Forum Topic

True enough. It was dreadful to play there back in the day. But then they did the same with Gunnersbury Park, where the changing rooms became so dangerous they couldn’t be used.I think the issue with sport on the site is more complicated than has been highlighted here. Bell basically gifted the site (and most of the land there) to QPR, with no guarantees for public use or access, on a hugely long lease. It wasn’t even going to have any wildlife protection. The only obligation on the football club was to provide and maintain a few pitches for local teams to use. It was a bad deal for Ealing (considering the eternal bleat about Joe cash strapped the council was), a good one for QPR.It remains to be seen what the detail of the new proposal is. Allowing Southall FC the land at low or no commercial rates is another bad deal. We have few public assets in Ealing so ought not to give them away. Plus other clubs in the region might wonder why they aren’t given the same largesse.If it’s simply a case of some football and other sports pitches occupying a relatively small area then that’s more acceptable. Although the decline of amateurs 11-a-side football means there’s less demand for council owned pitches now. That could be a problem for upkeep as the revenue stream will be small.They also need to improve public transport if they want people to go there without driving. Should Southall move in then they will be ambitious to progress up the leagues. Bigger crowds could mean more traffic and congestion.I wonder how the skylarks feel.

Simon Hayes ● 467d