RLFANS.COM
Celebrating
22 years service to
the Rugby League
Community!
WWW.RLFANS.COM • View topic - Odsal Sporting Village
Odsal Sporting Village Fri Dec 21, 2007 9:44 pm  

User avatarIdle Bull wrote:
Idle Bull User avatar
Eddie Hemmings's Wig
Eddie Hemmings's Wig

Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2006 1:39 pm
Posts: 176
Location: Uddersfax
Taken directly from the council executive meeting of December 18th - Do I sense a ground share looming? Sounds like the council fancy it!! Also noted that we will get a decision in March, definitely, maybe!!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Progress of the Odsal Sports Village (OSV) Project

The Odsal Sports Village project has much to commend it. It will enable Bradford’s World Champion side – the Bulls – to remain at their historic home; it will replace outdated public sports facilities in South-West Bradford with modern provision, and add brand new facilities with regional and national significance for a range of different sports.

The scheme demonstrates the community focus that has long distinguished the Bulls as a professional club. A great deal of preparatory work has been devoted to the scheme to date by the Bulls, Bradford Council, Bradford College and other partners, and there is a momentum behind the OSV project leading into the next report of the review group to the Council Executive, planned for March 2008.

It is understood that considerable progress has been made already in closing the ‘funding gap’ of £12.8m identified by Council Officers prior to the November meeting of the Council Executive, with funding becoming available from a variety of public sources at local, regional, national and European levels. After years of consideration of a variety of different schemes, it seems important that one scheme should go ahead in the near future.

Three Reservations about OSV

At the same time, three reservations may be noted about the OSV project in its current form:

1. Whilst the investment planned for the Odsal Stadium itself is necessary to its continued use by the Bradford Bulls, the level of accommodation envisaged does not meet all of the criteria that might be desirable for spectators in the 21st. Century, in relation to covered stands, for example;

2. The OSV plan seems to have emerged as a solution to a variety of specific practical problems arising from the age and condition of i) the Odsal Stadium (which is a major concern to Bradford Bulls) and ii) some of the existing public facilities in South-West Bradford, including the Richard Dunn Sports Centre (which is a major concern for the Council).
Despite the efforts made within the project to look beyond the immediate requirements of the Bradford Bulls as a club, and rugby league as a sport, it remains a ‘sectional’ project, both in terms of the areas of the Bradford District covered, and the sports involved. OSV might therefore be represented as a ‘tactical’ rather than a ‘strategic’ response to the development of publicly-funded sports facilities within the District;

3. The development of the plans for the future of the Bulls at Odsal appears to have taken place so far without any systematic reference to the existence of the other full-time professional sports club within the District – Bradford City FC. The two clubs are not dissimilar in their overall sizes, or in the level of support they enjoy within the community. The success of either club brings prestige and other benefits to the District. They have worked more or less closely together at different times in the past. And the question of whether they could collaborate more closely now is an open one that has hung over the discussion of the OSV, but has never been addressed directly.

A Case for Broader Consideration

If there is to be large-scale public investment that will benefit full-time professional sport in the District, there is a case for considering whether the investment could be used to provide facilities that are shared between the two full-time professional clubs. This would potentially double the impact of any given investment, with substantial possible advantages for the future revenue streams of both clubs. There is also the question of whether the investment could or should be considered in a frame of reference that is ‘non-sectional’ and ‘strategic’ in relation to the sports’ needs of the whole District, and recognises two football codes rather than one.

The problem is that if the OSV scheme is approved in its present form – which is not geared to participation by Bradford City FC – the issues of i) collaboration between the two clubs, and ii) the use of the public investment in the whole context of sport for the District, will be decided by default. Given the scale of irreversible public funding envisaged at Odsal (which runs into millions, or even tens of millions, of grant-aided support) the two clubs would be obliged to continue along separate paths for the foreseeable future, if OSV is approved at the conclusion of the current review process. The effects of such a decision would continue to be felt for as far ahead as a generation or more, and the decision might be taken in effect as early as March 2008. The window of opportunity for considering alternatives may therefore close within a very short space of time, perhaps as little as three months.

A Request to the Council Executive

In the light of the foregoing, the Council Executive is asked whether it might authorise Council Officers to investigate the whole range of options for the public support of full-time professional sport in the District, including all the options involving collaboration between Bradford Bulls and Bradford City. These consultations would take place as a matter of urgency with all the relevant parties, alongside the Council’s ongoing consideration of the OSV project.

