Stadium Thread - ALL Kirkby/Stadium Discussion Here

Status
Not open for further replies.
To answer your question I was born in London. Other than the Beatles and of course Everton I have no direct contact, relationship with the Mersey region.

But i am sure that Bill and Everton have an idea of what they are doing. The difficulty with those who try and say "What if this happened in London", is that London is too diverse a city. It already has 12 professional football teams, so moving would have to be set into another context.

For example, a team might want to locate into Notting Hill area. That area has patches of rich people, it contains the largest shopping mall in europe, but its a poor borough. They would also be fighting for support from QPR, Brentford etc.

Kirkby on the other hand is acknowledged as an Everton supporting stronghold. And while I don't want to diss anyone's area, the Walton district isn't exactly the West End of London, so we're not exactly leaving a rich area to move to a poor area. From what I understand, we are moving from a poor area to a poorer area, where regeneration may assist its development.

Well its just that you seem happy to call people Flat Earthers when you admit you've no direct knowledge of the area.

Now you're right that Walton isn't exactly the West End. But it's central to the core support and surrounding it there are many facilities that can be utilised by the fans.

Take a look at a map of the area. Everything you see on it from Kirkby to the west and south is mixed Everton/Liverpool. Everything to the north and east is no-man's land as far as Everton is concerned. There are Evertonians there, but they're outnumbered significantly by Man United and Liverpool supporters.

I suppose the nearest I can think of is this would be like Tottenham moving to Watford, West Ham moving to Thamesmead (that's the closet I can think of as an example actually), Chelsea popping down to Balham, Arsenal upping sticks to Friern Barnet. All those areas have supporters of each club, but they're all wrong for those clubs.

You use the term Flat Earthers like people are so stupid that they prefer to ignore all evidence that their theory is wrong. But that's not the case with the anti-Kirkby people at all. There is compelling evidence to suggest that a move to Kirkby is wrong for Everton, the same as it would be for Liverpool. Fair enough that you're a guy that thinks progress concerning Everton is measured by the first change offered. But I think you should leave the Flat earth references to areas that they deserve to be applied. Just like I wouldn't call a pro-Kirby person a Philistine, or a gullible type, you shouldn't assume that an anti-Kirkby person is a Flat Earther, bent on ignoring all compelling reasons as to why his theory of the universe is hideously wrong.
 
Last edited:
Take a look at a map of the area. Everything you see on it from Kirkby to the west and south is mixed Everton/Liverpool. Everything to the north and east is no-man's land as far as Everton is concerned. There are Evertonians there, but they're outnumbered significantly by Man United and Liverpool supporters..

Take a look at Speke on a map.............
 
If you have a firm belief that moving to Kirkby is correct, and you claim people against your position are Flat Earthers, you should have some local knowledge to back that belief up.

What suggests he doesn't?


Its a site thats been suggested. You might find its actual geographical location interesting - especially as its 'Liverpool' and the importance you place on district.
 

What suggests he doesn't?

See above


Its a site thats been suggested. You might find its actual geographical location interesting - especially as its 'Liverpool' and the importance you place on district.

You've got it wrong if you think I'm for a move to Speke. Location is the most important aspect of this. Speke would be a poor location, probably poorer than Kirkby.
 
See above




You've got it wrong if you think I'm for a move to Speke. Location is the most important aspect of this. Speke would be a poor location, probably poorer than Kirkby.

The point is, Speke is in 'Liverpool' - but its further away from Liverpool than Kirkby.

Interesting that.
 

The point is, Speke is in 'Liverpool' - but its further away from Liverpool than Kirkby.

Interesting that.

It is interesting and I think proof that at least for some people, the most important aspect of this is about more than retaining a Liverpool address. If the boundary shifted tomorrow and Kirkby was incorporated into the city, the location would still be wrong for Everton.
 
It is interesting and I think proof that at least for some people, the most important aspect of this is about more than retaining a Liverpool address. If the boundary shifted to morrow and Kirkby was incorporated into the city, the location would still be wrong for Everton.

And a location that would be right is?....
 
And a location that would be right is?....

Mate, I can't tell you that. It's up to the club to come up with proposals. The current proposal is wrong, so I'm just saying so. I have a preference, which is to redo the ground piece by piece. But if the club investigates other options that seem feasible and the location is agreeable, then I'm all for change.

There are options out there, which have all been dismissed by the club while it pursues its Kirkby "dream". If Kirkby goes tits up, something else will suddenly be deemed possible by the club. Plan B will come about. At the moment we're relying on an under0funded pressure group to do all the work regarding alternative sites. If the club took over from that group, progress almost certainly would be made.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome to GrandOldTeam

Get involved. Registration is simple and free.

Back
Top