Wednesday, 14 March 2012
I remarked previously on what sort of a city has a football team using the nicked-name of another town? And as it turns out the answer is... a place that stays a town.
Now I'm sure that whoever decided on the towns being honoured with city status didn't snub Milton Keynes (for the third time) on the basis of the provocative suffix to its football team name. However, when the leader of Milton Keynes' council won't even agree to talk about trying to resolve the enmity that now exists between his town and Wimbledon (http://www.thezonemk.co.uk/phpbb3/viewtopic.php?f=107&t=6378&p=31429), then it's indicative of an attitude that maybe didn't sit well with those handing out city status.
Whatever you think about the use of a council's time on this issue (I've no strong feeling either way), you can at least say that by trying to resolve this matter Merton council is trying to improve the situation for both towns.
Sadly, it seems, you can't say the same for the council leader of Milton Keynes. Those saying it is a waste of time and energy by Merton council and that none of the politicians or other interested parties should have got involved, should ask themselves why it had to come to that? When the 'Dons' nickname being used as a nicked-name by Franchise FC is so clearly an emotive and antagonising issue, why has the individual in a position to resolve the matter, Pete Winkelman, not taken a single step to do so? Winkelman caused this mess with his approach to move Wimbledon FC in 2000 and with his renaming of the team in 2004, so it's about time he did something to resolve a row that will simmer on otherwise. How far does the matter have to go before Winkelman will finally, for once in this whole sorry saga, step up and do the right thing?