This consultation would have one of two possible outcomes:

1. It might turn out that the OSV project represents the best use of the funding available, having taken account of a full range of alternatives. This would serve to strengthen any eventual decision taken in favour of the project, by providing further reassurance that public funds were being used in an appropriate and justifiable manner;

2. It might turn out that there is some alternative to the OSV project that meets the objectives of both clubs, provides better value for public money and/or meets a greater range of the Council’s strategic objectives for the development of sport within the District. If this outcome occurred, the consultation would have averted the dangers of proceeding with the OSV project in the face of a preferable alternative.
"Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill. That we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe. To ensure the survival and success of liberty" John Fitzgerald Kennedy
Fri Dec 21, 2007 9:46 pm  

User avatarRoofaldo wrote:
Roofaldo User avatar
Silver RLFANS Member
Silver RLFANS Member

Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2003 4:48 pm
Posts: 8224
Location: The Long, Dark Teatime of the Soul
So that's a no then is it?
Fri Dec 21, 2007 11:47 pm  

User avataraf wrote:
af User avatar
Gold RLFANS Member
Gold RLFANS Member

Joined: Sat Dec 22, 2001 12:04 pm
Posts: 10445
Location: Bradford

So, to save Bradford's two professional clubs, we kill one and let the other die. Dead simple.
Bradford gave us Hockney, Leeds gave us Moyles.
Sat Dec 22, 2007 2:51 am  

BullAdict wrote:
BullAdict Eddie Hemmings's Wig
Eddie Hemmings's Wig

Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 6:51 pm
Posts: 179
Location: Middle Earth
Thanks Idlebull, great info.
We can read into the gobblygook whatever we want and everyone will have their own opinion. Mine is that the council are saying that they will not put their money into two locations
If you are rocking the boat, make sure you have a lifejacket
Sat Dec 22, 2007 6:45 am  

bullsonfire wrote:
bullsonfire Free-scoring winger
Free-scoring winger

Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 3:30 pm
Posts: 1390
See you at Valley Parade.
Done. 25/01/17.
Sat Dec 22, 2007 8:05 am  

ritz wrote:
ritz Free-scoring winger
Free-scoring winger

Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 6:20 pm
Posts: 2411
If directors at vp say no will it be a dead duck now?
Will council say hey we tried to give it you but city wouldnt move to make it viable?
Will they dangle a financial carrot in front of directors to persuade them to move?
If council offered a couple of million to city to make this happen, getting the strain of dunns off from around their neck surely the shareholders would have to have a say.
City have staged a u21 game once(think v italy) surely by moving to a brand new sporting village would see them in the papers more, show their ambition and entice more corporate clients.
The fa could probably stage a few games there as well.
The wc challenge could get staged there rather than just leeds or huddersfield.
The fa would probably fund the gap to build it.
Richard dunns slides are shut for repair at mo, its taking a week and costing 90k to do the repairs, but how much are they losing as well, it will prob top 100k jsut for one week thru loss of sales and expenditure, 100k that could be given to the community or schools so everyone gets the benefits.

Odsal has a vast area to develope, with the building work going on at mo to bring jobs to the area, bringing more corporate clients with it.
Marksies are building a massive store, hoping to create thousands of jobs, could they get involved with it.
Re: OSV Update Sat Dec 22, 2007 10:57 am  

User avatarAsim wrote:
Asim User avatar
Gold RLFANS Member
Gold RLFANS Member

Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2002 10:46 am
Posts: 16239
Idle Bull wrote:
2. It might turn out that there is some alternative to the OSV project that meets the objectives of both clubs, provides better value for public money and/or meets a greater range of the Council’s strategic objectives for the development of sport within the District. If this outcome occurred, the consultation would have averted the dangers of proceeding with the OSV project in the face of a preferable alternative.

There you have your preferred solution.

It's the only option the club have that will see the council willing to write off the money the Bulls would owe to quit Odsal off their own back.

City moving into the OSV project is not going to happen, the proposed plans would not provide facilities anything like there is at VP now, and it would cost way way too much to develop similar facilities at Odsal.

