Rovers Ground Share

[RedTop]

Since the Supporters' Trust and the Supporters Club, both of which I am a member, will presumably be at the board meeting where the groundshare with the Gas is to be discussed, could I ask if you will be making any representations or observations on the desirability or otherwise of allowing them to play at Ashton Gate, and whether you will be taking a pro or anti stance on the subject?

This is not a fishing expedition or an invitation for people to start spouting anti-ST or anti-SC rhetoric and abuse. It is an inquiry because the emotive nature of the subject - something that SteveL himself said would be an important consideration in his decision - inevitably means that the views of supporters will be sought, and the responses by the ST and the SC on our behalf are likely to be influential. Therefore, I think we have a legitimate right to ask what those representations in our name to the board, if any, will be.

Thanks

[Bristol Boy]

I've written a piece on this for the ST Site and included in that are some suggestions on the subject.

Central to those is the standpoint that it is an emotional, as opposed to a purely financial decsion, has far reaching implications and all fans should be consulted, leaving aside the purely practical issues such as pitch quality.

Hopefully, it'll be on there today.

[RedTop]

I've written a piece on this for the ST Site and included in that are some suggestions on the subject.

Central to those is the standpoint that it is an emotional, as opposed to a purely financial decsion, has far reaching implications and all fans should be consulted, leaving aside the purely practical issues such as pitch quality.

Hopefully, it'll be on there today.

I look forward to reading it.

But it would be nice to know from those in power at the ST and the SC what representations - either pro, anti or on the fence - they intend to make on our behalf at the board meeting, or if they do not intend to make any at all, since the board acknowledges that it is an issue that demands taking account of "emotion" as well as the bottom line.

[RedM]

I'd be interested too. I think that the organisations in question will probably go as 'neutrals' and gather the facts and figures. I guess some of that information will be discussed with their members and then a decision will be made democratically to take the for or against stance?

I think it needs to be given a lot of thought, not only from our board but by the fans and boards of the other clubs involved, especially the Rovers who's fans seem as anti coming to us as we are to have them.

[bs3]

More than happy to let the Rugby club play at Ashston Gate, but no way Rovers.

I can remember Rovers playing Swindon at Ashton Gate and there was lots of trouble inside and outside the ground involing City fans.

There will be trouble every time they play down here. People in Bedminster will not take kindly to having to put up with Gas heads invadeing South Bristol every other Saturday.

I can for see lots of trouble and incidents every time they play.

Its just not worth it.

[Bristol Boy]

More than happy to let the Rugby club play at Ashston Gate, but no way Rovers.

I can remember Rovers playing Swindon at Ashton Gate and there was lots of trouble inside and outside the ground involing City fans.

There will be trouble every time they play down here. People in Bedminster will not take kindly to having to put up with Gas heads invadeing South Bristol every other Saturday.

I can for see lots of trouble and incidents every time they play.

Its just not worth it.

Regretfully, you're right and I believe the outtrurn from this will be sharing with The Rugby on the basis that their tenancy includes a quality pitch ala Wycombes and not the Gas who will have a short term return to Trumpton.

[Robbored]

But it would be nice to know from those in power at the ST and the SC what representations - either pro, anti or on the fence - they intend to make on our behalf at the board meeting, or if they do not intend to make any at all, since the board acknowledges that it is an issue that demands taking account of "emotion" as well as the bottom line.

Neither Stuart or I have any voting rights at board meetings.

[Bristol Boy]

Neither Stuart or I have any voting rights at board meetings.

Understood however you and the members you represent, will, no doubt have a view

[thatcham red]

Neither Stuart or I have any voting rights at board meetings.

Whilst that is true Alan, the Chairman does seek our opinion and we have always provided that when asked.

I can only speak from a Trust point of view on this.

The Trust always seeks to be evidence based in our representations to the club. Occasionally, when things come up at board meetings where there is not time to prepare and we are asked for a view, we give it, sometimes stressing if it is a personal view.

