Newest article: Re: Striker James Harding leaving Racing Club Warw… by VoRYesterday 21:13Yesterday at 21:13:48view thread
Oldest article: Mario Mendez by Dougie823/1 13:11Fri Jan 23 13:11:09 2026view thread
Next thread: Game tonight? by Unnamed Sauce6/10 16:43Tue Oct 6 16:43:22 2026view thread
4 new stadium sites
Views: 1260
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1Hm96P8iyc/
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 462
I understand officials from the club have visited the sites in question this week.
I dont suppose anything will he said until the meeting with the council but one site came out with promising results.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 413
This didn't happen. We visited all sites nearly 2 years ago, except the Dingle which was able to be discounted via a desktop review.
reply to this article | return to the front page
2 people
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 374
Had a text through saying they had..... can even name the official who sent it..... All I can say is that.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 368
Interesting.
But the reality is, as per my treasurers update last month and the response to the question asked at last week's full council, we are still awaiting the council to put forward their proposed site. Nothing else has happened in the intervening period.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 354
Thank you .... so how strange 🤔
Obviously someone is telling porkies, all I can go on is what I was told and who was involved.
Edited by Lord of the Manor at 19:43:03 on 5th October 2026
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 356
Or two volunteers from the coop had a walk around a park and someone is putting two and two together and getting 5!?
Be warned if you walk around some open space in Nuneaton in a club jacket 😅
---
Hope is not a plan.
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 351
How strange ...... two volunteers from the coop walking round a park commenting on a possible site, and a club official saying this never happened.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 359
Two Co-op members and club volunteers having a look around for their own interest is rather different to a club official visiting a site to review it.
And I'm walking my dog tomorrow morning around Paul's Land, just to nip any more rumours in the bud 😉
Edited by LH at 20:51:14 on 5th October 2026
reply to this article | return to the front page
2 people
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 360
Just don't walk him round jubilee fields ( or any of other 3 sites ) in a club jacket. Questions might be asked
reply to this article | return to the front page
When you’re in a. Hole …
Views: 385
Stop digging!
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 372
I do on a daily basis!
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 357
---
Hope is not a plan.
reply to this article | return to the front page
2 people
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 349
I spotted Tc walking up Arbury rd today - and in Town garb. Is he looking for sites?
Who knows who dares to dream?
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 359
Yes must have been
---
Hope is not a plan.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 373
You know as well as we do then that the sites put forward by the council have little chance of being viable. The only one of the four that had any chance was Vale view, which the council themselves seem to have vetoed.
We are being led up a blind alley.
reply to this article | return to the front page
2 people
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 370
The council can and will offer potential sites.
People seem to be forgetting this process was enacted 20 odd years ago and all sites failed - that’s why they ended up at LW in the end.
Being offered a site and getting planning permission is another story.
Forget any sites surrounded by housing - there will be big opposition and who can blame them.
Remember the Jubilee centre site? The locals turned up at the meeting and shot the whole thing down.
I see town at Beduth for years. Remember how many other clubs have lost their grounds and been in exile for ages. Bigger clubs than town too. Bristol Rovers were in Bath for years - Darlington still at that Rugger ground- Leamington? How many years have they been out in the sticks? Worcester? Took them some time to get anything. In today’s world planning is a mine field , it s very hard to get anything built in Britain these days without years of wrangling. And money talks and Town have very little . Take a look at google earth and the Borough plan - sites exist BUT problems exist with most, residential opposition and money to develop and provide access.
As much as I hate to say it LW as a site is probably the only option and only of a new relationship with Nuns could be build . Who thinks that would happen though?
Who knows who dares to dream?
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 348
Perfectly summed up. The club need to think again.
Note to self, 'be careful what you wish for'
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 348
There are 6 sites on the list.
Avenue Road & Tomkinson Road have been added in the Council's latest OSP Report.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 355
Avenue road , because of sitting tennents, is off the table. Tomkinson road has the same residential problems that the other sites put forward have.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 351
No we don't want to move in next to the Dingles, too many hidden graves.
Note to self, 'be careful what you wish for'
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 347
I feel that we are being misled by the council, and should be very wary. I hope I am wrong but this council have not got a good track record on most issues concerning the town.
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 414
Which site do you think it is and which one do you like ?
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 401
Greenmore Rd for me ..... back in the ford, loads of room, not much prep, easy access....
as for the clubs wishes im sure they would want that kept under raps 4 now .
