|
Post by oviedista on Oct 12, 2023 16:16:47 GMT
Agree but unfortunately this thread has been set on a raging battle full of conspiracy and generalisations for quite a while now and is very unlikely to change. Agree then make a comment that is likely to result in more battle. Hmmmm. Don't intend to but probably being flippant as feel it really won't make any difference will it? I'm much more interested in reading the constructive sharing of information when it arises.
|
|
|
Post by oviedista on Oct 12, 2023 15:43:16 GMT
That's also an issue for the club that we can have people living in the vicinity, fresh to the area that don't want to be involved in the club. There's no attempt to really galvanise interest in our neighbours or the new people to the city as a whole. When you compare that to the clubs under the Bristol Sport umbrella it's pretty poor. This is unique to Bristol Rovers!. I lived close to Ashton gate after moving from the inner city. There was a lot of middle class people moving into the chessels and Southville from the home counties. But they embraced the football / rugby club hence NO opposition. I know of people who live in Cardiff and say the same that middle class people are moving in . However : on the whole they embrace the football / rugby clubs. Hence very little opposition. This group are totally different and are well organised and versatile in hoping from one group to another. I say again there is NO football club in the England who face this level of opposition. How do I know ? Read the Areofilm guide to football grounds or the editions by Duncan Adams in the last 20 years . Accrington Stanley : A.F.C Wimbledon and US was the only three teams who haven't built a stand in 20 years . Also I bet the level of objections will surpass the last even though the club have been talking via Emma Edwards for nearly 9 months. Edit. Since the Duncan Adams edition 2018 . Wimbledon have built a new stadium ( 2020) and Accrington a new stand ( 2021). There is absolutely zero doubt that we are one of the most ridiculously underdeveloped clubs in the country in terms of facilities. However frustrating that fact is we have a unique history and set of circumstances that go well beyond the objections of Joanne at number 34.
|
|
|
Post by oviedista on Oct 12, 2023 15:37:42 GMT
I sympathise with our problem, however we must allow residents an opinion on something that like it or not affects their lives. Of course we can say ‘you moved into a home when there was a football team playing adjacent’ but they are still entitled to voice their thoughts. Plus let’s please not generalise whether they are all Green Party voters or what income they are on, that’s a little unfair in my opinion. I want our stadium to progress as much as anyone but let’s not turn this into a battle 👍🏾 Agree but unfortunately this thread has been set on a raging battle full of conspiracy and generalisations for quite a while now and is very unlikely to change.
|
|
|
Post by oviedista on Oct 8, 2023 18:10:26 GMT
Gasify Why not have a reasonable debate ?. The Green party hold a lot of power and are the biggest group in the council . They are the only group openly opposed to any stadium project . They have accepted they backed three groups . Emma promised ' if the club meets and ammends ' she will reconsider. The club have listened ( late I accept ) . Will the Greens now back this fresh group of objections? It's a major question now ! The club have listened up to a point. The Solar panels on the South Stand roof is a fantastic idea. Would probably save a few quid over the coming years too. I don't think you have to be a green supporter to realise that is something that can be done which benefits everyone. The transport idea is also a good one. Maybe we should set up a free bus that goes from Brislington, Lyde Green and the Portway Park and rides. It wouldn't be difficult to have busses leaving every 15 mins before and after the game. Maybe BCC could pay for this as part of their Green agenda? Not sure if it's universal there but my on one experience watching football in Germany I was surprised to find my match ticket included any public transport to the stadium on that day. Also regular buses running for fans specifically. Cheap ticket too.
|
|
|
Post by oviedista on Oct 8, 2023 16:02:05 GMT
But the greens are such a well meaning and thoughtful group. Ha!!!!! Love having their holidays abroad (flying ona areoplane) drive there cars adding shoe box conversions to the top of their houses drink there imported wines and fancy salads. When confronted in person about the utopia that they dream of there ideas generally don't stack up. I no this as I'm surrounded by them When you say you're surrounded by them do you mean they're in the room with you now?
