Joined: Feb 09 2004 Posts: 7735 Location: Here there and everywhere
suttonrobin wrote:As from next season. Remember this is a public stadium, so the council would have to make us at home ie-rebranding the seats, signage outside etc.
Its a public asset which your lot turned down the chances of playing when offered.
The very thought that the council would have to fund any signs / seats is laughable. IF (and thats a fairly big IF) you were invited by the current tenants to rent the stadium, it would be up to rovers to stump up anything they would want there.
At this moment in time I would prefer to reserve my vote till later, a move to KC Stadium would be the very final option as I do not like the place and opt not to go to the Derby Matches. I like to enjoy my Rugby without worrying whether I will get out of the Stadium in one piece.
Joined: Mar 05 2007 Posts: 13190 Location: Hedon (sometimes), sometimes Premier Inn's
Don't FC have a right of veto, they would pay us back for trying to shaft them when Gateshead bought them.
'when my life is over, the thing which will have given me greatest pride is that I was first to plunge into the sea, swimming freely underwater without any connection to the terrestrial world'
Joined: Aug 14 2005 Posts: 14302 Location: On the Death Star Awaiting Luke.
rover49 wrote:Don't FC have a right of veto, they would pay us back for trying to shaft them when Gateshead bought them.
TBH I wasn't 'us' it was our then Chairman which is rather a large difference. Also both clubs in one way or another have tried this on, Let us not forget that the then FC owner tried to buy us when we went in admin using irish 3rd parties to try and fool the administrator, unfortunatly for them he saw right through it. Shall we blame the normal FC fan or the current club for that?
Takes 10 mins off my journey so all for it. They may not rebrand for us but 8000 fans with an airfix pot of red paint can sort out a third of the ground in the first home game.
Joined: Mar 05 2007 Posts: 13190 Location: Hedon (sometimes), sometimes Premier Inn's
Anakin Skywalker wrote:TBH I wasn't 'us' it was our then Chairman which is rather a large difference. Also both clubs in one way or another have tried this on, Let us not forget that the then FC owner tried to buy us when we went in admin using irish 3rd parties to try and fool the administrator, unfortunatly for them he saw right through it. Shall we blame the normal FC fan or the current club for that?
That doesn't answer as to whether they have a veto or not and if they have, would they use it, for whatever reason.
'when my life is over, the thing which will have given me greatest pride is that I was first to plunge into the sea, swimming freely underwater without any connection to the terrestrial world'
Joined: Jan 15 2007 Posts: 11924 Location: Secret Hill Top Lair. V.2
Anakin Skywalker wrote:TBH I wasn't 'us' it was our then Chairman which is rather a large difference. Also both clubs in one way or another have tried this on, Let us not forget that the then FC owner tried to buy us when we went in admin using irish 3rd parties to try and fool the administrator, unfortunatly for them he saw right through it. Shall we blame the normal FC fan or the current club for that?
Really? The dastardley devil. Was that Lloyd or Tim Whatshisface?
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and yet depreciate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground. They want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters. This struggle may be a moral one; or it may be a physical one; or it may be both moral and physical; but it must be a struggle.
Joined: Jan 15 2007 Posts: 11924 Location: Secret Hill Top Lair. V.2
rover49 wrote:That doesn't answer as to whether they have a veto or not and if they have, would they use it, for whatever reason.
They do, always have had.
So do City who I think would probably be more against it with their idiotic ideas that rugby not football ruins the pitch.
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and yet depreciate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground. They want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters. This struggle may be a moral one; or it may be a physical one; or it may be both moral and physical; but it must be a struggle.
Joined: Mar 10 2011 Posts: 1508 Location: Bumblescum, AL
Sandra The Terrorist wrote:They do, always have had.
So do City who I think would probably be more against it with their idiotic ideas that rugby not football ruins the pitch.
I think it's more to do with that the football is played in the winter, then RL kicks in, right when the pitch is at it's most fragile. From a City/football angle, there's just no way they should ever agree to us moving in. They'd become a laughing stock - the surface would be just awful.
I know they (t'other forum) have always stated that they have a veto too - but what does this veto entail?
Is it a veto who plays/uses the KC (as in for a one off occasion) - say for the East Riding Senior Cup Final or Does the veto have the muscle to decide who can/can't share the council facility with them full time?
Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 82 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
