lcfcadam Posted 16 December 2009 Posted 16 December 2009 Tend to disagree. Very easy to do down the city in which you live but all this 'Nottingham is a better city than Leicester' ignores an awful lot of facts. The crime rate for one, the city chopping centres being another (Highcross now larger than Victoria) the multicultural nature of Leicester. The only area I would give Nottingham kudos is that their ground is more picturesque and atmospheric than ours (and the plans are to get rid of that) and the nightlife is better. Apart from that, not much between the two cities in my opinion. Exactamente.
Guest Bilo Posted 16 December 2009 Posted 16 December 2009 Why, just out of interest?City-centre-wise (I.E. shopping, eating etc), I would take Leicester any day (and to be clear I wasn't born here). Have you been down to Highcross recently? Or the more traditionally marvellous Queen's Road? How about Stoneygate? We have an incredible new multi-million pound Theatre, paired with a brand-new Arts Centre and a clear emphasis on culture. As well as City we have a world-famous rugby team. We have beautiful parks in Abbey Park and Victoria Park. Just not sure I agree with "twice the city of Leicester", in any respect really... Totally agree. We're all agreed that Leicester is far from perfect as a city but I moved away in 2000 and returned in 2008. In those eight years, Leicester went from being a city in Nottingham's shadow to, at the very least, matching it in most respects.
Leicester Rule! Posted 16 December 2009 Posted 16 December 2009 A summer holiday to Spain / Portugal or one down to Plymouth or up to Newcastle? I know what I would rather chose
OriginalRobboFOX Posted 16 December 2009 Posted 16 December 2009 I'd just like to know how much council tax is going to go up by next year as a result of submitting a bid.... Obviously way less than had we succeeded but at least we'd have world cup football to look forward to.... Well done Russ et al.
Edmund Posted 16 December 2009 Posted 16 December 2009 Why, just out of interest?City-centre-wise (I.E. shopping, eating etc), I would take Leicester any day (and to be clear I wasn't born here). Have you been down to Highcross recently? Or the more traditionally marvellous Queen's Road? How about Stoneygate? We have an incredible new multi-million pound Theatre, paired with a brand-new Arts Centre and a clear emphasis on culture. As well as City we have a world-famous rugby team. We have beautiful parks in Abbey Park and Victoria Park. Just not sure I agree with "twice the city of Leicester", in any respect really... Meh you can throw whatever you want at me but at the end of the day Nottingham has everything you've mentioned bar the rugby stadium and matches it like for like and if not better. Abbey park Never heard of sherwood forest? Stoneygate It's one road with a few over priced shops on. Of course I've been highcross it's just another shopping mall built from a flat pack shopping centre company. Queens road 'traditional', 'marvellous' what you on pal? I'm not getting into a petty argument about which city is better than which because it's getting embarrassing now. Sour grapes
Tommeh Posted 16 December 2009 Posted 16 December 2009 Meh you can throw whatever you want at me but at the end of the day Nottingham has everything you've mentioned bar the rugby stadium and matches it like for like and if not better.Abbey park Never heard of sherwood forest? Stoneygate It's one road with a few over priced shops on. Of course I've been highcross it's just another shopping mall built from a flat pack shopping centre company. Queens road 'traditional', 'marvellous' what you on pal? I'm not getting into a petty argument about which city is better than which because it's getting embarrassing now. Sour grapes The majority of moans on here are not at loosing out to Nottingham but MK Dons and to an extent Plymouth, the fact Nottingham are a long way from sorting out any sort of ground is added shock and more of a Joke. I'm glad we havn't got it and won't support the bid but even I can see the decision is beyond amazment, Derby would have been a wiser choice than Nottinham let alone Leicester. And twice the City is laughable, an ice rink and half decent arena is all, and this From someone who lives in neither.
lcfcadam Posted 16 December 2009 Posted 16 December 2009 Of course I've been highcross it's just another shopping mall built from a flat pack shopping centre company. Yeah, okay. I'm not getting into a petty argument about which city is better than which because it's getting embarrassing now. Well you won't feel the need to make another fucking stupid response then, will you?
