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'.

 

 

Time to Speak Up?

By now, I think that most Clapton supporters, and many football supporters of other other clubs, have concluded that Vince McBean is, at best, a slippery customer who has been consistently economic with the truth. The recent 'true supporter' rubbish on his website, in which he dismissed the problems over the Old Spotted Dog as rumour, were totally blown apart by the recent disclosure of emails between him, the FA and the ESL, prior to the League AGM last June (see the Old Spotted Dog blog).

The contents of emails are irreconcilable with the eventual announcement of a 'resolution' to the  Old Spotted Dog problem by the Essex Senior League at their AGM last June.  That decision now looks to make no sense whatsoever.

it is clear that some previous inquiry was made of the FA as to what was required in order that Clapton and London Bari could play in the Essex Senior League this season, 2017/18.  The FA spelt it out unequivocally in their email:-

1. That the Club (Clapton) presents an acceptable ground share agreement or;
2. That the Club produces written confirmation from the liquidator (or their solicitors) stating that tenure is in place for the 2017/18 season.

If Mrs Dorling, the ESL Secretary, was already aware of any existing agreement for Clapton at this time, otherwise, why ask the FA for guidance?

Equally, why did Mrs Dorling write to the Liquidator's solicitors asking for permission to play at the ground in May 2017?

Even more confusing is why Vince McBean write to his opponent's solicitors in the liquidation case, asking for that they consent to the lifting of the injunction just a week before the AGM when, if the documents is genuine, must have had the agreement in his possession all the time?

What we do know is that the injunction was not lifted and the Liquidator is prevented from granting any such permission.

It is therefore curious, and verging on ridiculous, that just before the AGM, that an acceptable agreement is put forward so as to allow McBean team to play at the ground, and is then accepted by the clubs. 

A further issue is whether the clubs, who are consistently being disciplined, and fined, for various misdemeanours by the League, have any real control, influence or say in the way the competition is being run.  I accept that there is a League Management Committee and that they are made up of representatives from some of those clubs, but what influence do they actually have?  For example, did any of the League Management Committee actually see the document prior to the announcement or did they just go along with what they were told by the Officers?

One also wonders if, any of the League Management Committee (or the clubs), had been aware of the correspondence prior the sudden emergence of the 'November 2016 agreement'.  If not, would they not have thought that the sequence of events the emails are somewhat inconsistent with the acceptance of the newly produced agreement?

As to whether the agreement of November 2016 is genuine or, in fact, complies with the requirements of the FA, as set out in their email to the League, is another matter that requires addressing but could have consequences for those who were active or passive in it being accepted.

If the OSD agreement is void, and has been submitted with the intention, or is calculated,  to deceive,  then all the insurance cover that relate to the Old Spotted Dog Ground during any event which is purported to have been covered by that agreement are also void.

Whilst we cannot expect the league or its officers to share everything with supporters, we can expect the League to share such information with members of its own League Management Committee who represent the member clubs.

When, and I think it is becoming a matter of time, the whole McBean and Old Spotted Dog affair, including the submission and acceptance of this agreement, is examined by the Lawyers, the Courts or whoever, this course of events will have to be explained.

Furthermore, experience tells me that if Vince McBean runs to form, he will make himself scarce when it all falls around his ears.  We know that did this in the Knights Charity case and, as we older Clapton supporters will recall, he took himself off to Ghana in the mid 2000s, when there were huge unpaid bills to pay at Clapton, leaving the mess for others to clear up.

The next Management Committee meeting of the Essex Senior League is on Thursday 18 January 2018, and, if any of the representatives were not made aware of any of the above, I wonder who, if anyone, has the courage to speak up.

I note from the aforementioned Old Spotted Dog blog that they say that there is apparently more to come.  Somehow, I don't doubt that.

McBean Reprieved, or Is He?

As you may know, Vince McBean filed the requisite Company House documents for his Clapton Football Club 1878 Limited and, for now, they limp on.

Despite this, there are still a lot of unanswered questions that arise from his negotiations with the Ultras (a board? a trustee? etc) and who exactly are this Company and what purpose do they serve?

