Re: Stadium and other issues : Wed Dec 21, 2022 10:08 pm  

Trojan Horse wrote:

Prince Buster wrote:

For anyone who is interested both detailed Castleford Stadium plans and the accompanying Axiom plans are now on the Portal. There is a massive amount of detail to wade through but two initial points i can see.
Their upgrade seems a bit of a strange design but on the face of it seems more than we are doing.
Axiom are pledging £12,2 M alone , then add the £2m coulncil money, so even with inflation looks realistic financially

I don’t know what the size and money involved in the Newmarket site compared to Axiom site but seems like in the long run we could come off second best if the funding reported is accurate and comes through.

The Axiom development must be far more lucrative to be millions more to contribute to Cas. Either that or we accepted a low ball in desperation. Not sure but I have no doubt our club got the best it could.

Long way to go before a sod is dug on this one ,and all the pitfalls to overcome ,which we know only too well . The big difference between the builds is our is on its way up whereas Castlefords is still in the drawing room ,so we are hardly coming off second best ,as by August we will have a 2500 seater stand to rival the best . And listening to MC they have plans to further enhance the rest of the stadium when funds become available, all in all a fantastic achievement after all the false dawns and failed promises over the years . I truly hope Cas get their new ground it can only be good for RL ,to have another stadium owned by their club and not sat in rented accommodation at the mercy of the landlord

Re: Stadium and other issues : Wed Dec 21, 2022 10:54 pm  

I did pose the question a few weeks ago that Cas might try to upstage us with their stadium build
I suggested they’d view us redeveloping one side of the ground and that maybe they’d then look to do more by erecting one main stand and 3 glorified bus shelters like Salfords new stadium. Cosmetic it may be but it gives the impression of a fully developed 4-sided stadium and if IMG/RFL & Co start thinking along the lines of just 1 WMDC club then they might favour Castleford

Re: Stadium and other issues : Thu Dec 22, 2022 6:32 am  

The Avenger wrote:

I did pose the question a few weeks ago that Cas might try to upstage us with their stadium build
I suggested they’d view us redeveloping one side of the ground and that maybe they’d then look to do more by erecting one main stand and 3 glorified bus shelters like Salfords new stadium. Cosmetic it may be but it gives the impression of a fully developed 4-sided stadium and if IMG/RFL & Co start thinking along the lines of just 1 WMDC club then they might favour Castleford

Although there seems to be a lot of guesswork going on regarding which clubs fit this hitherto unknown criteria, you make a good point regarding Cas and their hopes and aspirations for a new ground, in my opinion you make a very valid point and have every right to be worried about just 1 WMDC making it into final set up.

Re: Stadium and other issues : Thu Dec 22, 2022 8:48 am  

My take is we worry about us as a club and focus on being the best we can be. If Cas, or indeed us, think we only have to be better than each other we'll come up a cropper.

Re: Stadium and other issues : Thu Dec 22, 2022 9:15 am  

The Avenger wrote:

I did pose the question a few weeks ago that Cas might try to upstage us with their stadium build
I suggested they’d view us redeveloping one side of the ground and that maybe they’d then look to do more by erecting one main stand and 3 glorified bus shelters like Salfords new stadium. Cosmetic it may be but it gives the impression of a fully developed 4-sided stadium and if IMG/RFL & Co start thinking along the lines of just 1 WMDC club then they might favour Castleford

You just can't win with some folk, glass always half empty.

It's all utterly irrelevant until they get the money.

However even if they do thats not how it works, IMG are not daft, they can spot the difference between actual improvement and giving the impression!

If Cas get the money then they will do ok, other than the pitch, as two sides of their ground are OK bar a toilet upgrade, but facility wise they will be no better off than we are..

But as I say it's all about that cash, show me the money as they say. It's odd but I've heard nobody comment on this 12 million pounds other than Cas, certainly not the two organisation that matter, WMDC with the leverage, Axiom with the money (allegedly).

If it does appear, I expect it to take at least three years from that point to be complete. Even with the best scenario I can't see it being done before 2027, by which time we may well have sorted the West Terrace.

As an aside I'm also told that there are problems with the WR site where a main stand is concerned. It's on low laying land near a river and although it's not a flood plain, digging adequate foundation with such a low water table will vastly increase the cost on such a heavy structure. Can't prove this but came from the same non Trinity guy who's info has been spot on so far.