|
|
|
Post by oviedista on Oct 3, 2023 9:30:22 GMT
The objections would have been pretty much the same whether or not Rovers consulted with them. This would have also delayed the project. Lets also be honest a sizeable proportion of the objections were from people who wouldn't even be affected by it, don't live in the area or were p*ss takes by teds (Tit man). The application wasn't called in because of the objections it was called in because the green councillor decided to for no other reason than she didn't want it to go ahead and wanted to delay it. In fact I think her calling it in may have happened before any objections were made. The club haven't handled the process well and the timescales, even without the planning process, are somewhat questionable given we are still building the stand. So I very much doubt it would have been ready for the start of the season. However that is a separate issue to the green party. the reason for disliking the green party is because they protest, object and delay everything adding lots more costs to projects and a lot of the time results in killing the project. They know what they're doing and as with Sainsbury's they try every trick in the book and play the system. I think it has been said many times before how they behaved over Sainsburys and the way the green councillor has behaved this time is just the same. I wouldn't vote green anyway but this sort of behavior reaffirms my opinion about the greens. Agree 100% with your comments . There is a 25 year connection between ground plans and the Greens supporting local lobbyist. There is no other club in England who get so much opposition . And look at our desperate ground ?. Of course we have made mistakes and we need to acknowledge this. However : we have been constantly attacked by powerful middle class Greens supporting local lobbyist that Nulify any ambition. All communities embrace and support its football clubs like the model at Bradford with the Muslims community. There are positive examples up and down our great nation of communities celebrating and Co-existing with its football teams. Sadly the Greens have opted to support locals to object and protest to any plans. In conclusion we have made mistakes but have recieved no help by the Greens who seem to manipulate any cracks !. I've been as frustrated as anyone since first watching Rovers at Twerton in the early 90s at the state of facilities we have compared to small towns up north. I lived next to Valley Parade when it was being developed and used to go to many away games at places like Wigan, Huddersfield and er.. Darlington! It's easy to be angry about the situation but there are multiple factors why we are so far behind many which are nothing to do with noisy neighbours or green politics. And it's not as rosy elsewhere (see Dalington) as you might think. Check the 'positive' example of Liverpool for example: www.theguardian.com/football/david-conn-inside-sport-blog/2013/may/06/anfield-liverpool-david-connAnyway I believe Edwards when she says she is supportive of the stand being built and see nothing unusual about her behaviour if you look at the process and timeline without prejudice. Many people are projecting a sinister motives and assume she's lying and I don't think any minds are going to change on this. So circles and all that. Meanwhile I saw the stand the other day and it really enclosed the ground which is the main thing the ground lacks. Looking forward to seeing it filled with people asap.
|
|
|
Post by oviedista on Oct 3, 2023 6:49:20 GMT
I'm not at all desperate for it to fail. I am desperate for it to succeed. I want Bristol Rovers to once again be seen as a pillar of the community, so I want us to be doing everything by the book and not trying to cut corners. I want to know why we have withdrawn the planning application and have resubmitted it. If it is truly to be good neighbours then I am really happy about that. However, my concern is that we have f**ked it up again and my guess is that it's the same person f**ked it up. I want answers. I want to understand why we have acted the way we have. There are a few alarming things happening around the club and we should all want to understand why. Otherwise we may not have a club to support. What's alarming, that we misunderstood the Green party's agenda and failed to consult with them before submitting the plans? If they hadn't raised any objections it seems likely BCC would have approved the plans. You're starting to sound like KP with this "we may not have a club to support" nonsense when we're probably in the best financial shape we've ever been in. It's not the Greens they didn't consult with it's residents - and the club have held their hands up on this. Whatever you think of them getting residents on side was pretty important to avoiding what has happened because the number of objections made the application not going to committee extremely unlikely - regardless of which party any local councillor represented. On a general note I'm broadly supportive of the club and have no desire to 'put the boot in'. That's not going to stop me recognising a cock up when I see one - while others seem to feel any criticism of the club here diminishes the opportunity to get mad about the Green Party. In an alternative universe where there is no Green party we might still not sitting in the new stand tonight and definitely wouldn't have been at the start of the season as planned.