But most importantly, McBean has lost any credibility he may have had, even with those not fully in the know at the Old Spotted Dog.  He is flapping around, being attacked from all angles, merely because his is now under such scrutiny that his failings and scams are now being regularly picked up, and not only by the usual suspects (real Clapton FC, Andy Barr etc)

For my part, it is apparent is despite McBean's claim to be a businessman, over the years I have seen no evidence of any commercial or business like acumen from him, other than the sharp suits.  I am sure that I am not alone in wondering how he funds his lifestyle and what business he is actually in.  On the other hand, perhaps it is right under our nose and Clapton FC is his business, despite his denial that he is the owner.  What is clear, is that nothing is clear, when it comes to Vincent McBean.

So, for the moment, crisis over for Vince?  I'm afraid not.

The charity Newham Community Leisure Limited, which holds the lease on the Old Spotted Dog ground and, of which, Vince McBean is a director and trustee, failed to file its own Confirmation Statement at Companies House last week.  The consequence is likely to be another proposal to strike off the company, risk to the lease and to Clapton FC.

Vince McBean's credibility is shot.  He needs to leave Clapton FC to those who care about it, the supporters.

Join real Clapton FC

See : Two Months to Save Clapton FC

Two Months to Save Clapton FC

In the past week or so there have been two prominent pieces of news from the Old Spotted Dog, and neither of them was surprising.

I initially welcomed the end of the Clapton Ultras’ boycott of home games as it signalled a ‘first’ at Clapton FC since the McBean regime took hold of the club; McBean couldn't have things all his own way.

The Ultras had managed to reach a compromise over the price rise, whilst achieving a number of small victories in getting McBean to reduce prices for student, refugees, jobless, youngsters and old chaps like me!  Couple this with spectators’ possessions not being unnecessarily rifled through by McBean's bouncers, and it's a good result.  Thank you lads and lassies of the Ultras!

But how did they manage this, after so many people have tried, and failed before?  One word, Money.

Since the arrival of the Ultras, McBean has become accustomed to pocketing huge amounts of cash though gate money.  Add to this the bar takings from those spectators who remain unaware, or possibly disinterested, in the ‘Clapton situation’ and he was doing very nicely indeed.  However, the boycott has seen those windfalls disintegrate and, doubtless, he was desperate to fill his pockets once again.  No one is quite aware of what other business interest he currently has.

It was therefore strange that, in those negotiations, he chose to position himself as a go-between for the supporters and the ‘Board’.  Now, when a ‘businessman’, who McBean purports to be, speaks of a Board, it can only mean one thing - a board of directors, and Directors indicate the existence of a Limited Company.

Whilst McBean operating his club as a limited company is a possibility, as far as I am aware, Clapton FC, in whatever guise, has never been registered as such with the football authorities.  If there has been a change of entity from the original club, then the FA, County FA and the Essex Senior League would have to have been made aware and would have to have given their approval.  The problem is that none of these ‘governing’ bodies is willing to disclose any information.

During the negotiations, McBean also produced John Jackson as a ‘trustee’ at one of the meetings with the Ultras delegation.  I have referred to Mr Jackson in my blog previously, and still have no idea what he claims to be a Trustee of, but I have seen emails in which he claims to have been made chair of Clapton FC by McBean in 2008, apparently without his actually realising it.  He also claimed that McBean once told him that Clapton FC does not exist. I therefore see very little reason to place any trust (sic) in Mr Jackson, who may be as much a fantasist as McBean himself.  I also wonder if McBean knows what his mate Jackson has claimed to have happened.  What is clear is that when the meeting with Ultras, Jackson was dishonestly passed off as something he is not.

So whilst I am delighted to be watching the team again, the way in which McBean has behaved only underlines what a manipulative and dishonest man he is.

The second piece of news involves an actual limited company, Clapton Football Club 1878 Limited, to which Clapton CF News, a supporters run news page, have referred in their web post of today (14.02.2017).  This company has now been notified that the Registrar of Companies proposes to strike them off because they have failed to file documents as required by law.

Therefore, if Clapton Football Club 1878 Ltd is ‘McBean’s Clapton FC’ then one of the most famous names in amateur football is likely to disappear because if McBean follows his usual modus operandi in managing companies, he will do nothing and the company will be struck off in a couple of months.

Interestingly, I have a copy of a recent Clapton FC letterhead and, there is no reference to a company number or the registered office, as is also required by law.

What is remarkable is that McBean, refers to this dubious and possibly non-existent board, on his own www.claptonfc.com website.

The fact is that Vince McBean has behaved dishonestly and disrespectfully to the Ultras, the supporters who fill his pockets by coming to matches.  This is not only in respect of the Company issue, but also by misrepresenting the club itself and the state of the negotiations which ended up extending the boycott.

Whilst I am delighted to get back and watch this very impressive tam complete the season, Clapton supporters must now decide whether McBean is a person who can be trusted to run our club.

It is clearly apparent is that McBean operates all of his ‘visible’ business autonomously. He consistently puts up family, old friends and associates as his ‘colleagues’.  Have any of the supporters ever met, or seen, the supposed Chairman, Secretary or Treasurer of McBean’s club?

Despite the Ultras’ achievement in bringing McBean to the table, even then, the ‘self styled CEO’ couldn’t help by acting dishonestly during the boycott, even though it was very much in his interest to arrive at a settlement.  In the words of the Ultras themselves, “We’ve just been given a hard lesson in messing about, delaying and rearranging the furniture over what had already been agreed.” 

Couple that with the news that the Charity that holds the lease on the Old Spotted Dog, which he took over from the former regime, is now under investigation by the Commissioner for Charities, their bank account frozen, and under pressure to file documents with Companies House and its ridiculous that McBean continues to operate.  McBean cannot be trusted with the ground, the club. It’s about time something was done.

The real Clapton FC which was founded by supporters and life members of the club.  I have heard many people asking what this group are doing to oust McBean.  But dealing with a specious fabricator of the truth, like McBean, is always difficult, as the Ultras have discovered.  However, I am aware that they have played no small part in unsettling McBean and exposing his activities, not least with regard to the ground, breaches of the lease and, what would appear to be, a very dodgy ground share and rental agreements with London Bari and the Tyre Warehouse next door.

FELLOW CLAPTON SUPPORTERS  -  Time is now very much of the essence, because if Clapton Football Club 1878 Limited is the legal entity of Clapton FC, then we have two months in which to save it.  If it’s not the ‘club’, then its purpose is/has clearly been to defraud some poor sod, as it is £20k in debt according to the last accounts.

I ask you to help remove McBean and save Clapton FC.  Join the real Clapton FC.  Their website is www.claptonfc.info and there is a link to the membership application form.

UPDATE - It appears that Clapton Football Club 1878 Limited has filed its Confirmation Statement today, 15th February 2017, thus the strike-off action has been discontinued. 

According to the GOV.UK guidance on Confirmation Statements, it is a criminal offence to file this document more than 14 days after the review period (in this case 11th November 2016), so the company and its officers could be prosecuted.

Reality Check

Over the past eleven days I have seen Clapton lose four matches in succession and, speaking to few people at yesterday's game, there appears to be some mild despondency and frustration as to the way things are going on the pitch.  That is in stark contrast to the near euphoria in the early weeks of the season, the amusing internet talk of promotion and getting the Dog ready for Isthmian League football.  That all seems a long time ago now. But, in my view, our recent results are not surprising, and our position in the League table accurately reflects our level.

We made a good start to the season, beating teams home and away which took us to second in the table at one stage.  However, if one looks at the teams we had beaten, not one of them are above us in the table this morning.  We are ninth.  Of the eight clubs above us, we have played them all, with the exception of Bowers and Pitsea.  We have not won any of those games, but drew 3 and lost four.  Also, when we were put up against decent standard opposition in the cup competitions, Ipswich Wanderers and Stanway Rovers, we came a predictable second best.