When we took the Middlesbrough ticketing issue to the board it was based on factual information about call costs, waiting times, commission charges, timing of priority sales and direct feedback received by the Trust from supporters (not just members). Importantly, it made 10 constructive recommendations to help improve the process. Similarly, the East End debate was backed up by a members market research survey and a 3,200 strong petition (and a lot of passionate debate from supporters).

I don't know when this is due to be discussed and it would be wrong of me to presume a date, as it is not my agenda. If and when we input, I would expect us to have sought opinion first.

Can't say more than that at the moment as we've not had time to collect our thoughts on this. I'd be interested in anyone's views on how we might get a good spread of opinion without breaking the bank on expensive surveys. We can, of course, do online surveys like the one we are running now and we could conduct exit polls at the ground, which is quite labour intensive. Any other thoughts?

[Richy P]

I agree with SL to a certain extent, as realistically the financial benefits will be there for all to see. However, this has been a pretty good year for recouping losses, with very extensive cup runs, plus the sale of Coterill for two million. So one wonders where that extra finance will go?

From an purely emotional side of things, I would actually have more problem Bristol Rugby playing at the gate then Rovers. Having seen the state of the pitch earlier this year due to the previous rugby game, the passing football we will need to play in the Championship will suffer. I think the groundsmen do a fantastic job at the gate, I think our pitch is only second to Swansea in this division, and it seems we will be making their job twice as hard.

As for Rovers tbh they should have had a plan in process before they went ahead with the redevelopment. In terms of stadiums, its either us or a return to Twerton based on geographical status. The stumbling block would be this local rivalry, which can be taken far to seriously. I for one would have no problem with it, but some may just take advantage,

[CodeRed]

Neither Stuart or I have any voting rights at board meetings.

We know you can't vote....

but - in plain english - When SL turns to you and says " Alan - what do the supporters club members feel about groundsharing with Bristol Rovers?"

Your reply will be ???????????? because surely your membership will want their views represented on such an important and emotive issue. And - I believe SL will want to know the fans opinions on this one.

Presumably you will be now be starting to canvass your membership so as to be able to give SL the feedback he needs to help his decision process.......... won't you?

CodeRed

[Stoke_Gifford_Red]

I agree with SL to a certain extent, as realistically the financial benefits will be there for all to see. However, this has been a pretty good year for recouping losses, with very extensive cup runs, plus the sale of Coterill for two million. So one wonders where that extra finance will go?

From an purely emotional side of things, I would actually have more problem Bristol Rugby playing at the gate then Rovers. Having seen the state of the pitch earlier this year due to the previous rugby game, the passing football we will need to play in the Championship will suffer. I think the groundsmen do a fantastic job at the gate, I think our pitch is only second to Swansea in this division, and it seems we will be making their job twice as hard.

As for Rovers tbh they should have had a plan in process before they went ahead with the redevelopment. In terms of stadiums, its either us or a return to Twerton based on geographical status. The stumbling block would be this local rivalry, which can be taken far to seriously. I for one would have no problem with it, but some may just take advantage,

Swansea share with a rugby team as well I believe, so it is possible with the correct investment. The only question is will the rugby club want to make such a financial outlay.

[Meh]

We know you can't vote....

but - in plain english - When SL turns to you and says " Alan - what do the supporters club members feel about groundsharing with Bristol Rovers?"

Your reply will be ???????????? because surely your membership will want their views represented on such an important and emotive issue. And - I believe SL will want to know the fans opinions on this one.

Presumably you will be now be starting to canvass your membership so as to be able to give SL the feedback he needs to help his decision process.......... won't you?

CodeRed

I share your head-banging frustration. RedTop might as well just address the S.T. on such questions; the only way to get a straight answer.

P.S. Sorry RedTop; I know you didn't want any anti-SC comments, but, surely as a member, you have to be unhappy with the response? After all, it is only the likes of yourself who have the potential vote to do anything about it.