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 358
Manor park wasn't in Stockingford
Note to self, 'be careful what you wish for'
Edited by BoroughPod at 18:17:42 on 5th October 2026
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 345
Manor Park was in Manor Ward up until the boundary changes placed it in Stockingford East Ward.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 336
Political boundary only. Some people get upset about parts of Warwickshire being in Leicestershire postcodes and vice versa.
Manor Park is not in Stockingford or my mum would never have let me walk there.
Note to self, 'be careful what you wish for'
Edited by BoroughPod at 19:29:24 on 5th October 2026
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 330
It's a fierce craic!
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 332
Indeed!
Note to self, 'be careful what you wish for'
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 927
Problem is the numbers. Even if we had 1000 people per match that`s only just above 1% of the population of Nuneaton. It`s never going to be high on the agenda for the council as sad as that is. Even looking at the Boro chat, there are around 3300 members which is less than 4% of the population and a good number no longer live in Nuneaton or can get to games. There is no doubt the clubs needs to be back in Nuneaton but there isn`t likely to be a lot of help from the council/MP no matter which party is leading it
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 796
its not about primarily the first team and who actually attends a game or even the amount of members boro chat has.
the foot fall 7 days a week an all weather pitch/community stadium would far exceed any match day attendance , as real community asset for 100's of kids and adults on a weekly basis ..
this is desperately needed in nuneaton , my lad plays for a nuneaton team sunday league ...who have been moved to bedworth as their home ground this season , from pauls land last season which is currently unused due to the pavillion being condemned due to asbestos .
the sporting facilities in nuneaton are terrible this should be a worry for every nuneaton resident and the future of our town . i know what football gave me growing up
Edited by Camp hill reserves at 12:53:00 on 2nd October 2026
reply to this article | return to the front page
3 people
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 784
If you want to read up on NBBC's assessment of the sporting facilities that are available/currently required, check out their Playing Fields Strategy which is readily available online for anyone to study.
It is a very detailed document.
You might consider their assessment that Stockingford doesn't need another 3G pitch as being relevant to your future plans.
The areas that desperately need a new 3G pitch are Abbey & Wem Brook.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 762
Do you seriously not think we have read that and the FA report that the NBBC that is taken from ??
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 762
I have no idea?
I am just pointing out that it's not what you think/Town think that matters, it's what the Council thinks about the Town's needs.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 758
The bottom line is …We will end up where the council want us to go , not the other way around
So let’s take them on their word and give them the time they have asked for to consider all options
Every site has pro and cons which I’m confident the club has a real understanding of .
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 334
When it was first announced that the council had highlighted four possible sites four our new stadium, someone from the council said that the Jubilee centre was coming to the end of its life, read into that what ever you want
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 354
There is a suitably sized piece of land between Seeswood pool and Ansley rd.🤔
Who knows who dares to dream?
Edited by Armchair observer at 20:26:09 on 5th October 2026
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 314
Sounds good. However, if it is suitable for housing then that is what it will be used for. Overheard someone at the game saturday that said that the old crushing plant site at Judkins would be a good fit for a new ground. This sounded like a good idea, as it is a brown site that is unlikely to be suitable for housing due to it's proximity to the tip. Also it is not in an existing housing estate.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 301
Abbey needs a new 3G pitch.
The local Railway Station could be re-opened.
Edit:
Nuneaton Abbey Railway Station was Nuneaton's second main Railway Station when it was open.
Edited by VoR at 08:34:33 on 6th October 2026
Edited by VoR at 08:58:56 on 6th October 2026
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 308
Could Bermuda be a possibility ?
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 258
Nothing left down there - all developed -
Who knows who dares to dream?
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 305
It might be worth speaking to the Deeley Group in Coventry.
Both the Deeley Group & its subsidiary companies, including Deeley Properties Ltd own land & they also own long leasehold agreements in the area.
The new Royal Mail Depot is leased by Deeley, who in turn lease it from Arbury Estates.
It might also be worth speaking to Arbury Estates.
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 269
All land is developed around there -
Who knows who dares to dream?
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 260
Do you know that for certain?
Is all of Deeley's land now spoken for & I have already mentioned Arbury Estates.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 267
Yes - there is no available land - 40 years ago was a different matter. Arbury estate land will soon be developed for housing behind Ensors farm in heath end rd.
Deeley saved Bermuda village when the coal board wanted to demolish it. Most of the land around there if not all was owned by Arbury who since 1882 leased it to the Griff colliery company and then the NCB post 1947. I can’t think of any of that land which was once colliery and brick production land that has not been developed. Griff Clara colliery is now an industrial estate and has been for years. The opencast site would have been ideal but all that has been developed anyway. Boro missed the boat - there was once a large amount of post industrial land in Nuneaton.
