Dave Posted June 15, 2007 Share Posted June 15, 2007 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brummie Posted June 15, 2007 Share Posted June 15, 2007 When our takeover went through, immediately we started hearing stories along the lines of "OMFG!!!! Lerner wants to rename the ground!!!". The general consensus was: 1. He probably doesn't (and has since said it is not on the agenda). 2. Even if he did, we'd still call it Villa Park. 3. So would everyone else. You won't find many of our fans referring to the Doug Ellis Stand, for example, and I'm sure none of you refer to the Newcastle Brown Stand. I'd have thought naming rights for old, established grounds like VP, SJP, Goodison etc etc would actually not fetch that much anyway, purely because in the same way we know they'd always be called by their proper name, so do potential sponsors. New stadia are a different matter, mind. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Invicta_Toon Posted June 15, 2007 Share Posted June 15, 2007 groundhog day tbh hey, who should be our next captain? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted June 15, 2007 Share Posted June 15, 2007 I'd have thought naming rights for old, established grounds like VP, SJP, Goodison etc etc would actually not fetch that much anyway, purely because in the same way we know they'd always be called by their proper name, so do potential sponsors. New stadia are a different matter, mind. Spot on. What's the point if nobody uses the name? Waste of time and effort. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Offshore Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 I'd have thought naming rights for old, established grounds like VP, SJP, Goodison etc etc would actually not fetch that much anyway, purely because in the same way we know they'd always be called by their proper name, so do potential sponsors. New stadia are a different matter, mind. Spot on. What's the point if nobody uses the name? Waste of time and effort. Worked for the Snickers bar.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 Always has, and always will be MARATHON. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 And I still call Starburst, Opal Fruits. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Offshore Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 And I still call Starburst, Opal Fruits. Did opal mints become pacers? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Invicta_Toon Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 Always has, and always will be MARATHON. that's shite tbh I was raised on Marathon's, but haven't thought of that name in regards Snickers bars for years Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 What happened to smoggeordie ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Invicta_Toon Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 rebranded. he is now known as Alex_Harrison_10 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
abcdefg Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 It should be James's, James not being plural. Yes it bothers me! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
abcdefg Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 Anyway, I doubt there's much cash in changing the name of somewhere which would continue to be called by its previous name anyway. It's not as old as St James's Park in that London, which is an actual park rather than a football stadium [/Mr Logic] Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest togsy Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 could you imagine if they came up with something original like "the stadium of light" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 Choco Krispies tbh. National outrage. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarrenBartonCentrePartin Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 It should be James's, James not being plural. Yes it bothers me! having the apostrophe after the s signifies its the park belonging to St James (whoever he is/was/wasn't) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
abcdefg Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 It should be James's, James not being plural. Yes it bothers me! having the apostrophe after the s signifies its the park belonging to St James (whoever he is/was/wasn't) Yes, I know, and James not being plural it requires a further s St James's. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 St James' surely? Or has my English totally gone to sh*t? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 It should be James's, James not being plural. Yes it bothers me! having the apostrophe after the s signifies its the park belonging to St James (whoever he is/was/wasn't) Yes, I know, and James not being plural it requires a further s St James's. Both St James' and St James's are right. There are two alternative rules for that, depends which you choose. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarrenBartonCentrePartin Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 It should be James's, James not being plural. Yes it bothers me! having the apostrophe after the s signifies its the park belonging to St James (whoever he is/was/wasn't) Yes, I know, and James not being plural it requires a further s St James's. it has been written that way in some broadsheet newspapers if that consoles your anguish. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
abcdefg Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 If it were the park of Ken, it would be Ken's park, the fact that James ends in an s does not mean you miss out the s following the apostrophe. I told you it bothered me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 But you'd say it's Chris' pen would you not? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
abcdefg Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 St James' surely? Or has my English totally gone to sh*t? It has, the following s is only dropped for plurals. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
abcdefg Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 But you'd say it's Chris' pen would you not? No, I wouldn't. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
abcdefg Posted June 16, 2007 Share Posted June 16, 2007 I would be ashamed of this, but the whole thread is speculative nonsense. 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