Wimbledon vs Rotherham- Attendence 849 [Archive]

View Full Version : Wimbledon vs Rotherham- Attendence 849

Twyford Bee

29-10-2002, 10:30 PM

Is this the lowest ever Selhurst Park attendence?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/eng_div_1/2356617.stm

ruediger

30-10-2002, 06:18 AM

... And 227 of those who turned up came from South Yorkshire to support the Millers.

:D :clown: :cool:

Saturday 26 2002
Seagrave Haulage Football League Premier Division

AFC WIMBLEDON 4 - 0 COBHAM
Russell (8, 17, 51), Cooper (56).
Attendance: 3,377

Men At Work

30-10-2002, 06:57 AM

... And Wimbledon include the working staff in the attendance total. That means about 500 franchise fans. If it wasn't for their actions at the 'away' game two seasons ago I'd almost feel sorry for them.

as216

30-10-2002, 08:15 AM

Next Tuesday this fixture is repeated in the 3rd Round of the Worthington Cup - what are the odds on an even lower crowd?

brighton_eagle

30-10-2002, 08:18 AM

Originally posted by as216
Next Tuesday this fixture is repeated in the 3rd Round of the Worthington Cup - what are the odds on an even lower crowd?

I'd say thats almost certain mate. :D

anti-addick

30-10-2002, 08:22 AM

I hope it's as low when the move to MK

Del Gland

30-10-2002, 08:36 AM

Wimbledon Fan 1: What time is kick-off?
Wimbedon Fan 2 : What time can you make it? :D

Did they lock the Rotherham fans in for an hour?

Al From Bromley

30-10-2002, 11:04 AM

Kind of supports my theory about their numbers a their game with us the other week. There were never more than about 500 of them there then either. Its sad and its unsustainable. Do they really think that the people of Bucks and Beds are going to turn out in their droves to support them when they move? It wouldnt suprise me if they are out of existence by the end of this season. Unless someone has very deep pockets.

welshneil

30-10-2002, 11:13 AM

No sympathy whatsoever...they've dug their own graves!!!

Jimbo ?

30-10-2002, 12:37 PM

no the chairman has dug the grave - not the fans!!

Jimbo ?

30-10-2002, 12:39 PM

I dont like wimbledon that much - but is sad to see a team being torn apart like this!! How many years until wimbledon play afc wimbledon????
That would be a grudge match!!!

Dodger

30-10-2002, 12:53 PM

I read the other day that Wimbledon are curently offering Milton Keynes residents £10 return travel to Selhurst by coach for match days which has proved reasonably popular - for people who want a cheap way to get into London to go shopping....

Lombardarian

30-10-2002, 12:54 PM

I know a couple of W Afc fans and their season tickets cost £200 each-possibly more than Wimbledon. :confused:

tomario

30-10-2002, 12:54 PM

I think the proper wimbledon will be bust by then.

c_block_lad

30-10-2002, 05:53 PM

I hope for football's sake that the REAL Wimbledon survive and became a success in MK and show those club-killers AFC that there is only one Wimbledon-The REAL Wimbledon. Also there MK £10 scheme has been very succesful with more than 5 coaches coming down from MK every Saturday Home game.

Al From Bromley

30-10-2002, 06:15 PM

"Also there MK £10 scheme has been very succesful with more than 5 coaches coming down from MK every Saturday Home game."

oooooh, whooopeee doo! So that's a fan base of, oh, let me see, 70 people a coach, times five, er, that's 350 fans! Fortress MK is going to be a daunting prospect!

Stonewall

30-10-2002, 06:26 PM

That £10 scheme upset the season ticket holders as they were paying more to watch than the travellers:D

E.X Moontoad

30-10-2002, 07:01 PM

Originally posted by c_block_lad
I hope for football's sake that the REAL Wimbledon survive and became a success in MK and show those club-killers AFC that there is only one Wimbledon-The REAL Wimbledon. Also there MK £10 scheme has been very succesful with more than 5 coaches coming down from MK every Saturday Home game.

