Moyes, with little money to spend, appears to have made the difference for Everton; repeatedly punching above his weight, he seems to have reached something of a glass ceiling; not due to his ability but due to that one commodity that is in short supply at Goodison, and just about everywhere else, ? money. How is he to progress, challenge for honours and establish Everton firmly in the Sky 4 at the expense of Chelsea, Liverpool or Arsenal?
Bill Kenwright appears to be unable to invest personally in the club or attract investment at the level required. Like David Moyes, he appears to have reached his own glass ceiling. Despite many rumours of Arab, Indian and American ownership, they remain what they are ? rumours.
The other option appears to surround the relocation to Kirkby. This is designed to generate additional revenue for use by David Moyes on strengthening the squad, leading to better results, more honours, and bigger crowds, ad infinitum. There seems to be a difference in opinion as to the exact amount of additional revenue such a move would generate but at the moment anything is better than nothing, particularly when, at recent derby games, just one of Liverpool?s players cost almost as much as the majority of our team, telling you that the cost of those ten or twelve additional Premier League points that define success of failure is disproportionate to the amount we?re spending now.
Will Kirkby provide the financial impetus to propel Everton into the Sky 4 or will it provide the platform, in conjunction with the latest television deal, to attract a new owner? Perhaps it will do neither; perhaps the inquiry that has been going on for months will find against the project...
After the match, I was talking to a journalist acquaintance of mine in one of the lounges, his take on Kirkby was that it was far from straight forward and that the protest group KEIOC have put forward some strong arguments. I know a little about planning issues so this morning I read a couple of items on the KEIOC website. All is not what it seems, I had them down as a protest group against moving from Goodison ? it appears that they have either taken planning and legal advice or they include in their number legal and planning professionals; either way, they?re raising legitimate concerns that could have a major impact on the future of Everton.
The planning inspectorate will determine whoever is right, and this is a real worry. Not known for their football supporting prowess or intelligence, a group of individuals appear to hold the future of Everton in their hands; let's hope the right decision is made for Everton ? not some tree huggers, not the Council or the Government, just for Everton. COYB
Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer
1 Posted 08/02/2009 at 15:21:09
This has got the hallmarks of wind up written all over it.
2 Posted 08/02/2009 at 15:47:50
Come on guys, somebody tell me that this is a sound investment.....
3 Posted 08/02/2009 at 16:46:22
KEIOC have been telling us since day 1 that it is "straighforward" as far as DK is concerned - that DK goes against the grain of some aspects of planning policies, specifically retail floorspace allowance, and that would be enough for the inspector to "dismiss it out of hand" without a second thought.Unfortunately for them, the inspector does not quite see it as "straightforward" as the opponents had hoped.
All the indications are that we can confidently rule out one scenario ? the dream scenario of KEIOC ? that the inspector will "dismiss it out of hand". I?m made up she will be coming to her conclusions during a time of "depression" ("depression" not "recession" is what is being whispered loudly down in Whitehall these days).
It was ho-larious taking a peek at the KEIOC website and they listed the few planning policies (NOTE ? policies NOT laws) that DK goes against ? pity they didn't list the far more aspects of planning policies that DK complies fully with, the NorthWest Regional Assembly which oversees NW planning policy thinks that DK broadly complies with regional planning policy. ;)
4 Posted 08/02/2009 at 17:18:46
5 Posted 08/02/2009 at 17:54:30
I am in favour of staying at Goodison but believe that the first stadium advertised by KEIOC was rushed and looks like a women?s prison. The design was clearly inspired by a Nike shoe box and didn?t inspire much confidence as an alternative. The second stadium lasted less than a minute!
Therefore a piecemeal approach to developing Goodison over a longer period than the rushed Kirkby and KEIOC ideas seems plausible.
I am also weary of foreign investors who know nothing about our ideology. I only want someone to be able to hand Moyes £20-25 million per annum to invest in the team. We receive £40 million from the Premier League and Sky per annum so why is that so hard?
