Jump to content


Photo

Moyes Backs Groundshare


  • Please log in to reply
45 replies to this topic

#1 Louis

Louis

    Dixie Dean

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,612 posts

Posted 23 Nov 2008 - 10:15

David Moyes: “I know why people are against it but anyone who has seen Bayern Munich share with 1860 Munich can see how it’s done. One week it’s red, the next week blue.

“There are a lot of plusses.”
  • 0

#2 Jabber The Blue

Jabber The Blue

    Denis Stracqualursi

  • Members
  • 3 posts

Posted 23 Nov 2008 - 11:36

The last thing we should do, is share with then horrible bastards....


Don't go to bed with the devil!!
  • 0

#3 wakeyblue

wakeyblue

    Tim Howard

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 149 posts

Posted 23 Nov 2008 - 11:50

jabber i could not have put it any bettter myself
  • 0

#4 Bill

Bill

    Alex. Top player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,506 posts

Posted 23 Nov 2008 - 12:13

Its the only way we could get a half decent stadium.
If we have to go it alone we will end up with a corrugated tin pot, cheap and nasty, so called Stadium.
I'm all for it in Stanley Park.
  • 0

#5 dark

dark

    Pixie Lott <3

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,256 posts

Posted 23 Nov 2008 - 12:47

There may be some plusses from the groundshare but there could also be a lot of negatives. The rivalry will get worse and the bitterness would increase, we would be in the same stadium that hears 'You'll Never Walk Alone' each week and we would be sharing our seats with die hard Liverpool season ticket fans, we would be like one big club which is not what we want. Instead of having Dixie Dean outside the stadium he would be joined by Kenny Dalgliesh, Ian Rush, Steven Gerrard statues. Imagine that? On a matchday having your stadium decorated with Anfield legends. What colour would the seats be? Everton's ground with red seats? Imagine the vandalism that would take place, Liverpool fans would damage the Dixie statue more than they have already and vice versa. In my opinion the groundshare would create more problems that it solved.
  • 0

#6 Louis

Louis

    Dixie Dean

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,612 posts

Posted 23 Nov 2008 - 17:34

Dark, the major plus point for a groundshare is it would be cheap. A company would be able to build the stadium and let both clubs use it for free (and pay their own costs such as policing) as it would be bringing 120,000+ fans to the area most weeks to spend money on their supplementary businesses (selling food, hospitality, hoteliers, parking etc.).
  • 0

#7 Blue 250

Blue 250

    Bob Latchford

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,473 posts

Posted 23 Nov 2008 - 18:27

Speaking as a person who shared a bedroom with a red :angry: ....then to be honest a stadium wouldn't be a massive problem!

Sure I'd rather not!....you know a fantastic stadium in the Goodison footprint would have been my first choice.Other than that a nice new stand alone stadium in the "right place" would be ok!

I can only imagine that any shared stadium design would have to allow for the fact that one team couldn't have more of the limelight than the other, ie every thing would have to be equal.

A new (even shared) stadium for Everton would mean possible investment under the watchfull eye of Mr Kenwright.
Some have said why build a 55,000 seat stadium when we don't get 40,000 very often! Remember that a luckypool devoid of Gerrard and luck would lose a lot of their glory hunting fans, and after a couple of seasons outside the top 4 they might get less fans in than us!

Dixie Dean will look on with pride at whatever ground he's placed outside....safe in the knowledge that no one ever burnt shirts because of his attempts to get away from the place he loved.
  • 0

#8 StevO

StevO

    Blagging on the basis of knowledge

  • Cyber Steward
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,035 posts

Posted 23 Nov 2008 - 18:44

i dont see why rivalry would get worse. why would either set of fans vandalise it when its their home too.
its the only way out for both clubs in the current financial climate.
white seats id imagine, with red and blue lights all round to change the image of the place on match days. its all been talked about before. theres no reason other than big headed pride with no forward view on stadiums and finance.
as moyes said, it was done in germany, thats more a realistic comparison than the san siro.
  • 0