|
|
|
Post by oviedista on Sept 29, 2023 15:03:13 GMT
Think I would want Clarke to succeed in pretty much any job with the exception of City.
|
|
|
Post by oviedista on Sept 29, 2023 15:01:34 GMT
I fully appreciate there is a lot of bad blood after the UWE/ Sainsburies conflict and I wasn't involved so I can't comment on the behaviour and communication of individuals. But it needs to be at least understood that the opposition was to a supermarket being built on the Mem site not to Rovers progressing as a club (though obviously that was a side effect). It made political sense for Greens to oppose that plan but it makes no sense to oppose a small stand at one end of the current ground other than in process and detail. Understanding the history between the Greens and the club as a conspiracy against Rovers or against some vague notion of 'progress' is distorting what's going on in this case and perceptions of the party in general. Also have people forgiven Sainsburies? The time and the place for political opposition was (and still is) during the planning process. Ten years ago the Greens lost that political battle and so decided to take the fight to the courts - and again that's not completely unreasonable (checks and balances and all that) *but* it was the way they went about the various legal and administrative challenges that really annoyed me. Hiding names (of people involved), changing names of pressure groups (when it was the exact same people behind them) and hiding where the funding came from. All whilst claiming they were *serving* their constituents (many of whom supported the plans but were no longer being listened to, let alone represented... Fair enough - like I say I wan't involved. At the time I felt they were picking the wrong battles even if I thought it was a valid one ( I wanted the UWE above all). I think there's a big difference between these kind of criticisms (of previous strategic manoeuvring) and some of the more politically motivated and conspiratorial stuff thrown at the Greens as a whole.
|
|
|
Post by oviedista on Sept 29, 2023 13:09:10 GMT
I fully appreciate there is a lot of bad blood after the UWE/ Sainsburies conflict and I wasn't involved so I can't comment on the behaviour and communication of individuals. But it needs to be at least understood that the opposition was to a supermarket being built on the Mem site not to Rovers progressing as a club (though obviously that was a side effect). It made political sense for Greens to oppose that plan but it makes no sense to oppose a small stand at one end of the current ground other than in process and detail. Understanding the history between the Greens and the club as a conspiracy against Rovers or against some vague notion of 'progress' is distorting what's going on in this case and perceptions of the party in general. Also have people forgiven Sainsburies? Yes Sainsburys did the dirty on us but if the Greens hadn't held up everything with there judicial review rubbish then the projects would have already started and Rovers would now be sat in the UWE. Whether or not that's a good thing for the club or not is a different debate but I would forgive Sainsburys well before, if ever I would forgive the Greens. Could be sat in the UWE but I'm not 100% things wouldn't have gone tits up anyway. But either way, I'm not asking anyone to forgive anyone else for not prioritising Rovers over opposition to supermarket building - as it's still possible to be unforgiving whilst having a rational, objective understanding of people's motives and actions now.
|
|
|
Post by oviedista on Sept 29, 2023 12:42:09 GMT
"the other is acting to run society and the country" So the Tory's have just been objectively doing the best they can to run society without any other motivation?' But the Greens are ideologically driven? Sure the Greens are ideologically in favour of say nationalising water industries but then all other parties are ideologically in favour of keeping them in private hands. They also have no reason - ideological or otherwise - to oppose the construction of a small stand at Rovers in principle. Also other parties are ideologically pro car and pro car industry. London is a city in which most people travel by public transport and is not communist it just decided to do things differently. Anyway only important point to this thread is that all parties are ideological and people's personal politics (and ideology) is massively over politicising what is actually just a logistical and procedural shambles. A lot of Rovers supporters, many on this forum, remember the extreme (and some would say unethical) steps that local Green Party activists took to derail the club's last attempt to develop a new ground (and in turn the current site). There was a lot more to it than this, but the short version was that local Green Party councillors and their Green party activists formed a limited company to hide the funding that allowed them to launch a Judicial Review that was effectively laughed out of court - all to stop a development they didn't like but one that had already passed every other planning hurdle. Whilst the Judicial Review failed, the costs and delays incurred meant the plan had to be abandoned and whilst the club survived it risked the financial future of the club all to meet the Green's ideological ideas... Radice (who was my local councillor at the time) failed to respond to my very polite emails and social media posts about what she was doing and why she was doing it, leaving me effectively unrepresented as a local resident. Hardly an acceptable way for an elected representative to behave.... ...so the long and the short of it is that whilst a week is a long time in politics, it will take a lot of Bristol Rovers supporters a *very* long time to forget, let alone forgive what the local Green Party did to our club.... I fully appreciate there is a lot of bad blood after the UWE/ Sainsburies conflict and I wasn't involved so I can't comment on the behaviour and communication of individuals. But it needs to be at least understood that the opposition was to a supermarket being built on the Mem site not to Rovers progressing as a club (though obviously that was a side effect). It made political sense for Greens to oppose that plan but it makes no sense to oppose a small stand at one end of the current ground other than in process and detail. Understanding the history between the Greens and the club as a conspiracy against Rovers or against some vague notion of 'progress' is distorting what's going on in this case and perceptions of the party in general. Also have people forgiven Sainsburies?
