Crisis Clubs - Bury, Bolton etc.

[forestfan]

Mentioned on the Championship thread, but given it's not Championship as such...

There's a chance Bury will officially be kicked out of the League this Friday, having not played a game yet this season. Whatever happens, I've never seen a scenario like this before where a team has numerous matches postponed (they have now been defaulted from the League Cup, meaning Sheff Wed and Rotherham can get on with the next round). Sounds like a very complicated situation, but how exactly did the EFL let it develop this way?

Things seemed to be looking up (in relative terms) at Bolton when their takeover was announced as back on, but with virtually no senior players they took matters into their own hands and postponed their match tonight as it was too much for the kids to play twice in a few days after being thrashed at Tranmere. A further points deduction likely, and unless they can bring in some senior players by the deadline they may struggle to even get back to zero before the end of the season. Negative points really distort divisions, we saw a lot of it a decade or so ago and now it's returned.

I'm sure there's others close to the edge as well due to unscrupulous or overstretched owners. Obviously it's nothing new, we had Wolves, Boro and Swansea on the brink in the 80s and all recovered well, Leeds and Portsmouth more recently... some (Aldershot, Newport, Darlington etc.) weren't so lucky but all have returned in some form or other. So football in these towns will surely live on whatever happens - but could the football authorities do any more? I don't think (Gary or Phil?) Neville's suggestion of the big clubs bailing them out would be right, they're not charities for incompetent (or worse) owners of small clubs, despite their wealth. But the "fit and proper person" test clearly isn't fit for anything but the bin, and the League itself needs to hold owners accountable somehow. It could be any of our clubs next.

[mikeg13]

Mentioned on the Championship thread, but given it's not Championship as such...

- but could the football authorities do any more? I don't think (Gary or Phil?) Neville's suggestion of the big clubs bailing them out would be right, they're not charities for incompetent (or worse) owners of small clubs, despite their wealth. But the "fit and proper person" test clearly isn't fit for anything but the bin, and the League itself needs to hold owners accountable somehow. It could be any of our clubs next.

As a lifelong fan of one of the so called big clubs, they should intervene and help these clubs survive in there own interests, all at one point were themselves small clubs, know Afc were not above taking help from other at the time bigger clubs, Forest and Glasgow Rangers are as much a reason for Afc history and success as any manager owner or player we have had, what club spends on our pitch each season would ensure they stayed alive as clubs for years no question we could afford it. It would be the right thing to do even from a business point of view it would be viable the publicity would pay it back. Love our pyramid system it has to be protected.

[morganb]

Mentioned on the Championship thread, but given it's not Championship as such...

- but could the football authorities do any more? I don't think (Gary or Phil?) Neville's suggestion of the big clubs bailing them out would be right, they're not charities for incompetent (or worse) owners of small clubs, despite their wealth. But the "fit and proper person" test clearly isn't fit for anything but the bin, and the League itself needs to hold owners accountable somehow. It could be any of our clubs next.

As a lifelong fan of one of the so called big clubs, they should intervene and help these clubs survive in there own interests, all at one point were themselves small clubs, know Afc were not above taking help from other at the time bigger clubs, Forest and Glasgow Rangers are as much a reason for Afc history and success as any manager owner or player we have had, what club spends on our pitch each season would ensure they stayed alive as clubs for years no question we could afford it. It would be the right thing to do even from a business point of view it would be viable the publicity would pay it back. Love our pyramid system it has to be protected.

About 6 or 7 years ago (?), Aldershot were in trouble again. One of the big clubs, Chelsea, did help out - I remember that they moved their under 21 games to play at The Rec and even relaid the pitch with the old Stamford Bridge turf. Not sure how widely known this is.

[forestfan]

Helping out in small ways is fair enough, Forest did so by collecting money for unpaid Notts County staff in pre-season games, before they were saved by a takeover. But these owners of dubious character and financial means shouldn’t be able to act with impunity knowing they will be bailed out by the big boys whatever they do.

