Tony's Non-League Forum: Non-League Football: General: AFC Liverpool: Page 3


	MAIN INDEX	SEARCH POSTS	WHO'S ONLINE	LOG IN

Home: Non-League Football: General:
AFC Liverpool

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 15

View All

Fanatic
Reserve Team Star

Jun 1, 2008, 10:50 PM

Posts: 733
Location: Deepest Suffolk
Team(s):

Post #51 of 365 (7499 views)
Shortcut

Re: [pink hamlet] AFC Liverpool [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

In Reply To

slightly off topic,who designed the afcl badge, it reminds me of a 196o's russian army badge.

It would appear to be a copy of the Soviet seal, with a football and Liver bird emblazoned on it.

Obviously the club are keen to be associated with a dictatorial regime which killed millions of its own citizens... Unsure

Last new ground: St Mary's; Southampton 1 Charlton 0

(This post was edited by Fanatic on Jun 1, 2008, 10:51 PM)

Blanc Mange
Junior Team Star

Jun 1, 2008, 11:02 PM

Posts: 68
Location:
Team(s):

Post #52 of 365 (7486 views)
Shortcut

Re: [leohoenig] AFC Liverpool [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

Am i being a touch naive if i say that the Pyramid as we know it is starting to
crumble under its own weighty ambitions unsure of where it wants to proceed.
Reading this thread and the one in restructuring about whether Grimsby Borough and
Appleby Frodingham should be allowed in the NCE makes me yearn for the days of when
the pyramid just started without all the convoluted levels and over the top ground gradings
and teams like RS Southampton and Ruislip Town could chance their arms from unseen
lower levels.To me its like the universe always expanding but never quite what sure
what its going to do next and when it does,its the next big bang imploding and having to
start all over again.Personally i have no objection to AFC Liverpool forming or joining
the NWC but AFC!!!!!!...where's the imagination....they could easily use United,Rovers
Albion,Wanderers or even the old moniker of White Star.

dave
First Team Star

Jun 1, 2008, 11:05 PM

Posts: 2352
Location:
Team(s): AFC Wimbledon

Post #53 of 365 (7482 views)
Shortcut

Re: [leohoenig] AFC Liverpool [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

In Reply To

I really hope that if they FA have made this decision, they will explain it.

Thats the key point. I won't have a problem with whatever decision is made one way or the other as long as there are reasons behind the decision. And when I say reasons I mean proper reasons not: "well theres another AFC club and we don't like it," afterall AFC is only used as a prefix and isn't really important.

vienna1964
First Team Star

Jun 1, 2008, 11:23 PM

Posts: 2274
Location: Great Malvern
Team(s): Yeovil Town

Post #54 of 365 (7475 views)
Shortcut

Re: [Mike Frenzy] AFC Liverpool [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

In Reply To

Would it not be possible for Liverpool fans who cannot afford to get into Anfield to simply find their local non-League team and support the hard work of those struggling to run the clubs? OK the new club may turn up at each ground once giving a big payday but is it really helping grassroots footy? I don't have a problem with the AFC Wimbledon, understand the ideas behind AFCUM but think this is one AFC too far.

... and let us not forget that Liverpool F.C. itself was a breakaway club from Everton F.C. way back when !

I APOLOGISE UNRESERVEDLY TO EACH AND EVERY PERSON ON THIS FORUM WHO HAS FELT LET-DOWN BY MY INIMICABLE AND DEPLORABLE BEHAVIOUR OF OCTOBER 28th. 2009. ESPECIALLY TO BRIAN, WHO IS A MARVELLOUS GENTLEMAN AND IS THE LAST PERSON HERE WHO SHOULD HAVE TO PUT UP WITH SUCH UNDESERVED PERSONAL CHARACTER-ASSASSINATION. LET IT BE KNOWN THAT A PRIVATE PERSONAL APOLOGY WAS SENT, BUT WAS SEEN INSUFFICIENT. FAIR ENOUGH.