Edmund Posted 16 December 2009 Posted 16 December 2009 The majority of moans on here are not at loosing out to Nottingham but MK Dons and to an extent Plymouth, the fact Nottingham are a long way from sorting out any sort of ground is added shock and more of a Joke. I totally agree read my initial post. I was also just giving my two pence to those who did moan about the Nottingham bid A lot of sour grapes on here. Lets be fair Nottingham is twice the city of Leicester and I'm not talking population.Okay they might not have plans in place or whatever but it's easily justifiable why we lost out to them. What is questionable is the MK Dons and Plymouth bids. Plymouth was obviously chosen on location reasons but surely Bristol's bid covered that area? MK Dons is just laughable. Plastic city, plastic football club and will financially cripple a club who already struggle to fill a stadium half the size of the proposed one. It's a sad day for English football. I echo others who say they hope England don't get it. Seriously not because of the fact we didn't get it but because it's an embarrassment and makes a mockery of the whole football culture. It also begs a question of how much money was wasted down the drain by our council trying to secure our bid which I'm guessing was paid by you and me.
RedHux Posted 16 December 2009 Posted 16 December 2009 Surely the plan for the new stadium was part of the bid submitted to the committee though? And this is the plan for the new stadium right? Don't get me wrong, I'm no expert on bowls, but that looks like one. My worst fear is to move away from our trentside home and to move into a run of the mill, average if spacey new stadium.
PSYCHO Posted 16 December 2009 Posted 16 December 2009 end of the day the FA have decided from a neutral point of view that Nottingham is better candidate. move on.......at least youve still got fosse park
Edmund Posted 16 December 2009 Posted 16 December 2009 Well you won't feel the need to make another fucking stupid response then, will you? Yeah our buildings are bigger than yours....... Fucking grow up mate. It's a fucking world cup bid and your crying because of a few shopping centers and buildings. Man up you twat it's just a world cup bid. They won fair and square, accept it.
Tommeh Posted 16 December 2009 Posted 16 December 2009 I totally agree read my initial post. I was also just giving my two pence to those who did moan about the Nottingham bid Ok I did miss that earlier bit. Just feel the "twice the city" was not really needed and was always going to get a negative reaction. I tink Sheffield's twice the city of Nottingham but don't fancy hitting the Forest boards to broadcast it.
Guest Bilo Posted 16 December 2009 Posted 16 December 2009 The majority of moans on here are not at loosing out to Nottingham but MK Dons and to an extent Plymouth, the fact Nottingham are a long way from sorting out any sort of ground is added shock and more of a Joke.I'm glad we havn't got it and won't support the bid but even I can see the decision is beyond amazment, Derby would have been a wiser choice than Nottinham let alone Leicester. And twice the City is laughable, an ice rink and half decent arena is all, and this From someone who lives in neither. Correct again. Milton Keynes and Plymouth being selected are so laughable that I don't need to point out what's wrong with them being selected. Pathetic. The thought of World Cup football being played at stadium:mk and Home Park makes my stomach turn. As for the 'twice the city' argument,we might as well say we're behind Peterborough because they have an ice rink. I honestly think the choice of cities made today has killed the 2018 bid a year before the decision is made. With the embarassing cities chosen, I can't say I'm all that bothered.
Corky Posted 16 December 2009 Posted 16 December 2009 end of the day the FA have decided from a neutral point of view that Nottingham is better candidate.move on.......at least youve still got fosse park If you read the thread most are slightly aggreived at losing out to Plymouth and Milton Keynes, though quite a few didn't want the tournament in Leicester anyway. You go ahead, enjoy it and sit in the 50k stadium afterwards
Edmund Posted 16 December 2009 Posted 16 December 2009 Ok I did miss that earlier bit.Just feel the "twice the city" was not really needed and was always going to get a negative reaction. I tink Sheffield's twice the city of Nottingham but don't fancy hitting the Forest boards to broadcast it. Yeah maybe it was un called for but I saw just as much reasoning as to why they won as to those who just saw it from a Leicester perspective. I agree with you about Sheffield, lovely city
FilboFox Posted 16 December 2009 Posted 16 December 2009 Yawn... all this is irrelevant as England won't win the bid anyway, the whole thing is a shambles at the moment and in choosing a city like Milton Keynes to host games, it only highlights how baffling some of the decisions they've made so far are.
