Bury dead and buried (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter torchomatic
- Start date
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
A proposal for Bury to be readmitted to League Two next season was rejected by the English Football League's 71 member clubs at a meeting on Thursday.
Bury, who were in League One, were expelled from the EFL in August after a last-ditch takeover bid collapsed.
Earlier this week, a group trying to rescue Bury submitted a plan for "compassionate re-entry" to League Two.
However, an EFL statement said "it became clear that the proposal did not have the necessary support".
It added that EFL clubs' "preferred direction of travel" was "extending the existing principle of a reduction in relegation across all divisions as a means of returning to 72 clubs now and for the future".
It means only one team will go down from League Two this campaign, rather than two, while three clubs will go down from League One.
EFL executive chair Debbie Jevans said: "While we are saddened that Bury FC is no longer part of the EFL, the board's difficult decision to withdraw membership was only taken after every opportunity to find a resolution was exhausted.
"Since then, in recognition of the efforts made on behalf of the club, the EFL has engaged with supporters' groups, shared their submissions with our members and debated at length the issues raised.
"Following the discussion today, clubs have established that the preferred direction of travel is to reduce relegation from League Two as a means of returning to 72 clubs.
"The clubs felt that, in a difficult situation, this approach maintains fairness for all members and upholds the principle of the football pyramid."
Bury will now have to apply to the Football Association for a place in non-league football.
The "Bury FC Rescue Board" - backed by local MPs, the Mayor of Greater Manchester and supporters' group Forever Bury - wrote to the EFL to plead for the club's reinstatement, with confirmation of "active bidders" and a signed statement from owner Steve Dale pledging to sell the club.
Bury North MP James Frith said on Twitter that it was "devastating to hear self-interest was served cold by many EFL clubs" at Thursday's meeting.
Bury, who were in League One, were expelled from the EFL in August after a last-ditch takeover bid collapsed.
Earlier this week, a group trying to rescue Bury submitted a plan for "compassionate re-entry" to League Two.
However, an EFL statement said "it became clear that the proposal did not have the necessary support".
It added that EFL clubs' "preferred direction of travel" was "extending the existing principle of a reduction in relegation across all divisions as a means of returning to 72 clubs now and for the future".
It means only one team will go down from League Two this campaign, rather than two, while three clubs will go down from League One.
EFL executive chair Debbie Jevans said: "While we are saddened that Bury FC is no longer part of the EFL, the board's difficult decision to withdraw membership was only taken after every opportunity to find a resolution was exhausted.
"Since then, in recognition of the efforts made on behalf of the club, the EFL has engaged with supporters' groups, shared their submissions with our members and debated at length the issues raised.
"Following the discussion today, clubs have established that the preferred direction of travel is to reduce relegation from League Two as a means of returning to 72 clubs.
"The clubs felt that, in a difficult situation, this approach maintains fairness for all members and upholds the principle of the football pyramid."
Bury will now have to apply to the Football Association for a place in non-league football.
The "Bury FC Rescue Board" - backed by local MPs, the Mayor of Greater Manchester and supporters' group Forever Bury - wrote to the EFL to plead for the club's reinstatement, with confirmation of "active bidders" and a signed statement from owner Steve Dale pledging to sell the club.
Bury North MP James Frith said on Twitter that it was "devastating to hear self-interest was served cold by many EFL clubs" at Thursday's meeting.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
"
HuckerbyDublinWhelan
Well-Known Member
It’s ok though - if the football league rejected our move to Birmingham they’d let us back in...
Again a number of people legitimately thought this
Nobody in league two was going to support Bury - would be like turkeys voting for Xmas
Again a number of people legitimately thought this
Nobody in league two was going to support Bury - would be like turkeys voting for Xmas
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
Local MP goes on about "cold self interest", but realistically that is what the lower league is like, hence why the club he's moaning about has gone under.
Remember a few years ago when Bolton were in the PL their chairman suggested doing away with relegation.
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
We voted for the formation of the Premier League too, of course.
Shame clubs never remember where they came from... and where they could end up.
Astute
Well-Known Member
Correct. I hope we don't end up in the Prem again.
Liquid Gold
Well-Known Member
Although I have massive sympathy for their fans I feel this is the correct outcome. It would mean that the end result was basically a relegation that was already nailed on and with the other 23 clubs missing out on a match day. They will have to apply lower down as other clubs have. Problem is they’ve not been liquidated so they need to get the club back from that nutter before they do anything.
Otis
Well-Known Member
Yup. I cannot see how they could have voted in favour. They were all but certain to be relegated this season. Letting them start again in L2 just wouldn't be sufficient punishment.
We cannot forget, as Nick has said, they gained promotion on the back of this foolhardiness and many clubs missed out on a valid opportunity as a result.
We cannot forget, as Nick has said, they gained promotion on the back of this foolhardiness and many clubs missed out on a valid opportunity as a result.
covcity4life
Well-Known Member
i hope cov never win another game!!!!!!!
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Hopefully this will make people realise that going bust and starting again and / or the idea the EFL will just take the golden share off SISU and hand it to someone else is not as easy as some have made out and would more than likely have disastrous consequences for the club.
Of course you feel sorry for their fans but you can't just have them starting in L2 the season following one that would have certainly seemed them relegated from L1. They'd have effectively saved themselves a season of costs while the other clubs income was reduced by having one less game.
