win the match. Still, though, the unbeaten run continues and small possibility of a play-off place at the end of the season will remain just about in view as long as this run continues.
There is really no link to be had between the quality of football to be seen in a match and the notion of the supporter ownership of football clubs. If there was, though, this would have been a pretty good advertisement for it, with six goals, two sendings off, two penalties and a comeback from what seemed like an almost impossible position to rescue a point and preserve an unbeaten run. And all for an entrance fee of £7.50. As prices continue to rise at Old Trafford, Gigg Lane might find that there is a bit more interest in FC United of Manchester matches if this level of entertainment can be maintained through to the end of the season.
Beyond The Debt – Are You Going To Be A Part Of The Solution?
Source: Twohundred Percent
It was standing room only in the social club at Gigg Lane, Bury on Saturday lunchtime for the “Beyond The Debt” rally as a crowd of hundreds watched an impressive array of those in the know explain that the time for debate on the ownership of football clubs is coming to an end. We seem now to be entering a different time. A time when action is required. A time in which shrugging your shoulders and muttering that, “well, my club is alright” is no longer enough. When opening speaker and rally chair Andy Walsh from FC United of Manchester spoke, he talked of the rivalries between supporters of football clubs being an artificial construct which masked the true enemies of football supporters – the people that run the game itself.
Malcolm Clarke of the Football Supporters Federation was up next, offering a bleak insight into the world of the Football Association Council, an organisation in which two of the one hundred and fourteen members are women, two are from ethnic minorities and, astonishingly, just seven are under the age of fifty. Clarke spoken of his grandchildren and his desire for them to have football clubs to watch, something that coul have seemed unthinkable several years ago but is now something that is starting to raise its head as a possibility for the future. The fundamental issue that the game has to address is the sustainability of its financial model, which, currently, is practically non-existent.
Walsh had already made reference to a letter in the Guardian from a Portsmouth supporter stating that the spirit of Portsmouth Football Club will survive even if the worst happens to the current incarnation of the company that runs the club. Barry Dewy from Pompey Trust spoke of the madness that has engulfed his club over the last twelve months and of the action that is now required to ensure that, even if the worst happens to the current incarnation. They are still treating the ten per cent offered to them by Sulaiman Al-Fahim with a degree of suspicion, but the high take up rate for membership of the trust indicates that, no matter what happens in the future to Portsmouth FC, football in the city will continue, somehow and somewhere.
One occasional criticism of football supporters used to be that, while they criticised those that ran the game, they couldn’t offer an alternative to the status quo. When they did offer an alternative, it was claimed that this non-profit alternative couldn’t work at bigger clubs. The need to counter every argument that is put in the way of this movement remains, and Stuart Dykes, a fan worker from the German club Schalke 04, makes the argument that anybody that believes that supporter ownership of clubs can’t work should come to Germany to see clear evidence to the contrary. Clubs are owned under the “fifty plus one” rule, which means that fifty per cent of shares plus one vote for the club must always be held by the club itself. The net result of this is that German football is more competitive and with gate prices that would make supporters of Premier League clubs weep. Standing tickets at Schalke, he explains, cost €13 (£12).
Last up is Dave Boyle from Supporters Direct. Boyle makes the point that for as long as people within football continue to underestimate football supporters, the supporters will continue to beat them and that supporters should, in a general election year, put pressure on those standing for election to make a commitment to supporting our cause. We then wrap up with a Q&A session, during which one crowd member – not an FC United supporter – says quite plainly thaat he has been convinced of the potential power of the supporters trust movement. And why shouldn’t he have been? The arguments that have been put forward have been logical yet heartfelt.
The feeling that one comes away from a meeting like this is that it is now time for a tectonic shift in attitude. It is no longer good enough to say that there is a “debate” to be had about the merits of one model of football club ownership over another. The time for action has already come, and the protests at Manchester United and Chester City demonstrate that ordinary supporters, who want no more than to watch a football team that they can be proud of, have, quite simply, had enough. And with that, we head for the warmth of a bar to watch the second half of the match between Chelsea and Manchester City. Millions of people – possibly hundreds of millions of people – have tuned in to see whether Wayne Bridge will shake John Terry’s hand or not. It’s a circus. It flashes by on the screen and it looks like football, but something in the series of images that flash before me doesn’t compute. At the end of the match, it’s time to get out and into Gigg Lane for FC United’s match. There are flags everywhere, and constant singing throughout the entire ninety minutes. It’s time to decide whether you are going to be a part of the problem, or whether you are going to be a part of the solution.