#9 duncanmckenzieismagic

duncanmckenzieismagic

    Howard Kendall

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,611 posts

Posted 23 Nov 2008 - 19:27

There may be some plusses from the groundshare but there could also be a lot of negatives. The rivalry will get worse and the bitterness would increase, we would be in the same stadium that hears 'You'll Never Walk Alone' each week and we would be sharing our seats with die hard Liverpool season ticket fans, we would be like one big club which is not what we want. Instead of having Dixie Dean outside the stadium he would be joined by Kenny Dalgliesh, Ian Rush, Steven Gerrard statues. Imagine that? On a matchday having your stadium decorated with Anfield legends. What colour would the seats be? Everton's ground with red seats? Imagine the vandalism that would take place, Liverpool fans would damage the Dixie statue more than they have already and vice versa. In my opinion the groundshare would create more problems that it solved.



In an ideal world I would much prefer our own stadium, somewhere like the Kings Dock would be nice :-) !!

However we are a million miles away from the ideal world. We blatantly cant afford to go it alone so its a straight choice between Kirkby/Tesco or a shared stadium.

I cant see how a shared stadium would effect the rivalry or the bitterness and seriously doubt that vandalism would be an issue. The technology exists for us to have a "blue stadium one week or a red stadium the next at the flick of a switch" according to the article which kind of rules out all of your points!

I personaly would prefer o share a ground in Liverpool with The Shite than to move to Kirkby, not that I am totally against that idea either!
  • 0

#10 Louis

Louis

    Dixie Dean

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,612 posts

Posted 23 Nov 2008 - 19:58

I think (ok.. know.) there's bound to be a few more options available than the ones you've listed, the choice is more varied than Kirkby/Tesco or Groundshare (there's Goodison for a start).

The biggest obstacle in my opinion is the exclusivity deal, if that was not in place, the club could advertise that they are looking to enter a business agreement with a hotelier and/or events company (for example). There are a few companies sniffing around at the moment following on from Echo Arena's success (there's a site next to that actually) who believe that larger capacity events are commercially viable in Liverpool and may be willing to help Everton with a multi purpose stadium (as SFX were in 2004).
  • 0

#11 duncanmckenzieismagic

duncanmckenzieismagic

    Howard Kendall

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,611 posts

Posted 24 Nov 2008 - 08:22

I think (ok.. know.) there's bound to be a few more options available than the ones you've listed, the choice is more varied than Kirkby/Tesco or Groundshare (there's Goodison for a start).

The biggest obstacle in my opinion is the exclusivity deal, if that was not in place, the club could advertise that they are looking to enter a business agreement with a hotelier and/or events company (for example). There are a few companies sniffing around at the moment following on from Echo Arena's success (there's a site next to that actually) who believe that larger capacity events are commercially viable in Liverpool and may be willing to help Everton with a multi purpose stadium (as SFX were in 2004).



Admittedldy I am only going from what I have heard in the media but it does seem that redeveloping Goodison is a definite non starter. How could we pay for it and can we really improve it that much anyway? Where would we play while the work was being done?
If you enough but I dont see ant reason why the club/BK would lie about it.
Yes I would prefer to stay in Liverpool and yes I would prefer our own stadium but Im just being realistic. The longer we stay where we are the further we will fall down the pecking order.
The benefits of a shared stadium are obvious and I cant honestly think of a single logical reason why anybody would be against it
  • 0

#12 jofanon

jofanon

    Kevin Sheedy

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,544 posts

Posted 24 Nov 2008 - 11:09

I'm all for it.

It makes a lot of sense I can't think of many reasons why not to.

Yes I'd prefer us to have our own stadium but removing emotion from it, and as a business decision, it makes financial sense.

I don't believe any of this loss of identity nonsense.

I do worry though if we can't fill 36k then how are we going to fill 70k??
  • 0

#13 TC.

TC.