I have already discussed the recent losses to the playing squad and the apparent 'tinkering' of the line ups and substitutions.  The fact that we have now used at least five goalkeepers so far this season is also indicative of an unsteady ship. In my day, you could usually predict the team line up for the following week because the majority of players would be working nine til five, Monday to Friday.  In 2015, the weekend is now seen as part of the normal working week and, I am sure, this can frequently result in players being unavailable to play due to such commitments.  I believe stability is the key and the chopping and changing of recent weeks, in my view, has not helped.

Nonetheless, despite yesterday's result, I was delighted to see that the Scaffold was 'rocking' and most of a good sized crowd seemed to enjoy the match.  This, ladies and gents, is what it is all about.  During my time as a Tons follower, I have seen Clapton teams hammered, home and away,  but I have  always looked forward to the next game, as I am, for Saturday's trip to Stansted. Well done to you all, and up the Tons!

Another concern is the recent absence of the 'one sheet programme' that was being sold outside the ground up until a couple of games ago.  I used to find that a decent read and much superior to Vince's effort, (when he bothers to produce one).  However, on my walk around the ground, I was told that the reason might be that there are 'legal machinations' going on behind the scenes as regards Vince McBean's apparent ownership of the club.  If that's the case, then good on them, and lets get that issue resolved as soon as possible so we can enjoy the rest of the season with realistic expectations.

Finally, I have seen Vince's advert for a Club Match Secretary on his website. Anyone seriously thinking of applying for this needs to seek help.  The fact that they will be working with one of the most dubious characters in non league football and, with legal stuff apparently on its way, you might end up liable for any debts that he/the club has.

N.B.    Vince is not known to hang around once the legal stuff starts to bite.

Is It Just About Tull?

Walter Tull is one of the most prominent and interesting people in the history 138 year history of Clapton Football Club.  His footballing rise, after just one season of amateur football, to be part of the Clapton team that won the FA Amateur Cup in 1909 and to sign as a professional with Tottenham Hotspur within a year, is like something out of Boys Own Annual.  Add that to his childhood in a Bethnal Green orphanage, his strength in dealing with racism on and off the football field, and his undoubted leadership and courage during one of the most horrific of Wars, it is not unfanciful to say that Tull is an important person from the 20th century and, I can proudly say, he was a member of my club.

Vince's club has announced their dedication of Armistice Day to Walter Tull this Wednesday and there will be an exhibition / talk to commemorate his life.  I would certainly like to have been able to go and to have contributed, as would many others, but the late announcement, just five days beforehand, has caught everyone on the wrong foot. This includes the two organisations listed as partners in the event who make unfortunately no reference to it on their websites.

Whilst I applaud the sentiment,, I am unsure whether a day, which is supposed to commemorate all those who died in the First World War (estimates are not definitive but it is said that over 6 million military personnel from the 'Allied' forces alone), amongst others, should be dedicated solely to one person, whatever his talents or achievements.

Maybe there were other dates more specific to Tull (birthday, anniversary of his death etc) that might have attracted greater attention to the cause.  It might also be an opportunity to liaise with his Regiment and Vince would have the contacts, as he was a serving soldier in the 1970s.

Whilst Tull remains an important part of the 'Clapton story' it is true to say that he left the Dog long before the outbreak of War in 1914. He had also left Tottenham and had signed for Northampton Town and had reportedly signed to play for Glasgow Rangers when the war was over. 

The 1928 Jubilee Brochure of the Clapton Football Club is says that "From 1915 and 1919, every member took part in the Great War and H. Cameron, N. Coaksley, L.S. Dumbell, B.F. Packer, B. Page, C. Snow, W.M. Timson made the supreme sacrifice for their country."

Whilst it is undoubtedly correct to remember Tull's contribution as a footballer and a soldier, I hope, on Wednesday, that Vince and his colleagues will also remember the members of the Clapton Football Club, of which he claims to be the present owner/custodian, who like Tull and millions of others, met a premature end to their lives.

A Tale of Three Coaches

A short blog this time, but its all positive, which makes a change.

