Stadium Poll

[McDurban]

For me it is very simple, if Forest want to compete in Europe, they need significantly higher revenues and multiple revenue streams.
Attendance and associated match day revenue are one of those streams.
Non-match day revenue is crucial to bolstering the financial stability of the club.
If this cannot be achieved at the present location then alternative must be sought.

I'd be perfectly happy to take over the Nottinghamshire Sports Club next door, if they can be convinced to move.
I'd even go so far as to say they should be obliged to move in the financial interests of the city and the level of redevelopment that could be achieved on the south bank of the Trent with a mega project like a new City Ground would support.
Maybe they should move to Toton.

[Salvatore Matrecano]

Still somewhat confused as to logic from some of you.
The arguments have never changed, it has always been simpler to do a new build.
We have always known the CG doesn’t generate enough commercial revenue and doesn’t have a large enough capacity for bigger games. More revenue means growth opportunities for the club.
All this was true when Doughty wanted to move us to Gamston 20 years ago. Until a few days ago the overwhelming majority reaction was, we dont care we want to stay at the CG.

Therefore those of you know in favour or have shifted opinion, why the change?

For me Sal, it is probably down to stopping and thinking about the whole scenario, looking outside of the box if you like, and seeing the much bigger picture.

I have let my heart rule my head on this as it is an emotive issue. However, my head has now taken over and whilst it will pain me to know we may be moving to a new home, I now think the right move is probably the right option moving forwards.

As I said in my post, I doubt I will be around to see any move, but that would be me being selfish if I stood firm on the stay at the City Ground, rather than thinking of the club and its fan base in the future.

However, it might be worth asking the same question of the club!

It wasn't so long ago that Nicholas Randall KC informed the world that the lease had now been extended to 250 years and Tom Cartledge was spouting off that the City Ground would forever be our forever home? So who was lying? What has turned the clubs decision? I feel the decision to look at alternative sites is more to do with the planning application for the apartments being stuck in the mud, the problems with the Boatclubs and the numerous objections to those rather than it being a purely football decision.

If there was a feasible way in which we could stay at the City Ground, whilst being able to increase revenue streams, increase the stadium size and bring the rest of the ground up to modern day standards, then I would 100% be in the stay camp.

Thanks Tricky. Your post from yesterday was spot on my views too by the way.

I agree the duplicity from the club is getting infuriating. First Randall tells us we bought the freehold when we hadn’t. Then Cartledge tries to make out its all the council’s fault that we need to move when clearly they had already made up their minds moving was the preferred option.

How about Forest, you stop with the BS and come out and just say its the commercial necessity is the overriding factor and stop trying to deflect the blame and supporter opinion on to others? Not the first time they have acted like this, no wonder people lose trust.

Finally I remain torn on the whole question. Think if there was another option on the poll of new stadium within a mile of the CG that may well get a majority opinion. Toton would be good for me, I could walk there but its rubbish for most and Ratcliffe would be hopeless too.

[Sniffer Dog (Admin)]

The poll has been updated because another option has been added and people who have already voted can now vote again if they want to. Just click on undo vote in the red band above the poll and vote again.

Wassy, hope you don't mind me updating your poll (sorry).

[wassy04]

The poll has been updated because another option has been added and people who have already voted can now vote again if they want to. Just click on undo vote in the red band above the poll and vote again.

Wassy, hope you don't mind me updating your poll (sorry).

No worries, think the result would be pretty similar anyway. Just with everyone switching to the new option.

[Tricky]

The poll has been updated because another option has been added and people who have already voted can now vote again if they want to. Just click on undo vote in the red band above the poll and vote again.

Wassy, hope you don't mind me updating your poll (sorry).

There's no option to undo my vote Sniff

[Sniffer Dog (Admin)]

The poll has been updated because another option has been added and people who have already voted can now vote again if they want to. Just click on undo vote in the red band above the poll and vote again.

Wassy, hope you don't mind me updating your poll (sorry).

There's no option to undo my vote Sniff 

Are you sure mate. Both myself and also Bestwood Red have done it.

You should have gone to Specsavers

[Paplane]

The poll has been updated because another option has been added and people who have already voted can now vote again if they want to. Just click on undo vote in the red band above the poll and vote again.

Wassy, hope you don't mind me updating your poll (sorry).

There's no option to undo my vote Sniff 

Are you sure mate. Both myself and also Bestwood Red have done it.

You should have gone to Specsavers 

Cant do it either Sniff.

[Sniffer Dog (Admin)]

The poll has been updated because another option has been added and people who have already voted can now vote again if they want to. Just click on undo vote in the red band above the poll and vote again.

Wassy, hope you don't mind me updating your poll (sorry).

There's no option to undo my vote Sniff 

Are you sure mate. Both myself and also Bestwood Red have done it.

You should have gone to Specsavers 

Cant do it either Sniff.

Have you refreshed the page?

[McDurban]

refreshed and no option to undo

[Sniffer Dog (Admin)]

Strange because the new option has 5 votes already.

Perhaps it is the device or the browser you are using.

I am signed in on my laptop and using Google Chrome if that helps.

[zicorice]

Interesting mood swing on here on the back of one pretty soft interview.

Talk of a sports village. What does that really mean. In reality it will probably be just football and a training ground complex, not convinced there will be a multi sports facility. Do any of you care about other sports really? I don’t to be honest.

What it will mean is that all the catering and drinking facilities will be on site, Sounds good? Not really, it means you will be stuck having your pre match at the same bland corporate outlet, forget your nice atmospheric places like the Nav and TBI, many of these places at Trent Bridge could well fold.


I still get the commercial necessity and have always said the CG is no longer fit for purpose. But surprised how easily people are now having a change of heart on the back of some very vague promises.

Spot on. Man City is sh1te for away fans. To get a beer you are told to go inside ground despite the numerous (sh1te) outlets. Lesson taken on and we stay in City Centre before jumping on a bus/team to ground. City fans said same.

The question is really what are my priorities when I attend a game. What got me hooked and what do I want going forward?

1. Camaraderie with mates and fellow supporters.
2. Atmosphere to make the hairs on neck tingle.
3. Decent team and some winning football.
4. Players who actually give a sh1t about the fan's.
5. Memories for a lifetime.

What do I want going forward?
All of the above.

If the WFCG can be developed to cator for around 40k people, with the appropriate modern facilities to generate some extra all year around income then that will do me. I don't give a flying f@(k where our pampered overpaid players train day to day or if we are unable to accommodate extra tourists from around the world.  (as opposed to Forest supporters).

In reality a 50k vs 40k stadium (if filled every game) is around £7 million difference a season Or one sh1t players wage. Or 3 places higher finish in prize money. Or a shirt sponsor.......

As another poster has said let's get ourselves sorted first with the basics. The fact that our previous chairman said for some games we could have sold 50k tickets does not mean we need a 50k stadium, as nice as that would be.

It depresses me to think even many Forest fans have accepted that it's all about the revenue streams and the like.  Money is absolutely killing football.

[Username]

^agreed

Anyone advocating Toton should look at the Brighton match day experience, it’s an utter shit show logistically and the only way to get a pint is to be in the ground for overpriced flat beer.