New stadium thread

[RicoS321]

Nonsense. people going to Alford way, Tarland way, or Raemoir/Royal Deeside way, will still head west, of course with a half hour+ start on Pittodrie/AECC site.

 

How many will head all the way to Kingswells roundabout? Anyone going north/north west/south will be on the AWPR. Anyone heading to Dyce/Bucksburn/BoDon will get on AWPR. Anyone heading to kincorth/Cove/Portlethen/Torry will get onto AWPR.

 

So really, because of the AWPR, Anyone going to any of those locations served by the AWPR will be equally affected whether in Westhill or AECC - i.e. there's fuck all difference for them apart fae maybe 10 minutes extra for those from the South (me).

 

What Slim correctly points out is that it's far better served from the city centre, and the transport plan for AECC would be ten times more workable than Westhill with 16 existing bus routes. Also, I have on more than one occasion walked the 3.1 miles back into town from AECC. It's closer than Loirston, and flatter.

 

Whilst I don't really like the venue (in fact I think the AECC's biggest draw back currently is location) it's just an all round better location than Westhill. It's not even close in terms of transport plan.

 

 

[Tyrant]

3.1 miles is a 45 minute walk. IMO that's walking distance.

[Dunty]

 

 

The Parkway can't handle traffic but all the shitty back roads round Westhill and Cults can? Come on now. All traffic leaving Westhill going to the city is going to get backed up at the Roundabout at the start of Lang Stracht.

 

But the back roads I've mentioned are in addition to the main roads the site at Kingsford already has. The parkway IS one of the main roads the AECC relies on. The usage is going to be far higher.

 

 

All the parking I've mentioned is on private land? Except of course the thousands of existing spaces on the AECC site that we'd be able to use that we wouldn't have at Kingsford you mean? The private spaces in BoD are just as much, if not more, as Kingford with the added benefit of not being on the other side of a busy dual carriageway.

 

The parking currently at AECC would not be additional parking though. Within the site Aberdeen are allowed 1,333 spaces (reduced from their initial 1,600), they won't be allowed more than that at AECC even if they have the space for it.

 

So parking, traffic, ability to walk from union street - AECC doesn't offer an improvement on Kingsford.

[Slim]

That's the whole point though, how can they restrict parking spaces that already exist?

 

We'd be replacing one arena with another on more or less the same footprint.

 

I'm not having the A944 with traffic lights and a roundabout before Kingswells and another choke point Roundabout after Kingswells that leads to 2 single carriageways is better at dispersing traffic than the A90 which will be duelled all the way to Ellon. Both sites have proximity to the AWPR. Westhill is then left with a bunch of back roads no where near equipped to handle that volume of traffic, whereas King Street, Beach Esplanade and the Parkway which leads to both the Persley Bridge and the new 3rd crossing handles high volumes all the time.

 

According to the study performed by the club, most people attending Pittodrie travel either from the city centre or due north of the city. Westhill is not the convenient location for the vast majority of our supporter base.

[Dunty]

That's the whole point though, how can they restrict parking spaces that already exist?

 

We'd be replacing one arena with another on more or less the same footprint.

 

I'm not having the A944 with traffic lights and a roundabout before Kingswells and another choke point Roundabout after Kingswells that leads to 2 single carriageways is better at dispersing traffic than the A90 which will be duelled all the way to Ellon. Both sites have proximity to the AWPR. Westhill is then left with a bunch of back roads no where near equipped to handle that volume of traffic, whereas King Street, Beach Esplanade and the Parkway which leads to both the Persley Bridge and the new 3rd crossing handles high volumes all the time.

 

According to the study performed by the club, most people attending Pittodrie travel either from the city centre or due north of the city. Westhill is not the convenient location for the vast majority of our supporter base.

 

To build a stadium there, some parking spaces will have to go simply due to space issues. A football stadium is not going to fit on the footprint taken up by the AECC building.

 

Secondly, how many parking spaces are actually there? Is it more than 1300 (the Kingsford number)? Bear in mind Aberdeen were asked to reduce parking spaces, and in the council report released today the use of arnhall has been criticised because it increases car use. They're not suddenly going to be encouraged to go for a site with more parking.