Moan and bitch all you like but if you actually want an RL club to support in Bradford a move to Valley Parade is the only option.
Sat Dec 22, 2007 11:09 am  

Dan155 wrote:
Dan155 Cheeky half-back
Cheeky half-back

Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 3:30 pm
Posts: 545
My two cents on this as a fan of both clubs. For city to consider moving to Odsal the plans for the sports village would have to be radically altered. Due to the taylor report and city's desire to move back up the divisions the shared stadium would have to be an all seater, likewise it would have to be fully covered. We already have a 25,000 all seater in Valley Parade, so for moving to Odsal to be a step up basically Odsal would have to be redeveloped into a brand new 25,000 all seater fully covered stadium. Which needless to say, would pretty much involve all of Odsal being bulldozed and starting over.

Given that its going to cost tens of millions to put a roof over the popular side and add some extra seating there, i can't see the council wanting to come up with the funds to transform it into a 25,000 capacity state of the art stadium. What they seem to be hinting at IMO, is wanting to move the Bulls to Valley Parade and redevelop VP. Which i hear was the plan a few years ago.

My main concern is that Bulls crowds fell when moved to VP. Other than that i'd be happy for the Bulls to be at VP. Providing Odsal got redeveloped into a brand new community stadium i'd be happy for City to move to Odsal. Given that Odsal appears to be a financial black hole an even better option would surely be to build a brand new stadium somewhere else for both clubs? But we know the council can't organise a p*ss up in a brewery so theres more chance of me flying to mars in a robin reliant.
Sat Dec 22, 2007 12:04 pm  

User avatarPumpetypump wrote:
Pumpetypump User avatar
100% League Network
100% League Network

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2002 12:55 pm
Posts: 7595
Location: LS9

OK here goes again in this relentlessly circular conversation (now in its 108th year).

Given A - that Odsal is a dump beyond any hope of saving (the sports village should have the byline "polishing a turd") and B Bulls fans hate VP then why not C. Give both up and move to a brand new stadium on the periphery of the city somewhere?

It feels like Bulls fans need to get some sort of reality check and put aside the perfectly understandable but fruitless sentimentality about a stadium we cannot stay in. Once we reconcile ourselves with that fact we can try and formulate some genuinely visionary and sensible plans.

OR. Someone tell me how having a roof on the popular side interfaces with the need to replace all the concrete in such a huge arena.
Sat Dec 22, 2007 1:12 pm  

I_Pitty_Stevo User avatar
Strong-running second rower
Strong-running second rower

Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2005 8:25 am
Posts: 370
Location: Bradford

I am a bulls fan of many, many years, and have many great (and not so great) memories of odsal that I will always cherish. As much as I would hate to leave odsal the biggest priority must be the survival of the club.

When the Bulls played at VP a few years back I still attended every match, but was very glad to return top odsal. I was no fan of the facilities at VP, but I truly suspect that I would dislike any all-seater stadium just as much, being someone who prefers to stand in the crowd.

For me, VP is very badly situated; It is far from easy to reach from the motorway without hitting the town centre, parking is attrocious, and there is little potential from further development (if my memory serves me correctly in regards to the councils refusal to grant future planning applications a few years back.

For me, neither VP or Odsal is a viable unified stadium for the city and so a totally new development is, in my humble opinion, probably the only option.
Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 70 guests

Quick Reply



Subject:
Message:

   
Please note using apple style emoji's can result in posting failures.

Return to Bradford Bulls - RedAmberandBlack.net


POSTSONLINEMEMBERSRECORDTEAM
5,187,91879178,6789,567LOGIN
LOGIN HERE
or REGISTER for more features!.
When you register you get access to the live match scores, live match chat and you can post in the discussions on the forums.
YOU HAVE RL CHAT OFF
RLFANS Match Centre
Mon 2nd Aug
NRL RND: 20 Canterbury6-34Gold Coast
NRL RND: 20 Cronulla22-40Manly
SL RND: 17 Castleford16-34Huddersfield
SL RND: 17 Hull FC10-42St.Helens
SL RND: 17 Hull KR16-23Catalans
Sun 1st Aug
NRL RND: 20 St.George14-50Souths
NRL RND: 20 Newcastle34-24Canberra
NRL RND: 20 Melbourne37-10Penrith
CH RND: 15 Dewsbury18-22Swinton
CH RND: 15 Featherstone6-23Toulouse
CH RND: 15 Halifax24-21Bradford
CH RND: 15 Newcastle14-20Whitehaven
CH RND: 15 Oldham20-30LondonB
CH RND: 15 Widnes16-34Batley
L1 RND: 12 Doncaster24-46Hunslet
L1 RND: 12 Crusaders72-4West Wales
L1 RND: 12 Rochdale20-42Keighley
SL RND: 17 Wigan50-6Leigh
SL RND: 17 Leeds26-27Warrington
Sat 31st Jul
L1 RND: 12 LondonS12-14Coventry
This is an inplay table and positions can change as matches are in play.
National Rugby League 2021 ROUND : 20
 PLDFADIFFPTS
Melbourne 19 689 224 465 34
Penrith 19 521 228 293 32
Souths 19 613 382 231 32
Parramatta 19 484 295 189 26
Sydney 19 509 343 166 26
Manly 19 569 400 169 24
Gold Coast 19 460 484 -24 16
Cronulla 19 392 458 -66 16
 