It’s the system of ownership itself that is the problem, maybe allowing part-owned feeder clubs is one solution, or compulsory supporters’ trust ownership like Germany, or even the Football League itself holding a proportionate stake in each of its clubs, which is sold on promotion or relegation from the League?

[Zimmerman]

Always a tricky one... which clubs are in trouble because they are badly run (or exploited) versus those that have gambled away the clubs future chasing glory versus just unfortunate financial circumstances?

There was a bit of brouhaha a few years ago when the Accrington Stanley chairman was bemoaning much (little) these clubs got from Premier League teams.

I’m torn - if the rich were to just bail them out, where is the incentive for prudence and self-sufficiency? It’s a bit like being a parent of a young adult. If your kid keeps blowing his money on cocktail bars or weekends in Prague; do you help him when he can’t afford his rent?

[blahblah]

The Bury bod keeps rejecting Offers etc maybe he sees a few blocks of flats on the land?

[bspittles]

The Bury bod keeps rejecting Offers etc maybe he sees a few blocks of flats on the land?

I suspect that’s the real reason he got involved in the first place.

While a few clubs ARE badly run, the vast majority are struggling. That suggests to me that the problem is wider than just bad owners.

It will never happen, but I’d like to see all the TV money divided up differently. 50% to the top flight, 25% to the Championship, and so on, all the way down to non-league (where even a few thousand would make a difference).

I’d also like to see an end to parachute payments, as they encourage clubs to gamble for a year in order to receive huge amounts for the next three.

[Zimmerman]

I’ve raised it lots in previous discussions... we have too many teams in this country.

Yes they all want some of the money from the top table (and that could work).

But we have 92 professional clubs... most in tier 5 are professional (if not all) and even the 48 teams in the 6th tier are semi-pro (and some pro I think).

There are just too many all trying to eat from that pie.

Quite often, the product (and experience) at some of these non-league clubs was better than their local league counter parts. So understandably, the league clubs get neglected.

[blahblah]

Yep and some B Teams would help...

[murf]

With the Conference being (virtually) professional, it makes some sense to have a north and south split of the 4th tier. Less travelling expenses, more local derbies, possibility of combined end of season play offs. I know they do that in some cups already.

Only issue is balancing the numbers if, say, all southern teams get relegated. Can't remember which tier it was but Bishops Stortford got moved into the northern section a few years back and they are only about 15 minutes from the M25!

[murf]

Yep and some B Teams would help...

Was surprised how relatively badly the Premiership B/reserve/U23 teams have done in the Checkatrade Trophy. A few clubs were swerving it but Liverpool and some other big names are in for this year.

Not sure if I am keen on them joining the league system or not but if it were to happen you'd have to have rules that helped all sides regarding players getting 'promoted' to the main team or injured first teamers getting return run outs for the reserves. Make it too strict and the top clubs won't let any half decent prospects play for the B team so may not even both entering.

[Maldini]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YEbZK6 ... ture=share

So sad for these people. The old lad looks heartbroken.

[murf]

Has always annoyed me that the arts have been heavily subsidised over the years with grants etc despite (generalising) being popular with rich folks and sports have had less help despite being popular with poorer folk. Has changed a bit over the years with lottery funding etc and you have to draw a line somewhere to avoid propping up disastrous 'businesses' and disastrous/evil businessmen.

Surely the local councils can help out somehow, these communities will go downhill quickly without a club (and hence reduce Council income). Always (literal in this case) crowdsourcing to get a fan run club.

[bspittles]

No to B teams. If big clubs want their players to get competitive games, they should send them out on loan to other English clubs.

Better still, restrict a club to having 25 senior players (which I think is the size of a PL squad). The way some clubs stockpile is ludicrous, just so they don’t miss out on a possible star in the future.

[bluenosey]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YEbZK6 ... ture=share

So sad for these people. The old lad looks heartbroken.

Yeah, very moving

Clubs like Bury are the heart of the community. It's so sad what is happening. The two Manchester giants are close by, surely they could help somehow ?