Last Saturday, at Hullbridge Sports FC, I saw one of the most exceptional fightbacks from a Clapton team in many a year.  I was in good company, as the boys and girls from the Ultras had hired a coach (1) for the trip and were in splendid voice throughout, even when things were going a bit pair shaped. Well done to them, and how marvellous it must have been, for our team, to see that, out of an attendance of eighty-odd, at least half of them had made the trip into Essex from Forest Gate, in order to cheer them on.  There is absolutely no doubt that the voiciferous support for the team, home and away, is having a very influential effect on both our players and, certainly in the case of Hullbridge during the last 20 minutes, the opposition.

At the same time, the influence of the other coach(es) is proving to be just as important. There is no doubt, and I keep saying this, that the contribution of  Peter Harrington and Dan Portsmouth has made a remarkable difference to the team.  This is not only in respect of the new faces they have brought to the club, but also it is becoming evident with every game, that our lads have very high fitness levels for this level of football.

Putting aside last Saturday's comeback, there have already been a number of occasions this season when our team has recovered from a losing position or scored late to win matches.  For instance, the comeback at Sawbridgeworth, the recovery at home to Ilford or late winners against Newham, Greenhouse and Takeley all seem to prove that this Clapton team are going to be battling in each match for the entire 90 minutes.

We are also hitting a rich vein of form in front of goal.  In the past 12 matches we have scored 3 or more goals on 10 occasions, which is probably costing the pyro bods a few more shillings than they would have anticipated, but this is good stuff indeed, and is a joy to behold.

Onto this week and its off to Harlow to visit Enfield then, on Saturday, a trip to Broxbourne to be entertained by former 'local' rivals, Eton Manor.  That all sounds 'up the pictures' to me, but that's modern non-league football I suppose.

Lets hope our lads keep up the good work and we get something from both of these games.  In the meantime, "Well Done One and All"

In closing, I wish to claim money owed to me, in a bet, that I could not write a blog article without mentioning Vince...... ,    oh bugger.

Educating the Newbies

Clapton v Ilford. Essex Senior League. Attendance 761.  It doesn't seem possible does it?

This was the probably highest attendance at a league game at the Old Spotted Dog since the War and, from what I saw, there were a lot of very happy spectators lining the perimeter fence, in the stands and sat, 'hippyesque', on the grass banks behind the goals.  It was a marvellous day.

For my part, I got free admission to the match as a Senior and Vince McBean even smiled at me as I went through the turnstile.  It could have been something about the wad of banknotes he was holding in his hand.

There were lots and lots of other folk who clearly were attending their first Clapton match and, unsurprisingly, were delighting in in the experience.  As the match played out, the McBean's Bar was being frequently visited by these happy newbies and they were returning to their spot with plastic glasses filled with McBean's beer or cider, seemingly oblivious of what the true situation is as regards Clapton FC.  This, to a small extent, marred the day for me.  At first instance, I thought why would these people openly support McBean's regime?  I was told by one young chap, a first time visitor, that "I thought I was supporting the club" and this I think was the general thought process of those who didn't know the truth about Vincent Joseph McBean.

I can understand the motives of those in his entourage who support him, such as the Youth Team managers, who's self interest, is to maintain the franchised link of their team in being able to use the name Clapton. - "I am under 15s manager of Clapton FC sounds a lot more impressive than I am the manager of Prostar Rangers in Newham".  However perhaps the the supporters who are members of the real Clapton FC would have made more play of the state of McBean's so-called club and his antecedents, both as a football person and an individual on this important day.

This is, in no way, a criticism of the wonderful work being done by the real Clapton FC and when I spoke to Andrew Barr, their secretary during the game, he told me that 'matters were very much in hand'. I hope he is right and that they can move things forward as soon as possible.  Nonetheless, I was delighted to buy a new Tons' scarf, badge, and programme from the tressel table outside the gate, as were many others.  I just thought that this was a marvellous opportunity to drive home the points about McBean.