Canberra 19 383 465 -82 16
St.George 19 382 464 -82 16
Newcastle 19 325 472 -147 16
NZ Warriors 19 373 502 -129 12
Wests 19 412 564 -152 12
NQL Cowboys 19 358 584 -226 12
Brisbane 19 331 578 -247 10
Canterbury 19 242 600 -358 4
This is an inplay table and positions can change as matches are in play.
Betfred Super League XXVI ROUND : 17
 PLDFADIFFPTSDIFFWP%
Catalans 16 482 262 220 30 183.97 93.75
St.Helens 13 328 106 222 22 309.43 84.62
Warrington 15 456 247 209 23 184.62 76.67
Wigan 17 305 295 10 22 103.39 64.71
Hull FC 14 308 279 29 15 110.39 53.57
Leeds 16 380 290 90 16 131.03 50
 
Hull KR 12 287 267 20 12 107.49 50
Castleford 15 267 388 -121 12 68.81 40
Huddersfield 16 278 334 -56 10 83.23 31.25
Salford 14 237 405 -168 8 58.52 28.57
Wakefield 16 279 394 -115 8 70.81 25
Leigh 14 218 558 -340 0 39.07 0
This is an inplay table and positions can change as matches are in play.
Betfred Championship 2021 ROUND : 16
 PLDFADIFFPTSDIFFWP%
Toulouse 10 456 94 362 20 485.11 100
Featherstone 14 579 189 390 24 306.35 92.86
Halifax 15 422 220 202 22 191.82 73.33
LondonB 14 404 357 47 17 113.17 67.86
Batley 15 404 302 102 20 133.77 66.67
Bradford 14 375 339 36 18 110.62 64.29
 
Whitehaven 15 297 410 -113 13 72.44 43.33
Widnes 14 323 378 -55 11 85.45 39.29
Sheffield 14 313 413 -100 11 75.79 39.29
Newcastle 14 298 420 -122 11 70.95 39.29
York 14 345 327 18 10 105.50 35.71
Dewsbury 14 215 401 -186 9 53.62 32.14
Oldham 14 210 500 -290 4 42 14.29
Swinton 15 256 547 -291 2 46.80 6.67
This is an inplay table and positions can change as matches are in play.
Betfred League One 2021 ROUND : 13
 PLDFADIFFPTSDIFFWP%
Barrow 11 382 162 220 19 235.80 86.36
Workington 9 334 158 176 15 211.39 83.33
Doncaster 11 348 251 97 15 138.65 68.18
Crusaders 11 350 322 28 12 108.70 54.55
Keighley 12 410 279 131 13 146.95 54.17
Hunslet 12 334 301 33 11 110.96 45.83
 
Coventry 11 258 264 -6 10 97.73 45.45
Rochdale 11 299 322 -23 10 92.86 45.45
LondonS 12 192 350 -158 7 54.86 29.17
West Wales 12 126 586 -460 0 21.50 0
This is an inplay table and positions can change as matches are in play.
Betfred Womens Super League 2021 ROUND : 9
 PLDFADIFFPTSDIFFWP%
LeedsW 7 364 38 326 14 957.89 100
St.HelensW 7 370 36 334 12 1,027.78 85.71
WiganW 6 222 64 158 10 346.88 83.33
YorkW 6 186 102 84 8 182.35 66.67
CastlefordW 6 166 96 70 8 172.92 66.67
BradfordW 8 158 264 -106 6 59.85 37.50
 
Hudds W 7 104 288 -184 4 36.11 28.57
Wire W 8 150 334 -184 4 44.91 25
FeatherstoneW 8 122 338 -216 4 36.09 25
WakefieldW 7 50 332 -282 0 15.06 0
RLFANS Recent Posts




X