Wimbledon

theox · Post by **theox** » Tue May 24, 2011 9:10 am

I'd like to respond to a few points above.

1) MK fans didnt steal a club. It kinda landed in their laps. I suppose if you wanted to convict them of a crime it would be somehting like being in receipt of stolen goods.......BUT, as I've said before I don't think that any football fan could question another who goes home and away or a young child who knows nothing else than his love for his club.

2) AFC being in the league is excellent news. The few hundred fans who've worked hard (and the 4 thousand-ish who support) deserve what they've achieved. Although, playing devil's advocate, am I correct in thinking that they didn't have to start right at the bottom? Is it fair that they should jump above other clubs who have been toiling away for years. Are the supporters of these other clubs somehow less deserving despite volunteering many hours of service?

3) Laughing at Luton is one thing, wanting a club to fold is enitrely another. In fact, I didnt enjoy Luton's relegation as it was effectively forced upon them. It would have been much better had they spent the season getting beaten and finished rock bottom fair and square. However, I am fine with them struggling to get out of the Conference on 'merit'. Let's face it, they will get out sooner rather than later and I'm pretty sure there were a lot of people laughing at our exploits 'down there'.

4) Ultimately, I just think its perverse to want MK to go out of business now that they are (gulp) 'established'. Fair enough to wish them to drop into the misery of the Conference or lower but to go out of business and people to lose their club and others to lose their jobs is just spiteful.

Baboo · Post by **Baboo** » Tue May 24, 2011 10:35 am

&quottheox&quot wrote:I'd like to respond to a few points above.

1) MK fans didnt steal a club. It kinda landed in their laps. I suppose if you wanted to convict them of a crime it would be somehting like being in receipt of stolen goods.......BUT, as I've said before I don't think that any football fan could question another who goes home and away or a young child who knows nothing else than his love for his club.

2) AFC being in the league is excellent news. The few hundred fans who've worked hard (and the 4 thousand-ish who support) deserve what they've achieved. Although, playing devil's advocate, am I correct in thinking that they didn't have to start right at the bottom? Is it fair that they should jump above other clubs who have been toiling away for years. Are the supporters of these other clubs somehow less deserving despite volunteering many hours of service?

3) Laughing at Luton is one thing, wanting a club to fold is enitrely another. In fact, I didnt enjoy Luton's relegation as it was effectively forced upon them. It would have been much better had they spent the season getting beaten and finished rock bottom fair and square. However, I am fine with them struggling to get out of the Conference on 'merit'. Let's face it, they will get out sooner rather than later and I'm pretty sure there were a lot of people laughing at our exploits 'down there'.

4) Ultimately, I just think its perverse to want MK to go out of business now that they are (gulp) 'established'. Fair enough to wish them to drop into the misery of the Conference or lower but to go out of business and people to lose their club and others to lose their jobs is just spiteful.

1 - Agree MK Dons fans didn't steal a club. Winkelman did. Guilty by association at least? Winkelman had worked for years to entice a club to MK - a place deserving of a football league club apparently. Didn't he try it on with Luton &amp Northampton?

2. Combined Counties League was a long way down the pyramid. Fair enough in my opinion. Now if MK Dons had been made to start there we wouldn't be having this debate would we.

3. Agree that Luton will get out of it sooner rather than later. As for their punishment, well fines just don't really hit home do they. Whilst others obeyed the rules they didn't. Harsh on supporters, but what other way is there?
But football is about tradiiton, history, and rivalry going back decades and decades, whether one likes this or not. Luton are not liked by many because of - the away fans ban, the plastic pitch, David Evans. And more recently the behaviour of a significant minority of their supporters. Remember our trip to Kenilworth Road last season? To make matters worse the club brushed it under the carpet &amp how did they get away with their attack on the York players in the play-off semi without punishment? Having said that I don't want them to go bust. They have some decent fans too.

4. If MK dropped to the Conference and below and fought their way back up through fair means I would have a different opinion of them.

SmileyMan · Post by **SmileyMan** » Tue May 24, 2011 10:48 am

&quotBaboo&quot wrote:4. If MK dropped to the Conference and below and fought their way back up through fair means I would have a different opinion of them.