I can't; I will never pay the £5 whilst it makes me a member of the S.C.; the pure hypocrisy of accepting I would be a part of the S.C., therefore, accepting "Alan's" chairmanship would be too much.

If the money was going to the S.T., then i'll gladly pay up.

[BCFC Matthaus]

When the gas were asked to leave the Ikea Stadium wasn't sharing AG an option way back then? All you need to do is dig up the exact same reasons for not having them back then and present them to SL. Hopefully SL will throw it in Duncefords face and tell them to #### off!!

[Bristol Boy]

Whilst that is true Alan, the Chairman does seek our opinion and we have always provided that when asked.

And, given the current shareholding, that is as good as it's ever likely to get

Can't say more than that at the moment as we've not had time to collect our thoughts on this. I'd be interested in anyone's views on how we might get a good spread of opinion without breaking the bank on expensive surveys. We can, of course, do online surveys like the one we are running now and we could conduct exit polls at the ground, which is quite labour intensive. Any other thoughts?

I've made some suggestions in my article and the one about a simple show of cards will be open, visual and will get the crowd going five minutes before KO.It is very simple and a snapshot but, I believe, will attract more people than an online survey, ensure they are all City Fans, plus not that costly or labour intensive with sponsorship and club co-operation

I agree with SL to a certain extent, as realistically the financial benefits will be there for all to see. However, this has been a pretty good year for recouping losses, with very extensive cup runs, plus the sale of Coterill for two million. So one wonders where that extra finance will go?

We'll need that and plenty more in The Championship IF we give it a real go.

From an purely emotional side of things, I would actually have more problem Bristol Rugby playing at the gate then Rovers. Having seen the state of the pitch earlier this year due to the previous rugby game, the passing football we will need to play in the Championship will suffer. I think the groundsmen do a fantastic job at the gate, I think our pitch is only second to Swansea in this division, and it seems we will be making their job twice as hard.

Sorting the pitch so it could cope would cost £250/300k and that, IMHO would HAVE to be part of any deal.

As for Rovers tbh they should have had a plan in process before they went ahead with the redevelopment. In terms of stadiums, its either us or a return to Twerton based on geographical status. The stumbling block would be this local rivalry, which can be taken far to seriously. I for one would have no problem with it, but some may just take advantage,

We'll see how it pans out, but I think few are likely to agree about The Rovers

[Chappers]

I really don't care too much about ground-sharing. Having seen the state of Wycombes pitch after a huge downpour, it is clear that the pitch need not be a problem having the egg-chasers around. The difference with the Gas now is that it will only be for 12/18 Months, not long-term as before. Ultimately, we are a business, and need to look at maximising revenue for the good of City - That should be our priority, regardless of the 'them' and 'us' arguments. Also, please remember, IT'S ONLY A GAME!

Right, fire away, I can take it!

[RedTop]

Thanks for the responses. I understand that you can't vote, but you are both at the board meetings to represent the fans and your stance is likely to be influential on this issue. Given the emotional importance to fans I'd be very surprised if you weren't asked for your input, so I feel we do have a right to know what it will be.

I also understand that the announcement about possibly sharing with the Gas or rugby team is very recent and that you will need time to consult your members, either formally or informally, before coming to a conclusion as to what you will say. That's entirely reasonable and right. But it will be good to know before you go into a board meeting where this is discussed exactly what your organisations' stances are on the issue, given its importance to your members, and to tell us what representations - if any - you intend to make.

Thanks.

[Red`s Ashtonic Lustpit]

I really don't care too much about ground-sharing. Having seen the state of Wycombes pitch after a huge downpour, it is clear that the pitch need not be a problem having the egg-chasers around. The difference with the Gas now is that it will only be for 12/18 Months, not long-term as before. Ultimately, we are a business, and need to look at maximising revenue for the good of City - That should be our priority, regardless of the 'them' and 'us' arguments. Also, please remember, IT'S ONLY A GAME!

