johnny punkster Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 What? forget it corp... jesus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc1955 Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 Read the thread, for Christ's sake. I have done and you seem to know for certain that our 12,000 seater stadium will be a 12,000 seater stadium for ever!!! I take it you would be happy with 16,000 then? Why don't you wait and see what the detailed plans are before making comments on something that you cannot possibly know!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 I have done and you seem to know for certain that our 12,000 seater stadium will be a 12,000 seater stadium for ever!!! I take it you would be happy with 16,000 then? Why don't you wait and see what the detailed plans are before making comments on something that you cannot possibly know!! I expect that the plans will state that it will be a 12000 seater stadium with room for expansion. I have explained many, many times, for the benefit of people like you who keep repeating the same questions, that I believe that if there was any intention of playing long-term at a higher level ever again then the stadium would have a larger than 12000 capacity to begin with. Nearly all grounds as small as that are concentrated at the lower end of the Football League. Anybody can pay lip service to ground expansion safe in the knowledge that it will never happen. I have also said, again in response to people who, it seems, won't read the thread despitean urge to post on it, that all I'm doing is questioning why we needed a 16000 seater stadium yesterday, but one of only 12000 capacity today-and all without any discussion. I've asked if that could possibly represent anything other than a downscaling of ambition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 forget it corp... jesus. It would help if you'd explain yourself in more than one or two words or short, barely coherent soundbites. The two chord thrash isn't a metaphor for life, you know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnny punkster Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 It would help if you'd explain yourself in more than one or two words or short, barely coherent soundbites. The two chord thrash isn't a metaphor for life, you know. well as i replied to your posts,why not go back and read again? but as i say ,forget it. tedious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 well as i replied to your posts,why not go back and read again? but as i say ,forget it. tedious. All you have to do is explain the Darlington comparison you raised. I've already said that I don't think our situation is similar to theirs at the time they built their stadium, and that nobody's suggested doing anything remotely like they did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnny punkster Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 "Though the stadium can seat up to 25,500 people, the club is restricted to just 10,000 because of county and local planning regulations." 2008/9 average attendance..around the 3,000 mark. white elephant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 "Though the stadium can seat up to 25,500 people, the club is restricted to just 10,000 because of county and local planning regulations." 2008/9 average attendance..around the 3,000 mark. white elephant And? As already said, nobody's advocated building a stadium as big as Darlington's. So where do they come into it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnny punkster Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 And? As already said, nobody's advocated building a stadium as big as Darlington's. So where do they come into it? i'd spell it out,but i've lost heart. i give up.you are ALWAYS right. i'll jog on now..life is short. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 And? As already said, nobody's advocated building a stadium as big as Darlington's. So where do they come into it? Do you not see any comparison? The only difference is in how many extra empty seats you think need to be built to show the suitable degree of ambition. To be honest you have just gone too far over this one Corp. For one who claims to be based on cold headed logic you have gone amazingly the other way, you may as well advocate yogic flying as the ambition that you keep banging on about. Darlington must have been proportionately the most ambitious club in the country when they built their ground. It's still 3 for a win and 1 for a draw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 i'd spell it out,but i've lost heart. i give up.you are ALWAYS right. i'll jog on now..life is short. Why not concede that there's nothing to spell out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
footy68 Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 I expect that the plans will state that it will be a 12000 seater stadium with room for expansion. I have explained many, many times, for the benefit of people like you who keep repeating the same questions, that I believe that if there was any intention of playing long-term at a higher level ever again then the stadium would have a larger than 12000 capacity to begin with. Nearly all grounds as small as that are concentrated at the lower end of the Football League. Anybody can pay lip service to ground expansion safe in the knowledge that it will never happen. I have also said, again in response to people who, it seems, won't read the thread despite an urge to post on it, that all I'm doing is questioning why we needed a 16000 seater stadium yesterday, but one of only 12000 capacity today-and all without any discussion. I've asked if that could possibly represent anything other than a downscaling of ambition. All supposition and your opinion. You bang on about how people should use facts and choose not to yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 Do you not see any comparison? The only difference is in how many extra empty seats you think need to be built to show the suitable degree of ambition. To be honest you have just gone too far over this one Corp. For one who claims to be based on cold headed logic you have gone amazingly the other way, you may as well advocate yogic flying as the ambition that you keep banging on about. Darlington must have been proportionately the most ambitious club in the country when they built their ground. It's still 3 for a win and 1 for a draw. But given Darlington's history and potential they were being wildly over-ambitious. Or more accurately, their Chairman at the time was. I don't see that Latics' (not a big club but bigger than Darlington) modest ambition to have a stadium that holds 16000 was in any way comparable. After all, it's hardly like we'd be the only club in the country who play in front of empty seats most games. As I keep having to point out, ground capacities reflect where you want to one day be. Taking your argument to its logical conclusion you might as well say that we should build a 7000 capacity stadium, as we rarely top that for league games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 All supposition and your opinion. You bang on about how people should use facts and choose not to yourself. Of course it's supposition and opinion. Doh! I haven't bangd on about how people ought to 'use facts.' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpmarko Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 I haven't said that we ought to do anything other than try to emulate those clubs from similar towns to Oldham who have managed to make a go of their football clubs, advancing up the league with decent stadiums and not jokey little Mickey Mouse arenas. Nothing that warrants your hysterical response. No rotating of clubs on my part. I've always wondered why the better of our Lancashire rivals thrive while we don't despite their having been struggling at the lower end of the scale in dilapidated grounds on crowds half the size of ours when we were flying high, and used those examples. Today I've mentioned the likes of Hull and Reading as examples of clubs who have never been all that big and exist in towns just as apathetic as Oldham allegedly is but who have now left us behind probably forever. And that's it. I haven't said that ground size equals ambition on its own. What I've said is that ground capacity reflects where you expect to spend most of your time. A capacity of a mere 12000 reflects the expectation of permanent lower division football. I don't know how we'd pay for the extra 4000 seats its deemed that we suddenly have to lose. I don't know how this latest project is to be funded. But neither do you. And if it isn't up to the owners of the club to find extra investment, I don't know who it is up to. The window cleaner or the man who sweeps out the stands perhaps? My my, accusations of hysteria followed by blatant sarcasm, you are slipping Corporal!! lol But anyway, here's a less than hysterical response for you. Firstly similar towns to Oldham who blah de blah. Who did you have in mind, who whilst being in a large town, are hemmed in by at least two large Premiership clubs (the two Mans), and three lower league clubs (Rochdale, Bury and Stockport) in very close proximity with other Premiership clubs, at least two of which have taken further success and fans away with the help of sugar daddies (Blackburn and Wigan). Bearing in mind also that Oldham does not have the old past traditional heritage and support of the likes of Burnley and Preston to call upon. In fact our record attendance is less than 48k, at a time when Bolton and Blackburn were known to pull in over 60k. So why are our Lancashire rivals doing better now? Pity you didn't mention who you mean but I'll try a few off the top of my head, hope I don't skip who you did have in mind. And bearing in mind that, yes, divide are growing, are more and more the poorer are getting left behind whilst the rich prosper, football is generally a business of cycles. Most clubs have had good times and bad times. And just because we've had good times doesn't mean that it follows that we should be able to keep that going forever. But we should try! And also I think a fair few Lancs clubs fall into the category of 'sleeping giants' as mentioned above. Certainly you can include Preston, who have slowly rebuilt their base, prudently and now have a pretty cracking ground albeit in a dodgy area. Although they haven't succeeded yet as they'd like I'd take them as a good example of how to build a club I think. Not sure how big Preston's population is especially as you could reach out into the countryside a little bit before hitting rivals. Bolton have certainly passed us by now, and probably quite similar to us in terms of being plagued by Man U, though they were flying high at much the same time as us. Not sure though if they would suit your arguments' purposes as it is difficult to define exactly what got them so well established in the top flight. It would be easy to pinpoint Sam Allardyce as the key catalyst there. But certainly they were helped by the building of the Reebok stadium, which ironically was slated at the time by being out of town, and the financing for which was too reliant on selling the name to Reebok, but which even more ironically is now slated for not being expandable. Blackburn, can be summed by Sir Jack Walker Wigan, ditto JJB guy Man City have had their troubles in between. What mainly got them out was getting 27k for League One games enabling them to climb free. Not to mention some incredibly lucky last moment play off goals. I don't think you had Man U in mind Blackpool. A bit far out but so far holding their own in the division above, have clearly not done it through investment in the ground. Burnley, also have not YET invested that much in their ground. They have got promotion to the Premiership via canny wheeling and dealing over transfers, but time will tell if their success stays, and you never know, they might joing the Southampton, Morwich, Leeds etc etc free falling past us. As for clubs you've just mentioned now; Hull Sugar Daddy!! Reading Sugar Daddy!! In fact, they are potentially perfect examples when you see them implode as the sugar is taken away. You just cannot realistically use those two as comparisons to Oldham when their support is artificially 'bought' by their wealthy owners. Your distinction between ambition and 'where you expect to spend most of your time' is just pure semantics. Stop wriggling Corporal and accept that, you cannot, in all honesty, simply take one look at a preliminary stadium plan and make the sweeping statements you have done. I don't claim to know what the future holds and we could be doomed very soon, but you certainly seem to have even less idea of TTA ambitions, and your opinion seems to be based on the flimsiest of reason. Fine, you think they are not ambitious enough for you, though more likely they are just unfortunately not rich enough. But to state 12k means they do not have ambition is just plain ridiculous. And finally the closing sarcasm, well, the less said about that, the better! Oh dear! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
