Ten Years Since We Left Underhill

Anything and everything related to Barnet FC
User avatar
John_c
Posts: 4989
Joined: 23 Jan 2011, 08:23

Re: Ten Years Since We Left Underhill

Post: # 353526Post John_c »

underhillbovrilstink wrote: 24 Apr 2023, 19:42 Great piece fellas Drink2:

If we had a time machine we would all be going back to 2013, chaining ourselves to the goal posts, protesting and letting TK know who’s club it is. The “temporary” move was only announced in the February and last match was played only a mere two months later.

TK took an opportunity at this stage (after council shenanigans and relegation looming) as he required Barnet FC off the Underhill site in order to make a sale prior to 2016 by which time he would have had to split the profits with the council due to a covenant on the freehold.
It’s been a while since I posted here but felt I had to on this one. Your Time Machine would also have helped you with the facts. There was no covenant that required a sale by 2016. There was a 10 year clause in the sale of the freehold that required profits of a sale to be split with the council. After that the club kept the profit. The announcement in February wasn’t billed as temporary as far as I am aware.

Everyone was very sad at leaving Underhill. Maybe the reason that we didn’t mount a campaign of civil disobedience and also that the then Supporters Trust couldn’t muster a decent support was that most Bees fans accepted that moving to a nicer stadium albeit 6 miles from Underhill and out of the Borough was the sensible thing to do at the time?

There’s a separate debate around how badly the "opportunity" at The Hive has been handled. We will probably agree on that one.
Proud Sponsor of Luisma Villa Lopez's Football Conference Winning Away Shirt. Season 2014/15

Proud Winner of the Sponsor Marvin Armstrong Shirt Raffle 2023/24

Worlds best Prediction League player
thebeekeeper
Posts: 430
Joined: 30 Oct 2019, 23:21

Re: Ten Years Since We Left Underhill

Post: # 353555Post thebeekeeper »

John_c wrote: 25 Apr 2023, 23:41
underhillbovrilstink wrote: 24 Apr 2023, 19:42 Great piece fellas Drink2:

If we had a time machine we would all be going back to 2013, chaining ourselves to the goal posts, protesting and letting TK know who’s club it is. The “temporary” move was only announced in the February and last match was played only a mere two months later.

TK took an opportunity at this stage (after council shenanigans and relegation looming) as he required Barnet FC off the Underhill site in order to make a sale prior to 2016 by which time he would have had to split the profits with the council due to a covenant on the freehold.
It’s been a while since I posted here but felt I had to on this one. Your Time Machine would also have helped you with the facts. There was no covenant that required a sale by 2016. There was a 10 year clause in the sale of the freehold that required profits of a sale to be split with the council. After that the club kept the profit. The announcement in February wasn’t billed as temporary as far as I am aware.

Everyone was very sad at leaving Underhill. Maybe the reason that we didn’t mount a campaign of civil disobedience and also that the then Supporters Trust couldn’t muster a decent support was that most Bees fans accepted that moving to a nicer stadium albeit 6 miles from Underhill and out of the Borough was the sensible thing to do at the time?

There’s a separate debate around how badly the "opportunity" at The Hive has been handled. We will probably agree on that one.
It's interesting how your memory can play tricks on you – I always had it in my head that the move was initially billed as temporary. But I can't find any evidence online to back that up. This statement about the move doesn't make any reference to it being temporary: https://www.barnetfc.com/relocation-san ... all-league

Then, a couple of years later (in June 2015), TK said: "There can be no doubt that Barnet currently find themselves in a much better place than when we left Underhill in April 2013 and hope one day we will return, but (I) cannot see this in either the short or medium term."

I wonder if we made an assumption about the temporary nature, because of the initial 10-year agreement to play at The Hive?

I also think you're right about most Barnet supporters being behind the move – though it perhaps didn't get the kind of scrutiny that it should have done. I know that I was in favour at the time, but have significant regrets about that now (to put it mildly). I suppose sometimes you don't know what you've got until it's gone.

The mishandling of the opportunity is significant too. I've possibly mentioned it before, but I don't think too many people would complain about The Hive if it's full and rocking, week in and week out. If Barnet were flying at the top of League Two, in front of a good crowd, I think that much of the talk about it not being in Barnet would be pushed to one side. As an example, I'm pretty certain that few Brentford supporters are lamenting the loss of Griffin Park, when they're enjoying Premier League football.

