I remember and your right. We differ only in that you believe it and I don’t.

The myth I refer to was SKY saying no, they didn’t.

The roof at permissible height is incorrect imo. To me that the club was making excuses. Roughly speaking the height of the old west stand sets a historical precedent and that I know to be true.

Problem is the roofing used is technically temporary and that’s where the restriction is, the next size up so to speak was too pricy. Also the bit they did build is just as much in site lines as it would be full length, never really got that argument.

To be honest I don’t blame the club it was never vital, at the time it was just a fop. The roof has served its purpose. What I would be interested in is knowing the lifespan of these roofs, that I don’t know?

Anyway these are side issues, it’s just fair to say the west terrace is the most limited section of the ground.

Never needed to go to public, these were feasibility studies, all rejected in advance so no point.

As for Luton you’re spot on and there are others but you’re missing the point.

These are stands that were built pre-regulations and thus have less strict criteria. The problem comes when you replace them. When you do that to have to meet modern standards, you can’t replace like for like. That’s one of the reasons Luton’s ground has barely been developed, that is a ground in a truly awfull position.

Sure you’ve been to York? Without wanting to patronise but do you think you’d be allowed to build the Shambles under modern planning? That’s the problem.

The only real solution would be if the council would close the path and we could buy the land and perhaps some of the adjoining garden land. However we are in ransom strip territory there, nightmare.

This is such amazing news
The best news I’ve had all year in fact

I’m not sure we’ve ever got to the point where we’ve submitted plans before
I’ve seen artist impressions , maybe 3 lots now?

I’d like to go early and say the stand need naming after MC

I’m not sure I’m ready to believe it just yet

Is this really going to happen for us

That would certainly feed the resident haters on the two rugby forums.

I suppose the sensible options would be a sponsorship naming or Neil Fox?

The "Neil Fox Stand" sounds good to me and probably a lot of others too, I would suspect ??

I imagine it will be called after a sponsor, but that could be its actual name, no issue from me.

see what I mean?

I reckon he’d still sell for a quid. He’s turned around the debacle of Glover and the last regime who somehow managed to plunge the club into the worst financial position ever!

He comes over a bit dry at times and straight talking. Maybe it was a tongue in cheek, throw away comment.

I get what you say about other names though, maybe a suite named after him

They are indeed all club legends but, from that list, for me, there is a clear "winner" - has to be Neil Fox !

I completely respect all the legends we’ve had play for us over the years

But they aren’t the reason the stand is getting built

None of this would be happening without MC and the stability and sound business sense he’s brought to the club

It’s not happened yet so it’s not something I’d consider arguing over

It’s just my view point