 

In the 2014 AECC development framework, it has comments from locals who have viewed the plans for the area once the AECC moves to Bucksburn. Link is here. http://www.aberdeencity.gov.uk/nmsruntime/saveasdialog.asp?lID=64900&sID=2991  - look at the comments. Page 13 Too much traffic, roads can't cope, public transport links need improved, traffic is a nightmare. Page 11 - 24% of 600 respondents said too much traffic. Page 15 - 56% have road traffic concerns. Page 16 destroys all arguments you're making about great transport links. This is for an area about to lose a 4,000 capacity AECC - the locals aren't even being asked about their thoughts on a 20,000 capacity stadium.

 

If Kingsford is rejected, I can't see how Aberdeen could make an argument for the AECC site and suggest whatever got Kingsford rejected wouldn't be a problem at Bridge of Don. Traffic, nightmare. Fans pouring onto main road up to five times the volume they currently do. Noise, light, not on LDP, no sustainable transport plan, heavily reliant on cars.

 

If Kingsford is out, there are four options and only four options.

 

1) Abandon new stadium, build training facilities, then try and do what they can with Pittodrie. Forget about anything close to a good stadium, it'll be done on a budget far, far less than Kingsford. With the loss of the sale of Pittodrie and maybe the need to knock down flats, it could be well over £20 less to spend on the stadium than Kingsford, in a more difficult footprint. I'd be amazed if the stadium looked anything other than rubbish. It's a horrible thought. The people desperate to stay at Pittodrie should be careful what they wish for.

 

2) Try and build at Kings Links. Maybe it's doable. But again it'll be more expensive, and the budget will probably be less due to that expense, and I'm not sure we'll be happy with the result.

 

3) Loirston. I don't see how it can work, even if they abandon a dual facility and just build the stadium, without scaling back some of the other plans for that area. If they can, and they rebuild cove train station, maybe it's okay. It's probably my preference should Kingsford fail but I can't help but feel the time to build there was five years ago.

 

4) The club move to Aberdeenshire.

[jess]

Secondly, how many parking spaces are actually there? Is it more than 1300 (the Kingsford number)? Bear in mind Aberdeen were asked to reduce parking spaces, and in the council report released today the use of arnhall has been criticised because it increases car use. They're not suddenly going to be encouraged to go for a site with more parking.

 

Look like maybe 2500 in total in the proper car parks - 600 or more taken away for a stadium.

 

The club also says the site isn't big enough for training facilities. I call bullshit on that unless they're desperate for 5 pitches.

 

In the 2014 AECC development framework, it has comments from locals who have viewed the plans for the area once the AECC moves to Bucksburn. Link is here. http://www.aberdeencity.gov.uk/nmsruntime/saveasdialog.asp?lID=64900&sID=2991  - look at the comments. Page 13 Too much traffic, roads can't cope, public transport links need improved, traffic is a nightmare. Page 11 - 24% of 600 respondents said too much traffic. Page 15 - 56% have road traffic concerns. Page 16 destroys all arguments you're making about great transport links. This is for an area about to lose a 4,000 capacity AECC - the locals aren't even being asked about their thoughts on a 20,000 capacity stadium.

 

Ignore the capacity - it would be around a third of the parking?

 

 

If Kingsford is rejected, I can't see how Aberdeen could make an argument for the AECC site and suggest whatever got Kingsford rejected wouldn't be a problem at Bridge of Don. Traffic, nightmare. Fans pouring onto main road up to five times the volume they currently do. Noise, light, not on LDP, no sustainable transport plan, heavily reliant on cars.

 

I think it would be far less reliant on cars. They don't appear to believe any cunt would use the bus plan they've submitted to go to Kingsford, whereas people already go into town and along King Street. It's only adding to the same journey.

 

 

4) The club move to Aberdeenshire.

 

Aberdeenshire Council which everyone is pointing towards as helpful has objected to Kingsford and raised concerns/threatened that half of the footbridge, which is a condition of approval from RDM, is in Aberdeenshire. 

[Garlogie_Granite]

 

I'm not having the A944 with traffic lights and a roundabout before Kingswells and another choke point Roundabout after Kingswells that leads to 2 single carriageways is better at dispersing traffic than the A90 which will be duelled all the way to Ellon.

Roads are dualled all the way to Kingsford and up to the entrance of Westhill itself.

 

Both sites have proximity to the AWPR. Westhill is then left with a bunch of back roads no where near equipped to handle that volume of traffic, whereas King Street, Beach Esplanade and the Parkway which leads to both the Persley Bridge and the new 3rd crossing handles high volumes all the time.

Who will be travelling these back roads? Which roads do you mean? And on match days king street definitely can't cope with traffic, the Parkway can;t cope with concert traffic, never mind football traffic.