Presumably you'd need a new t-shirt: &quotFranchise football, never forgive, never forget (or at least until MK Dons have dropped to an arbitrarily low level in the pyramid, and I reserve the right to change my mind again should they beat us in the cup)&quot

's advocate

Baboo · Post by **Baboo** » Tue May 24, 2011 3:34 pm

&quotSmileyMan&quot wrote:
&quotBaboo&quot wrote:4. If MK dropped to the Conference and below and fought their way back up through fair means I would have a different opinion of them.
Presumably you'd need a new t-shirt: &quotFranchise football, never forgive, never forget (or at least until MK Dons have dropped to an arbitrarily low level in the pyramid, and I reserve the right to change my mind again should they beat us in the cup)&quot

's advocate

Yes, I'd look on the them as an entirely different team, but would not forgiven Winkelman. Any supporter who stuck with them as the fell &amp rose again would be welcomed into the brother (&amp sister)hood of real / genuine (am I allowed to say that withou$t upsettign anyone?) by this cynical old Oxford United supporter.

Kernow Yellow · Post by **Kernow Yellow** » Tue May 24, 2011 4:53 pm

&quottheox&quot wrote:Although, playing devil's advocate, am I correct in thinking that they didn't have to start right at the bottom? Is it fair that they should jump above other clubs who have been toiling away for years.

Bit harsh I think, given that their *football league* club had been stolen from them. They weren't just a bunch of wantaway fans like FCUM. How many times do you want to punish them? Wimbledon should have been able to start in the highest league their facilities and finances could cope with, as some kind of recompense for the injustice they suffered. But then of course, if the FA had given a shit about Wimbledon fans they would never have had their club taken from them in the first place.

Baboo · Post by **Baboo** » Tue May 24, 2011 6:22 pm

&quotBaboo&quot wrote:
&quotSmileyMan&quot wrote:
&quotBaboo&quot wrote:4. If MK dropped to the Conference and below and fought their way back up through fair means I would have a different opinion of them.
Presumably you'd need a new t-shirt: &quotFranchise football, never forgive, never forget (or at least until MK Dons have dropped to an arbitrarily low level in the pyramid, and I reserve the right to change my mind again should they beat us in the cup)&quot

's advocate
Yes, I'd look on the them as an entirely different team, but would not forgiven Winkelman. Any supporter who stuck with them as the fell &amp rose again would be welcomed into the brother (&amp sister)hood of real / genuine (am I allowed to say that without upsetting anyone?) fans, by this cynical old Oxford United supporter.

Snake · Post by **Snake** » Tue May 24, 2011 9:14 pm

There is a lesson to be learnt here, and I’m sure the FA will have taken notice. Let’s hope it never happens again.

Looking forward to seeing AFCW at The Kassam next season.

tomoufc · Post by **tomoufc** » Wed May 25, 2011 1:25 am

[quote=&quottheox&quot]
2) Although, playing devil's advocate, am I correct in thinking that they didn't have to start right at the bottom?

4) Ultimately, I just think its perverse to want MK to go out of business now that they are (gulp) 'established'. quote]

2) Wouldn't have been realistic given their fanbase and the size of 'stadiums' down there

4) I'm sure the same argument was put forward by the British Empire. It seems that most of its subjects were pretty glad it did go out of business, except perhaps for the fine citizens of The Falklands, Gibraltar and er...Pitcairn Island.

Sackcloth Ox · Post by **Sackcloth Ox** » Wed May 25, 2011 8:33 am

Irrespective of the rights and wrongs here, there is no doubt that MK Dons are the most unpopular club in professional football while AFC are now one of the most popular.

Long may that state of affairs continue. What happened with the FA ..some time ago now... was an unbelievable travesty.

I look forward to seeing us one day playing 'MK Dons' - honestly the name itself is enough to make them truly disliked .....and thrashing them.

SmileyMan · Post by **SmileyMan** » Wed May 25, 2011 10:23 am

By the way, the FSF thinks that the MK Dons are OK for near on four years now: http://www.fsf.org.uk/uploaded/press-re ... 6%2007.pdf

Also, do we boycott Arsenal because of their money-grabbing move away from Woolwich?

