Monday 9 January 2012

The abandon lie revisited yet again

The lie that Wimbledon fans abandoned their club is always the throwaway insult of choice that pops back up from time to time, usually emanating from the Franchise customers of course. What makes it the most witless and empty of jibes is stuff like this:


That's a Milton Keynes newspaper on 30th May 2002 saying, "WIMBLEDON FC are on their way to Milton Keynes with top flight football just 10 weeks away if a temporary home can be found."

So how could it possibly have been premature of Wimbledon fans to re-form their club? This is MK's own local paper telling them this, yet they allow Koppel and Winkelman botching the move for a further 18 months to let them make their pathetic accusation at Wimbledon fans.
Any doubts? Read more...

"Wimbledon have burned their boats and cannot realistically go back to South London."

Got that? If an MK local paper knew that on 30th May 2002, how come there are still Franchise customers so ignorant of reality ten years later? When they come up with the 'abandon' lie, it's only themselves they are making look ridiculous. 

Oh yes, and note the final paragraph of that report:

"Its 113-year heritage will be respected in deference to past fans and the Football League, but an insider at the club said the obvious choice for the future would be MK Dons as suggested by the Citizen more than a year ago."

Does anyone really still believe it was ever about 'saving' Wimbledon FC? Here you have an MK paper, not 2 days after the Commission, confirming that 'MK Dons' (registered as domain names by Winkelman in 2000) was always the plan. And there are Franchise customers out there that ten years later are still lying to both themselves and the rest of us by imagining Winkelman as some sort of saviour, when this was clearly his plan from start to finish... well... if it ever does get finished!

It also makes further mockery of the FA Commission itself, which pontificated at length about maintaining the Wimbledon FC name. Yet here we have open admission that long before the Commission it was planned to change the name. Did they not bother to ask Koppel and Winkelman but just presume? Or were they lied to about the plans? Clearly the Commissioners don't care that their decision was either based on being lied to or on doing such an abysmal job of asking the right questions, but it leaves the Commission itself looking as shoddy and incompetent as ever.

No comments:

Post a Comment