DUNCAN BAYLEY Secretary of the UniBond League
Back in the darkest days of summer, one week before the meeting of the FA Appeals Committee, the Ed managed to talk to Duncan Bayley, Secretary of the UniBond League. This is the transcript of their telephone conversation on 9 July 1999 at around 4.30pm. Hello, is that Mr Bayley? Yes, it is. Good afternoon. I'm Graham Murphy and I'm preparing an article for the Holker Street Newsletter and the Barrow fanzine, Give 'Em Beans! I wonder if I could ask you a few questions about why you've refused to accept Barrow in next season's competition? Ah, I've got absolutely no comment on that subject. There's nothing I want to say. I just wanted to ask you about your point of view, why you felt that you couldn't accept Barrow in the UniBond? No, this is too complicated, I don't want to say anything. I don't want to talk about it. I've got nothing to say. Absolutely no comment. There are some things I cannot tell you. But I thought it would be a chance for you to put your side of the story. I'd really rather not say anything about this. But the FA have instructed you to accept Barrow. Oh, we can't do that because Barrow weren't officially relegated by the Conference. What do you mean? We have to act according to our constitution. That is to accept those clubs that are officially relegated. Barrow are not one of those clubs. But don't you have to follow FA rules? We have to follow our own constitution. That is what we are doing. So you don't have to accept Barrow at all? No. We don't even know which Barrow it is. There seems to be more than one. Yes, there's the old club which is in liquidation and the new company formed to take their place. But we don't even know which one they're talking about. It seems to change by the day depending on exactly what they want. I believe that the liquidator is prepared to let the old club continue for at least one more season provided the new company guarantees all losses. The liquidator hasn't spoken to us. We don't know what he wants and we don't have a great deal of faith in what he says anyway. Why? I really can't go into that. So are there any circumstances in which you'd accept Barrow into the UniBond for next season? No, I don't think so. Why? It's against our constitution. Look, I've really got nothing more to say about this. There's a rumour that you don't want Barrow because there was a lot of bad feeling between the UniBond and the previous owner of the club. That isn't true. We had very good relations with the last administration at Barrow. We haven't really spoken to the new team to be able to know them. There's no bad blood. What if the FA appeals panel which sits on 15 July rules that you must take Barrow? I don't really want to answer any more questions. But would you accept that ruling? We are considering legal action and if circumstances require us to move in that direction then that is what we will do. I don't want to talk about this any more. There then followed a six week battle during which the FA threatened to suspend the UniBond's clubs from all competitions unless Barrow were accepted. It culminated in an EGM of all 44 UniBond League clubs on 22 August, during which Barrow were reluctantly admitted. Shortly after Barrow's admission to the league the Ed and Mr Bayley spoke again. So how do you feel about things now? We're getting on with it with a smile on our face, happy that Barrow AFC, in liquidation, are playing as a member club of the UniBond. We wondered what your reasons were for trying to keep Barrow out despite the ruling of the FA that they should be admitted? It's over. I don't see the need for an inquest. A lot of supporters don't understand why you were so opposed to us. This is your chance to set out your side of the story. So you want an inquest. No, I'm writing an article which explains all the various viewpoints as fairly as I can. I know how the Barrow fans feel. I'm not sure about you. That's what I said. You want to have an inquest. Well, if you want to call it an inquest then that's what it is... But I don't see the point in that. What's gone is gone. There's no need to go back over it and point fingers, make accusations. It's over. I don't see the need for pats on the back either. So have you had second thoughts about anything? My point of view hasn't changed. I don't think Barrow should be with us. We understand your legal objection against the FA's ruling was to do with the fact that under the FA's constitution, the appeal should have been made by the UniBond against Barrow, but it was actually set up the other way round. Look, there's no point in raking all this up. I told you there's no point in an inquest. We accepted the FA's decision with dignity and we are getting on with it. I don't think the outcome was right but I have to accept it and that's what I'm doing. But why did you fight so hard against the decision of the FA Appeals Committee? Barrow are now a member of our league. We want to put the past behind us, not say who was right and who was wrong. That does nobody any good. And that's my final word. Part one originally appeared in the Holker Street Newsletter no.405 - 15 July 1999 Part two in G'EB! issue 041 - October 1999