Bet this goes down well...

3rd July, 2017

Rec to host Shaw Lane games

Toolstation NCEL Premier Division side Athersley Recreation will be sharing their ground with Evo-Stik League outfit Shaw Lane for the 2017/18 season, it has been announced today.


Both teams will play their home games at the Rec's Sheerien Park for the upcoming campaign and, as Shaw Lane are based in a higher-ranked competition, their matches will have priority when it comes to the scheduling of fixtures.

 

Any reason why?

 

You obviously don't know the history. To say they don't like each other is an understatement. Rec's manager left just before the official announcement with the following statement:

"I have played with and managed some of the best lads you could ever hope to be around who have become lifelong friends and they, along with the club's traditions, have instilled in me many qualities that have helped me become a better man - qualities such as loyalty, togetherness, fairness, hard work, integrity and sticking to your principles.

Unfortunately, due to recent events I have to invoke one of these qualities as my principles won't let me agree with the path that the club wants to take"

 

I'll ask again.

Why is there such animosity regarding Shaw Lane?

I'm not trying to goad anyone, I genuinely would like to know as I am interested.

The last time I asked the only 2 responses I got were:

'I'd like to know too'
And
'They're the MK Dons of Barnsley', which isn't the clearest answer. I understand little bits but not enough to establish why there's a deep hatred for them.

Sent from my WAS-LX1A using Tapatalk

 

From a purely personal perspective, my son played for their under 16s up until end of last season having joined what was Barugh JFC at 5 years old. That apart, I've no affinity with them at all. Barugh were a good family club, fundraising, parent sponsorship, red shirts etc. One of the dad's must have sponsored them thousands from his business in terms of training gear, kits, balls, referees fees and so on. Then in come Aquaforce - changed everything, not just the colours. No consideration for what others had done or put into all levels of the club. Felt a bit like an MK Dons franchise deal in that respect. You also have to question the path for the junior players. Historically, Barugh FC, like Athersley Rec and Penistone Church (who both told Aquaforce where to go when approached I think), had a route for players to go from under 6's to first team. I can't see that now as much of the current first team have been purchased from a wide catchment area. In context, all these are minor personal gripes really but outside of the first team nothing seems to matter. Not how a community club should be run IMHO.

 

Can understand why there would be a problem with taking over a club, but I'm sure I read that there were problems are Barugh FC hence why Shaw Lane took them over. I may well be wrong though

Regardless of that, I don't have a problem with what Shaw Lane are wanting to do. It's not the same type of club as Athersley. Realistically, at any level of football it's difficult to make a lot of progress without spending money. It's what for example Burtona and Fleetwood have done. So I can understand the animosity to an extent; but if they want to be ambitious then as I see it good for them

 

Thanks for this. I suppose looking at how quickly they've gone through the ranks, it's only inevitable that they would be trying attract players from outside the catchment area in order to continue to progress. It does leave doubts over how young players may progress through the ranks in future. I suppose it's crossed over the threshold between being a football club and a business.

Sent from my WAS-LX1A using Tapatalk

 

I do know the history. What I meant was, why are they ground sharing?

 

Joint Statement:

BARNSLEY RUFC AND SHAW LANE AFC ISSUE A JOINT STATEMENT REGARDING GROUND SHARE
Barnsley RUFC will focus solely on rugby following an in-depth review of its current ground-sharing strategy.
The ground-sharing arrangement with Evostik Premier football team Shaw Lane AFC, has been reviewed by both parties and the conclusion has been reached that the best interests of both clubs would be served by an amicable parting of the ways.


The rugby club, having listened to substantial feedback, has decided that it now needs to focus more on the needs of its nineteen senior, junior, ladies and children’s teams. This will also enable the club to develop its RFU-backed priorities properly, including 'holding on clubs' and its 'All Schools initiative', which is the key recruitment and retention activity for its thriving Tots, Minis and Juniors section.
At a senior team level the ground share meant that last season the club was only able to play 10 of its 20 fixtures at its home venue on the main pitch, and for the junior teams they have not been able to use that facility at all.
Commenting on the decision, rugby manager Paul Matthews said; “It would have been wonderful if the ground share agreement had worked for us all, but partly due to Shaw Lane AFC's continued success their needs have become more than we are able to support, and sadly in trying our best to support them we have run the risk of alienating our loyal fan base.
"We are fully committed to running a rugby club that is accessible to all ages and demographics, and to rolling out a strategy that develops the sport and in order to do that we need to have full access to our pitches and training spaces.”
Dave Exley, Shaw Lane AFC secretary said, “The rapid progress that the club has made in recent years has no doubt been helped by the co-operation that we have received from Barnsley RUFC.
We fully understand their position and the review has made our club look at its future needs with emphasis on continued growth. As we rise up the leagues the agreement with Barnsley RUFC would be more difficult to maintain, therefore we must look elsewhere for a facility with potential to develop.”

So basically they've been kicked out!

 

Most of the animosity comes from jealousy from others who don't have the financial clout in the lower non league environments. Completely different to MK Dons who pretty much bypassed most of the non league pyramid.

 

In the progress respect Archey, I agree that matching the ambition of the owner comes at a price in terms of attracting ex pros etc and wish them well in that respect to be fair.

As I say, my own experience is more from the personal angle of seeing my son joining Barugh FC as a community club and Aquaforce, with the Barugh FC committee sanctioning it, using a community club as a vehicle for their ambition.

At junior level, the community element is the most vital component of a club (in my opinion), and that's where the animosity from within comes from. It destroyed it.

I think it perhaps fair to say that had Aquaforce started from their own location, grown their base and footprint (whether bankrolled or not) then they would probably be seen differently. I'm not quite sure who, as a club, they actually represent other than the owner, if that makes sense?

 

I don't disagree with much of that to be honest. See my reply to Archey. Hope it makes sense.

 

Partly the reason why I asked is because I didn't understand the references to MK Dons.

Sent from my WAS-LX1A using Tapatalk

 

Thanks for the reply. As I say I was genuinely interested as it seems like it was a story which passed me by.

Sent from my WAS-LX1A using Tapatalk

 

Jealousy? Even Nudger couldn't be that funny unintentionally.

 

Why's that? People from other non league outfits complaining that they can pay their players more etc.. Not as if they are doing owt wrong.

 

It has nothing to do with jealousy.

 

They're owned by a Wednesday *******.

 

Apologies. That's the other answer I usually get too.

Sent from my WAS-LX1A using Tapatalk

 

The away teams will have more support than the home. All the Rec fans will be cheering the opposition.