Knights chief’s community stadium choice (From York Press)

“There’s no point doing it half-baked.”

Full baked is better then.

Very strange and I don't believe a word of it.
Sounds like he has fallen out big time with YCFC and is suggesting precisely what will finish the football club off - more delay.
Clever use of promising the earth to get people on side - will this super stadium have gold plated seats for the 600 Knights fans too, John?
Wasn't this the guy who voted for Huntington and who only yesterday was critical about delay. Whats it be tomorrow - a 100,000 seater in the sky?
Crazy.

I can't argue with this. 10,000 including terracing has to be right. 6,000 is surrendering to the status quo without the room for much progression and also ignores the fans' (ie customers!!) desire for terracing.
Surely we should have facilities at least the same as the residents/visitors of/to Warrington given the size of York

So he goes from one minute asking where the money is coming from to the next day wanting to spend more on a bigger stadium.I wonder if those supporting his views yesterday now see the true picture. As above what are his motives,delay the build knowing it will never happen springs to mind .

The man has just lost all credibility.

Oh I like the sound of it - I just don't believe it will ever happen and I don't think he does either. 6000 for City, 10,000 for the Knights. All singing all dancing. Super League! Premiership!
I sniff bull**** and the timing after yesterday suggests a big falling out between the camps.
I despair. The slim chance of any new ground has just dwindled to nothing in my opinion. Cheers John.

Councillors receive advice and recommendations from their Officers, which reflect all facets of the proposals. There are for instance, land ownership issues which must be weighed in the balance.

can't argue with most of it, 10,000 is what is needed, but it wont happen with the set of idiots running the council, the only time you see them meeting us oinks is election time or if a nice photo opp is on the cards, we don't want what Darlington have, take note mr Galloway, we just need something that can take both clubs forward.

pedalling paul wrote:
Councillors receive advice and recommendations from their Officers, which reflect all facets of the proposals. There are for instance, land ownership issues which must be weighed in the balance.

The recommendations from officers given to councillors, are within briefs given to them by the councillors, therefore all facets are rarely looked by the officers as the councillors have set the boundaries.

Increasing the size of the proposed stadium simply increases the cost with no extra income (except maybe the occasional cup tie).
The land at Hull Road is in private ownership and because it is designated green belt would be unlikely to get planning permission. (My understanding is that the athletics tracks don't contravene to the green belt designation).
This guy is trying to wreck the Community Stadium project.
If he succeeds then the Knights could be without a home in 2012 when the current lease and management arrangements at Huntington Stadium terminate. Maybe then he'll talk more constructively to York City.

Gets more of a farce by the day. They are just playing into Galloway's hands and ensuring the clubs both fold.

10000 capacity? York Knights in the Super League? Is this bloke off his head? York Acorn get a better crowd than the Knights on a good day. Knights and YCFC are not much better than Sunday league sports, and I wouldnt give them a 10 seater stadium, never mind ten thousand.

billy shears wrote:
10000 capacity? York Knights in the Super League? Is this bloke off his head? York Acorn get a better crowd than the Knights on a good day. Knights and YCFC are not much better than Sunday league sports, and I wouldnt give them a 10 seater stadium, never mind ten thousand.

1-10. Must do better.

duffy wrote:
So he goes from one minute asking where the money is coming from to the next day wanting to spend more on a bigger stadium.I wonder if those supporting his views yesterday now see the true picture. As above what are his motives,delay the build knowing it will never happen springs to mind .

The man has just lost all credibility.

A bit like Lizzie Browning and her rants! Mr Guildford has a right to defend the interests of his business as much as Jason McGill. Guildford just seems to be the better businessman.

I think Billy Shears probably has it right though. Why are we, the taxpayer, supposed to throw so much money at these two companies to bail them out? Maybe we should, but I think there needs to be complete transparency across the board.

Don't forget we will get a chance to vote on this and a everything else this council proposes before this project even has a chance to get planning. It may never happen if there is a change in the political wind.

sciencefan wrote:

duffy wrote: So he goes from one minute asking where the money is coming from to the next day wanting to spend more on a bigger stadium.I wonder if those supporting his views yesterday now see the true picture. As above what are his motives,delay the build knowing it will never happen springs to mind . The man has just lost all credibility.

A bit like Lizzie Browning and her rants! Mr Guildford has a right to defend the interests of his business as much as Jason McGill. Guildford just seems to be the better businessman. I think Billy Shears probably has it right though. Why are we, the taxpayer, supposed to throw so much money at these two companies to bail them out? Maybe we should, but I think there needs to be complete transparency across the board. Don't forget we will get a chance to vote on this and a everything else this council proposes before this project even has a chance to get planning. It may never happen if there is a change in the political wind.

You still don't get it. This is not about a private company that only benefits the directors/owners. This is about a community stadium with sporting and leisure facilites that will be for the citizens of York and something that will be used for many years to come. What he is right about is the fact it needs to be done correctly.
Put aside your feelings about the football club for a minute and look at the bigger picture, done correctly this facility can receive revenue streams that will show it to be an assett in the future. I live in Scotland and the local football club have a cummunity stadium funded by the council that is constantly in use.
Yes I know through your postings you don't want it to ever happen but in my view even if you are not a football or Rugby fan there is an opportunity here to build something for the future benefit of many people in York and not just the 3-400 that watch the clubs every other week.

I've yet to have it explained properly why even 1p of my council tax should be spent on bailing out two privately owned businesses in which I have absolutely no interest.
If YCFC is in the sh1t, so what? Let it do what all other businesses have to do and find its own solutions.
Yes, there's a very small minority of people in the York area who think that the rest of the City should pay for their entertainment and "passion". But, after all, YCFC's usual attendance is less than 2% of the population in the CoYC area.
If YCFC fans care so much, let them pay for their new stadium.

Abstemious wrote:
I've yet to have it explained properly why even 1p of my council tax should be spent on bailing out two privately owned businesses in which I have absolutely no interest. If YCFC is in the sh1t, so what? Let it do what all other businesses have to do and find its own solutions. Yes, there's a very small minority of people in the York area who think that the rest of the City should pay for their entertainment and "passion". But, after all, YCFC's usual attendance is less than 2% of the population in the CoYC area. If YCFC fans care so much, let them pay for their new stadium.

Popular is good. Thankfully there are no Christians around any more which means that no more public money should be poured into restoring and maintaining the Minster. It should be knocked down and replaced with a big arena where they can come and film X-Factor. Because popular is good. Actually, one thing is correct - there shouldn't be a new stadium because the people of York don't deserve anything nice because most people living here are a-holes, as you can see reading anything like the quoted message or the tedious pratt "science bellend".

I refer you to the post above from Abstemious.

I completely get it. but what is being proposed at the moment does not offer enough for the community outside of football (and maybe rugby). IMO there is not currently enough on offer for it to get my support. As other posters have said, if the proposal included facilities to allow a myriad of sports to use the site then it would have my backing. However I would doubt that the football club (and the rugby club) would be able to provide the flexibility of use in the ground which would give these other sports a chance to genuinely use the space.

Phantom1974 wrote:

Abstemious wrote:
I've yet to have it explained properly why even 1p of my council tax should be spent on bailing out two privately owned businesses in which I have absolutely no interest. If YCFC is in the sh1t, so what? Let it do what all other businesses have to do and find its own solutions. Yes, there's a very small minority of people in the York area who think that the rest of the City should pay for their entertainment and "passion". But, after all, YCFC's usual attendance is less than 2% of the population in the CoYC area. If YCFC fans care so much, let them pay for their new stadium.

Popular is good. Thankfully there are no Christians around any more which means that no more public money should be poured into restoring and maintaining the Minster. It should be knocked down and replaced with a big arena where they can come and film X-Factor. Because popular is good. Actually, one thing is correct - there shouldn't be a new stadium because the people of York don't deserve anything nice because most people living here are a-holes, as you can see reading anything like the quoted message or the tedious pratt "science bellend".

When you have something useful to say let us know.

The council doesn't pay for the minster, the Church of England does you numpty.

Thankfully your opinion seems to be in the minority, bit like the support for YCFC.

Let YCFC fold, apart from a few die hards no one will miss them.

@ Phantom

An interesting comparison, which I think supports my thinking.

http://donate.yorkmi
nster.org/

The Minster doesn't receive government money (national or local) and it doesn't get anything from the CofE either. In fact it's just lost out on a £1M grant due to spending cuts.

It's maintained by donations from people who believe that it's worth maintaining.

I was only suggesting that YCFC should apply the same principle.

Really? So the Minster hasn't received any money from the National Lottery? Whoops.

sciencefan wrote:

Phantom1974 wrote:

Abstemious wrote: I've yet to have it explained properly why even 1p of my council tax should be spent on bailing out two privately owned businesses in which I have absolutely no interest. If YCFC is in the sh1t, so what? Let it do what all other businesses have to do and find its own solutions. Yes, there's a very small minority of people in the York area who think that the rest of the City should pay for their entertainment and "passion". But, after all, YCFC's usual attendance is less than 2% of the population in the CoYC area. If YCFC fans care so much, let them pay for their new stadium.

