www.bostonbuzz.co.uk
The prime
platform for Boston and District sports news
For all the latest news, reports and updates from
Tattershall Road…
THE POACHERS
|
|
|
|
|
|
SPECIAL STATEMENT ISSUED JANUARY 24th,
2007 |
|
Views
from the Boston Town chairman and board of directors in relation to the
on-going impasse and concern over the future of the Poachers’ Tattershall
Road stadium * * * * * Following
the planning applications refusal for Lavaflow Ltd’s proposed developments
for Boston’s two senior football clubs, many people have been asking: what
now for Boston United? However, there is a band of people simply wishing to
know what the future holds for Boston Town FC. The club’s proposed new
stadium has now gone up in smoke in the wake of the latest plans refusal. Boston
Town still have at least five years remaining on their lease agreed with
landlords Sportsfunds Ltd. But the future still looks uncertain. The
history of Boston Town (formed in 1962) is well documented, a club born out
of the remnants of a troubled and close-to-extinction Boston United (possibly
a mirror image of the predicament in which the Pilgrims again find
themselves). When United looked to be going under in the early 1960s, a group
of football supporters vowed to ensure association football would carry on in
the town. A
meeting was held in the Assembly Rooms. The gathering was well-attended and
Boston Football Club was duly born. From monies salvaged from the Boston
United supporters’ club and shares issued for a nominal fee, land was bought
off Tattershall Road. And while ex-United manager Paul Todd recruited players
for the new club, it was decided that a charitable trust company would be
formed as the owner and administrator of the land. Therefore
Sportsfunds Ltd came into existence. And directors Derrick Beecham, Tom
Balderston, Bert Platt, Cyril Keightley, John Simons, Reg Dilley and Bernard
Burr-Rees worked hand-in-hand with the club to develop Tattershall Road and
met regularly to discuss any problems and to ensure their original ideal was
maintained. In the
early years Boston Football Club attracted good crowds and had encouraging
success. However, Boston United re-invented themselves and gradually took
their place back as the main football club in the town. But Boston FC
continued and the facilities at Tattershall Road were enhanced to the benefit
of the club and landlords Sportsfunds Ltd. The
personnel of both bodies changed periodically. However, the reason behind
Sportsfunds Ltd being brought into being never wavered. In 1986 a local
American football team was formed and their committee approached Sportsfunds
Ltd to inquire whether that could play at Tattershall Road. Then then
chairman of Sportsfunds (Mr Tom Balderston) replied, insisting the potential
tenants contact Boston Football Club. And among his words were: “Sportsfunds
owns the freehold of the Tattershall Road football ground and hold it
specifically for the benefit of Boston Football Club.” Such
observations were deemed accurate at the time. By 1987 Boston Borough Council
had bought the land adjacent to the main stadium and looked for a joint
venture to develop the site into sports pitches for use by local football
clubs. It was
a project that also involved the council, Sportsfunds Ltd, Batemans Brewery
and Boston Football Club where all parties wanted to fund an operation that
would see new changing rooms and social club improvements to further enhance
the facilities. The football club duly looked into obtaining a Sports Council
grant towards some of the costs and were told that, with some amendments,
funds would be made available. One
such amendment was the Sports Council’s insistence that the football club
seemed vulnerable without the security of a long-term lease. Despite
informing the FA of the historic relationship between Sportsfunds and the
football club, the Sports Council required evidence of a lease. Therefore,
in 1990, a lease was brought into force to help the football club — and not,
as it eventually became, intended for use against the club years down the
line. Subsequently the grant was provided. Before this, all business was
conducted at regular meetings and agreements made with a shake of hands. The
original committee of Sportsfunds Ltd (most now deceased) would — many
observers feel — probably be furious if they knew the way their successors
were now handling things. As previously mentioned, it was inevitable that the
committees of both landlords (as they had thus become) and tenants would
change in composition from time to time. With
this in mind, the football club were becoming wary of some of Sportsfunds’
intentions and requested that someone connected with the football club should
be recruited to the committee to safeguard their interests. On June
15, 1998, the aforementioned Mr Balderston wrote: “With regard to the
appointment of directors to Sportsfunds, the committee of management have
decided that for the time being they are unwilling to appoint as directors
anyone connected with either Boston Football Club or Boston United Football
Club.” Subsequently,
though, it came to light that a member of the Sportsfunds directorship for
some years, Mr Ralph Jenkin (a staunch supporter of Boston Football Club in
the early years — in fact, he was chairman for a while) seemed to become
closer to Boston United, a club he reportedly openly criticised back in 1966.
