: Sun May 17, 2009 5:03 pm  

'J20' raises a few good points there IMO, not just sticking up for him as he is WIdnes either. I recall a bin bag being mentioned by a handful of stewards, and to my knowledge (I could be wrong) it was searched and nothing incriminating was found, just flags and bits of newspaper? I think the major upset amongst the lads stood up came from the stewards chucking out a few people needlessly, 'just for being stood'. As youa ll saw there were at least 30 or so Widnes fans stood up, and to throw a handful out is hypocrisy in action. No one was being aggressive or inciting trouble, or necking cans as far as I can remember. As priorr to KO, a few lads were askesd to empty their can content into plastic pint glasses. Some people get that yellow uniform on and they start to think they are some kind 'dictator like' figure. Some of them can be like that at Widnes too.

As for the dullard who suggested Widnes carry knives, sort your head out mate this is the 21st century. We are rugby fans, not the 'ICF' or the chelsea headhunters

widnes bad lads : Sun May 17, 2009 6:24 pm  

Well here,s my 4 penneth.

First a handful of fans in the South Stand who wanted to stand up and blocking no-ones view are getting a lot of flack. They weren,t foul mouthed they weren,t blocking anyone,s view, they weren,t putting anyone at risk. How many does the stand hold ? and even the stewards could see they weren,t bothering anyone apart from them.

Had the stand been at capacity, had they been violent and abusive, and had they been threatening anyone, I might have a different opinion but this thread is well over the top as far as I,m concerned.

Seems to me these fans deserve an apology.

Re: widnes bad lads : Sun May 17, 2009 6:28 pm  

frankb wrote:

Well here,s my 4 penneth.

First a handful of fans in the South Stand who wanted to stand up and blocking no-ones view are getting a lot of flack. They weren,t foul mouthed they weren,t blocking anyone,s view, they weren,t putting anyone at risk. How many does the stand hold ? and even the stewards could see they weren,t bothering anyone apart from them.

Had the stand been at capacity, had they been violent and abusive, and had they been threatening anyone, I might have a different opinion but this thread is well over the top as far as I,m concerned.

Seems to me these fans deserve an apology.

It was the abuse they gave the stewards that was the main problem.....

: Sun May 17, 2009 10:03 pm  

Maybe your stewards were upset that the Widnes away kit made their spectators stand out more than your 'official' stewards jackets!!

: Sun May 17, 2009 10:46 pm  

dazednconfused wrote:

Maybe your stewards were upset that the Widnes away kit made their spectators stand out more than your 'official' stewards jackets!!

You should try your hand at comedy mate.

: Mon May 18, 2009 10:14 am  

imleythbenter wrote:

And how illinformed are you? the stand was actually designed for all seats bu they were never put in as a poll was made and as a result of the fans voting, the stand was left for all standing, it is about two days work to put in seats as all the relevant holes etc ar in place, and as for a safety certificate do you really think the council wouldnt allocate one to a stadium they are part owners of? get real sonny -by the way the Halliwell Jones doesnt do to badly despite having a standng area, you really are a bad troll

I'm sure this is right, but it was put out that the real reason was because the RFL changed its rules for SL from a 10,000 capacity stadium to 12,000 so Leigh asked for a redesign. Not that it made any difference as the RFL ......nope, what I was going to say would be libellous

: Mon May 18, 2009 10:28 am  

The rules can't have been changed to keep Leigh out. The RFL refused to acknowledge the LSV existed and wanted to inspect Hilton Park for suitability for 2009. Thats how .............. they are and will continue to be.

: Mon May 18, 2009 12:22 pm  

DemonUK wrote:

The rules can't have been changed to keep Leigh out. The RFL refused to acknowledge the LSV existed and wanted to inspect Hilton Park for suitability for 2009. Thats how .............. they are and will continue to be.

I'm sure originally 10,000 capacity was the threshold but they increased it to 12,000 and I remember one of your directors saying so.

I agree it was irrelevant anyway given what happened subsequently.

: Tue May 19, 2009 5:34 am  

DemonUK wrote:

The rules can't have been changed to keep Leigh out. The RFL refused to acknowledge the LSV existed and wanted to inspect Hilton Park for suitability for 2009. Thats how .............. they are and will continue to be.

yet Sky do sex wee's over the LSV, it is by far the best and easiest RL ground they have ever been too and worked in. FACT !!!

: Tue May 19, 2009 8:07 am  

manxviking wrote:

I'm sure originally 10,000 capacity was the threshold but they increased it to 12,000 and I remember one of your directors saying so.

I agree it was irrelevant anyway given what happened subsequently.

The variance is/was absorbed in the North Stand Terrace which has not changed in design.

Originally, only the bottom half of the terrace was to be used; a temporary herras fence had been erected halfway up and the crush barriers excluded. However, not long before the stadium was complete it was decided to open up the whole terrace and complete the barriers.

In theory the terrace could hold over 5000, taking the capacity to something like 14000 but this far exceeds the stadium planning permission. It would be 40% greater than the associated infrastructure had allowed for.

What the Corpy have set the current limit to I do not know (bear in mind not all of the infrastructure and work on the village is complete).