Andy D
First Team Regular

Jun 2, 2008, 9:47 AM

Posts: 1245
Location: Cheshire/Dorset
Team(s): Northwich Victoria, Forfar Athletic, Castleford RLFC, Lancashire CCC,

Post #55 of 365 (7419 views)
Shortcut

Re: [dave] AFC Liverpool [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

Here's a thought. Maybe some of the problem here is the name. Why AFC Liverpool? Why not for example....Liverpool City? Was much thought put into the name at all, or was it just taken as read that it would be AFC?

Games 2010/11 - 6
New Grounds 2010/11 - 5
Last New Ground: 24.7.2010 Betws-yn-Rhos 1 Y Glannau 2, PSF

http://www.flickr.com/photos/groundhopper27/

susandy034
Youth Team Sub

Jun 2, 2008, 11:14 AM

Posts: 114
Location: Leeds
Team(s): Bishop's Stortford

Post #56 of 365 (7395 views)
Shortcut

Re: [Andy D] AFC Liverpool [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

AFC is generally taken to mean a club run by and/or on behalf of the fans. Whatever your thoughts about the aesthetics of the name - AFC (Club name) - and whether you think that a particular club is actually run in that fashion, who can possibly have an issue with the general sentiment behind it? Therefore by picking the name AFC Liverpool they are making a statement of intent which would be lost if they chose a different name.

leohoenig
Chelsea Transfer Target

Jun 2, 2008, 11:30 AM

Posts: 4246
Location: Outer Cheltenhamshire
Team(s): Cheltenham Town

Post #57 of 365 (7379 views)
Shortcut

Re: [susandy034] AFC Liverpool [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

How many clubs called AFC are there in England.
How many of these are run by the fans? One??? Two??? (prior to AFC L).

AFC just seems to be a popular prefix at the moment for new and reformed clubs.

The majority of very small clubs in the country are run by their fans/players - that is clubs that are not limited companies, but clubs, and are then run by committee.

There are a small number of clubs run by Trusts - that is where the club are a limited company but registered as an Industrial and Provident Society (I think that is the wording), as per football trusts. The point about this form of operation is that no person is allowed to own more than one share in the company.

Clubs I believe to be run in this way
Enfield Town
AFC Wimbledon
FC United of Manchester

Others that may be
AFC Telford United

Certainly not run in that way
All 92 clubs in the league and Premier League

Pretty certain not run in that way
AFC Hornchurch
AFC Emley
AFC Fylde
AFC Hayes
AFC Totton

You have reached your credit limit. You are no longer credible

Now blogging at www.leohoenig.com

rainjar
Reserve Team Regular

Jun 2, 2008, 11:43 AM

Posts: 632
Location:
Team(s):

Post #58 of 365 (7369 views)
Shortcut

Re: [Blanc Mange] AFC Liverpool [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

In Reply To

.... To me its like the universe always expanding but never quite what sure
what its going to do next and when it does,its the next big bang imploding and having to
start all over again. ....

That would appear to be the conventional wisdom.

Football Insights
GIFFA - More Than Just a Game A Day
FIFFA - Never Too Old To Score
Totalworlds Football
Totalworlds

susandy034
Youth Team Sub

Jun 2, 2008, 11:48 AM

Posts: 114
Location: Leeds
Team(s): Bishop's Stortford

Post #59 of 365 (7363 views)
Shortcut

Re: [leohoenig] AFC Liverpool [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

I was answering the question as to why AFC Liverpool and not another name. Having no connection with the club or city I nevertheless offered an opinion. Regardless of other uses of the prefix AFC and the status of other clubs with that prefix I still believe that the name is intended to be a statement that the club is run by/on behalf of its fans.

I would infer from Leo's post that he approves of a club being run by/on behalf of its fans, as he notes that the majority of small clubs are run this way, although he doesn't state this approval explicitly. If I am wrong I am sorry for puting words into your mouth Leo.

Russell
First Team Star

Jun 2, 2008, 11:51 AM

Posts: 1589
Location:
Team(s):

Post #60 of 365 (7359 views)
Shortcut

Re: [Mike Frenzy] AFC Liverpool [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

In Reply To

If this is the case then surely all of the clubs currently playing below the Kent County League and applying for membership are mugs. Well run clubs and with good facilities built up by themselves such as Eltham Town should simply fold then form a new club - maybe claim to be disgruntled followers of some local League team and apply for membership of the league of their choice with a right to be admitted.

That is not how football has been run before now and I for one don't see why fans who don't like how League football is going should have the right to barge in on the non-League game with big time clubs who easily dominate those who accomodate them.

I got fed up with League football in the early 80s and ended up involved in my local club. It's not all fun, it cost me a lot of money at times. Yes I enjoyed it but look where the Crocks are now - was it worth my while? I sometimes think not. Those opting out of Anfield should fully understand what they are joining before claiming AFC status.

How many AFC clubs are we likely to host in all? 92?!! Or 93 if an AFC Gretna come back to their roots?!! Think it through...

I respect your point of view but none of the clubs in the Kent County League have got the facilities necessary for Kent league football. Only 2 have lights for example - Otford and Lewisham - and neither of those fgrounds have the necessary spectator facilities.

Veteran
Chelsea Transfer Target

Jun 2, 2008, 12:17 PM

Posts: 5083
Location: Derbyshire
Team(s): A. B. U.

Post #61 of 365 (7341 views)
Shortcut

Re: [Blanc Mange] AFC Liverpool [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

In Reply To

Am i being a touch naive if i say that the Pyramid as we know it is starting to
crumble under its own weighty ambitions unsure of where it wants to proceed.

Thank God the Ancient Egyptians didn't construct their Pyramids like this one. There are just so many things going wrong, and so many arbitrary decisions being made by the FA that I agree with the previous poster that it is beginning to crumble. Some clubs are being allowed promotion when they have not met ground grading or league position criteria simply for "political" reasons (Durham City and the NCE newcomers) ; in direct conflict with the rules several clubs have been allowed to arrange immediate groundshares to secure promotion or admission to leagues (e. g. FCUM, Chalfont Wasps etc.) : some new clubs are being made to start at the very bottom whereas others aren't; and as for the rules, guidelines or whatever they call them on going into administration, folding, reforming etc. they just seem to be making these up as they go along. Throw in a lot of clubs unhappy with the geographical organistion and the legaues they now find themselves unwillingly in and you have the recipe for major problems ahead in both league and non-league football.

If I was organised, I'd be Dangerous.

DaveU
Reserve Team Regular

Jun 2, 2008, 12:19 PM

Posts: 677
Location:
Team(s): Maidstone United, Chelsea

Post #62 of 365 (7340 views)
Shortcut

Re: [susandy034] AFC Liverpool [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

The prefix AFC has nothing to do with the way a club is run. It merely (in most cases) stands for Association Football Club and thus has the same meaning as the suffix FC except that it is more accurate because rugby teams could also use FC suffix. It is also no more part of the club name than FC, apart from the obvious case of the ludicrously named FC United of Manchester.

Nobody calls Manchester United "Manchester United FC" or Chelsea "Chelsea FC". Most AFC Wimbledon fans just refer to them as Wimbledon or The Dons. When naming a new club the AFC prefix should be ignored when considering whether the name is already in use. Nor should just using the words in a different order constitute a new name.

There are plenty of genuine suffixes to choose from, United, Rovers, Rangers, Albion etc, or why not come up with something completely new. How about Liverpool Lions, Manchester Sabres, or something even less obvious. There are hundreds of thousands of words in the English language, but I would guess less than 100 of them are used in football club names. It can't be beyond the wit of people forming clubs to come up with a name that is both distinctive and original but still indicates the club's roots.

rainjar
Reserve Team Regular

Jun 2, 2008, 12:23 PM

Posts: 632
Location:
Team(s):

Post #63 of 365 (7337 views)
Shortcut

Re: [vienna1964] AFC Liverpool [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

In Reply To

... and let us not forget that Liverpool F.C. itself was a breakaway club from Everton F.C. way back when !

Not really a breakaway club - more a club formed by the leaseholder/owner of Anfield after Everton refused to pay an increased rent, and moved to Goodison.

Something that Chelsea share with Liverpool - a club formed to occupy an otherwise vacant stadium.