Yes, lets hope that the 'real' Wimbledon becomes a success in MK because you never know it may inspire someone to buy Palace and move us down to say Cornwall, afterall they do not have a professional football league or premier club down there for all of those armchair Man U and Arsenal fans to go and watch. Must have huge potential.
Still nevermind expect that you will be dutifully treking down to Newquay or Padstow every other week not getting much change out of £100 and arriving home in the early hours of Sunday Morning to watch 'real' Palace whilst the rest of us club-killers will be a couple of miles down the road from Selhurst watching AFC Palace.
Have fun.

2059

selhurst

30-10-2002, 07:13 PM

Originally posted by as216
Next Tuesday this fixture is repeated in the 3rd Round of the Worthington Cup - what are the odds on an even lower crowd?

Very good I'd say!
Such a waste of money, opening the ground and turning on the floodlights, for a meaningless match played infront of less than 300 (?) people...

welshneil

31-10-2002, 04:05 PM

Jason

31-10-2002, 04:35 PM

Originally posted by c_block_lad
I hope for football's sake that the REAL Wimbledon survive and became a success in MK and show those club-killers AFC that there is only one Wimbledon-The REAL Wimbledon. Also there MK £10 scheme has been very succesful with more than 5 coaches coming down from MK every Saturday Home game.

You really do not have a clue do you.

The association between club and town has laways been it's strength. It is no coincidence that almost all professional clubs are named after PLACES. If you kill this link, you ultimately kill the game. The move to Milton Keynes is a cynical attempt to destroy this link so that a few people can make money. The people bringing about this move are the "club killers". The people forming AFC Wimbledon are attempting to keep alive the spirit of the side that went from Non League to FA Cup winners in barely a decade. I wish them the best of luck, as do all true football fans.

C-Block, you are entitled to your opinions (that is after all what the BBS is for), but I really do not understand your irrational dislike of AFC Wimbledon. Can you please put forward a rational argument as to WHY you think that Wimbledon going to Milton Keynes is good for the game (and the fact that Wimbledon have always low crowds is NOT a valid argument)

c_block_lad

31-10-2002, 05:45 PM

The fact is that the REAL Wimbledon are in a very strange situation, it is not as easy to simply move back to Merton. Were the most people support Foolham and co. The REAL Wimbledon need to move to MK to survive.

Jason

01-11-2002, 10:38 AM

Originally posted by c_block_lad
The fact is that the REAL Wimbledon are in a very strange situation, it is not as easy to simply move back to Merton. Were the most people support Foolham and co. The REAL Wimbledon need to move to MK to survive.

Hmm. Yet again a lack of understanding of the game comes to the fore. What you don't seem to get is that the move to Milton Keynes in itself kills the football club. To rip a club away from it's natural home is in itself to kill it. Yes, if the move ito MK is a success in crowd terms, the BUSINESS will survive. Surely though, football is more than that. It is about the passion, history, and yes the PLACE that symbolises the club. When Wimbledon moves to MK, the club that rose from non - league to the Premiership (winning the FA cup in the process) will be dead. Charles Koppell and co. have killed them. AFC Wimbledon are trying to keep at least some of the spirit of that club alive.

As for "it's not as simple as moving back to Merton" well actually yes it is (or would be but for the greed of a few individuals). Merton council have gone on record as saying that they would welcome Wimbledon back at Plough Lane (a site which could be developed to Nationwide . . although probably not Peremier . . .standard given the right investment). The only reason that this move is not happening, is that Koppell and Co are unwilling to put up the required cash, as they feel that a move to MK will make them more money. Yes, the supporter base is limited, but if the club was restructured around it's reduced long term income base, then a viable future at Second division level (at the lowest) could certainly be acheived at Plough Lane (particularly given Wimbledon's excellent tradition of bringing on young talent) . The fact that AFC Wimbledon even exists shows that the fans (who should be the most important people in all this) would happily support such an outcome.