I wholly applaud and but sympathise with the efforts of the Clapton Ultras who, in response to McBean not reducing prices for regular supporters or for the unwaged etc on NonLeague Day, undertook to distribute Solidarity Tickets for newcomers so they would not be price barred from coming along and enjoying the experience.  Unfortunately, the some of the media and newspapers (including the BBC Sport website) portrayed it as if it was the 'club' (McBean) bestowing this offer to  fans.   Poor show.

I believe that the main reason why many people did support the bar etc was that they really have no idea of the Clapton situation.  So it is therefore imperative that the supporters and members of the real club take every opportunity to spread the word.  At the match I managed to engage at least two first timers in conversation, mentioned McBean, and the fact that he does not run his Clapton FC as a club, but as his personal place of business.  The reaction was genuine shock and in one case an apparent embarrassment that he was holding a pint of McBean lager in his hand.

I do not have to go over all the facts in this blog.  There is plenty of info out there on the net, none with more clarity than the real Clapton FC website which not only provides an account of how Vince McBean took control of Clapton, but also supporting documents which prove their case as to the fraud that took place. www.claptonfc.info/vmcb/home.htm

The entertainment was provided by players who play for the love of the game, ably supported by fans who are the best I have seen in many years of watching football at Clapton.  McBean scant effort, as to the experience, of letting me, the kids, and the other 20 or so seniors in for nothing pales into insignificance.  His motivation is not that of the players or supporters or the real Clapton FC, the furtherance of our great old club, it is money and greed.

It's is time to get McBean out of Clapton, and whilst one can forgive the unknowing support of McBean by the newbies, I would ask them, whilst still fuelled by the superb occasion that was yesterday, to read up on the situation.  Google 'the great leader'.  You may find that when they next visit the Old Spotted Dog, that the pull of tinned lager and cider, served in plastic glasses, does not hold the same attraction.

To the Clapton Ultras and the real Clapton FC, keep going and spread the word.  You are the future and true life blood of my great old club.

To the newbies, great to have you aboard, now keep supporting the team, do your research and join the real Clapton FC, its a fiver, less than one match entrance fee to McBean FC. http://www.claptonfc.info/1/join/2.html

Right, enough of my ramblings.  Dog walk and sunday lunch at my local.  Come on you Tons!

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.

Why I Will Not be A Mug

Once again, apologies to my regular readers for my not uploading recently.  A combination of dodgy health and a preference to reflect on recent events at Clapton are responsible for my absence.  Not surprisingly, it was Vincent McBean and his Clapton website that has induced me back to my keyboard, however this time my missive refers to sponsorship of Clapton FC.

Mr McBeans's message of the 9th April entitled 'Thank You' referred to proposed ground improvements that are scheduled to take place during the close season.  All very laudable you may think.

These improvements were said to be dependant on donations, funding and support and, if Vince's Clapton were to be a normal club one could that expect assistance might be forthcoming under each of these headings, particularly with the ground swell of interest that has been generated over the past couple of seasons.

However, the shroud of secrecy in which Vince's club is operated does not persuade me to dig into my pocket, or bring my tools to the ground (were I to be younger and fitter)

If there was more clarity as to who Vince's club are, under what guise (or disguise) they do business, then I might be prepared to re-consider

Donations : So to who I am I being asked to donate?

• Clapton Football Club?  As we know, Vince's 'Clapton' are not a members club.  We also don't know if it is running under the guise of one of his Limited Companies. This Clapton FC are purported to be the sub lessees of the ground share agreements with London Bari.  They have no right to enter into such an agreement or to sub let the ground for their benefit.
• Clapton Members Club? Formed in 2000, this 'club' is said to be one and the same as Clapton FC although is unrecognised by the London FA.
• Vince McBean?  On the basis that there is no evidence of there being a members club being run by Vince, is it the case that he believes that he is the owner of the Club?  He is the personal licence holder of the clubhouse and runs his 'club' without a committee.  However, he is listed on various planning documents as the owner of the site (even though this is definitely not the case).
• Newham Community Leisure Limited ?  This is the non-profit making Trust/Charity/Limited Company by Guarantee that was set up in the 1990s and who holds the lease.  Vince is one of only three remaining trustees.  This company has been under investigation by the Charity Commission for over a year.  A donation to this charity would be more palatable had it not been the case that Vince has previously attempted to sell the lease to a third party after the company had been struck off and de-registered as a charity. He re-instated the company, after a court order but, unsurprisingly, the potential buyers decided against it.  This company is forbidden from trading and thus are not the best recipient of any fiduciary help / donation / funding.

