"Destination Kirkby" Public Inquiry

[John Williams]

Originally Posted by Joe the red

McGrath - John would have them move to Everton Cemetary and exhume tens of thousands on the other side of Long Lane rather than it be built in the docks. He lives in lala land (a suburb of Milton Keynes) and his plans should largely be ignored.

Do you mean me? I live in Milton Keynes? New to me. Nice planning there though.

[John Williams]

Originally Posted by Evertonian

Which is why I have repeatedly asked you for your opinion on re-opening up Waterloo tunnels for rapid underground rail link directly to a stadium at Clarence Dock.

Clarence Dock is about as relevant as saying a stadium is being built at Penny lane. The Waterloo Tunnel does not run to Long Lane.

[eyeam]

Originally Posted by Joe the red

Medici - Grow up and stop being unnecessarily melodramatic and hysterical. No footballers, officials or anyone from EFC have said they want or plan to move there. So the capitalist bollocks is just political nonsense just for the sake of it.

This suggestion has only come from about the last 5 of John's aliases alongside a list longer than most people's arms including Garston, Speke, Halewood, Baltic Triangle, Bowring Park, Long Lane, Kirkby, Sandhills etc. In fact anywhere 100m+ from the River isn't safe from old MK.

To be fair Joe, it was a real proposal with some legs.

Sainsbury's were lined up as a retail partner (even though they've got a shop on the other side of the park already!). I think the KEIOC website had some official documents relating to it up ages and ages ago.

[Medici]

Scotland Road is the best option. Put EFC back in Everton and kickstart major regeneration of one of the UK's most deprived areas with a big capital project.

[John Williams]

Originally Posted by McGrath

Evertonian, the docks idea for me is much more straightforward than Long Lane.

The Long Lane site, whilst close to a number of trunk roads, would involve the forced removal of a large number of private businesses. Never simple, no matter who the landowner is.

The Long Lane site was suggested by Liverpool Council They would not suggest a site unless it is goer.

Moreover, John's idea of using the outer loop line is fantasy, just like his six-platform Kirkby station. The finance and will to redevelop this line are not there.

The line is "mothballed". They even left the bridges in place. They are large expensive structures and require mainetnace. They have been disused for around 35 years.

Amazing they all know about the finaces.

Peel will be waiting for a long time before thier Waters scheme gets off the ground.

Like after the CC. The PP has been submitted.

One thing that you have forgotten about Clarence Dock - for a large number of supporters it will be walkable from town, and also for those who remain west of Scotty.

One thing you have forget is tat this site is not on the radar and a large part has been reserved for the Shanghai Tower.

Not worth talking about Now what do you think about Penny Lane having a big stadium?

[John Williams]

Originally Posted by eyeam

To be fair Joe, it was a real proposal with some legs.

Sainsbury's were lined up as a retail partner (even though they've got a shop on the other side of the park already!). I think the KEIOC website had some official documents relating to it up ages and ages ago.

They did not incorporate a rapid-transit rail station, although it was located near he Outer Loop line

[John Williams]

Originally Posted by Medici

Scotland Road is the best option. Put EFC back in Everton and kickstart major regeneration of one of the UK's most deprived areas with a big capital project.

The Loop site is not that bad. It needs a rapid-transit rail station.

[John Williams]

Originally Posted by Splendidineogh

I do feel sorry for Everton. Isn't this the third time in recent history that their planned move away from Goodison has been foiled?

No the second. There was a site earmarked at Kirby Golf course, which was at the of Aintree race course. No plans were drawn up as Liverpool council scuppered it as they owned the land.

The council offered Everton a stake in Kings Dock on a plate. They screwed it up. Just as well. It would have been a disaster for the city. It is bad enough with a 10,000 seater arena. The congestion with just 10,000 after an event is horrific.

However, I do think it is positive that Everton will not move out to Kirkby.

They can move there without the retail. It is not dead.

If the two clubs are to agree to a shared stadium, it should only be on the basis that it will be a large and genuinely world class facility, with railway links into the city centre, etc.

I agree. The best club stadium in the world of 75,000 and rapid-transit rail station next to it, or under it. Hul City's old ground had a trail station next to the ground. The turnstiles were on the platform. You bought a ticket and it included the entrance fee. Off the train and into the ground.

[steveedster]

Originally Posted by John Williams

No the second. There was a site earmarked at Kirby Golf course, which was at the of Aintree race course. No plans were drawn up as Liverpool council scuppered it as they owned the land.

The council offered Everton a stake in Kings Dock on a plate. They screwed it up. Just as well. It would have been a disaster for the city. It is bad enough with a 10,000 seater arena. The congestion with just 10,000 after an event is horrific.



They can move there without the retail. It is not dead.



I agree. The best club stadium in the world of 75,000 and rapid-transit rail station next to it, or under it. Hul City's old ground had a trail station next to the ground. The turnstiles were on the platform. You bought a ticket and it included the entrance fee. Off the train and into the ground.

The new 10k arena at Kings Dock has been a great success tho. I have been to several shows there, it is a great overall experience. Getting away is not really a problem IMO, it is a great asset to the city centre. Obviously a 50k stadium is a different kettle of fish.

[John Williams]

Originally Posted by steveedster

The new 10k arena at Kings Dock has been a great success tho. I have been to several shows there, it is a great overall experience. Getting away is not really a problem IMO, it is a great asset to the city centre. Obviously a 50k stadium is a different kettle of fish.

It is in the wrong place. It is a carbuncle. A ugly looking building. It should have been at the end of the Wapping tunnel with its own rail station.

[Tony Sebo]

John, have you ever been swayed by anyone or changed your mind after being inspired by an idea of someone else?

[Keayman]

This is the most ridiculous and outlandish posting on this or any thread in the history of SSC.

[buggedboy]

Originally Posted by John Williams

It is in the wrong place. It is a carbuncle. A ugly looking building. It should have been at the end of the Wapping tunnel with its own rail station.

It's like being on the Liverpool One big wheel.

round and round...

[John Williams]

Originally Posted by Tony Sebo

John, have you ever been swayed by anyone or changed your mind after being inspired by an idea of someone else?

Yes, have you?

[the golden vision]

This sums up the last couple of days perfectly Timesonline

Tony Barrett

At 8pm on Wednesday night a ground share was not on the agenda for anyone on Merseyside. By 8am the following morning - it was the only talking point in town.

How did that happen? It’s not as if Anfield and Goodison had been razed to the ground by fans angry at the way their teams are letting them down.

The only thing that changed the agenda was someone at Everton had “indicated” to someone at Sky Sports News that they would now be willing to consider moving into a stadium with Liverpool.

Why ever would anyone have done that? Could it be, and forgive by cynicism, that the Everton hierarchy knew they were in for an absolute and richly deserved kicking for their second failed stadium project in less than a decade and decided to pull a flanker?

On the day the city of Liverpool’s World Cup bid was sent to London – possibly the most embarrassing thing to travel on a train between the two cities since Jimmy Tarbuck was drawn to the capital by the bright lights of the Palladium – how better to divert attention from your own failings than to let it be known to the media that there could be a radical solution to the ongoing problems of both clubs and the city itself, one which is absolutely guaranteed to steal headlines?

The day after Everton’s latest stadium dreams went belly up should have been a day for recriminations. It should have been the day when Bill Kenwright, the Everton owner and chairman, had to answer searching questions about the future of his club having said on so many previous occasions that only a move to a hideous soulless bowl built outside the boundaries of a city which they should never even have considered leaving would give them any hope of recapturing past glories.

It should have been a day when searching questions were asked about what this setback means to David Moyes, who has performed near miracles in defying the kind of lack of finance which would have crippled lesser managers to produce the only team in the Premier League which regularly out performs its wage bill, but who is now faced with the realisation that there is no immediate prospect of Everton having the kind of stadium which would produce revenue in keeping with his ambition.

It should have been a day when Everton’s board had to answer searching questions about why it sanctioned the spending of millions of pounds pressing ahead with proposals that appeared to be clearly in contravention of planning policy, as consistently argued by the Keep Everton In Our City campaign group which did such magnificent work on behalf of the tens of thousands of fans who were quite rightly opposed to the idea of Everton quitting the city in which they belong.

But we got none of this. Instead, someone says the magic words “ground share” and hey presto, the media dances to a different tune and the Everton hierarchy is off the hook.

Now, had the renewed possibility of a shared stadium been discussed with anyone at Liverpool or the city council before Sky were briefed about it and before Robert Elstone, the Everton chief executive, gave an interview about it on the platform of Lime Street Station, the latest talk of two of sports biggest rivals moving in together would have much more credibility.

Not that it deserves any, though. Liverpool and Everton Football Clubs deserve stadia of their own. They deserve it to enrich their separate identities. They deserve it for their sense of individuality. They deserve it for their size and stature in the game. And, most of all they deserve it for their fans.

Both clubs have consistently tried and failed to build much needed new stadia over the last ten years but this does not equate to a justification for ground sharing. Rather, it is a condemnation of a chronic lack of leadership and vision in the boardrooms of Everton and Liverpool and at a city council which has floundered around while others, for example Manchester with the City of Manchester Stadium, have delivered. Not being able to build a ground in one of the world’s most football mad cities is only one step away from being unable to organise a piss up in a brewery.

