How about the "we got a new stadium" chants during the derby? Clearly only sung because AV fell through and it looked like UWE was going ahead. I'm not going to get all precious about chanting etc. but it does highlight the problem within Bristol. I read many many comments on BBC Bristol news etc that were made by people with Gashead usernames that basically said we are glad BCFC aren't getting their stadium. Hopefully City fans will be more sympathetic to Rovers as we have been through the same thing. Sadly I don't think that will be the case.
I think you are reading too much into this Mc. Of course there was irritation from Rovers supporters who were annoyed that the City were give priority planning because of the World Cup bid. Rovers have been blocked by BCC for over twenty years in their attempts to obtain planning permission for a new stadium. There was without doubt a perverse attitude within BCC to disrupt any proposal Rovers put forward. The way that BCC enabled City to gain planning approval on Green Belt land almost at the drop of a hat was enough to raise Blue hackles after years of frustration. Post the loss of the World Cup, most Bristolians saw the benefit of the AG principle and went along with it to see some improvement in the backward facilities which a large city like Bristol urgently requires to rectify. Football crowds banter, in case you haven't noticed. All the Gas were singing because their stadium has approval. City's is still in abeyance. I still think it more likely that AG will happen, because nobody is going to sit back and allow anyone to build houses on that piece of Green Belt land without one hell of a fight.!!! Forget the nimbys, just watch out for Joe Public!!
You are basically agreeing with me then. Rovers weren't happy that City got something they wanted. What I'm saying is this is part of the problem that holds Bristol back and it works both ways...
Not at all. The Rovers fans were unhappy that City were seen to be given their application without the slightest resistance, because the Councillors wanted to be seen as the 'good guys' over the World Cup bid and agreed to bit of a dodgy deal.. It was the obvious unfairness of the procedures which were reacted to. Having gone this far down the road, I believe now that we should all let common sense prevail.
...and now we are back to where we started. Both clubs have crap/outdated grounds, which are holding them back
Sapphire you say BRFC have been blocked for over twenty years by BCCC from getting PP for a ground, can you put me in the right direction of these so called planning applications, because to be honest I can't remember any time where you've actually submitted plans bar the UWE! What I can remember though is many letters in the post/western daily press stating the council should help BRFC out by giving them some land. Actually I don't believe you've ever had PP turned down, maybe you can put me right!
sorry to hear your news. it will pay dividends to keep onside with coalition mp's and eric pickles, who will want to see jobs created by sainsburys. good luck.
Too many facts Delboy, that will spoil all the self pity they like to exude against the big cruel Bristol Council who love us but hate them.!
Oh for ****'s sake! Why has this thread descended into Rovers v City....again!!? We should all agree that, despite our many differences, it would be great for all concerned if both clubs could move forward with the new stadia that both need and deserve.
I find this stuff about the hiding behind the World Cup thing strange, it's something that happens all over the world it was to be part funded by FIFA and SL will take on the cost of it as well. If the World Cup was approved the infrastructure inside the City would of been improved. Go and look at Newport's train station for example. Prior to the Rydar cup it was a **** hole. Then it got updated, there was a **** load of work to be done there in time for the event to smarten it up. It got held back as the recession took hold. The docks improvement still got done just 6 years later. The city of Bristol would of benefitted by it all, and just because it was not 100% funded by BCFC. But without causing more arguments people in glass houses etc because is UWE being 100% funded by BRFC. You might be getting it on this weird lease but you are not buying the land and paying for everything 100%. So where's the difference. You are getting very bitter Saphire, calm down as Bluebaldee says this isn't about City or Rovers this is about people preventing Bristol moving forward. I hope you get your ground, it's got good motorway links can save me money from travelling to London or Midlands to watch a good band play.
It would be a good idea if you actually read and took in what is actually written ROD. Forget how you have found some hidden and misguided interpretation between the lines!!!
yawn. here you go then. watch and see for yourself [video=youtube;0TKGH-9XlsI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0TKGH-9XlsI[/video] there has been a few down the years. severnside and land by whitchurch sports centre amongst others
cooment from the post... "The legal challenge against a planning decision to allow Sainsbury's to build a new store at the Memorial Stadium is expected to cost council-taxpayers at least £100,000 in legal and consultants' fees and council officers' time." http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/Bris...tory-19789648-detail/story.html#axzz2eZWlJkxO
Unbelievable. They got some gall. That Radice woman isn't content for Bristol taxpayers to pay her councillor's allowance, now she wants them to fork out for her pointless little judicial jolly. Disgusting. And a prime example of a non-Bristolian royally biting the hand that feeds her.
