Leeds introducing it was the prompt for me posting that.
We’d still have more demand than supply in the championship. At least at the start of the season.
Leeds introducing it was the prompt for me posting that.
We’d still have more demand than supply in the championship. At least at the start of the season.
Yeah agreed. Just makes me laugh how quickly the club forget 15k attendances (and that includes counting ST holders who didn't actually go).
This will be dragging on long after the administrators have gone.
We don’t actually know what forest did bid for the land. And you’d also think a council would have duty to its city and residents to allow a top flight club to flourish in the area due to other benefits, both economic and social that they bring.
@BrettWilliams has written: @dj_bobbins has written:Clearly trying to crank the pressure up on the Council...
The timing of this seems far from coincidental, in that the club has chosen to go public a couple of days after government-appointed commissioners arrive at Loxley House. I suspect Cartledge believes this is the perfect time to swoop and apply pressure over the lease.
My feeling is that his timing probably couldn't be worse. When commissioners are sent in to stricken councils, probably quite correctly, they have precisely zero fucks to give about any of the things the chairman raises, i.e. the club's emotive and historic connection to the City Ground. It's all about finding every possible cost saving at the same time as maximising revenue generation wherever that's possible.
Even if the club could persuade the council's commercial property department to accept something below market rate for the land (which they clearly seem to think they can with this recent media campaign), there is absolutely no chance it would be signed off by commissioners. They will view this land purely in terms of its value to taxpayers and if Forest want to play hardball, they'll likely happily wave them off to Gamston and flog the site for housing.
Hopefully the two sides can get back around the table, but it looks to me like Cartledge might have dropped a bit of a bollock here. Fans will lap it up in the meantime, though, of course.
This will be dragging on long after the administrators have gone.
We don’t actually know what forest did bid for the land. And you’d also think a council would have duty to its city and residents to allow a top flight club to flourish in the area due to other benefits, both economic and social that they bring.
Is one way of looking at it. The other is that Forest have likely been underpaying quite significantly for that lease for many years and now aren't too keen to pay what it's worth. Don't forget that much of the economic benefit you mention is felt 'south of the water', so to speak.
Yet another way of looking at this is that it's actually a genius move by Cartledge. Let's just say that privately the club has decided, for whatever reason, to abandon the ground redevelopment and build a new stadium elsewhere. This could be some really smart laying of groundwork on a comms/PR front. When the announcement is made and the fanbase largely goes apeshit, you've made yourself bulletproof.
"It was all their fault," they say, pointing at Loxley House. "We desperately wanted to stay and they made it impossible."
@Charlie has written:Notts MPs have written a joint letter urging Forest and the Council to sort things out. Looking at the signatories, what on earth has the county done to deserve such appalling representatives? Anderson, Clark-Smith, Jenrick, Bradley… it’s a roll call of incompetent, racist right wingnuts.
Ben Bradley's chosen this moment to reveal in a tweet he's a Forest season ticket holder and a massive Reds fan (at the same time as reminding folk he's standing in the mayoral election in a couple of months' time, of course...).
He’s also a “massive Mansfield fan”. And more often seen in the corporates Trentside with his lad (although not seen him this season).
@Seven has written: @BrettWilliams has written: @dj_bobbins has written:Clearly trying to crank the pressure up on the Council...
The timing of this seems far from coincidental, in that the club has chosen to go public a couple of days after government-appointed commissioners arrive at Loxley House. I suspect Cartledge believes this is the perfect time to swoop and apply pressure over the lease.
My feeling is that his timing probably couldn't be worse. When commissioners are sent in to stricken councils, probably quite correctly, they have precisely zero fucks to give about any of the things the chairman raises, i.e. the club's emotive and historic connection to the City Ground. It's all about finding every possible cost saving at the same time as maximising revenue generation wherever that's possible.
Even if the club could persuade the council's commercial property department to accept something below market rate for the land (which they clearly seem to think they can with this recent media campaign), there is absolutely no chance it would be signed off by commissioners. They will view this land purely in terms of its value to taxpayers and if Forest want to play hardball, they'll likely happily wave them off to Gamston and flog the site for housing.