    Tim Cahill

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 897 posts

Posted 24 Nov 2008 - 12:06

My only concern with the groundshare is that to majority of the world, it would NOT be our ground it would be Liverpool's home ground, with nobody knowing who we are. Unfortunately with Liverpool being so well known around the world, having a groundshare with them would in a sense decrease our appeal to the greater global community, as they are the more prominately known team.
  • 0

#14 Everton_Worshiper

Everton_Worshiper

    David Moyes

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,337 posts

Posted 24 Nov 2008 - 12:13

I'm all for it.

It makes a lot of sense I can't think of many reasons why not to.

Yes I'd prefer us to have our own stadium but removing emotion from it, and as a business decision, it makes financial sense.

I don't believe any of this loss of identity nonsense.

I do worry though if we can't fill 36k then how are we going to fill 70k??


Liverpool fans with season tickets might get reduced price tickets and vice versa.
Either set of fans might want to watch a football match between Manure and Everton or Liverpool and Real Madrid, it would work like the tickets do now, 1st Everton season tickets holders, 2nd Evertonia, 3rd General Sale, 4th Liverpool season ticket holders (maybe reduced rate???). I would rather have Liverpool season ticket holders there for £20 and spending another £10-15 on food/drink (assuming matchday revenue goes to the team who is playing) than having empty seats.

I am actually all for a shared stadium.
  • 0

#15 Everton_Worshiper

Everton_Worshiper

    David Moyes

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,337 posts

Posted 24 Nov 2008 - 12:15

My only concern with the groundshare is that to majority of the world, it would NOT be our ground it would be Liverpool's home ground, with nobody knowing who we are. Unfortunately with Liverpool being so well known around the world, having a groundshare with them would in a sense decrease our appeal to the greater global community, as they are the more prominately known team.


It may have the opposite affect in promoting Everton due to Liverpool's success.
Champions league games played at Stanley Park, "home to Everton FC & Liverpool FC".

Edited by Everton_Worshiper, 24 Nov 2008 - 12:16.

  • 0

#16 paul

paul

    Mikel Arteta

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 153 posts

Posted 24 Nov 2008 - 12:17

Why are people assuming that just because you share you are guranteed a good stadium?

Companies will always look to cut costs. There's no guantees it would be goodso can we nip this theory in the bud until plans are made please?
  • 0

#17 duncanmckenzieismagic

duncanmckenzieismagic

    Howard Kendall

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,611 posts

Posted 24 Nov 2008 - 12:26

Why are people assuming that just because you share you are guranteed a good stadium?

Companies will always look to cut costs. There's no guantees it would be goodso can we nip this theory in the bud until plans are made please?



Are you for real???

If the 2 clubs do decide to share it will half the costs and therefore it stands to reason that a better ground would be more affordable
  • 0

#18 Everton_Worshiper

Everton_Worshiper

    David Moyes

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,337 posts

Posted 24 Nov 2008 - 12:55

Why are people assuming that just because you share you are guranteed a good stadium?

Companies will always look to cut costs. There's no guantees it would be goodso can we nip this theory in the bud until plans are made please?


You don't have to comment or read the thread you know.
  • 0

#19 Romey 1878

Romey 1878

    Mildo

  • Cyber Steward
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 44,218 posts

Posted 24 Nov 2008 - 13:00

A while ago I'd have been dead set against a groundshare but re-developing Goodison seems out of the question (unless we get our own billionnaire) and the Kirkby stadium move is all wrong IMO and it has a cheap and nasty design, so for me, sharing with the shite is the lesser of two evils and I'm all for it.
  • 0

#20 dark

dark

    Pixie Lott <3

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,256 posts

Posted 24 Nov 2008 - 22:11

^That post has kinda' convinced me. If we look at the costs and looking at how much we could save then it would be good for both clubs. I suppose that the whole idea of being at Liverpool's ground would be forgotten after a few days there and once everyone has settled in then it would be a good thing to have. I know that there are a lot of downsides to this, the biggest being that we are sharing seats with Liverpool there are some plusses that have to be accounted for. We should look to either redo Goodision (which isn't going to happen) and Kirby just sounds worse and worse, even though the poll was won to move to Kirby I just don't see it going ahead. I think that the best thing for both clubs would be to groudshare. I'm on the fence, but I'm swaying to the majority.
  • 0

