Yes and tying it in with your "priorities" thought it has to be up there with the biggest shared by BOTH clubs which is very rare.

Lets say the amount was xxxxxxx, divided by 2 and all the monies contributed were collected from the supporters by the respective clubs and put into a "Pitch Fund" and only to be used for that.

The amounts would be the same and there could be regular updates as to how it was progressing.

It would not really matter how long it took and there might even be a bit of healthy competion that would keep up the momentum and get the funds in quickly.

It all depends on the amount in question, it may be doable and even if not at least it will be out in the open that everyone thought about it and tried.

I wonder if there is any one out there who could tell us what the cost of making the pitch playable would be?
Not half measures that have taken place in the past, which probably add up to the same as a proper job.

Im sure as part of the offer it means only one team playing on the pitch..........

This could be seen as a deliberated pre meditated discriminatory action against one of the current tenants concerning a community asset.

If the Rugby club had suggested such a thing there's no need to go over the response from Town supporters and us for that matter.

Even the suggestion shows the intent, I wonder if the proposer will be subjected to any short of backlash as members of the Rugby club have been?

I'm not sure that would solve the problem in any case, the pitch was in a mess before Fax set foot on it.

Fax have played just 2 home games and if the water had been drained away properly shouldn't have made that much difference.

Of course it's a seasonal and drainage problem as much as a usage problem.

As soon as the dryer weather comes along there is no problem, the pitch is fine when Fax have finished playing on it but not when they start playing on it and that is not down to them.

Back to the cash problem, can the funds be raised from JOINT sponsorship and voluntary contributions or is it too much because the Council will not be paying for it so if not it will stay as it is.

The problem with the New Shay is that the council will not spend a lot of cash simply to keep the 3000 or so people that go there on a regular basis happy. Hell they cant even run the place at a profit which in itself is simply amazing given the potential that is there. It either needs the right person to come in and do it for them or for the council to get their act together, neither which looks likely in the near future.

As an ex Chairman of a local rugby club my main priority was always to look after the main asset of the club which was the pitch! This was the reason for being there and with no games there was no revenue for the club from playing subs, the bar, use of the clubhouse etc. Annual spend always had pitch maintenance top of the list and that was usually around £10k p.a. ironically my hardest decision, from a personal point of view, was turning Fax down from training on the pitches whilst this work was going on etc. My successor carried on with this philosophy and now Fax do train on there-so it can be done with the right amount of money, dedicated groundstaff, and planned approach. In my eyes the council will not prioritise an asset that draws in only 3k spectators out of a population of 150kpeople? The onus to me is to set up a joint scheme between the two town teams to get the pitch sorted to the standard required for BOTH clubs.(You can see the proof of the pudding next time you drive past Heath RUFC pitches at West Vale.)If the club(s) or council wanted any help to get this off the ground I would be more than happy to volunteer to get this initiative up and running.