Bristol R*vers dustbin thread

[Swede]

Perhaps the bristol "bernibow" has a retractable roof when they put the floodlights on Shambolic. Nothing's joined up with that clown outfit, The very definition of TINPOT

[Bazooka Joe]

3 hours ago, OneCity said:

Oh, they've been saying the same thing for rather a long time. Far longer than ten years...

EASTVILLE Stadium Could become the West's Biggest Sports Centre...

..."There are 19½ acres of ground here [said Douglas Milne, Rovers' Director]. We could build a hall of sport, a running track and a multi-storey car park, and the stadium could cater for many sporting interests...not just soccer and greyhound racing. It could be a little White City..."

Tut, tut.

Sounds like Milne could have done with some diversity and equality training.

[Ska Junkie]

Why are they carrying on 'building' when they still don't have permission? I thought they had to stop until permission was / might be granted?

Stinks of assumption and arrogance IMHO.

It would be their best cock up ever (NLBR apart) if they had to take it down again. 

[Gert Mare]

4 hours ago, OneCity said:

Oh, they've been saying the same thing for rather a long time. Far longer than ten years...

EASTVILLE Stadium Could become the West's Biggest Sports Centre...

..."There are 19½ acres of ground here [said Douglas Milne, Rovers' Director]. We could build a hall of sport, a running track and a multi-storey car park, and the stadium could cater for many sporting interests...not just soccer and greyhound racing. It could be a little White City..."

And that from 1965!

 

58 years and counting now...

These things take time.

Evolution not revolution 

1 hour ago, CiderJar said:

As bus stops go it is awesome, as football stands go it is awful

Boat storage available in Horfield.

For details / enquiries please contact:-

Wally,
Da Gas,
BS7 FTG 
Tel: 0272 272 272 
or FAX: 0272 999 999 (Please wait 50 seconds before pressing the send button)

[Gert Mare]

23 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

Why are they carrying on 'building' when they still don't have permission? I thought they had to stop until permission was / might be granted?

Stinks of assumption and arrogance IMHO.

It would be their best cock up ever (NLBR apart) if they had to take it down again. 

Apparently, if they didn’t start the build the contractor was going to pull out to work on another job so in the words of The Beautiful South “Carry on regardless”

[Eddie Hitler]

35 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

Why are they carrying on 'building' when they still don't have permission? I thought they had to stop until permission was / might be granted?

Stinks of assumption and arrogance IMHO.

It would be their best cock up ever (NLBR apart) if they had to take it down again. 

 

When I've read about similar with private individuals building unauthorised houses or extensions they are often ordered to tear them down.

Council planning officers really don't like arrogant people who totally ignore the rules and their guidance and usually give it to them with both barrels.

I think that there is a real possibility that Rovers will be ordered to tear it down with their only remaining option being to rebuild their old stand exactly as it was.

[The Gasbuster]

2 minutes ago, Eddie Hitler said:

 

When I've read about similar with private individuals building unauthorised houses or extensions they are often ordered to tear them down.

Council planning officers really don't like arrogant people who totally ignore the rules and their guidance and usually give it to them with both barrels.

I think that there is a real possibility that Rovers will be ordered to tear it down with their only remaining option being to rebuild their old stand exactly as it was.

That would be perfect. However, I suspect they will get away with this.

[Eddie Hitler]

Just now, The Gasbuster said:

That would be perfect. However, I suspect they will get away with this.

 

I'm not sure that they will.

Remember those trees they cut down without permission, Greens on the council are gunning for them.

If we behaved in the same way do you think that we would get away with it?

I don't and I don't think that they will either.

[BS13 Robin]

34 minutes ago, Gert Mare said:

Apparently, if they didn’t start the build the contractor was going to pull out to work on another job so in the words of The Beautiful South “Carry on regardless”

Surely any selfrespecting decent building contractor wouldnt start building until planning has been given due to costs involved and the possibility of not getting paid for work already done!Unless it is someone keeping their hand in of course.

[italian dave]

27 minutes ago, Eddie Hitler said:

 

When I've read about similar with private individuals building unauthorised houses or extensions they are often ordered to tear them down.

Council planning officers really don't like arrogant people who totally ignore the rules and their guidance and usually give it to them with both barrels.

I think that there is a real possibility that Rovers will be ordered to tear it down with their only remaining option being to rebuild their old stand exactly as it was.

I’ve said before, but I think they’ll get consent, but it will be subject to some amendments to the proposals. Which, if it’s already there, will be more than a little awkward. 

[Gert Mare]

24 minutes ago, Eddie Hitler said:

 

I'm not sure that they will.

Remember those trees they cut down without permission, Greens on the council are gunning for them.

If we behaved in the same way do you think that we would get away with it?

I don't and I don't think that they will either.

Is that “They gurt Shithead Greens?” 

