Why Are Many Lower Non-League Clubs Missing a Trick?

 In recent years one cannot not have missed the ‘support grassroots football’ tag, plastered on social media and elsewhere, extolling the virtues of the beautiful game, played, organised and administered by the supposed good and virtuous, far removed from the apparent greed of the high rollers of the Premier League.

Interestingly, the opening games of this season at the, so-called, ‘grassroots’ level, have seen some clubs have reporting vastly improved attendances, possibly caused by the ‘no fans’ policy at higher levels due to the Covid restrictions, and the desire from some football fans to watch a game, any game

However, it remains to be seen whether this increase is a genuine renewal of interest in lower level non-league football and whether it can be maintained.   This situation presents an incredible opportunity for clubs, particularly those who normally play their matches in front of a sprinkling of die-hards, dim-wits, girlfriends, dads, the curious and confused.

So, “Get involved with your local team” is the rallying call.  Another mantra is “Football is all about of opinions”.  But how much will your view or opinion have in the running of your local club should you decide that you wish to get involved?  Perhaps the contribution you are really being encouraged to make is limited to making tea, cleaning, fund raising, editing a programme, selling raffle tickets, making sandwiches, taking the gate money, rolling and cutting the pitch as, all too often, many of these tasks are left to just a few individuals as it is difficult to recruit new people on a regular and committed basis.

But as these tasks are necessary in the running of a football club, the question is “Who is getting the true benefit?”

Certainly, the players will benefit but their contribution is normally confined to playing a game of football.  With respect to them, many are hardly the hottest ticket in town.  In fact, if they had been actors in a West End production, playing to near empty theatres as many do, Cameron Mackintosh would have closed the show long ago.

Clubs that lose money are commonplace and, unless one can find a benefactor or soccer ‘Sugar Daddy’, the inevitable result can be merger, the sale of a ground and ultimately extinction. 

Football, at all domestic levels, has seen its share of Sugar Daddies, from double glazing salesmen to Qatari Sheiks.  But can they possibly care about the club as much as the man or woman who makes the players’ after match tea and sandwiches?  Investment, whether in cash, or in time and effort, is always welcome, but the former rarely has the longevity and unconditional commitment of the latter.

One should distinguish between these Sugar Daddies and many of the genuine ‘benefactors’ at lower leagues who have, or continue to, contribute financially, and have worked hard behind the scenes in efforts to keep a club going for little or no personal gain.

Some benefactors put money into the club, maybe clearing debts, or contributing to a player’s budget.  Unfortunately, in many cases, there are those who do not part with their money without having strings attached and the inevitable situation is that the club ‘owes’ him/her £xxx,000 and a new position of club ‘owner’ is said to have been created.

Once a person assumes ownership of a club, the legal entity changes from being a members’ club to that of a proprietary club.  This means that all the assets of the club belong to the owner, which is then run for the purpose of making a profit and then owner can make whatever rules he or she thinks fit.  Think of your club as a night club of which you are member.  There are no meetings, it is run by the ‘owner’ and members are just customers.  The pay their subscriptions and enjoy the facilities/entertainment.

Some benefactors have become purported ‘owners’ of a club that was previously run and governed by members, because a real membership no longer existed, sometimes by the new owner excluding/cancelling/suspending membership, or by the remaining members handing over control of the club because of a promise to clear a debt or more funding in the future.  Such significant constitutional changes should certainly involve the Football Association who, unfortunately, have been asleep at the wheel for years, as far as lower league non-league football is concerned.

These situations may be the hurdle by which many clubs are losing out on generating much needed revenue during the present crisis.

Should a club decide to open itself up to customers/clients/fans etc through an annual membership scheme, it could benefit from a sure-fire way to raise funds, not just once, but every year.  For example, if a club had 200 paid up members (which is not beyond a step 5 club with serious intentions of reaching out to its community) at an annual subscription of £20, it would raise £4,000 immediately and continue to do so each year. This income could prove to be a life saver financially, not least with the additional revenue through merchandise, matchday refreshments etc. and would also have the added benefit of inviting new ideas and initiatives into the club.

So why isn’t this happening?

Could it be because that a new influx of membership may, at a properly convened meeting, vote against the wishes of the ‘benefactor/owner’ and thus take control?  Ultimately, they may vote the benefactor out of office.  But isn’t this the way a community club is run, for the benefit of the community?