It is this which rankles most when fans of both clubs are told, usually by people who have never in their lives paid to sit, never mind stand, in either the Gwladys Street or the Kop, that a ground share is the only thing that can save their clubs. What they really should be asking is when will these great clubs and this great city be given the leadership they need to come up with a plan and the accompanying finance to build stadiums of their own?

It is well known that Liverpool’s supporters are being let down by their owners. There is no longer even any debate about the fact, for that is exactly what it is, that the ongoing reign of Tom Hicks and George Gillett has been an absolute disaster for the club, on and off the pitch. But they were also let down in the past and you would have to go back to the days of John Smith and Peter Robinson to find the last time when Liverpool were led with the kind of vision that facilitates regular success and genuine stability.

And yet their fans are consistently told that a shared stadium with their biggest rivals which will be the panacea to all their ills. If only the wider football world were as concerned with the imposters in the Anfield boardroom as they are with their zealous desire to see Liverpool and Everton subjected to the kind of experiment which no other leading clubs in the country are ever asked to perform.

If Liverpool and Everton ever bought in to the shared stadium dream of others they would put the full stop on an entire generation which has been characterised by a lack of ambition and foresight. The message that they would send out would be that while both Manchester clubs, Arsenal, Chelsea, Tottenham, Aston Villa, Birmingham City, Newcastle United, Sunderland, Celtic and Rangers can have their own stadia, the Merseyside clubs can’t.

The argument that keeps getting shoved down the throats of fans on Merseyside is that if it’s good enough for the people of Milan then it is good enough for them. Besides the fact that anyone who has ever been to the San Siro will have been confronted by a pitch as patchy as Gavin McCann’s head, the more important thing to bear in mind is that Inter Milan are now working towards moving out and building a ground of their own. Why? Simply because the shared arrangements at the San Siro do not allow them to maximise their commercial revenue from corporate facilities.

Juventus have already given up on sharing with Torino and are in the process of building a new stadium of their own on the sight of the much maligned Stadio Delli Alpi. Torino, meanwhile, have already moved permanently to the Stadio Olimpico.

If the great municipal shared stadium experiment that began in Italy around the time of the World Cup in 1990 is being held up as an example it should be to warn clubs not to follow their lead.

This is without even getting into the fact that Everton and Liverpool currently have totally different needs. That’s a debate that should be left for another day, one which will hopefully never come when those who preach that sharing is the only way two of Europe’s greatest clubs can survive are holding away.

Sacrificing heritage, individuality and identity at the altar of finance should not even be an option. Liverpool and Everton are unique sporting institutions and they deserve to be treated as such, not shunted together without any consideration for their past.

It is men with vision that both sets of supporters need and deserve, not a stadium which neither of them could claim as their own. If that day ever comes then it would be one of the saddest days in the history of football in England and on Merseyside in particular.

in Columnists, Everton, Liverpool, TheGame, Tony Barrett | Permalink Bookmark and Share

e

[romablue]

Just so this myth of Italian clubs wanting to be in shared stadiums (owned may I say by public bodies) is put to bed ..

here is the presentation video of Roma's new stadium proposal to the west of the city which is going through pre-planning here in Rome ..http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQFhBchYavY

Lazio too have plans to leave the Olympic Stadium and build the new 'Stadio delle Aquile' (Stadium of the Eagles) to the east of the city :- http://www.calciomercato.it/news/323...IO---FOTO.html

The rome city council have agreed on the basis of both clubs having their own stadia. Even though the Italian Olympic Agency will loose the rent on the ground which both clubs pay.

[Evertonian]

Originally Posted by John Williams

They can move there without the retail. It is not dead.

"The first thing to say in terms of Kirkby, is that the chapter is over and the book is closed." - Bill Kenwright.

[Splendidineogh]

Originally Posted by the golden vision

This sums up the last couple of days perfectly

Timesonline...

Excellent piece of journalism. Makes you wonder why good old Andy Burnham was being so pushy over a shared stadium. It seems that everything under this Government must be rationalised down into pounds and pennies, and reduced to being soulless and shit - or so it seems in Liverpool's case.

However, if other clubs and cities around Europe can develop new stadia, then why can't Liverpool's two great clubs? Both are in serious danger of falling way behind other clubs.

I know the clubs need money to do it, but if you have a big enough site, and allow developers to build a load of flats/offices/shops on it, and allow companies to cover the stadium in adverts, that adds up to a lot of pennies to get a proposal off the ground. It just takes imagination, and a Council that is willing to hand over, or CPO, some decent land.

[eyeam]

Is that the same Tony Barrett who used to be the LFC reporter in the Echo?

Good article that.

[Toadboy]

The same Tony Barrett, still on the Kop every game as well.