Re: Stadium and other issues : Thu Dec 22, 2022 9:38 am  

Dunkirk Spirit wrote:

PopTart wrote:

Where does it say IMG aren't including stadia in their criteria?

Paragraph from a report by IMG, 16/12/20
The bit about “it isn’t about building a new stadium “, I admit it’s a bit ambiguous.

I don’t think it’s similar at all (to licensing). We are not trying to find 15 clubs that fit into a league,” Dwyer said.

“It’s the criteria. From a learning one, the model that we created needs to be objective, transparent and clear to everyone and not subjective.

“It (licensing) was based on business plans rather than actuals. One of the challenges was that people weren’t sticking to those plans.

“We are looking at what you have actually done. It isn’t about planning to build a new stadium.”

That should worry Cas more than us. It does sound like a dig at us and Cas, in that a commonly-held view, and not unreasonably, is that we promised things to get the franchise but then did nothing about it (remember the levelling of parts of the West Stand to get temporary seating that never appeared?). However, given that we most of our ground development is actually happening, we are in a better position.

However, as it is said, and it's always been my criticism of licensing, there aren't limited slots, with clubs vying for them in competition. You are either Grade A or not, based on set criteria. If there are 14 clubs with Grade A, there will be a 14 team super league and no one is going down.

My concern is whether geographical terms are inserted. It will cause problems for Leigh and Wigan, and Hull and Hull KR, but those are offset by facilities. Cas? More problematic.

Re: Stadium and other issues : Thu Dec 22, 2022 10:37 am  

Slugger McBatt wrote:

Dunkirk Spirit wrote:

PopTart wrote:

Where does it say IMG aren't including stadia in their criteria?

Paragraph from a report by IMG, 16/12/20
The bit about “it isn’t about building a new stadium “, I admit it’s a bit ambiguous.

I don’t think it’s similar at all (to licensing). We are not trying to find 15 clubs that fit into a league,” Dwyer said.

“It’s the criteria. From a learning one, the model that we created needs to be objective, transparent and clear to everyone and not subjective.

“It (licensing) was based on business plans rather than actuals. One of the challenges was that people weren’t sticking to those plans.

“We are looking at what you have actually done. It isn’t about planning to build a new stadium.”

That should worry Cas more than us. It does sound like a dig at us and Cas, in that a commonly-held view, and not unreasonably, is that we promised things to get the franchise but then did nothing about it (remember the levelling of parts of the West Stand to get temporary seating that never appeared?). However, given that we most of our ground development is actually happening, we are in a better position.

However, as it is said, and it's always been my criticism of licensing, there aren't limited slots, with clubs vying for them in competition. You are either Grade A or not, based on set criteria. If there are 14 clubs with Grade A, there will be a 14 team super league and no one is going down.

My concern is whether geographical terms are inserted. It will cause problems for Leigh and Wigan, and Hull and Hull KR, but those are offset by facilities. Cas? More problematic.

Assuming that more clubs are able to secure grade A status, then, criteria would have to change in order to limit the number of clubs in the league and with the long term aim of the sport being to "expand", at some point, proximity to other clubs will probably come into play but, that is some way down the track.
Interestingly, both Salford and perhaps Huddersfield have some issues with their ground and although Ken Davy has been happy to pump millions into the Giants, I dont see him buying the John Smith's stadium, although, there are rumours that Kirklees Council may step in ?

Sorry for the thread drift

Re: Stadium and other issues : Thu Dec 22, 2022 10:39 am  

Slugger McBatt wrote:

Dunkirk Spirit wrote:

PopTart wrote:

Where does it say IMG aren't including stadia in their criteria?

Paragraph from a report by IMG, 16/12/20
The bit about “it isn’t about building a new stadium “, I admit it’s a bit ambiguous.

I don’t think it’s similar at all (to licensing). We are not trying to find 15 clubs that fit into a league,” Dwyer said.

“It’s the criteria. From a learning one, the model that we created needs to be objective, transparent and clear to everyone and not subjective.

“It (licensing) was based on business plans rather than actuals. One of the challenges was that people weren’t sticking to those plans.

“We are looking at what you have actually done. It isn’t about planning to build a new stadium.”