#21 Jesse11

Jesse11

    Phil Jagielka

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 340 posts

Posted 24 Nov 2008 - 22:20

If we keep playing like we did today we should be looking for a groundshare with Tranmere to host our League 1 battles.
  • 0

#22 Sprooly

Sprooly

    Andrei Kanchelskis

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 487 posts

Posted 25 Nov 2008 - 00:45

i agree mate that was so bloody bad
  • 0

#23 paul

paul

    Mikel Arteta

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 153 posts

Posted 25 Nov 2008 - 17:48

Are you for real???

If the 2 clubs do decide to share it will half the costs and therefore it stands to reason that a better ground would be more affordable


That still doesn't mean that they won't find ways to make the stadium cheaper does it? So that both clubs can save money again.

Until you see plans don't assume that it will be a great stadium.
  • 0

#24 StevO

StevO

    Blagging on the basis of knowledge

  • Cyber Steward
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,035 posts

Posted 26 Nov 2008 - 13:00

Until you see plans don't assume that it will be a great stadium.


works both ways mate, until you've seen any dont assume it wont be great.
the only plansso far have come from trevor skempton, and they were pretty impressive and individual to me.
  • 0

#25 duncanmckenzieismagic

duncanmckenzieismagic

    Howard Kendall

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,611 posts

Posted 26 Nov 2008 - 13:33

That still doesn't mean that they won't find ways to make the stadium cheaper does it? So that both clubs can save money again.

Until you see plans don't assume that it will be a great stadium.


It does make it a lot less likely though. If the costs are split between the 2 clubs it means they have more money to spend also if they were intending to cut corners they would have to run it past both boards and i cant see that happening
  • 0

#26 paul

paul

    Mikel Arteta

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 153 posts

Posted 26 Nov 2008 - 15:46

works both ways mate, until you've seen any dont assume it wont be great.
the only plansso far have come from trevor skempton, and they were pretty impressive and individual to me.


The point is, is that people are trying to sell this groundshare on the basis that it will be a great stadium when there is no evidence to back this argument up.
  • 0

#27 Everton_Worshiper

Everton_Worshiper

    David Moyes

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,337 posts

Posted 26 Nov 2008 - 16:45

The point is, is that people are trying to sell this groundshare on the basis that it will be a great stadium when there is no evidence to back this argument up.


To reiterate what StevO said, there is no evidence to the contrary.
  • 0

#28 paul

paul

    Mikel Arteta

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 153 posts

Posted 26 Nov 2008 - 20:43

To reiterate what StevO said, there is no evidence to the contrary.


Which is why I'm saying, why use quality as a selling point in favour of the argument? Is it therefore acceptable for me to argue against the groundshare under the assumption that it will be total rubbish?
  • 0

#29 StevO

StevO

    Blagging on the basis of knowledge

  • Cyber Steward
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,035 posts

Posted 26 Nov 2008 - 21:13

the point is paul, to sell it to both sets of fans it would have to be spectacular
  • 0

#30 BlueNose1878

BlueNose1878

    Mikel Arteta

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 152 posts

Posted 26 Nov 2008 - 21:32

The people who are for the groundshare obviously arent scouse :angry:
  • 0

#31 Romey 1878

Romey 1878

    Mildo

  • Cyber Steward
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 44,218 posts

Posted 26 Nov 2008 - 21:46

The people who are for the groundshare obviously arent scouse :angry:



You're not scouse so maybe you should want it ;)
  • 0

#32 Blue 250

Blue 250

    Bob Latchford

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,473 posts

Posted 26 Nov 2008 - 22:12

BlueNose perhaps your right! A lot of people who aren't scouse are maybe more open minded than you local Blues.I can understand that, my own feelings are (as a non-local) that a groundshare isn't really what I want, but for the good of Everton FC then so be it!

