Joe. Posted 29 March 2007 Posted 29 March 2007 I get what you are both saying, I understand it but I don't agree with it. As Jordan says, it's agree to disagree time... New badge, new colours, new name and sixty miles from your cultural home = new club in my book and nothing anybody says is going to convince me otherwise. Wimbledon FC is dead and I refuse to recognise the existence of the MK Dons. I couldn't care either way about AFCW. I totally agree. MK Dons are an edifferent club. Different badge, kit and moving 60 miles away says it all. Wimbledon were in the Premiership MK Dons, League Two. Slight difference there too in a short space of time eh...
Daggers Posted 30 March 2007 Posted 30 March 2007 Wimbledon were in the Premiership What the deuce?! They got to the Premiership? For me, I will always fondly remember them as a crap fourth division side...
BartonFox Posted 30 March 2007 Posted 30 March 2007 Barton You tit! You're the first person I've ever come accross that has supported MKDongsFC Well done
Master Fox Posted 30 March 2007 Posted 30 March 2007 Barton You tit! You're the first person I've ever come accross that has supported MKDongsFC I support the MKdons aswell. I honestly don't see what the problem some people have with them? I hope they go up, and one day make the Premiership, oh and their new ground actually looks and sounds better than the Walkers. Good luck to them!
Jordan Posted 30 March 2007 Posted 30 March 2007 What the deuce?! They got to the Premiership? For me, I will always fondly remember them as a crap fourth division side... If they'd have beaten Wycombe in that 2001 FA Cup replay, maybe it would have delayed Peter Taylor causing the club to collapse by just a little bit longer.
Alexikokopops Posted 30 March 2007 Posted 30 March 2007 Am I the only one that's noticed the oxymoron in the thread title?
act smiley Posted 30 March 2007 Posted 30 March 2007 Conspiracy theory time - they're going from maximum to minimum so that the West Ham punishment can be the same.
vanfox12 Posted 31 March 2007 Posted 31 March 2007 Look at Scotland both Livingston and Clyde moved from their old locations because of lack of support and success. Livingston were known as Meadowbank Thistle (Formerly Ferranti Thistle) and moved because they played in front of 3 figure crowds in an athletics stadium in Edinburgh. As a result crowds went up and they moved up the leagues getting into the SPL for a few seasons even winning the CIS Cup. The same applied to Clyde moved out of Glasgow because of most of their support had moved away from Glasgow. There is a third example in Scotland, Airdrie United who are actually Clydebank but replaced the Original Airdrie who went bust a couple of Years ago. Franchising might not be the answer but when your clubs in trouble you'll do anything to keep it going.
RedOnRed Posted 4 April 2007 Posted 4 April 2007 People seem quick to forget that Wimbledon arrived at Milton Keynes homeless and under administration and that the MK Dons often get bigger crowds in the bottom division then Wimbledon typically got in the Premiership…so much for loyal Wimbledon support then? If you’re looking to blame someone for Wimbledon’s demise then why not blame Sam Hamann for selling them to Norwegians and then the Norwegians for pulling the plug on them? Why blame Milton Keynes for throwing them a lifeline? MK Dons have evolved from Wimbledon and will always have historical ties, but they have also risen from Wimbledon’s ashes and have forged their own identity. We can all be as romantic and loyal as we like about Wimbledon but if it hadn’t been for the support in MK and a passionate MK Dons chairman - Wimbledon and their footballing bloodline would have ceased all together.
vanfox12 Posted 4 April 2007 Posted 4 April 2007 People seem quick to forget that Wimbledon arrived at Milton Keynes homeless and under administration and that the MK Dons often get bigger crowds in the bottom division then Wimbledon typically got in the Premiership…so much for loyal Wimbledon support then?If you’re looking to blame someone for Wimbledon’s demise then why not blame Sam Hamann for selling them to Norwegians and then the Norwegians for pulling the plug on them? Why blame Milton Keynes for throwing them a lifeline? MK Dons have evolved from Wimbledon and will always have historical ties, but they have also risen from Wimbledon’s ashes and have forged their own identity. We can all be as romantic and loyal as we like about Wimbledon but if it hadn’t been for the support in MK and a passionate MK Dons chairman - Wimbledon and their footballing bloodline would have ceased all together. If anyone was to blame for the death of Wimbledon FC it was Sam Hamann who suggested that the Club moved across the Irish Sea to Dublin.