It was standing room only in the social club at Gigg Lane, Bury on Saturday lunchtime for the “Beyond The Debt” rally as a crowd of hundreds watched an impressive array of those in the know explain that the time for debate on the ownership of football clubs is coming to an end. We seem now to be entering a different time. A time when action is required. A time in which shrugging your shoulders and muttering that, “well, my club is alright” is no longer enough. When opening speaker and rally chair Andy Walsh from FC United of Manchester spoke, he talked of the rivalries between supporters of football clubs being an artificial construct which masked the true enemies of football supporters – the people that run the game itself.
Malcolm Clarke of the Football Supporters Federation was up next, offering a bleak insight into the world of the Football Association Council, an organisation in which two of the one hundred and fourteen members are women, two are from ethnic minorities and, astonishingly, just seven are under the age of fifty. Clarke spoken of his grandchildren and his desire for them to have football clubs to watch, something that coul have seemed unthinkable several years ago but is now something that is starting to raise its head as a possibility for the future. The fundamental issue that the game has to address is the sustainability of its financial model, which, currently, is practically non-existent.
Walsh had already made reference to a letter in the Guardian from a Portsmouth supporter stating that the spirit of Portsmouth Football Club will survive even if the worst happens to the current incarnation of the company that runs the club. Barry Dewy from Pompey Trust spoke of the madness that has engulfed his club over the last twelve months and of the action that is now required to ensure that, even if the worst happens to the current incarnation. They are still treating the ten per cent offered to them by Sulaiman Al-Fahim with a degree of suspicion, but the high take up rate for membership of the trust indicates that, no matter what happens in the future to Portsmouth FC, football in the city will continue, somehow and somewhere.
One occasional criticism of football supporters used to be that, while they criticised those that ran the game, they couldn’t offer an alternative to the status quo. When they did offer an alternative, it was claimed that this non-profit alternative couldn’t work at bigger clubs. The need to counter every argument that is put in the way of this movement remains, and Stuart Dykes, a fan worker from the German club Schalke 04, makes the argument that anybody that believes that supporter ownership of clubs can’t work should come to Germany to see clear evidence to the contrary. Clubs are owned under the “fifty plus one” rule, which means that fifty per cent of shares plus one vote for the club must always be held by the club itself. The net result of this is that German football is more competitive and with gate prices that would make supporters of Premier League clubs weep. Standing tickets at Schalke, he explains, cost €13 (£12).
Last up is Dave Boyle from Supporters Direct. Boyle makes the point that for as long as people within football continue to underestimate football supporters, the supporters will continue to beat them and that supporters should, in a general election year, put pressure on those standing for election to make a commitment to supporting our cause. We then wrap up with a Q&A session, during which one crowd member – not an FC United supporter – says quite plainly thaat he has been convinced of the potential power of the supporters trust movement. And why shouldn’t he have been? The arguments that have been put forward have been logical yet heartfelt.
The feeling that one comes away from a meeting like this is that it is now time for a tectonic shift in attitude. It is no longer good enough to say that there is a “debate” to be had about the merits of one model of football club ownership over another. The time for action has already come, and the protests at Manchester United and Chester City demonstrate that ordinary supporters, who want no more than to watch a football team that they can be proud of, have, quite simply, had enough. And with that, we head for the warmth of a bar to watch the second half of the match between Chelsea and Manchester City. Millions of people – possibly hundreds of millions of people – have tuned in to see whether Wayne Bridge will shake John Terry’s hand or not. It’s a circus. It flashes by on the screen and it looks like football, but something in the series of images that flash before me doesn’t compute. At the end of the match, it’s time to get out and into Gigg Lane for FC United’s match. There are flags everywhere, and constant singing throughout the entire ninety minutes. It’s time to decide whether you are going to be a part of the problem, or whether you are going to be a part of the solution.
