|
Post by faggotygas on Aug 15, 2017 8:24:30 GMT
That land sold behind the ground helped finance the West stand and the Dribuild, without that the mem wouldn't have the capacity it has today and we wouldn't have been able to stay there for long. The existing site is still big enough for a ground, its more the parking and local residents that will be the problem. I was under the impression a lot of the housing was owned by directors, similar to a lot of them making plenty of dolla from the Lambert sale? Hasnt the Dribuild been the same since we moved there? Hope so as Ive been sitting there since day 1 It was the Rugby club that sold the land for housing, and the Rugby club that built the Dribuild.
We've been over the land size issue many times, its not exactly roomy but is comparable to a lot of other grounds with much higher capacity. Stamford Bridge, for example, is about the same size plot, even including hotel and restaurant units.
|
|
|
Post by faggotygas on Aug 11, 2017 14:39:39 GMT
Did he actually mention 26k? Or did someone just say he did? I did say I THOUGHT he had said 26k on Points West. So it's just my understanding of what he said while I was half listening and cooking my tea at the same time so I could be wrong but I did say it's just what I thought. I cant check right now but expect its still on catch-up somewhere. You can't just say womthing like that without backing it up & giving us the full story.
What did you have for tea?
|
|
|
Post by faggotygas on Aug 11, 2017 13:23:33 GMT
LCD Soundsystem - Drunk Girls. Or perhaps that's more appropriate to some of our away performances.
|
|
|
Post by faggotygas on Aug 10, 2017 14:26:57 GMT
I wonder how many of those players are still playing league football ? Lines, Sawyer .............. Wright ?? It was 7 years ago!
|
|
|
Post by faggotygas on Aug 10, 2017 14:23:23 GMT
Funny how after hearing Wael and Family walked away from the deal with UWE, incurring vitriolic posts about how they've screwed us, how they don't care and are only in it for a financial return and they'll be selling soon after no investment other than money borrowed against the land value, the news about the possible redevelopment of the Mem has incurred interest, at the cost of the Al Qadi family. When it's done, will you all still shout Fake Sheiks? Pfft. Who is 'you', exactly? You realise we aren't all the same person? You'll probably find that the people speculating positively about the Mem (T&Cs apply) aren't the same people shouting about fake sheiks. I certainly wasn't.
|
|
|
Post by faggotygas on Aug 10, 2017 10:26:07 GMT
Interesting, he does say regenerate, but then he mentions a project team that has built 12 stadiums, implying a rebuild.
Ah, who knows.
I think he said regenerate coz he want to emphasize the idea that it would have a positive effect on the area and community, so that all the NIMBY homeowners nearby won't be scared into reaction. Other stadium developments have helped regenerate the local area, so he wanted to use that angle. Of course, Horfield is about as generated as you can get, so he might be barking up the wrong tree on that one. Hopefully you are right.
|
|
|
Post by faggotygas on Aug 10, 2017 9:31:00 GMT
I didn't mean it to read that the possibilities suggested are unrealistic, More that regenerating to quote Wael, IMO means a lick of paint and new hand dryers, whereas the consensus of opinion on here seems to be it is a rebuild of the Mem but i sincerely hope i am wrong. Regenerate - Bring new and more vigorous life to (an area, industry, institution, etc.); revive, especially in economic terms. ‘the money will be used to regenerate the heart of the town’ Redevelop - 1.1 Construct new buildings in (an urban area), typically after demolishing the existing buildings. ‘plans to redevelop London's docklands’ Agree that using the term regenerate leaves lots of wiggle room when we see a roof being put up over the east terrace! Interesting, he does say regenerate, but then he mentions a project team that has built 12 stadiums, implying a rebuild.
Ah, who knows.