Instead, we made the move immediately following relegation (never a time when people are in great spirits) and have pretty much been one giant PR / customer service disaster since arriving at The Hive. What I sincerely hope is that we haven't missed the boat, in terms of The Hive ever being 'home' / a success, because of this bungled first decade.
beew
Posts: 4734
Joined: 29 Jan 2012, 17:46

Re: Ten Years Since We Left Underhill

Post: # 359833Post beew »

Sorry to reopen old wounds but I've just been made aware of this.

https://publicaccess.barnet.gov.uk/onli ... BU3JIIDE00

Seems like a development on Quinta Field has been proposed. 2 acres of green belt land with a material change of state for development. Residents are comically angry but is this something TK could explore?
DerekRocholl
Posts: 4368
Joined: 02 Feb 2011, 16:59

Re: Ten Years Since We Left Underhill

Post: # 359835Post DerekRocholl »

beew wrote: 17 Sep 2023, 17:36 Sorry to reopen old wounds but I've just been made aware of this.

https://publicaccess.barnet.gov.uk/onli ... BU3JIIDE00

Seems like a development on Quinta Field has been proposed. 2 acres of green belt land with a material change of state for development. Residents are comically angry but is this something TK could explore?
Slight difference between an application to locate a couple of temporary residences for travellers and the construction of a football stadium.
User avatar
rudebwoyben
Posts: 9115
Joined: 22 Jan 2011, 18:53
Location: Seven Sisters, London N15

Re: Ten Years Since We Left Underhill

Post: # 359840Post rudebwoyben »

Pretty sure that 2 acres would not be big enough either!
DerekRocholl
Posts: 4368
Joined: 02 Feb 2011, 16:59

Re: Ten Years Since We Left Underhill

Post: # 359849Post DerekRocholl »

rudebwoyben wrote: 17 Sep 2023, 21:16 Pretty sure that 2 acres would not be big enough either!
The stadium at Underhill and the terraced houses demolished to accommodate the school occupied 6,450 sq meters, 2 acres is just under 8,100 sq meters. So it probably would be just big enough without car parking and training grounds.
User avatar
miguelito
Posts: 458
Joined: 11 Mar 2011, 21:45
Location: Barnet

Re: Ten Years Since We Left Underhill

Post: # 359854Post miguelito »

beew wrote: 17 Sep 2023, 17:36 Sorry to reopen old wounds but I've just been made aware of this.

https://publicaccess.barnet.gov.uk/onli ... BU3JIIDE00

Seems like a development on Quinta Field has been proposed. 2 acres of green belt land with a material change of state for development. Residents are comically angry but is this something TK could explore?
Unless I'm missing something obvious, this proposal isn't on the Quinta Club site; it's for on a smaller plot of land on the other side of Mays Lane.
"Oh my god, he's attacking them!"
thebeekeeper
Posts: 430
Joined: 30 Oct 2019, 23:21

Re: Ten Years Since We Left Underhill

Post: # 359864Post thebeekeeper »

DerekRocholl wrote: 18 Sep 2023, 07:53
rudebwoyben wrote: 17 Sep 2023, 21:16 Pretty sure that 2 acres would not be big enough either!
The stadium at Underhill and the terraced houses demolished to accommodate the school occupied 6,450 sq meters, 2 acres is just under 8,100 sq meters. So it probably would be just big enough without car parking and training grounds.
I was walking across Barnet Playing Fields last week and it really does feel like there should be enough space for a small stadium there – clearly not a site as big as The Hive, but a sort of 6000-ish capacity ground, like Underhill but obviously more modern.

