AFC Wimbledon to return to Plough Lane
Comments
-
The answer to the first question conveniently brushes over the "administration" bit. Like I said, there might well have been no Kingstonian at all at that point.InspectorSands said:This is the K's fans' side of the story: https://thekingstonroadend.wordpress.com/2015/11/18/the-sale-of-kingsmeadow-by-afc-wimbledon-to-chelsea-fc-what-might-it-mean/
0 -
Is Imber Court, home of Met Police FC an option.0
-
Looking to move to that area (Wandsworth/earlsfield) soonish, will be an interesting day out if Charlton are away!0
-
Doubt it, Met Police have very, very few fans of their own (as you'd imagine- Britain's most misunderstood football club, no less) - those I know that have been there say it's spookily empty for home matches. K's see themselves as a much bigger deal, and representing the town of Kingston, with decent transport links - if Chessington (there's already Chessington & Hook Utd two divisions down) won't please them, being exiled out in Thames Ditton certainly won't.smudge7946 said:Is Imber Court, home of Met Police FC an option.
(Here are the Ryman League Premier attendances - boycotters could go to Crayford's VCD and lift their crowds...)
Grim all round. K's effectively being punished for past maladministration. Could happen to us all.1 -
Plus, i think you'll find its in Elmbridge not Borough of Kingston.InspectorSands said:
Doubt it, Met Police have very, very few fans of their own (as you'd imagine- Britain's most misunderstood football club, no less) - those I know that have been there say it's spookily empty for home matches. K's see themselves as a much bigger deal, and representing the town of Kingston, with decent transport links - if Chessington (there's already Chessington & Hook Utd two divisions down) won't please them, being exiled out in Thames Ditton certainly won't.smudge7946 said:Is Imber Court, home of Met Police FC an option.
(Here are the Ryman League Premier attendances - boycotters could go to Crayford's VCD and lift their crowds...)
Grim all round. K's effectively being punished for past maladministration. Could happen to us all.0 -
What are you getting at here? it's usually something interesting. But maybe you should remember that the season before we moved back to the Valley we were playing in front of 4/5,000 at Upton Park..MrOneLung said:But have they got more fans than before?
0 -
There wasn't enough interest in the old Wimbledon to keep them as a viable option. Just wondered comparison in crowds now to then. can they sustain a 20k stadium? Their fans let the club die once already due to a lack of a Prague Womble etc.
1 -
Stadium initially will be 11000 all seater. Their crowds today are in the region of 4500.1
-
-
crock of shit. They were formed in 2002 & have always played at Kingstonian so how can they return to their "spiritual home". Also, Wimbledon FC played at a ground in Plough Lane , which is now a housing development. AFC Wimbledon want to move to a site next door, which is currently a dog track.
but hey, why let the truth get in the way of whimsical fantasies.5 - Sponsored links:
-
Kingsmeadow is not fit for purpose. They will now need to give a minimum 2,000 to away fans. The sooner they get there the better.0
-
Any idea where Plough Lane is in that picture / artists imoression ? It doesn’t seem to fit with the current surroundings0
-
This is the dictionary definition of spiritual home:golfaddick said:crock of shit. They were formed in 2002 & have always played at Kingstonian so how can they return to their "spiritual home". Also, Wimbledon FC played at a ground in Plough Lane , which is now a housing development. AFC Wimbledon want to move to a site next door, which is currently a dog track.
but hey, why let the truth get in the way of whimsical fantasies.
Your spiritual home is the place where you feel that you belong, usually because your ideas or attitudes are the same as those of the people who live there.
So on that level, perfectly reasonable to use the term "spiritual home". Most of their current supporters followed the original Wimbledon FC, many of them would have watched them playing at a stadium on Plough Lane in the Borough of Merton, so they are certainly "returning to their spiritual home".
Don't understand the attitude. I presume that supporters of Glasgow Rangers, Accrington Stanley, Maidstone United, Chester, Darlington 1883, Halifax Town, Hereford, Newport County and Scarborough are all forbidden from claiming any connection to the predecessor clubs with a similar/identical name, even though they're all followed by the same people who supported (and sadly lost) the original club?