How about Headington Utd for their shameless name-change to steal supporters from other local clubs, before ditching Headington altogether and moving to Blackbird Leys?

Loads of football clubs have changed owners, names and locations. But Hammam and Winkelman make good pantomime villains for a few agitprop fans with media contacts.

slappy · Post by **slappy** » Wed May 25, 2011 10:50 am

Orient aren't too happy with West Ham moving onto their patch.

AFCW also have moved into Kingstonian's ground (which is presumably until they decide they need to find somewhere bigger), but presumably as Merton Council couldn't find anywhere for the old club in their 12 years at Selhurst Park, they will perhaps end up taking over another non-league ground with more space, or moving outside of the area, which surely is the whole point?

theox · Post by **theox** » Wed May 25, 2011 11:01 am

This is actually a good branch to the debate. I saw a documentary a few years ago about building new grounds which focussed on Derby and Bolton in particular. It showed the devastating effect on the local community that moving the grounds had. Businesses and pubs shut and the area declined rapidly.

I expect the same did not happen in Wimbledon as a) they didn't and still don't play in their own area and b) the locals, other than a hardcore 4000, have generally been fairly unfussed about the team.

The moves may not have been so dramatic but in terms of impact it could be argued that others are worse.

Baboo · Post by **Baboo** » Wed May 25, 2011 11:28 am

&quotSmileyMan&quot wrote:By the way, the FSF thinks that the MK Dons are OK for near on four years now: http://www.fsf.org.uk/uploaded/press-re ... 6%2007.pdf

Also, do we boycott Arsenal because of their money-grabbing move away from Woolwich?

How about Headington Utd for their shameless name-change to steal supporters from other local clubs, before ditching Headington altogether and moving to Blackbird Leys?

Loads of football clubs have changed owners, names and locations. But Hammam and Winkelman make good pantomime villains for a few agitprop fans with media contacts.

Wimbledon to MK is somewhere in the region of 60 - 70 miles. A bit further than other moves referred to. Even Meadowbank Thistle to Livingston is only about 20 miles.

SmileyMan · Post by **SmileyMan** » Wed May 25, 2011 11:42 am

&quotBaboo&quot wrote:Wimbledon to MK is somewhere in the region of 60 - 70 miles. A bit further than other moves referred to. Even Meadowbank Thistle to Livingston is only about 20 miles.

Ah, thanks for that. I wasn't aware of the exact value for the Outrage Radius. Maybe if someone could let me know I could be better informed about which moves I should be upset about...

BigCrompy · Post by **BigCrompy** » Wed May 25, 2011 12:09 pm

&quotBaboo&quot wrote:
&quotSmileyMan&quot wrote:By the way, the FSF thinks that the MK Dons are OK for near on four years now: http://www.fsf.org.uk/uploaded/press-re ... 6%2007.pdf

Also, do we boycott Arsenal because of their money-grabbing move away from Woolwich?

How about Headington Utd for their shameless name-change to steal supporters from other local clubs, before ditching Headington altogether and moving to Blackbird Leys?

Loads of football clubs have changed owners, names and locations. But Hammam and Winkelman make good pantomime villains for a few agitprop fans with media contacts.
Wimbledon to MK is somewhere in the region of 60 - 70 miles. A bit further than other moves referred to. Even Meadowbank Thistle to Livingston is only about 20 miles.

Surely there's a world of difference altogether?

Milton Keynes also changed their name, (I'm fairly sure) their colours immediately, and eventually even conceded Wimbledon's significant history of amateur and professional honours back to the community of Merton.

This was unashamedly and unequivocably a new club who got a leg-up the Football League that your Ketterings and Bath Citys would have given their eye-teeth for.

I think it is the morphing of our game away from the 'proud to represent the local community' to the mercenary 'will play for whichever given franchise offers the most corn' idiom that people resent the most about Franchise FC. No-one could deny the young lads and lasses of Milton Keynes the experience of a league team to support - if only the city of Milton Keynes deserved it, by having a club rise up the eschelon from the bottom first.

Rage Online

Wimbledon

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re: