D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
tbf he does also confirm the club looked closely at the site.
So it appears in this instance, everybody is right
I don't know how this chap wasn't interviewed or quoted when that article was first written.
tbf he does also confirm the club looked closely at the site.
So it appears in this instance, everybody is right
tbf he does also confirm the club looked closely at the site.
So it appears in this instance, everybody is right
Whilst we were all pretty sceptical on the idea, get the feeling we've all been toyed with again.
We could all go to a car showroom though and look at a Ferrari couldn't we, even though we haven't got this money and know we can't afford it.Meh. In its own way I'm actually reassured if they were looking closely at the site.
It does at least suggest an attempt to make something happen beyond telling people!
Meh. In its own way I'm actually reassured if they were looking closely at the site.
It does at least suggest an attempt to make something happen beyond telling people!
Can't see any way at all where you could squeeze a 20,000 seater in, let alone a 30,000 seater.that article just appeasr to be the opinion of a guy that wants to buy the land.
there is a sizable chunk of land up there, and a parkland behind it, i'd be amazed if we couldnt squeeze a ground in it that would hold 30,000, when we see grounds squeezed in other towns, it would make business sense to bring us back into a central area
that mainstand thats already there is as wide as the north/south ricoh standsCan't see any way at all where you could squeeze a 20,000 seater in, let alone a 30,000 seater.
that mainstand thats already there is as wide as the north/south ricoh stands
if you stand on the site and take a really good look you can easily imagine a stadium of 30.000, saint have one that would fit in that spot for sure
Are you talking about the Butts?
The school?Barker Butts?
an example. if anyone wants to take a butchers up there,
afc wimbledon new 20,000 seater will be 150metres long
You've never been to the Butts have you? The main stand only holds 3000 and is about a third if that of the depth of any of the Ricoh stands
its a main stand
which means its the longest stand
my 'squeeze' makes the ground rotate 90 degrees so this is now the new width of any stadium
gotta think outside the box
you really think we wouldnt develop it befor we moved in??
saints 33.000 stadium cost 32 mil to build, and has permision to take that to 50.000 without extending the floorspan, thats gotta be worth an investment, look how its changed them
What also helped Southampton was a rich owner pumping in millions to the playing staff and not teams of lawyers and worthless chief executives.
okay fine we give up
nice call, lets stay at the wasps stadium and NEVER get anywhere in life
im not trying to argue, im putting out REAL possibilities that could and WOULD make us something again
sorry for trying, i'll just join you all and give up a dream too
that article just appeasr to be the opinion of a guy that wants to buy the land.
there is a sizable chunk of land up there, and a parkland behind it, i'd be amazed if we couldnt squeeze a ground in it that would hold 30,000, when we see grounds squeezed in other towns, it would make business sense to bring us back into a central area
FFS, you can't just pave over a park you don't own. What nonsense.
FFS, you can't just pave over a park you don't own. What nonsense.
No way you can build a stadium large enough at the Butts. Just not possible. There's the retirement village within yards too. You think a 30,000 seater stadium can be built right next door to a retirement village? Seriously?
It's a nonsense and to talk of a 'squeeze' is laughable unfortunately.
Nick, Les Reid's affirmation that his exclusive was right is misleading. Anyone that heard Jon Sharp from Cov Rugby on BBC C&W's "Ruck and Maul" last night will have heard him confirm that the Sky Blues had visited the BPA, but that there are significant obstacles to either the Sky Blues or Cov United entering into a ground-share, and there had been no further discussions.
That does not constitute anything CLOSE to confirmation of groundshare talks.
More like another case of journalists trying to make their paper sound better than the competition. Shame ... I have a great deal of respect for Les Reid's integrity.
reading that article would suggest its private leasehold ownership of the whole thing
spurs moved everyone out of buildings that had been family owned for 100 years.
the A12 in london aquired hundreds of houses to build a link to london, it isnt unusual to buy up property
I think you are a tad prone to bouts of wishful thinking, try checking out the facts for yourself.
Also I remember the club tried buying up property around Highfield Road, they either never had enough land or decided that the location being inside the town was not viable. When Highfield Road was built the site was on the outskirts of the city, now like the Butts it is surrounded by mature development, unless you have compulsory purchase rights getting adjacent land will be a bugger to negotiate.
Isn't the current owner buying land?I think you are a tad prone to bouts of wishful thinking, try checking out the facts for yourself.
Also I remember the club tried buying up property around Highfield Road, they either never had enough land or decided that the location being inside the town was not viable. When Highfield Road was built the site was on the outskirts of the city, now like the Butts it is surrounded by mature development, unless you have compulsory purchase rights getting adjacent land will be a bugger to negotiate.
To be fair if the club were serious Mr Sharp would not be the main person to convince really.
To be fair if the club were serious Mr Sharp would not be the main person to convince really.
Who would be?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?