BartonFox Posted 4 April 2007 Posted 4 April 2007 If anyone was to blame for the death of Wimbledon FC it was Sam Hamann who suggested that the Club moved across the Irish Sea to Dublin. If anyone is to blame it is the FA who upon creating the Premier League decided Wimbledon's Plough Lane wasn't up to spec allowed them to move to Selhurst Park with no insistance of finding their own home. Had they done so then Sam Hammam would have had to look for a new home and possibly none of this would have occured. The reason for Hammam's suggestions of Dublin was because Merton council (the London Borough where Wimbledon sits) did nothing to help the Club. Of all the villans in the piece and despite the fact I dislike him greatly Pete Winkelman and the people of MK are not the worst.
RedOnRed Posted 5 April 2007 Posted 5 April 2007 Sam Hamann was main person for putting Wimbledon on the map but he was also the catalyst for taking them off it.
DJhinckley Posted 5 April 2007 Posted 5 April 2007 I can tell you all now that AFCW are fast becoming more hated in non league than FCSCUM. It may seem from the top levels of the the Football League that they are a little club trying to come to terms with seeing their team moved away from their base and gradually finding their feet again rising up the leagues. Far from it. They are merely another franchise themselves seeking not to ingratiate themselves in the non league community, but to claw their way above all rivals, no matter at what cost. This latest episode merely highlights this fact. Despite being kicked out of their home, they used their financial muscle to kick out Kingstonian and virtually destroy a great non league club with it's own long history. The fact that the punishment for the rule breaking was completely in accordance with the rule seems to be lost on AFCW fans. Funny, because I can't remember AFCW lobbying any MPs last season when the exact same punishment was handed out to Altrincham for the same offence? Points gained whilst playing a player without international clearance shall be docked. Altrincham weren't even allowed to appeal! Yet here we are with AFCW saying how harsh the punishment was and how it was unfair. Harsh and unfair it may be but no club in the Ryman League lobbied the Ryman board to change the rule following the Altrincham decision, so was the rule agreed at the start of the current season, by accepting the constitution at the AGM. Now the FA have set a precedence. Apparently the more MPs you get to talk nonsense about a punishment the more chance you have of getting the FA to bottle out. It is now possible to change the rules half way through the season without the majority vote of the member clubs of a League. Truly the non league spirit shown from the AFCW faithful. Yet after all that, do you know what most non league fans hate the most about AFCW? It's that their websites and many fans claim the history of Wimbledon from the FA Cup victory right the way back to teh Southern League. They live in a dream world with a single goal of getting into to the Football League. That is all.
act smiley Posted 5 April 2007 Posted 5 April 2007 Well, I think that an appeal would be fair thing to have, that the maximum points deductions seemed a bit over the top and I seem to remember saying the same thing last season for Altrincham. True, changing things mid-way through isn't a good idea, but I thought that there was an appeal, but that it just didn't get anywhere? Or am I mixing it up with another incident? Either way, 18pts is too much, 3 is possibly a little bit soft. Its an adminstrative error rather than deliberate deception, West Ham style, so I don't think there's any need to dish out the whole punishment, is there? I thought the thing with Kingstonian was that Kingstonian's ground had been taken by a loan company or something along those lines and they couldn't afford to buy it or keep up the payments, and that they're getting it rented back to them by AFCW, who happened to have the money for it? They getting shafted on the rent or something?
Daggers Posted 23 June 2008 Posted 23 June 2008 If anyone is to blame it is the FA who upon creating the Premier League decided Wimbledon's Plough Lane wasn't up to spec allowed them to move to Selhurst Park with no insistance of finding their own home. Had they done so then Sam Hammam would have had to look for a new home and possibly none of this would have occured.The reason for Hammam's suggestions of Dublin was because Merton council (the London Borough where Wimbledon sits) did nothing to help the Club. Of all the villans in the piece and despite the fact I dislike him greatly Pete Winkelman and the people of MK are not the worst. I miss BF.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.