Who knows who dares to dream?
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 261
The Windmill 🤷
Maybe North Warwickshire might be more accommodating than NBBC.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 253
Have they got a club house already and is football being played their ?
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 243
Yes .... yes .... The boro youth teams play there ....
mind you they also play at Greenmore Rd .... ill get my coat
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 246
So would there be any objection from anyone to play there if football is already being played there
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 247
I have no idea ...
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 273
Then we might have to go cap in hand to the Nuns ?
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 295
That would be easily the best & most cost effective route to take...
Build a new 500-seater stand & upgrade the floodlights with a modern LED system.
Lay a new hybrid grass pitch, have a look at the Hewitt Sportsturf website, suitable for both football & rugby.
Agree a proper groundshare arrangement with the Nuns.
Make sure that the existing Stadium owners buy into the arrangement & we have a WIN/WIN/WIN agreement.
Once all of that is out of the way both Town & the Nuns can start their climb back up their respective Pyramids to where they rightfully belong.
Oops! Sorry!...that's too simple!
Everybody, let's make everything as complicated as possible eh!
Just my thoughts!
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 258
Improving a landlord’s site again,whilst being tenants again,same landlord again,same again. Never again for me.
Little by little.
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 245
Are you just averse to being a tenant, full stop?
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 244
I would prefer starting up again with just a farmer’s field but it being our field. Yes it would take decades to build up but it would be ours. My folly of course but you did ask. I remember a couple of visits to Mickleover in recents seasons and was impressed with what could be done with a farmer’s field.
Little by little.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 269
The difficulty in buying a farmer's field is the risk.
If NTFC wanted to pay the minimum agricultural price, that would be a great risk.
To lessen the risk, they would have to discuss the land with NBBC, as to the likelihood of achieving a satisfactory Planning Permission.
If the football club received a favourable response from the Council, then the intended site would have a 'hope' value & the purchase price for the land would increase.
Edit:
If you wanted to take that further & the Council advised that a satisfactory Planning Permission could be achieved, the farmer would then receive a payment based on Building land prices, on condition that he paid the football club's Planning costs.
So there are different scenarios that can be played out.
Second Edit:
Just to clarify:-
The football club would pay for the Planning costs initially & then when the satisfactory Planning Permission is gained, a purchase price would be agreed with the farmer & at that stage the Planning costs would be deducted from the farmer's payment.
So, the Planning risk will always remain with the football club.
Edited by VoR at 15:08:25 on 6th October 2026
Edited by VoR at 15:16:46 on 6th October 2026
Edited by VoR at 15:17:55 on 6th October 2026
Edited by VoR at 15:19:25 on 6th October 2026
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 394
That would be brilliant for me .
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 251
I was having a giggle there 44 - I thought you’d go mad lol.
Who knows who dares to dream?
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 769
Concentrate your efforts on liasing with Warwickshire County Council Highways would be my advice.
Employ a good Transportation Consultant to work alongside your Planning Consultant.
WCC Highways will have a major influence on the choice of site & ultimately the size of the new Stadium that is permissible.
Edit:
Be aware that WCC Highways work to their own timescales.
Edited by VoR at 13:47:52 on 2nd October 2026
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 818
Your logic is sound. However, what percentage of the town will use the hotel that the council have built? Tens of millions were spent on a building that residents who live in the borough will, by the same logic , have little or no need!
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 808
I`d say the percentage is even less than the football.,
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 820
Exactly. The football club are not asking for the council to bankroll the club. Just that a viable piece of land be made available to the club so we can play in the town we represent.
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 788
If the club ever got far in the FA cup, the council would be right on the band wagon
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 765
Of course, it would then be 'our club'
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 920
Any site in close proximity to residential areas will be the subject of massive opposition from local residents just as the Jubilee centre was a few years back.
Vale view ticks all the boxes bar one and that is access which is poor. A new ground could be relatively hidden behind existing trees there.
Gala fields ? It’s said it’s already leased but what about Griff moving in and sharing with Boro and the junior and women’s teams using the Pingles? Get it right and the Boro can re- emerge in the higher levels of non league - get it wrong and in the wrong location and the club will stagnate at step 3 or below.
Edited by Armchair observer at 20:14:29 on 1st October 2026
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 741
One thing to bear in mind is the main reason we need to move to our own premises - the revenue from the bar and facilities. If we could persuade the sitting tenants at Gala Field to allow us to build a stadium on what is effectively their patch, wouldn't we basically be in the same boat as now? If I was them, I would be saying "You build the stadium, but as senior tenant I'll run the bar and sublet the 4G pitches etc etc - and I'll take the revenue". Wouldn't you do that in their position?