As for Milton Keynes, your belief that large numbers of people in that town will go and follow Wimbledon (the fact that the club will continue to be named after a place 100 miles or more away from it's new "home" just shows the farce of the whole thing) again shows a lack of understanding of the dynamics of football. Milton Keynes (like any other town) contains basically two types of people football wise. These are of course, those who have an interest in football, and those who do not. Those who have an interest in the main will already follow a club (even if they do not attend matches) and are unlikely to switch allegiance. Those who do not will of course have no interest in the club arriving in the town, and may even consider it a nuisance. Either way, this myth of a mass of support just waiting for a club to arrive is just that . . .a myth.

Basically, what it comes down to, is that Charles Koppell and his associates are moving the club to MK because they believe it is their best option financially. They are quite happy to kill the spirit of Wimbledon FC to acheive their aim. As a response to this, AFC Wimbledon has been formed by Wimbledon fans who wish to try and keep that spirit alive. I personally believe that the interests of football are best served by AFC Wimbledon eventually climbing back into the football league, while the MK project fails dismally. This is the outcome I would like to see. If Charles Koppell loses all of his personal wealth in the process, so much the better.

wedgetail

01-11-2002, 11:08 AM

Originally posted by Jason
If Charles Koppell loses all of his personal wealth in the process, so much the better.
A well argued case, but Koppell doesn't own the Club, he is just an employee.

Lambeth Palace

01-11-2002, 11:19 AM

Originally posted by wedgetail
A well argued case, but Koppell doesn't own the Club, he is just an employee.

...and there is no chance of the Norwegians who actually own the club losing all their wealth.

Jason, you make excellent points there. I also hope that Franchise FC go under asap and that AFC Wimbledon somehow make it back into the league. The chaps I know who support AFC are having the time of their lives at the moment and haven't enjoyed football that much in years.

As for c-block's 'arguments' (for want of a better word) in favour of franchising. :S:

Boris the charltonhater

02-11-2002, 11:06 AM

It is quite obvious that C-Block Lad and myself are the only two people who post here who know what we are talking about. Last year Wimbledon were losing £20,000 a day they have to move, there is no alternative.

A.F.C Wimbledon are second to Charlton in my list of most hated teams. Their 'fans' are disloyal moaning idiots who abandoned their club when they were needed most. They charge absurd prices for people to watch non-league football in an attempt to buy themselves a league place while continuing to critisice the real Wimbledon for making money.

Does A.F.C stand for "All F***ing C***s"?

1fae

wedgetail

02-11-2002, 11:20 AM

Boris,
You don't seem to see the difference between the club, i.e. the fans and the business, i,e, the privately owned company. What happened at Wimbledon FC was that out of greed the owners of the company decided they did not want to have that particular club and those particular fans any more, what they wanted was a DIFFERENT club playing in a DIFFERENT city with DIFFERENT fans. Unfortunately the feeble load of tosers at the FA and the FL let them have their way in complete vioaltion of the league rules.

So the owners of Wimbledon FC told their fans that their (the fans) club was to taken away from them and given to a new set of fans(if indeed theese fans actually exist).

The AFC supports did not desert their club they had it taken away from them.

WorthingEagle

02-11-2002, 11:25 AM

Originally posted by Boris the charltonhater
It is quite obvious that C-Block Lad and myself are the only two people who post here who know what we are talking about. Last year Wimbledon were losing £20,000 a day they have to move, there is no alternative.

A.F.C Wimbledon are second to Charlton in my list of most hated teams. Their 'fans' are disloyal moaning idiots who abandoned their club when they were needed most. They charge absurd prices for people to watch non-league football in an attempt to buy themselves a league place while continuing to critisice the real Wimbledon for making money.

Does A.F.C stand for "All F***ing C***s"?

