|
Post by mildrover on Feb 15, 2024 8:02:10 GMT
Jordan in one of your posts you consider the fortunes of the growing numbers of fan owned clubs in Scotland. One you mention is Clydebank , ' Clydebank are . by all accounts, a bit of a sleeping giant. The town has a proper affinity with them. Their crowds regularly top 500' I think there is a strong message for the Rovers in the need to build that 'proper affinity' the town has for their football club'. I would guess that the effort to build that proper affinity has paid off for Clydebank with crowds being 500 plus.
Ronnie
|
|
|
Post by fineen on Feb 15, 2024 10:27:09 GMT
Ronnie, I agree that what would be a game changer would be the 'proper affinity' with the population of Coatbridge, but I believe that the polarisation of the football-minded in the town is too firmly established. If anyone can think of anything that might persuade even a modest number to think about supporting our club I would happily put some of my time (and money if required) into helping such an initiative. I would also be interested in buying shares if that would help and if it were possible, but am not getting into the pros and cons of fan ownership, simply because I do not know how viable it is.
|
|
|
Post by weerabwatt on Feb 15, 2024 15:56:34 GMT
Ronnie, you are correct about the 'sleeping giant' that is Clydebank. I was at Holm Park on Saturday for their game v Gartcairn. The crowd was definitely more than 500 as a quick count indicated that there was in excess of 300 on the river side of the ground. There was clearly a bigger crowd for the game v Pollok on 27th January that I also attended. Twenty odd years from the sellout of the original club to Airdrie United has not diminished the support and their town's determination to see their club prosper. That despite becoming nomadic tenants at Dumbarton and Greenock during that period. Whether the citizens of Coatbridge would get behind a fan owned club is open to debate. Nobody will know until it is a reality.
Incidentally Holm Park is the historical home of Yoker Athletic. I don't know the arrangement between the clubs, but a significant amount of money has been spent on a recently laid plastic surface, as well as terracing improvements.
Regarding Pollok, I have attended games at Newlandsfield this season where the crowds have been even bigger than those at Clydebank. A match earlier in the season v Benburb attracted somewhere north of 1100 and their game v Beith in November had almost 800 fans. I attended both of those, as well as their Scottish Cup tie v Gala Fairydean which also drew a large crowd.
Rab Crangle stated that Pollok FC has spent a fortune bringing Newlandsfield up to senior standard. Frank Meade and I attend Pollok matches on average about 4 or 5 times a season together, or separately, depending on circumstances. It is Frank's local club, as he lives not far from there. The only improvements that we are aware of over the past twenty years or so are upgraded floodlights, the funding for which was grant aided, I understand. A recent rumour is that Pollok are investigating selling up and moving to Lesser Hampden, partly due to the fact that Newlandsfield will never be suitable for SPFL licence requirements.
Their current financial issues have probably been caused by the same issue that recently raised its head at Darvel, overspending on players and not achieving the desired result i.e. promotion to the Lowland League.
As I've alluded to above, I've watched many of the teams in the WOSFL this season. Clydebank, Beith, Darvel, Gartcairn and Pollok would be a match for any of the teams in the Lowland League, including the runaway leaders East Kilbride, IMO. Pity that the junior clubs didn't buy into it when the pyramid was first mooted, as it stopped the top junior clubs taking their rightful place in the 5th tier of Scottish Football, instead the Rovers are playing the likes of Edinburgh Uni, Gretna 2008, Gala and Caley Braves, each of which has virtually no travelling support.
|
|
|
Post by charlestheoptimist on Feb 15, 2024 17:13:04 GMT
With reference to the above re the town's association with the club - It is interesting to note that we have a huge percentage of support in the ex pats bracket - including myself - but who still have positive vibes for the club and attend games when they can. Given the conurbation of the Coatbridge area and when you look at comparable townships it is disappointing that we cannot garnish a rough hard core of 600 - 800 at our games. Such a difference this would make to our longer term playing and financial prospects . Our dedicated band of supports are to be saluted - but a few newbies would be hugely beneficial.
|
|
|
Post by rab on Feb 15, 2024 19:33:17 GMT
Pollok is my local team too and I sometimes go to their matches, but only if Rovers aren’t playing.
|
|
gwood
Regular Visitor
Posts: 114
|
Post by gwood on Feb 15, 2024 21:25:39 GMT
Would we be able to get some sort of update on how this is looking? Not expecting everything laid out on here as I don’t know what stage it’s at. I understand people will be doing a lot of work in the background and to be honest I don’t have a problem with that.
Is it looking like a realistic option? If so, then it would be nice to see what the next steps are and how we would all go about being a part of it.
Even just something so that we can start to see where we are in the process and what the future may hold rather than people going back and forth on here and everyone else being in the dark as to what’s actually happening.
|
|
|
Post by jordancampbell on Feb 15, 2024 21:42:10 GMT
Clydebank are a really interesting example in a number of ways. As a town, its population is smaller than Coatbridge. I’d imagine, however, that the demographics of Clydebank are somewhat different to that of the Iron Burgh. They were also a First Division outfit for a number of years and this would have been instrumental in growing their support.