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 735
There would need to be a new Tenancy Agreement that allows all 3 tenants to share the benefits.
Edit:
That new agreement would need to include use of both the new Stadium & the existing Pingles Stadium.
Edited by VoR at 14:45:37 on 2nd October 2026
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 738
I can feel my head repeatedly hitting the brick wall here, but ....
Why would Griff and the Harriers want to give up the access they already have - which, presumably, they are happy to pay the current rent and upkeep for - just to help out Boro? As far as I can see, we would gain a stadium which they could use (but they already have one of those which more than meets their needs anyway) and they would lose some of their current access, lose one of their Gala Field pitches (our stadium would only have one, but use the footprint of both) and maybe save a few quid which they are happy to pay anyway.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 736
I don't know whether you were aware but Nuneaton Griff were relegated last season, finishing bottom of the league (21st) & are now playing their football at Level 11/Step 7.
I would think that any proposal that could boost their fortunes might be welcome?
Edit:
Sharing in the benefit of the revenue being gained from the community use of a new 3G pitch I would suggest far outweighs the loss of two grass pitches, which has very limited use.
Second Edit:
In the commercial world of Development & Construction, numerous proposals/opportunities are considered, some are dismissed, some are costed, some go ahead.
There is no harm done in discussing a development proposal for Gala Field, even it is dismissed & the status quo remains.
Run the numbers.
Third Edit:
It would only be replicating what they already have in Bedworth, a Sports Hub in the town.
Edited by VoR at 17:19:30 on 2nd October 2026
Edited by VoR at 17:40:08 on 2nd October 2026
Edited by VoR at 17:40:49 on 2nd October 2026
Edited by VoR at 17:43:52 on 2nd October 2026
Edited by VoR at 17:44:34 on 2nd October 2026
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 700
Why don't you give Griff a call to see if they would be ineterested in having an even better stadium to go with their relegation? Let them know that they would, of course, lose their first claim on the facilties but we could take bar takings off their fans. I reckon you could be onto a winner. Let us know how it goes.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 705
Greg! Greg! Greg!
Better facilities attract better players & more paying customers.
There is a recognised phenomenon in football that when a club moves into a new Stadium, attendances & interest in the club both increase.
Edit:
The Pingles Stadium would also still be a part of the deal.
Edited by VoR at 17:53:12 on 2nd October 2026
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 704
VoR, VoR, VoR ....
"Better facilities attract better players & more paying customers."
Is that why our crowds rocketed up so much when we moved to Liberty Way?
You are living in your own little fantasy land, VoR. Do you really think that Griff's crowds would increase if they did a ground share with Boro? They already have a reasonably modern ground which more than caters for all their needs. They do not need to share with us, and any share would water down the access they currently have. They have virtually nothing to gain, but would need to give up plenty.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 779
They wouldn't have to give up anything, their privileges would remain the same & their accesses would be greatly enhanced.
Financially they should be better off & the new Stadium facilities should attract better players & increased interest in the Club.
They would just be party to a new 3-way Tenancy Agreement.
The Town & the Griff could then develop various ways in which the can work together on the football side & both Clubs would have shared use of two Stadiums.
The Harriers would continue as they are but could also benefit financially out of the deal.
The town of Nuneaton would then have a true Sporting Hub, in the town, mirroring what they already have at Bedworth.
Just my thoughts!
Edit:
In the meantime the Council can lead NTFC on a merry dance around 4 difficult sites, progressively wasting their money, with no redress!
Edited by VoR at 18:31:04 on 2nd October 2026
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 588
Oh dear, VoR, you "Gala Fields tinted specs" really give you a tinted view of reality. Just think about what you're saying:
"They wouldn't have to give up anything, their privileges would remain the same & their accesses would be greatly enhanced."
So currently Griff are the prime tenants of three pitches. They have absolute priority for the Pingles stadium and their junior teams on the two at Gala Fied.
We breeze in, build a new stadium over those two pitches. Immediately Griff have given up one pitch. Then are we really saying that their ladies juniors will have priority over Boro in the new stadium? Of course not - so they have given up their priority on Gala Field. If there was any sort of issue with GF, would we want priority over the Pingles? Possibly - so they may lose that primacy too. Quite clearly, whatever happens their privileges would change. Now be a good chap, and - just for once - admit that your statement there was maybe just a tad inaccurate.
Then look at their current stadium. As you mentioned, they have just been relegated, so the Pingles is almost certainly one of the best grounds in their league. Why would they need a better one? And, to be blunt, could Boro afford to build a better stadium than the Pingles anyway? Initially, probably not!
There are benefits to be had, but I don't think Griff would see it as a net benefit to them.
Also - and I have heard this from a number a sources (though not confirmed officially) I believe the council are keen to keep a strip of undeveloped land between Attleborough and Coton. That would prevent building on Gala Field anyway.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 611
You need to read the attachment that Gustavus has posted this morning!
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 578
No I don't. I spoke today with someone involved, and they made it clear that Avenue Road is mentioned only because it is leisure land owned by the council. The council is not interested in ending the current lease, including Boro or allowing construction of a stadium. Of course, you may know better than someone involved in things from the council side. You usually think you do.
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 542
The OSP Report refers to biodiversity/ecological reports being required for sites in the green corridor.
That doesn't rule out Avenue Road, unless you know better?
Edit:
Perhaps it's better to read what the Report actually says?
Edited by VoR at 19:24:50 on 3rd October 2026
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 545
I thought you'd know better than someone who was involved in creating the report
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 549
Just read the Report, which I have found to be very encouraging.
Avenue Road is up for discussion, again unless you know better?
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 508
I have already posted what I was told today, including the rationale for having Avenue Road in the report. Whether you believe it is your choice. I would be prepared to have a £500 bet with you that we will not be looking seriously at that site.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 514
Let's do as CHR has suggested & give the Council time to consider the 6 sites listed in the OSP Report.
They will have to prepare a properly considered response for each site.
I am prepared to wait for their response, as opposed to listening to your summary verdict, based on someone who works at the Council, who you have spoken to at a football match.
Is that fair?
Edited by VoR at 20:42:01 on 3rd October 2026
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 516
As I recall, most posters (including me) were prepared to wait until some idiot started saying that Avenue Road was the prime site and we should push ahead with that. I wonder who that was.
So I can refrain from posting about the potential sites if you can. Deal? We both stop speculating on them?
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 536
I was born in Nuneaton & as a Nuneaton resident & taxpayer, it is my opinion that Gala Field is a prime sporting development site that needs to be maximized commercially, which in my opinion, I do not see is happening at present.
I would like the Council to offer a properly considered explanation, as to what their future development plans are for this site & if those plans exclude NTFC, fair enough but they need to be clear as to what they intend to do to in the future to maximize revenue from the site, in the public interest.
Edit:
If the decision makers in the Town Hall do not have the necessary skill & dexterity, political guile & business acumen, then it is going to be a long, hard struggle for NTFC to make any progress.
Edited by VoR at 22:37:28 on 3rd October 2026
Edited by VoR at 08:15:12 on 4th October 2026
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 541
So that's a no then? You're still going to keep prattling on about Gala Field/Avenue Road rather than just waiting for decisions?
Let's change the subject - what did you think of the match today? Who do you think was our standout player?
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 756
If thats the case some woyld still moan we're putting more money behind the bar than the other two put together
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 742
That could be worked out.
The Pingles Stadium would still need to maintained.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 729
How about ...
Nuneaton and Bedworth AFC
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 875
The two questions that need to be answered are:-
1. Do the Council want to own another Sports Stadium?
They already own two Stadiums in the Borough!
2. How sustainable is this new Town football club?
Will it be here for the long term?
I can understand the Council wanting to take their time over carefully making a decision in trying to find a suitable site in Nuneaton for NTFC.
Edit:
What is a suitable site?
What are NTFC's realistic/true ambitions/aspirations?
Edited by VoR at 20:54:45 on 1st October 2026
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 945
Council need to do a compulsory purchase order on liberty way. Then we lease it off the council.
There is no where in Nuneaton which is suitable for a new stadium. I think itll have to be liberty way (somehow or stay at Bedworth for ever). We won’t get a new stadium in Nuneaton
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 917
NTFC could buy some land off the Nuns, if they can put together a consortium interested enough to make them an offer?
The Nuns Nr2 pitch could be a possibility?
Edited by VoR at 17:38:04 on 1st October 2026
reply to this article | return to the front page
Here we go
Views: 1074
This will trigger (yet another) feeding frenzy among the club's autistic savantes. Those superior mortals who have amassed a mountain range of received wisdom and yet who do not actually go to games.
"Checks watch.."
reply to this article | return to the front page
2 people
Re: Here we go
Views: 858
I promise to keep shtum Sauce as I know longer attend games lol.