|
|
|
Post by faggotygas on Aug 10, 2017 7:54:00 GMT
When looking at the consented design a few things stood out for me: 1) How much they managed to squeeze on the site, the stadium is much bigger than I expected, this is partly due to the fact that it is wrapped with student accommodation and has a hotel on one corner. 2) The height of the stadium, it is 7 storeys high and with the big trusses on top of each stand it certainly is not a low rise and subtle structure like the UWE design, however this seems to be at least partly by design, i.e. to make an architectural statement. 3) The limited site area around the stadium and how little parking there is. What this tells me is that the club have already established a precedent for building a big stadium on our site in the not too distant past (2008). This is extremely positive as a lot of the neighbourhood issues have been successfully dealt with once before, meaning our chances of success this time around are reasonably high and risk of rejection quite low. I'm struggling to see anything that has really changed in terms of the environment and demographics around the site that would give cause to any sensible objections that the council would have to consider giving them an excuse to refuse consent. Furthermore the ground being a memorial site is surely designated for sports use and our redevelopment would secure that for the long term. Whist I agree with some of the concerns raised over the parking and access, having had some involvement in the dreaded arena, the council are actually pushing for less and less parking on developments to move people away from cars and onto public transport (disabled provisions​ apart of course). Part of the consent (which will be reinforced through conditions no doubt) will be match day traffic and access management, this is perfectly normal and happens at all large stadia. Anyone who has ever been to the millennium stadium will have experienced it, there are road closures and pedestrian marshalling measures put in place to manage the flow of people and vehicles to, from and around the ground. There is virtually none of this at the moment. For instance it would make sense to make Filton Avenue residents and club only access on match day and let all other traffic divert up and down Glos Rd and Muller Rd. The other thing is that we could decide to build a basement and put car parking under the stadium, this will of course come at a cost but it is certainly feasible from a technical perspective. Whilst the new design will no doubt be completely different to the 2008 version I have shared, I am now feeling very positive about what might be able to be achieved with a mem redevelopment and am excited to see what Wael & Co can come up with. Let's accept the decision that has been made, have some positive thinking about the potential we have on our own site and get fully behind the club on this. UTG! Great analysis, it is a massive building. Assuming that student accompdation would no longer be needed, there's much more room then I thought before I compered with other stadium sites.
A lot of creativity will be needed to minimise costs, especially in terms of reduction in capacity. What Spurs have done is interesting, wrapping a new stand around one end of the old stadium. Lets hope Buckingham can provide that kind of thinking.
|
|
|
Post by faggotygas on Aug 10, 2017 7:39:39 GMT
Some of the more enjoyable trips I've had to Rovers games have been to grounds with no parking. Fulhsm, Chelsea etc the worst,delay wise,being Derby, Reading and Oxford which do. The problem isn't parking the problem is Bristols' inability to provide decent public transport. It wouldn't be such a problem if there was a train station nearer the ground. Someone compared it to Charlton but Charlton had a train station right outside. Park and ride has to be the answer. Works at Southampton, for example. Disability friendly, too.
There's new park and ride sites popping up, most likely has to be the new one at Stapleton (which is only supposed to serve the Metro Bus, but I'm sure something could be sorted). Also direct busses from Parkway and Temple Meads.
The Mem redevelopment is perfectly doable, its a matter of cost, which with all the digging out and reduced capaicity will be a considerable hurdle.
|
|
|
Post by faggotygas on Aug 9, 2017 11:42:54 GMT
Fair points - especially the bit about tucking in to help the midfield. Sinclair playing on the left allows us to play 4-4-2 but also have 3 CMs in the middle when the opposition attack. Not sure I'd start him on the left over a more attacking wide player in every game, but for tough ones it's definitely an option. I thought that Byron Moore played really well when he came on, some of the inter-play with Lee Brown, Tom Nicholls and Rory Gaffney was sublime. Early doors I know, but could he make the left wing his starting position this season? Good thing about this squad, we have lots of options
|
|
|
Post by faggotygas on Aug 9, 2017 8:15:58 GMT
Yeah I get that - was just thinking about it more commercially I guess in terms of revenue outside of a matchday, sponsorship etc. Yeah, I guess both is better, hard to know what room there is for a major commercial project at the Mem, though. Istm, Wael would like a little Stamford Bridge, so maybe a hotel. I was surprised, but on measuring, the Stamford Bridge site, including the hotel, commercial units etc, is exactly the same size as the Mem site. Only slightly bigger if you include the health club in the corner.
Of course, much better transport links.
|
|
|
Post by faggotygas on Aug 9, 2017 8:11:10 GMT
Visiting the Valley on Saturday gave me some hope in this respect. The area of the Valley (excluding its car park) is almost identical to the area of the Mem site (including car park). The Mem site is in some ways better, as is basically square, while the Valley has some wasted angles. You would, however, somehow have to drag the building North a bit - away from Alton Road and Strathmore road, and do a lot of digging in the car park.
Direct access is not a problem, as very few would actually be parking at the ground, as now. Direct access at the Valley is similar to the Mem - residential streets.
The big thing that the Valley has, of course, is a train station round the corner. Apart from cost, supporter transport has to be our main issue. Perhaps we could sort something out with the new park and rides being built around Bristol - Lyde Green, the Portway, and, especially, Stapleton/Stoke Lane. Also, Parkway station.