Palace are losing money every day, every club is. So you'd be happy for Simon Jordan to move Palace because we only get crowds of 16,000-18,000? And you'd still go to Palace even if they were being moved out of London within the next year?

Wimbledon were only losing that much money because they were badly run and had so many players on Premiership wages. There is no reason they couldn't survive as a Crewe or Grimsby-sized club back in Merton, and hopefully this is what AFC Wimbledon will achieve in the next 20 years.

I hope Franchise FC goes under at the end of this season, freeing up a league place for a real club from the Conference.

Stonewall

02-11-2002, 11:27 AM

Originally posted by wedgetail
Boris,
You don't seem to see the difference between the club, i.e. the fans and the business, i,e, the privately owned company. What happened at Wimbledon FC was that out of greed the owners of the company decided they did not want to have that particular club and those particular fans any more, what they wanted was a DIFFERENT club playing in a DIFFERENT city with DIFFERENT fans. Unfortunately the feeble load of tosers at the FA and the FL let them have their way in complete vioaltion of the league rules.

So the owners of Wimbledon FC told their fans that their (the fans) club was to taken away from them and given to a new set of fans(if indeed theese fans actually exist).

The AFC supports did not desert their club they had it taken away from them. Wedgetail. you are spot on with those sentments!
As far as I can see, Boris & C block havent a clue what they are talking about. I grew up in the Wimbledon area, I know how many of the A.F.C. fans feel about the Franchise and will appose it to the end!

AddiscombeEagle

02-11-2002, 11:36 AM

I can't be bothered to write a long article.

Boris and C-Block:clown: :clown: :clown: :clown: :clown: :clown: :clown: :clown:

Ruskin Old Boy

02-11-2002, 11:44 AM

Originally posted by AddiscombeEagle
I can't be bothered to write a long article.

Boris and C-Block:clown: :clown: :clown: :clown: :clown: :clown: :clown: :clown:

I agree with every :clown: you posted.... mind you a :S: or two would also have been appropriate.

Franchising football in England must not succeed.

anti-addick

02-11-2002, 11:49 AM

Originally posted by c_block_lad
The fact is that the REAL Wimbledon are in a very strange situation, it is not as easy to simply move back to Merton. Were the most people support Foolham and co. The REAL Wimbledon need to move to MK to survive.

2 comments that make you look a complete f*cking idiot. The REAL Wimbledon are AFC Wimbledon, end of story.

Boris is clearly as much of an idiot as you too.

I am also hoping that MK Dons fail miserably and fold, hopefully showing any other potential 'movers' that this kind of thing is a bad idea. It's nice to see AFCW stuffing everyone each week too, they'll certainly make the Conference or at least the one below it in the next few years.

as216

02-11-2002, 12:09 PM

Originally posted by anti-addick
Boris is clearly as much of an idiot as you too

Thought that had been established ages ago.

Lambeth Palace

02-11-2002, 12:35 PM

Originally posted by Boris the charltonhater
£20,000 a day

Get your facts straight. It was 20,000 a week. That's 1 million over a year and how much did Charles Koppel spend on a pointless PR campaign for MK? Yes, you've guessed it. With respect, when you and c-block grow up you will realise that there is more to life then petty rivalries with fans of other clubs, however, much they've made you cry recently. That's what this is all about, you don't like them because they don't like you and you allow this to cloud your view of franchising which no REAL football fan would support.

As for the incorrect figure you quoted, I suggest you get your so-called 'facts' straight before posting. :clown:

c_block_lad

03-11-2002, 10:23 AM

I didn't hear the Wimbledon "fans" complaning about there homeless situation when they were doing well in the Premiership, did you?:rolleyes:

c_block_lad

03-11-2002, 10:26 AM

Also why is WISA and AFC so bothered about "MK Dons"? I mean counting the amount of people going into a ground etc. Why don't they just get on with their own club? You dont see the Real Wimbledon turning up to AFC's matches and you also don't see the REAL Wimbledon releasing press statements about the other wimbledon and vice versa. Why can't they just get on with their own club?:rolleyes:

c_block_lad

03-11-2002, 10:28 AM

Because they are jealous of the success the real wimbledon WILL have in MK land.

sydney eagle

03-11-2002, 11:09 AM

1f9e

Originally posted by Ruskin Old Boy

Franchising football in England must not succeed. I could NOT agree with this more.