Kenwright once stated that he wouldn?t sell our silverware to purchase our future, however the players are our most important assets right now.
As a brand we have nothing else to attract investors, entice fans or get noticed by our peers. They are the reason why we are where we are. Selling any of them could hurt us and take us backwards. However come the summer that could be our only option.
This week I witnessed how the manager, fans, players and club were on the same page. I also witnessed how KEIOC and Everton Football Club Ltd clearly weren?t.
The stadium debate is morbidly tiresome and has reared its ugly head yet again. Kirkby will distract the club again come the summer as Moyes is given absolutely no financial backing like last year.
They need to stop the bickering and childish petty behaviour. Stop playing tug of war and mutually combine ideas to reach one which is beneficial, realistic and achievable without compromising the financial integrity, purity and historical ideology which is Everton Football Club.
6 Posted 08/02/2009 at 18:25:30
Gerrard... I mean err, 'Rupert', fancy sitting down with the guys from KEIOC for tiffin?
7 Posted 08/02/2009 at 19:13:53
8 Posted 08/02/2009 at 19:19:37
Secondly; one thing that the Inquiry has confirmed is just what a bit part (and that?s being generous) Everton FC are playing in the Tesco grand scheme for Kirkby. I read on the KMBC website that over 850 documents were submitted to the Inquiry, the fact you can almost count the documents submitted by Everton FC on one hand tells its own damning story.
Another related issue was Tesco?s opinion that anything to do with the proposed stadium should be dismissed as having no relevance to planning policy.
After having read the closing submission of KEIOC, they list a whole raft of policies that the proposed stadium would be in conflict with. Now either they (KEIOC) are correct, meaning that Tesco were deliberately playing down the stadium issue, or Tesco are correct and the role of the stadium and by association, that of Everton FC was even more insignificant than I thought possible.
Is there anyone (no not you ?Rupert? or whatever other alias you may use) with a professional planning background who can possibly attempt to shed some informed light on this issue?
9 Posted 08/02/2009 at 20:42:16
1/ Do nothing. Not really an option, but it may yet come to that.
2/ Kirkby. An enormous risk and likely to be very divisive for what looks like peanuts (£6m per annum) maximum gain.
3/ Redevelop Goodison over the next 10-15 years. It?s what virtually every other Club has done. It may mean less cash for players some of the time or it may mean paying them lower wages. Not particularly palatable, but you get nowt for nowt as they say.
4/ Utilise the City of Liverpool?s unique position in English football, plus the fact that both Clubs want new stadia and can?t afford them on their own, and join a 4 way (EFC, LFC, public money, limited private investment) partnership to create World class stadium and amenity for the whole city in Stanley Park.
THE WHOLE CITY NEEDS TO PULL TOGETHER ON THIS... You Scousers don?t seem to realise what you have got ? your unity has always been your strength.
I?m an outsider so maybe I?m too idealistic. On the other hand, perhaps I am standing just far enough back to make a REALISTIC and LOGICAL judgement?
10 Posted 08/02/2009 at 22:12:18
Frank, there are two sides to every story, one of which has not been put out by our local media / press. If DK was the only way forward after a fair, open, transparent debate, I'm pretty sure all EVERTONIANS would be as one and go to Kirkby.
But it ain't. It's been bent from day one. Only for KEIOC, we'd be like sheep following each other to Kirkby. Come on you blues.
11 Posted 08/02/2009 at 23:20:12
The only way we can make money is through extra gate receipts because as sure as hell there?s going to be very little Corporate income.
If we assume ,which IMO is realistic, that attendances will go up by the same amount as those staying away either through protest or because they are unable to get there then the only way we?ll be able to pay the interest bill let alone make a profit of any sort is through a 20% increase in ticket prices over and above any normal inflation increase.
My vote is firmly to remain at GP until/unless we have some backing and a proposal befitting Everton football club.
Kirkby is a complete letdown on every level and the only beneficiaries will be Billy liar and his buddies leaving EFC with a legacy of debt and a mausoleum.
12 Posted 09/02/2009 at 00:14:29
Subsequent events since then ? coupled with his very unconvincing performance at that meeting ? have now firmly moved me from being in the "sceptical camp" to a position of outright opposition.
Yes, I have still have many questions / reservations about the viability of KEIOC proposals to redevelop GP in tranches. I would however be delighted if they came to fruition.
On the other hand, the risks of DK are glaringly obvious.
One of my doubts = amongst many ? concerns the potential marketing of corporate facilties in the current economic market be it at GP / DK
We got less than 34,000 on Saturday ? no doubt partly due to home fixture congestion but more likely a result of the worsening recession where fans are becoming more selective.
My main fear is that our relative real success on the pitch is being put into jeopardy.
We should withdraw from DK now to avoid potential internecine conflict arising over the move.
If at the worst, staying @ GP means for the short / medium term we have to "stagnate" or even go backwards (down the league), while we wait to see GP can be developed (as suggested by KEOIC) I?ll take that risk.
Nevertheless we are told that we?ll need £75M to contribute to DK: I?d rather have that sum spent on expanding the Park End / extra corporate facilities @ GP.
Far better that, than proceeding literally down the road to potential ruin/ alienating a very significant section of our core support.
13 Posted 09/02/2009 at 01:35:08
1/ and 3/ will see us in the Championship or below in the immediate future, and once that happens there will be no return - unless, perhaps, in the event that LFC does a Leeds. 2/ is just crazy, and will only result in the same outcome as 1/ and 3/.
If we do 2/, we will be worse off that Bolton and Boro. Only the real diehards will want to go a Reebok/Riverside soulless replica on the outskirts ? look at their half-empty stadia. We will be worse off because at least they haven?t got a true hearts and minds competitor like LFC on their doorstep.
And if you?re going to do 1/, the for heaven?s sakes don?t do it on Stanley Park. Find a King?s Dock type site that?s actually in the City.
14 Posted 09/02/2009 at 10:00:34
I love the idea of the hotel and I hope that KEIOC are right and manage to convince the people who matter that it is possible.
I’d make the hotel look like the tower on the Everton badge. :)
15 Posted 09/02/2009 at 10:21:59
In Hull, where I work, the KC stadium has been the catalyst for success. Everyone hated leaving Boothferry Park but it was an awful ground. I stood on the terraces at Gwladys Street and am as nostalgic as anyone but we have been left behind. The city of a Liverpool needs a world class sports stadium and neither Liverpool nor Everton can afford one on their own. A joint bid would have a far greater chance of success than two separate bids and at a time of recession development funding should be easier to access.
I know that RS supporters and leaders probably think that by going it alone they would kill Everton off once and for all but that is naive. They need the local rivalry as much as we do. My point is we shouldn?t shy away from all possible solutions when circumstances are constantly changing out there. We should also be mindful that it is the club we support not Goodison Park FC or the Kirkby Tesco Stadium so let us be respectful of fellow Evertonians opinions on the matter.
16 Posted 09/02/2009 at 11:25:50
I know the question has been asked before, I also know the pro-Kirkby people struggled to find an answer, Arsenal would be the one and only example they could throw up.
It might well be worth asking the question again. Since their move to the Emirates, wonderful stadium though it is, Arsenal have gone from being a club that won 1 or 2 trophies every year to a club that wins nothing, in fact its been widely reported that the club faces financial disaster in the increasingly likely event they fail to qualify for the CL. Wonder how many lifelong Arsenal supporters will be happy "they moved with the times" now?
Anyways back to the question, name club that has actually benefited from moving grounds?
17 Posted 09/02/2009 at 13:07:53
18 Posted 09/02/2009 at 12:44:01
"It was ho-larious taking a peek at the KEIOC website and they listed the few planning policies (NOTE ? policies NOT laws) that DK goes against ? pity they didn?t list the far more aspects of planning policies that DK complies fully with, the NorthWest Regional Assembly which oversees NW planning policy thinks that DK broadly complies with regional planning policy)"
"They list the few planning policies that go against"!?
