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'.

 

 

Unequivocal Support For A Con Artist

At the news that Clapton Community Football Club had been offered a lease on the Old Spotted Dog Ground there was a flurry of internet activity.  People sent their congratulations to the club and many members of CCFC were obviously delighted with the freeholders' decision.

Amid this activity was a tweet from Hackney Wick Football Club who have played at the Old Spotted Dog since 2012.  They first arrived in Forest Gate in 2012 as London Bari FC and, following a merger in 2017, continued their tenure under the name of Hackney Wick FC.

The tweet, which was posted at 3:43pm on the 17th September 2019 read : 
"So we paid £4k for half the season at the OSD where we've been for the last 3 years and since have had to switch our FA Cup ties, costing more money, pay up front for 2 other home matches elsewhere, and now have to pay for a full season at Coles Park.  It your face don't fit"

So Hackney Wick handed over £4k,  For what, and to whom?

Undoubtedly, HWFC would have been fully aware that the company that previous held the lease of the OSD were in liquidation and thus the ground should be under the control of the liquidator.  So why would they pay this money to anyone else?

Despite the liquidation, the recipient of rent from London Bari/Hackney Wick in previous years has been Vincent McBean and/or limited companies under his control. This, of itself, is theft and the dishonesty continues as HWFC have been conned or misled into paying £4,000 for the specific purpose of playing football at the OSD.

HWFC have not yet made it clear whether the payment was in cash or via a bank, or whether it was paid into a personal or company/business account.  What is clear is that HWFC have parted with a substantial amount of money and that they are extremely unlikely to get it back.  Their options are that they sue, or ask the football authorities to help them.

So, imagine my surprise when I saw that Essex Senior League Chair, Lee Dorling, was present at a meeting called by Vince McBean on Wednesday 18th September.  Mr Dorling addressed the meeting in his capacity as ESL chair, expressing unequivocal support for Vince McBean in the matter concerning the lease.

This support was given, not withstanding the con that has been perpetrated on HWFC, a club that until last season, was a member of his League.

Something is very wrong with the priorities and the moral compass of the Essex Senior League and I wonder how much longer the member clubs will continue to allow the 'Dorling charade' to continue in their name.

NB : It has been suggested that HWFC issue legal proceedings to recover the money.  Good luck with that.  Mr McBean uses false/accommodation addresses, purports to be impecunious and is adept at avoiding bailiffs.