I doubt TK would be particularly interested in something so modest though, and the political will to get it done still may not be there, though I suppose it could be different with a Labour council now.
hoofer2
Posts: 5369
Joined: 01 Feb 2011, 13:48

Re: Ten Years Since We Left Underhill

Post: # 359867Post hoofer2 »

thebeekeeper wrote: 18 Sep 2023, 10:00
DerekRocholl wrote: 18 Sep 2023, 07:53
rudebwoyben wrote: 17 Sep 2023, 21:16 Pretty sure that 2 acres would not be big enough either!
The stadium at Underhill and the terraced houses demolished to accommodate the school occupied 6,450 sq meters, 2 acres is just under 8,100 sq meters. So it probably would be just big enough without car parking and training grounds.
I was walking across Barnet Playing Fields last week and it really does feel like there should be enough space for a small stadium there – clearly not a site as big as The Hive, but a sort of 6000-ish capacity ground, like Underhill but obviously more modern.

I doubt TK would be particularly interested in something so modest though, and the political will to get it done still may not be there, though I suppose it could be different with a Labour council now.
It was a Labour Government that blocked Copthall way back when... every party has own political agenda at all levels...
There are zero guarantees for any party to support a return... party consensus is often driven by not doing the same as whoever has majority

For me Barnet has always been about Chipping Barnet / Barnet Town - not the Borough... to me Cricklewood, Hadlet, Whetstone, Finchley, Hendon, Hampstead Garden Suburb is no more Barnet than Edgware or Canons Park
thebeekeeper
Posts: 430
Joined: 30 Oct 2019, 23:21

Re: Ten Years Since We Left Underhill

Post: # 359872Post thebeekeeper »

hoofer2 wrote: 18 Sep 2023, 10:35
thebeekeeper wrote: 18 Sep 2023, 10:00
DerekRocholl wrote: 18 Sep 2023, 07:53
rudebwoyben wrote: 17 Sep 2023, 21:16 Pretty sure that 2 acres would not be big enough either!
The stadium at Underhill and the terraced houses demolished to accommodate the school occupied 6,450 sq meters, 2 acres is just under 8,100 sq meters. So it probably would be just big enough without car parking and training grounds.
I was walking across Barnet Playing Fields last week and it really does feel like there should be enough space for a small stadium there – clearly not a site as big as The Hive, but a sort of 6000-ish capacity ground, like Underhill but obviously more modern.

I doubt TK would be particularly interested in something so modest though, and the political will to get it done still may not be there, though I suppose it could be different with a Labour council now.
It was a Labour Government that blocked Copthall way back when... every party has own political agenda at all levels...
There are zero guarantees for any party to support a return... party consensus is often driven by not doing the same as whoever has majority

For me Barnet has always been about Chipping Barnet / Barnet Town - not the Borough... to me Cricklewood, Hadlet, Whetstone, Finchley, Hendon, Hampstead Garden Suburb is no more Barnet than Edgware or Canons Park
I completely agree, but am I right in saying that Copthall was blocked at national rather than council level? It would surely be worth exploring the current Labour council's view on things – maybe the club has, and we're just not aware of it.

Spot on re: Barnet the town too IMO, I'd have no real interest in leaving The Hive for places like Hendon, Mill Hill etc. They're no more Barnet than Edgware / Harrow is, despite technically being within the borough.
User avatar
rudebwoyben
Posts: 9115
Joined: 22 Jan 2011, 18:53
Location: Seven Sisters, London N15

Re: Ten Years Since We Left Underhill

Post: # 359874Post rudebwoyben »

Copthall was called in by the Labour SoS for a public enquiry after being passed by the then Lab/Lib council. The enquiry rejected Copthall as they believed that expanding Underhill had not been fully explored by the club. The club subsequently drew up the South Underhill plan which was passed by the same council in 2001 and by the GLA. Unfortunately the council changed hands in 2002.
User avatar
Reckless
Posts: 2876
Joined: 23 Jan 2011, 17:53
Location: Potters Bar
Contact:

Re: Ten Years Since We Left Underhill

Post: # 359884Post Reckless »

rudebwoyben wrote: 18 Sep 2023, 10:59 Copthall was called in by the Labour SoS for a public enquiry after being passed by the then Lab/Lib council. The enquiry rejected Copthall as they believed that expanding Underhill had not been fully explored by the club. The club subsequently drew up the South Underhill plan which was passed by the same council in 2001 and by the GLA. Unfortunately the council changed hands in 2002.
This is exactly my reading of the whole thing - summed up in a paragraph.
Roy57
Posts: 3428
Joined: 22 Sep 2018, 10:43

Re: Ten Years Since We Left Underhill

Post: # 359896Post Roy57 »