Eventually he became a director of United. All the
time, meetings of the Sportsfunds directors/committee became increasingly
fewer and virtually dried up by the early 1990s. Boston Football Club (now
incorporating “Town” into their title) were largely left to their own
devices, an arrangement that seemed quite acceptable to the club at the time. Then in
September 2000, there was a somewhat surprise offer by Sportsfunds to sell
the Tattershall Road ground to the football club as an option to Sportsfunds
winding up their affairs. Obviously the club were delighted by this
development and agreed in principle. However,
the offer was then suddenly withdrawn while at the same time Mr Balderston
resigned from his Sportsfunds position and requested that all correspondence
by directed to Mr Jenkin. From that moment, the relationship between Boston
Town FC and Sportsfunds Ltd seemed strained and around this time, further
members of the Sportsfunds hierarchy departed for various reasons. It has
to be said that all directors of the football club past and present not only
committed a tremendous amount of their own time into the club but, in some
case, a lot of money as well without ever seeking remuneration — unlike
Sportsfunds members who, as far as is known, appear to have contributed
little time or effort for the benefit of the club over the past 15 years or
so. As a result, Boston Town connections grew suspicious that Sportsfunds had
evolved into a body with a hidden agenda. Putting
the whole Sportsfunds saga aside for a moment, Boston Town FC had by this
time built a solid reputation among the ranks of certain sections of
non-league football spheres by winning league titles and various other
trophies. On the way they incorporated a junior and youth policy that over
the years has thrived and developed into an extremely successful venture —
bringing through a production line of youngsters who have gone on to have
rewarding careers in the semi-professional game. To name but a few, these
have included: Lee Rippin, Dave Scotney, Pete Massam, Jamie Ireland, Derrick
and Micky Nuttell, Kevin Scrupps and Richard Pell (the latter currently
playing for Gainsborough Trinity in the Conference structure). These
are just some of the lads who developed via Boston Town youth teams. And to
this day, the junior set-up continues with a strong pedigree at Tattershall
Road. In addition, Boston Town have run teams in both the Boston and District
Saturday and Sunday Leagues as well as opening their doors to a variety of
county cup, schools, local and charity games. In essence, the club has made
itself into a community organisation with ground facilities open to all. With
their continuing desire to improve the facilities still further to meet
modern-day footballing needs, Boston Town officials applied for and were
successful in attaining Lottery funding in 1995 to assist in the construction
of a new changing rooms block coupled with a club office, treatment room and
accommodation for match officials. To
further bring the club into line with the ever-increasing stadium upgrade
requirements to meet criteria for promotion within the pyramid system, Town
officials applied to their landlords (Sportsfunds) for an extension to their
ground lease to enable them to seek additional substantial grants known to be
available. But Sportsfunds were less that helpful and in the main failed to
reply to correspondence. However,
they did respond via their solicitor (and Boston United director) Phil Hanby
after yet another letter was sent from Town inquiring as to whether the
landlords would re-open negotiations for either selling the land or extending
the lease on Tattershall Road. The following
is an extract from the reply in question, dated May 2002: “My client does not
wish to seek to dispose of the ground either by sale of the freehold or the
grant of a longer lease. It is its intention to act more strictly in
accordance with its charitable objectives, namely to generally promote
association football within the community and not simply to exclusively
benefit one club such as your own.” From
this response, Town connections held the view that it appeared Sportsfunds
had now decided to abandon the whole concept of what the original
organisation was formed to achieve: Mr Balderston’s letter to the American
football committee back in 1986 seemingly totally forgotten and its contents
deemed irrelevant to their objectives. Sportsfunds,
by this time had evolved into a committee of two members of the Jenkin family
plus Christopher and Andrew Malkinson (whose lifelong association with Boston
United is common knowledge) — a far cry from another of Mr Balderston’s
letters which indicated that no Sportsfunds members should have an
affiliation to either of the football clubs. Despite
other Town efforts to re-open discussions with Sportsfunds, the latter failed
to respond: as recently as May 2004 when they were contacted to (among other
things) discuss the payment of rent. But again there was no response. Then,
out of the blue, more or less at the same time that Boston United’s planned
move to a new stadium was announced, came news that Boston Town were to be
relocated and housing built on the Tattershall Road side — land that two
years earlier Sportsfunds said they had no interest in selling. There were no
discussions whatsoever with Boston Town FC. Not even a written word to
indicate what might be happening. Once
the Boston Borough Council planners rejected Boston United’s complex planning
applications in December 2006, Boston Town officials felt it wouldn’t be
unreasonable for discussions to be held on the club’s future. But to date
there has again been no response to a letter sent to Sportsfunds on November
16, 2006 requesting a meeting. This
point brings the whole situation fully up to date — leaving Town officials
drawing the following conclusions: q
Boston
Town Football Club have never faulted on their original ideal — to
satisfactorily maintain a football team to a decent level of association
football. q
Somewhere
along the line, Sportsfunds has turned away from their pivotal role seemingly
without feeling there was a need to explain to Boston Town what the club has
done wrong and why there appears a need to close down the club. q
Sportsfunds
may argue they were prepared to relocate the football club — a policy, in
itself, a contradiction to their earlier (and documented) viewpoint,
particularly in 2002. q
Sportsfunds
was never meant to be a business aiming for profits year in, year out. In
fact, it wasn’t a business at all as there were no premises, no day-to-day
activity, no employees, perhaps a meeting once a year and certainly (for some
time) no interest in Boston Town whatsoever. If fact some might argue,
Sportsfunds had become the total opposite to what the organisation was
originally brought into being to achieve. q
Finally,
Sportsfunds may put forward at some stage their viewpoint (or perhaps not).
But nothing can be said to alter the organisation’s moral obligations — not
least sticking to the original agreement made back in 1962. There is a
suspicion Sportsfunds might try to hide behind legal jargon and comments, but
Boston Town officials and supporters want to hear from the organisation
(without any individual issues being brought into the equation) why the
present path has been taken and why the landlords’ original identity appears
to have been wholly betrayed. Statement issued on behalf of the chairman and board of
directors of Boston Town Football Club |