Rich

I respectfully suggest you look into the history books again. BRFC joined the football league in the 1920/21 season after being admitted to the division 3 southern section. We (BCFC) joined the football league into the 2nd division in 1901 and have remained a member ever since, regardless of an administrative name change in 1982, our membership has never lapsed.

Completely forget about this. So their claim to be the oldest club in Bristol, is false and, we have been a member of the football league (unbroken) since 1901. The claimed oldest club haven't been in the league as long as us, only joining the football league when the authorities formed an extra two divisions and then it was only half the country(div 3 South). They stayed there all cosy for thirty (yes 30) years until finally progressing upwards for a short period. So not the oldest Bristol Club and not the oldest league club, why do they claim and believe such rubbish?

I don't.

The £400,000 the club would have received from the proposed third ownership partners, of Rovers and the Council. That £400,000 was the precise figure that Martin Flook reportedly offered to the administrators for the purchase of the whole ground. Methinks the person scuppering the deal was more likely to be aligned to the blue side, in an attempt to obtain the whole ground. Once they knew the level of cash injection required to pay off the clubs debts, in went the offer. It was an exercise only, with no intention to become a partner, in my opinion.

Ben Garner Come on down, the fourth tier warm and welcoming.

And performed with the help of Peter Glaze.

It was down to the bras of the 50's, dangerous looking things, could have a mans eye out.

Interesting article in the post about sites considered for Bristol's arena. One site assessed and deemed unsuitable for reasons below, was the fruit market. It states it was not big enough for their planned arena (17,000). Also multiple lease holders. So it begs the questions, how big a stadium could be built and, are those multiple leaseholders the reason nothing appears to be happening regarding the purchase of the site by a consortium with, no direct connection to BRFC. From the Post article: Despite being further out from the city centre it was considered that the site “occupies a more accessible location to Bristol city centre” However availability of the site was considered an issue because of multiple leases covering individual units on the site. The site was also deemed too small for the arena complex that YTL has planned in Filton.

No, according to their recruitment team they've brought in vast experience and extremely promising younger players to compliment them. They evidently have the best squad in league one and are expected to challenge for the top spots. I believe this to be true but, it might take some time.

Do they actually believe Wael has "paid off" the debt? He's just moved it and, it's still secured against the rugby ground.

Rename them the wasps.

In reality, this score line is a false one and the match should be replayed. Reasons= They had to play against eleven opposition players, for the whole match and, they never received their customary penalty from an obviously biased referee who just happened to be a shytehead. I suggest they start a petition to get this result overturned and have points docked from Ipswich for playing an unregistered Dutchman back in 1979.

Though they haven't yet had a game they could attend, there were thousands of them lined up in their cars in Redcliffe and Victoria Streets wondering how they'll get to the hallowed ground. I suppose they could always get out of their cars and watch from the pavements.

The worst thing is, thousands of fans from South Bristol are unable to get to the ground, because Bristol Bridge is closed to traffic.

And lost.

Not in the slightest. For the majority of their existence they have held onto our shirt tails and done their utmost to thwart our progression. Given any encouragement, they will still be a threat, as they are only one division or good/bad season away from us. There are many examples of them holding us back, along with mopping up a level of support which would be useful if it was attached to just the one club. As a result, they are still hanging on and, if I and others can highlight their petty ways and comical existence to future or floating support and in some way increase our support, then that's good enough reason for having this thread.

Looks to me as if it's still about the other conditions imposed in November 2001. If not, why are they referred to? Proposal Discharge of condition 1 (materials) attached to planning permission PT16/4965/RVC. Erection of clubhouse, floodlights and store. Construction of vehicular and pedestrian access and car park. Removal of conditions 7 and 13 attached to planning permission PT01/2726/F dated 13.11.01, (which relate to building opening hours and the personal, non-professional and specific users of the site by Bristol Combination Trustees.) Status Awaiting decision

It would appear that conditions are still in place from 13/11/01 and an application for their removal was received August 6th. Awaiting decision. Perhaps all is not as it would appear re the planning process. Surely the conditions would refer to a more recent application.

I would think it a little odd, that architects are working through planning conditions, especially if all planning criteria had been met and they are in the process of starting the build. It did get planning permission, did it? Lot's of questions could follow.

Currently playing for Derby County, in front of de fence.

Of course!

Where for?

I was under the impression that there was a hold up with the local authority and some of the planning criteria not met. Therefore it wouldn't be useable until those conditions were met.

If they get an offer, he'll go. It's their only chance of income for months to come. Wael has tried to make out that he's been investing in the club, in an attempt to get on board with some serious players/developers. They can play hardball and make him sweat, that's if they're at all interested in having that club as tenants. In the mean time, he has to either put his own money in, or, generate some to keep them turning over. Their new manager/coach is probably realising about now, that he has to make do and mend, more than he thought. Wael of course has the benefit of being able to blame the covid situation for any financial problems. Why has the training ground come to a halt?

Smoke and mirrors, Bert. It's all to create an illusion of the club being valuable, when in reality, it's only value is the rugby ground.