FSF Annual Conference 4th June 2005
Way back in September 2004 the Supporters Association (SA) applied for membership of the Football Supporters Federation (FSF). The SA had applied to join the FSF as it was a logical step in our progression to provide a voice for our members amongst fellow supporters, football authorities, central and local government. The FSF also provides members with big discounts on publications such as the Sky Sports Football handbook. They offer an insurance package to cover the cost of cancelled transport due to games postponed late along with insurance to cover death or serious injuries suffered by members whilst attending matches in England and Wales. There is also a wealth of knowledge regarding best practice and the various rules regarding the treatment of fans etc that the SA members would benefit from.
Unfortunately the application caused some concerns in the FSF world as some felt that the Football club would use our joining the FSF "in a way damaging to the interests of the FSF". They also felt that our membership "would send out the wrong message about the acceptability of football franchising". After various letters and conversations the FSF National Council resolved to refer the decision on allowing us entry into the FSF to Conference in June. Further they proposed the following motion:
"Conference notes the membership application from the Milton Keynes based MK Dons Supporters Association. It reaffirms its total opposition to football franchising and the decision to move the former Wimbledon FC away from its community. It believes that those in Milton Keynes who wanted a Football League club in their City should have put their energies and resources into supporting Milton Keynes City FC, which has now ceased to exist, in an attempt to rise up the football pyramid, just as the old Wimbledon FC and other clubs did, and as AFC Wimbledon are now attempting to do.
It believes that acceptance into FSF membership at this time of a new Milton Keynes based MK Dons Supporters organisation is likely to be used for publicity purposes by that club and its Chairman in a way which is damaging to the interests of the FSF, and would send out completely the wrong message about the acceptability of football franchising before we have won the battle to ensure that this can never happen again. It further believes that such acceptance would be highly divisive within the FSF and would not show appropriate support to the valued member organisations who have been heavily involved in the fight against football franchising, some of whom have directly been the victims of it. Therefore, in line with objectives (a), (b) and (e) of the FSF, it declines the membership application at this time.
Conference notes that in their own minority report to the Football Task Force, the football authorities said (para.4.1) "In recognition of the key role a club plays at the heart of the community, the football authorities should introduce rules to prevent a club from disposing of a stadium, or any interest in a stadium without the consent of the FA and/or the relevant league. Consent should only be given to a sale where the football authorities have been satisfied that a suitable alternative has been secured as a long-term home for the club within the community". It deeply regrets that notwithstanding the above statements, the authorities have not introduced such rules, nor made any other rule changes since the approval given to move Wimbledon FC to Milton Keynes, to ensure that there can be no further cases of franchising.
However, Conference also recognises that if MK Dons FC survives, there may come a time when it would be appropriate to draw a line under this matter and move on, but it believes that this can only occur when the rule changes referred to above have been introduced. It hopes that the MK Dons Supporters Association will actively support the FSF’s campaign for such changes, and expresses its willingness to reconsider an application for FSF membership from that supporters’ association after such rule changes have been implemented."
On arrival at the conference to present the MKDSA’s case against the motion I discovered that our rebuttal of the above motion and relevant letters had not been made available to conference. Unfortunately my speech had been prepared under my mistaken belief that conference would have had the full facts before them – this is not a criticism of the National Council members who graciously invited us to conference to present our case, but a criticism of myself for not preparing for such an eventuality! It obviously meant my original speech was consigned to the dustbin and a rapid rethink was called for. Conference started with the review of last year’s minutes, various reports and the election of Chairman, Treasurer and Secretary. We were now onto the motions and as the one referring to us was number 1 we were due to present the arguments against the motion shortly but, unfortunately, there had been a problem with voting cards. The motion regarding our admittance was seen as one that would promote much discussion hence less controversial motions were presented first. Eventually it was our turn.
