I remember when Witton moved to Wincham and the loss of a ground within 'walking distance' of many fans was replaced by a car journey and that was a concern. When Vics moved there (irrespective of other issues) the move away from town was a concern again. That has proved to be ongoing ever since.
A shared ground back 'in town' would probably benefit both teams - but by how many?
The world has moved on a long way in terms of football watching habits as said above. 50 or 100 to each club? A boost to income yes, but life changing? No.
In addition there would have to be a proven benefit for the wider community in order to get significant support from local authority. That might mean eg a running track around the pitch. Ever watched football in that environment? It's deadly. I went to West Ham last season and it still dampened the atmosphere with a big crowd because everything is so distant. If it's a shared ground then, largely for what fans would want, it needs to be funded mostly by the clubs.
Within the local football culture there is a major stumbling block. A large proportion of both fan bases (perhaps more within Witton's at the moment due to the experience of the Vics/74 split and the reality that came with it) will resist anything that is perceived to benefit the other club.
There needs to be more cooperation between both clubs for the benefit of local football as a whole as that will have a positive knock on effect to individual clubs. At the moment I think victory is seen as being on the end of the Titanic that sinks last as that way you can see others drown first.
Larger joint fund raising efforts would be a start as they would be supported by both sets of fans. Same cost for staging but bigger overall receipts. That needs to be led by the fans with input but not control, from respective boards. That way you break down historic and useless prejudices that serve no one well in this day and age.
Working constructively together gives some hope for the future but sadly I think pigs will learn to fly first.
A shared ground back 'in town' would probably benefit both teams - but by how many?
The world has moved on a long way in terms of football watching habits as said above. 50 or 100 to each club? A boost to income yes, but life changing? No.
In addition there would have to be a proven benefit for the wider community in order to get significant support from local authority. That might mean eg a running track around the pitch. Ever watched football in that environment? It's deadly. I went to West Ham last season and it still dampened the atmosphere with a big crowd because everything is so distant. If it's a shared ground then, largely for what fans would want, it needs to be funded mostly by the clubs.
Within the local football culture there is a major stumbling block. A large proportion of both fan bases (perhaps more within Witton's at the moment due to the experience of the Vics/74 split and the reality that came with it) will resist anything that is perceived to benefit the other club.
There needs to be more cooperation between both clubs for the benefit of local football as a whole as that will have a positive knock on effect to individual clubs. At the moment I think victory is seen as being on the end of the Titanic that sinks last as that way you can see others drown first.
Larger joint fund raising efforts would be a start as they would be supported by both sets of fans. Same cost for staging but bigger overall receipts. That needs to be led by the fans with input but not control, from respective boards. That way you break down historic and useless prejudices that serve no one well in this day and age.
Working constructively together gives some hope for the future but sadly I think pigs will learn to fly first.
Last edited:
Personally I do think that something has to give and at some point sensible constructive dialogue needs to happen. Looking forward, neither club can rely on the Mid-Cheshire populouse to boost the coffers through the gate. Working together in some form or another (maybe a joint charity initiative could be a good starting point?) must be better than waiting with bated breath for the other to slip up on and off the field. Neither are likely to profit from the demise the other in my opinion.
