Dulwich Hamlet chairman’s reaction as they face £10k bill after attempt to overturn National League punishment ends in failure

Dulwich Hamlet chairman Ben Clasper has hit out after an FA independent appeal board upheld their £8,000 fine for not fulfilling fixtures during the Covid-19 pandemic.

The National League charged the South London club for not playing four games in February.

Dulwich wanted adequate funding in place to cover the tail end of the campaign when a grant – to compensate for matches taking place behind closed doors – was no longer in place. The National League South season was declared null and void later that same month – but the penalties still stayed in place.

Dulwich were one of 11 clubs to have their appeals dismissed. They also have a suspended deduction of eight points.

Hamlet told the appeal board that the punishment – £2,000 per match – was excessive and that they only had £836.55 in their account.

When asked about the verdict, Clasper said: “It is the least surprising email I have had all week. The appeal, and the case, was never fought on the morals and the merits – it was all on technicalities.

“And when the league is run by a veteran of almost 20 years judicial services at the FA, they know how to follow the rulebook to their advantage. That is what they have done. We have got no grudge against the people who rejected the appeal, because they did it simply on technicalities.

“There are upsides to this. It demonstrates, once and for all, that even with a new head of the National League, nothing has changed – that their attitudes to clubs will remain the same.

“Therefore the wider reviews and reform discussions will just treat this as another swing of the bat by them that needs to be addressed.

“I’m more positive that longer-term good change will come off the back of this decision.

“It’s no secret there is a government review of the governance of football underway. The National League seem pretty content to demonstrate, time and time again, why that is needed.

“What people forget is clubs try and engage positively. We try to engage regularly.

“The relationship soured because of the league’s non-response over the last 12 months. So they are wholly responsible for relationships reaching this level.

“And their reaction has always been to double down and hammer harder, rather than hold out a hand and take a step back. While they are hellbent on following that course of action, it is going to take reform to deal with it.”

Dulwich have also been ordered to pay costs of £1,600 within 30 days of the date of the decision.

Hamlet’s last match with a home crowd was on December 8 – 1,078 attending the 2-1 win over Eastbourne Borough.

Asked about the financial impact of the ruling, Clasper replied: “It’s serious, because the £8,000 is now £9,600. Losing our appeal fee means it is £10,000.

“Someone is making money out of this national crisis – and it is the National League. The fact it is coming at the expense of community clubs is, quite frankly, abhorrent.

“It means back to the drawing board with our cash forecasts. Ironically Monday was the deadline to submit your season’s budget to the National League for their scrutiny. Well, we could be in the ridiculous position of them rejecting our budget because we can’t afford to pay their fine.

“I’ve now asked eight times for the league to say what they are going to do if the inevitable happens – which is when further delays to the relaxing of restrictions start to impact on next season.

“We now know that the month’s extension takes us into pre-season. Gavin [Rose, manager] and I spoke on Tuesday morning, we’re now looking at our friendly schedule because we may not be able to have fans.

“You’ve got a seemingly hamstrung institution that is unwilling to take any actions to prevent a third impacted season.

“Their plan is the same as the Prime Minister’s – to see if it all goes away. We’re seeing, to the country’s cost, how that is no plan whatsover.”

The National League indicated earlier this week that they would make no further comment.

Written reasons for the hearing said that new evidence could not be submitted by Dulwich.

“The provisions of regulation 10 are also clear that an explanation must be provided as to why the new evidence was not and could have been provided at the original hearing before the panel.

“The appeal board is not satisfied with the explanation of the club. The club accepts it was a mistake not to provide it.

“It assumed the league would provide the materials to those who were making the decision. That was an unwarranted assumption. All documentation and financials provided on appeal that was not before the panel is therefore excluded.

“On the material before them the panel was entitled to reach the conclusion that the club did not have just cause not to fulfil the fixtures.

“Absent detailed financial information and reports the panel did not have the material to even begin to consider the assertion by the club that to continue to play matches would trigger an insolvency event.”