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Football & The Media – There’s Something In The Air
Source: Twohundred Percent
Posted by Ian on Jan 20, 2010 in Clubs in Crisis, Latest
Football & The Media – There’s Something In The Air
In an extraordinary article in the Daily Mirror yesterday, Oliver Holt put forward a call to arms to all football supporters and offered an impassioned defence of those that are protesting against the way that our game is being mismanaged at the moment. Last Friday the Daily Mail, of all people, ran an article on FC United of Manchester that came close to being a eulogy and was at the same time a stinging attack on the Glazer’s management of Manchester United. The Guardian is getting its teeth well and truly into the proposed Manchester United bond issue, with new stories about the state of the club’s finances being reported on a seemingly basis. There’s something in the air. Attitudes are starting to change.
The writers on the sports pages are generally given a freer political reign than those in other parts of a daily newspaper. Much as it might seem jarring to be FC United being talked about in the Daily Mail, it isn’t, upon reflection, actually that surprising. Football is in the process of eating itself, and football sells newspapers. At this moment in time, however, there is a tangible sea change in the attitude of the printed press in its attitude towards football and money. The bare fact of the matter is that articles such as the two linked to above simply wouldn’t – apart from the ever-impeccable David Conn in The Guardian – appeared in British newspapers a year ago.
When the truth began to come out the takeover of Notts County a couple of months, there was no public apology from Chief Executive Peter Trembling over comments that he made about media speculation being the reason for the lack of money being forthcoming from the supposed billionaires that had persuaded the supporters to give it to them, rather than the possibility that the supposed “bank guarantee” that was the proof that everything was above board wasn’t worth the paper that it was written on. Unsurprising, perhaps, considering that he brought it for £1 from them. Nice work if you can get it.
The truth of the matter is the people running English football clubs are completely losing the trust of the public, and this can be seen in the reaction to various stories involving football clubs and insolvency over the last few weeks. Portsmouth have been taken to court for not paying their tax and lost their initial appeal, pushing them closer to becoming the first Premier League club to enter into administration. In previous years, it may have been easy for them to paint the taxman as some sort of bogeyman, but this doesn’t wash any more. Even the news that Sol Campbell – not necessarily the most popular footballer in the country – has chosen to launch proceedings against them over money that they owe him has been met with a mixed reaction, with a sizeable number of people siding with a player that is owed money and not been paid it.
The reaction on the television has been somewhat more muted, but this is not surprising when we consider that television contracts will be up for renewal in a couple of years and the heavy handed reaction of many of those within the game to the Panorama special on bungs in 2006. Alex Ferguson, to his considerable discredit, still doesn’t talk to the BBC as a result of the programme. Harry Redknapp threatened very publically to take legal action against the corporation in 2006, during a time that falls very much within the period that he was recently charged with tax evasion over. No libel writs were ever issued over that particular programme.
The over-dependence of football clubs on television money in particular may yet prove to cause them even greater problems in the future. The television regulator Ofcom’s recent confirmation that they are to force Sky to cut prices to wholesalers is likely to lead to a price war in the pay TV market, it is not unreasonable to suggest that the next contract for football on the television will be worth less – possibly considerably less – than the current one is. Clubs are going to have to readjust if these circumstances come to pass. Whether they will be able to or not is a quite different question. There isn’t a great deal of confidence in the people running our clubs going around at the moment.
And the responsibility for all of this lies with the people running the clubs. Excuses will be thrown around. It’s the fans for not turning up. It’s the taxman for demanding payment. It’s the authorities for trying to eliminate debt and mismanagement. These, however, are the the bleatings of the culpable. The shower in charge of Portsmouth are running a business. They have projected income streams which are, by the standards of most businesses, fairly stable. They have a largely captive consumer basis that is loyal above and beyond any reasonable call of duty. If they can’t run their business properly, they should face the consequences. The “club” – the community, the shared experience – will keep going. We know this from the clubs that have reformed after the failure of clubs as busineses in the past.