[Monkeh]

11 minutes ago, BS13 Robin said:

Surely any selfrespecting decent building contractor wouldnt start building until planning has been given due to costs involved and the possibility of not getting paid for work already done!Unless it is someone keeping their hand in of course.

No, you'd go ahead and build,

And then you tear it down when ordered at an extra cost, and then rebuild it when pp is granted,

It's not the builders fault they are working as per their contract

[phantom]

1 hour ago, Ska Junkie said:

Why are they carrying on 'building' when they still don't have permission? I thought they had to stop until permission was / might be granted?

Stinks of assumption and arrogance IMHO.

It would be their best cock up ever (NLBR apart) if they had to take it down again. 

Are they actually still building?

The structures in the pictures from the game against Cheltenham were what was being put in a few weeks ago

[BS13 Robin]

27 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

No, you'd go ahead and build,

And then you tear it down when ordered at an extra cost, and then rebuild it when pp is granted,

It's not the builders fault they are working as per their contract

Fair enough,that makes sense i suppose.

 

[bert tann]

Further up the pages there is some confusion about the role of the secretary which I hope I can clarify.

The company secretary deals with corporate governance and is responsible for filing relevant documents at Companies House.

The club secretary deals with football matters and is responsible for filing relevant documents with the football authorities.

The personal secretary deals with personal matters and is responsible for keeping senior management satisfied.

As an example of the latter I've inserted a 1957 vintage photograph of my own personal secretary Marjorie receiving the news that I was on my way back from Liverpool with a point in the bag.

 

 

[1960maaan]

I have no doubt they will get planning , but it puts the whole office in a bad light that they carry on regardless. 
If that was you or me, or some chancer they would probably make us tear it down. I hope they really make them jump through hoops just for their arrogance and twattish behaviour. 

[bcfc01]

4 hours ago, slartibartfast said:

DOH...........who forgot about the lights ? Another cock-up !

If the lights are partially blocked in that corner the assumption must be it's the same at the other end of the stand. Heading for another classic hopefully

[bcfc01]

Update... 

It appears that as thy moved the pitch 3m, it has affected the lighting at the other end of the pitch as well... 

[Rudolf Hucker]

9 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

Update... 

It appears that as thy moved the pitch 3m, it has affected the lighting at the other end of the pitch as well... 

Thank goodness they don’t design aeroplanes. 

[Rudolf Hucker]

55 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

it puts the whole office in a bad light

Sounds like it’s their pitch that they’ve put in a bad light. 

[slartibartfast]

24 minutes ago, Rudolf Hucker said:

Thank goodness they don’t design aeroplanes. 

Yes, they'd be  in the air forever !

[JBFC II]

 

[Scrumpty]

1 hour ago, bcfc01 said:

If the lights are partially blocked in that corner the assumption must be it's the same at the other end of the stand. Heading for another classic hopefully

Indeed. There is a simple solution - make the floodlights higher…. Which will require planning permission! More entertainment coming our way I hope!

[GreedyHarry]

5 hours ago, bcfc01 said:

Supporters and Radio Bristol saying how dark it was in that corner due to the lights being partially obscured by the roof of the stand...

 

Ah they have this covered. If you look closely the roof has concertinas in it. A bit like a horizontal shutter door would have. 
It’s probably made by the same company that used to do those awnings that the ex chief of Manchester police advertised.

Just need to train a steward to pull the chain to open the roof up…… job done.

[Monkeh]

Doesn't there have to be correct lux levels for a game to take place at night,

I wonder if there's a rule breach there

[Topper 123]

3 hours ago, Gert Mare said:

Is that “They gurt Shithead Greens?” 

They gert big 6 fingered shit ‘Ed’s :laugh:

Just now, Topper 123 said:

They gert big 6 fingered shit ‘Ed’s

Or they 82ers :laugh: 

prowed to be gas 

[1960maaan]

Question for the Class.

With all the chatter, and now they have lost a tent/stand/dwelling , how many seats do they have ?
EFL minimum is 2,000. 
The only mention I can find is when they had 12,000 capacity, that is 2,500.
My question is, is that all in their real stand ?
How many seats do they have now ? 
All I can see is the new stand will increase seating by 3,000 but I can't see how many they have now they binned the old tent seating. 
Anyone ?

[slartibartfast]

55 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

Doesn't there have to be correct lux levels for a game to take place at night,

I wonder if there's a rule breach there

That's soap.........they wouldn't be doing with that !

[Glen hump]

Only caught the last bit on the radio but unless I’m going mad ,I’m sure they were talking about joey saying genghis Kahn wasn’t all bad , totally blew my mind.

[Bar BS3]

7 hours ago, CiderJar said:

As bus stops go it is awesome, as football stands go it is awful

So they've got their planning permission now then.?