WISA had also proposed a late amendment to the motion that added (After paragraph 3) the following:
"Conference notes that Milton Keynes Dons FC and their supporters continue to claim the history and honours of Wimbledon Football Club, which were won prior to the transfer of that Club’s league place in May 2002 to Milton Keynes.
We note the campaign of the Wimbledon Independent Supporters Association to return the honours to their rightful owners, the Community of Wimbledon and/or AFC Wimbledon, and mandate the FSF Council to support this campaign.
We support the position that these honours cannot legitimately be claimed by a town that had no connection with the Club who won them. We further agree that until this matter is resolved no further application by the Milton Keynes Dons Supporters Association will be considered."
At last I was asked by the chair to present our rebuttal to the original motion. I had decided to read excerpts from various correspondences to the FSF and the FA that I had now discovered the vast majority of members at the conference were unaware of. I started my arguments by reading directly from the FSF application form whilst holding it up for the audience to recognise exactly what it was.
"The Football Supporters’ Federation exists for football supporters:
-
To provide services to them and their organisations
-
To represent their interests and that of their organisations
-
To promote friendship and links between fans
Whichever team or national side your supporters’ organisation follows,""the FSF is there for you. We provide services to you. We stand up for you, the match-going supporter and their organisations. Whether you’re a supporters’ club, trust or association, your group belongs in the FSF."
I explained that the above was the call to action that we as a supporters’ association had heeded and then read excerpts from our response regarding the motion to the National Council on 15th April:
"Those in Milton Keynes who wanted who wanted a football league club in their city should have put their energy and resources into supporting Milton Keynes City FC"
Our Comments:
We understand the sentiment behind this statement but do not accept it as a fair basis on which to discriminate against the MK Dons Supporters Association. Not all of our members are Milton Keynes residents who switched allegiance following the move.
Secondly, I’m sure you’ll agree that in most towns and cities around the country many supporters attend matches at a Premiership or Football League club even though there is a struggling lower level league club on their doorstep. MK based Dons fans are far from unique in this and it does not seem a very fair basis on which to discriminate against them.
Thirdly, not allowing the MK Dons Supporters Association to join FSF on the basis that Wimbledon FC relocated to Milton Keynes, does nothing to impact those who initiated, allowed or facilitated the move. Instead, it alienates the one group associated with MK Dons who had no part in the move; it’s supporters, who only had a very indirect impact after the move had happened.
To question why those in MK did not get behind MK City when you are using this as a stick to beat us with regarding "franchising" frankly makes us very confused. For those that don’t know MK City was the name chosen by the team formally known as Mercedes Benz who originated in the Brentford area of London before moving to Milton Keynes.
"It further believes that such acceptance would be highly divisive within FSF and would not show appropriate support to the valued member organisations who have been heavily involved in the fight against football franchising, some of whom have been the victims of it."
Our Comments:
We understand why FSF would want to be supportive towards existing member organisations. We agree that this is important. However, we wish to be clear that the MK Dons Supporters Association has no intention of behaving in a manner, which would be divisive.
"that It believes acceptance into FSF membership at this time of a new Milton Keynes based MK Dons Supporters organisation is likely to be used for publicity purposes by that club and it’s chairman in a way that is damaging to the interests of the FSF and would send out completely the wrong message about the acceptability of football franchising before we have won the battle to ensure that t5his can never happen again.
Our Comments:
Peter Winkelman is not a member of our Supporters Association. We are wholly independent of the football club and this point was strongly re-affirmed by the membership at our last AGM.
As Mr Winkelman is not a member, and we are independent, we cannot legislate for what he or the football club might, or might not, do any more or less than any other independent Supporters Association.
However the belief that our acceptance is "likely" to be used by the club in a damaging way is a highly subjective and unfairly leads conference. It’s also inconsistent with what we believe the club or its chairman would do.
Similarly, we also have understandable concerns that not accepting us, might be used for publicity purposes by some of your existing member organisations in a way which could imply significant and unrepresentative influence over the FSF and to stigmatise supporters of one particular football club.
