Stadium Thread - ALL Kirkby/Stadium Discussion Here

[BlackToffee]

It'd help no end if you concentrated on the argument and not in demonising people as members of the 'Flat Earth Society'. Just a thought.

Pot. Kettle. Kenwright.

Clearly he never read the article, hes made his mind up and thats it. I was all for it at 1 stage and I changed my mind once I had read the arguements made for and against.

I guess some people just arent for changing.

I did read the article. After your second invitation I thought that I should. If you want I can give you a full discertation of the article if you wish just to show you that I read it.

When an organisation is against something then they say in an article meant to persuad people like me of their viewpoint "based on our own research", someone like me who has done social research is bound to conclude that a great deal of bias has gone into that "research".

In otherwords, treat me like I'm intelligent then I am open to possibilities, treat me like an idiot and reap the worldwind. That's all I ask of the no camp.

 

[Nebbiolo]

Pot. Kettle. Kenwright.



I did read the article. After your second invitation I thought that I should. If you want I can give you a full discertation of the article if you wish just to show you that I read it.

When an organisation is against something then they say in an article meant to persuad people like me of their viewpoint "based on our own research", someone like me who has done social research is bound to conclude that a great deal of bias has gone into that "research".

In otherwords, treat me like I'm intelligent then I am open to possibilities, treat me like an idiot and reap the worldwind. That's all I ask of the no camp.

Bias has gone into the article, but I believe that that bias is well-founded. There is nothing inherently wrong in providing a viewpoint. Political parties doing it all the time. Moral movements do it also. It's about a vision for the future. Keioc might not be every person's cup of tea, and they're certainly not a sleek, professional outfit. But, like with many grassroots organisations, their point is very pertinent.

 

[steevie]

BT, i dont understand your meaning that those who dont agree with a move to Kirkby is a biased opinion or that of someone who is misinformed. Firstly, anyone has the right to express concerns contrary to age, education and beliefs. Secondly, respect and understanding should be given to all for and against a possible move to Kirkby. My main argument is thus, why move to a stadium in an area more difficult to travel too when Goodison Park is quite easily more accessible from Liverpool City Centre? Why also move to a stadium with greater difficulty to reach with a higher ground capacity when we cannot currently fill Goodison Park? Everyone is entitled to their say without being labeled bias and just because all dont agree with your reasoning does not mean they are incorrect. No offence meant mate, just my opinion.

 

[BlackToffee]

BT, i dont understand your meaning that those who dont agree with a move to Kirkby is a biased opinion or that of someone who is misinformed. Firstly, anyone has the right to express concerns contrary to age, education and beliefs. Secondly, respect and understanding should be given to all for and against a possible move to Kirkby. My main argument is thus, why move to a stadium in an area more difficult to travel too when Goodison Park is quite easily more accessible from Liverpool City Centre? Why also move to a stadium with greater difficulty to reach with a higher ground capacity when we cannot currently fill Goodison Park? Everyone is entitled to their say without being labeled bias and just because all dont agree with your reasoning does not mean they are incorrect. No offence meant mate, just my opinion.

I never said that those who don't agree with Kirkby are biased. Never said that. I was asked to read an article which had convinced other people to be against Kirkby. It was felt that once I had read the article I would be convinced. I read an article which, apart from two points, could be an article against a move per say. I pointed this out in my response and was accused of not reading the article.

I did read the article, so I am a bit offended that someone would think that I didn't take the time to read it. I have no problem with people having different opinions, its the basis of this forum and one to which I subscribe to.

You raise the fundamental points that this thread is about. Without going all over the issues again, I'll say this. We either at a start agree or disagree that GP does not currently fulfill our ambitions. We need to either rebuild GP or stay where we are. I do not feel that GP fulfills our ambitions.

Basically you take it from there. The more successful we are, the more sell out games we have, simple as that. The Flat Earth Society at the enquiry appeared to argue that as we don't fill our stadia we don't need to move. Therefore using their own logic, we don't need to rebuilt GP, and we don't need to worry about a stadia within the city boundary, but they always advocate a stadia within the city boundary, even though we can't fill our current stadia. How contradictory is that? The only logical conclusion that you can reach with that attitude is the RS singing "The cities all ours"

We need a new ground which we can afford and which can be built.

Kirkby fits that bill. All the other suggestions made are, to use the common parlance, undeliverable. Personally, I don't give a damn about political boundaries ~ when the tories get in next year they want to reduce the MP's and the boundary commission may revisit the issue of Kirkby being part of the city of liverpool.

Transport is a real issue, but you should realise that nothing stays the same forever, and even if at the start transport is not up to scratch, it doesn't mean that it can't improve.

Hope that helps.

 

[steevie]

I never said that those who don't agree with Kirkby are biased. Never said that. I was asked to read an article which had convinced other people to be against Kirkby. It was felt that once I had read the article I would be convinced. I read an article which, apart from two points, could be an article against a move per say. I pointed this out in my response and was accused of not reading the article.

I did read the article, so I am a bit offended that someone would think that I didn't take the time to read it. I have no problem with people having different opinions, its the basis of this forum and one to which I subscribe to.

You raise the fundamental points that this thread is about. Without going all over the issues again, I'll say this. We either at a start agree or disagree that GP does not currently fulfill our ambitions. We need to either rebuild GP or stay where we are. I do not feel that GP fulfills our ambitions.

Basically you take it from there. The more successful we are, the more sell out games we have, simple as that. The Flat Earth Society at the enquiry appeared to argue that as we don't fill our stadia we don't need to move. Therefore using their own logic, we don't need to rebuilt GP, and we don't need to worry about a stadia within the city boundary, but they always advocate a stadia within the city boundary, even though we can't fill our current stadia. How contradictory is that? The only logical conclusion that you can reach with that attitude is the RS singing "The cities all ours"

We need a new ground which we can afford and which can be built.

