Jump to content
Fugitive

*Shakes head* Everton again.

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Halcyon Days said:

Funny as fuck if (when) this white elephant falls through but UNESCO can get to fuck, they want to keep this city as some sort of museum and not a living breathing forward thinking dynamic one. Good riddance I say, well done Everton you useless twats might have have actually done something good for a change.

Yep. There are many issues with Everton's phantom stadium, but the impact it'll have on the skyline isn't one of them. If Unesco had been around back in the day, they'd have objected to the Eiffel Tower and the Sagrada Familia.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get the indignation against UNESCO but don't for one minute think that they haven't visited Liverpool which seems to be the narrative put out.

The council made a big play of the heritage status so don't be surprised if it gets removed if you move away from the things that got us the status.

Fuck me the council knocked the Cavern down. This is on chippy tits.

Also, apart from an extra 10000 bums on seats I don't see the sudden upturn in visitors/tourists/hotel rooms. It's a football ground with no history.

Fuck them.

 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, deiseach said:

Yep. There are many issues with Everton's phantom stadium, but the impact it'll have on the skyline isn't one of them. If Unesco had been around back in the day, they'd have objected to the Eiffel Tower and the Sagrada Familia.

These cunts would have blocked the 3 Graces due to them blocking the view of a fishing shed from 1600’s. To be fair to the bloos they’ve done well designing a modern building that actually fits in with it’s Victorian surroundings, not sure what else they could do? Also amazes me that other cities seem to build whatever the fuck they like (London - Gherkins and walkie fuckin talkies next to genuine historical architecture) without all the bullshit and hurdles. Anyway it’s all moot as surely the costs are starting to run away from them now.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, rubble-rouser said:

To be honest their ground is hardly the key factor here - more the Liverpool Waters issue. Frankly, fuck UNESCO. He’s done fuck all since Rhinoceros anyway.

The main character could hear the boos from the blue hordes. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, rubble-rouser said:

To be honest their ground is hardly the key factor here - more the Liverpool Waters issue. Frankly, fuck UNESCO. He’s done fuck all since Rhinoceros anyway.

What is the liverpool waters issue please ? Isn’t the ground part of that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, rubble-rouser said:

To be honest their ground is hardly the key factor here - more the Liverpool Waters issue. Frankly, fuck UNESCO. He’s done fuck all since Rhinoceros anyway.

No better place for a shout-out to The Theatre of the Absurd than this thread

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, DalyanPete said:

I get the indignation against UNESCO but don't for one minute think that they haven't visited Liverpool which seems to be the narrative put out.

The council made a big play of the heritage status so don't be surprised if it gets removed if you move away from the things that got us the status.

Fuck me the council knocked the Cavern down. This is on chippy tits.

Also, apart from an extra 10000 bums on seats I don't see the sudden upturn in visitors/tourists/hotel rooms. It's a football ground with no history.

Fuck them.

 

I can't see how Everton's ground impacts anything. Those docks will never be used as docks again. It's a fucking shit hole. As long as the design is relatively sympathetic to the surrounding area (and I think the bloos have done a decent job), I can't see what the issue is. 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Reckoner said:

What is the liverpool waters issue please ? Isn’t the ground part of that?

It was "started" in 2005 when they released loads of cgi of the docks in 30 years time which looked like Hong Kong harbour. Only problem was they had no plans to put anything in this development. Sixty floor skyscrapers but no businesses to put in them to create jobs and not enough money to make from overpriced apartments. You would basically need someone like ITV like in Salford Quays to kick start the regeneration. Liverpool is notoriously shit for attracting outside investment thanks to chippy tits and the cartel of the same developers being chosen over and over again.

 

So basically it has dragged on since then with virtually no progress and Peel being a company that invests the absolute bare minimum in all it's assets and constantly wants government grants to do anything. The Liverpool waters images get scaled down every couple of years and will go from looking like Hong Kong to Cheshire Oaks. They release statements every so often that the development is on track but never back it up with anything concrete. The IOM ferry terminal has been funded almost entirely by the IOM government and the new cruise terminal is not funded by Peel. Also the buildings in Princes Dock are all private developments but they release images on their website and Twitter feed to give the impression the development is down to them.

 

Everton have only decided eleven years after Liverpool Waters was announced to build there so Peel have been happy for them to do that and make out that they are part of some masterplan development whilst letting Everton build a stadium while they build a couple of prefabs and a power station around it and then pat themselves on the back. 

  • Upvote 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bobby Hundreds said:

Fuck UNESCO don't get me wrong if this was us Moral outrage FC would be going spare but I don't give a fuck, hold back city plans because some shitty organisation decides to bestow its blessings your way. The only grim thing is the absolute corruption  and a dogshit Council we've had for decades regardless of UNESCO.

 

Fuck the high rises off and I know nostalgia plays a part but build a unique city not a carbon copy high rise piece of shit that every city is becoming, Manchester is a damn eye sore and like our centre losing all its originalty. Town used to be magic full weird shops, hidden gems, the only thing different about city's now is their layout.

Some high rises are ok in the business area but as soon as anything in the city centre gets planned you just get everyone opposing it. Also the planning department are obsessed with bland stumpy red brick crap and never want anything with any personality.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As has rightly been said, I'd rather see that area developed rather than kept derelict not doing anything. 

 

What pisses me off is that if this was us the bloos would be going absolutely mental about it whereas the vast majority of Reds aren't arsed and would prefer to see the area updated. Fuck me they were kicking off over a few trees on Stanley Park last week. 

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

As has rightly been said, I'd rather see that area developed rather than kept derelict not doing anything. 

 

What pisses me off is that if this was us the bloos would be going absolutely mental about it. 

You just know they would be all over it, and add it to their long list of  our "shame" that they constantly bang on about. Hysterical sanctimonious twats. 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bobby Hundreds said:

Fuck UNESCO don't get me wrong if this was us Moral outrage FC would be going spare but I don't give a fuck, hold back city plans because some shitty organisation decides to bestow its blessings your way. The only grim thing is the absolute corruption  and a dogshit Council we've had for decades regardless of UNESCO.

 

Fuck the high rises off and I know nostalgia plays a part but build a unique city not a carbon copy high rise piece of shit that every city is becoming, Manchester is a damn eye sore and like our centre losing all its originalty. Town used to be magic full weird shops, hidden gems, the only thing different about city's now is their layout.

I can't believe the way UNESCO are getting criticised for this. This is what they do. Perhaps you'd like them to start selling ice creams instead. Asking them to mind their own business is akin to wondering why the National Trust aren't involved in the space race. If the government of Uttar Pradesh built an Aldi next door to the Taj Mahal, UNESCO wouldn't be very pleased. The docks are a massive, historically important site. If we want to permanently destroy parts of that, it comes at a number of costs, risking losing UNESCO status is but one. The stadium is one of the final straws. Who's to blame? Liverpool City Council for granting permission. Not Everton for asking, not Moshiri, Liverpool City Council. 

 

I've said all along that we destroy areas of historical significance at our peril. There is no shortage of suitable land that could accommodate a new Ev stadium. Indeed the docks are suitable. But ignoring the financial cost, here are a couple of others:

1. Destroy a large area of historic importance. 

2. Risk losing UNESCO status. 

 

Whether we think it is better do something with BMD than nothing is utterly irrelevant. 

  • Upvote 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Red74 said:

£750 million and counting at this stage. Laings are on site and starting the groundwork’s in September, but my contact theres telling me they’re still scratching their heads on why it was allowed to go ahead down there, especially with the restrictions in exits onto Regent Road.

 

You wouldn’t be buying a high rise apartment down there and having loads of divvies boxing each other in your car park every other week.

Only a spit and a stride from where the Strand has just been narrowed.

 

If this thing ever got built it would be a monumental fuck-up and a massive drain on the city. And it wouldn't even help them to become successful. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Doctor Troy said:

We are more powerful than the gods in Clash of the Titans. We can influence any decision on or off the pitch. 

So what your saying is that for years we hear of "the powers that be" but we as a collective have been unaware that actually, we ARE the powers that be!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Doctor Troy said:

It was "started" in 2005 when they released loads of cgi of the docks in 30 years time which looked like Hong Kong harbour. Only problem was they had no plans to put anything in this development. Sixty floor skyscrapers but no businesses to put in them to create jobs and not enough money to make from overpriced apartments. You would basically need someone like ITV like in Salford Quays to kick start the regeneration. Liverpool is notoriously shit for attracting outside investment thanks to chippy tits and the cartel of the same developers being chosen over and over again.

 

So basically it has dragged on since then with virtually no progress and Peel being a company that invests the absolute bare minimum in all it's assets and constantly wants government grants to do anything. The Liverpool waters images get scaled down every couple of years and will go from looking like Hong Kong to Cheshire Oaks. They release statements every so often that the development is on track but never back it up with anything concrete. The IOM ferry terminal has been funded almost entirely by the IOM government and the new cruise terminal is not funded by Peel. Also the buildings in Princes Dock are all private developments but they release images on their website and Twitter feed to give the impression the development is down to them.

 

Everton have only decided eleven years after Liverpool Waters was announced to build there so Peel have been happy for them to do that and make out that they are part of some masterplan development whilst letting Everton build a stadium while they build a couple of prefabs and a power station around it and then pat themselves on the back. 

 

1 hour ago, Bjornebye said:

As has rightly been said, I'd rather see that area developed rather than kept derelict not doing anything. 

 

What pisses me off is that if this was us the bloos would be going absolutely mental about it whereas the vast majority of Reds aren't arsed and would prefer to see the area updated. Fuck me they were kicking off over a few trees on Stanley Park last week. 

Nails smacked on the head these 2 posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Barrington Womble said:

I can't see how Everton's ground impacts anything. Those docks will never be used as docks again. It's a fucking shit hole. As long as the design is relatively sympathetic to the surrounding area (and I think the bloos have done a decent job), I can't see what the issue is. 

Haven't gone that deep into it Baz, but obviously it's pissing on someones chips at UNESCO and this is the straw that broke the camels back.

Having had a boozer not far from there I can confirm it's badly in need of something. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This looks like an out for High Morals FC. How could they possibly proceed with something that damages the City?  They would rather stagnate or go backwards than do that. They will rip up the plans and start on sometime that will have UNESCO hanging at their door to apply special status too. A stadium built of flower that re-pollenate the whole of Merseyside that turns into homeless accommodation Monday to Friday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, rb14 said:

I can't believe the way UNESCO are getting criticised for this. This is what they do. Perhaps you'd like them to start selling ice creams instead. Asking them to mind their own business is akin to wondering why the National Trust aren't involved in the space race. If the government of Uttar Pradesh built an Aldi next door to the Taj Mahal, UNESCO wouldn't be very pleased. The docks are a massive, historically important site. If we want to permanently destroy parts of that, it comes at a number of costs, risking losing UNESCO status is but one. The stadium is one of the final straws. Who's to blame? Liverpool City Council for granting permission. Not Everton for asking, not Moshiri, Liverpool City Council. 

 

I've said all along that we destroy areas of historical significance at our peril. There is no shortage of suitable land that could accommodate a new Ev stadium. Indeed the docks are suitable. But ignoring the financial cost, here are a couple of others:

1. Destroy a large area of historic importance. 

2. Risk losing UNESCO status. 

 

Whether we think it is better do something with BMD than nothing is utterly irrelevant. 

Spot on this. It isnt UNESCO's 'fault' that the historic infrastructure of the docks was destroyed decades before the status was awarded and the site was razed to the ground. What's left now are the pretty much derelict remnants.

 

But they are remnants of what was once there same as what's left of Hadrian's Wall is a remnant, Stonehenge is a remnant. There are other examples that escape my mind but the point is, you protect what's left because that's what it is, what's left. Once it's obliterated, all you have left are words in a book oran old map of what was once there that no one will ever give a fuck about again.