WorthingEagle

03-11-2002, 11:11 AM

Originally posted by c_block_lad
Because they are jealous of the success the real wimbledon WILL have in MK land.

They are doomed to spectacular failure in MK, and the reason the AFC fans still report on Franchise FC is that they want to see the tossers who stole their club from them fall flat on their incompetant, greedy faces....

Even if Franchise FC were to have success on the field, they won't be jealous, they'll be happy watching a team that means something to them and management + players that actually give a toss about their support.

Edmundo

03-11-2002, 08:59 PM

Originally posted by c_block_lad
I didn't hear the Wimbledon "fans" complaning about there homeless situation when they were doing well in the Premiership, did you?:rolleyes: I did. You obviously weren't listening.

In a competition for the biggest fool on the internet, Boris the charltonhater runs you close, but there's no doubt in my mind that you take the prize.

Ruskin Old Boy

04-11-2002, 08:01 AM

Extract from the Guardian report of the Milton Keynes/Delia Smith match

"Banging the banks of empty seats around them is the best Wimbledon's smattering of fans can muster to show support for their team these days. The loneliness of the soon-to-be long-distance Don is profound.
The fans' continued attendance can barely be called loyalty, given that Wimbledon are an unrecognisable sham of the club which brushed aside allcomers on their rise through the leagues. But without them Wimbledon would cease to exist and, morals aside, it is a shame for the players that performances such as Saturday's aren't celebrated more widely.

Around 1,000 home fans were said to be present but few of those are expected to return tomorrow night when Rotherham are back at Selhurst Park in the Worthington Cup, a fixture which attracted 849 fans in the league last week."

Even the large number of comps distributed by Koppel's cronies hasn't done much to increase their attendances...

Neil the Eagle

04-11-2002, 09:26 AM

Chaps, don't fall for the wind-up. If you run a search on some of c_block kid's postings in the summer they are very contradictory to his present stance... he's posting simply to provoke a reaction and you lot are giving it to him.

Boris the charltonhater

04-11-2002, 09:27 AM

Originally posted by Ruskin Old Boy
Franchising football in England must not succeed.

I never once stated that franchising in football was a good thing. But I would rather support a team in a totally desperate situation who are doing everything they can to survive than support a bunch of disloyal idiots like those at AFC Wimbledon.

AFC get ten times the average attendence in their league yet charge absurd prices for tickets. I know it takes money to set up a club but they are effectively trying to 'buy' themselves a league place back. Most people on this board were disgusted by how Fulham have 'brought' themselves a Premier League place but are happy to see AFC attempt to buy themselves a league place. People on this board were posted at the start of the season saying how sad it would be if Bradford went bust but seem quite happy to let Wimbledon go bust.

In my view and in the view of every other decent person on the planet loyalty is the most important things in life. If Palace's finances were as bad as Wimbledon's and had to move to deepest darkest Peru to survive then I would still support them and do as much as I possibly could to make sure I could watch them play as often as possible.

Boris the charltonhater

04-11-2002, 09:28 AM

Boris the charltonhater

04-11-2002, 09:34 AM

Originally posted by Lambeth Palace
As for the incorrect figure you quoted, I suggest you get your so-called 'facts' straight before posting. :clown:

Sorry but it is you who is the :clown: here.