"However conference also recognises that if MK Dons survives, there may come a time when it would be appropriate to draw a line under this matter and move on, but it believes that this can only occur when the rule changes referred to above have been introduced.
Our Comments
The recommendation that we should not be able to join FSF until the football authorities change their rules places a barrier to our entry that we have no direct control over. Whilst we do support the statement in the minority report and wish to work with FSF regarding this, the rule changes themselves require action from the football authorities themselves. To this end, we feel our presence within FSF would add further weight to the campaign for this, rather than it being a fair reason to exclude us."
I then read from a letter sent to the new chief executive of the FA, Brian Barwick on 6th May:
"I am writing to you on behalf of the Milton Keynes Dons Supporters Association, an association that is totally independent of the Milton Keynes Dons FC. We represent original Wimbledon FC supporters who have stayed with the club through the move from South London and the name change etc and new local support. Having been on the receiving end of what many are dubbing a "franchised football club" we feel that we have a valuable voice to add to any debates regarding rule changes bought about due to the Football Task force minority report.
We have experienced the prejudice against our members by other supporters’ groups, the unsettling of players and staff who have had to relocate en masse, the disruption of a respected Academy programme and it’s scholars as it relocated, the acceptance into the local football pyramid structure of an "implant" club. All these points have very serious impacts on the club, players and community life and cannot be underestimated. We do believe that the move of Wimbledon to Milton Keynes should be the last time a club is moved from it’s community without predetermined and published robust and transparent checks to ensure that all possible avenues to allow the club to continue within it’s local community have been explored and are agreed to be unworkable by all parties, including supporters."
I then took my place in the audience unable to take part in the debates, as I am not an individual member. The debate was long with lots of outpouring of emotions. Many members spoke up on our behalf, there even seemed to be a consensus of opinion that both AFC Wimbledon and MK Dons are new clubs. WISA then presented their amendment regarding the honours; I got the impression that conference were not happy that they be "returned" to AFC Wimbledon but could see the point that the Community of Wimbledon should have the honours. A community that obviously encompasses AFC Wimbledon supporters, those Wimbledon supporters that decided to follow the MK Dons and those that either decided to follow other teams or gave up on football altogether. I took to the stand and pointed out that we had formally requested that the club loan the trophies "to the National Football Museum so that both sets of supporters’ (Mk Dons and AFC Wimbledon) can view them without restriction in a neutral environment" as "it is our view that despite our differences both sets of supporters’ have equal rights to the memories that these trophies engender."
We now went to a vote. The amendment stating that the honours should be returned to the Community of Wimbledon and/or AFC Wimbledon narrowly scraped through. Motion one was passed with a 2/3rd majority. At last the myth that the supporters’ associations "unanimously" loathed us as frequently preached on the web was shown to be untrue and we took great heart from those that had the courage of their convictions and stood up and supported our case.
What next? Well I have written to the Chair of WISA and the FSF asking for a clear definition of what is meant by "honours" so that there can be no misunderstanding. The next step will be to hold discussions with the club and our members to ascertain their views. Personally I do feel that there is a way forward on this as the club have used rhetoric describing the burden of expectancy placed on a child trying to emulate it’s parents achievements, thereby recognising that the move and name change were a new beginning. I do get the impression that the majority of our members feel that the trophies should be kept in a neutral venue so that they are freely available to all who supported Wimbledon FC. Our final stance will obviously be up to our members once we have received the required clarification. The Football League changed their rules on 10th June 05 to ensure that any future moves of a club from it’s community would be prevented. The SA have written to the Chair of the FSF asking for clarification as to whether the latest rule change fulfils the condition in the original motion for the rules to be changed (i.e. the motion calls for "the FA and/or the relevant league" - we are under Football League rules and obviously have fulfilled the "relevant league" part of the motion and as it clearly states "and/OR" we do feel the intent of the original motion has been fulfilled) .
Report by John Brockwell – Chair MKDSA
