English clubs · English league · Football administration · Football finances & business · Media · Sociology & community

Treatment Of New Clubs

In reply to

Steve Whitney (NonLeagueDaily.com editor) utters some rather strong opinions against new clubs in his piece on the 10th June.

Including, but not limited to; “something needs to be done to prevent more of these `clubs` being formed.” and “But `clubs` being formed from disenchanted fans should be halted by the FA”.

The beauty of the pyramid in England (and many other European countries), is that you *can* start from scratch if you feel like it. Is he advocating a franchise model instead?

It’s not clear if he objects to a new club entering at step 6, or if he wants to stop supporter owned teams entering the pyramid altogether.

I have to say I find his use of `clubs`, as if we’re not prober clubs, a bit annoying.

I don’t see why any group of people should be prevented from forming a football club if they want to, whatever their motivation.

His real gripe appears to be that AFC Liverpool have been allowed in at Step 6. If they meet the requisite criteria, why not?

If it brings fans of Premier League clubs to watch non-league football, why should the non-league community complain?

(First posted on Tony Kempster’s Non-League Forum)


2 thoughts on “Treatment Of New Clubs

  1. In reply to

    …. I am concerned how the traditional non-league pyramid will look in ten to fifteen years.

    One thing that’s popped up in my head, somewhat crazily, what would happen if a group of ‘disillusioned’ Liverpool or Manchester United fans from, say Devon, where there must be a lot of them, decided that they too didn’t like what was happening with their big clubs, but couldn’t face the travelling up to the north-west to support the ‘AFC’ clubs? And they decided to form a sort of ‘franchise offshoot’ of their ‘AFC’ club, to cater for (ex) United or ‘Pool fans in their area, and entered the Western League? It won’t happen, but who thought these clubs wouldn’t ever happen..


    Even if you had 10 to 20 such clubs being formed, in 10 to 15 years, some may be successful (maybe even finding their way into the Football League?), some may have been wound up, and others would just be trundling along at one level or another of the pyramid.

    That’s the story of English football.

    Each club finds its level based on its circumstances. If the money men come in, the club has a good chance of moving up, if the money men leave, it is likely to go down, or go bust. If the club puts together a good manager and a good squad, the club moves up, if they fail to do so, it goes down. Attendances increase or fall over time with changes in population, demographics and levels of interest.

    It’s all about ups and downs.

    To fear for the state of affairs in 10 to 15 years borders on paranoia [;)].

    As was discussed elsewhere, several clubs, including Liverpool and Chelsea, were formed to occupy otherwise vacant stadia.

    That was a time when land was cheaper, and land owners might build a stadium first, and then decide what to do with it later. With property prices the way they are now, you won’t see that happening again.

    Whether a club ultimately succeeds or fails turns on the circumstances described above.

    In that respect, nothing has changed.

    (First posted on Tony Kempster’s Non-League Forum)

  2. In reply to

    I don’t have any issues with people forming new clubs if they so wish. I don’t have any issues with disenchanted fans forming a club if they want to. What I object to is them using the old clubs name to gain an advantage thatother new teams don’t have. If they are a new team, then that is exactly what they should be. If they are truly disenchanted with their old club then they should break all links entirely. If they are prepared to trade on their old clubs name to gain an advantage then they are not truly disenchanted whatever they may try to claim. It seems to be a case of not wanting to support Liverpool but still wanting all the kudos of supporting Liverpool.

    If disillusionment is the reason for forming a new club, the disillusionment is usually not with the old club itself, but the way it is run.

    In such circumstances, it is understandable why those forming the new club want a club that is as much the old club as legally or factually possible, but run in a different way.

    In the circumstances, it is entirely understandable why the choose a name that is as close as possible to the name of the old club.

    (First posted on Tony Kempster’s Non-League Forum)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s