Weird.10 -
You're always such a miserable sod. Maybe you deserve the username @grumpyaddick more than he does.golfaddick said:crock of shit. They were formed in 2002 & have always played at Kingstonian so how can they return to their "spiritual home". Also, Wimbledon FC played at a ground in Plough Lane , which is now a housing development. AFC Wimbledon want to move to a site next door, which is currently a dog track.
but hey, why let the truth get in the way of whimsical fantasies.
AFC Wimbledon were formed to be the newest iteration of the original club formed back in 1889.2 -
But they didn't lose their club - its still exists. It didn't go into administration or went bust, it simply moved. Same as Arsenal (who also changed their name to reflect their new area)0
-
I agree Arsenal are the original MK Dons, I like to remind Gooners of this, but the big difference is original WAFC supporters didn't set up a phoenix club and try to take them back to the right side of the River. They probably weren't very happy about it and there might have been more fightback had the war not intervened.
0 -
You're talking a 12 mile move versus a 65 mile move.golfaddick said:But they didn't lose their club - its still exists. It didn't go into administration or went bust, it simply moved. Same as Arsenal (who also changed their name to reflect their new area)
MK is nothing to do with Wimbledon other than taking their league position and SOME of their playing staff.
Arsenal evolved from Dial Square (Royal Arsenal, Woolwich Arsenal, The Arsenal and now Arsenal) and kept the majority of backroom and playing staff when they took their 12 mile move (Let's ignore the latter 0.25 mile move to the Emirates).
0 -
The unhappy WAFC supporters simply transferred their allegiance to the up and coming CAFC, and were blessed with 100 years of continual success, and inspirational ownership, showered with trophies and glory, whereas the relocated Arsenal stuttered along, before fading into insignificancerananegra said:I agree Arsenal are the original MK Dons, I like to remind Gooners of this, but the big difference is original WAFC supporters didn't set up a phoenix club and try to take them back to the right side of the River. They probably weren't very happy about it and there might have been more fightback had the war not intervened.
19 -
sorry, but distance is immaterial. Same club, just different ground. We moved to Selhurst, Leicester moved from Filbert Street, Derby from the Baseball ground. All the same. All MK Dons did was to change their name. If Hull City had change to Hull Tigers would that make them a different team ??Dazzler21 said:
You're talking a 12 mile move versus a 65 mile move.golfaddick said:But they didn't lose their club - its still exists. It didn't go into administration or went bust, it simply moved. Same as Arsenal (who also changed their name to reflect their new area)
MK is nothing to do with Wimbledon other than taking their league position and SOME of their playing staff.
Arsenal evolved from Dial Square (Royal Arsenal, Woolwich Arsenal, The Arsenal and now Arsenal) and kept the majority of backroom and playing staff when they took their 12 mile move (Let's ignore the latter 0.25 mile move to the Emirates).
I know I am in the minority - a very big minority, but history is history - you can't change it. AFC Wimbledon were formed in 2002 & so can't have won the FA Cup in 1988. The team that won it simply moved to a new ground & changed their name. They had the same players, were in the same league the next season (AFC Wimbledon have come through the league structure to be in League One now).
I'm not saying that it was right, but that is what happened. In my mind they shouldn't have given the Cup back, but that's more to do with pleasing The League & trying to placate their fans. I really don't care about either team but you can't simply change history because it doesn't fit in with what you think should be.3 -
utter nonsense. mk dons' own website says they were formed in 2004. they make no claim to be the same club that won the fa cup, in fact the history section of the site refers to how Robbo's team made history in 2013 by reaching the 4th roundgolfaddick said:
sorry, but distance is immaterial. Same club, just different ground. We moved to Selhurst, Leicester moved from Filbert Street, Derby from the Baseball ground. All the same. All MK Dons did was to change their name. If Hull City had change to Hull Tigers would that make them a different team ??Dazzler21 said:
You're talking a 12 mile move versus a 65 mile move.golfaddick said:But they didn't lose their club - its still exists. It didn't go into administration or went bust, it simply moved. Same as Arsenal (who also changed their name to reflect their new area)
MK is nothing to do with Wimbledon other than taking their league position and SOME of their playing staff.
Arsenal evolved from Dial Square (Royal Arsenal, Woolwich Arsenal, The Arsenal and now Arsenal) and kept the majority of backroom and playing staff when they took their 12 mile move (Let's ignore the latter 0.25 mile move to the Emirates).
I know I am in the minority - a very big minority, but history is history - you can't change it. AFC Wimbledon were formed in 2002 & so can't have won the FA Cup in 1988. The team that won it simply moved to a new ground & changed their name. They had the same players, were in the same league the next season (AFC Wimbledon have come through the league structure to be in League One now).
I'm not saying that it was right, but that is what happened. In my mind they shouldn't have given the Cup back, but that's more to do with pleasing The League & trying to placate their fans. I really don't care about either team but you can't simply change history because it doesn't fit in with what you think should be.
4 - Sponsored links:
-
Short short memories. What happened to Wimbledon could easily have happened to us. Would we still think that “moved” club was charlton?golfaddick said:
sorry, but distance is immaterial. Same club, just different ground. We moved to Selhurst, Leicester moved from Filbert Street, Derby from the Baseball ground. All the same. All MK Dons did was to change their name. If Hull City had change to Hull Tigers would that make them a different team ??Dazzler21 said:
You're talking a 12 mile move versus a 65 mile move.golfaddick said:But they didn't lose their club - its still exists. It didn't go into administration or went bust, it simply moved. Same as Arsenal (who also changed their name to reflect their new area)
MK is nothing to do with Wimbledon other than taking their league position and SOME of their playing staff.
Arsenal evolved from Dial Square (Royal Arsenal, Woolwich Arsenal, The Arsenal and now Arsenal) and kept the majority of backroom and playing staff when they took their 12 mile move (Let's ignore the latter 0.25 mile move to the Emirates).
I know I am in the minority - a very big minority, but history is history - you can't change it. AFC Wimbledon were formed in 2002 & so can't have won the FA Cup in 1988. The team that won it simply moved to a new ground & changed their name. They had the same players, were in the same league the next season (AFC Wimbledon have come through the league structure to be in League One now).
I'm not saying that it was right, but that is what happened. In my mind they shouldn't have given the Cup back, but that's more to do with pleasing The League & trying to placate their fans. I really don't care about either team but you can't simply change history because it doesn't fit in with what you think should be.
What the hell have all the recent protests been about? That the club is the fan’s, not the owners. Wimbledon fans formed AFC as a Phoenix club, in my opinion it’s the same club, it has the same fans and the same colours etc.
If we had completely lost both charlton to palace swallowing up the club (as noades dreamed) and losing the valley, would you reject a Phoenix club formed in or close to se7 by CAFC supporters? Would you fuck, you’d be with the “new” club with the other cafc supporters and call that the same as CAFC
The fans are the football club.9 -
Are Wimbledon / AFC Wimbledon any different to the likes of Darlington / Darlington 1889 or Hereford United / Hereford... Same with the current versions of Accrington Stanley or Maidstone United
Technically all clubs mentioned have gone and have had to reform before climbing up the Non-League pyramid - The only difference is that Milton Keynes Dons pretty much got away with it themselves and didnt have to restart from the bottom which I think they should have done1 -
Hope they don't get pissed groundworkers to install the pitch this time round0
-
Are rangers now a different club because they had to reform and go back up the pyramid?ForeverAddickted said:Are Wimbledon / AFC Wimbledon any different to the likes of Darlington / Darlington 1889 or Hereford United / Hereford... Same with the current versions of Accrington Stanley or Maidstone United
Technically all clubs mentioned have gone and have had to reform before climbing up the Non-League pyramid - The only difference is that Milton Keynes Dons pretty much got away with it themselves and didnt have to from the bottom which I think they should have done0 -
While I like to think AFC are the real Wimbledon, there's no right answer, it's the old philosophical/ Trigger's broom thing.kentaddick said:
Are rangers now a different club because they had to reform and go back up the pyramid?ForeverAddickted said:Are Wimbledon / AFC Wimbledon any different to the likes of Darlington / Darlington 1889 or Hereford United / Hereford... Same with the current versions of Accrington Stanley or Maidstone United
Technically all clubs mentioned have gone and have had to reform before climbing up the Non-League pyramid - The only difference is that Milton Keynes Dons pretty much got away with it themselves and didnt have to from the bottom which I think they should have done
What I don't want to lose sight of is the fact that AFCW have some utter cretins following them, and I no longer have the same appreciation for their fight as I did before we came across them on the pitch recently.2 -
No, but they would be if they changed their name, colours and moved to Edinburgh.kentaddick said:
Are rangers now a different club because they had to reform and go back up the pyramid?ForeverAddickted said:Are Wimbledon / AFC Wimbledon any different to the likes of Darlington / Darlington 1889 or Hereford United / Hereford... Same with the current versions of Accrington Stanley or Maidstone United
Technically all clubs mentioned have gone and have had to reform before climbing up the Non-League pyramid - The only difference is that Milton Keynes Dons pretty much got away with it themselves and didnt have to from the bottom which I think they should have done1 -
Yes, I would have probably supported a new club, but that's not the point. MK Dons didn't get swallowed up by another club, they simply moved to a new ground & changed part of their name (they kept the ...........don bit to show who they are). Just like Arsenal - they dropped the "Woolwich" as they were no longer in that area, but are they a different club to Woolwich Arsenal - I think not.kentaddick said:
Short short memories. What happened to Wimbledon could easily have happened to us. Would we still think that “moved” club was charlton?golfaddick said:
sorry, but distance is immaterial. Same club, just different ground. We moved to Selhurst, Leicester moved from Filbert Street, Derby from the Baseball ground. All the same. All MK Dons did was to change their name. If Hull City had change to Hull Tigers would that make them a different team ??Dazzler21 said:
You're talking a 12 mile move versus a 65 mile move.golfaddick said:But they didn't lose their club - its still exists. It didn't go into administration or went bust, it simply moved. Same as Arsenal (who also changed their name to reflect their new area)
MK is nothing to do with Wimbledon other than taking their league position and SOME of their playing staff.
Arsenal evolved from Dial Square (Royal Arsenal, Woolwich Arsenal, The Arsenal and now Arsenal) and kept the majority of backroom and playing staff when they took their 12 mile move (Let's ignore the latter 0.25 mile move to the Emirates).
I know I am in the minority - a very big minority, but history is history - you can't change it. AFC Wimbledon were formed in 2002 & so can't have won the FA Cup in 1988. The team that won it simply moved to a new ground & changed their name. They had the same players, were in the same league the next season (AFC Wimbledon have come through the league structure to be in League One now).
I'm not saying that it was right, but that is what happened. In my mind they shouldn't have given the Cup back, but that's more to do with pleasing The League & trying to placate their fans. I really don't care about either team but you can't simply change history because it doesn't fit in with what you think should be.
What the hell have all the recent protests been about? That the club is the fan’s, not the owners. Wimbledon fans formed AFC as a Phoenix club, in my opinion it’s the same club, it has the same fans and the same colours etc.
If we had completely lost both charlton to palace swallowing up the club (as noades dreamed) and losing the valley, would you reject a Phoenix club formed in or close to se7 by CAFC supporters? Would you fuck, you’d be with the “new” club with the other cafc supporters and call that the same as CAFC
The fans are the football club.
As I said, I had enough of this. You'll not get me to change the way I think & I believe history is on my side.0 -
Hosting Football League matches at Kingsmeadow is ridiculous, but I've really gone off AFC Wimbledon after our most recent matches against them.2
-
Re: Rangers, This is from 2013, but the stance from all concerned is still the sameJiMMy 85 said:
While I like to think AFC are the real Wimbledon, there's no right answer, it's the old philosophical/ Trigger's broom thing.kentaddick said:
Are rangers now a different club because they had to reform and go back up the pyramid?ForeverAddickted said:Are Wimbledon / AFC Wimbledon any different to the likes of Darlington / Darlington 1889 or Hereford United / Hereford... Same with the current versions of Accrington Stanley or Maidstone United
Technically all clubs mentioned have gone and have had to reform before climbing up the Non-League pyramid - The only difference is that Milton Keynes Dons pretty much got away with it themselves and didnt have to from the bottom which I think they should have done
What I don't want to lose sight of is the fact that AFCW have some utter cretins following them, and I no longer have the same appreciation for their fight as I did before we came across them on the pitch recently.
http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1rkt3ke0 -
Nope I see them as the same Rangerskentaddick said:
Are rangers now a different club because they had to reform and go back up the pyramid?ForeverAddickted said:Are Wimbledon / AFC Wimbledon any different to the likes of Darlington / Darlington 1889 or Hereford United / Hereford... Same with the current versions of Accrington Stanley or Maidstone United
Technically all clubs mentioned have gone and have had to reform before climbing up the Non-League pyramid - The only difference is that Milton Keynes Dons pretty much got away with it themselves and didnt have to from the bottom which I think they should have done0
