I've said it before and i'll say it again the why can't the council get together with the two clubs to talk about forgeting the Odasl pipe dream and puting the money saved into buying VP from the Zoo man and making the alterations needed for Rugby League. Then form a 3 way stadium trust to run the new "Bradford Stadium" so all 3 parties have an equal share and say in how the ground and its corporate facilities are run. That way we can share the costs of upkeep and share the proffits that a well run corporate and event facility can genorate. I remember the manager of the new stand at the Shay saying that he could make the new stand pay for its self and that the Football and Rugby teams are a distraction.

I know leaving Odsal would be a wrench for us and sharing VP anoying for the City fans but in the long term it might be the best option for both clubs to survive and indead prosper.

Leaving Odsal wouldnt bother me in the slightest, I don't get why many fans had the stubborn heads on last time we went!! There is no atmosphere at Odsal and its not exactly a modern facility! An VP is closer to my home

Quote ="BillyRhino"How about a move in the other direction? Bulls ditching Odsal and taking over VP, with City as tenants. I'm assuming that Valley Parade ticks all the Super League boxes.'" It does [imostly [/iand I can't remember the exact details at the moment but IIRC the pitch at VP is not big enough at the moment, with the concrete hoardings being too close to the in goal areas. I think any permanent move would need work to increase the pitch size. I think the rfl were fine with it last time on a temp basis but it would require work for a permanent move. #edit# found my previous links; www.therfl.co.uk/~rflmedia/docs/ ... rt%201.pdf www.bradfordcityfc.co.uk/page/Co ... 66,00.html The pitch size at VP is 103m x 64m. According to the RFL rules pitches need to be a minimum length of 88m goal line to goal line, 2 in goal areas of minimum 6m and 3m clearence behind the dead ball line (2m in exceptional circumstances with padding, but this is not a long term solution IMO) which gives an absolute minimum length of space needed of 106m. I don't know exactly where the VP measurement is taken from, but its clear to me the pitch as it is at VP is not long enough. Didn'y someone at City float the idea of removing some of the front rows of the seating to accomodate a bigger pitch if we groundshare?

Quote ="BillyRhino"How about a move in the other direction? Bulls ditching Odsal and taking over VP, with City as tenants. I'm assuming that Valley Parade ticks all the Super League boxes.'" It does [imostly [/iand I can't remember the exact details at the moment but IIRC the pitch at VP is not big enough at the moment, with the concrete hoardings being too close to the in goal areas. I think any permanent move would need work to increase the pitch size. I think the rfl were fine with it last time on a temp basis but it would require work for a permanent move. #edit# found my previous links; www.therfl.co.uk/~rflmedia/docs/ ... rt%201.pdf www.bradfordcityfc.co.uk/page/Co ... 66,00.html The pitch size at VP is 103m x 64m. According to the RFL rules pitches need to be a minimum length of 88m goal line to goal line, 2 in goal areas of minimum 6m and 3m clearence behind the dead ball line (2m in exceptional circumstances with padding, but this is not a long term solution IMO) which gives an absolute minimum length of space needed of 106m. I don't know exactly where the VP measurement is taken from, but its clear to me the pitch as it is at VP is not long enough. Didn'y someone at City float the idea of removing some of the front rows of the seating to accomodate a bigger pitch if we groundshare?

move to horsfall.its closer to where i live

I'd have no problem with the Bulls moving to VP just so long as the Bulls are full partners in the stadium and not just a tenant.

Actually, the 508 changed routes and no longer goes past my house. I'd be in favour.

think that would be the main sticking point tbh. we were very much treated as 2nd class citizens last time we were there. If we were equal partners, and by that I mean equal branding of stadium as well as equal say in running then I'd go along with it. Major problem is the clause making us repay odsal settlement if we leave odsal in next 19? years.Plus we dont currently pay rent at odsal only ground upkeep. I'd imagine the rent at VP would outweigh what we spend keeping odsal going meaning we'd have to find other revenue/increase ticket prices to offset this.

Just to add the other side to the coin, I wouldn't be in favour but we've had all the arguments for both sides before.

Just to be clear I'd only be in favour if there were no realistic possiblility of staying at odsal. I'm not in the category who would refuse to attend at VP and went to all games there last time. Just didnt like it and much prefer odsal, even in its current state. Big plus for me is I can stand at odsal which is something I dont think can be accomodated at VP under footbal league rules. Hate sitting at a rugby match

Really cant see city going down this season to be honest, and if city did move to odsal it would just kill the atmosphere we have at VP

If they do go down which players would we go in for?

I doubt City will be relegated, Taylor has to get 3 points at Macclesfield or the board will sack him IMO. It's a very tight league table this year, two wins would change everything. Plus there are several long term absentees coming back from injuries this week and an experienced striker making his debut.

The pitch could be lengthened at VP to accommodate the Bulls too, either take rows out of the front of the Kop or demolish the TL Dallas stand.

Dunno to be honest.

However, on the first point, what the owners want isn't necessarily what the owners will get. What is their investment worth without a tenant? I'd guess that even as a building plot it, in Bradford it wouldn't be worth vast amounts of dosh right now, even with any planning permission, which presumably, they haven't got anyway. Again a guess, but in a situation where City could no longer afford to operate from there, I suspect the owners would actually be pretty desperate for someone to come in.

