Haven't heard that but it could well be mateI think it is 1.3 to 1 for non international matches.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Haven't heard that but it could well be mateI think it is 1.3 to 1 for non international matches.
Honest to god, dont remember that. Seemed far more complete as well. Other than the concourses that were bare breeze block. In my defence, I was hosting taking a few lads on a corporate do, so drink may had been taken.
I do remember the WRFU had a goat on the pitch during the build up mind.
I did that survey today
They’ll need a while to read mine mateI done it yesterday and it said it would take 20 minutes. Took me about 45 minutes but maybe that's because I answered some of the questions like an essay lol
They’ll need a while to read mine mate
Sorry mate, I thought you were looking for the other WHS public buildings to go with the Three Graces on the water front. Cross wires.And what Dave? Not getting your point.
UnderstoodSorry mate, I thought you were looking for the other WHS public buildings to go with the Three Graces on the water front. Cross wires.
When the original plans for Liverpool Waters went to get outline planning permission Martin Samuel , who was then Chief Sports writer for The Mail , wrote an article against it .That Journo who did The Times piece seems to be their culture correspondent btw.
Probably loves wasteland docks.
I’m not going to pretend I know how important it is or isn’t to the city, but we can’t let the past define our future as a city. I want a council to hold that view, too.It's a sacred cow though. It'll be a massive decision to slay it.
The big boys have done all the figures , got the expert advice and shown the council the results.Sheer pragmatism will, or has.
For the boys involved it’s a 2 way win winI'm sure eventually a compromise will be forthcoming. The LW Project will have to be re-thought, and the likes of Anderson now bowing and scraping to UNESCO after his bravado about the WHS suggests it'll be significant enough to get the thumbs up. Maybe that was the idea all the way through: shoot for the stars in terms of scale and then throttle back to retain the waterfront's WHS?
That will delay matters, though, and it can only add to cost in terms of materials and possibly the way the stadium will have to be designed to fit in with the environment. I'd be concerned about cost. I do hope the club wont be taken beyond what is reasonable financially speaking in order to act as an anchor for a wider redevelopment. Our priority is Everton not Peel's fortune or Joe Anderson's legacy.
You'll get no arguments from me on that. My point is only that you cant ignore these organisations (or expect the council to ignore them). They have a lot of influence over what can or cant happen in this development. I've seen others here post stuff that minimises the danger to the scheme that they represent (encouraged by the attitude of that beaut Anderson it has to be said). But as you can see, they can make life very difficult.I’m not going to pretend I know how important it is or isn’t to the city, but we can’t let the past define our future as a city. I want a council to hold that view, too.
Unfortunately, I see no evidence of that in anything I've read so far. Everton will be stretched by this if it goes ahead; the club's assets are on the line.For the boys involved it’s a 2 way win win
They and their associates make money , Kronke gets a bloody nose and hit in the pocket and the boys get the ego boost and the kudos.
Everton get a shiny new stadium by the water that WONT be allowed put a financial strain on the club
This is an ego trip for UsmanovUnfortunately, I see no evidence of that in anything I've read so far. Everton will be stretched by this if it goes ahead; the club's assets are on the line.