In some cases, ‘benefactor/owners’ have even tried to protect their position by including in the club rules that anyone owed money by the club cannot be voted off a committee.  Once again, such a rule, if constitutional in the first place, can be easily removed by a members’ vote, but would certainly deter any sensible person from wishing to join that entity.

It would be marvellous if there was greater interest in lower league and local football, but to adhere to their grassroots ‘motif’, the clubs, leagues and the FA should get their house in order.

Would-be supporters may wish to ensure that the club in which they intend to invest their time, goodwill and not least their money, is transparent and open, and that they have a say in its management and decisions made.

The rules of some leagues compel their clubs to publish details of the legal entity by which they trade.  However, this is not as vigorously enforced as one would expect.  Even at level 9/ step 5, some clubs are Limited Companies and, as such, unless a supporter is a shareholder, he/she has no say in the running of the ‘club’.

Surely such exclusion of supporters gives the lie to the statement that grassroots football offers inclusion and the opportunity to be part of the club you choose to support.  

Unfortunately, in such cases, the non-league supporter is really no different to the customers who shop for their entertainment at more upmarket businesses such as Chelsea, Liverpool and Arsenal Football 'Clubs'.

 

 

BBC 3 on the Ultras. Epic Fail

Justin

Last week a short documentary was released on the BBC3 website that told the tale of a West Ham supporter, Justin, who has turned his back on English football to follow an Italian 3^rd division team which enjoys the support of a vociferous group of Ultras. In listing his reasons for this change of perspective, he mentioned that, prior to the decision, he had concluded that his support was no longer valued by the club and he felt like he was merely a ‘customer’.

Having witnessed the ‘Ultras effect’ at the Old Spotted Dog over recent seasons, I can certainly understand why this young man is attracted to this way of supporting a team. The incredible atmosphere that was created by the Clapton Ultras was not only the envy of many other non league clubs, even those at a higher level, but was also a contributory factor as to why many good players stayed with the Tons rather than move on to other teams where they could possibly earn a few quid. It still amazes me that some players would, for the sake of a few bob, rather play in front of one man and a dog than in front of a real crowd with all the atmosphere. [but that’s for another day]

There is little doubt that, whilst the Ultras were at Clapton, attendances increased, and with it came a lot more income and, consequently, many other non league clubs in the area have been doing their best to attract similarly vociferous supporters in order to form their own version of the ‘Ultras’.

For some time Non League football has presented itself as being the part of game in which supporters can be come actively involved in their club. Despite this, many clubs are still being run by a small group of people or just one individual, and are lacking the requisite numbers and expertise, whether that be in administration, matchday organisation or even in marketing the club.

In recent seasons we have seen the increased number of clubs who have become fan owned, not least Clapton Community Football Club, where supporters decided to change their allegiance from Vincent McBean’s Clapton where they had been clearly and deliberately excluded, to enjoy active participation in a club in which they have a say in how it is run. This, despite they are now watching football that is a number of levels lower in the football pyramid.

So, this brings me back to the BBC3 documentary.

During the film, the young man visits the Dog and clips from various videos are shown in which the Clapton Ultras are seen in full voice, cheering on the lads in their inimitable style. Some of these clips are at least three years old and deliberately mislead the audience. The reality is that McBean FC's home matches have been sparsely attended since the home match boycott and the advent of CCFC. There is, however, a very short clip of a more recent match with McBean’s team playing in their new, non Clapton garb, with red shorts. It is devoid of any fan noise or chanting but is clearly designed to give the impression that the Ultras continue to support McBean FC.

So, imagine my surprise, given his consistent condemnation of the Ultras, when Vincent McBean appeared on the film. Interviewed whilst standing in front of the “famous scaffold stand” (his words), he went on to say about the Ultras, “They’re the heart and soul of the club, Those guys are the ones who make the club.”

As far as I am aware, none of the Ultras have ever been members of Vincent McBean’s club. In fact Mr McBean is on record as having made allegations of racism against the Ultras (all of which were mischievous, totally unsubstantiated and none reported to Kick It Out.)

I am no investigative journalist, but one doesn't have to be Hercule Poirot to assemble enough accurate information so as not to be hoodwinked by the McBean, the Walter Mitty of Forest Gate (and of London SW4 - thank you to my sources).

