Martin Samuel replies to comments on whether it is time to forgive Milton Keynes Dons

Martin Samuel's chosen subject for The Debate this week was should Milton Keynes Dons and Pete Winkelman, their chairman, be welcomed into football’s fold? Below, our five-times Sports Writer of the Year replies to your responses.

Milton Keynes Dons should never be forgiven. The anger may fade with time, but the feeling Wimbledon fans had something stolen will not go away. Hardest to take is the justification that we didn't have many supporters in the first place. So what? We were a small club who, against all odds, became the first team to rise from non-league to the top division (an achievement only recently repeated by Wigan Athletic). Does the fact we did this and failed to pick up tens of thousands of fans in the meantime make us any less worthy of a league position? I do not doubt Pete Winkelman's dedication and enthusiasm. It is because of this that MK Dons are now doing well in League Two. However, why did he not put that passion and enthusiasm into Milton Keynes City? How much prouder would the children of Milton Keynes be if they knew their town had produced a club rather than bought one? Will Brewster.

MS: The subject of the children is an interesting one, because it is hard to blame a teenager in Milton Keynes for supporting a team that was formed several years ago as a result of a bitter argument that he could not possibly have been expected to understand at the time. When the Football Supporters Federation had a debate about whether to accept supporters groups from MK Dons, I thought there should be an invitation extended to younger supporters, who cannot be blamed for going to watch their local club, however it came into being. We would surely rather that than another provincial town full of big club replica shirts. This then raises the issue of local fathers taking their sons – as happens with a guy in my office – which is also hard to discourage and then the FSF policy requires a committee meeting to look at each individual MK Dons fan, and the whole thing becomes ridiculous. There is an age at which one is old enough to have known better, and I think that is where the pride issue that you raised, Will, kicks in. Interestingly, though, I was expecting heavy correspondence on this subject from MK Dons supporters, defending their club with the passion of a city in which football frenzy is underway. The only noise from Buckinghamshire has been rolling tumbleweeds. Wimbledon, meanwhile, has turned out in force. That tells you something.

No, it isn't time to forgive Franchise FC, Pete Winkelman, the Football Association, the Football League, Sam Hammam, Charles Koppel, the FA Commission or anyone else responsible for allowing this travesty. It doesn't matter what Franchise FC achieve, the price paid by Wimbledon fans was too high to justify it - and we are still only one more chancer, one more property dealer, one more fake football fan away from the next club to be used as a pawn in someone’s money-making scheme. BathWomble.

MS: I agree. And nice to name the guilty men, too. The supporting cast often gets off the hook when the demise of Wimbledon is discussed.

I have reservations about the name but understand and respect the commercial aspects. The NFL in the US has operated on a franchise basis for some time and, like it or not, it works. I don't want this to become a widespread thing in English football but if there is a bigger fan base and, potentially, increased revenue to be earned by moving and re-branding, you can't fault it in today's money driven game. It is not an unforgivable act. Elliott.

MS: I’ll let James Farrar take this one. James?

Elliott comments that the NFL works on a franchise basis and is successful. This is true, but only because the NFL was explicitly set up on a franchise basis. It is an example of a top-down league, where the league is formed and then the teams that participate are chosen. The English football pyramid is a bottom-up structure, where the clubs are formed and then find an appropriate league, at a suitably low level at first, with the opportunity to move up the pyramid. Allowing franchising into a bottom-up league structure breaks the system. Milton Keynes had a club, until Winkelman effectively forced it to close by parachuting a league team into its territory. If Milton Keynes' residents wanted the opportunity to watch League football in their town, they should have supported Milton Keynes City and let it grow and progress up the pyramid. James Farrar.

MS: Impressive, wasn’t he? Round of applause for James, please. Now back to the coal face.

If anyone was to blame for the demise of Wimbledon, it wasn't Pete Winkelman or the 9,000 supporters who pay at the gate every other Saturday to watch the Dons. Merton Borough Council must hold their hands up and accept responsibility for their failure to provide the club with the assistance they required to improve Plough Lane or provide a better location. Also, I don't recall you being so indignant about Meadowbank Thistle moving to Livingston. Indeed, if you had been born 100 years ago would you have complained about Arsenal’s move from Woolwich to Highbury and will you be protesting Everton’s proposed move to Kirby? Allan Martin.

MS: Presumably, 2,500 of those 9,000 paying supporters must have fancied a night off on Tuesday because on the back of a handful of lousy results top of the table MK Dons attendance for the match with Macclesfield was 6,483. The average this season is 8,390 and your magic 9,000 figure has only been reached four times. You didn’t provide the statistics for the Football League commission by any chance, did you? On the subject of Meadowbank Thistle the reason you cannot recall my indignation is that the move happened 13 years ago in another country (in football terms). I was based in London at the time and did not have a column to express my views on subjects beyond the mainstream, such as the sad fate of a club in the Scottish Second Division. Everton is a current issue, but the club is moving across town not 60 miles up the motorway; I am sure you can appreciate the difference. Finally, I am sorry I did not protest the move made by Arsenal to Highbury in 1913, 51 years before my birth, but by the time I got to hear of it I rather fear the horse had bolted. Much like logic from your argument.