 

Im not sure anyone can say the docks will never be used again. Sure, they arent going to take modern container ships but there are still many smaller ships in operation today. Hell, it \ they could be used as marinas.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, rb14 said:

I can't believe the way UNESCO are getting criticised for this. This is what they do. Perhaps you'd like them to start selling ice creams instead. Asking them to mind their own business is akin to wondering why the National Trust aren't involved in the space race. If the government of Uttar Pradesh built an Aldi next door to the Taj Mahal, UNESCO wouldn't be very pleased. The docks are a massive, historically important site. If we want to permanently destroy parts of that, it comes at a number of costs, risking losing UNESCO status is but one. The stadium is one of the final straws. Who's to blame? Liverpool City Council for granting permission. Not Everton for asking, not Moshiri, Liverpool City Council. 

 

I've said all along that we destroy areas of historical significance at our peril. There is no shortage of suitable land that could accommodate a new Ev stadium. Indeed the docks are suitable. But ignoring the financial cost, here are a couple of others:

1. Destroy a large area of historic importance. 

2. Risk losing UNESCO status. 

 

Whether we think it is better do something with BMD than nothing is utterly irrelevant. 

It's the inconsistency of their decisions though. London can build massive skyscrapers next to the tower of London and there's a few mad buildings near old buildings in Paris. 

 

Lime street was knocked down with an old cinema just left to rot and they build some utter shite brown cladding on the site with an Aldi there. It's only a few steps away from St George's Hall and the first thing that people see when they walk out of the train station. You could also say that about St John's. 

 

Some company wanted to do a zip wire from the Beacon to the gardens in St George's Hall but the only people to oppose it was the general public. Also Lawrence Kenwright put a shit extension on top of one of the nicest buildings in the city and UNESCO and English Heritage were nowhere to be seen.

 

They are opposing Everton building on a derelict dock that hasn't been touched for years. The area round there has been neglected for decades. It's nowhere near the sight line of the Pier Head. No other city in this country seems to have every single development opposed like in Liverpool. It can be a good thing but it's held the city back for a long time which is probably why outside investment is always in short supply.

  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Doctor Troy said:

It was "started" in 2005 when they released loads of cgi of the docks in 30 years time which looked like Hong Kong harbour. Only problem was they had no plans to put anything in this development. Sixty floor skyscrapers but no businesses to put in them to create jobs and not enough money to make from overpriced apartments. You would basically need someone like ITV like in Salford Quays to kick start the regeneration. Liverpool is notoriously shit for attracting outside investment thanks to chippy tits and the cartel of the same developers being chosen over and over again.

 

So basically it has dragged on since then with virtually no progress and Peel being a company that invests the absolute bare minimum in all it's assets and constantly wants government grants to do anything. The Liverpool waters images get scaled down every couple of years and will go from looking like Hong Kong to Cheshire Oaks. They release statements every so often that the development is on track but never back it up with anything concrete. The IOM ferry terminal has been funded almost entirely by the IOM government and the new cruise terminal is not funded by Peel. Also the buildings in Princes Dock are all private developments but they release images on their website and Twitter feed to give the impression the development is down to them.

 

Everton have only decided eleven years after Liverpool Waters was announced to build there so Peel have been happy for them to do that and make out that they are part of some masterplan development whilst letting Everton build a stadium while they build a couple of prefabs and a power station around it and then pat themselves on the back. 

Knowing the fucking dipshits in the IOM government they've probably been dry bummed on the cost of that terminal and grinned like fuckwits whilst handing over every penny. 

 

You don't have to be mildly retarded to get elected on the IOM, but it helps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, General Dryness said:

Knowing the fucking dipshits in the IOM government they've probably been dry bummed on the cost of that terminal and grinned like fuckwits whilst handing over every penny. 

 

You don't have to be mildly retarded to get elected on the IOM, but it helps.

Think it started off at £9m then went up to £16m with delays etc. 

 

It will look good when it us finished. Just like every development in Liverpool, it seems to take about 3 times longer than anywhere else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×