Unsurprisingly, this film has been criticised by many Clapton supporters including some of the old Ultras. They have a point, as it is an appalling piece of journalism which gives a totally misleading account of the present situation at McBean FC. Instead it gave the false impression that Clapton Ultras were still attending McBean FC matches, did not mention the boycott, the new fan owned club or the ongoing court case that was sparked by McBean’s attempt to liquidate the leaseholding Charity. Even more surprisingly, Justin, or the filmmakers failed to contact the Ultras to obtain their account. So what we were left is an unbalanced and misleading report.

Had they done so, they would have become aware that the legacy of Clapton Ultras continues at the Stray Dog where Clapton CFC are setting an example to McBean, and other 'exclusively run' entities that aree passing off as 'clubs', in non league football. Matchdays are exciting and atmospheric, the players and supporters come together as a group in striving for victory (as they used to do before the boycott at the Old Spotted Dog) Most importantly, membership of the club is open to all, every member own a share in the club and can propose and/or vote on any motions or proposals put forward.

Compare this with McBean's set up. The loudest sounds at matches comes from the dugouts and the players. He is flanked by other individuals who, whilst possibly well meaning, are being totally duped by the false persona he has developed in many years of his dodgy dealings. (Lets not forget the south London Charity from which he took nearly £500k).

I need not mention the litany of failed and struck off limited companies using the name, and other variations, of Clapton Football Club.

I was also interested to read a recent tweet from one the McBean FC team management who insisted the players were playing for them and not McBean. That, is not a club. The fact is that McBean FC amounts to a profit making entity from which only one person benefits (the licensed bar, rents from London Bari FC/Hackney Wick, Filming Shoots, The Tyre Warehouse etc). The players and team management are supporting this regime as they are a cog in that wheel and seem content to play their matches, amid the atmosphere of Sunday team on the Marshes, despite the obvious problems. It is a matter for their conscience alone.

It is therefore very little wonder why Clapton Community Football Club was established. Since its inception it has managed to recreate, and even improve upon, the old, inclusive club that was Clapton Football Club before the arrival of McBean. CCFC has the support of all the Life Members of the old Clapton FC and, coupled with the enthusiasm and vision of the members and owners, there is every reason to be optimistic that they will return Clapton to its old standing in non league football. That standing not only includes matters on the field but, just as importantly, what happens off the field. I salute Clapton CFC on the sterling work they have done to overcome a variety of obstacles whilst remaining true to their principals.  Sport should be for all to enjoy.

The future will be interesting. The High Court case appears to be coming to a head and McBean is been known to bail out just before the axe falls (as he did with the South London charity). This decision will obvious impact upon the ground and its usage and ultimately McBean FC. I have long since given up on the idea that any of the purported governing bodies will intervene of their own volition. The Charity Commission, HMRC, The Essex Senior League, the Football Association etc. have all stood by and done very little. 

Is it that their governance and adminstration is lamentable?  Or do they all stand squarely' McBean? One certainly has a reason to be curious.....

The documentary can be viewed at
https://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/clip/f41124ba-6b55-401d-a976-be92114e6cdd

The credits for the film, on the website of producer Charles Copsey (www.charlescopsey.com) read as follows :

I Turned My Back On English Football For Italian Ultras - BBC Three

​

Upset with West Ham, Justin turned to Italian club Arezzo to find the passion he believes his old club lost.

​

Director, Producer, Editor: Charles Copsey

BBC Producer and Development: Ally McCrae

Cinematography: Lloyd Cook

Sound Location and Post: Louis Lincoln

​

Commissioned by BBC Three for digital channels. Released and distributed by BBC Three, BBC Sport and Match of The Day social media channels.

True Legends

I’d been off the scene for a while but tempted out of retirement by the lure of the clash between Clapton Legends and their Sporting Bengal counterparts  at Ilford FC's Cricklefields ground.

Glad to say what a fantastic evening I had, great to see so many old faces and the carnival atmosphere had to be seen and heard to be believed. I have heard a lot about this ‘pyro’ issue over the years and fair play to the fans who have not used it of late because of the fines which would apparently be credited to the home side. But here in a more relaxed setting, the pyro was in full flow and added to a visually fantastic occasion which the incredible photos of the game bear testimony to.

What a truly inclusive occasion it was as well both on and off the pitch and great to see so many old faces in the Clapton squad ranging from the full spectrum of the early days of Chris Wood’s team such to those who have graced the pitch and the dug out in more recent times. Whilst the players picked were certainly of mixed ability and fitness levels due to the passage of time, they all held a shared affinity with the Ultras through good times and bad and most importantly it was plain to see the respect and affection was a 2 way thing. Having gone to only a handful of games in recent years I found myself more drawn towards this mixed band of footballing ‘desperados’ than the teams I had seen of late which seemed to chop and change on a regular basis, I found myself really getting behind the players and appreciating their efforts whatever the outcome might be.