What I will say is that here’s hoping they get back to Nun asap and to a place that’s both adequate and sustainable and in the right location. And that will never be Liberty way.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Here we go
Views: 995
No mention of Gala Field?
NBBC are trying to do this right, so why isn't this site included in the review?
It is easily the best site in the town for a new Stadium, with very few Planning issues to resolve, unlike the 4 sites being mentioned, so why isn't it being considered?
Just my thoughts!
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Here we go
Views: 997
The council are not trying to do the right thing at all. They just want to be seen to be doing so. They know, as well as we do, that the sites they propose are none viable. Kicking the can down the road comes to mind.
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: Here we go
Views: 980
They are a Public body going through due process.
NTFC have to be very careful now that the Council don't start to lead them down the path of wasting money.
The key consultant is Warwickshire County Council Highways.
Unless the football club are happy to accept the construction of a new small scale Stadium, WCC Highways are likely to kick most, if not all of those 4 potential sites into touch, on the basis of highways issues.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Here we go
Views: 960
You have, for once, hit the nail on the head.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Here we go
Views: 954
Highways improvements as a part of the granting of a satisfactory planning permission are dealt with under a Section 278 Agreement between the Council & the Developer (NTFC) & are paid for by the Developer (NTFC).
Highways works can be wide ranging & are very costly, because of the nature of the works.
They have to be tendered for, using Roadworks Contractors chosen from WCC's approved lists.
Gala Field, IMO, doesn't have any highways issues to resolve.
If NTFC appoint a good Transportation Consultant, who will carry out the necessary Local Traffic Assessments/Studies & also produce a good Local Travel Plan, it should be a good outcome for the Gala Field site.
The question needs to be asked as to why 4 difficult sites have been proposed & the site with the most favourable Planning outlook has been excluded?
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Here we go
Views: 915
"Gala Field, IMO, doesn't have any highways issues to resolve."
You may well be 100% correct on that VoR. Sadly, you seem to have forgotten the one issue it does have: SOMEONE ELSE ALREADY HAS A ROLLING LEASE ON IT!!!!!!!!! I don't know how many times this has to be said before it works its way into your thoughts, but Gala Fields is already spoken for.
Sayong that it's an ideal site is a bit like saying there's a great site on Harefield Road. Great for traffic, central location - all wonderful. As soon as we can get rid of that bloody bus station we can start building our stadium.
reply to this article | return to the front page
2 people
Re: Here we go
Views: 916
Leases can be re-negotiated.
I am sure NTFC would be welcome at Gala Field, if the discussion could be had but that lead needs to come from the Council, that is if they are genuinely supportive of NTFC's desire to return to Nuneaton?
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Here we go
Views: 907
Can you really not see the issue here, VoR? For NTFC to be welcomed onto Gala Field, the current tenants must be told they are not welcome. In other words, the council would need to break the contract they have with the current tenants. Do you really think that's appropriate behaviour?
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Here we go
Views: 894
A new tenancy agreement could include the Town, the Griff & the Harriers.
Town are well supported both in numbers & commercially & could add that into the mix.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Here we go
Views: 893
But why would Griff and The Harriers want to give up some of their privileges to us?
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Here we go
Views: 836
To me non of these 4 sites are gonna happen waste of time getting money for the back to Nuneaton fund Paul’s land no way the dingle to small and the jubilee residents will complain to hell but the council are more than happy to build houses and supermarkets than helping the football club out (joke)
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Here we go
Views: 912
The Griff could groundshare with Town at the new Stadium.
That would free up the Pingles pitch for the two clubs other teams to use.
It would remove the cost burden of maintaining Gala Fields two grass pitches from both the Griff & the Harriers.
The additional revenue that Town would bring to the site would be beneficial for all 3 new tenants.
I think it's worth having the discussion.
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: Here we go
Views: 689
"I think it's worth having the discussion."
I seem to remember we have this discussion on here regularly. Over and over and over and .....
Weirdly, it always ends the same way: there are already tenants there, and those tenants have shown absolutely zero enthusiasm to let us join in.
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: Here we go
Views: 795
Great minds think alike - A town - Griff ground share would be a doddle and both play in blue and white - Griff would get better facilities too. It’s a win win for all involved including the junior teams. If I were running Griff and a junior team with a lease to play at Gala fields I’d snap hands off for better facilities. All win.
Who knows of dares to dream?
Edited by Armchair observer at 21:33:20 on 1st October 2026
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Here we go
Views: 770
There will be a new 3G pitch at Gala Field at some point.
The Council have persuaded the Griff & the Harriers to stand the cost of the grounds maintenance but I am guessing that is only in the short term.