Like many I to lost my older brother, we both use to sell programmes at underhill for many years, but unlike most I in know way blame TK for what happened to and why we had to move from underhill, I blame the people who didn't want us there Barnet Council. I am sure if during these past ten years if TK would in anyway believe of have any reason to believe our attendances if we were to move back to the borough would see a steep increase in attendances I feel he would of made more of a effort, but if attendances would be similar to what we are now getting why at a time when do many clubs have either folded or are in deep financial problems would Tk spend millions of his own money to move back to a borough that doesn't want a football club or supporters attendance would not improve, and I am sure as it's been showed in record stats that our attendance would not improve know where near enough to warrant the move. Look at all the club's who had far bigger gates than we get or will ever get that know longer exist, or clubs like Southend who get three times the support we get, yet all of the above can only dream about being as financially stable as we are today.
User avatar
ninestein
Posts: 7045
Joined: 03 Aug 2011, 20:00

Re: Ten Years Since We Left Underhill

Post: # 359903Post ninestein »

A lot has been said about the lack of a referendum on moving. Regardless of whether it was promised originally, what were the likely options?

Pay the extortionate amounts Barnet Council were proposing and be hemmed in at an outdated stadium. Good enough 20 years ago, but not fit for purpose as a modern professional outfit.

Ground share with Orient or Stevenage. Echoes of Brighton playing at Gillingham in the 90's. Coaches to home games. A sad state of affairs. No timescale on a return.

Develop the Hive as we have. Comfortable, modern, a little out the way. At least it looks like a Barnet stadium.

Unless I'm missing another obvious option that was immediately open to us, I'd have picked the latter as the best of unfortunate situation. No fans like being forced away from their old home. There's enough other "lost" grounds around the country. How many of those clubs were given a referendum? I suspect most decisions were made at board level with the best interests of the club's future at heart. How you manage the new stadium after you move is another subject. Some have done it well (Brighton, Swansea, Brentford and Hull have all made the top level). Some have faltered (I give you Darlington). But I be there are still some Brighton fans bitter at losing the Goldstone Ground, and that all happened 25 years ago. We just don't hear about those opinions because we're not connected to them.

In our situation, as a club we are no further forward but no further back compared to when we left Underhill. The memories will always be there, especially the last game and THAT save from Stack.
Barnet showing all the flair of Rupert-the-Bears trousers, but lots more style!
DerekRocholl
Posts: 4368
Joined: 02 Feb 2011, 16:59

Re: Ten Years Since We Left Underhill

Post: # 359927Post DerekRocholl »

ninestein wrote: 18 Sep 2023, 18:59 A lot has been said about the lack of a referendum on moving. Regardless of whether it was promised originally, what were the likely options?

Pay the extortionate amounts Barnet Council were proposing and be hemmed in at an outdated stadium. Good enough 20 years ago, but not fit for purpose as a modern professional outfit.

Ground share with Orient or Stevenage. Echoes of Brighton playing at Gillingham in the 90's. Coaches to home games. A sad state of affairs. No timescale on a return.

Develop the Hive as we have. Comfortable, modern, a little out the way. At least it looks like a Barnet stadium.

Unless I'm missing another obvious option that was immediately open to us, I'd have picked the latter as the best of unfortunate situation. No fans like being forced away from their old home. There's enough other "lost" grounds around the country. How many of those clubs were given a referendum? I suspect most decisions were made at board level with the best interests of the club's future at heart. How you manage the new stadium after you move is another subject. Some have done it well (Brighton, Swansea, Brentford and Hull have all made the top level). Some have faltered (I give you Darlington). But I be there are still some Brighton fans bitter at losing the Goldstone Ground, and that all happened 25 years ago. We just don't hear about those opinions because we're not connected to them.

In our situation, as a club we are no further forward but no further back compared to when we left Underhill. The memories will always be there, especially the last game and THAT save from Stack.
I was there when the referendum was promised. If it had been held it is pretty likely that a move to the Hive would have had majority support and quite a few people who subsequently opposed the move would have accepted it was being done with support of the majority.

The fact that the referendum wasn’t held was a breach of trust on the part of Kleanthous and it made him very difficult to trust on anything else.
Post Reply