I think the big teams ought to contribute more although you have to be careful what you wish for. When Phil Gartside was Bolton chairman I could have sworn he wanted to abolish relegation from the Prem....though that could be my memory. That certainly looks ironic now, although, again a great shame for a club with terrific history and fans like Bolton

[bluenosey]

With the Conference being (virtually) professional, it makes some sense to have a north and south split of the 4th tier. Less travelling expenses, more local derbies, possibility of combined end of season play offs. I know they do that in some cups already.

Only issue is balancing the numbers if, say, all southern teams get relegated. Can't remember which tier it was but Bishops Stortford got moved into the northern section a few years back and they are only about 15 minutes from the M25!

Isn't that the way it used to be - 3rd divison north and south in the 1950s ?

What you may well start to see are more established clubs being replaced by newer teams. Take Salford. Or Forest Green. Who'd have thought they would be a league above Notts County ?

[murf]

No to B teams. If big clubs want their players to get competitive games, they should send them out on loan to other English clubs.

Better still, restrict a club to having 25 senior players (which I think is the size of a PL squad). The way some clubs stockpile is ludicrous, just so they don’t miss out on a possible star in the future.

From a big club point of view you are saying clubs shouldn't stockpile players and then saying they should go out on loan. They only go out on loan because the reserve(/U23) system isn't fit for purpose (ie training youngsters to play against senior teams and players). For those youth players in the first team broader squad but not getting in the matchday squad then they need to have a reserve/U23 team to stay match fit and if that isn't enough you have to loan them out (at risk of holes in matchday squad with an injury crisis). This means they need to own a lot more players. Admittedly not on the scale some clubs do (Chelsea worst offenders, City not far behind and admittedly my team Liverpool are guilty too) - mind you most of these are not 'senior' so the current squad limits are fairly pointless, just means a few CK flops get loaned out anywhere that will have them and pay (part of) their wages.

[murf]

With the Conference being (virtually) professional, it makes some sense to have a north and south split of the 4th tier. Less travelling expenses, more local derbies, possibility of combined end of season play offs. I know they do that in some cups already.

Only issue is balancing the numbers if, say, all southern teams get relegated. Can't remember which tier it was but Bishops Stortford got moved into the northern section a few years back and they are only about 15 minutes from the M25!

Isn't that the way it used to be - 3rd divison north and south in the 1950s ?

What you may well start to see are more established clubs being replaced by newer teams. Take Salford. Or Forest Green. Who'd have thought they would be a league above Notts County ?

Before my time!
If the 4th tier and Conference distinction gets a bit more blurred then it is less of an issue for Notts County and co when they drop down a tier.

[blahblah]

I hope Bury Council have put it will put a "No Building in perpetuity" type of thing on the land.

All Councils should do this to stop the trashimg of Clubs to build flats....

[bspittles]

No to B teams. If big clubs want their players to get competitive games, they should send them out on loan to other English clubs.

Better still, restrict a club to having 25 senior players (which I think is the size of a PL squad). The way some clubs stockpile is ludicrous, just so they don’t miss out on a possible star in the future.

From a big club point of view you are saying clubs shouldn't stockpile players and then saying they should go out on loan. They only go out on loan because the reserve(/U23) system isn't fit for purpose (ie training youngsters to play against senior teams and players). For those youth players in the first team broader squad but not getting in the matchday squad then they need to have a reserve/U23 team to stay match fit and if that isn't enough you have to loan them out (at risk of holes in matchday squad with an injury crisis). This means they need to own a lot more players. Admittedly not on the scale some clubs do (Chelsea worst offenders, City not far behind and admittedly my team Liverpool are guilty too) - mind you most of these are not 'senior' so the current squad limits are fairly pointless, just means a few CK flops get loaned out anywhere that will have them and pay (part of) their wages.

It was more of an either/or solution. Clubs should either send players on loan (rather than playing in non-competitive U-23 leagues) or (better still) not have the players in the first place.

And if players do get sent on loan, maybe there should be some rule about the majority staying within the English league system.

[forestfan]

With the Conference being (virtually) professional, it makes some sense to have a north and south split of the 4th tier. Less travelling expenses, more local derbies, possibility of combined end of season play offs. I know they do that in some cups already.