Popular is good. Thankfully there are no Christians around any more which means that no more public money should be poured into restoring and maintaining the Minster. It should be knocked down and replaced with a big arena where they can come and film X-Factor. Because popular is good. Actually, one thing is correct - there shouldn't be a new stadium because the people of York don't deserve anything nice because most people living here are a-holes, as you can see reading anything like the quoted message or the tedious pratt "science bellend".

When you have something useful to say let us know. The council doesn't pay for the minster, the Church of England does you numpty. Thankfully your opinion seems to be in the minority, bit like the support for YCFC.

When my comments become as boring and moronic as yours then I'll let you know. Please bore off and leave York to York people and bugger off back to Selby or whatever scumhole you claimed asylum from.

The Minster is funded in many ways - its just received £10m from the Heritage Lottery fund for example, for the East Window repairs. So anyone buying a 'lucky dip' will have contributed.
We do seem stuck however on this idea that the stadium will solely be for YCFC. Its a community stadium; the council 110 page document outlines how the community will benefit. Seriously. Read it.
One must also remember that whilst the professional rugby and football teams aren't part of everyone's daily life, they are (like it or not) part of our civic pride. The bring recognition to the city and visitors. The world took notice when YCFC beat Arsenal, Man U and Everton. The Liverpool games, the Wembley visits. Further back there was the wonderful 1955 cup run. As a child growing up, I didn't know somewhere was unless it had a football team. Doubtless there are many kids now with the same view- football is our national sport after all.
So no, its not everyone's thing - but neither are our two professional clubs a trifle to let die. This, in conjunction with the community uses are why I think the project should be supported. Others may disagree - but lets disagree for the right reasons.

On a happier note, England are doing well in the cricket. Or shall we argue about that now...<smile>

simple, lets all stop paying tax and we can all decide where our own money is spent, i work full time and get nothing back out of the system, no kids yet i have paid for loads to go through school etc, anarchy lets have it.
Let me know when it all kicks off, the press is usually a day or two behind these days.

Phantom1974 wrote:
Really? So the Minster hasn't received any money from the National Lottery? Whoops.

Well, as I understand it, the Lottery Fund gives grants to organisations which it deems worthwhile.
However, when grants don't cover the running costs of the Minster, which they never will, the rest of it is met without reliance on public funds.
Conversely, YCFC has a grant on the table from the Football League, which obviously thinks that the club is worth maintaining. But, over and above that, it's still asking for handouts from people who don't give a sh1t.
Don't get me wrong, I'm perfectly happy for YCFC to survive. I just don't see why I should pay for your entertainment when you're not prepared to do it yourself.
But go ahead, prove me wrong. Leave me out of it and get all of your buddies to shore up a PRIVATE business and see where that gets you when it all goes t1ts up anyway.

I already pay for my entertainment, is it free to get into to watch York City? Nope. The Minster received a 10 million pound handout from the Lottery in 2007 which is public money. Also - get your facts straight...the Football League has loaned YCFC absolute NOTHING, the loan is from the Football Foundation, a completely different entity altogether. If you go along the lines of "I don't do x, y or z so I shouldn't have to pay for it" then society would collapse.

Sure, you pay to see York City. My point is that what you pay isn't enough to pay for the nice shiny new stadium that you want and you're asking me to pay for it. Just offer to pay double and everything'll be sorted.
I find cinema tickets expensive, why don't you pop along to City Screen, give them a few quid and ask them to reduce their ticket prices?
The Lottery Fund isn't public money in the same way as that raised by general taxation. It's understood that a part of the cost of a ticket will go to causes that you may not necessarily support. If you don't like that, don't buy a ticket. You can't opt out of taxes so that gives you the right to complain when your money is being misspent.
Football League/Football Foundation? I don't see your point. Are they involved in two different types of football or something? They don't have anything to do with each other?
Don't think society's going to collapse if YCFC doesn't get a new stadium.

If York City charge sensible prices more folks might go. They are more expensive than Barcelona to watch.

How much am "I" i.e., the community you belong to, asking you to contribute personally? 10 quid? 20 quid? For a stadium that will last a hundred year plus? Of course you should pay, as the stadium is for the community not just for private enterprises. If it was up to me I would nationalise York City and make the whole thing publicly funded, seeing as both clubs represent the community and the city. Like it or not, York City is York's football club, the only one we will ever have. Likewise with the rugby league club etc.

But less than 2% of the community goes to see York City. And that figure is being generous.
I belong to the 98% of the community that really couldn't care less.
"Community Stadium". You're having a laugh. It's already clear that there'll be no place for athletics and YCFC have just told the rugby club to get lost when they asked about using their ground.
Anyway, nice talking to you, whichever planet you're from. I'm just off for a completely unsubsidised night out.

