: Sat Mar 21, 2009 11:54 pm  

Asim wrote:

Really? First I've heard of this, I think you might be getting it confused with the number of season tickets sold for next season.

I'm sure the majority of City fans would accept the Bulls at VP if they really had to (ie to guarantee the future of the club), though you don't readily invite someone back to your house when they decided to sh*t on the carpet on their last visit.

Where does this them and us attitude come from. I think you'll find that the majority of city fans are Bulls fans anyway and just want the best outcome for both teams. This is not Wigan you know, and I don't think we need to hear your unconstuctive bile posted on here Asim.

: Sat Mar 21, 2009 11:56 pm  

bullfan away wrote:

Where does this them and us attitude come from. I think you'll find that the majority of city fans are Bulls fans anyway and just want the best outcome for both teams. This is not Wigan you know, and I don't think we need to hear your unconstuctive bile posted on here Asim.

I learnt how to do it from the Bulls fans whining about anything and everything during 2001 and 2002.

: Sun Mar 22, 2009 7:02 am  

Asim wrote:

Me and my army.

What a thought.

: Sun Mar 22, 2009 7:26 am  

Gill J wrote:

Sorry Asim not wanting to have a go at you personaly here but when you see things like this written by Football fans it really does not inspire any confidence in doing what City want us to do and move to VP to ease their rent issues.

We would be back to being second class rent paying tenants somewhere where we are tolerated rather than wanted, you only have to read some of the BCFC forums to see that.

I'd rather not....

: Sun Mar 22, 2009 7:29 am  

debaser wrote:

I'd rather not....

Certainly not if the unpleasant bile we've seen posted on here is anything to go by.

: Sun Mar 22, 2009 7:31 am  

As has already been said,there is little chance of a Sugar Daddy coming to the rescue of either the Bulls or City and both need more security than they have at present,in order to survive long term.Obviously a successful winning team would help matters from an attendance point of view,but both are in the process of rebuilding right now.Despite the size of Bradford,its' population in the main seem not to be sport keen and unlike Leeds or Manchester etc,our Clubs cannot count on big crowds to get them through.Even when on the 'up',I don't think we would regularly see 20,000 or so fans in to support either code here in this City,therefore the conclusion has to be weighted towards a groundshare scheme.City is the more facillitated ground,but is the pitch suitable in width for SL really?On the other hand,maybe we could apply to have the age old Odsal Stadium recognised as a Heritage Site marking its' place in Rugby League history.OSV to me is the answer,as ground sharing between sports will be more and more on Clubs agenda as costs rise and crowds dwindle.

: Sun Mar 22, 2009 3:01 pm  

bullfan away wrote:

Where does this them and us attitude come from. I think you'll find that the majority of city fans are Bulls fans anyway and just want the best outcome for both teams. This is not Wigan you know, and I don't think we need to hear your unconstuctive bile posted on here Asim.

Trust me mate, i go to every city home game and i can asure that most city fans do not want to part company with the bulls, fact.

: Mon Mar 23, 2009 12:19 pm  

OK,

I am a Bulls fan and a City season ticket holder. there are plenty of people like me, and also many who are one or the other and dont understand the other code.

As a Bulls fan living in Wibsey, I like Odsal being close, and for its historical links to the club. However, Northern existed away from ODsal originally and may have to again.

Valley Parade has been the only home of Bradford City, and the fact that 56 fans died there 24 years ago means that it is much more than an address or a stadium; it is a living memorial to those who died on 11/05/85.

taking the emotion out of it Valley Parade may not in its current state, enable us to get a SL franchise in 2012 if we go there. the pitch is 11 metres too short! nor is it owned by Bradford City so Mark LAwn and Julian Rhodes have little or no say in who Gordon Gibb alows to cohabit there with City.

odsal as it is now, is not an option for City. Even on a wave of emotion post the fire, crowds were down to 6000 or there abouts in the 18 months that they played at Odsal.

neither club at the moment has a stadium or training facilities that are of the standard required for elite sport. Bradford is the 9th biggest council district in the country and that simply is not good enough. If a sharing plan is the only way for both clubs to grow and flourish then so be it. whether it is at the OSV (that does not yet exist) or VP then so be it!

Lawn, Rhodes and Hood should meet to discuss the options, they would be doing their clubs and the city a disservice if they didnt.

Much of the bile that is trotted out by City fans, is by those living in the Aire Valley. the snobs from North of the City who wont even put the dreaded word Bradford in their address, and only are linked by a BD postcode!!! So good people, of Bingley, Baildon, Steeton, Silsden etc... remember that you are part of Bradford whether you like it or not! These are the people who gladly are on the facebook "Leeds" network and only venture into Bradford on match days!

end of rant!!!

: Mon Mar 23, 2009 12:20 pm  

Did Hood go to the forum at City on Saturday? And if he did, what was said there?

Ground. : Mon Mar 23, 2009 9:09 pm  

As a Bulls fan I think the Bulls and City should buy back Valley Parade, 50% Bulls, 50% City. I just think OSV will not happen & as neither the Bulls & City cannot afford to keep going alone, it just looks like the obvious choice. Ideally I would like the Bulls & City to have there own grounds, in reality it will not happen. I think the Bulls should only go to Valley Parade if they will gain some power in running/owning the ground, i.e. to prevent a Wigan situation. BTW, I am a new member, so hi everyone, Matt.