Sorry but I have to ask ? have you any idea how putting an argument works?
Presumably, you expected KEIOC to have said "Ok so there?s one or two policies that haven?t quite been adhered to but in the main..."
(Do you know KEIOC stands for ?Keep Everton In Our City??).
As for your desperate pointing out that a policy is not ("NOT") a law, well... fair enough.
But you know what ?Rupe?, I have a have an aunt who says it?s her ?policy? ? not to gossip.
But guess what ? she gossips all the time and everyone knows it.
Luckily (as this is just a policy) she?s not breaking any law.
I should mention however that everyone thinks she?s an untrustworthy, bullshitting oul? piece of shit and nobody wants a fucking thing to do with her.
By the way, love your use of the word ?broadly?.
19 Posted 09/02/2009 at 13:27:05
Are you sure we benefited ? after all we were champions there and the neighbours from hell didnt exist . . . . . in fact not only am I against the proposed next move, you’ve just made me realise I’m against the f...k.n last one too
20 Posted 09/02/2009 at 13:38:19
21 Posted 09/02/2009 at 13:34:04
22 Posted 09/02/2009 at 14:16:33
If you do, whether for or against Kirkby, you will see that the whole application is based on retail and is a big risk to Everton FC.
However, taking EFC out of the equation, Tesco tried to slip the planning application through at council level i.e the equivalant of adding an extension to your house, as they knew that if they applied through the proper channels for such a large develoment it would be rejected. It is about the regional development of the North West, with Liverpool and Manchester being the ?centres?.
40,000 people live in Kirkby and therefore it does not justify such a large retail development especially on green belt land. The regional policy is to develop town centres of Kirkby?s size not try to encourage people away.
Extract taken from ?Closing submissions of KEIOC?
?39.0 And that is what it?s all about, LOCATION, LOCATION, LOCATION; the right location for the fans, the right location for the residents of Kirkby and the right location for Everton Football Club. For Tesco it appears that the right location is one that enables them to achieve the maximum amount of retail despite the apparent unsuitability of Kirkby and for the neighbouring authorities. The applicant has successfully used this tactic of providing a sports stadium on at least two occasions in local towns. A stadium for Warrington Wolves was built on a brown field site and more recently a proposed stadium was given planning permission in St Helens on another brown field site. Apart from the use of Urban Green space, the difference between these and Destination Kirkby is that at St Helens, a town with a population of over 100,000, they?re building an 18,000-seat stadium and at Warrington, a town with a population of over 190,000 Tesco built a 14,000-seat stadium. Common sense tells you that a 50,000-seat stadium doesn?t belong in a town of 40,000; it is likely to overwhelm the centre and the local residents, many of whom will have no interest in football, let alone Everton. To that extent the stadium will be a most unwelcome interloper?.
This is, and always has been, about Tesco chancing their arm to gain a huge retail outlet and not about taking EFC into the future.
130 years in our home to move to Kirkby on the basis of what ? A ?supposed extra £6 million a year ? Come on, no-one is seriously using that as a reason to move ? Goodison is part of our armoury and with enough belief it can be redeveloped.
I strugge to believe that so many Evertonians still cannot see the application has nothing to do with EFC and is all about the ?giant? that is Tesco throwing their weight around and using and abusing EFC to get more retail.
Closing submission for KEIOC @ -
23 Posted 09/02/2009 at 14:29:05
To me, now living in Stockport and one who has spent only one year in Liverpool (Garston/Aigburth) many years ago, I can make just one comment. The area where the ground is presently situated is dire. To consciously and at great expense (if indeed possible) endeavour to rebuild Goodison Park at its present location appears madness.
I would dearly love to know just how many ?died in the wool ? Evertonians actually live in Liverpool and how many, like I used to, live on the Wirral or even further afield.
One gets the feeling from all these KEIOC supporters, that 90% of the clubs supporters, are from Liverpool and completely support the idea of rebuilding the ?old lady?.
