redforest
Geoff Thomas
Ah yes the warm leg, happy days
-
All - as you will understand, the forum is exceptionally busy at this time. The admins and moderators simply don't have time to read every post in every thread. Could you PLEASE use the "Report" option below a post to flag any content that you feel we need to be aware of. We'll review everything reported as a priority and deal with it accordingly. Thank you.
The World Famous City Ground - Home of the PROPER WORLD‘S OLDEST LEAGUE CLUB
- Thread starter donny
- Start date
Often, Rail seats only allow the same number of standing fans, as it has to be one fan to one seat, and the rail seats are similarly sized to the seats currently in use.
Stuttgart‘s MHP Arena, for example, has an open terrace at one end (the famous Cannstatter Kurve) and when rail seats are installed there for international matches, the capacity of that end drops by over 5.000!
Irish Red
A. Trialist
It's what it says on the tin, 'safe' standing. Man U's is shit as they've just bottled on some rails. QPRs (in a VERY confined space) is decent as it's built in. Don't get anymore people in but also don't fall forward and break your leg like I did.
Redemption
One less gobshite...
The only way to get an increase in capacity from safe standing is during a new build.
The raking and the step length is different to seating, so taking out seating or just adding rails doesn't alter the capacity.
Everton's new stadium will have safe- standing in, it looks quite claustrophobic.
The raking and the step length is different to seating, so taking out seating or just adding rails doesn't alter the capacity.
Everton's new stadium will have safe- standing in, it looks quite claustrophobic.
Notcher
Stuart Pearce
The fact that the ground is no longer registered as an asset of community value seems to have slipped through conversations. That was something of real significance and security.
Why has this changed? What was the thinking in deciding not to renew it? Why weren't supporters informed?
Why has this changed? What was the thinking in deciding not to renew it? Why weren't supporters informed?
donny
Grenville Morris
Its similar to the Westfalenstadion, IIRC, capacity there drops over 15000 to 66000 as they have to put seats on the SudTribune.
donny
Grenville Morris
Supporters were involved. It was that 'bunch of luminaries' the Supporters Trust, who were probably too busy slapping their own backs for something insignificant.
Notcher
Stuart Pearce
Brilliant of them to not inform supporters about it then. I can't understand their logic for deciding to not register it again.
Redemption
One less gobshite...
Gyros Peter
Sauce salad?
Can you get your cock out of my back please?
And also hilariously ignoring the size of most matchday gentlemen!
Notcher
Stuart Pearce
This is the only information I've seen as per the DT article. Some answers are required here.
Redemption
One less gobshite...
The registration is for 5 years only.
So it ran out 2 years ago.
I wager 50/50 on forgetfulness or assuming the 250 year deal puts the likelihood of a sale event down to negligible.
So it ran out 2 years ago.
I wager 50/50 on forgetfulness or assuming the 250 year deal puts the likelihood of a sale event down to negligible.
Redemption
One less gobshite...
Some one should check the Boat Club's registration.
Wouldn’t that have been during Covid, which might explain it?
Notcher
Stuart Pearce
I'm going from the terminology DT used which was "decided". That assumes a conscious decision was made.
Redemption
One less gobshite...
Redemption
One less gobshite...
Then I would still go with "assuming the 250 year deal puts the likelihood of a sale event down to negligible."
2 years ago, when the renewal was up, how would secure wouldnyou have rated the grounds future? No hindsight allowed.
Notcher
Stuart Pearce
But the 250 year deal wasn't secured so the proper thing to do should for it to be registered again until such a time that it was.
Redemption
One less gobshite...
When did you know the 250 year deal wasn't secured? And what did you belive before that revelation?
Notcher
Stuart Pearce
I'm not responsible for the registration so what I knew is irrelevant. This goes back to my point about Randall being economical with the truth about the lease.
The point remains that the 250 year deal was not secured and the ACV should have been registered until such a date that it was. Did Randall tell the trust that the new lease had been secured?
Otis Redding
Try A Little Tenderness
If it is now the case that the city council views the CG freehold as of far more value as a potential residential site than it does a sporting venue, then re-registering it as an ACV is more important then ever, surely?
It increases my suspicion that the city council would ultimately prefer to back a new shared stadium at Eastcroft/Cattle Market and cash-in on Trentside.
It increases my suspicion that the city council would ultimately prefer to back a new shared stadium at Eastcroft/Cattle Market and cash-in on Trentside.
Redemption
One less gobshite...
Sort of.
The purpose of an ACV is that if it came up for sale, the 'community' has a right to bid. The legislation gives a 6 month window in which you can prepare the bid and make an offer. It's a right to bid, not a right to buy.
Putting factions aside, for a minute, could the fans realistically buy this land from the City Council based on their current predicament and the likely sales value?
As a gesture, it should have been renewed. But practically, broadly irrelevant.
Last edited:
I'm Red Till Dead
Stuart Pearce
I did mention some months ago that it had expired off the register.