|
|
|
Post by oviedista on Sept 29, 2023 9:40:49 GMT
all parties "derail (stuff) that doesnt conform to their ideologies" isnt that their point? In that i'd say those that are most "dangerous" are ones whose only ideology is to make more money for a tiny percentage of people and screw everyone and everything else. But we are way off topic. Not to derail this into another political conversation but there is a difference. One is acting out of ideology and the other is acting to run society and the country. the greens have never really been in charge of anything. They are a party of protest and pretty much always oppose anything that others would call development. Name one development the Greens have actually been in favour of and supported? and I agree with the original post. I know a green party member and they are ideologically opposed to the motor car. Aside from the pollution they see that resources should be shared and public transport being the only option. A communist view. Fortunately the greens will never get any real power but they will have the power to play the system and frustrate and obstruct. "the other is acting to run society and the country" So the Tory's have just been objectively doing the best they can to run society without any other motivation?' But the Greens are ideologically driven? Sure the Greens are ideologically in favour of say nationalising water industries but then all other parties are ideologically in favour of keeping them in private hands. They also have no reason - ideological or otherwise - to oppose the construction of a small stand at Rovers in principle. Also other parties are ideologically pro car and pro car industry. London is a city in which most people travel by public transport and is not communist it just decided to do things differently. Anyway only important point to this thread is that all parties are ideological and people's personal politics (and ideology) is massively over politicising what is actually just a logistical and procedural shambles.
|
|
|
Post by oviedista on Sept 28, 2023 20:00:40 GMT
Just seems an odd or even paranoid to believe a person or group has an agenda but have no idea what it is. A bit like thinking I'm 'clearly' someone else in disguise. It would be paranoia if there wasn’t previous experience of these people regularly doing their upmost to disrupt and delay progress around Bristol. Trying to understand their motives is a waste of time - like trying to understand why vandals take pleasure in breaking and ruining things. Well taking pleasure in spoiling things is a motive. But it's a weird way to imagine adult human motivation so trying to understand motives and agendas is a pretty useful way to spend time if you want to provide good arguments against people.
|
|
|
Post by oviedista on Sept 28, 2023 19:19:05 GMT
That doesn't answer the question about what the agenda is. There agenda is anyones guess. They seem to have a need to delay, derail, scupper , argue , and generally stick their noses into anything that amounts to progress for this football club and this city in general. I'm not going to try and justify it anymore as you are clearly dannack or whatever their name was in disguise. Just seems a odd or even paranoid to believe a person or group has an agenda but have no idea what it is. A bit like thinking I'm 'clearly' someone else in disguise.
|
|
|
Post by oviedista on Sept 28, 2023 18:53:37 GMT
What exactly do you imagine this agenda is that means they object in essence to the construction of a semi permanent football stand? For the greens any of pure spite, a need to interfere and delay any large projects as it’s in their DNA to do so and a hatred of football and its fans. So not any political agenda as such (there's certainly nothing in the manifesto) - just a set of villainous characteristics and an inherent hatred of football?
