I'd say not going isn't the same as a boycott, but you'd use that argument against me as evidence that not all non-Sixfields attendees are boycotting. Which of course they aren't-just most of them.
Was your boycott an anti-SISU one? I tried to start one of those at the end of the relegation season but my bastard mate went and renewed our ST's any way!
Well, that's an interesting question. (not that interesting tbh, but bear with me
)
Never been a fan of anybody owning football clubs to make money for themselves, as it exploits a captive audience... so it became harder to justify giving them my cash anyway when they came in. Some of Ranson's statements were rather concerning (debt free!) and the focus on players rather than foundations... well, we see the result of that today.
Then I'm afraid the club's whole attitude re: King got right up my nose, the manager being humbled in his presence etc. along with the taunting of Saint Ann Lucas, and the bizarre mysoginistic comments against her too. King, let's be honest, fit the remit of the club compromising its own identity morals and ethics for a quick financial fix. It wasn't against him (everyone has the right to a 15th chance) but rather the way the club dealt with it, and further evidence of it doing what it wanted, regardless of the impact on its fanbase. It may be a person, but it follows up its bullying attitude towards the small shareholders etc. That's not a never say never (they do, possibly after all, have more of a long term plan now than they've had before - but alas their inept communication is still there, so we don;t know and with no movement ona new ground or Ricoh revival, why should I give them the benefit of the doubt yet?) but having had years of McGinnity, Robinson, SISU... all want to run the club not for mty benefit as a fan, as a 'community asset' as you were... I find it rather difficult to blindly hand over my cash.
Boycott? Definitely in that it's a conscious decision not to go. Again, now, it would actually be quicker and easier for me, by myself to get to Northampton, but as I reported back
it just feels wrong... As it happens, an economic slowdown sees me having to work Saturdays too, so many Sunday games is helpful to me also, it's not about that.
So, I figured, they don't care if they want my money, why should I care to give it them? (sound familiar, this bit?). Everybody's positions are at different tipping points. I can buy, for example, king walker's comment about wanting to take his son to watch the City, and him finding MK less bad than Northampton - that seems a perfectly reasonable position to take. I can buy Mr. Dazzle saying it's another lifetime away, and at some point you have to move on...
I do however think that sometimes the actions have to be thought about. me not going to the Ricoh because we were owned by SISU doesn;t send out a message, but it made me feel better, cheered me up, made me remember I could have some spare cash(!) and also enjoy my Saturdays doing other things.
Now as it stands, we haven't moved permanently. As it stands, the messages need to be sent out that we don't want to move permanently, and that moving permanently is a bad thing. The mere finances of popping to northampton makes no difference, they make a loss regardless. The demonstration of away fans holding up does show less than apathy however - it's the one thing that we have shown consisrtently that doesn't look like a 'don't care what happens'.
However... we don't want to move permanently.
Wimbledon in the end pragmatically had to give up because there was an inevitability, and a lack of support from other clubs and other clubs' fans that shouldn;t have been there. Thinking back, i went to Selhurst Park when Wimbledon were boycotting, and hindsight makes me deeply ashamed of not standing shoulder to shoulder (although in my defence I didn;t even realise they were until we got there!). That day made me ashamed not to stand up for them, but also made me aware that a boycott was not sending the message out -see the Catch 22? At the end of the day action shows a message far more than inaction... but I see going blindly to MK as inaction. The day we move permanently and it's confirmed we're not coming back is, incidentally, the day I hope we crash and burn without trace. Even 120 years after the event, seeing my old club successful would not be pleasing to me. Maybe I'm just embittered and angry...
Here, on this game, was an opportunity to show that not only was the latent support out there, but that it encouraged clubs that moved back (Bristol Rovers) and reformed as the fans' possession of their own identity, not a money man's (Wimbledon) as opposed to vindicating and justifying the merits of a permanent move (MK). There was a story tio be made here...
Ultimately, it's as much about showing the message is one of action rather than inaction. In this case there was a not overly imaginative point that could have been laboured, and highlighted many many issues regarding the governance of our game... along with showing the rewards for returning to the place that carries the team name are greater than staying away forever.
Final edit
but just to forgive the typos and incosistencies, it's hard to bore people to such an extent that you cover all complexities, and as it is this is plenty enough boredom in one post when we can carry on dick waving over who's the better fan
