TomYam

Yes - although Sunderland actually joined the league in 1890. By season 1957-58 Sunderland had clocked up more seasons in the top flight than any other and were the last of the 19th century clubs to be relegated. They didn't just survive in the top division either - before that relegation season they had finished in the top 12 of the league 84% of the time and the top 5 43% of the time. Quite remarkable consistency for the time and Sunderland had by far the best record in the league. Of course the illegal payments scandal and subsequent relegation was the end of Sunderland's status as one of the true giants of English football.

Shame about Spartans. Their goal difference suggests they were better than wherw they finished. Oddly, they seemed to have turned the corner after several years of barely surviving relegation; a malaise set in 3 months ago and they became listless and abject - a sure sign of problems off the pitch affecting performance.

Somewhat simplistically but, based on Option D: a trailblazing 70,000 stadium in Castle Leazes: Pros: - improved comfort, acoustics, facilities - much greater scope for fans - especially youngsters - to attend matches - new revenue streams increases economic performance of both club and city - harmonious design a boon to the cityscape, expansion of parkland Cons: - not our spiritual home So imo there are emotional reasons for wanting to stay put and nothing more.

The Royal Arcade fronted Pilgrim Street which had extended unbroken to Manor Street (now gone) and City Road. It faced down Mosley Street to the south-west. Behind it lay Carliol Square and The Holy Jesus Hospital. Once the decision to build a large roundabout for the proposed new central motorway had been made, the planners had to choose between RA and HJH as to which should be demolished to accommodate it - they chose RA and it bit the bullet at the end of 1963 with Swan House replacing it. The Royal Arcade was lauded as an architectural masterpiece, but its original purpose as a stylish shopping mall foundered on the fact it was a few minutes from the main shopping streets and was at the furthest point of Pilgrim Steeet and beyond it was a decaying part of town (Pandon). In the decades preceding its demolition it was a beacon for counterculture and a hangout for anarchists and communists. The city administrators were probably more than happy to sign off its destruction, but the city lost some magnificence that can never be replaced - just as it has with the loss of two-thirds of Eldon Square, King Charles House with Shieldfield Green and the surrounding houses, the ancient Dolphin House, the original Pearl Assurance Building and the old classical library (that was flattened to make way for John Dobson Street) - all demolished over less than a decade of destruction in the name of progress. The cool leftfield Handyside Arcade was blitzed in the late 80s to make way for the faceless and unsuccessful Eldon Garden - proving the council are myopic phillistines.

Interesting. So, on that basis, a large majority would prefer a ground move providing it is nearby and of sufficient quality. Perhaps those folks with skills I don't possess could now formulate graphics for alternative possibilities other than Option C (ie. on Castle Leazes)?

Disappointing. Can never want RM to win unless it's against Juventus or ManU.

When I was a geography student, Cheshire was a midlands county and Lancashire a northern county - so that makes Manchester a northern county by a whisker. In Roman times, Manchester and Liverpool though not Leeds) were in Mercia - a midlands kingdom. One things for sure is this attempt to designate Manchester as the new capital of the north - where they are awarded cultural assets and offered economic and political advantages - is contempible.

My feelings too. I use the park a couple of times a week and it's well used by many friends I know. Admittedly there is regular antisocial activity to the south-west (Barrack Road), but the great majority of the oark is well-maintained and harmonious. For the wellbeing of the city we should be looking at expansion not diminishment.

No, there would be much less opposition IF the land vacated by the existing stadium were redesigned/redesignated into park land. There would have been far less opposition to the Hall plans if they hadn't intended to retain St.James 's Park AND build a new stadium. Again, though, why nit build a new stadium on Castle Leazes instead of buildinh over part of the existing stadium and a huge chunk of Leazes Park? Option C makes no sense to me on that basis.

Option D - on Castle Leazes - for me. Option C is a move away from the hallowed turf so why not move a further 200 yards north as it'd be less contentious (gar less encroachment into the park), less complicated and imo a better setting for the city.? Option A is more realistic than Option A.

I've spent 50 years regretting the fact we couldn't get the winner in the 0-0 against Wolves becuase IF we had only scored we'd have finished 12th instead of 15th. Oh cruel fate!

What a difference one week has made. Last week, before the Fulham game, I thought we'd finish anywhere from 7th to 12th. Now 6th to 9th - and more likely 6th than 9th. Outstanding results and hopefully more of the same next week.

It was even worse in the following game, Bournemouth v ManU (predictably). That's what the pundits and broadcasters do, unfortunately. They're all in thrall to ManU, especially, but all the heavyweight clubs at top. If we become regular top 4 material, they'd focus more on us.

I feel very similarly. After a first 18 months of almost wholly good news and activity, it feels like we've stood still this season. FFP/FPS and new lines of obstruction have played a huge part of course, but I'm really hoping that ducks are being lined up behind the scenes and then...bam...some really exciting and holistic plans are published.

Excellent win at Fulham again. We've had a good run against them recently winning 7 and drawing 2 of the last 9 - and they've only scored 2 against us in those matches.

1. New stadium on Castle Leazes 2. Extend Leazes Park on to land vacated by old stadium 3. Build a couple of 30 storey commercial buildings on Gallowgate (in front of metro station) Result: the club can take a giant leap forward and 20,000 more can attend, the city can finally get a worthy park in a great setting...and St. James's metro station would have much greater weekly use.

Much how I feel.

You're right, of course, but you could canvas fans' opinions based on a very simple poll such as: Choose one, would you prefer to: A. Stay at St.James's Park permanently - renovated and with a small increase in capacity. B. Move to a new stadium at either Castle Leazes or the Arena site with a 70,000+ capacity.

Brought back memories of 3-2 FA Cup comeback wins for Cov, eh Leffe?

Great game and brilliant and fully merited for Cov. A final against the Sky Blues is still on!

Nothing against Wolves, but I'm dreaming of a Cov v Toon final - so come on the Sky Blues!

You're right. It's an obvious choice as the land is a blank space and those that don't wish to move can be reconciled with this tiny migration northwestward.

Just don't be blaming the players, the management or ownership. Blame the Sky 3 redtops and the administrators who are in their pocket.

Yes it is. Keep banging that drum, but still try to enjoy what life has to offer.

Hmm. John Hall never identified a thing in his life except for the principles of Thatcherism. His 'advisors' suggested he focus on Castle Leazes - just as they suggested he buy Newcastle rather than Sunderland.