Any other clubs formed primarily to occupy an otherwise vacant stadium?

Football Insights
GIFFA - More Than Just a Game A Day
FIFFA - Never Too Old To Score
Totalworlds Football
Totalworlds

(This post was edited by rainjar on Jun 2, 2008, 12:29 PM)

Russell
First Team Star

Jun 2, 2008, 12:31 PM

Posts: 1589
Location:
Team(s):

Post #64 of 365 (7327 views)
Shortcut

Re: [rainjar] AFC Liverpool [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

Thames Association - 120,000 capacity stadium

rambler77
Reserve Team Regular

Jun 2, 2008, 12:45 PM

Posts: 698
Location: Braunstone, Leicester
Team(s): Oadby Town, Rimini

Post #65 of 365 (7313 views)
Shortcut

Re: [DaveU] AFC Liverpool [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

All Roads Lead Somewhere
www.rambler77.net

mick
First Team Sub

Jun 2, 2008, 12:49 PM

Posts: 1076
Location:
Team(s):

Post #66 of 365 (7309 views)
Shortcut

Re: [Russell] AFC Liverpool [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

In AFC Liverpool's case there seem to be 2 key things which people have objected to.

1. Direct application to a Step 6 league.

In my view, this one is a bit of a red herring. The NWCL have long accepted direct applications from existing clubs who have not finished in a promotion position in a Step 7 feeder league. Examples include:
Ramsbottom Utd - 1995 (7th in Manchester League Prem Div)
Formby - 2003 (9th in Liverpool Combination)
New Mills - 2004 (14th in Manchester League Prem Div)
Ashton Ath - 2006 (4th in Div 1 of the Manchester League)

It seems to me that as long as there are vacancies in the NWCL, the league's willingness to accept direct applications is perfectly reasonable. What leagues in other parts of the country do in similar circumstances is of no relevance here (people might say there should be a level playing field nationwide but, like it or not, this is not the case at present)

2. Having a ground with the required grading by a set date.

If existing clubs, such as those above, making direct applications need a graded ground in place by the quoted 31 March, then clearly new clubs should also be subject to the same condition. Does anyone know (rather than think) what rules apply to existing clubs?

susandy034
Youth Team Sub

Jun 2, 2008, 12:57 PM

Posts: 114
Location: Leeds
Team(s): Bishop's Stortford

Post #67 of 365 (7298 views)
Shortcut

Re: [DaveU] AFC Liverpool [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

If AFC means only Association Football Club and nothing else then why are clubs with Athletic in the title playing football? Surely Liverpool Lions would be best matched up with a team of Christians.

The meaning of words changes over time - it isn't a good idea to depend too rigidly on one fixed definition.

DaveU
Reserve Team Regular

Jun 2, 2008, 1:56 PM

Posts: 677
Location:
Team(s): Maidstone United, Chelsea

Post #68 of 365 (7259 views)
Shortcut

Re: [susandy034] AFC Liverpool [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

My original post did say "in most cases". However, I fail to see the connection between AFC and Athletic. Without bothering to look it up, I'm guessing that clubs with Athletic in their name grew out of athletics or general sports clubs, and the name is part of the club's history. I'm pretty sure that Charlton's full title is Charlton Athletic FC (I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong). However my contribution to the debate was more to do with coming up with something original for a change. Why, with the richness and cultural diversity of the English language, are the same few tired old appendages used time and time again by football clubs?

leohoenig
Chelsea Transfer Target

Jun 2, 2008, 2:50 PM

Posts: 4246
Location: Outer Cheltenhamshire
Team(s): Cheltenham Town

Post #69 of 365 (7234 views)
Shortcut

Re: [mick] AFC Liverpool [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

In simple terms, Mick - they only thing that may stop AFC L from joining the NWC league is the FA
Generally, objections on this board do not count

You have reached your credit limit. You are no longer credible

Now blogging at www.leohoenig.com

susandy034
Youth Team Sub

Jun 2, 2008, 3:00 PM

Posts: 114
Location: Leeds
Team(s): Bishop's Stortford

Post #70 of 365 (7225 views)
Shortcut

Re: [DaveU] AFC Liverpool [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

DaveU - apologies for missing the "in most cases" and perhaps getting a bit too serious. My point was that the more recent use of AFC has (in many cases) been to denote a club run by the bulk of ordinary fans and/or primarily for the benefit of them. As for usiing newer and fresher names I do see your point but personally I tend to prefer the traditional.