|
|
|
Post by oviedista on Sept 28, 2023 18:44:00 GMT
What exactly do you imagine this agenda is that means they object in essence to the construction of a semi permanent football stand? Try a quick Google search to see who has opposed and funded the last few objections and interjections to us trying to better ourselves at the mem. Youl find a running theme. That doesn't answer the question about what the agenda is.
|
|
|
Post by oviedista on Sept 28, 2023 17:56:18 GMT
Councillors cannot use political or spurious reasons to call in an application. Objectors can still send in their objections , but that maybe more difficult if the objectons have all been dealt with. Now the stand is up it is clear that there is no detrimental effect on the neighbourhood from things such as loss of light and loss of trees, and when the back is put on neghbours will notice that sound is retained within the ground . I imagine there will be alot less objections seconed time round. Surely your joking. Councillors have used political reasons and spurious reasons since day dot to stall and hinder planning applications that don't suit their agenda. It won't be that difficult to find the slightest thing the club have missed off the application to call it in again to delay. Youd be extremely naive to think they won't do it again after our history with them and the locals since our tenure at the mem began. What exactly do you imagine this agenda is that means they object in essence to the construction of a semi permanent football stand?
|
|
|
Post by oviedista on Sept 28, 2023 15:17:49 GMT
What does decent time frame mean. given we were told it would be ready for the start of the season (even though anyone with no knowledge could see that was going to be a stretch). All the problems stem from lack of consultation in the first place, because they wanted to get it built ASAP and we are currently building it without planning permission It will get built, a few neighbours might be upset but we will move on. Just hpe the club actually learn some lessons for if we try to do anything else at the mem or anywhere else I’m not convinced any amount of “consultation” will have helped. There are too many nimbies along with Bristols resident professional protestors and greenies who love to stick their noses in purely to obstruct and delay anything we try and do. I don’t see anything wrong in wanting to get it built asap and I’m sure we will have outsourced to relevant planning professionals rather than dealing with the whole complex process in-house. Possibly guilty of over optimism re timescales with Bristols recent history? Maybe. As for decent timeframes if we’ve got the stand in use Oct/Nov then I’d be very happy with what an 8-9 month turnaround? When I first heard of the temporary new stand I never anticipated anything as big, solid and “permanent” looking as what we are getting so that combined with inevitable political grandstanding and troublemakers delaying tactics along the way we might not end up having done too badly. Those who love to give the club a kicking at every opportunity will obviously see things different which is fine! Alternatively, it's not unreasonable to imagine that if we had consulted in the first place the new application would have been the original one and while I can't see the stand being completed and planning permitted in time for the start of the season in any circumstances - it might be about now that the stand would be set to open. I'm happy about the club's ambition here and I'm generally supportive of the work the club have done in recent years but for me there's no way to avoid holding them accountable for this mess (+ they have pretty much accepted responsibility themselves.).
|
|
|
Post by oviedista on Sept 25, 2023 17:55:09 GMT
Would much temporary stuff be necessary given most of the hospitality in the West stand? There is more hospitality in terms of raw numbers in the East than there is in the west, especially the pay per day hospitality offerings plus you have the bar there as well. All of the exec boxes are sold on a per season basis with the only exception being the new CJ Hole Suite which was the old presidents bar. Didn't know that. Hoped reconstruction would be less disruptive. Maybe they could keep the terraces open while developing behind but unlikely.
|
|
|
Post by oviedista on Sept 25, 2023 12:43:30 GMT
The problem with the East Stand is that will have to be a much bigger and long term project than the south stand. You will have to factor in a loss of revenue from the hospitality restaurants and bars or at least, try and set up some sort of hospitality room by way of porticabins in the car park. I would have thought the Blackthorn end would be the most obvious for development next and that way you can create the extra capacity there to house fans who would usually sit in the East Stand and if you build it to have some sort of conferencing facility you can make that a temporary hospitality suite on match days and still be able to offer that service whilst developing the east stand. There is so much under utilised space behind that goal and you could make a really decent stand there. Would much temporary stuff be necessary given most of the hospitality in the West stand?
|
|