Hi all, I'm still located away from base but have been catching up on my reading and I found this article, it's old, the names and dates are from a few years ago.. Some on here have raised the discussion that because both teams are crap at the moment they think we should merge and have a Bristol Utd, it would cut down on costs, we could all concentrate on one team and....blah,blah,blah, the arguments have been discussed for a long time and have failed, I'm from the school of thought that we should each retain our own culture and heritage, if we fail then so be it, I want Bristol City FC and Bristol Rovers FC to earn and deserve their own future. Anyway, read this old article, think about the scenario and tell us from your hearts and your heads where you stand on this debate.. @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ One team in Bristol? So, why not? By Bristol Boy.. I’ll tell you why not... I am a very proud Bristolian and so are the vast majority of those I have stood side by side with on the terraces of football stadia all over this country for the past forty-odd years. So why will a huge sigh be heard all over the City as we return to this subject? I first heard it mooted around oh, 40 years ago, so it’s taking a while to catch on! And, from what I can gather, it’s even less popular now than it was then! What stops something so practical and so sensible in the eyes of many pragmatists working? Tribalism? Rivalry? Hatred? History? The River? There is no doubt in my mind that Bristol has underachieved as a footballing City to the point that eyes go up to heaven. Nobody will even argue when one mentions it and, let’s face it, as Bristolians we can argue for England. That’s not the same as saying City are useless which City fans are allowed to say on occasions with gusto & vigour while others may need to duck or run on the mere utterance of those words. The reasons we’ve underachieved are many but, in brief, I’ll put it down to three things. Underinvestment, poor leadership and bad management. Don’t get me wrong we’ve had good managers, money’s been spent, wisely on occasions and good Chairman…just rarely at the same time! Rovers fans would probably point to the same factors. There is a business method used by many top businesses over the years that tells you to buy the competition. It works mostly, but then when some very smart people decided that combining two poor things would equal one good thing, it was a bridge to far. What you in fact finish up with is one large abysmal thing as opposed to two smaller abysmal things. So, back to the football scenario and a merger of the two clubs. Any successful merger is a synergy; a meeting or fit of two things that compliment each other and without setting out to be controversial, what would Rovers bring to the party? A fan base of about 4,500-5,500 who wouldn’t cross the City and around 1,000 have found Horfield beyond them some weeks. Even with the new stadium, an 18,000 Capacity Ground. They don’t have rich backers and their financial problems over recent years of massive underachievement that nearly saw them playing conference football, are well documented. Two cup finals this season must have seemed like manner from Heaven to the Dunfords. League One Football? The Bristol public have no desire to regularly attend that as nine seasons in that Division has, at best seen a better supported clubs gates stagnate at best. If one combined the two squads, do they have a player that would get in the first XI? I suppose Walker up front with 23 goals would have a case, but I don’t know if he’d do it for a poor side at a higher level and my understanding is that both he and star defender Elliot will soon be off to pastures new. If I had a choice of Walker or Brooker with both fit and on form, I know which one I’d pick. The fact that they beat us over two legs said more about our tactical errors and underperformance than Rovers ability and I still say neither team deserved to score, never mind win! However, no amount of part timers on a one day Beano to the Big City will ever justify the formation of a single team or make up for the supporters who turn up week in, week out, home & away. I’m talking about those who have, on occasions, attached themselves to both clubs (probably a lot of the same people). People will come onto the fact that even a combination of the average crowd that watched both clubs would give a home attendance of about 18,000. That’s fine if they all watched one team and the only way that would happen is if BOTH teams folded and a new team made it’s way up the football pyramid with all the hassle that entailed, although MK Dons are giving it a go. Off the field they look good. On it, they’re in the Fourth Division with no manager, albeit with a brand spanking 30,000 Stadium, that’ll be 20% full most weeks. So, in brief, it ain’t gonna happen, the vast majority of fans from both clubs don’t want it to and City don’t need it to happen to give Bristol a Premiership Club that will be supported by over 20,000 people week in, week out, as it was thirty odd years ago. The stadium, depending on success, will hold 29,000 by 2010, at a guess. Without wishing to sound like a happy-clappy eternal optimist of ridiculous proportions, Premiership football could happen in 2008. Just close your eyes and dwell on that fact if you’re in anyway disappointed by Rovers promotion. At that point, everything that those who don’t understand local rivalry, our history & culture-pundits and “football people” alike, will see what the fans already know. It’s not about starting again. Every time a new manager turns up the first mistake they make is telling us we’re a massive club/sleeping giant* (*delete as applicable). Some piously preach loyalty (then leave next season for Hearts/Pompey* (*delete as applicable). They tell us that we’ve underachieved for a “town” (I love that bit) with “massive potential” and they’ll probably call us “Bristol” as well!! Whilst those “football people” may understand some aspects of our game more than fans, it is an immutable fact that fans do understand what I’m writing about more than they ever will. They, along with most Chairman & Managers, have never “gone to football” as we have. Our club has taken a journey that has involved our families, friends and those we love going on a roller coaster ride of emotion with more downs than ups it has to be said. Some of those people are no longer with us and I don’t mean that they’ve left for another £500pw at Derby. Talk of one team insults our tradition, our culture and our club. Neither do we want to share a ground because ours has our emotional investment in it and even in this day and age, isn’t that worth something? @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ An old argument I know, join in the debate, is it worth each of us giving up our culture, colour, heritage, independence, I still don't think so, do YOU..? http://www.bristolcityst.org.uk/Soapbox/article000322.shtml
I don't want to see the teams merge to be a Bristol United. But I still think we are all missing a trick at the moment with these ground issues. Rovers can't move due to protestors stopping the sale of The Memorial, but nothing stopping the development of UWE apart from cash. We have a potential buyer of our ground but can't move due to protesters stopping the development of AV. But we have cash. Put the rugby back up the memorial and put cash into UWE to create a ground share. If we was to be moving to share with them 1 match after they opened the doors for a game I won't like it because then it will always be their home. At the moment it's no ones but their idea, so we could jump in and share their idea to create a ground suitable for both clubs. If both of us are successful and both get over our hurdles of getting AV and UWE then we can kiss goodbye any incentive's we expected from concerts and business venues. With UWE sat 1/2 - 1 mile from Parkway and Abbeywood with the M32 the same distance away will be more attractive to potential clients. We can sit round arguing saying I ain't going there, it has to be on the South side or nothing. But in reality if our wife's, partners or mothers say we are moving across town we all know we would do it. It works in Italy, it reduces overheads so both can spend on the playing surface. This could be the chance for both clubs to do something not this silly Bristol Utd.
You don't need to merge, the ground receipts would benefit more from a match every week and one set of workers. If it's done correctly as a business it will work as a ground share. It's when one expects more ownership then it falls down.
I would not want us to ' Ground share ' but I acknowledge that Bristol City no longer owns it's own ground, when I am at the gate it is still Bristol City and a hundred plus years of people like us going there and 'our emotional investment,' I would not go to UWE, I am a big supporter of Ashton Vale but I would never, ever want to share anything with the blue brigade and yes I am biased..
I don't think of it as selling your soul, it's about securing a future for the club so our kids, grandkids and theirs beyond can enjoy watching City as much as we do.
Bristol as a City is way behind the other big cities of the UK. To bring us into the 21st Century we need; Modern, well appointed facilities for the following. Four separate stadia for BCFC, BRFC, B RUGBY, ATHLETICS - or ONE super stadium for all of us to share? Or stick with the outdated and mainly uncomfortable old stadia at the Mem, Ashton and just a running track at Whitchurch? Arenas for north Bristol and south Bristol or ONE very good one for the City and surrounding areas. Or continue going to Cardiff or Birmingham or London? A modern RAPID PUBLIC TRANSIT SYSTEM or sit in our cars and buses on choked up roads like Gloucester Road taking an hour to go from Bradley Stoke to the Centre. We have a wonderful city but to outsiders we are a joke, non existent in the sporting world and with the most congested roads in Britain. Shall we keep our 19th century roads, our early 20th century entertainment stadiums and concert halls OR JOIN THE REST OF THE COUNTRY IN THE 21ST CENTURY?
Weird arguments here. Destroy the club identity and history whilst decreasing its income potential. Re -developing Ashton Gate is the way forward. No sharing revenues between second. third and fourth parties. No other business partners involved v BCFC and Steve Lansdown. Use the rugby club as tenants to increase income to the football club. All = increased revenue to the FC. A two club City playing with FC's in separate stadiums is not a barrier to success in England. Both clubs need to up the game, and strive to do better, far better than the neighbours.
I agree about the Rugby Club - they should be seen as tenants and pay the going rate to use our stadium
I've said it before so will say it again. I'm happy to merge both teams as long as we keep The first Name of Bristol Rovers, The second name of Bristol City, The Bristol City Shirts and the Bristol Rovers shorts compromise and have white socks and play at the bigger of the two stadiums. Job done.
Long term it is something that could work maybe but short term it would destroy football in teh City as I know some big wigs out there who know nothing about the sport will just think merging the two clubs would means merging supporter numbers which it wont. Both clubs have die hard fans that if they merged would stop watching so the gates would not be 20K+ you would still have below average crowds. Mergining the two would basically mean Bristol City with a new name so it wont work
One big stadium shared could be the way forward. It should be seen as creating history and not destroying history. It works abroad so why not here? Merge?......I would rather support Cardiff!
It could only be seen as destroying the clubs culture, identity and history. It would almost certainly galvanise support v any such move, perhaps forming their own club! Clubs sharing stadia is not that wide in Europe as it appears. Big clubs e.g Juventus have moved away from that model. For those whose think money is everybodies god why share income three ways, who owns the assets and associated revenue streams? In short you reduce earning potential. An argument against Ashton Vale, and it is a good one is that it would involved business partners taking their slice of pie. They would want returns for their money, A re-developed Ashton Gate will significantly increase Citys income, an income at present that is enough to support teams in a league above. Stay at Ashton Gate increase income, keep culture, identity and history, improve links with its own community, and its already costed and with funding in place via Steve Lansdown seemingly with no other business partner involved.
And that's because the local highways Gestapo would rather install unnecessary traffic lights every 30 yards and take up what remaining road there is with cycle lanes 1 in 3000 people use. We need.... A proper M25 like ring road/orbital right around the city keeping HGV's off of the A4 and A37 particularly At least 50% of traffic lights decommissioned, especially at junctions with minor roads where 100 yards of commuters get held up the second that Ethyl pulls up in her Nissan Micra. It's just wrong, heats up the world with people continually braking and it causes massive frustration A truly international airport. But instead the nimbys in North Bristol got their way despite buying properties next to Filton which could have been the busiest airport this side of Heathrow Proper football stadia **** rugby it can rot A speedway stadium