20,000 a week means £1,040,000 a year
20,000 a day means £7,280,000 a year

Wimbledon who were losing money each year in the premiership got relegated to the first division where income is at least five or six million pounds below what it is in the top flight. Whatever your opinion of Wimbledon and AFC Wimbledon is is you cannot argue with true facts. Wimbledon were losing 20,000 a day. If their propsed move to Milton Keynes had been blocked then the club would have folded in the summer.

Boris the charltonhater

04-11-2002, 09:35 AM

Originally posted by Ruskin Old Boy
Extract from the Guardian report of the Milton Keynes/Delia Smith match

"Banging the banks of empty seats around them is the best Wimbledon's smattering of fans can muster to show support for their team these days. The loneliness of the soon-to-be long-distance Don is profound.
The fans' continued attendance can barely be called loyalty, given that Wimbledon are an unrecognisable sham of the club which brushed aside allcomers on their rise through the leagues. But without them Wimbledon would cease to exist and, morals aside, it is a shame for the players that performances such as Saturday's aren't celebrated more widely.

Around 1,000 home fans were said to be present but few of those are expected to return tomorrow night when Rotherham are back at Selhurst Park in the Worthington Cup, a fixture which attracted 849 fans in the league last week."

Even the large number of comps distributed by Koppel's cronies hasn't done much to increase their attendances...

Ooooooooooooh the Guardian! :rolleyes:

c_block_lad

04-11-2002, 09:47 AM

Originally posted by Neil the Eagle
Chaps, don't fall for the wind-up. If you run a search on some of c_block kid's postings in the summer they are very contradictory to his present stance... he's posting simply to provoke a reaction and you lot are giving it to him.

:rolleyes: I have already said that those postings about AFC were done by my brother before his registered as the daddy 5+5. I made that clear on the thread, I suggest you get your facts right before you start making random comments which are false.:rolleyes:

2c80

Ruskin Old Boy

04-11-2002, 10:21 AM

Originally posted by Neil the Eagle
Chaps, don't fall for the wind-up. If you run a search on some of c_block kid's postings in the summer they are very contradictory to his present stance... he's posting simply to provoke a reaction and you lot are giving it to him.

Happen you're right.... one Trolley is bad enough but two Junior Trolleys is alarming. Perhaps you could give them a few column inches on page 94 of the Echo? :)

Lambeth Palace

04-11-2002, 11:25 AM

Originally posted by Boris the charltonhater
Wimbledon who were losing money each year in the premiership got relegated to the first division where income is at least five or six million pounds below what it is in the top flight.

A figure which, changed mysteriously from 20,000 a week in february this year.

If it does include 'potential' revenue 'lost' due to relegation then every club outside the premiership is 'losing' '20,000 a day':clown:

Will moving to MK give Wimbledon automatic promotion? If not, then they will continue to 'lose' close to '20,000 a day' won't they?:clown:

Losing '20,000 a day' didn't stop Mr Koppel spending 1 million on a PR campaign in favour of MK, that's 20,000 a week.:clown:

The figure of '20,000 a day' conveniently overlooked the revenue gained from player sales, Koppel has also said that they are losing less money this season with lower attendances. How did he work that one out? Perhaps if attendances drop to zero they will lose even less money, using 'Koppel's calculator' of course. Maybe it's because he no longer has to employ the PR firm Brunswick to help push 'Milton Keynes'.

However, on page 5 of a glossy brochure sent to Wimbledon supporters just after the commission’s decision, the club says:
"In the 2000/01 season the club made a loss of £10.8 million (operating loss of before player trading)."

So what? Well, in that season the club sold Carl Cort to Newcastle for £7 million; Ben Thatcher to Spurs for £5 million; Herman Hreidarrson to Ipswich for £4 million; and John Hartson to Coventry for an undisclosed fee. Taking these sums at face value, they should have eradicted the club's losses and left it with a healthy surplus. What has happened to this money? If it is in the accounts (which, in breach of regulations, have yet to be filed at Companies House) they should show Wimbledon to be solvent in the year 2000/01. In addition, in the season just past, Jason Euell was sold to Charlton for £4 million and Marcus Gayle to Glasgow Rangers for £1 million.

