Skip to content

Tuesday's friendly behind closed doors

13»

Comments

  • @floyd said:
    Relatedly, here's a tremendous piece of satire from the guardians of our game:

    https://www.efl.com/news/2017/september/efl-statement-afc-wimbledon/

    I think the efl should be a-fucking-shamed of themselves they're an accessory to the original theft of the club and now they want to penalise the victims and I still don't like Wimbledon

  • I suppose the Football League are happy that Franchise 'behaved with the utmost good faith' when they unsportingly bypassed the long-established pyramid to buy a place in the Football League.
    If they had any backbone, they should expel them from the Football League and make them start from the bottom and earn their place by winning promotion from the Conference, like everyone has since 1987.

  • I care about us playing them. It's an absolute disgrace. People are invertebrates unfortuently on these sorts of subjects.

  • So all you getting up in arms about a behind closed doors fitness exercise ask yourself this question. Let's say your son is 16 and is good enough to play professional ffootball and was offered a contract by MK Dons would you as their legal guardian step in to say no as a matter of principle or would you as I suspect if you are honest let him sign?

  • Its all hot air the game was played nobody died

  • @dickie I'm not sure why that is in any way relevant?

  • @Dickie if You had a child who was offered a job at the Sun or in the offices of Nigel Farage or the NRA what would you do. The problem is the same as is the answer

  • @Dickie , funnily enough most people's strongest principles will loosen when money comes into it.

  • I don’t have a son.

  • @Malone said:
    Dickie , funnily enough most people's strongest principles will loosen when money comes into it.

    Nope you're young and wrong

  • I would prevent them from playing for that disgusting franchise.

  • @Malone said:
    Dickie , funnily enough most people's strongest principles will loosen when money comes into it.

    Speak for yourself

  • It would be nice to have some clarification from the Trust on this one. @DJWYC14 has explained on here in the recent past how the Trust stepped in to persuade the club to abandon plans to play a friendly against the Franchise before, so what changed this time? I get that our fringe players need games, especially with no reserve team, but surely there were other local, less controversial options out there? We have Reading, Watford, Chelsea, Brentford, Fulham and QPR all fairly nearby. Were none of these clubs able to accommodate? Can we have some assurances from the Trust that this will not happen again?

    I would also add my belated disapproval to this happening (haven't been on here a while so playing catchup!) I would be unhappy about this if I supported any team that played a friendly against a franchise team, but as a Trust-run club, I believe it is even more important that we take (and are seen to take) a stand against collaborating or otherwise associating with such an disgusting entity. Furthermore, let's not forget that we have quite likely suffered as a result of the Franchise's creation, as they have aggressively (and quite disrespectfully) targeted areas of South Bucks with an advertising campaign in an attempt to recruit supporters who might otherwise come to Adams Park on a Saturday.

    One thing I would say in the club's defence; I'm pretty sure this isn't the first time we've only heard about a training ground/BCD friendly until after the event. I'm not convinced that this was an attempt by the club to deceive us or bury bad news. However, they must have known this wasn't going to go down well with a sizeable section of our core support and I'm surprised they went ahead with it.

  • One thing that caught my eye in that 'EFL' statement from the Wimbledon v Franchise game;

    "If the club is charged with a breach of EFL regulations then the matter would be referred to a Disciplinary Commission.

    Regulations 3.4 and 3.5 state:

    3.4: in all matters and transactions relating to the league, each Club shall behave towards each other and the League with the utmost good faith.

    3.5: no Club, either by itself, its servants or agents, shall by any means whatsoever unfairly criticise, disparage, belittle or discredit any other Club or the League or in either case any of its directors, officers, employees or agents."

    To that end, I wonder if Plymouth Argyle have broken this rule in the past with the overtly disrespectful way they have referred to us on their official twitter account, which is a representation of the club online.

    I know I'm poorly placed to criticise dodgy tweets on official club accounts though...

  • @Jonny_King, I emailed Trevor Stroud about this. He assured me that the only time we will play MK in an official fixture would be in a league or cup game. He is going to find out if the club contacted Supporters Direct about playing this BCD friendly, and what their view is. I will let you know his response.

    I feel that it was disrespectful to other Trust owned clubs to play it, particularly to AFC Wimbledon, but we will see what Supporters Direct think.

  • Thanks for that, Steve. It will be interesting to see the response of Supporters Direct.

  • Cheers Steve. Will be very interesting to hear what the Trust have to say on the matter. I don't want to be overly critical - I think they do a great job generally - but for me (and clearly many others) they've dropped a bollock here.

  • Hi @Steve_Peart. Hope you're well. Did you ever get a response from the club/Trevor Stroud on this? Cheers

  • @Jonny_King, since the last post on this, Trevor checked and the club did not consult Supporters Direct as the game was considered a training exercise rather than an official match, and was happy for Gareth to choose suitable opposition.

    The match was discussed at the last Fans Council meeting and it was suggested that I contact Supporters Direct to get their view. I got their reply a few days ago, basically saying that there is a difference between a training exercise and a friendly and that, if consulted in future, their Council would probably not be in favour of an official friendly. They emphasized the need for clubs to engage with their Trust and supporters groups, which might have avoided any issues arising from this match.

  • Thanks very much Steve.

Sign In or Register to comment.