Kirkby fits that bill. All the other suggestions made are, to use the common parlance, undeliverable. Personally, I don't give a damn about political boundaries ~ when the tories get in next year they want to reduce the MP's and the boundary commission may revisit the issue of Kirkby being part of the city of liverpool.

Transport is a real issue, but you should realise that nothing stays the same forever, and even if at the start transport is not up to scratch, it doesn't mean that it can't improve.

Hope that helps.

So, are you for or against a move to Kirkby?

 

[DENNIS STEVENS]

You do make me smile BT. I respect your right, & anybody elses for that matter, to hold any opinion at all but I do find your use of the term Flat Earth Society more than a little ironic seeing as how this sort of comment is usually made with regard to somebody who stubbornly clings to a discredited idea ......

 

[BlackToffee]

You do make me smile BT. I respect your right, & anybody elses for that matter, to hold any opinion at all but I do find your use of the term Flat Earth Society more than a little ironic seeing as how this sort of comment is usually made with regard to somebody who stubbornly clings to a discredited idea ......

Flat Earth Society = KEIOC = discredited idea. Got it in one.
I don't deny them a legitimate view. I just don't like them, don't trust them. Nothing personal, I'm sure they are passionate Evertonians.

 

[BlackToffee]

So, are you for or against a move to Kirkby?

I am for Everton building a new ground, whether that be Kirkby or Goodison Park. But, to use the modern parlance, the new ground has to be "deliverable"

 

[Goat]

Thats the only reason people like Kirkby. Because its the only thing we can afford, that doesnt make it the best option, that just makes it the only option with the current board.

 

[DENNIS STEVENS]

Flat Earth Society = KEIOC = discredited idea. Got it in one.
I don't deny them a legitimate view. I just don't like them, don't trust them. Nothing personal, I'm sure they are passionate Evertonians.

Er, no you didn't

 

[Inner-city]

But, but, but you're talking rubbish, Goat. The stadium is effectively free and is the deal of the century. Kirkby is only a 5 minute jog from Goodison and the stadium is world-class. Goodison will also fall down within 5 years. FACT.

The Kirkby stadium is 2nd rate. It is too small and the corners are not even used. There is no expansion on the 50,000, so the club's progress is halted.

There is no rapid-transit rail station to shift the fans. It needs a 30,000 per hour station adjacent. Without that all of the stadium will be flop. It will not propel the club forward at all.

Walton Hall Park is the answer, near to GP, and recommissioning the Outer Loop rapid-transit Merseyrail line to shift the fans. It is all there waiting. No joined up thinking at all.

 

[Inner-city]

Thats the only reason people like Kirkby. Because its the only thing we can afford, that doesnt make it the best option, that just makes it the only option with the current board.

Totally correct. A stadium with no expansion and no rapid-transit rail station will not propel the club forward. Status quo. The odd cup final appearance is all we can hope for. Bye, bye big time.

 

[davek]

Read elsewhere today that the proposed site is fenced off at Kirkby. Let's hope it's for Tesco to build their Super-dooper Megastore and not a stadium or we really are facing long term oblivion.

 

[Inner-city]

Flat Earth Society = KEIOC = discredited idea. Got it in one.
I don't deny them a legitimate view. I just don't like them, don't trust them. Nothing personal, I'm sure they are passionate Evertonians.

KEIOC is for two things:

1. Stay at GP - That is suicide

2. The Loop - a very poor site with no rapid-transit rail available in a city with a metro rail network.

Poor effort.

 

[Nebbiolo]

I never said that those who don't agree with Kirkby are biased. Never said that. I was asked to read an article which had convinced other people to be against Kirkby. It was felt that once I had read the article I would be convinced. I read an article which, apart from two points, could be an article against a move per say. I pointed this out in my response and was accused of not reading the article.

I did read the article, so I am a bit offended that someone would think that I didn't take the time to read it. I have no problem with people having different opinions, its the basis of this forum and one to which I subscribe to.

You raise the fundamental points that this thread is about. Without going all over the issues again, I'll say this. We either at a start agree or disagree that GP does not currently fulfill our ambitions. We need to either rebuild GP or stay where we are. I do not feel that GP fulfills our ambitions.

Basically you take it from there. The more successful we are, the more sell out games we have, simple as that. The Flat Earth Society at the enquiry appeared to argue that as we don't fill our stadia we don't need to move. Therefore using their own logic, we don't need to rebuilt GP, and we don't need to worry about a stadia within the city boundary, but they always advocate a stadia within the city boundary, even though we can't fill our current stadia. How contradictory is that? The only logical conclusion that you can reach with that attitude is the RS singing "The cities all ours"

We need a new ground which we can afford and which can be built.

Kirkby fits that bill. All the other suggestions made are, to use the common parlance, undeliverable. Personally, I don't give a damn about political boundaries ~ when the tories get in next year they want to reduce the MP's and the boundary commission may revisit the issue of Kirkby being part of the city of liverpool.

Transport is a real issue, but you should realise that nothing stays the same forever, and even if at the start transport is not up to scratch, it doesn't mean that it can't improve.

Hope that helps.

I hope you don't take this the wrong way, BT, but do you know Kirkby in relation to Liverpool? Like you, I'm also not a local to Everton (these days), but I do know Merseyside, Liverpool and Lancashire. I just get the feeling that you're coming into this debate without an awareness of the geography or the sociology of that region of the north west.

How about I say I can speak about the region of the south east that you're from with the authority that you have?