footy68 Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 Of course it's supposition and opinion. Doh! I haven't bangd on about how people ought to 'use facts.' One of your fave statements is 'stick to the facts'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlossopLatic Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 (edited) I propose we go down the Bradford City root and show real ambition they got in to the premiership then expanded their ground massively to 30000 signed a load of overated players on over inflated wages and 10 years down now have a stadium where 20000 seats are left beautifully un sat in every season and haven't been sat in for years and have the indignity of Oldham "stagnation" Athletic pinching all the best players who want to come here to further their careers. We could ofcourse build a stadium with improved facilities makes the club self sufficent which when TTA decide their work is done means we are a more attractive proposition to any potential investors but that would be boring wouldn't it. Edited July 27, 2009 by GlossopLatic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lookers_Carl Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 One of your fave statements is 'stick to the facts'. Can I start FACT: For the 1994/1995, 1995/1996 and 1996/1997 season whilst playing in the second tier of english football, our average attendance was less than 9k for all three seasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wozz_oafc Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 Why dont we try and build the biggest stadium in the world, that will show that we are the most ambitious team in the world and will get the star players and fans flocking to us! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 But given Darlington's history and potential they were being wildly over-ambitious. Or more accurately, their Chairman at the time was. I don't see that Latics' (not a big club but bigger than Darlington) modest ambition to have a stadium that holds 16000 was in any way comparable. After all, it's hardly like we'd be the only club in the country who play in front of empty seats most games. As I keep having to point out, ground capacities reflect where you want to one day be. Taking your argument to its logical conclusion you might as well say that we should build a 7000 capacity stadium, as we rarely top that for league games. I'm quite willing to say that although I would have been perfectly happy to see a 16,000 seater stadium built, when you think about it it would have been pretty much surplus to requirements. Perhaps on the large side of requirements if we got promoted. You seem to think that saying the word, "ambition," enough times makes you right. It doesn't. I think ambition may well be better served with a smaller ground than you. The 16,000 figure is a fairly arbitary one, isn't it? Why are you taking it as some article of religious faith?How many points does ambition get you? Why would it not be practical and a sensible business decision to build seats when they had arses to sit on them rather than before? Why, why, why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnny punkster Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 Why not concede that there's nothing to spell out? no,you're right... nothing. you're loving the attention again aren't you... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lookers_Carl Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 Heres another one FACT Since we have been relegated from the premiership, to this date in all league and cup competitions, we have exceeded a crowd of 13k on just TWO occasions 8/2/2004 vs Grimsby 13007 (when everyone got in free) 8/1/2005 vs Man City 13171 in FA Cup round 3 And we have had a crowd of between 12-13k on just 7 occasions 21/12/1996 vs Man City 12992 Div 1 7/11/1998 vs Man City 12976 Div 2 2/1/1999 vs Chelsea 12770 FA Cup Round 3 10/5/2003 vs QPR 12152 Div 2 Playoff Semi 30/1/2005 vs Bolton 12029 FA Cup Round 4 13/5/2007 vs Blackpool 12154 League 1 Playoff Semi Final 26/1/2008 vs Huddersfield 12749 FA Cup Round 4 So all in all, in 15 full seasons (three at championship level, the rest at this level) we have exceeded a crowd of 12k on just 9 occasions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafcprozac Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 Heres another one FACT Since we have been relegated from the premiership, to this date in all league and cup competitions, we have exceeded a crowd of 13k on just TWO occasions 8/2/2004 vs Grimsby 13007 (when everyone got in free) 8/1/2005 vs Man City 13171 in FA Cup round 3 And we have had a crowd of between 12-13k on just 7 occasions 21/12/1996 vs Man City 12992 Div 1 7/11/1998 vs Man City 12976 Div 2 2/1/1999 vs Chelsea 12770 FA Cup Round 3 10/5/2003 vs QPR 12152 Div 2 Playoff Semi 30/1/2005 vs Bolton 12029 FA Cup Round 4 13/5/2007 vs Blackpool 12154 League 1 Playoff Semi Final 26/1/2008 vs Huddersfield 12749 FA Cup Round 4 So all in all, in 15 full seasons (three at championship level, the rest at this level) we have exceeded a crowd of 12k on just 9 occasions. Found the stats you were looking for then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
underdog Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 Ok I have my sarcastic head on now...lets all get one of these and stuff the ground. All get fully protected from weather, expansion is easy just buy more and we can create a big hill to watch from. Quids in. EXCELLENT!!!!!...count me in......eco friendly stadium eh......love it...no building cost whatsoever and we can stay at BP - just knock the stands down.....lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 EXCELLENT!!!!!...count me in......eco friendly stadium eh......love it...no building cost whatsoever and we can stay at BP - just knock the stands down.....lol I'm thinking of Gillingham away a couple of years ago. I think my core body temperature got back above freezing come March. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts