Stifler Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 Looks like it'd piss you off, so I'm all for it. In the wider aspect it would be mis managing the city. That would have a knock on effect of developments in the city, which would have a knock on effect on jobs created, tourism satisfaction, residents satisfaction, local business success rate etc. Effectively you would be cheering on jobs losses, a city falling behind it's rivals etc all so it would piss off me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 Looks like it'd piss you off, so I'm all for it. In the wider aspect it would be mis managing the city. That would have a knock on effect of developments in the city, which would have a knock on effect on jobs created, tourism satisfaction, residents satisfaction, local business success rate etc. Effectively you would be cheering on jobs losses, a city falling behind it's rivals etc all so it would piss off me. From not changing a couple of signs? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 Looks like it'd piss you off, so I'm all for it. In the wider aspect it would be mis managing the city. That would have a knock on effect of developments in the city, which would have a knock on effect on jobs created, tourism satisfaction, residents satisfaction, local business success rate etc. Effectively you would be cheering on jobs losses, a city falling behind it's rivals etc all so it would piss off me. From not changing a couple of signs? No, from at least four years of managing NCC. Theirs more chance of Science city progressing under the Lib deems, also the same could possibly be said for EPS (though thats mostly down to the land owners at this stage). Not forgetting the The Lib Dems are more supportive of developments from universities, infact they are more supportive of private developments altogether. They are also more in favour of investment in public transport etc. Labour winning the NCC seats is bad news for the city. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fugazi Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 Banter.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 No change to Davros' custom title Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilko Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 Gan on Dave. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dotdotuk Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 Looks like it'd piss you off, so I'm all for it. In the wider aspect it would be mis managing the city. That would have a knock on effect of developments in the city, which would have a knock on effect on jobs created, tourism satisfaction, residents satisfaction, local business success rate etc. Effectively you would be cheering on jobs losses, a city falling behind it's rivals etc all so it would piss off me. From not changing a couple of signs? No, from at least four years of managing NCC. Theirs more chance of Science city progressing under the Lib deems, also the same could possibly be said for EPS (though thats mostly down to the land owners at this stage). Not forgetting the The Lib Dems are more supportive of developments from universities, infact they are more supportive of private developments altogether. They are also more in favour of investment in public transport etc. Labour winning the NCC seats is bad news for the city. Well I am not sure this is the place to discuss politics no matter how much I agree with "Stifler". However there was political unity at the council tonight. A Lib Dem amendment calling for the media to continue calling it St James Park was accepted and the motion as amended was agreed unanimously by all councillors. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 Looks like it'd p*ss you off, so I'm all for it. In the wider aspect it would be mis managing the city. That would have a knock on effect of developments in the city, which would have a knock on effect on jobs created, tourism satisfaction, residents satisfaction, local business success rate etc. Effectively you would be cheering on jobs losses, a city falling behind it's rivals etc all so it would p*ss off me. From not changing a couple of signs? No, from at least four years of managing NCC. Theirs more chance of Science city progressing under the Lib deems, also the same could possibly be said for EPS (though thats mostly down to the land owners at this stage). Not forgetting the The Lib Dems are more supportive of developments from universities, infact they are more supportive of private developments altogether. They are also more in favour of investment in public transport etc. Labour winning the NCC seats is bad news for the city. very little difference between them at council level up here. from what i've read there are many worse city councils. interesting you say about private development when most of the university expansion, quayside, eldon square etc were inititated under labour as was the metro. not saying that the lib dems wouldn't do similar had they been in the same position. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 Looks like it'd p*ss you off, so I'm all for it. In the wider aspect it would be mis managing the city. That would have a knock on effect of developments in the city, which would have a knock on effect on jobs created, tourism satisfaction, residents satisfaction, local business success rate etc. Effectively you would be cheering on jobs losses, a city falling behind it's rivals etc all so it would p*ss off me. From not changing a couple of signs? No, from at least four years of managing NCC. Theirs more chance of Science city progressing under the Lib deems, also the same could possibly be said for EPS (though thats mostly down to the land owners at this stage). Not forgetting the The Lib Dems are more supportive of developments from universities, infact they are more supportive of private developments altogether. They are also more in favour of investment in public transport etc. Labour winning the NCC seats is bad news for the city. very little difference between them at council level up here. from what i've read there are mant worse city councils. interesting you say about private development when most of the university expansion, quayside, eldon square etc were inititated under labour as was the metro. not saying that the lib dems wouldn't do similar had they been in the same position. Lib Dems bought the northern Rock tower and have since re-let it again making a profit on it's purchase. They have also actively sought investment in Science city, both by trying to entice the private sector to invest in it but also by seeing if the council themselves could take out a loan and being able to kick start the development themselves. Nick Clegg is very much in favour of the Science city project and as a result a Lib Dem ruling NCC could be in a great position to develop the site. I could go on about other things but as it has been said this maybe isn't the correct thread for this discussion. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 Looks like it'd piss you off, so I'm all for it. In the wider aspect it would be mis managing the city. That would have a knock on effect of developments in the city, which would have a knock on effect on jobs created, tourism satisfaction, residents satisfaction, local business success rate etc. Effectively you would be cheering on jobs losses, a city falling behind it's rivals etc all so it would piss off me. From not changing a couple of signs? No, from at least four years of managing NCC. Theirs more chance of Science city progressing under the Lib deems, also the same could possibly be said for EPS (though thats mostly down to the land owners at this stage). Not forgetting the The Lib Dems are more supportive of developments from universities, infact they are more supportive of private developments altogether. They are also more in favour of investment in public transport etc. Labour winning the NCC seats is bad news for the city. Educayshun! Educayshun! Educayshun! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest icemanblue Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 Ah, fucking hell. Here we go. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 I could go on about other things but as it has been said this maybe isn't the correct thread for this discussion. Correct & the same goes for the rest of you punks. Especially you Dave! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/north-east-news/evening-chronicle-news/2012/01/13/council-defiant-on-st-james-park-name-change-72703-30115763/ Council defiant on St James' Park name change by Adrian Pearson, Evening Chronicle Jan 13 2012 MIKE Ashley has been told he will receive no support from Newcastle Council in his efforts to rename St James’ Park. City leaders at the council have passed a motion calling on Mr Ashley to reverse his decision in light of wide-spread fan opposition. Labour and Liberal Democrat politicians united behind a motion which will see the council refuse to change street signs to reflect the club’s decision to rename the ground the Sports Direct Arena. The motion, agreed unanimously, says the council officially agrees with “the overwhelming majority of supporters who believe this is the wrong decision”. It adds: “Council confirms that it has no plans to change existing wayfinding signs which bear the name St James’ Park and call on the club to reconsider their decision.” The council motion also commits city officers to write to media organisations asking them to hold back from referring to the ground as the Sports Direct Arena. Labour’s Michael Burke proposed the motion. The councillor said: “Newcastle’s passion for football is world renowned, with thousands of people across the city loyally following the team through thick and thin. “While players and managers come and go, the ground and supporters don’t. “Football is an intrinsic part of civic life, and by re-naming St James’ Park the club has broken with history and tradition. Given the attachment thousands of people have across the city to St James’ Park, I think it is right that the council call on the club to reconsider their decision and write to the major media outlets requesting that they continue to use St James’ Park in their reporting.” His motion, passed on Wednesday night in the civic centre’s council chamber, came in the same week in which Virgin Money boss Sir Richard Branson made clear he will not be bidding for stadium naming rights. In his first visit to Newcastle since taking over Northern Rock, Sir Richard said he was happy to settle for shirt sponsorship only. He said: “I think we are a lucky brand as can be. I’m told we did the sponsorship deal two hours before the match, got the name on the shirts and they beat Manchester United three-love. “I don’t think we will push our luck too much.” Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JCONA Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 “I don’t think we will push our luck too much.” If only Ashley would follow suit. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sifu Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/north-east-news/evening-chronicle-news/2012/01/13/council-defiant-on-st-james-park-name-change-72703-30115763/ Council defiant on St James' Park name change by Adrian Pearson, Evening Chronicle Jan 13 2012 MIKE Ashley has been told he will receive no support from Newcastle Council in his efforts to rename St James’ Park. City leaders at the council have passed a motion calling on Mr Ashley to reverse his decision in light of wide-spread fan opposition. Labour and Liberal Democrat politicians united behind a motion which will see the council refuse to change street signs to reflect the club’s decision to rename the ground the Sports Direct Arena. The motion, agreed unanimously, says the council officially agrees with “the overwhelming majority of supporters who believe this is the wrong decision”. It adds: “Council confirms that it has no plans to change existing wayfinding signs which bear the name St James’ Park and call on the club to reconsider their decision.” The council motion also commits city officers to write to media organisations asking them to hold back from referring to the ground as the Sports Direct Arena. Labour’s Michael Burke proposed the motion. The councillor said: “Newcastle’s passion for football is world renowned, with thousands of people across the city loyally following the team through thick and thin. “While players and managers come and go, the ground and supporters don’t. “Football is an intrinsic part of civic life, and by re-naming St James’ Park the club has broken with history and tradition. Given the attachment thousands of people have across the city to St James’ Park, I think it is right that the council call on the club to reconsider their decision and write to the major media outlets requesting that they continue to use St James’ Park in their reporting.” His motion, passed on Wednesday night in the civic centre’s council chamber, came in the same week in which Virgin Money boss Sir Richard Branson made clear he will not be bidding for stadium naming rights. In his first visit to Newcastle since taking over Northern Rock, Sir Richard said he was happy to settle for shirt sponsorship only. He said: “I think we are a lucky brand as can be. I’m told we did the sponsorship deal two hours before the match, got the name on the shirts and they beat Manchester United three-love. “I don’t think we will push our luck too much.” Good stuff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarrenBartonCentrePartin Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 some of the older signs around town say St. James' Park, but the newer ones up by the Haymarket just say 'Newcastle United FC'. If they really want to reaffirm their view, those ones should be changed to say SJP too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
David28 Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 Is the big 'St James' Park' sign next to the stairs still there? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueStar Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 Yep Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
David28 Posted January 13, 2012 Share Posted January 13, 2012 Yep Cheers. Good thing that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M4 Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 Centre circle today: http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/4365/sjpsd.jpg That's new isn't it? ... Fucking hell Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decky Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 Lets hope he isnt planning to colour that Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
David28 Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 Lets hope he isnt planning to colour that He probably won't be allowed to do that by the FA. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
timeEd32 Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 Isn't there a Sports Direct tarp over the center circle before kickoff? Maybe it left a mark with the frost? Or maybe we're about to have the tackiest center circle in the world. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karjala Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 looks like it has faded out during the first half Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now