Certainly, to rebuild at a more convenient location than Kirkby, somewhere in the more prepossessing part of the city, would meet with universal approval. However, no sensible location has been proposed and at no time has the wherewithal to build the new Stadium been suggested.
Maybe, it could be possible to float a share issue but today seems an unlikely time. I am not hugely enamoured of the idea of DK but I don?t think time is on our side. Furthermore, I wonder how long our present good fortune as a team can go on. We are playing possibly the best football for yonks but such things have a nasty habit of disappearing with the passage of time and not necessarily such a great deal of time.
24 Posted 09/02/2009 at 15:03:08
This does not take into account the fans who could not vote for numerous reasons (I did not receive a ballot paper despite requesting one 3 times via post, email and phone), those who did not vote and a majority of the hard core fans whose opinions were basically ignored and still are.
Therefore, the so called extra revenue Moyes will get from Kirkby is based on higher attendances from what would become the remotest stadium to its roots in the Premier League. Are we all willing to take the risk that a lot of fans will simply not go to Kirkby? Why put ourselves into that position?There are options, there always have been. Options that we can all agree upon no matter where you were born or live.
One last point ? Goodison and the area dire? A tad strong. If the board had not ignored Goodison for the past 25 years it could still be at the forefront of stadium design as it had been for the previous 100 years. I think its location is fine and enjoy the walk through the terraced streets etc.
There have been many amazing times at Goodison and long may it continue ala last Wednesday night. Against Sunderland I went with my 23-year-old daughter and took my 9 year old niece to her first game.(Her Dad and sister are mad reds). Despite a crap pint of Chang that tasted of pipe cleaning fluid, it was a fantastic day.
Sophie, my niece, has not stopped talking about it to anyone and everyone. Goodison is now in her blood and I for one believe our legacy to our future fans should be a redeveloped Goodison minimum. Where there is a will, there is a way.
If proved beyond doubt this is not possible then the Loop site should be considered. Yes the same site that Tesco and EFC have tried to discredit at every turn, which has been proved beyond doubt as a viable alternative to a redeveloped Goodison.
The finances may very well be able to be raised once Kirkby is put to bed and the exclusivity period with Tesco long gone. Anyway one step at a time. Let?s hope Kirkby is refused then we can look at all the alternatives and move forward into the future together.
25 Posted 09/02/2009 at 16:50:29
We?ve since found out at the inquiry by the LCC planning chief that the LCC planning ?machine? is not behind any ?loop? site at all or indeed any site and that it was the simple opinion of one or two cllr?s and a minion at a small cash and carry to KEIOC that the ?loop? site may possibly be an option.
The LCC QC at the inquiry last week could only mutter something along the lines of "There?s no reason why EFC cant wait a few more years until another viable option might crop up" ? hardly the words of a man who knows there?s an option available in the city right now. ;)
We?ve also found out at the inquiry that even if the loop site was big enough and available it would cost (according to Skempy) at least £230m and "probably more" - oops... how can the club afford that! Good job the site is too small and surrounded by busy important dual carriageways and is therefore not and never been an option. ;)
26 Posted 10/02/2009 at 11:53:22
Fine - then this will interest you.
AFTER the vote, we?ve since found out that the stadium will not, as promised, be ?state of the art?.
That it will not be ?effectively free?.
And that some supporters could end up waiting 90 mins for a train home after the match.
In other words, we?ve ?since found out? that what people voted ?yes? to, was total bollocks and was never going to happen..
In other words, they?d (we?d) all been lied to.
Now obviously, it?s not a crime to be lied to.
However, in my opinion, it IS a crime to be lied to, to then excuse the lies and the liars and instead suggest it is those who have been lied to, who are in some way playing with the truth.
In fact all logic suggests that in this situation, the only person who would/could take this course of action, would be someone with another agenda ? a personal interest in a move to Kirkby perhaps.
It?s funny, the name Rupert always reminds me of another fantasist of the same name.
Ever see the King of Comedy?
Pupkin did at least get to be ?king for a day?
You it seems are determined to remain ?schmuck for a lifetime?.