Sadly, I don't think Town will be invited to join that party.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Here we go
Views: 795
You are right. We have very few options open to us. I have resigned myself to the realisation that I may not live long enough to see us play our home games back in the town. I have supported the club for over sixty years and will carry on doing so as long as I am able to do so.
Getting to the Oval ,from stockingford, is no more hassle than it was going to Liberty way.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Here we go
Views: 789
I believe Town could possibly be playing at the Oval for 10 years.
They are now embroiled with NBBC & that is going to take a lot of patience & trust on both sides.
Granting Town a 49-year lease is a very generous offer by the Council.
In return NTFC have to convince the Councillors that they will be around for the long term.
I think that is reasonable & the onus is on the football club to put forward a good case for long term sustainability.
Edited by VoR at 22:03:13 on 1st October 2026
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Here we go
Views: 876
A workmate from years ago use to have a wonderful saying: "You can't educate pork". I think I have reached that point.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Here we go
Views: 873
Most importantly for Town, they could build a National League standard Stadium at Gala Field, as long as the new 3G pitch is a Quality PRO Performance specification.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Here we go
Views: 900
Nuneaton needs a Harborugh type set up .... not just one 3g pitch but several .... the one at the academy is used till 9pm and it fully booked ..... imagine the revenue potential ££££
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Here we go
Views: 900
The 3G pitch at Alderman Smith Academy caters for the needs of that area.
According to NBBC's Playing Fields Strategy (readily available online) Stockingford does not need another 3G pitch.
I am sure the Academy have done their sums correctly before their 3G pitch was constructed.
It's the same at the Oval.
It would be the same at Gala Field, Wem Brook & Abbey both need new 3G pitches installed.
NBBC know this!
Edited by VoR at 16:28:56 on 1st October 2026
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Here we go
Views: 863
Sadly we are seeing same problems like Worcester City, who had wait a decade to return to the city, after groundsharing with Kidderminster and Bromsgrove. Though landed on their feet getting sixways recently.
Club as too many enemies, who want to see us fail even folk from Nuneaton. I sadly fear every stadium we will look at across the town will be rejected.
If you want to see the club back in the town got look again at Liberty Way. That option cant be dismissed, i think club should at least propose some sort of deal to return. Even if it means using back to nuneaton fund to buy the stadium back. Its not the best option but maybe the quicker way to get ourselves home.
#BoroFanof50years#
Edited by StockingfordBrew at 18:21:28 on 1st October 2026
reply to this article | return to the front page
3 people
Re: Here we go
Views: 823
Sadly I believe you may be correct as regard timescales. As for a potential return to Liberty way, the current owners will not entertain such a move. They made that quite clear when such a proposition was raised. The situation may change over time, and the club may well be given an option to purchase the stadium.
If such an option occured then we would also need to to buy the ransom strip from the Nuns, or we would risk another skipgate situation.
Other than staying at the Oval, I believe Liberty way may be the only other option, as for obvious resons , none of the sites put forward by the council would be viable.
Edited by Stockingford Blue at 21:11:42 on 1st October 2026
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Here we go
Views: 730
Misguided is what they are. The regeneration project in the town proves this, I do not believe that the council have a genuine desire to help the football club. Individual councillors may want to help, but others , who make up the majority, want nothing to do with us. Like I posted yesterday, they want to be seen as trying to help, yet knowingly putting forward proposed sites that they know to be unobtainable.
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: Here we go
Views: 741
I think the underlying problem for Town is that the Council don't want to own another Sports Stadium, they already own two, the Pingles & the Oval.
Coupled with the fact that the Councillors, as public servants, need to be convinced that NTFC is a viable long term proposition?
IMO, NTFC need to buy a piece of land to develop themselves without relying on the Council's support.
They need to speak to the Nuns about buying some land off them, which I think has possibilities.
In the meantime settle to the idea that they will be playing at the Oval for some time to come!
Edited by VoR at 10:24:05 on 2nd October 2026
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Here we go
Views: 684
Technically it’s the people of Nuneaton and Bedworth who own two sports stadiums. The council are our representatives.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Here we go
Views: 710
The Council own the two Stadiums & they manage them as a public asset, as opposed to them being owned by the residents.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Here we go
Views: 726
Is that a realistic option? The upfront costs of buying such a piece of land is beyond the financial means of the club at present. Also the Nuns will not burn their own bridges by selling us their own pitch. The Nuns do not own the stadium at Liberty way so it's use is not guaranteed to them.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Here we go
Views: 735
The Nuns Nr2 pitch could be an option?
I think it is worth an enquiry?