Elsewhere, the game stumbles from PR disaster to PR disaster. A Liverpool director – and the son of the club’s owner – sends vile emails to a supporter and has to resign over it. There is more alarming news from Old Trafford, with talk that the Glazers could take £130m out of the club if their proposed bond issue is successful while the club’s debts have risen to £716m. The game is starting to smell rotten from the inside out, and this smell is starting to become all-pervasive to the extent that even those that have been trying to avoid the smell or don’t have a particularly strong sense of smell are starting to notice it. The question now is whether the current press enthusiasm for sniffing around is a passing fad or something capable of bringing about meaningful change.
Posted by Ian on Jan 20, 2010 in Clubs in Crisis, Latest
Football & The Media – There’s Something In The Air
In an extraordinary article in the Daily Mirror yesterday, Oliver Holt put forward a call to arms to all football supporters and offered an impassioned defence of those that are protesting against the way that our game is being mismanaged at the moment. Last Friday the Daily Mail, of all people, ran an article on FC United of Manchester that came close to being a eulogy and was at the same time a stinging attack on the Glazer’s management of Manchester United. The Guardian is getting its teeth well and truly into the proposed Manchester United bond issue, with new stories about the state of the club’s finances being reported on a seemingly basis. There’s something in the air. Attitudes are starting to change.
The writers on the sports pages are generally given a freer political reign than those in other parts of a daily newspaper. Much as it might seem jarring to be FC United being talked about in the Daily Mail, it isn’t, upon reflection, actually that surprising. Football is in the process of eating itself, and football sells newspapers. At this moment in time, however, there is a tangible sea change in the attitude of the printed press in its attitude towards football and money. The bare fact of the matter is that articles such as the two linked to above simply wouldn’t – apart from the ever-impeccable David Conn in The Guardian – appeared in British newspapers a year ago.
When the truth began to come out the takeover of Notts County a couple of months, there was no public apology from Chief Executive Peter Trembling over comments that he made about media speculation being the reason for the lack of money being forthcoming from the supposed billionaires that had persuaded the supporters to give it to them, rather than the possibility that the supposed “bank guarantee” that was the proof that everything was above board wasn’t worth the paper that it was written on. Unsurprising, perhaps, considering that he brought it for £1 from them. Nice work if you can get it.
The truth of the matter is the people running English football clubs are completely losing the trust of the public, and this can be seen in the reaction to various stories involving football clubs and insolvency over the last few weeks. Portsmouth have been taken to court for not paying their tax and lost their initial appeal, pushing them closer to becoming the first Premier League club to enter into administration. In previous years, it may have been easy for them to paint the taxman as some sort of bogeyman, but this doesn’t wash any more. Even the news that Sol Campbell – not necessarily the most popular footballer in the country – has chosen to launch proceedings against them over money that they owe him has been met with a mixed reaction, with a sizeable number of people siding with a player that is owed money and not been paid it.
The reaction on the television has been somewhat more muted, but this is not surprising when we consider that television contracts will be up for renewal in a couple of years and the heavy handed reaction of many of those within the game to the Panorama special on bungs in 2006. Alex Ferguson, to his considerable discredit, still doesn’t talk to the BBC as a result of the programme. Harry Redknapp threatened very publically to take legal action against the corporation in 2006, during a time that falls very much within the period that he was recently charged with tax evasion over. No libel writs were ever issued over that particular programme.
The over-dependence of football clubs on television money in particular may yet prove to cause them even greater problems in the future. The television regulator Ofcom’s recent confirmation that they are to force Sky to cut prices to wholesalers is likely to lead to a price war in the pay TV market, it is not unreasonable to suggest that the next contract for football on the television will be worth less – possibly considerably less – than the current one is. Clubs are going to have to readjust if these circumstances come to pass. Whether they will be able to or not is a quite different question. There isn’t a great deal of confidence in the people running our clubs going around at the moment.
And the responsibility for all of this lies with the people running the clubs. Excuses will be thrown around. It’s the fans for not turning up. It’s the taxman for demanding payment. It’s the authorities for trying to eliminate debt and mismanagement. These, however, are the the bleatings of the culpable. The shower in charge of Portsmouth are running a business. They have projected income streams which are, by the standards of most businesses, fairly stable. They have a largely captive consumer basis that is loyal above and beyond any reasonable call of duty. If they can’t run their business properly, they should face the consequences. The “club” – the community, the shared experience – will keep going. We know this from the clubs that have reformed after the failure of clubs as busineses in the past.