27 Posted 10/02/2009 at 21:00:14
Whether the new ground is state of the art or not is simply a matter of judgement of an individual, in my opinion a brand new 50,000 (extendable to 60,000) ground with excellent modern facilities, a club museum, wonderful sightlines will be a joy to behold and will be in the top four or five stadiums in the country. If you feel it is not state of the art and a hundred (or two) more millions need spending on it to make it ?state of the art? then the money has to come from somewhere... oops!
I dont remember any literature from the club saying ?effectively free? so no one was lied to... except the liars of KEIOC who raised the hopes of a small number of fans saying there was a viable alternative... except no one has told the LCC planning chief or the LCC QC at the inquiry that there is a viable alternative have they? ...oops! ;)
28 Posted 10/02/2009 at 23:06:37
29 Posted 11/02/2009 at 11:05:21
In fact, It is not argument or debate, simply denial.
He says "I dont remember any literature from the club saying ?effectively free? so no one was lied to... except the liars of KEIOC..."
He doesn’t remember "effectively free" so....it didn’t happen.
("don’t remember spewing up after them 15 Calvados and lemmos’ laar so....it never happened")
"Whether the new ground is state-of-the-art or not is simply a matter of judgement of an individual, in my opinion..."
So it’s now ’a matter of Judgement’...even though everyone (for or against) knows the once-used phrase ’state-of-the-art’ eventually became ’mid-range’.
Using my ’judgement’, Goodison is state-of-the-art and we’ve no need to move anywhere.
(Incidentally, while I’m here, Michael, can I ask for a ruling on calling another poster a childish, bellendish, fucking poltroon? I’ll abide by your decision of course).
30 Posted 11/02/2009 at 16:38:08
Since you have not been thusly stained, I can only imagine ’tis you who wishes to do the staining. I couldn’t possibly condone such a thing...
However, as they say, "it’s the thought that counts" ? And seems to me you have already thunk it.
Jimmy Carter... Playboy, perhaps??? God will no doubt mete out the correct punishment in due course.
31 Posted 12/02/2009 at 14:46:53
KEIOC have said repeatedly that a vast proportion of our support comes from Wirral & North Wales.
And to Rupert/Ged
You don’t remember anybody saying ’effectively free’ ?
Not even our esteemed Chief Exec, Mr Wyness?
32 Posted 12/02/2009 at 23:11:04
The map of season ticket locations is in the Traffic Assessment, Volume 3, if you are interested in looking it up, and the proposed local matchday services are based upon it.
Those who are saying that KEIOC should sit down with the Clu and resolve their differences are living in cloud cuckoo land. At the moment, the two sides are diametrically opposed. One wants to move to Kirkby, to the exclusion of considering all other options (due to the exclusivity agreement) and the other doesn?t. Unless one side can somehow persuade the other to make a 180 degree change in viewpoint it won?t happen. However, hopefully, when the day comes that DK is finally declared dead, I hope the Club have the wherewithall to include the experts from KEIOC and others in planning for the future. After all, they?ve had Desperate Dan and Corky the Cat working on it so far!
33 Posted 13/02/2009 at 01:34:20
Since day one the club has been willing to listen if an alternative hit them in the face - the exclusivity agreement cant stop alternatives coming forward.....its just that none have came forward - ask the LCC planning chief or indeed the QC representing LCC at the inquiry...
On to traffic and travel issues (I just feel like raising it again) - Merseytravel and the Highways Agency didnt object to DK and deemed the traffic and travel ’work in progress’ package as acceptable, those organs are the only organs worth listening to on the ol’ traffic and travel front not some KEIOC no-mark.
34 Posted 13/02/2009 at 08:01:49
In terms of other proposals coming forward, they did. You will remember, I?m sure, during one of your previous incarnations, that the esteemed Mr Wyness met with LCC and stated that the ground had to have the capability of being developed to 75,000 ? a requirement that has now been dropped, but which was useful at the time in order to refute potential proposals. It was clear that had LCC been able to meet that demand, then another spurious requirement would have followed.