The game itself was probably more competitive than expected and had a moment of controversy and good humour when a Sporting goal was unceremoniously ruled offside, a giant Ultras flag mischievously cutting short the celebrations. The boys went on to win 3-1 but the night wasn’t about the result, it was all about the occasion and perhaps an insight of how enjoyable football could be with the right people at the helm and everyone unified.

Well done to everyone involved including our very good friends Sporting Bengal in making this a true Night to Remember. Credit and my respect to the Clapton fans, you have to admire the unity of purpose in carrying out an unflinching year long boycott , let’s hope the future bring resolution to the fantastic fight waged against the ‘owner’.

Regards Lew

ESL Rules and The Lack of Consistency

Some time ago I mentioned a blog post I had in mind concerning the rules of the Essex Senior League and how they have been implemented and applied their rules.  Shortly afterwards, an article appeared in the Non League Paper, penned by our own Colin Yates, which complained about the overbearing attitude of the league, not least in their levying fines upon clubs  for 'allowing' the supporters to let off pyro and drink beer within sight of the game.

Fortunately the Essex Senior League publish their rules in full on their website in section Who We Are and I have managed to have a good look through these in recent weeks.

The relevant section that relates to these offences and fines are listed under the heading 'Procedural Arrangements to be followed For Essex Senior League Matches' (page 73) and, under paragraph 6(a)

My recollection is that this change in rule is founded by events that happened a couple of years ago when the League Chairman, Mr Errington, wrote to Vince McBean with regard to the Ultras, who were then significantly smaller in numbers, letting off pyro at Clapton matches.  Vince reproduced an extract from the letter on his website which quoted the Safety at Sports Grounds Act and emphasised the fact that a criminal conviction under this Act can carry a term of imprisonment.

To me this approach seemed, at the very least, a bit heavy handed and it was later revealed that the legislation referred to by the League Chairman does not apply to Clapton FC or any other club in the League.  A partial retraction was published by Vince, undoubtedly under instructions, that said 'No one is accusing anyone of anything'.  At best, it was embarrassing.  

In what appears to be a bid to deal with the Clapton Ultras issue, the League have, this season, amended the Procedural Arrangements so as to include references to pyro and bringing alcohol into the ground.

It also amended, from the previous season, a requirement that a spectator is forbidden to consume alcohol (even if he were to have bought it in the clubhouse) anywhere from where he/she is able to view the match.

The fine for any breach of these procedural arrangements is £250, the highest financial penalty on that tariff.

Putting pyro aside for the moment, one wonders how these procedural arrangements adopted by the club's when, as is abundantly clear at the majority of away games I have been to this season, spectators are enjoying a beer whilst watching the game.

It certainly appears that the club's did vote or acquiesce to their implementation as I have seen tweets from ESL Registration Secretary and Secretary of AFC Hornchurch, Peter Butcher confirming this.

If the club's did consciously vote for this, to then subject themselves to a £250 fine for every pint of beer consumed pitch side (and I have seen plenty of folk enjoying a beer whilst watching the match this season at a number of ESL grounds) is craziness.  To me it smacks of a renewed attempt by the League to implement the Safety at Sports Ground Act following the threats and embarrassing failure mentioned above.  Had Parliament intended to implement the Safety at Sports Grounds Act at grounds such as Clapton FC, then they would have legislated to do so and not left it to Mr Errington and Co.

I am unaware of any similar  procedural arrangement at any other league at our level and, dare I say it, one of the attractions of non league football at this level is the fact that you can watch the game whilst sipping a Tyskie or two.  But rather than following Clapton's lead in encouraging people to watch Essex Senior League matches, the League seem intent to drive them away.

Interestingly, the rules of Carshalton Athletic FC state that whilst alcohol is not allowed to be brought into the ground, alcohol bought in the bar can be consumed outside in plastic glasses.  It goes on to say that no alcohol can be consumed outside for cup matches. This would indicate that there is no such 'blanket ban' on alcohol being consumed whilst viewing the game in the Ryman League, where attendances and facilities are expected to be generally superior to those in the ESL.  Mr Butcher, as secretary of Hornchurch FC, would undoubtedly be aware of this as his club is not constrained by the same 'procedural arrangement' implemented by their League. The question is why would he want to be part of the implementation and enforcement of such a draconian and unnecessary measure?

Another aspect of this, is the vigor in which the League appear to clamp down on Clapton and Vince McBean on the pyro issue.  "Spectator safety" is the obvious retort, but recent events have shown that the League are very 'flaky' in implementing or retaining that.

The collapse of the pitch barrier in front of the scaffold last Saturday fortunately did not result in any injuries. There is no question of fault by any party, the only rider being, that the barrier has been there for decades and therefore, at some stage or another, it will have had to have given up the ghost.

It is a League Rule (not a 'procedural arrangement'), that all grounds must have a permanent pitch barrier of a certain type.  (ESL Handbook page 96) One would assume the requirement of a perimeter barrier of this type within the ground gradings is for player/spectator safety, which is apparently the League's primary concern as to the occasional pyro, be that undertaken by fans of Burnham Ramblers, Waltham Forest or Clapton.  Thus, the remedial work (traffic cones and tape) which replaced the fallen barrier for London Bari's home match with Barking last Wednesday was not clearly compliant with the League rule, and clearly not conducive to the safety of players and spectators.  A Referee, who's additional duties would appear to now include the reporting of pyro at Clapton games, would certainly have seen this before the game started and, under League rules, (assuming "rules is rules") should have called it off.

Whilst I have an extremely qualified sympathy for Vince McBean, I can understand his frustration in having to pay fines to a League whose committee seem to interpret their rules as and how they see fit.

A further RULE, seemingly ignored by the ESL, is their failure to ensure that the legal identity of each club is made public (ESL Handbook p47 - para 2.13).  In absence of Vince actually giving anyone a straight answer as to whether he considers himself the club's owner or otherwise, this would provide information, as is intended by the inclusion of the rule, to which all supporters should be privy.

The perennial financial struggle for income effects all clubs at our level and it is understandable for them to aim to maximising their income on match days and this would include the sale of alcohol. Thus, it would interesting to know the reason why the clubs who did vote through the 'Procedural Arrangements', particularly when the many of them continue to allow alcohol to be consumed in the ground in contravention of it.  Or perhaps its the case that the procedural arrangement went through at the AGM without discussion, debate or disclosure and it is only now that some clubs are reaping the wrath of letting it go through unchallenged.

The crux of the matter is that the officers and committee of the Essex Senior League appear to be running the league in such an arbitrary fashion that it is hard to see what they do actually benefits the clubs.  OK, so they run a competition but there has been no sponsorship of the league for many a season, the official league website is basically defunct and their internet presence owes much to the 'unofficial' website, fortunately run and administered by an enthusiastic and competent fan.  (here's an idea - hand the running of the official site to Pete Dudley)  It is not difficult to argue that the ESL are one of the weaker leagues at step 5. One would have therefore thought that the Clapton revival would have been embraced and encouraged by the League rather than their imposition of rules/'procedural arrangements', by stealth or otherwise, that appear designed to stifle the upturn in attendances and interest.  Clapton, or more correctly, the Clapton Ultras, have helped bring more people through the gates of Essex Senior League clubs, they have generated more positive publicity for the League than one can remember and are a shot in the arm for football at this level.  Its time the League appreciated this and applied their rules, provided that they are genuinely approved by and for the benefit of member clubs, consistently and fairly.

Weather to Play the Game or Not.

Not so long ago Clapton and Bowers and Pitsea were propping up the Essex Senior League and only a victory, in our final game of the season at the McMillan against Newham, finally condemned the Essex club to the basement spot in 2013/14.

Eighteen months later, and things have changed for both clubs.  Last season, with a much-changed squad, Bowers were very much in contention for the league title and won the League Cup Final in fine style against the Tons at Great Wakering..  At the same time, the Clapton revival continues to roll on, supported by unprecedented regular attendances for the Essex Senior League and they have lost only one of 12 league matches so far this season.

So, last Saturday's game promised to be a titanic match with the Tons undoubtedly looking to avenge their drubbing in the aforesaid League Cup final and Bowers hoping to extend their lead at the top of the table.

Unfortunately, it came as no surprise when the game was called off on Saturday morning. Bowers had already tweeted about apparent pitch problems and there had been some rain. But being an club with ambitions of Isthmian League football, it would not be unrealistic to have expected a 'brigade of fork wielding Bowers volunteers' to get the game on.  It must have worked three miles away at Basildon United, their game went ahead.

So, call me cynical, but, hypothetically,  if the choice was:

1. To have my side, promotion favourites, full of good footballers, play an important match against a decent, in-form team who could possibly challenge for the title    -  on a pitch that was slippery and forked so as to be made just about playable.
   
   Meanwhile, our opponents are backed by supporters who would create an atmosphere akin to an away match for us.
   
   
   or
2. have the match played on a Tuesday night later in the season when the visiting support will be considerably less and and visiting players may be unable to travel or the team form may have levelled out.

I know which I would opt for.  I would keep the forks in the work shed. 

I am not saying that this is the case. However, what is clear, is that Bowers and Pitsea are far from being the Cinderellas of the League. They are competing, seriously, and like any professional club, despite their protestations over their low playing budgets etc,  their recruitment of decent Isthmian League players (Dan Trenkel, Rob Whitnell, Lewis Manor, John Bricknell and most recently Aaron Waters etc) is certainly indication of their intention to bring Isthmian League football to the Len Salmon before too long.

If they achieve their objective, which would be an outstanding achievement, then they may need to continue a practice in such alchemy to keep them up there.

How would I know?  Clapton were an Isthmian League club for many, many years.

Does Silence Mean Assent?

Here I am again!  Since my last post the team played in two cup finals at which, despite the results, they and the supporters acquitted themselves admirably and were a credit to the Clapton name.   I was very pleased to see that both finals went off well and, speaking to a few people unconnected with Clapton after the game, it was clear that a lot of friends were made and, in some cases, a lot of wounds healed.

We then had Vince McBean’s statement on his website “Setting The Record Straight”.  As someone who has been around the club for longer than most, I found this statement to be devoid of fact and laughably inaccurate.

Whilst Vince complains about Andy Barr (who I know personally from his previous involvement at Clapton) allegedly spreading falsehoods about him, he doesn’t actually respond to any of the matters that have been raised.

Are the documents on www.claptonfc.info/vmcb/index.htm false or forgeries?  If so, then Vince should say so.

Is it true that he was attempting to sell the lease of the ground whilst the charity/company holding the lease had been struck off?  If not, Vince should have unequivocally denied it.

Is it true that Vince personally wrote to the freeholders to buy the ground from under the club and the charity?  If not, Vince should have unequivocally denied it.

There is a list of allegations which I won’t go through and you can look them up on the aforementioned site.  But, by not addressing any of the specific issues in which supporters are interested, Vince should be made aware that he does not ’Set The Record Straight’ at all.

In fact, by not addressing these issues, he gives further credence to the matters raised.

One glaring piece of misinformation from Vince was that he said Andy Barr had been secretary at the time he took control of the club.  This is factually incorrect as I remember Andy leaving Clapton as Secretary about 1992, about 8 years before the arrival of McBean.  I have no doubt that Andy will have noticed this and he may have asked Vince to amend this inaccuracy.  On the other hand, he might be saving this up for another day and another setting.

There are plenty of other things in Vince’s statement which I am sure could be challenged but I’ll leave that to others, for now.

What is a shame, is that Vince is complaining that supporters are selling scarves and badges etc that are bearing the Clapton badge.  He should be very grateful to those supporters for raising interest in the club and boosting his gate receipts beyond all expectations.  I am no expert in Intellectual Property but Vince has been invited to sue Andy Barr on this and other issues.  By not doing so, it’s not difficult to conclude that he daren’t.  As was said during a recent meeting at which I attended, “Silence is assent”, and by keeping silent and failing to address the real issues that have been raised, Vince credibility falls flat on its face.

So, we are now looking forward to pre-season friendlies and I am particularly keen to meet up again with an ex-Clapton keeper, Ronnie Syrett, who played for the Tons under, team manager, Danny Murphy.  Ronnie, who also lined up against the Tons for the likes of Collier Row and Haringey Borough, is now the Chairman at Cockfosters FC.

At the end of the day, we need to resolve the Clapton / McBean question and Vince needs to be honest.  If the issues cannot be resolved by negotiation, then both sides need to get before a Judge as soon as possible to sort this out and, if it does go to Court, I suspect that Vince will need to do an infinitely better job of "Setting the Record Straight" than he did on his website.

Peace and Goodwill in 2015. The future of Clapton FC ?