NTFC would need to put together a consortium of interested parties to buy the land.
The Nuns existing playing arrangements/the Main Stadium/their Nr1 pitch would not be affected.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Here we go
Views: 465
All depends if the Nuns need the money, im amazed the club can afford to play on liberty way with the attendances they get and low level they play at now. I think there's different proposals they can offer the nuns.
1) help us rebuild the relationship with the owner, agree a groundshare. Which includes rebuliding changing rooms and a new club house. In return we could offer to pay to update their facilites on the other pitches. Which could be used for football and rugby.
2) Approach Nuns and see if there interested in a joint project to rebuy the stadium and make it a community based stadium. Which could bring extra funds to both the football club and rugby club.
3) Look to rent some land off the Nuns and look to build an acceptable step 3 to 4 stadium.
The area has enough space to make a towns sports complex. With football and rugby being played there for all age groups. Deffo would need assurance that this football club is community based club and the previous regime are no longer involved. The vision is to make sure the town has football team and a rugby team that are both successful and a safe future.
#BoroFanof50years#
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Here we go
Views: 455
From what I have been told the Nuns do not have to pay to use the stadium. If this is the case then they can manage as they are. As I pointed out to the oricle, their use of the stadium is not guaranteed even if if the current owners are happy to have them use it at the moment.
They are not likely to sell any of their other pitches, or do a groundshare with us, which may put their own future in jeopardy.
I do not believe that we could afford to buy enough ground from them at this time, for us to build a new stadium . This is why we have had to go to the council, cap in hand, in order to enable us to move back into the town.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Here we go
Views: 477
Sounds feasible I think they might go for that it is just the owners of the ground we have to convince.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Here we go
Views: 451
Well said sounds good to me ,I'm sure the Nuns would not mind that all ,they would attract better players and the community would benefit.
But how would the Town get in contact with the owners with this idea and would the football side foot the bill for new changing rooms and club house.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Here we go
Views: 432
We would have no choice sadly to foot the bill in order to meet grounds league requirement, however the cost of building a new club house, hospitability of some sort and of course dressing rooms will be a lot more cheaper than a new stadium. Build the changing rooms and new club house, Liberty Way easily meets even step one criteria. If a deal could be agreed, we could be back playing in Nuneaton by next season maybe.
#BoroFanof50years#
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: Here we go
Views: 421
Be interested to know what our club officials think of this.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Here we go
Views: 415
NTFC would not need to build a new Clubhouse, they could come to an acceptable agreement with the Nuns to use theirs, all the football club would need to provide initially is temporary changing rooms.
A grant could be sought from the Football Foundation towards this cost.
They could then concentrate on raising the funds to build a new 500-seater Main Stand to the design proposed for Vale View.
If they also chose to upgrade the floodlights to a modern LED floodlighting system, a grant of up to 70% of the cost could be sought from the Premier League Stadium Fund.
Edit:
Yes, Town could be playing again at Liberty Way next season.
If common sense prevailed!?
Edited by VoR at 20:52:27 on 4th October 2026
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Here we go
Views: 397
And all of this to be in place for the League ground inspection in March next year presumably ? What capacity of seating must be available in Northern Premier Midlands,anyone know ?
Little by little.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Here we go
Views: 359
I personally wouldn't want to go back unless we owned it outright and thats never going to happen
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: Here we go
Views: 832
Liberty way was a disaster for the club - gates dropped down there - the site was the wrong side of town - loads stopped attending when they moved there.
If they went back there they’re step 3 at best.
Who knows of dares to dream?
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Here we go
Views: 858
No that’s not gonna happen we’re screwed
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Here we go
Views: 964
Because it has tenants ?
Little by little.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Here we go
Views: 943
That can be discussed.
I would suggest that the NTFC Board ask the Chair of the Scrutiny Panel why Gala Field has been excluded from the list of potential sites.
While they are at it, also ask them when they intend to construct a 3G pitch at Gala Field.
Wem Brook area needs a new 3G pitch.
Edited by VoR at 14:57:16 on 1st October 2026
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 993
Jubilee would be ideal.
Just look at what Bedworth council have built next to the oval. Look to replicate that and include the football ground.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 981
Good luck with that. It was a definite NO when we wanted to move from Manor park. What has changed?
reply to this article | return to the front page
1 person
Re: 4 new stadium sites
Views: 980
We might get some of Man City's millions to build it if they filter it down the leagues
reply to this article | return to the front page
Previous thread: Team News by Lord of the Manor I'm3/10 14:55Sat Oct 3 14:55:32 2026view thread