Elsewhere, the game stumbles from PR disaster to PR disaster. A Liverpool director – and the son of the club’s owner – sends vile emails to a supporter and has to resign over it. There is more alarming news from Old Trafford, with talk that the Glazers could take £130m out of the club if their proposed bond issue is successful while the club’s debts have risen to £716m. The game is starting to smell rotten from the inside out, and this smell is starting to become all-pervasive to the extent that even those that have been trying to avoid the smell or don’t have a particularly strong sense of smell are starting to notice it. The question now is whether the current press enthusiasm for sniffing around is a passing fad or something capable of bringing about meaningful change.
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Match Of The Week: AFC Wimbledon 2-0 FC United of Manchester
As we walk into the bar at Kingsmeadow, something silver and shiny catches my attention in the corner of my eye. “It’s the FA Trophy!”, I squeal, “The real FA Trophy”. It takes a sharp prod to the rib cage to remind me that, sitting next to it, is the squatter but considerably shinier FA Cup. It’s carnival day in south-west London, the day of the Co-Operative Supporters Direct Cup match, an annual invitation match for supporters trust owned clubs, and this year - as it was two years ago this weekend - it’s Wimbledon and FC United doing the honours. The mutual respect and friendship is immense, but Wimbledon are starting to show United a clean pair of heels on the pitch.
The last time the two sides met Wimbledon were in the Ryman League Premier Division. Since then, they’ve managed two successive promotions and, for all the talk of a season of consolidation, they have become accustomed enough to success to be able to dream of challenging in the Blue Square Premier, even if they might not want to admit it to themselves just yet. United, on the other hand, stalled in the Unibond League Premier Division last season and missed out on the play-offs on the last day of the season. One might expect a side playing to average home crowds of 2,000 in what is effectively the regional seventh division of English football to be in a more powerful position than they are, but the eye-watering price of renting their temporary home - Bury’s Gigg Lane - and the fact that every spare penny is going into a ground development fund means that they compete, on the pitch at least, as equals.
Wimbledon, however, make slightly hard work of things, particularly in the first half. They push the United defence back and seem physically stronger, but the United defence isn’t playing this match as a friendly. They dig deep, get feet and bodies in the way and show a nice touch on the ball after a nervy looking start. Then came the big chance - Phil Marsh cut into the penalty area and was tripped by a clumsy tackle from Kennedy Adjei to give the visitors a penalty. Adam Carden, their Player of the Year last year, stepped up to take the kick, but his finish was poorly placed and predictable, and Wimbledon goalkeeper James Pullen saved comfortably. Half-time came with the scores goalless but Wimbledon still looking in pre-season mode - a sharper attack may have severely punished them.
Parity lasted barely fifteen minutes into the second half, and when it came it was with simplicity that was apposite for a match of this type - Chris Hussey drove a free-kick across the six yard area and Ben Judge tapped it, unmarked at the far post. Many of the travelling supporters could have been forgiven an inward sigh at this point. They travelled from Manchester to London two years ago and lost 2-0 - any pretence of football not being been a harsh mistress coming when United’s Marsh thumped a low free kick against the inside of the post. In the dying seconds, Luke Moore found himself little space on the right hand wide and whipped over a low cross for triallist Peter Rapson to roll the ball past the prone FC United goalkeeper Sam Ashton to wrap the game up.
After the match, the ceremonies and awards. The awarding of a cup gave this game a little more bite than most pre-season friendlies, and the addition of triallists - men who are playing for a job - meant that there weren’t many tackles that were being avoided. Again, though, the most notable thing on the menu this afternoon was the mutual respect between the two clubs, both of whom have much to look forward to. Wimbledon have their work cut out in the BSP, but will benefit from being newly-promoted into a league which may see more established clubs struggling with Setanta money that they may already have spent but definitely won’t receive. FC United, meanwhile, will continue to fight their battles both on and off the pitch. The Unibond League Premier Division remains a winnable league, but their biggest goal remains a home of their own.