Here are some sources. I suggest you read them, you might learn something.

http://www.wisa.org.uk/news/n20020207g.html

http://football.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,9753,698582,00.html

http://www.soccernet.com/columns/2002/0528/20020528featborg.html

http://www.warwickboar.co.uk/?article=631

http://www.bias.org.uk/News/July%202002/WISAletter.html

Lambeth Palace

04-11-2002, 11:31 AM

Originally posted by Boris the charltonhater
Ooooooooooooh the Guardian! :rolleyes:

A better source then Charles Koppel surely and he seems to be your only source of information on this matter!

Jason

04-11-2002, 11:53 AM

Originally posted by Boris the charltonhater
Sorry but it is you who is the :clown: here.

20,000 a week means £1,040,000 a year
20,000 a day means £7,280,000 a year

Wimbledon who were losing money each year in the premiership got relegated to the first division where income is at least five or six million pounds below what it is in the top flight. Whatever your opinion of Wimbledon and AFC Wimbledon is is you cannot argue with true facts. Wimbledon were losing 20,000 a day. If their propsed move to Milton Keynes had been blocked then the club would have folded in the summer.

OK, lets assume that your figures are right (and to be fair, I have also heard the £20,000 a day figure quoted). That doesn't mean that Wimbledon have to move to MK. As I said earlier in the thread (and others have echoed this), Wimbledon's best future lies as a restructured Nationwide League club playing back in Merton. This could be acheived even if the current club is indeed losing £20,000 a day:

The fact is that the current losses are Caused largely by the fact that Wimbledon are continuing to pay several players Premiership wages. Culling the top ten wage earners would eliminate most (if not all) of these losses at a stroke. It is fair to say that selling players is difficult in the current climate, and while some players would attract fees, others would need to be let go on frees, and some even partially paid up to encourage them to take reduced contracts elsehwere. For arguments sake then, lets say that the net financial result of releasing these players is neutral,but that a couple of promising youngsters have to be sold to bring about the neutral result. At a stroke (or over a period of a few months realistically) the losses are eliminated.

Obviously, a squad left containing mainly existing reserve / youth players mixed with a few low profile free transfers is likely to struggle (although sometimes clubs pull together and thrive in these situations, us in Administration being a case in point). Lets therefore assume that as a result of this drastic cost cutting exercise, the club were relegated to Division 2.

The move to Merton would then have to be completed. As Boris rightly says, facts cannot be argued with. It is a fact that Merton council have gone on record saying they would do all they could to support a WFC return to Plough Lane. Lets therefore assume that this is made to happen, and the cost of this move is £5,000,000 (cost of regaining use of the site, and bringing the ground back up to League standard). I know that this figure may seem low, but if Merton Council are serious about their intent, they could follow the precedent set by Greenwich over the Valley, and designate the land in souch away that it's redevelopment potential is virtually nil. This drastically reduces the value of the land, and encourages the owners (who I remember reading somewhere may be Sainsburys, but don't quote me on that) to come to an arrangement with Wimbledon.

In terms of the ongoing running of the club, I believe that Wimbledons average gate this season is around 2,000. The gates of AFC Wimbledon suggest that were the current WFC playing second division games at Plough Lane, average gates of at least 4,000 could be acheived. If we assume 25 home games a season (23 league and a nominal 2 cup games), and an average ticket price of £12, then gate recepits on an average gate of 2,000 total £600,000 a season. Naturally, if gates increase to 4,000, gate revenue increases by £600,000 a year. This means that the club is running at a £600,000 a year PROFIT, because the player cull would have eliminated the losses previously incurred, so break even could be acheived on the previous gates.

