(01-08-2024, 05:26 PM)Tricky Wrote:

(01-08-2024, 08:22 AM)ToryTom Wrote:

(01-08-2024, 07:11 AM)Sniffer Dog (Admin) Wrote:

(31-07-2024, 09:46 PM)ToryTom Wrote:

(31-07-2024, 09:24 PM)Salvatore Matrecano Wrote: The huge difference is that Man Utd plan to build their new ground adjacent to the old one still within Old Trafford. Its a big industrial area with room for development.

Forest of course dont have the room and its just not possible, even a move within a few miles would seem to be impractical, pretty sure the club have looked at alternatives. So the option is Toton or some other site probably outside the City. Commercially a move would make sense but if you think that’s the only consideration in my opinion you miss the point. Personally I think that alternative strips the club of its identity and what we lose is far more than we gain.

Man City, Arsenal, West Ham, Brighton, Southampton, Leicester Derby , Sunderland all moved to bigger and better stadiums in different locations. I bet not many of their fans would regret those moves and wish to go back to their old stadiums. Why would Forest fans be any different.

Sorry but that is Dog S**t ^

None of them left from an iconic location like the City Ground for a start and non of them moved to a S**t tip like Toton.

You are completely missing a much bigger picture.

The love affair and the history and nostalgia  etc of the CG, doesn't it mean anything to you?

Those other clubs you mentioned didn't have that.

The comparison you are trying to make is not  valid and is actually a bit annoying and offensive.

‘Annoying and offensive’. That’s a bit over the top isn’t it. I am sure Man City Arsenal Sunderland WHam fans and even Derby ones would say they also have great histories and a lot of nostalgia for their old stadiums but they moved because they wanted to progress and move with the times. We risk being stuck in the past and seen as a novelty like a Preston North End or Huddersfield. A once succesful club living in the past. Top level football has changed dramatically in the last thirty years. Football in the premier league has taken off. Crowds are bigger and spectators expect much better facilities and experiences than in the 70’s and 80’s. If Forest don’t provide that people will go elsewhere. We live in more of a consumer society and loyalty to specific brands are much weaker. Recent general elections show that. At one time people would vote for one of the two parties all their life but now are much more fluid.

What an absolute c**k of a statement!!!! If FOREST fans don't like the stadium and the facilities it provides and will go elsewhere, then they aren't Forest fans!!!

The facilities when I started going to watch the Reds (50 years ago) were virtually non-existent in comparison to todays facilities. Outside toilets with no roof over them (unless you pissed down the Trent End steps!), no running water (either hot or cold!) minimal foods availability, no alcohol available, stood on packed to crushing terracing with only crush barriers in the way to stop the crowd cascading down from top to bottom, but which if you were on the wrong side of could (and did) cause significant injuries, fighting on the terraces and around the ground, all the way up to the station (and beyond occasionally), fenced in like animals, in partial wooden stands. I could go on. BUT!! I loved it and I'm sure every other true Forest fan, irrespective of which era they started watching OUR team, will say the same thing. They love the place. I did then and I do now.

I know there are many issues with the ground that do need urgent attention, especially in todays day and age, but irrespective of whether there is hot water or not or bird S**t on the terracing, it is our ground, our home, our history and our legacy. If people want to go elsewhere to watch their football with better facilities (a statement I find ridiculous to say the least), then in my opinion, f**k off to Man City or Arsenal or Spurs or West Ham and watch football from a distance in stadia with little or no atmosphere. 

One last thing to state, you look at other fans forums and see how many fans from other clubs love coming to the City Ground, with the most common point being made, that it is a proper old school football ground, not a lifeless bowl.

(01-08-2024, 09:48 PM)Salvatore Matrecano Wrote: Whilst I ultimately disagree with TT I believe you have a valid opinion and its a bit insulting to suggest you are talking rubbish. Yes I do agree other clubs who moved have history too. In addition younger fans go where they are entertained. My own nephew wants to follow the Sheep because he went on a trip to a match and they made a fuss of him. His Forest supporting Dad is mortified but can’t get him a ticket at the CG. Again its a valid point.

Football has indeed moved with the times but the City Ground hasn’t. Commercially it is currently a disaster and yes I would prefer to be able to wash my hands after a half time piss, Im not 14 years old anymore. The whole ground needs urgently updating and to be able to bring in more revenue.

The best way to do that? Demolish the whole damn thing and rebuild a stadium on the same or nearby site with other facilities and create a Forest Village. That wont happen for many different reasons but principally because there isnt the space.
However where our opinions differ is I believe selling our soul when we can make do isnt worth it, particularly when the option is to leave a good location to go to a (very) bad one. You think it is worth it and fans will come around to the idea. Its a fair debate, lets see how it pans out.

(02-08-2024, 06:51 AM)ToryTom Wrote: Reading between the lines it looks like the club were offered a lot of land at Toton on the cheap. It probably would have been enough to build the stadium with the facilities they wanted and maybe academy and trading facilities as well. The city ground site could no way match that. It sounded like an opportunity similar to that offered West Ham. Probably the potential Toton stadium would be more suited for football because it would have been built just for that purpose. The downside would have been the nostalgia older fans have for the City Ground and its distance away from the City Ground site. I still would not be surprised if we eventually move there because it will be extremely unlikely, because of multiple reasons, the City Ground site can be developed in the way the club want.

(02-08-2024, 09:07 AM)JollyLollyAussie Wrote: How about knocking down the council house and building a ground in the Square, cant get more central then that!

(02-08-2024, 09:07 AM)JollyLollyAussie Wrote: How about knocking down the council house and building a ground in the Square, cant get more central then that!