The biggest problem Albion Rovers Football Club have? Celtic. It is really as simple as that. In a town with such a high % of Roman Catholics/those of Irish heritage, it’s a really difficult to appeal to the “masses” and get them along to Cliftonhill. For me, football was never about religion and, despite being baptised RC and attending Celtic games for much of my childhood, I followed my own path and my love for ARFC began. It would be really interesting to compare the average number of Coatbridge natives in Celtic Park in any given Saturday versus those in Cliftonhill. I’d hazard a guess of at least a good few thousand v 200. That’s the grim reality.
|
|
|
Post by mildrover on Feb 15, 2024 22:14:51 GMT
Ronnie, I agree that what would be a game changer would be the 'proper affinity' with the population of Coatbridge, but I believe that the polarisation of the football-minded in the town is too firmly established. If anyone can think of anything that might persuade even a modest number to think about supporting our club I would happily put some of my time (and money if required) into helping such an initiative. I would also be interested in buying shares if that would help and if it were possible, but am not getting into the pros and cons of fan ownership, simply because I do not know how viable it is. Wise words as always Fineen. For a few years in the mid- 70s(19) I spent a fair bit of my social and cultural activity time in Clydebank. I remember being struck by how similar the town was to Coatbridge. Their best times behind them and their worst just around the corner. I certainly remember Clydebank also being, as you put it ,fairly polarised on football and related aspects. Obviously Clydebank FC have worked really hard in building that affinity through football and community activities: I would argue on a much greater scale than we have done. As I said before the days of seeing a football club and its stadium as being open 2 hours on a Saturday every 2 weeks as a feasible model are over. There are signs we could be moving in the direction of travel Clydebank took several years ago. If that is the case, there may just be hope that we can rebuild a fanbase to sustain the club into the future. Ronnie
|
|
|
Post by jordancampbell on Feb 16, 2024 14:59:21 GMT
Would we be able to get some sort of update on how this is looking? Not expecting everything laid out on here as I don’t know what stage it’s at. I understand people will be doing a lot of work in the background and to be honest I don’t have a problem with that. Is it looking like a realistic option? If so, then it would be nice to see what the next steps are and how we would all go about being a part of it. Even just something so that we can start to see where we are in the process and what the future may hold rather than people going back and forth on here and everyone else being in the dark as to what’s actually happening. Aye, that’s an idea actually, maybe Ronnie and his fellow ‘Steering Group’ members could share something (anything!) with us all and put some meat on the bones. Three meetings down the line and nothing in the public domain…
|
|
|
Post by tommysermanni on Feb 16, 2024 18:54:06 GMT
Might be an idea for the Mods to lock this thread for the time being. Not so sure trading insults is a way forward. Everyone has their own views and I respect that but unless more information is forthcoming this is serving no real purpose.
|
|
gwood
Regular Visitor
Posts: 114
|
Post by gwood on Feb 16, 2024 19:16:19 GMT
I wasn’t trying to stir the pot btw. Just got genuine care and interest in the developments like I’m sure many of us do. No malicious intent on my part!
|
|
|
Post by tommysermanni on Feb 16, 2024 19:42:54 GMT
No it wasn't aimed at anyone mate it was just that we should be rallying behind the team as much as possible now and until new information emerges I don't see the point. I'm all for free speech as long as everyone agrees with me
|
|
|
Post by jordancampbell on Feb 16, 2024 19:55:38 GMT
This thread has became a boring cycle of the same tripe. Jordan, Roversgrant et al why don't you cease with all the clandestine jibes etc and spit it out? You clearly know what has happened at these meetings because rovers as a football club and wider support absolutely leak like a sieve and thrive on titillation & gossip. They have clearly stated when they have something to tell you they will so if you have something specific to say then spit it out. Where does this entitlement and gatekeeping come from at this club? Just because you pay £11 to go to a game doesn't give you the right to know the inner workings no more than paying your tax allows you the keys to all the fire houses. So can we just wrap this coatbridege edition of mean girls now unless anyone is going to add anything constructive? What jibes? I have no idea what has happened at these meetings or what has been discussed. I do know that attendees have been hand-picked and we’ve heard nothing in public. Is the irony lost on you? The very fact you’re using terms like “gatekeeping” and “entitlement” baffles me. Those behind the meetings are those acting in a way which undermines the principles of fan ownership - transparency being the main one. They are the only ones acting as gatekeepers and/or in an entitled way.
|
|
|
Post by rab on Feb 16, 2024 20:56:17 GMT
Those behind the meetings are those acting in a way which undermines the principles of fan ownership - transparency being the main one. They are the only ones acting as gatekeepers and/or in an entitled way. Utter bollox. There isn’t a fan owned club - there are discussions to see if a plan can be worked out to progress towards one. You came on here sh1t stirring, asking what was going on when you knew full well. You said you doubted the group would tell the board what they were doing when you had already been given an update during your time on the board. Then you gave false examples of ‘badly run’ fan club from back of a fag packet research. You’re a civil servant, right? Do you know nothing about policy development? You have meetings, discussions, take advice, consult experts, put it all together and develop a proposal or options, and THEN and ONLY THEN do you go public. Even then you might not get all the details right, but you have a better chance of avoiding announcing something half baked. Or having a shambolically organised event (such as an AGM or open meeting). Hope I got all this in before the thread gets locked!
|
|
|
Post by jordancampbell on Feb 16, 2024 21:49:29 GMT
To compare civil service policy making and the future of Albion Rovers Football Club is wild, Rab, and you know it. There isn’t a fan owned club (yet!) as you quite rightly say, but you’ve got to assume those advocating for it would opt for transparency and honesty from the outset, no? We are a small church and, as such, there should have been fan-wide consultation before anything was put in motion. It seems to me, though, as those who have always put themselves first when making decisions in the past continue to do so. It’s sad, really, and smacks of a need to stay relevant. The Club wasn’t put first when going rogue and appointing a manager that set the wheels in motion for where we find ourselves now. It certainly wasn’t put first when signing loan papers and costly lease agreements for unnecessary printing equipment.
I have always put my views across on here without concerning myself about the opinions of others and will continue to do so. Those who want this thread (and the points discussed in it) closed down and “locked” need to think about how open and transparent we all want ARFC to be.
|
|