I hope Paul Ince gets the big move he deserves and MK Dons drop down through the leagues. Ian.

MS: All in favour? Aye.

Whether MK Dons deprived Wimbledon of a club or caused the demise of Milton Keynes City is irrelevant. The facts were that not many cared about Wimbledon when they played in their own neighbourhood and it would appear the same applied to the former Milton Keynes City fans. andipoll.

MS: Not many is not the same as nobody.

I shall never forgive MK Dons and all those connected with them but it is best to just ignore them and get on with developing AFC Wimbledon, an honestly conceived club. Hugh.

MS: Hard to disagree here.

The moving of Wimbledon to Milton Keynes was an abominable decision by the FA. However times move on and AFC Wimbledon has been reformed as a community-owned club. It is a fine example of everything that is good about the game. If Milton Keynes could drop the Dons moniker, we could perhaps move on. Ross Fraser.

MS: Although in some ways it is almost their punishment. This perpetual reminder of the rotten way the club was formed, a real ball and chain.

Comments

[George Cavanagh]

Great debate guys, old wounds never seem to heal. I was at the Meadowbank Thistle Reunion last September and was surprised to hear the ferocious words pelted at that other franchise, Livingston FC. Football is a hyper-competetive business and it will always attract the extremes in our society. Maybe MK Dons and AFC Wimbledon could arrange a pre-season friendly and meet somewhere in the middle of those 60 miles that have kept tnem apart. Borehamwood's a nice place.

[Darren B]

Totally agree, im a Luton Town supporter & feel that my teams 123 years of life could be at risk from this Alien franchise that are buying supporters from all over Luton Town's backyard, while my club are powerless to currently do anything about it! please people in Bedfordshire stay loyal to Luton & don't sell your soul's to the devil.

[Rob Quinlan]

It will be time to forgive what has happened when 2 conditions have been met.

1. The 'Dons' part of the name is dropped.
2. The stolen league place is relinquished.

I'll probably still loathe them though!

Rob Q Stockport County Supporter

[Andy S]

Having read this column, its the first time I've actually approached this argument thinking "what if it were my team?"

I would hate my beloved Boro to be moved an hour away from its geographic and spiritual home.

I agree with the argument behind the removal of the Dons moniker and continue to wish AFC the best of luck.

At the same time I empathise with those new MK fans who feel a little 'picked-on'. Surely recognition of MK as a "new" club will aid the healing and help to rebuild after the past failings of the FA.

Finally, thank you for altering my perception of this argument by having this debate.

[Olly in MK]

I agree with Ross - the MK Dons should drop the "Dons" moniker and replace it with city. It doesn't mean anything now except reminder people in MK of the Dons origins. Frankly, neither the MK Dons or AFC want to be reminded. Life must move on. Milton Keynes is a city is its own right and it should be reflected in the football team's name.

[NickB]

Having been a devout Wimbledon FC fan and season ticket holder the lingering feeling of abandonment still remains. The fact is that you build up more of an affinity with a football team when you're in your early years. So for that club of my childhood to be taken from me and then expect me to not feel angry about it is absurd. I do support AFC and try to go as much as is possible but it is not the same and essentially I do not feel the same exhiliration of my team scoring a goal as i did back when the Dons represented Wimbledon. It wasn't just my club but part of my appreciation for the sport which was taken from me

[Barry the Plum]

The FA are as much to blame for sanctioning a deal that in effect sold a football league place above existing established teams.

MK Dons attempts to sever all ties with the original club by handing back the trophies and ‘history’ to AFC Wimbledon and Merton council and referencing the date of their conception as 2004 (their first season) should really been seen for what it is. Not a franchise but purchasing a league place at the expense of every club, player and fan from the championship down to grass roots football.

A tad dramatic maybe, but if Wimbledon could not have been salvaged from the mess they were in then the club should have been left to inevitably fold, as sadly clubs do. Genuine clubs who had earnt their position would could then have stepped up the football league ladder to fill the void and AFC would have been re-born to carry the torch.

If MK Dons and their supporters wish to be accepted into the fold then they need to start where every other new club has had to start. At the bottom.

[Adam S]

Whilst the correspondence thus far has rightly dwelt on the injustice of moving the club, there's one further outrage to reflect on. MK Dons, a completely new club in a completely new town, was allowed to begin life in the third (?) tier of professional football, whereas the remnants of Wimbledon were required to continue life at the very bottom of the amateur game. Even as a neutral, I look forward to the day when the two clubs finally meet, and will be watching from the AFC end.