To an extent, what was visible off the pitch was more important than anything that could have happened on it. With Notts County supporters choosing a get rich scheme over controlling their own destiny, Wycombe Wanderers being backed into a corner by their managing director Steve Hayes and Stockport County taken out of supporter ownership after falling into administration at the end of last season, this match was a timely reminder that it doesn’t have to be bad news all of the time and a pleasing diversion from the increasingly dispiriting circus that seems to follow the game around each summer.
The last time the two sides met Wimbledon were in the Ryman League Premier Division. Since then, they’ve managed two successive promotions and, for all the talk of a season of consolidation, they have become accustomed enough to success to be able to dream of challenging in the Blue Square Premier, even if they might not want to admit it to themselves just yet. United, on the other hand, stalled in the Unibond League Premier Division last season and missed out on the play-offs on the last day of the season. One might expect a side playing to average home crowds of 2,000 in what is effectively the regional seventh division of English football to be in a more powerful position than they are, but the eye-watering price of renting their temporary home - Bury’s Gigg Lane - and the fact that every spare penny is going into a ground development fund means that they compete, on the pitch at least, as equals.
Wimbledon, however, make slightly hard work of things, particularly in the first half. They push the United defence back and seem physically stronger, but the United defence isn’t playing this match as a friendly. They dig deep, get feet and bodies in the way and show a nice touch on the ball after a nervy looking start. Then came the big chance - Phil Marsh cut into the penalty area and was tripped by a clumsy tackle from Kennedy Adjei to give the visitors a penalty. Adam Carden, their Player of the Year last year, stepped up to take the kick, but his finish was poorly placed and predictable, and Wimbledon goalkeeper James Pullen saved comfortably. Half-time came with the scores goalless but Wimbledon still looking in pre-season mode - a sharper attack may have severely punished them.
Parity lasted barely fifteen minutes into the second half, and when it came it was with simplicity that was apposite for a match of this type - Chris Hussey drove a free-kick across the six yard area and Ben Judge tapped it, unmarked at the far post. Many of the travelling supporters could have been forgiven an inward sigh at this point. They travelled from Manchester to London two years ago and lost 2-0 - any pretence of football not being been a harsh mistress coming when United’s Marsh thumped a low free kick against the inside of the post. In the dying seconds, Luke Moore found himself little space on the right hand wide and whipped over a low cross for triallist Peter Rapson to roll the ball past the prone FC United goalkeeper Sam Ashton to wrap the game up.
After the match, the ceremonies and awards. The awarding of a cup gave this game a little more bite than most pre-season friendlies, and the addition of triallists - men who are playing for a job - meant that there weren’t many tackles that were being avoided. Again, though, the most notable thing on the menu this afternoon was the mutual respect between the two clubs, both of whom have much to look forward to. Wimbledon have their work cut out in the BSP, but will benefit from being newly-promoted into a league which may see more established clubs struggling with Setanta money that they may already have spent but definitely won’t receive. FC United, meanwhile, will continue to fight their battles both on and off the pitch. The Unibond League Premier Division remains a winnable league, but their biggest goal remains a home of their own.
To an extent, what was visible off the pitch was more important than anything that could have happened on it. With Notts County supporters choosing a get rich scheme over controlling their own destiny, Wycombe Wanderers being backed into a corner by their managing director Steve Hayes and Stockport County taken out of supporter ownership after falling into administration at the end of last season, this match was a timely reminder that it doesn’t have to be bad news all of the time and a pleasing diversion from the increasingly dispiriting circus that seems to follow the game around each summer.
Sunday, July 12, 2009
Returning Home & New Homes
In non-league football, things are moving and plans are afoot. It looked for some time as if we were heading for a rash of grounds being sold, demolished and converted into luxury apartments. Indeed, over the last ten years we have lost some of the best known non-league grounds, including Hendon’s Claremont Road, Scarborough’s Seamer Road, Aylesbury United’s Buckingham Road, Enfield’s Southbury Road, Slough Town’s Wexham Park and Edgware Town’s The White Lion. There are plenty more, of course. Probably too many to mention. It’s not all doom and gloom, though. You get enough of that on here. This evening, we’re going to take a quick look at four clubs that look as if they may be moving into new facilities or returning home in the next couple of years or so.