On the second point, if the rental agreement remains in place and City can't afford to pay it, then the owners need to look back at point one, because if they try to enforce it and the club just don't have the cash it can only go one way, which is receivership, and the main point then, for the owners, is that they still won't get their money.

Any item, commodity or service is only worth what someone else is willing to pay for it and a sports ground in Bradford is only really of value to a sports club in Bradford. I'd suspect they would settle for a lot less than many might think. Not that I think City are doomed, far from it.

I've said it before, but sitting down at RL matches just isn't as good. I could cope with moving from Odsal but being forced into being seated and driving to that side of Bradford would be a pain for me.

I can't see myself ever not supporting the club but I would have to be convinced that all other realistic options had been considered before I'd accept it. These discussions frustrate the hell out of me!

bcafc.livewwware.co.uk/viewtopic ... 4db1be76e0 Some of the above makes interesting reading.

bcafc.livewwware.co.uk/viewtopic ... 4db1be76e0 Some of the above makes interesting reading.

To be brutally honest I found the City to Odsal / Bulls to VP debate 'interesting' the first 600 times but no one says anything new.

Sems like a vast majority of the Bantams fans are in favour.....

Which I'm shocked about considering the previous hostility between the two.

Maybe if you checked out the thread you'd see BR was being sarcastic...

So we should move out of our brand new state of the art training complex that's cost the club pounds ten to build so that we can help fund one for them?

We definitely shouldn't. There's a world of difference between ground sharing and amalgamating the clubs. I think the vast difference between the finances needed to be successful in soccer and RL makes any integration of the financial sides of the two clubs to be quite out of the question.

I am a Halifax fan, i support both Halifax teams and beleive me this isnt a good idea.

The Rugby and the Football fans resent each other, there's constant jibbing, on the respective Football and Rugby fans messageboards, if a rugby fan goes on the football messageboard and see's it it will turn into a slnging match on RLFANS. and the same the other way round.

The "you wendyballers keep messing up our pitch"

and "get your own ground then cause we were here first you egg chasers"

are comments i here so often, you have larger fan bases for both the football and the rugby too than Halifax, so the divide would be even bigger and the jibbing would be even worse

Oh for sure mate, it goes on already. I think the majority of fans (as I suspect in Halifax as well?) would realise why things like this are done, much as the fringes tend to rail against it.

I guess it helps if both clubs are in a similar position, where neither can just carry on in the old way without the other to share the costs burden. It concentrates the mind on exactly what is important, on both sides.

This thread is one that keeps recurring, but I think that each time it comes up, there is a good reason to have another look at the situation. The change this time is the very real possibility that City could be relegated this year. This does and should change people's thinking on the matter.

As a season ticket holder at Both City and Bulls, and someone who as an 8 year old was in the paddock of the main stand on 11/05/85, I accept that those who are shouting loudest are those who are against a ground share / merger / any link at all between the two clubs. However, taking a common sense approach ( I know, very risky, especially in Bradford) we need to look at the reality.

From a Bulls in superleague perspective, we should ask if Odsal in its current (and likely permanent) state is going to be able to sustain an SL franchise and allow for a rebuilding of long term success. we are fortunate that a number of clubs are worse off than us in tersm of the license applications, otherwise we would struggle. if the current system stays, then in the next couple of license applications we could find ourselves in bother.

From a City point of view, we need to look at whether the rent they are paying to stay at VP is the main factor in them not doing anything other than balancing the books, and spiralling closer to non league football.

Neither club is in the golden era that they were 10/11 years ago, as it was not financially viable. That needs to be addressed by both parties.

On the idea of a shared training facility. Why would this be bad? perhaps it could be offset by free rent for a fixed time? The facility at Tong has potential. I've already seen David Baldwin (City COO) there on occasions, and in the next 12 months there is the possibility of another (grass) pitch or two being there, to complement the 3g pitches, as the Yorkshire Martyrs site closes in July and will most likely be bulldozed and reclaimed. the current bulls grass trainingpitch is on land reclaimed from the demolished Tong school, so it can be done quite quickly.

this all hinges on what agreement can be come to by Gordon Gibb, the owner of VP, and whoever rents it from him. If City go down, and Lawn and Rhodes bail out, then he will be sat on nothing. He is sensible enough to know this. The idea of the money that has been set aside by the council for the Odsal redevelopment being used to fund VP being bought as a community stadium isnt a bad one. Straight away, Bulls would have a ground at the same modern standards as any in superleague. Both clubs could agree a rent that enabled them to function properly, and city would benefit by having some security in terms of a much reduced financial outlay.

Odsal could be retained in its current state to host lower grade games for both clubs, and take advantage of the massive potential from the Coral stand.

In terms of the areas that VP and Odsal are in, i can honestly say that in 20+ years of supporting both teams, our car has only been damaged once, and that was on Halifax road during a Bulls match. Again, if people take the time to ask, there are plenty of decent pubs / clubs that are open to fans on matchdays that offer decent parking, a nice pint and friendly atmosphere. It would take some getting used to, and I would love for both clubs to be able to stay at their homes forever. But I just cant stand the idea of either going to the wall for the sake of the non silent minority.

Both clubs pay the same amount of rent to use the ground, there is no way 1 of the clubs alone could afford to use the shay without the other team, so i guess its best for both clubs.

there is a certain amount of hatred between both sets of fans