Funding : Who is likely to fund the project?

It is difficult to imagine any responsible organisation who, having done due diligence, would fund any scheme or proposal emanating from Clapton FC whilst Mr McBean is 'at the helm' (his words).  

However, Vince's plausibility has reaped previous successes, most notably his successful application for £2 million grant in 2000 from the Millennium Commission (take a bow MC), much of which was syphoned out of the recipient charity, Knights Millennium Foyer Limited to one of his Limited Companies.

Support : Do I really wish to support Vince McBean's business interests when he is unprepared to come clean about what they are in relation to the club?  The answer to that is an emphatic "No" and, as tempting as the BBQ sounds, along with the "player of the year awards" etc, I shall continue to steer clear of his bar and supporting his other business interests, save for paying at the gate to watch my team.

Vince has previously criticised people for scuppering his attempts to attract sponsorship etc. He does not help himself..  I am sure that there are many people who would help Clapton, myself included, (in a pensionerly sort of way) but I will not contribute as things stand.

Indeed, I am in good company, as Vince himself has confirmed that his plans are dependant of donations,funding and support etc.  This would indicate that he will not use the money generated this season through... 

• gate money
• phone mast rental
• London Bari ground share
• Rental of the Tyre warehouse
• Auto trader advert filming venue
• Ground letting to Newham FC
• Ad-hoc ground lettings
• and the income generated from the parents of youth team players for kit and equipment etc.

... all of which may have been received by one or other of the four entities above, or possibly other Limited Companies such as Clapton Football Club 1878 Limited. Who knows?

However, dear reader and Clapton supporter, its your choice.  For me, Walter Mitty is alive and well and living in South London.

Rules, Fools and a Load of Balls

Over the years one has often heard the phrase “rules are meant to be broken” and, as attractive or maverick a mantra as this might seem, recent events have brought me to the conclusion that, if one is intent of having rules, surely one has to adhere to them so as to achieve good and fair practice in any society, group, club or even a football league.

So before my anarchic friends start spitting at their monitors, let me explain my thinking.

As most people now, the actual status of the ‘club’ that Vincent McBean runs is something of a mystery, and purposely so.  One is aware of the various Limited Companies that he has opened, allowed to be struck off through failing to file accounts, and then started again with a new one with the same name.

Couple that with two more McBean creations, the ‘Clapton Members Club’, and a mysterious supporters group, the ‘Tons Members Club’ who no one has ever encountered, and it adds up to a very complicated situation indeed.

THE ESSEX SENIOR LEAGUE RULES.

So thank the footballing gods for rule 2.13 of the Essex Senior League that requires all clubs to publish on website and programmes etc its legal name and form. That is to say that they are obliged to declare, as a minimum requirement, to publish whether it is a member’s or a proprietary club, a limited company etc. This rule also requires that if a part of a club is privately owned, they should declare it.

I was one of a number of people who wrote to the secretary of the League asking that he enforces this rule and was firstly disappointed that he chose not to respond personally but send a generic email to Andy Barr, complaining of an ‘email bombardment’.  I was also surprised by his refusal to accede to enforce a rule that is said to be a minimum requirement.  This refusal was all the more surprising as, in the mail, he referred to possible legal proceedings which, as he will know, are unlikely to be started without actual clarification of what kind of operation, and under what guise, Mr McBean’s 'club' is officially being run.

As Dworkin once said. the correct interpretation of a rule is “the one that puts practices in their best light, or makes of them the best that they can be.” In my opinion, an epic fail here.

It is circumstances such as this, where football is unable to be consistent in its application of its rules and where transparency is clearly in question.  To address this, the Football Governance Bill is being put through Parliament.  I wish Damian Collins MP every success with his efforts to enact the Bill.  The only people who have anything to fear from its enactment are those using football for questionable motives and others who support and protect them, tacitly or otherwise.