Credit to the local Blues, for making Everton the peoples club.
  • 0

#33 Everton_Worshiper

Everton_Worshiper

    David Moyes

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,337 posts

Posted 27 Nov 2008 - 08:59

I am sure we have been down this road before on here.....just because someone is not "scouse" nor do they live within a stones throw of the ground does NOT make them any less a fan - I am sure there are fans all over the country that put a lot more commitment and money into Everton than those that are scouse/local.

Blue 250....it is the Everton fans that made Everton the Peoples Club, not sure what "Credit to the local Blues" means..?
  • 0

#34 Louis

Louis

    Dixie Dean

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,612 posts

Posted 27 Nov 2008 - 09:34

I think the breakdown of those who would support a groundshare is basically those who can see the financial benefits of sharing with another club. There was an article in a magazine not long ago and in it was a red saying he'd hate it because both clubs have history and their own identity and many would refuse. The blue said that many fans who'd grown up with a stadium each would be dead in two generations time and any subsequent generations wouldn't know any other way and would embrace it as the common sense approach.

When you see that the city of Liverpool has a population of less than 500,000 (Merseyside 1.5m) and there are two separate similar capacity stadiums lying empty on the days the other is not in use, it begs the question "why"?

I'm not convinced Stanley Park is the best site for a shared stadium either (even though I acknowledge it would have a negative effect on some businesses in Walton and Anfield).
  • 0

#35 paul

paul

    Mikel Arteta

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 153 posts

Posted 27 Nov 2008 - 11:01

the point is paul, to sell it to both sets of fans it would have to be spectacular


I'm sure people said that about Kirkby, and believed it when people were trying to sell that, but after that fiasco, for fans to yet again fall for the 'it will be a great stadium' propaganda is just silly. Reserve any judgement and exclude quality of the stadium until there is further evidence.
  • 0

#36 pete0

pete0

    Howard Kendall

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,200 posts

Posted 27 Nov 2008 - 11:38

am scouse and i would agree a shared stadium makes more sense, as both clubs are lacking in finances. my grandad always goes on about when he was younger, he an all his mates went to both everton and liverpool games, so i think a ground share would be a good idea and would bring the people of liverpool closer again.
  • 0

#37 StevO

StevO

    Blagging on the basis of knowledge

  • Cyber Steward
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,035 posts

Posted 27 Nov 2008 - 12:04

I'm sure people said that about Kirkby, and believed it when people were trying to sell that, but after that fiasco, for fans to yet again fall for the 'it will be a great stadium' propaganda is just silly. Reserve any judgement and exclude quality of the stadium until there is further evidence.


then reserve judgement yourself mate, its a two way street, but you cant see it for some reason. if we cant be positive about it then you cant be negative, under your own guidelines.
  • 0

#38 duncanmckenzieismagic

duncanmckenzieismagic

    Howard Kendall

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,611 posts

Posted 27 Nov 2008 - 12:29

The point is, is that people are trying to sell this groundshare on the basis that it will be a great stadium when there is no evidence to back this argument up.


The reason I back a shared stadium isnt so much because it will be a great stadium, although that is another good point!
The main and in fact only selling point for me is that we cant afford to go it alone


Oh and I am a Scouser and have had a season ticket for as long as I can remember so I do understand it all!
  • 0

#39 paul

paul

    Mikel Arteta

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 153 posts

Posted 27 Nov 2008 - 13:21

then reserve judgement yourself mate, its a two way street, but you cant see it for some reason. if we cant be positive about it then you cant be negative, under your own guidelines.


I am reserving judgement on the quality of the stadium! I'm not going round saying that we shouldn't groundshare because it will be a rubbish stadium? However, people have argued in favour of it, saying that it will be a quality stadium! There is nothing to say that it will be a great stadium.
  • 0

#40 paul

paul

    Mikel Arteta

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 153 posts

Posted 27 Nov 2008 - 13:25

The reason I back a shared stadium isnt so much because it will be a great stadium, although that is another good point!
The main and in fact only selling point for me is that we cant afford to go it alone


Oh and I am a Scouser and have had a season ticket for as long as I can remember so I do understand it all!


Again assumption it will be great. (Interesting avatar for this debate by the way!)
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users