Only issue is balancing the numbers if, say, all southern teams get relegated. Can't remember which tier it was but Bishops Stortford got moved into the northern section a few years back and they are only about 15 minutes from the M25!

Conference South and Conference Not Quite So Far South, as they’ve been nicknamed before.

The pyramid is obviously more south-centric due to population density and it’s a vicious circle in a way given more remote northern clubs struggle with more distance to travel and therefore higher costs, regardless of how regionalised it is. For example, Blyth Spartans have to travel to Hereford, Gloucester and Brackley in a “north” division this season.

[forestfan]

With the Conference being (virtually) professional, it makes some sense to have a north and south split of the 4th tier. Less travelling expenses, more local derbies, possibility of combined end of season play offs. I know they do that in some cups already.

Only issue is balancing the numbers if, say, all southern teams get relegated. Can't remember which tier it was but Bishops Stortford got moved into the northern section a few years back and they are only about 15 minutes from the M25!

Isn't that the way it used to be - 3rd divison north and south in the 1950s ?

What you may well start to see are more established clubs being replaced by newer teams. Take Salford. Or Forest Green. Who'd have thought they would be a league above Notts County ?

Before my time!
If the 4th tier and Conference distinction gets a bit more blurred then it is less of an issue for Notts County and co when they drop down a tier.

Yeah, a lot of the National League/Conference is fully professional now, and the majority of the teams have been in the Football League in living memory. It’s still a big loss of status to drop out of the League though, it’s as if your club no longer exists to the wider world. And with only two promotion places it’s really hard to get back. Some have dropped out and then come back strongly though, such as Luton, Lincoln and Tranmere.

It’s still good to see new teams emerge, as long as they’re sustainable (remember Rushden and Diamonds?) But that involves others finding their level, rather than disappearing completely. In the days of the closed shop FL there were plenty of clubs stagnating at the foot of the 4th division who got re-elected by the “old pals’ act” every year.

[raoul]

Bury still seem to own their ground and their Accounts have it as £5m + (based on a revaluation a few years ago).

If I had won the lottery (or I was Bury Council, or I was one of the sons of Neville Neville, after who a Bury stand is named, and did not have a conflict of interest due to Salford), I would offer to buy the stadium for its market value and lease it back to the club on 99 year terms with a requirement that it remains used as a football stadium. Get a reasonable return on my £5m, and save the football club.

And if the club wants to buy it back at any point once they are back up and sorted, it's theirs for whatever the market value is at that time.

Anyone able to oblige?

[blahblah]

Joe Hart's dad has one named after him.

The whole thing stinks, and I doubt they will be the last. There seems to be a strange mix or owners outside the top flight re their intentions ...

[morganb]

AFC Wimbledon are running a Crowdfunding campaign to return to Plough Lane:

https://www.afcwimbledon.co.uk/club/new ... unding-qa/

Wonder if this is a route other clubs will go down?

[forestfan]

AFC Wimbledon are running a Crowdfunding campaign to return to Plough Lane:

https://www.afcwimbledon.co.uk/club/new ... unding-qa/

Wonder if this is a route other clubs will go down?

I thought they were taking over the dog track? Or is that basically the same location?

[MorrisonDullforce]

AFC Wimbledon are running a Crowdfunding campaign to return to Plough Lane:

https://www.afcwimbledon.co.uk/club/new ... unding-qa/

Wonder if this is a route other clubs will go down?

I thought they were taking over the dog track? Or is that basically the same location?

Yes same location.

The initiative is going pretty well. They have 60 days to raise a minimum of £2m and they've so far raised £1.78m with 43 days to go.

[blahblah]

There has been a dog track in Wimbledon for years? I didn't realise it was Plough Lane....

[forestfan]

There has been a dog track in Wimbledon for years? I didn't realise it was Plough Lane....

The dog track and old football ground were 200 yards apart, apparently.

[bluenosey]

Phil Parkinson has recently resigned as Bolton manager and sadly, it's make or break day for Bury