THE SAWBRIDGEWORTH RULES.

Last weekend, we came across more rules, this time, apparently, by order of the Football Association.  Here is the sign that greeted spectators at our away match with Sawbridgeworth Town FC.

This sign was probably a product of the Essex Senior League meeting recently referred to by Vince McBean on his website. However, there have been no fireworks let off at Clapton matches that I have been to, and, in fact, the last ones that lit up the Spotted Dog were from neighbour’s gardens at Dwali a couple of years ago. Flares? Pyro? or whatever, I believe qualified undertakings were given to Mr McBean on that front and the issue has been closed.

However, the banning of food and drink was quite a surprise, so the idea of having to dispense with my Greggs pasty and bottle of Dr Pepper at the gate was not the ‘Welcome to Sawbridgeworth Town FC’ I was hoping for.

But, on a serious point, what was the purpose behind the obviously newly commissioned sign?  It was clearly aimed specifically at Clapton supporters, 'purported' or otherwise (see below)  But, there have been no incidents involving drunkenness at any of the Clapton games that I have seen over the past couple of years (if one excludes the infamous Clapton groundsman) and neither sandwich, chomp bar or other tasty comestible has been jettisoned pitchwards.  I don’t recall any kids becoming disruptive whilst having OD’d on sunset orange or other E numbers, so why have the FA, who, according to the sign, expressly ordered this ban, taken such a heavy handed approach?  Someone should ask them, but don’t hold your breath for an answer.

It might be no coincidence that Sawbridgeworth chairman, Mr Steve Day, is a member of the Essex Senior League Management Committee and he may have thought this a way of flexing his muscles in response to the embarrassment they must feel over their failure to apply their own rules in response to our initial request for information.

So I admit to breaking an FA order (if that was what it really was).  I did not dispense with my snacks and drinks outside or declare them at the gate.  I ate and drank my contraband pitch side, alongside a band of locals who were happily imbibing of alcoholic beverages whilst watching the game.

REF STOPS THE GAME

There was another mysterious incident when the referee stopped the game, after his linesman indicated that one of the Clapton followers, who was getting in position to lead the singing, had held onto a pole behind the goal to support himself.  Play was a long way away from the incident and this was hardly a pitch invasion.  But the reaction of the officials to this incident smacked of them being briefed or under some kind of orders, instructions or a campaign, by whoever is instructing referees, to ‘clamp down on Clapton supporters’.  The referee even went to have words with the Clapton dug out. That was ill-advised, no Clapton officials in there mate, as our ‘owner’ was scheduled to be trousering the bar take at the London Bari home match at the Dog.  However, if the referee wanted to be even handed in his pedanticism, he could have equally instructed the home supporters to remove their drinking vessels containing alcohol from the pitch side barrier.  He didn’t. 

THE FANS WIN THE DAY

But this is non–league / amateur football for pity’s sake and, in contrast to the idiocy of the welcome sign and the fussy referee, the highlight of the day was the superb post match exchange between the Sawbridgeworth and Clapton supporters in which everyone joined in to celebrate their day.  It was an excellent victory for the home team and the visitors had enjoyed another day of vociferously supporting one of the most popular non-league teams in the south of England.

So the overbearing and ridiculous sign was booted into the long grass by those who actually matter, the supporters.  It might be interesting to see if that sign becomes a permanent fixture at Sawbridgeworth games or even if the FA actually did make the specific order or why it only applies to Sawbridgeworth.

As Albert Camus once said “Integrity has no need of rules”.

Finally, I have read in another email that was sent to an ex Clapton Chairman from the ESL Secretary in which he refers to ‘purported Clapton supporters’.  He should be assured that I was a Clapton supporter long before he was ever involved with Ilford FC and, more recently, his tenure at the Essex Senior League.  It is also quite possible that the new breed of Clapton supporters, purported or otherwise, might well outlast him.

Right, I'm up for the cup and I'm off to the Dog for our match against Waltham Forest. Come on you Tons.