Well, it was good to get the game on last night and the boys responded with an excellent victory over Hullbridge who are very capable opponents.  Having fallen behind early on, I felt our equalising goal, just before half time, was the turning point and thereafter I didn't think we were going to lose.  As it was, Andy Mott's effort popped over the visitors goal line prompting celebrations in the scaffold, and the world was a better place once more.

However, this game was remarkable on a number of fronts.  The match had not been publicised by Vince McBean's website, his twitter or in the local press and I only heard of it through the www.claptonfc.info site and subsequent tweets.  It's hard to imagine that Vince would prefer the team to play in front of empty terraces once more (and I've been there) as he is taking a very good 'tap' from the gate receipts.  Perhaps the real reason is that he does not have the numbers, or back up, to actually run a senior football club at this level?

He has spoken before of teams of volunteers but I see no evidence of this.  He is very much a one-man band and I have come to the conclusion that the whole 'club' thing that he has has put forward in his statement are something of a sham.

Miss Doyle, the secretary is never seen at matches.  There is no treasurer and it will be interesting to see if Mr Syfox, the commercial manager (and promoter of various live music events at the club house), retains his interest since the opening hours for the club house were cut by Newham Council the other week following a review of the licence that were prompted by various misdemeanours.

So, is this therefore not a good time for the situation regarding the Clapton FC to be resolved in the interests of the club?  To do so will require give and take on both parts.

Perhaps those who are trying to return the club to a members entity should consider offering Vince help with running it?  They have shown, that by welcoming people to the ground and making them feel part of the event, Clapton FC has a future, even at this level of football.  They have also been successful in spreading the word by selling scarves and mementos etc. and are now organising travel to away matches.  These are positives, to which Vince has contributed nothing.  However, he should not ignore them and, in fact, should embrace them.

What do they want?  Well, according to correspondence I have seen, it was to join the club.  This was in January 2013 and they were told by the chairman that 'membership was suspended for re-structuring'.  One assumes that this re-structuring period must be over by now.  So why can't Vince contact them and say “Join the club”.

The reason, I fear, is that matters have significantly progressed since that initial application to join and this is where both 'sides' must consider their position in the interests of our famous old club.

The first step is for the parties to liaise.

In order to progress issue it requires both parties to be absolutely open and frank about the situation.   I am a person who would wish to join a members club and it is not unreasonable for me to want to know the structure of the club, the rules and any debts for which I might be liable as a member.  Thus it would require Vince to be open and honest as to the true situation at his Clapton FC as, at the moment, it is as opaque as the shard of perspex that was kicked out of the dugout wall by the subbed Hullbridge player last night.

This might prove difficult as the other 'club' have been pro-active in uncovering, and continuing to uncover, various side issues (limited companies, side rents, county court judgements etc.), all of which are an understandable concern.  However, if they were to be told the truth by Vince as to the situation, would it be possible for them to put these matters aside in helping to establish a real club club in which we can all pull together?

So, in order for this resolution to come about, both sides will have to act both equitably and professionally.  I have no doubt, in order for it to have any real meaning or gravitas, that both sides will need legal advisors to come up with a solid foundation upon which a club can be re-built.

The stand off is not helping the club that I love and I recognise that some could argue that were it not for Vince 'holding the baby', any organisation known as Clapton FC might not exist today.  Equally, I am not foolish enough to think that his tenure at the club has been solely philanthropic. 

So, come on Mr McBean and the committee of Clapton FC ('the real club'), you have an opportunity of putting Clapton Football Club on its best footing since the signing of the lease on the ground in the early 1990s.

With the incredible support and interest that has been generated over the past two seasons, the opportunity for Clapton is without comparison at our level of football.

In the spirit of the season, goodwill, forgiveness and a fresh start, let's make 2015 a year when Clapton FC, with a clean slate, can move forward as a real club and to which everyone can be a part.

The Meat In the Sandwich

So much to write about this week.

Firstly, it was a very good result for the team last Saturday, some decent football played and, as ever, a storming performance by the lads and lassies in the Scaffold.  What could be better? I have liked the look of Warren Mfutu ever since he came into the team and congratulate him on his hat trick.  A good player indeed.

After the game I did tweet that I was pleased that people had decided to give Vince's Bar a wide berth.  This again shows solidarity by the fans, which is something I may return to in my next missive.

However, first things first.

