Observer banned from Vale Farm matches

[Gussy]

Wembley FC chairman Brian Gumm has banned the Observer from attending future matches at Vale Farm.

 

A highly irate Gumm contacted the sportsdesk last Thursday and expressed his dissatisfaction with the paper's coverage of his club, specifically in last week's edition.

 

Gumm questioned the coverage we afford to other clubs but was particularly aggrieved we did not give more column inches to Wembley's FA Cup match with Royston Town, which took place last Saturday.

 

The extra preliminary round tie was one of a dozen being filmed thanks to a new partnership involving ITV and The FA, whereby highlights packages of the games are available to view on their respective websites.

 

Observer sports editor Tim Edwards took the decision that this news, while it was a profile booster for the club, was not as newsworthy as Wembley's encouraging start to the new Combined Counties Premier Division season.

 

Therefore, the Observer held back space on one of the pages to include Wembley's latest match report , which was submitted just hours before the paper's deadline. The report of their midweek 1-0 win over Egham Town was published along with a brief report of the goalless draw with Molesey. This was followed by brief details of the filmed match against Royston. This report was also reproduced on our website.

 

In addition, we also afforded Wembley the back page of the free Brent Leader, carrying a report of their game with Molesey, a picture and again brief details of the film crews' impending visit to Vale Farm.

 

However, Gumm was unrepentant, saying: "This is our big moment and what have you given us? A small bit in the paper and nothing else."

 

Gumm put the phone down abruptly and our sports editor called him back minutes later only to be drawn into another heated exchange.

 

In a subsequent phonecall to the Observer editor, David Tilley, Gumm repeated his disappointment with the paper's coverage.

 

He said: "I am happy for the paper not to cover Wembley FC. Your coverage is an insult."

 

When asked if he was banning the paper from the ground he said: "Yes, I am."

 

The Observer received an e-mail later that day from the club's Daren Butler on behalf of the Wembley chairman, which stated the paper was "no longer welcome".

 

"Many years of outstanding work has now been destroyed and thrown into a state of disarray due to negligence," claimed the e-mail. "Bryan (sic) is extremely disturbed that the Wembley Observer found it far more beneficial to provide Wealdstone with full back page coverage and provide Wembley FC a small highlight."

 

* Royston beat Wembley 4-0 in Tuesday night's reply after the initial game ended 1-1.

 

 

[Coffin Ender]

Interesting logic...you don't give us enough coverage so, er, we're going to ban you! Somehow I think the local paper will survive this grievous blow!

 

 

[Gussy]

[Two Ton Ted]

Oh for a local press even vaguely interested.

 

We send in our match reports and they don't print them.

[DorkingDave]

Which local press would you use?

[SurreyLegend]

We get nothing at the green

[Two Ton Ted]

Originally Posted By: DorkingDave

Which local press would you use?

There's just the two free papers in Epsom - The Guardian and the Post. It's full of stories about Slutton and Carshalton.

[Terrence Collina]

Peckham Echo perhaps

[Big J R]

Some Epsom teams get their match reports in the Dorking/Leatherhead Advertiser. Have a word with Dan Jones, their Senior Sports Reporter.

 

I can give you his contact address if interested.

 

As far as the Wembley issue is concerned, the words 'NOSE' and 'FACE' spring rapidly to mind.