Of course you feel sorry for their fans but you can't just have them starting in L2 the season following one that would have certainly seemed them relegated from L1. They'd have effectively saved themselves a season of costs while the other clubs income was reduced by having one less game.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
There are Less clubs that have disappeared like Bury since the formation of the premier league
I’m not a huge fan but clubs like bury have not collapsed because of the premier league
ccfcway
Well-Known Member
Each to their own, but that’s nuts to me. I wasn’t us to play at the highest level.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
In a strange way I think a rebirth in the lower reaches of non league will actually be better for them in the long run.
CanadianCCFC
Well-Known Member
Why do important people tweet about things they don’t understand?
oscillatewildly
Well-Known Member
The Hawthorns?
ccfcway
Well-Known Member
don't joke, that could well be our home if BCFC get bored of us. They were next in the queue
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
A few more big near misses though
Leeds
Pompey
Bolton
Southampton
Sunderland
Then you factor in that 4 Championship sides have sold their grounds to gamble at the big time and that many run monstrous losses in the process and you can't really argue that the second tier especially is in a healthy state. We would have no chance of competing if we ever made it back
covboy1987
Well-Known Member
Lets this be a warning to CCFC - EFL are not as soft as some people have written - We have to get our own house in complete order and either go back to the Ricoh or build a new ground within three years stated - From afar it seemed that the Bury idea of been reinstated would happen but a vote went the other way - We cannot afford to be in a position that after three years we are still ground-sharing or we might get voted out of the league
Liquid Gold
Well-Known Member
Sunderland aren't a casualty of the premier league, they got relegated. If you put them in are you saying Swindon and Oldham are casualties?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
There were as many near misses before the premier league
ccfcway
Well-Known Member
Don’t agree. In my opinion, efl may well let us do whatever in terms of playing elsewhere and akin to mk dons, change the name, it’s all about fulfilling fixtures. At least two venues that will happily support us
BornSlippySkyBlue
Well-Known Member
Agree with the general point of what you are saying, and the assumption by some fans that we would either bounce back from liquidation or somehow avoid it if we lost the golden share is, optimistic. However there are significant differences in our situation to bury’s. Their’s was caused by overspending (cheating, some would say) in order to gain an unfair advantage over fellow clubs, ours was / is caused by local disputes between vested parties, none of whom are our rivals or direct competitors. The 72 would have far less reason to chuck us out if we were playing in Nuneaton, say, compared to if we’d spent money we didn’t have to gain a promotion we didn’t deserve.
And I genuinely do feel for their fans, it wasn’t their choice to spend spend spend (although I bet they didn’t complain at the time).
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
I'm more referring to their prospects with Ellis Short cutting off financial support at a time when he didn't seem to be pursuing a buyer
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Before the PL did 2nd tier clubs sell their grounds to raise funds? Did they run at losses anywhere near comparable to those today?
CanadianCCFC
Well-Known Member
That would happen regardless of what the top flight is called. It’s the tv deals that bring this about not the words “premier” and “league”.
HuckerbyDublinWhelan
Well-Known Member
Thing about the ground sales have only occurred because of financial fair play. The teams in question have owners spending their money
The grounds have been sold artificially to meet profit and loss criteria.
Is it wrong yeah - but it’s dangerous now, I find it dangerous that the EFL are about to tell teams what they can sell their assets for
Same with sponsorship deals - I remember real Madrid’s owners saying “it’s not possible for PSG to have bigger sponsorship deals”
Is it a work around? Yes - but the EFL and the governing body’s shouldn’t be able to tell teams what their assets are worth
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Couple of points on that
1. It gives the owner even greater leverage over the club if things go sour for them either on or off the pitch. Abramovich can still technically call in well over £1 billion from Chelsea at around 18 months' notice-suppose his business dealings turn for the worse and he wants to call in the loans? What would happen then? What if he just gets bored?
2. I'm not calling for bans on this but what I'm criticising is the short termist attitude that is prevalent enough to make teams sell their grounds or run up heavy losses to have a punt at promotion.
Clubs now are whoring themselves out to the highest bidder or running up unsustainable debts. It's no way to run the game and will turn it further away from the fan base it was once built on
HuckerbyDublinWhelan
Well-Known Member
Don’t get me wrong it’s a dangerous game, and I’ve warned villa fans at work that the selling the ground idea is bad.
But financial fair play in my eyes can put ceiling on teams.
The money from the premier league isn’t going to trickle down. The only way you’re going to compete to get to that stage is take a gamble.
Punishing teams for spending money is the wrong way to go about it.
Personally I think the idea should be clubs are unable to take out loans. If the owner wants to spend money it has to be a non-repayable gift. Not sure if that’s governable though or compatible with he law
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Er yes
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Spending caps wouldn't be violating any law and could provide an absolute upper limit to spending such that there is still discrepancy but you don't get clubs like Wolves completely taking the piss and lopsiding the competition. Let's be honest, is 'my tycoon's richer than yours!' an interesting competition?
CJ_covblaze
Well-Known Member
Same as the national side. The Premier League’s formation is blamed for us not doing well in most major tournaments. I agree it hasn’t helped but what was the excuse for the 28 years before?
Irish Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Ultimately who are they punishing? The first sets of owners who started their financial problems have gone.The guy who is there now seems to be a bit of a lame duck and will surely go before they start again. It seems to me the people being punished are ordinary club workers and the fans, neither of which were responsible for the mess they are in.
I don’t agree with this EFL decision, which casts Bury FC into the football wilderness. I can’t see why at the very minimum Bury couldn’t be in the division below league two next season in effect one of the relegated two from division two. The only sufferers are the innocent supporters as normal