After just one post? ONE post? Is that how it works over here?

It was actually a genuine question, although I can see why you'd pounce on it as an FC fan taking the mickey. I read the thread on the virtual terrace and came for a look.

Yes Phil we did and yes Phil we have other partners but which of those partners wanted cladding to match the sky? Which of those partners decided that we didn't need enough toilets to make legal requirements? Which of those partners decided to alter the look from the original plans in such a rather large way?

I understand your position Phil but lets be honest here the red pillars aside it looks very little like the original plans/drawings and that is rather poor wouldn't you say?

WTF is a 'shert'?

It doesn't look great tho does it anakin, weird colour to have int it

After 31 posts I'm surprised you know how it works 'over there' never mind over here.
Unless you are admitting this is just a new account and not a new user?

Don't be ridiculous Phil, the Golf stand was wonderful. I missed my first game at CP since Rovers' promotion last season because of it's demise. Had great character.

It's 'shirt' written in a Hull accent. As per my username, I like to throw the odd word in, written in a Hull accent. No offence meant or owt. Not living in 'Ull anymore, it helps me to reminisce. Probably should've written 'perple' in the ferst perst I made. Apologies.

Surely Rovers and the council's company would've signed off each stage jointly? Are you saying Rovers failed to examine the plans detailing the loos, for example? Hudge is a solicitor for goodness' sake.

Still feel a bit for Phil, here. Without the council there wouldn't be a stand at all, which many on here seem to have completely forgotten when unilaterally criticising which are, after all, mere cosmetic details when compared to the financial implications of no new stand at all.

Bravo, Phil and the council.

The cladding was a major faux pas and it was a stupid remark about the sky, as I made quite clear at the time, as for the toilets they do make the legal requirements, if they didn't it would not get its safety certificate, the problem is because of the nature of Stadia, people tend to use the loos at the same time, legally there are enough, but practically it would have helped if there were more, but where do you draw the line (outside the toilets it looks like) seriously it's a difficult call.

You are also right that it doesn't look like the original drawings, the reason for that is that the original bid from Wilmott Dixon was a screw up, it was undervalued by circa £1m, that left 2 options re submit for tender or scrap the scheme as we couldn't get further funding, so we ran a value engineering exercise to reduce costs and a lot of the features were changed, it was literally this or nothing.

I didn't say I knew how it worked over there(?), I obviously understand the concept of that being a main board for general RL issues, and each club having it's own dedicated board with it's own moderators. I'm not too sure what you mean to be honest. I was just surprised that I was threatened with a ban after one post, that's all.

I rather like the towers, actually. Especially the red light idea shining through.

The comment about the sky isn't the real point though Phil it's more about who in their right mind decided that sky blue was right for a team that plays in red and white? You say we have to share with partners but I get the impression they didn't request this. If not then who did?
I'll happily withdraw the point on legal requirements Phil. But getting the amount wrong (As you hint) means on that score surely they are not going to really fit for purpose due to them being so few for the amount that will be needed in what is a very short space in time with now way to now fix the problem. That will mean if the stand is well used then it is a situation that we as a club are stuck with. Who didn't know that sporting toilets get used in a huge way at HT/FT?

The thing is that the colours being wrong is a major part of what I am getting at (externally anyway) with regard to the look of the stand.

I understand that you are probably sick of hearing this Phil but it seems that there have been major screw-ups and nobody is being held to account over it.

Are the loos blue, too? If there's too few you'll need a lot of blue down 'em. Though Ginge and I prefer bleach.

Darth, repeating Phil's name often during converstions sounds a bit intimidating. Just saying. Didn't Rovers have any say at all, then? Seems strange.

Not wanting to be pedantic but Blue is one of Rovers colours, and before the banner went up on the RM stand that was nearly all blue with a red and white V.
The error occurred at planning, there were a number of colour fobs for different parts of the stand and that's where the screw up happened as they thought it was to match the RM stand, we all thought it was an undercoat that was to be painted so nobody picked up on it until later, it wouldn't have mattered anyway as they are made to order, and being self cleaning are a very expensive panel, to paint them now would be too expensive and we would lose the guarantee, all in all a bit of a mess, but I still think that we need to look at it when it's finished and then there is still a possibility of putting up red covers to drain pipes to break up the colour, and don't forget all of the signage is yet to be added.
Lets see when the seats are in and it's finished, because it's been a living nightmare for me, I've had more fall outs with friends over this than anything i've ever done, TBH be glad when it's over.