Redbridge Council on Ilford FC vs Barkingside FC Cricklefields row

Senior councillors granted officers permission to begin negotiating with Ilford FC over a 50-year lease on the site, but indicated that they expected it to continue accommodating Barkingside FC as well.

Barkingside chairman Jimmy Flanaghan released emails last week showing Ilford has tried to almost double its rent, which he says is a breach of an existing contract.

When Barkingside refused to pay the higher rent, Ilford chairman Adam Peek sent emails saying he will no longer accept Barkingside’s rent payments or match fixtures.

Mr Flanaghan said Barkingside “will probably fold” if it loses Cricklefields as its home.

The row, revealed last week by this newspaper, continued in last week’s cabinet meeting over whether to grant Ilford a long-term lease.

Councillors green-lit negotiations with Ilford, but said they expected both clubs to “flourish” at the site.

Council leader Cllr Jas Athwal said: “The motivation of this council is none other than simply ensure that the lease here is significant enough to attract the investment into Cricklefields to secure its long-term future.”

Barkingside FC chairman Jimmy Flanaghan has raised concerns over the club’s future, saying Ilford FC is trying to hike its rent and the club ‘will probably fold’ if it loses Cricklefields Stadium as its home (Image: Barkingside FC / X (Formerly Twitter))

“Serious concern”

Mr Flanaghan and Barkingside youth club’s development officer Tony McGrath addressed the meeting last Thursday, September 14.

Mr McGrath was there representing Ilford Sports Club, which also uses the site.

But Redbridge Council has blamed an equipment failure for both men’s speeches being chopped out of the meeting when it was broadcast to the public.

The broadcast had recommenced by the time councillors began debating Cricklefields, which is also home to Ilford Athletic Club.

Cllr Lloyd Duddridge said: “Cricklefields desperately needs some investment. One side of the ground, you can’t even go and watch a game of football anymore. It’s a rickety old stand.

“This ground needs some significant money inputted into it and it can’t come from the council. We don’t have that money.

“So for Ilford to say that they are going to input significant amounts of money, or some investment in, it’s interesting. I think we would be stupid as a council not to consider it.

“But I think Ilford need to put some of their ego to one side, sit with the gentlemen that we heard tonight and make sure all these sports clubs flourish.

“We need to make sure every sports club at that site both can use it for the foreseeable future and can flourish there.”

Cllr Lloyd Duddridge told last week’s meeting that Cricklefields was in such disrepair and so in need of investment that some of it cannot currently be used (Image: Gavin Ellis/TGS)

Stipulations

Cllr Athwal echoed Cllr Duddridge’s comments, saying: “I think the three teams, clubs, have to all flourish.”

Cllr Kam Rai, cabinet member for finance and regeneration, told colleagues that the council had received two bids to run Cricklefields.

It preferred Ilford FC’s bid, based “largely on the higher amount of investment”.

Cllr Athwal joined his cabinet in agreeing to move forward with Ilford FC, but added: “One thing I would like to ask is that when the negotiations take place, that any lease agreement should have a break clause that, if investment doesn’t come, then the council has the right to take the lease back.

“It can’t be that we give a community asset on a promise and then find that the promise is not fulfilled. So there should be time stipulations.”

“This does not mean that the lease is agreed,” Cllr Rai clarified before the vote – only that officers can commence negotiations with Ilford FC.

Catch up:

Row erupts between football clubs as council prepares for Cricklefields vote

Ilford FC chairman Adam Peek said he was ‘delighted’ by last week’s council decision (Image: Gavin Ellis/TGS)

Dispute

Mr Flanaghan last week accused Mr Peek of acting like the new lease is “a done deal”.

He said Barkingside and Ilford have a ground-sharing contract – ratified by the FA’s own solicitors as “legally binding” – entitling Barkingside to use Cricklefields at a set price until 2031.

But Mr Peek claims Ilford’s lawyers believe the contract is “invalid”.

He has sought to almost double Barkingside’s annual rent, claiming the club is paying half the market rate while Ilford incurs rising maintenance costs.

Last week, one of Barkingside’s matches had to be abandoned because the floodlights failed.

Mr Peek said he was “delighted” that the cabinet had authorised officers to negotiate with Ilford FC.

“As part of the conversations with the council, we will discuss all matters in relation to the site and ensure all facts are presented,” he said.

“The proposal outlines our support of athletics, school usage and the wider town, which will give much more access to local people and groups than is currently available, whilst improving the facilities.

“This is a great opportunity for the football club and our future.”