Hopefully the two sides can get back around the table, but it looks to me like Cartledge might have dropped a bit of a bollock here. Fans will lap it up in the meantime, though, of course.
This will be dragging on long after the administrators have gone.
We don’t actually know what forest did bid for the land. And you’d also think a council would have duty to its city and residents to allow a top flight club to flourish in the area due to other benefits, both economic and social that they bring.
Is one way of looking at it. The other is that Forest have likely been underpaying quite significantly for that lease for many years and now aren't too keen to pay what it's worth. Don't forget that much of the economic benefit you mention is felt 'south of the water', so to speak.
Yet another way of looking at this is that it's actually a genius move by Cartledge. Let's just say that privately the club has decided, for whatever reason, to abandon the ground redevelopment and build a new stadium elsewhere. This could be some really smart laying of groundwork on a comms/PR front. When the announcement is made and the fanbase largely goes apeshit, you've made yourself bulletproof.
"It was all their fault," they say, pointing at Loxley House. "We desperately wanted to stay and they made it impossible."
Nice thinking but I can’t really see why the club would actually want to move grounds. It would cost far more than paying a bit more ground rent.
I think the ground move levels of batshittery from our batshit fanbase would depend on the chosen location.
The walk over Trent bridge seems most fans reason for wanting to stay, I’d hazard a guess that most don’t do this anyway.
@Charlie has written:Notts MPs have written a joint letter urging Forest and the Council to sort things out. Looking at the signatories, what on earth has the county done to deserve such appalling representatives? Anderson, Clark-Smith, Jenrick, Bradley… it’s a roll call of incompetent, racist right wingnuts.
Ben Bradley's chosen this moment to reveal in a tweet he's a Forest season ticket holder and a massive Reds fan (at the same time as reminding folk he's standing in the mayoral election in a couple of months' time, of course...).
He’s always been a Forest fan tbh. He was often at matches pre-Prem. Stags are more like his team that he supports/attends because the locals like it thing.
Nice thinking but I can’t really see why the club would actually want to move grounds. It would cost far more than paying a bit more ground rent.
For a much larger capacity? Not sure what a revamped City Ground would hold but it won’t be anywhere near 50k or whatever they’d aim for at a new place.
@Seven has written:Nice thinking but I can’t really see why the club would actually want to move grounds. It would cost far more than paying a bit more ground rent.
For a much larger capacity? Not sure what a revamped City Ground would hold but it won’t be anywhere near 50k or whatever they’d aim for at a new place.
And also, "The Evangelous Marinakis Stadium".
And also, "The Evangelous Marinakis Stadium".
Early in my career I worked with a guy who drove a Bentley. One day I asked him why he had such a nice car but no personalised plates, he gave me a pitying look and said "I drive a Bentley, I don't need plates to tell people how much money I have".
I feel like the same applies with Marinakis. He owns multiple football clubs, he doesn't need his name on the stadium for people to know who he is. I don't know why there's this insistence of ascribing character traits to him that aren't in evidence.
I'm disappointed you even felt the need to ask him. Anybody who buys themselves a personalised number plate is a 5TUP1D CUN7 and may as well have a sign saying that hanging around their neck. Also why the fuck does anyone want them to know they've made a load of cash anyway? Unless you're trying to pull birds, it's just inviting people to loathe you and is daft.
Rob Jones is fourth official at the Amex on Sunday, so best pray the ref (Michael Salisbury) doesn't get injured. although Craig Pawson is on VAR, so we're fcuked anyway.
Felipe leaves at the end of the season: x.com/louiswheeldonns/status/1764730562458038588?s=61&t=w-weDDzS0PXEYtazUCi1rg
Felipe leaves at the end of the season: x.com/louiswheeldonns/status/1764730562458038588?s=61&t=w-weDDzS0PXEYtazUCi1rg
I think he’s retiring.
U21s lost 2-0 at bottom club Man City, who featured Kian Breckin in their side.
U21s lost 2-0 at bottom club Man City, who featured Kian Breckin in their side.
Please tell me Ian Breckin didn't name his kid Kian...