Oh, and the Ashton Gate site is only very slightly bigger, and ignoring their out buildings and most of their car park, is the same. Easier though, as it's flat.
Just some thoughts, and, of course, cost is the biggy.
|
|
|
Post by faggotygas on Aug 9, 2017 7:13:36 GMT
Just a shame Sinclair is being played on the left bloody wing I like Sinclair there! Can tuck in to help the midfield, adds energy, frightens the full back with his pace and pressing. He's not going to take anyone on from a standing start, but runs in behind instead.
Moving him off the left wing on Saturday sapped all of the energy from our attack.
|
|
|
Post by faggotygas on Aug 8, 2017 7:18:13 GMT
Well, I guess there's only one person who actually knows. GGMI ? Apparently so. Handy to know we have a medical professional on the forum though. GGMI, I've got this swelling down below...
|
|
|
Post by faggotygas on Aug 8, 2017 7:14:47 GMT
You even played football mate? A bang on the shin hurts like hell for a couple of minutes. Doesn't mean you're injured, and it fades quickly. Sinclair has never rolled around before to be fair has he? If you don't think SS exaggerated it then you are only fooling yourself. Well, I guess there's only one person who actually knows.
|
|
|
Post by faggotygas on Aug 8, 2017 7:06:58 GMT
Dont respect people knocking sinclairs reaction to a heavy 2 footed tackle. It probably hurt in truth and many times ive seen stu but his foot or head in where many wouldnt dare. In fact hes picked up a few nasty injuries through his bravery. Last season at bolton he twice went to ground to easily and got sent off but on that night he wasnt feigning injury. Cant people see he is more than happy to get stuck in without regard for any injury consequences? Have you critics been watching games since grimsby at home in the conference? Don't let his "honest bloke" stigma fool you. Just because he is orepared to get stuck in etc does not mean he won't roll around like a baby when fouled. Seen him do it on numerous occasions. Did he come off injured? Enough said. You even played football mate? A bang on the shin hurts like hell for a couple of minutes. Doesn't mean you're injured, and it fades quickly.
|
|
|
Post by faggotygas on Aug 7, 2017 15:05:49 GMT
Should we have let one of them go and which one? I believe DC has in a way bottled it by keeping them both. Obviously it depends on their wages etc as well but neither appear good enough going forward. Gaffney is definitely the better of the 2 at this stage. (More consistent) but Ellis has more potential. But how long can we keep saying this for? When is Ellis going to come of age. The fact many of us say we still need a CF says it all as they are both CF's so we shouldn't need a 3rd. This is a make or break season with Ellis for me. Correct decision to keep both, for the reasons given, however we do need another target man, and a left winger. Need to have a decent bench where they can be used to transform the game, Saturday we had Broadbent supporting the attack. To be fair, Broadbent only came forward with the ball because Charlton were standing off so much
|
|
|
Post by faggotygas on Aug 7, 2017 8:04:02 GMT
Maybe I am being a bit harsh, but technically they both did just up and leave us, and part of our slide into non league oblivion, was that we never did find a decent player to replace Lambert. I know DC appreciates loyalty, but accepts that transfers are all part of modern football. Transfers have been part of football virtually from the beginning.
|
|
|
Post by faggotygas on Aug 7, 2017 8:01:01 GMT
Biggest frustration for me is that there was an extensive pre season and yet we go into our first game of the season with a seriously poor quality match day squad. Not our fault apparently about Ryan and Dom but when I saw Harrison and Broom involved and even to a lesser extent Sinclair I sensed the worst. Two are simply not good enough and one try's really hard but that's about it. No Leadbetter hurts us and when Clarke gets injured early and his replacement on the bench isn't fit enough to play the whole 'project' is jeopardised. Throw in an awful performance from Lockyer and ineffective Ollie C and Bodin plus Browns crossing and its no wonder we couldn't break them down. Positives with Liam and Tom B balanced things a little... much still to do and DC needs to really think about the 'undroppables' as some are just not going to get us to that top six goal. Looking forward to seeing a proper attacking force in the next few games. Hoping that we still have eyes on a proven permanent striker in the Madden or Godden mould to partner Nichols up front. Writing off Broom this early in his career is ridiculous. He was excellent when he came on yesterday. Pacey, strong, direct running at tired defenders, and always wanted the ball. I think he'll be a real asset coming on late in games this season.
|
|
|
Post by faggotygas on Aug 7, 2017 7:16:03 GMT
Minimum 3 match ban if the FA stick to their rules on such matters... I think its 6 for spitting
|
|