Right, fire away, I can take it!

I have no raging antipathy to the sags using the Gate, although I would rather they did not. However, after listening to Blandsdown on talkSPORT, I fear it is a done deal. He gave his opinion on the advantages ie: loot etc, and hurriedly added that it was only a proposal blah, blah. I think if Steve wants, then Steve gets.

Oh, and if they do come, I hope there is a caveat stating any cost due to damage caused by their fans will be borne by their club, subject to regular ie: weekly, ground inspections.

[Robbored]

I have no raging antipathy to the sags using the Gate, although I would rather they did not. However, after listening to Blandsdown on talkSPORT, I fear it is a done deal. He gave his opinion on the advantages ie: loot etc, and hurriedly added that it was only a proposal blah, blah. I think if Steve wants, then Steve gets.

Oh, and if they do come, I hope there is a caveat stating any cost due to damage caused by their fans will be borne by their club, subject to regular ie: weekly, ground inspections.

I heard Steve Lansdown on Talk Sport and thought he covered all the bases well consideribng he was only on for 5 mins or less - but then I suppose you heard the same i/v and interpreted it a different way.

[bucksred]

Rather a sister in a whorehouse than Sags playing at the hallowed Gate. Bristol rugby club or no one.

[Chappers]

Could the ST negotiate for the Gas to bring their excellent pasties as well? It really goes against the laws of football catering selling decent pasties at a reasonable price!!! Seriously, good luck to the ST, you have an impossible job representing fans as opinion is divided between taking the cash and having a Gas free zone. The biggest worry of all is that the New Mem will actually make the Gate look very tired, dated and cramped.

[Robbored]

I also understand that the announcement about possibly sharing with the Gas or rugby team is very recent and that you will need time to consult your members, either formally or informally, before coming to a conclusion as to what you will say. That's entirely reasonable and right. But it will be good to know before you go into a board meeting where this is discussed exactly what your organisations' stances are on the issue, given its importance to your members, and to tell us what representations - if any - you intend to make.

Thanks.

I don't know if you heard SL on Talk Sport tonight but he basically said that City had been approached by Rovers and that discussions were to be held.

When asked about how the fans would feel Steve Landsown said that in his view there would be a minority who would be against the idea. A minority who would be for the idea and many who wouldn't have a view.He said he was aware that the Gas using AG would be an emotional issue for some fans and thats a consideration.

He also said that the finances at lower league clubs sometimes dicatated buisness moves but that nothing had been decided.

The above summary is the gist of what he said - I don't remember it all word for word.

The supporters that are vehemently against the move will be far more vocal than those that are for it or those that don't have a view.Those with a cause will have more motivation to get their voices heard and in the absence of any hard evidence provided by canvassing or polls that is something that I and Stuart will have to be aware of.

[Tom Fleuriot]

Just to say I think BB's idea of a show of a cards is an excellent idea.

Personally, I'd go with rugby + high-end pitch investment, followed by Gas with investment in our crowd management systems, pitch & security, followed by nothing. Get the money as long as it doesn't damage the pitch or the stadium.

[RedTop]

I think BB's idea of a show of a cards is an excellent idea.

I agree and have suggested it before for things like voting on a kit for the next season. The problem with this I would guess, as far as SteveL goes, is that it is a very visible way of showing our views and would effectively foist a decision on him, as to take the alternative decision would be a PR faux pas. SteveL is someone who has shown that he makes his own decisions, so my guess is that he wouldn't welcome that way of gauging fan opinion. He's much more likely to ask the ST and SC because he would expect them to know what 'the fans' think.

Of course, it may well be that the answer is that the fans are so divided on the issue that he's damned whatever decision he makes. My gut feeling is that the most financially attractive decision will be the least popular. But it's SteveL's decision to make...I don't envy him that one.