As we now know, according to Tesco and KMBC, there is no cross subsidy or ?enabling? between the retail and stadium aspects ? something they came up with on day 1 of the Inquiry despite stating it more than 50 times in the application. If true, Everton can go anywhere. They don?t need Tesco.
As regards the transport being a ?work in progress?, let me enlighten you. It?s not.
It was admitted in the Inquiry that the railway station will not be capable of handling more than 4,000 spectators per hour ? more than that travel by rail to Goodison now. There is nothing they can do, no matter how many meetings they have. It?s done.
In terms of bus travel, if you believe Tesco and KMBC, it will take over an hour to clear the bus queues ? up to 90 minutes by KEIOC figures. To meet their target, Tesco will need to have a bus leave the bus station every 14.5 seconds for an hour, making it the busiest bus station in Britain by a margin of 50% ? their figures, not KEIOC. This bus station will operate with part time staff, maybe 25 times per year. Quite how it will achieve that efficiency is not explained, and the Inspector made a particular note of that point.
Finally, during cross examination,Tesco/Everton did not raise a single question regarding the KEIOC transport figures, and KMBC asked only one question ? concerning whether Merseytravel had signed off on it. In fact Merseytravel have signed off to the extent of qualifying that it must not impinge on current public transport services ? something which will be almost impossible.
What we do know is that Network Rail have expressed strong concerns about the current figures provided for rail travel, and the projected figures used by Tesco. For some reason, Tesco omitted those paragraphs from their evidence.
I wonder why?
35 Posted 13/02/2009 at 12:05:21
The transport IS ?work in progress?, LFC?s transport plan for their new stadium was and is ?work in progress? and their plan got rubber-stamped before it is anywhere near finalized. The traffic and travel stuff will move onto a new plane when DK gets passed and the tramline gets underway ? heavily hinted at by.... wait for it.... the LCC planning chief.... at the inquiry ? some of the witnesses for the objectors have actually been some of the best advocates FOR DK. We?ve had senior witnesses representing LCC and the CAO admitting to the Inspector that 1) DK will have little effect on Liverpool City Centre/Liverpool One, 2) There?s no alternative site ?In the City? and 3) No objections to the stadium.
Need I remind you the Inspector has actually been to Goodison on a match night... she will have seen how landlocked and how so much more residents Goodison affects than the comparitively little housing that the Kirkby stadium will affect... She will have seen how close our current ground is to where the RS new stadium will be... literally a couple of hundred yards away! I can visualise clearly how the inspector would view TWO new/redeveloped 50-70,000 stadiums in an area of just a few hundred yards affecting thousands of residents sixty times a year as something that needs to be ?sorted out? and that major stadia should be ?spaced out? more within the Scouse City Region. ;)
36 Posted 17/02/2009 at 12:08:29
For instance, I?m prepared to believe that Peter Stringfellow?s 12 year old girlfriend loves him ?for who he is? and doesn?t dry-heave each time she sees him in a leopard-skin bills.
Im also prepared to believe that the 81 year old lady down the landing from me, is right about her cat when she says - "he understands every word I?m saying".
That those fellers who say "actually my wife is my best friend" reeeeeaaally mean it.
That there?s a good, legitimate reason for restaurants using ?pan-fried? but not using ?saucepan heated-up?.
That anyone over the age of 11, traveling along the pavement on one of them little silver scooters, is not necessarily a twat.
That Bono wears shades indoors because he has an eye disorder that makes his eyes sensitive to light and not because he?s a self-centered oul? nobhead who mistakenly thinks it makes him look ?cool?.
That those hands-free bluetooth things that people wear on their ears are worn because those people are so busy, they need to be able to talk while having their hands free to perform other tasks.
That although Chelsea hadn?t won a title in 60 years, ludicrous amounts of money played only a small part in them winning two on the bounce.
Rupert Tarlington/Gerrard Madden is just some ordinary blue with no links to Everton!!?
In the words of William Shakespeare (as Hamlet said to Shylock in the Merchant of Vienna) "I should fuucking co-co!".