Villager
Junior Team Regular

Jun 2, 2008, 3:49 PM

Posts: 38
Location: Hull
Team(s): North Ferriby, Bridlington, Hall Road Rangers

Post #71 of 365 (7193 views)
Shortcut

Re: [dave] AFC Liverpool [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

In Reply To

How on earth are they behaving like bullies, and who exactly are they bullying then?

FCUM's attitude to the televised match at Curzon could be construed as bullying.
Equally afcliverpoolred's post doubting the ability of the Liverpool County League clubs to
be able to accommodate the expected number of AFC Liverpool's fans, hence the application for the club to start in NWCL2, could be seen as bullying. Actually, this is a valid point in terms of the practicality of the situation but placing clubs on potential attendances would open another can of worms. Before anybody jumps down my throat, I am not accusing anybody of bullying, I am pointing out how actions and words can be interpreted.

As has been said in another post, it is probably the two clubs' names that get up people's noses. If the fans of AFCL and FCUM are so disenchanted with the Prem Lge big boys, why choose to start two new teams that, by name, immediately associate them so readily with the Prem clubs? It is possibly this that leads to accusations of favouritism with regard to initial league placement and the other adverse comments that have been, and no doubt will continue, to be made.

Incidentally, I remember refereeing Mcr Utd Supporters Club 1st and 2nd teams in the Manchester Amateur Sunday League in the 80s. Surely this would be the real "Fans club".

I understand and appreciate the disenchantment of many with regard to Prem Lge clubs. It was becoming apparent in the late 60s and is why I turned my back on watching 1st division football, as it still was, and becoming a regular at both Macclesfield and Altrincham in the NPL. I've never really understood why it has taken so long for others to follow suit.

scottywalds
Reserve Team Sub

Jun 2, 2008, 4:24 PM

Posts: 395
Location: Boston
Team(s): Boston United

Post #72 of 365 (7179 views)
Shortcut

Re: [Villager] AFC Liverpool [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

AFC can also mean Amalgamated Football Club, in the case of AFC Sudbury

Mike Frenzy
Youth Team Sub

Jun 2, 2008, 5:05 PM

Posts: 151
Location:
Team(s):

Post #73 of 365 (7151 views)
Shortcut

Re: [scottywalds] AFC Liverpool [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

I'm backing gracefully out after this observation that this thread can just be a little reminder to any future group mildly unhappy with their pro club that some people in the non-League world have had enough of AFC clubs.

However if a club such as Rotherham folded as a result of the Booths bullying I'd have no problem with a new club being formed.

dave
First Team Star

Jun 2, 2008, 5:44 PM

Posts: 2352
Location:
Team(s): AFC Wimbledon

Post #74 of 365 (7130 views)
Shortcut

Re: [Mike Frenzy] AFC Liverpool [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

In Reply To

If your so unhappy with new non league clubs being formed and people coming into watch them, you can hardly moan if people are not coming into already existing non league teams.

afcliverpoolred
Youth Team Sub

Jun 2, 2008, 6:03 PM

Posts: 108
Location: South Manchester
Team(s): Liverpool, AFC Liverpool,

Post #75 of 365 (7112 views)
Shortcut

Re: [dave] AFC Liverpool [In reply to]	Can't Post or Reply Privately

In Reply To

If your so unhappy with new non league clubs being formed and people coming into watch them, you can hardly moan if people are not coming into already existing non league teams.

Surely it is better to have supporters attending non-league football whatever the club they are supporting. If the formation of AFCL attracts 500+ fans to non-league and some of them take an interest in non-league issues, then that has got to be good non-league football as a whole.

http://afcliverpool.org.uk/go/

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 15

View All

Search for (options)

HOSTED BY SOCCERLINKS v.1.2.3