That should worry Cas more than us. It does sound like a dig at us and Cas, in that a commonly-held view, and not unreasonably, is that we promised things to get the franchise but then did nothing about it (remember the levelling of parts of the West Stand to get temporary seating that never appeared?). However, given that we most of our ground development is actually happening, we are in a better position.

However, as it is said, and it's always been my criticism of licensing, there aren't limited slots, with clubs vying for them in competition. You are either Grade A or not, based on set criteria. If there are 14 clubs with Grade A, there will be a 14 team super league and no one is going down.

My concern is whether geographical terms are inserted. It will cause problems for Leigh and Wigan, and Hull and Hull KR, but those are offset by facilities. Cas? More problematic.

Yes I agree with mich of that. I dont the IMG are as independent as they purport. This is Rugby League and there will be others behind the scenes influencing and shaping the future of the game in their benefit. I am sure even now before all this grading Bull is officially released , they will be more than 95% sure who has got a gig and who can be sacrificed. We have done all we can and can do no more. I am also sure that Cas are not as far behind as some think, neverthless we are still ahead but not by a long margin. If they want is in , they will fit us in. If not all they need is a simple single stipulation which would seem entirely reasonable to the wider game and could not be argued against. It would be That all grade A clubs must have stadia of a minimum £10 k capacity.

Thats just a easy example to shut us out. All we can do for know is avoid relegation next season and hope we are seen as sound proposition to eat at the top table

Re: Stadium and other issues : Thu Dec 22, 2022 1:23 pm  

Prince Buster wrote:

Slugger McBatt wrote:

Dunkirk Spirit wrote:

PopTart wrote:

Where does it say IMG aren't including stadia in their criteria?

Paragraph from a report by IMG, 16/12/20
The bit about “it isn’t about building a new stadium “, I admit it’s a bit ambiguous.

I don’t think it’s similar at all (to licensing). We are not trying to find 15 clubs that fit into a league,” Dwyer said.

“It’s the criteria. From a learning one, the model that we created needs to be objective, transparent and clear to everyone and not subjective.

“It (licensing) was based on business plans rather than actuals. One of the challenges was that people weren’t sticking to those plans.

“We are looking at what you have actually done. It isn’t about planning to build a new stadium.”

That should worry Cas more than us. It does sound like a dig at us and Cas, in that a commonly-held view, and not unreasonably, is that we promised things to get the franchise but then did nothing about it (remember the levelling of parts of the West Stand to get temporary seating that never appeared?). However, given that we most of our ground development is actually happening, we are in a better position.

However, as it is said, and it's always been my criticism of licensing, there aren't limited slots, with clubs vying for them in competition. You are either Grade A or not, based on set criteria. If there are 14 clubs with Grade A, there will be a 14 team super league and no one is going down.

My concern is whether geographical terms are inserted. It will cause problems for Leigh and Wigan, and Hull and Hull KR, but those are offset by facilities. Cas? More problematic.

Yes I agree with mich of that. I dont the IMG are as independent as they purport. This is Rugby League and there will be others behind the scenes influencing and shaping the future of the game in their benefit. I am sure even now before all this grading Bull is officially released , they will be more than 95% sure who has got a gig and who can be sacrificed. We have done all we can and can do no more. I am also sure that Cas are not as far behind as some think, neverthless we are still ahead but not by a long margin. If they want is in , they will fit us in. If not all they need is a simple single stipulation which would seem entirely reasonable to the wider game and could not be argued against. It would be That all grade A clubs must have stadia of a minimum £10 k capacity.

Thats just a easy example to shut us out. All we can do for know is avoid relegation next season and hope we are seen as sound proposition to eat at the top table

What about a simpler one? Profitable. Ironically, we're first in!

Re: Stadium and other issues : Thu Dec 22, 2022 5:43 pm  

vastman wrote:

The Avenger wrote:

I did pose the question a few weeks ago that Cas might try to upstage us with their stadium build
I suggested they’d view us redeveloping one side of the ground and that maybe they’d then look to do more by erecting one main stand and 3 glorified bus shelters like Salfords new stadium. Cosmetic it may be but it gives the impression of a fully developed 4-sided stadium and if IMG/RFL & Co start thinking along the lines of just 1 WMDC club then they might favour Castleford

You just can't win with some folk, glass always half empty.

Oh wind your neck in you self righteous windbag!

No one’s being negative or glass half empty, it’s just you that can’t get free of this idea that everyone’s attacking the club