Slough Town: The falling into disrepair of Slough Town’s Wexham Park became a symbol for the interminable wrangling between clubs and landlords which often threatens to drive clubs to the wall. Slough were evicted from Wexham Park in 2003 and have been trying to find a permanent new home since then, managing to share a ground at Windsor & Eton and Beaconsfield SYCOB as they tumbled down the divisions and out of the Southern League altogether. Last season (after being reprieved thanks to the collapse of Halifax Town) they stabilised somewhat in the Southern Division One South & West, and there was further good news for the club this week with the announcement that they have the full support of their local council to build a new 3,000 capacity stadium on the outskirts of the town, along with eighty-one houses. They will now submit a full planning application before the end of this year, but there is quiet optimism that after six years (and counting) of a nomadic existence, they could soon be returning home.
Scarborough Athletic: The old Scarborough ground at Seamer Road is another that continues to sit and rot. Follwing the collapse of Scarborough FC in 2007, two clubs - Town and Athletic - have emerged, with Athletic (who owned and run by their supporters trust) being the homeless ones. Town played in the amateur Wearside League but in a ground within the town, while Athletic were forced to play their home matches twenty miles away from home at Bridlington Town. With Seamer Road now in a state of disrepair that seems to preclude its use in the forseeable future, Athletic have been looking for a home of their own back in Scarborough for some time, but their search may also be appoaching an end. They confirmed a deal last week to ground-share with Town at the Pindar Sports College, back in Scarborough. The ground is only a basic one, but Athletic plan to bring it up to scratch to reach the Football Association’s Grade D (which includes the installation of such basics as floodlights, hard standing, turnstiles and a perimeter fence), which would be enough for them to compete in their current division, the North East Counties League Premier Division and the Unibond League Division One, which is the one above. It’s only a short term solution - the club’s ultimate goal is to be back pushing for a place in the Football League again - but it’s a start.
Enfield Town: The sale of Southbury Road in 1999 proved to be the catalyst which led to the formation of AFC Wimbledon and the other clubs that came about because their supporters had had enough. By 2001, Enfield FC were still ground-sharing and the club was making no effort to find a new home back in the London Borough of Enfield, so the supporters broke away and formed a new club, Enfield Town. Town have shared grounds with nearby Brimsdown Rovers since then, but in October 2008 they confirmed a plan to move to the QE2 athletics stadium, barely half a mile from their old home. The club is desperately raising £50,000 towards paying for this move, and remain optimistic that they will move home for the start of the 2010/11 season. The solution of playing at an athletics stadium isn’t an ideal one and has caused some disquiet, but a home of their own would be a massive step forward towards reclaiming the place near the top of the non-league table that they held from the 1960s until the end of the 1980s.
FC United of Manchester: FCUM’s hopes for a ground of their own are possibly the most intriguing of the lot. Since their formation in 2005 they have, in no small part due to safety considerations brought about because of their 2,000+ crowds, played their home matches at Gigg Lane, the home of League Two club Bury. However, the cost of renting Gigg Lane is almost prohibitively expensive and the club needs a home of its own. Last month, however, the club announced an open tender to build a sustainable new stadium in Manchester (no definite site seems to have been indentified yet) whilst Manchester-based architects, Judge Gill, are working on a 7,000 capacity stadium for an unnamed club which some believe to be FCUM. The club signed a new ground share deal at Bury earlier this summer, but the fact that it was only signed for two years has also been taken by some as being a further sign that the club is preparing to move to a home of its own. Nothing is guaranteed yet, but if any club is capable of building a unique stadium with the best interests of its fans at heart, it has to be FC United of Manchester.
It’s not all good news, of course. It never is, is it? Gloucester City remain stranded in Cirencester following the ruination of their Meadow Park during the terrible floods of 2007. Aylesbury United will be groundsharing at Leighton Town next season, with a move back to Aylesbury seeming as far away as ever. There are plenty of others. This is a battle that isn’t over yet, and the economic downturn may prove to be a short term blip before the vultures start hovering again. Football grounds may yet prove to be prime real estate again in the near future.