Guest Bilo Posted 16 December 2009 Posted 16 December 2009 Sheffield is a proper World Cup city. Unfortunately, this is all just conjecture because it all seems to have gone terribly wrong over the past year.
Tommeh Posted 16 December 2009 Posted 16 December 2009 Sheffield is a proper World Cup city. Unfortunately, this is all just conjecture because it all seems to have gone terribly wrong over the past year. Too right. I'm sure tartanowl has more idea than me but the only thought I had was that when I've been hillsborough 20,000 people coming from the City centre has meant carnage on the trams and it'll be twice that for the WC but it's only a few minor transport upgrades and 8 years to do it. Not quite a whole ground to be built.
davieG Posted 16 December 2009 Posted 16 December 2009 Well at least it saves the Leicester City taxpayers stumping up £15mill and Leicester City fans from inevitably paying for a 10k extension to the ground. Oh and don't forget you'll probably not get to see a game live either because of the ticket prices or availability.
hairy Posted 16 December 2009 Posted 16 December 2009 Not really bothered that we are not hosting it. But how much does a stadium get for hosting a group stage match? It must be alot if stadiums are going to be extended or built for a single match. Anyone know what the going rate is?
Tommeh Posted 16 December 2009 Posted 16 December 2009 Plymouth fans view. nooooooooooooo What the f**king hell are you doing picking us. By doing so you have ruined my club. I dont want a 42000 seater stadium when there is only 5-9000 true fans. Were going down this year how f**king s**tting stupid are we going to look with 5000 fans knocking around in a 42000 seater stadium are you pissing stupid. Also i dont want as part of my football stadium, a basketball court, and ice rink, a place for concerts, idont want my pitch to be used by plymouth albion RFC. I dont want a hotel where you can get prawn sandwiches, i want my stadioum where i can stand with my bovril/beer without daytripping ****** talking there way through the ground about bollocks. We havnt got the infastructure, and we definatly are not a football following kind of people down here. The amount of peolple in the catchment area for PAFC and all we can manage is 5k true fans. Also, argyle have been hit with a transfer embargo this week for not paying their debts. they have tried to keep it quiet, for the reason of: we are wasting pointless money on the world cup bid. We should be spending our money on the team to stop us getting relegated. All i can hope for is that england dont win the bid, or i will have to stop going to argyle, if only home matches. The only upside is, surely we cannot win the WC bid if MK Dons are one of our host citys, hahahahahaha, dont be silly england. And whoever the old bloke is who made the decision, what is he banging on about, MKdons being one of the "unsung successes of english football". How, why,what the hell are you talking about. Please dont give england the WC please please please.
MC Prussian Posted 16 December 2009 Posted 16 December 2009 Plymouth! Milton Keynes...? The responsibles probably thought it was about time the Stadium:MK got a chance of being sold-out for once.
lou Posted 16 December 2009 Posted 16 December 2009 Well at least it saves the Leicester City taxpayers stumping up £15mill and Leicester City fans from inevitably paying for a 10k extension to the ground.Oh and don't forget you'll probably not get to see a game live either because of the ticket prices or availability. Pretty much word for word what I said when I heard. Feel for the fans of some of the clubs that have got it, upgrading the stadia could finish some of them and it could all be for nothing...
Guest Bilo Posted 16 December 2009 Posted 16 December 2009 Pretty much word for word what I said when I heard. Feel for the fans of some of the clubs that have got it, upgrading the stadia could finish some of them and it could all be for nothing... Plymouth Argyle, MK Dons and Nottingham Forest suffering financial catastrophe as a result? BACK THE BID
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.