Burnley FC - The London Clarets

The London Clarets
Meetings between the Burnley FC Board and Supporters Groups

Home
Magazine - latest issue
Magazine - archive
Fixtures / results
Match reports
News
News archive
Player of the year
Meetings with Burnley FC
Firmo's view
Pub guide
Survey
Photos
Burnley FC history
London Clarets history
About this site
Credits
Site map
Site search
Contacts
E-mail us

Back to the last page

 

 

First meeting
Held Burnley Football Club - Tuesday 24th November 1998

I am sure that you will all have heard of this unprecedented meeting between the supporters and the board, which was called unsurprisingly at very short notice. A maximum of two committee members from each of the supporters group's was invited for a wide ranging discussion of all issues relating to BFC. The only stipulation was that the discussion was to be constructive and not a shouting match, which indeed is how it turned out. Most questioners took the opportunity to question the board on the substantive issues, and only rarely did we have the 'why was the team crap last week' type of waste of time question. Stan was not there, but there is no doubt at all who runs the playing side.

All four of the directors were present, including Barry Kilby, and to be fair to them they each displayed an openness, which was a little breathtaking given the past history. BK is obviously now the dominant factor on the board, but Teasdale Out was quite the more prominent and impressive in discussing the issues.

It was apparent immediately prior to the meeting that there was a good deal of cynicism in the room before the board members made their entrance, which was only slightly offset by the end of the evening. The meeting could quite rightly be regarded as a step in the right direction, but the size of the step can only be measured following progress on issues raised, at future quarterly meetings.

CISA have put together a summary of the main points from the meeting, which  is not much different from my own notes. It is however worthwhile emphasising just a few impressions and comments for your edification:

a) There is no doubt at all that the club is in some financial trouble, and that the rights issue is seen as absolutely essential. With £3million of debt increasing by £50,000 monthly, with interest piling upon interest, a cash injection is essential. No real alternative considered by the board should the rights issue be rejected, as sale of players was firmly discounted (thank goodness).

b) There was a good deal of surprise from the board members at the quantity and quality of ideas from the supporters, particularly regarding the commercial side of the club. How many years have we been saying how poor, for instance, the commercial side of the club is, and how a little input from the supporters might help!

c) There is an understanding by the board that the football world is rapidly changing, not all for the good, and BFC needs to amend its infrastructure to operate as a first division club, if indeed that is where the club wishes to position itself. Time is not on our side.

d) The demise of the Pontin's league, certainly in its present form, and the rise of the Academies, was given a full airing. Stan is very much in charge here, and we look forward to the modern day equivalent of the old BFC youth set up. Charlton was mentioned several times, as one would expect.

e) The Ingleby situation was given some prominence, as of course was the Shackleton situation. The board obviously gave the latter bid a good deal of credence initially, as it was much more favourable in many ways than the former. The difficulties arose when it became apparent to everybody, except apparently the board, that Billy Liar was all wind and no sails.

f) The poor response from the players and the club generally to supporters' functions created a good deal of heat, particularly where related to sponsorship. This will be acted upon, and could be timely for the APFSCIL dinner if the present number of injuries creates a pool of potential attendees.

All in all a very useful exercise, but it needs some positive action from the future quarterly meetings in order to feel that we are getting somewhere. The only real downside was the criticism of Stan, which is the first time that I have heard this, particularly in relation to the sacking of the Waddle Four. Personally, I feel that Blatherwick could have been quite useful given the present injury situation, but what do I know? As for Stan, well I myself have not yet approached the Rubicon, never mind got my toes wet, but the number of potential Julius Caesers seems to be on the increase.

Up the Clarets.

Barry Heagin

Back Top Home E-mail us

The London Clarets
The Burnley FC London Supporters Club