Naturally, the £5,000,000 needed to return to Plough Lane wouldn't just be lying around. Therefore lets assume that the full amount has to be borrowed. If this was the case, the £600,000 profit would go a long way (if not all of the way) to repaying that loan over say a 10 year period.

The net result of all of the above would be a 2nd Division Wimbledon breaking even and playing at Plough Lane. Surely a better scenario than what we have now. I acknowledge that the situation is not quite as simple as set out above (in particular, cutting the wage bill by the amount needed may not be possible in the present climate without taking a large finanical hit in the short term). However, some positive factors as well as negative have not been factored in. For example, no account is made of the fact that 4,000 people spend more in a ground than 2,000. Nor is the profit on selling players brought through the youth ranks considered. Both of these would be significant sources of future revenue. The above is an OUTLINE of how WFC could survive WITHOUT moving to MK.

Worthing Eagle actually stated that a Crewe / Grimsby sized club would be sustainable for Wimbledon in Merton. I agree with this entirely, and could actually see Wimbledon becoming a "Crewe of the South". A Youth driven club that prospers by selling the cream of it's talent to bigger sides.

None of this will actually happen of course, and Boris may be quite right when he says that without the MK move, WFC would have been liquidated in the summer. What those who support MK have to understand though, is WHY things are as they are. The reason quite simply is greed. The "vision" (for want of a better term) of how WFC could be structured would involve huge amounts of dedicated hard work, and at the end of it there would be nothing more (financially speaking) than a club that breaks even. Wimbledon's owners have no interest in this, as they are motivated only by profit. As such, they wish to in effect kill the club and start a new one using the existing League membership in Milton Keynes. C-Block, Boris and co. seem unable to grasp that this new club would NOT be Wimbledon. It would be a new club using Wimbledon's league status, and (probably obly for a few seasons) it's name. AFC Wimbledon is not killing WFC, it is trying to salvage it's spirit from the devestation heaped on WFC by it's owners.

As for the point that people resenting Fulham but encouraging AFC is a contradiction, well they are missing the point. Fulham's success was bought by one (largely unpopular) man massaging his own ego. IF AFC Wimbledon succeed, it will be the result of fans collectively gathering together to try and reform the club that was taken away from them. One flies in the face of what football should be, the other represents all that is good in the game.

Finally, just a small thought to leave with C- Block and Boris. How would you feel singing "1-0 to the Londoners", or "South London is Wonderful", while watching a team named Crystal Palace take the Field for a "home" game 100 miles or more away from Selhurst, with most of your "fellow fans" knowing (and caring) nothing for the history and trasition of the club. When you consider that, you will (providing you have the intelligence and empathy required) understand why the MK move is so violently opposed by Wimbledon fans, and why AFC Wimbledon has such widespread support among decent fans of all clubs.

863

c_block_lad

04-11-2002, 12:33 PM

So becuase I don't support AFC Wimbledon it doesn't make me a decent fan?:rolleyes:

Ruskin Old Boy

04-11-2002, 12:47 PM

Originally posted by Lambeth Palace
A better source then Charles Koppel surely and he seems to be your only source of information on this matter!

Perhaps Boris is Charles Koppel;)

Snorwood Eagle

04-11-2002, 03:08 PM

Well I doubt they'll improve on 849 for the Worthington Cup match between the two tomorrow night. Any guesses?

I'm going for 432.

Ruskin Old Boy

04-11-2002, 03:20 PM

They may Snorwood, if only because Rotherham are providing free coach travel for their supporters.

Elephant with mouse gyp

04-11-2002, 03:33 PM

Originally posted by Ruskin Old Boy
Rotherham are providing free coach travel for their supporters.

Unfortunately, free food is not on the agenda. That means they will be looking for somewhere to eat. Any ideas? I don't think they like curries, pub food, or football stadium food.

Ruskin Old Boy

04-11-2002, 03:57 PM

Originally posted by Elephant with mouse gyp
I don't think they like curries, pub food, or football stadium food.

:D :o