Thetownend.com

TrustSTFC are urging the board of Swindon Town to reject the proposed Groundsharing arrangement with Bristol Rovers. Rovers chairman Ron Craig was quoted in the Swindon Advertiser yesterday saying that Swindon was a "Prime Contender" for the 18 month period while they are redeveloping the Memorial Stadium.

With fixtures due to be announced soon, a final decision is bound to be made shortly and the Trust is making a final plea to the board to listen to the Clubs fans, the local residents and councillors, who have all stated their opposition to the move, while there is still time.

Trust Chairman Paul Davis commented :"Our own poll of Town fans and a similar poll conducted by the Swindon Advertiser both showed overwhelming opposition to the move. There are understandable concerns about the likelihood of crowd trouble, and Rovers promotion to League One through the play-offs raises the absurd possibility of Swindon playing at the County Ground as the away team."

"We have nothing against Rovers, or the vast majority of their supporters, but it would simply be irresponsible to ignore the trouble that has occurred on three occasions recently involving sections of both clubs support."

Trust Communications officer Andy Ratcliffe added :"Clearly the additional income is attractive given the clubs ongoing financial plight, but the long term implications could cost the club much more if the move delays, or even scuppers completely the redevelopment of the County Ground. "

"The plain fact is that the club`s financial problems are too deep rooted to be solved by grasping at every offer of short term cash regardless of any other considerations. To properly solve the clubs problems requires more fundamental changes along with substantial fresh investment which is precisely why we launched the Fans Consortium in September of last year."


http://www.truststfc.co.uk/news_item.php?id=1078

Good statement and I agree, shame the bit abouyt the take over made it.  This is agaisnt the ground share and should have only mentioned that.  I am not having a dig just an opinion

Agree with the statement, though feel we don't truely know the financial incentives behind the move. i.e what percentage of recipts we'll get and so on.

Though with the refrence to the fans consortium, does slightly sound like an STFC board little dig.

BBC RS say the club will respond later today.

I note in today's Adver the sign of sentence again of nobody being available for comment from the club.  What do Brunel FM think?

Does that mean we can expect a reworded version of Bob Holt's radio reply to appear on the official site.......replacing radio with groundshare and saying what financial sense it makes and the great opportunity it represents for both clubs  :roll:

I fully expect another spiteful statement from the board to be honest saying 'Trust stfc should butt out and this has nothing to do with them. We are gods and will do as we bloody want and no one can stop us now on our way to world domination mwahaha!!!'

I also saw they said:



which is obviously more than a little interesting, that said the adver also said we were signing gerald asamoah (of the bundesliga) so fetch me a large pinch of salt.

The Adver would be unlikely to say that without someone at either Town or Wovers indicating it's not going to be at the CG but who wasn't prepared to go on the record. Whether the person who said it is in a position to know is another matter.

It would be fucking great news though.

I would consider it a victory for the vocal 'minority' as the board seem to think of us, as without this opposition you know full well they would have done it. The best result would be if Rovers have decided against it after seeing opposition from our fans........That would make the board slightly angry I would imagine, horrible fans destroying their money making scheme  :soapy tit wank:

I won't believe it isn't happening however until I hear it from the horse's mouth so to speak......

the Cheltenham fans seem pretty ambivelant on the whole, looking through a couple of forums.  If anything they're not even talking about it.

I'm sure that'll change after a Rovers v Leeds game at Whaddon road  :D

http://www.swindontownfc.premiumtv.co.uk/page/News/NewsDetail/0,,10341~1030854,00.html

Batch sorry mate im at work cant read that...Any chance could let me know what it says

Updated above, needed to switch to firefox to cut n' paste!

That suggests to me its happening.....

I think I'll be attending the open day at the County Ground and let my feelings be known.

 That suggests to me the Board would like it to happen, but haven't as yet carried out the consultation.....surely  once this process is put into action some form of  protest will see it off......an occupation of the public gallery of  Civic Offices should do the trick.

Surely they have talked to the police and council by now before offering up the CG though?

Won't Rovers be wanting to get their season tickets on sale soon? I guess they could do a mini-season ticket Aug-Dec, then another Dec-May when they'll know where they will be playing.

It'll have to by done 'n dusted by the time the fixture computer randomly calculates our away match against Carlisle will be midweek in mid January.

Why the fuck did they have to put a picture of Rovers celebrating with that statement on our so called official site...

Going back to what I heard from Bowden back in April........the phrase 'token gesture' springs to mind regarding these consultations and it is a done deal

Here is how i see it

They will not go ahead they will know this but still carry out the open meeting.

then they will announce that after consulting fans they have decided its not a good idea..

They think we are fucking stupid

 It may have been a done deal in Blodders head.

 This thought crossed my mind, but its of no importance, just as long as the Sags don't end up at the CG.

Agree reg but the mavericks of the world will say the board have started to listen etc lets give them a chance

   I like the board apologists stuff.....it makes I larf .

It's either not happening or any consultation will be after the fact - Wovers have to tell the League where they're playing by the end of May.

I'm sure the consulatation wil lbe after the event to explain to supporters what is happening and how it is worked out what the findeer details are.

Rovers will probably hold one with their supporters as well to let them know what is going on

How do you know the May deadline Paul? any chance Rovers could have got an extension?

So basically not a consultation process at all as we get no real say, it would effectively just be a presentation!

...and of course a chance for Cliff Puffett to try out his nodding horse impression once again from the front row.

Oh god that was one of the most pathetic examples of staged support I have ever seen

We checked with a former Chief Exec of a leading Southwest football club a while back - if you think about it, the fixtures are out in a few weeks so they have to know before they start calculating those. Thinking about it though, it could be that Wovers could tell the League "We'll either be playing at Swindon or Cheltenham" and as long as both grounds are OK for League regs etc that would be good enough. Presumably it would only be a problem if they were proposing to go to a ground that hadn't been assessed for whether it was fit for League football recently (e.g. Twerton).

But they would need to ensure that both clubs are not home on the same weekend if the ground they go to are in the same league.

Well, yes, hence why they would need some indication by the end of May, but it may be possible that an "either or" situation could be accomodated by the fixtures computer, whereas once you get "one of the following four" (for example) that becomes exponentially harder to schedule.

I'm getting increasing confused regarding the points that Maverick is trying to make but I notice he seems to be back on form with his Trust and consortium bashing today.

Thought I had made it clear before that I am against the ground share - always have been and always will be - for me the sooner this is formally rejected publicly the better - end of.

Oh and remind me where I have been "Trust bashing" today??  :-))(

 Think its what is implied in this little snippet

 

Frankly the whole Trust/Consortium vs Board of STFC thing is getting tiresome. But if people don't keep harping on about it, it may indicate to the Board that the people who want them out have given up.

Sorry Reg but I do not have a clue who belongs to the Trust and who doesn't. Also I hardly see the fact that I have a different point of view as "bashing" !

The "cause" I was referring to was the Consortium and not the Trust who, as I have always understood it, are involved in more than just the Consortium, such as the Red Army Fund and the Keep Town in Swindon campaign for example.

It's basically down to a lack of trust in the current board Maverick.