I have just seen that our away game with Newham FC next Saturday is to be played at Broxbourne Borough FC in Goffs Oak, Cheshunt.  This will cause a lot of inconvenience for both sets of players, a considerable extra expense and one wonders why this is happening. Couldn't more help not be given to Newham FC who must be finding themselves under a lot of financial, and other pressures, due to the apparent disqualification of the Terence McMillan Stadium from being an acceptable venue for Essex Senior League matches.

I have no doubt that the Newham officials made every effort to find an acceptable ground as near as possible to the locality of the teams.  The Old Spotted Dog would have been first choice and the best possible alternative venue.  The problem might have been that Vince McBean's sub-tenants, London Bari, have a match to play on Saturday afternoon, but what about an earlier kick off for the Newham match?  As recently as 27th September a double header was played at the Old Spotted Dog when Newham kicked off at 1pm  against Waltham Forest and the Tons followed them with the match against Bowers and Pitsea at 3pm.  If a similar arrangement was made for this Saturday it would ensure a bumper crowd, which can only help Newham FC in their difficult position.  It would also save supporters a lot of money and expense in their being able to follow their team.  

So why wasn't the game allowed to take place at the Dog before the Bari match?  I cannot imagine Vince objecting.  I assume that he pays petrol money to players to get to away games and a match at the Dog would save him that expense* (see below).  There is also an opportunity to sell stuff in the bar and a ground rental fee from Newham FC.  One reason might be that due to the wet weather, the pitch might not be up to two games being played on it.  A look at the forecast will show that, save for a possibility of rain on Thursday afternoon, there is no rain forecast for East London until Sunday.  Coupled with Vince's 'drainage' and the roller there is a very good chance that the double header could have easily taken place.

But this idiocy has precedent.  I remember Clapton having to play an Isthmian League match in August at Barton Rovers FC (Bedfordshire) because their floodlights had fallen below the required lux value.  Unless there was to be an eclipse of the sun in Forest Gate that afternoon, there was no possibility of the ground falling into darkness and bringing about an abandonment.  As ever, the administrators (who can usually count on free tea and sandwiches) made a decisions that adversely effect the clubs and their supporters.
I cannot imagine Bari objecting.  Let's face it, if they wanted to play on a decent pitch they would not have ground shared at the Old Spotted Dog in the first place.

However, if Saturday was not possible, why not re-schedule it for the following Thursday at the Dog?  There is a better chance of getting a decent crowd, which would soften the blow to Newham's finances, and there would be less expenditure and inconvenience for everyone.

One of the issues that spring to mind here is as that very little is known about the objections to the McMillan and very little is being done to help Newham FC who I know to be a group of decent football loving people.  If there are problems with the McMillan then the league or the FA should be open about it.  Rumours are, that the 'failings' of the stadium include

•  non paying spectators can view the game from positions on the premises.
• Has anyone been to Southend Manor recently or even Tower Hamlets? Perhaps it depends on your vision. Incidentally, the free tea and sandwiches brigade certainly don't pay to get in, they watch the match and they are the arbiters of this?
• no signs around the seating. No lines delineating standing areas.  No ticket booth.
• The average attendance at Newham /London Apsa's home matches last season was 29.  The highest attendance was 50 and the lowest 8 (eight).  Is this really a serious concern?

This whole issue is ridiculous and the FA, and the rest of the free tea and sandwich brigade, who chirp on about how they are promoting 'grassroots' football ought to devote their efforts in helping Newham FC rather than plunging them further into further logistical and financial problems.

The application of bit of common sense would be a good place to start.

In the meantime, we supporters all have to troop off to Cheshunt for Saturday's match and whilst I am sure that all the die-hards will be there, it feels as if the interests of the supporter are not being given any consideration whatsoever.  In effect, due to the lack of openness and common sense, we are the meat in the sandwich.

When the Isthmian League was formed, the officers of the League were members of the participating clubs.  Sadly, control of football has now been handed over to administrators who, on the evidence of this situation, are clearly not acting in the interest of the clubs or the supporters.  Its up to the clubs to wrest back control but I doubt whether any of the clubs have the bottle to stand up against them.

In the meantime, my best wishes and sympathies go to Newham FC and I look forward to a good game on Saturday.  What a shame it's not at the Dog.  What an opportunity missed.

Tea and sandwiches anyone?

*ADDENDUM
My assumption was incorrect.  Vince McBean does not pay expenses or petrol for away matches.