Most disappointing gig I’ve ever attended. Elbow were great, but U2 came on, very little interaction with the crowd, played their songs and then went. Trying to think who other support act was. Richard Ashcroft?? Decent weather and it was packed. U2 failed to deliver.
Couldn't agree more. I do not want to watch my team in a plastic stadium. You can go to Derby, Sunderland, Leicester (to name but 3) and if it weren't for the colour of the seats, you wouldn't have a clue where you were.
I said financially better. And they are ground sharing with Birmingham. No hassle because it’s the same ground every home game.
Yes but they did have to play at Northampton and now as you say Birmingham. I used to work in Coventry (Jaguar) and had loads of mates who were die-hard fans and season ticket holders. I was talking to one of them recently, he's not been to watch them for several years including when they played at the Ricoh in the Championship. He also said that none of his mates go any more (or would if they could). Coventry City may be financially viable but there is no real Club, no heart, no soul and no supporters. Do you want that for Barnsley? cos I don't.
Yep. I’ve had it on good authority from outside Oakwell that this is the case and the reference to ‘late last year’ just means ‘after the Daily Mail article’ and not anything in the last couple of months or so. I don’t know this bit for sure, but based on what we know, the enquiry to Rotherham isn’t ‘can we come and ground share with you because we’re wanting to leave Oakwell’. It’s more ‘if that eventuality ever came up is ground sharing an option’. People saying Rotherham knocked us back gives an impression that a stonewall request was made. Doesn’t feel like there’s any immediate ness to this and as sighted back in September it’s purely posturing for the courtroom/payment battles we’re aware of.
Hoping you're right but it just feels a bit "I'm going to get my Dad onto you". A price was agreed for the sale of the club and for the sale of 50% of the ground, just get on with it.
Agree, and no I don’t. I’m just highlighting how the costs of running a stadium can affect the club itself. The lack of investment since the administration era hasn’t helped either at Oakwell. My point in regards to Coventry, is simply without having the costs of a stadium around there neck, they’re probably financially better off. The Ricoh Arena saga is interesting.
Can’t say I’ve seen many of those. There’s been people acknowledge the thought process and finances involved, but not excusing it per say. You’re allowed to think something is an awful idea, poor form, and still give some rationale as to why it’s happened.
Nobody can give any rationale why it's happened though because those who claim to own us refuse to give any rationale. They refuse to explain this land issue. Ever since they 'bought' the club they dodged the question of why they hadn't taken the 6 month land ownership. They won't give any explanations at all and without any explanations there can be no rationale
Never said it doesn't worry me. Doesn't change the fact that they own the company and there's no way to legally stop them making decisions. I also don't think it's a smart idea to assume the consortium are in the wrong without knowing anything about the case. Wait and see what the court decides.
Isn't it their fault for our assumptions? They have mouths, they have computers, they actually have their own official website which they can use but they choose not to clarify anything so as far as I'm concerned if we make assumptions that are not in their favour that's all on them
When you're the face of a public company with customer engagement being key to your business it's probably a good idea not to treat them like mushrooms whilst making plans to relocate the business away from those customers.