Ian 8 July 2009 Non-League
Slough Town: The falling into disrepair of Slough Town’s Wexham Park became a symbol for the interminable wrangling between clubs and landlords which often threatens to drive clubs to the wall. Slough were evicted from Wexham Park in 2003 and have been trying to find a permanent new home since then, managing to share a ground at Windsor & Eton and Beaconsfield SYCOB as they tumbled down the divisions and out of the Southern League altogether. Last season (after being reprieved thanks to the collapse of Halifax Town) they stabilised somewhat in the Southern Division One South & West, and there was further good news for the club this week with the announcement that they have the full support of their local council to build a new 3,000 capacity stadium on the outskirts of the town, along with eighty-one houses. They will now submit a full planning application before the end of this year, but there is quiet optimism that after six years (and counting) of a nomadic existence, they could soon be returning home.
Scarborough Athletic: The old Scarborough ground at Seamer Road is another that continues to sit and rot. Follwing the collapse of Scarborough FC in 2007, two clubs - Town and Athletic - have emerged, with Athletic (who owned and run by their supporters trust) being the homeless ones. Town played in the amateur Wearside League but in a ground within the town, while Athletic were forced to play their home matches twenty miles away from home at Bridlington Town. With Seamer Road now in a state of disrepair that seems to preclude its use in the forseeable future, Athletic have been looking for a home of their own back in Scarborough for some time, but their search may also be appoaching an end. They confirmed a deal last week to ground-share with Town at the Pindar Sports College, back in Scarborough. The ground is only a basic one, but Athletic plan to bring it up to scratch to reach the Football Association’s Grade D (which includes the installation of such basics as floodlights, hard standing, turnstiles and a perimeter fence), which would be enough for them to compete in their current division, the North East Counties League Premier Division and the Unibond League Division One, which is the one above. It’s only a short term solution - the club’s ultimate goal is to be back pushing for a place in the Football League again - but it’s a start.
Enfield Town: The sale of Southbury Road in 1999 proved to be the catalyst which led to the formation of AFC Wimbledon and the other clubs that came about because their supporters had had enough. By 2001, Enfield FC were still ground-sharing and the club was making no effort to find a new home back in the London Borough of Enfield, so the supporters broke away and formed a new club, Enfield Town. Town have shared grounds with nearby Brimsdown Rovers since then, but in October 2008 they confirmed a plan to move to the QE2 athletics stadium, barely half a mile from their old home. The club is desperately raising £50,000 towards paying for this move, and remain optimistic that they will move home for the start of the 2010/11 season. The solution of playing at an athletics stadium isn’t an ideal one and has caused some disquiet, but a home of their own would be a massive step forward towards reclaiming the place near the top of the non-league table that they held from the 1960s until the end of the 1980s.
FC United of Manchester: FCUM’s hopes for a ground of their own are possibly the most intriguing of the lot. Since their formation in 2005 they have, in no small part due to safety considerations brought about because of their 2,000+ crowds, played their home matches at Gigg Lane, the home of League Two club Bury. However, the cost of renting Gigg Lane is almost prohibitively expensive and the club needs a home of its own. Last month, however, the club announced an open tender to build a sustainable new stadium in Manchester (no definite site seems to have been indentified yet) whilst Manchester-based architects, Judge Gill, are working on a 7,000 capacity stadium for an unnamed club which some believe to be FCUM. The club signed a new ground share deal at Bury earlier this summer, but the fact that it was only signed for two years has also been taken by some as being a further sign that the club is preparing to move to a home of its own. Nothing is guaranteed yet, but if any club is capable of building a unique stadium with the best interests of its fans at heart, it has to be FC United of Manchester.
It’s not all good news, of course. It never is, is it? Gloucester City remain stranded in Cirencester following the ruination of their Meadow Park during the terrible floods of 2007. Aylesbury United will be groundsharing at Leighton Town next season, with a move back to Aylesbury seeming as far away as ever. There are plenty of others. This is a battle that isn’t over yet, and the economic downturn may prove to be a short term blip before the vultures start hovering again. Football grounds may yet prove to be prime real estate again in the near future.
Ian 8 July 2009 Non-League
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