Abstemious wrote:
But less than 2% of the community goes to see York City. And that figure is being generous.
I belong to the 98% of the community that really couldn't care less.
"Community Stadium". You're having a laugh. It's already clear that there'll be no place for athletics and YCFC have just told the rugby club to get lost when they asked about using their ground.
Anyway, nice talking to you, whichever planet you're from. I'm just off for a completely unsubsidised night out.

Thats okay - the council budget is about £450m - so 2% is fine thanks. :-)
Oh and add in the rugby mob and the althletics and....gosh; we've been short changed!
Yes I'm kidding, but it does show how easy (and pointless) it is to bandy manipulated stats about.
Bottom line is a city the size of York should have a community stadium facility. Just like other towns and cities - some much smaller. Uses are multiple as shown in the council document.

Abstemious wrote:
But less than 2% of the community goes to see York City. And that figure is being generous. I belong to the 98% of the community that really couldn't care less. "Community Stadium". You're having a laugh. It's already clear that there'll be no place for athletics and YCFC have just told the rugby club to get lost when they asked about using their ground. Anyway, nice talking to you, whichever planet you're from. I'm just off for a completely unsubsidised night out.

And less than 2% go to church, we've already established that the Minster got 10 million of public money, or did you miss that bit? Password: "soil town", just about sums it up!

Correct me if I'm wrong as I have been away from the country but wasn't the council only loaning the money? They would get the money back over the long term through rent payments/share of income and use of the facilities?
.
Also a 6000 all seater is proposed. If it is built without seats behind both goals wont that add a couple of thousand to the capacity? Lower costs as there's less seats to buy and terracing would be cheaper to maintain?
.
I also find it quite fun too read some of the short sighted comments of people who don't quite understand what sports team's bring to an area!! And whenever there's a mention of some ambition (the rugby club and super league, the footy club and getting back to the league) the non-supporters have to shoot them back down! I especially like the argument about attendance figures, as yes City averaged just under 2700 last season but you have to remember that you get people to evening matches that cant go on Saturday due to work or sporting commitments, while a lot of the younger children and fans from out of the area will miss the evening games. It would be good to see how many individuals actually went to see the team last season, that's probably more of a fairer view of people who have an interest in the club and still excludes those who cant make games at all for whatever reason. Just look at the last 2 Wembley figures to see that the 2% quoted doesn't really mean anything.
.
Top level sport should be something to be proud of in a City, not moaned about.

I understand Guilford has a bit of a track record ?????? can anybody fill us in ? Makes me wonder what really is going on!

I think that Mr Guildford was given assurances that he would be able to use the Crescent whilst his stadium is out of action. Obviously he now doubts the realism of that...

But what's really needed is a start-from-scratch big building project on Hull Road so that the other two can be used in the meantime. There's no problem with planning permission etc. as far as I'm aware, considering that it's the same location as the MASSIVE university expansion. And when you look at the two sports teams, you have to admit that they're more likely to go up not down - we shouldn't be willing to get into a position where in 5 years York City could be playing in League 2 and hasn't got a stadium big enough, even after a brand new stadium! Whether 6,000 is enough, though, is a different matter. I don't know enough about it to comment. But I agree entirely with Mr Guildford - a half-baked job is completely unacceptable and that's what it looks like the Council is heading towards at the moment.

Eric wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong as I have been away from the country but wasn't the council only loaning the money? They would get the money back over the long term through rent payments/share of income and use of the facilities?
.
Also a 6000 all seater is proposed. If it is built without seats behind both goals wont that add a couple of thousand to the capacity? Lower costs as there's less seats to buy and terracing would be cheaper to maintain?
.
I also find it quite fun too read some of the short sighted comments of people who don't quite understand what sports team's bring to an area!! And whenever there's a mention of some ambition (the rugby club and super league, the footy club and getting back to the league) the non-supporters have to shoot them back down! I especially like the argument about attendance figures, as yes City averaged just under 2700 last season but you have to remember that you get people to evening matches that cant go on Saturday due to work or sporting commitments, while a lot of the younger children and fans from out of the area will miss the evening games. It would be good to see how many individuals actually went to see the team last season, that's probably more of a fairer view of people who have an interest in the club and still excludes those who cant make games at all for whatever reason. Just look at the last 2 Wembley figures to see that the 2% quoted doesn't really mean anything.
.
Top level sport should be something to be proud of in a City, not moaned about.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the FA didn't allow any terraces in grounds anymore due to the increased risks of crushing.

You are wrong, Biologic. Rules are relaxed for lower leagues with terracing allowed. Think its only enforced in the Premiership and Championship - but am sure Google would give you the belt and braces version if you ask nicely. :-)