 

According to the study performed by the club, most people attending Pittodrie travel either from the city centre or due north of the city. Westhill is not the convenient location for the vast majority of our supporter base.

Anyone coming from the north will join the AWPR at Foveran, or if A96 corridor at Craibstone. Their journeys will be considerably better.

 

Most in the city will have it easier going toi Kingsford. I was in summer street last night at 4.40, I was at tesco Westhill by 4.55.  Less traffic on a football day than rush hour.

 

Meanwhile leaving pittodrie from my usual east end pitch parking spot, I'm lucky to be across king street in those same 15 minutes.

[manc_don]

They're on the ropes now. This is truly desperate and embarrassing 

 

http://www.nokingsfordstadium.org.uk/2017/09/07/open-letter-to-mr-george-yule-executive-vice-chairman-of-aberdeen-football-club/

[Garlogie_Granite]

They're on the ropes now. This is truly desperate and embarrassing 

 

http://www.nokingsfordstadium.org.uk/2017/09/07/open-letter-to-mr-george-yule-executive-vice-chairman-of-aberdeen-football-club/

Wow. How dare Aberdeen FC not have plans for community facilities that are not football related.

 

Are these guys for real?

 

Also.."Westdyke football club are fully supportive of your plans.  However we have received information to the contrary –  that the views of Graeme Burnett and the Committee  are not necessarily representative of the whole club. There are many families with connections to the Westdyke Club that are opposed to the plans, and we believe no canvassing of opinions for Kingsford was sought from the volunteer coaching staff, players or indeed parents of the players. "

 

Now, as far as I believe, there's been no official letter of support to the council from Westdyke, however "Westhill Scouts" have put in an official letter of complaint, despite the exact same accusation being leveled at them. 

 

Desperate indeed

[Dunty]

 

 

Ignore the capacity - it would be around a third of the parking?

 

You think there'll be less cars using the stadium than what currently use the AECC?

 

I think it would be far less reliant on cars. They don't appear to believe any cunt would use the bus plan they've submitted to go to Kingsford, whereas people already go into town and along King Street. It's only adding to the same journey.

 

How many bus routes go past the AECC? I'd suggest the majority of fans will still need a bus into Aberdeen then a bus to AECC for a concert.

 

What I will say about AECC, and I wouldn't be massively against it (that's not the point I'm making), is that buses would reach it quicker than Kingsford. But I just don't see how the overrall picture is a better one than Kingford, and how if Kingsford fails that AECC could be viewed as a possibility.

 

If Kingsford fails, it would be stupidity for the club to spend more money embarking on a plan somewhere that isn't earmarked for a stadium in the LDP or has good transport links. If they lose this, they just have to accept Aberdeen Council are only going to let them build at Pittodrie, Kings Links or Loirston.

 

But, I think Kingsford will get the go ahead. The main concerns are pedestrian safety, and Aberdeen will have to spend a fair bit on footbridges, on bus laybys and on widening paths, decreasing the width of the dual carriageway, and all the other wee things road traffic management have suggested in their report.

 

Other than that - traffic, it's going to be a problem anywhere, and would have been just as bad if not worse at Loirston, which the council passed. There wasn't loads of parking at Loirston which got passed. The shuttles bus idea was flawed at Loirston, passed.

 

The only reason really for any councillor rejecting this will be they believe Aberdeen need to stay in the city centre for economic reasons. I think that's a weak reason and would be astonished if that happened.

 

 

Aberdeenshire Council which everyone is pointing towards as helpful has objected to Kingsford and raised concerns/threatened that half of the footbridge, which is a condition of approval from RDM, is in Aberdeenshire.

 

All true, but it also says in the stadium application that Aberdeenshire council offered the club land for a new stadium at Blackburn, Balmedie and Portlethen. I don't know why their attitude is so anti-Kingsford - maybe because it's not actually in Aberdeenshire?

[baggy89]

They're on the ropes now. This is truly desperate and embarrassing 

 

http://www.nokingsfordstadium.org.uk/2017/09/07/open-letter-to-mr-george-yule-executive-vice-chairman-of-aberdeen-football-club/

 

What does it matter that planning hasn't been applied for and if they are so sure it won't be granted why worry enough to write a condescending letter?

 

You would hope that the plan is for an indoor 3/4G for community use.

 

Regardless, I can see why a local sports clubs would be against any development which might present improved facilities.

 

I cannot understand why coaches players and parents of any youth football club would be for their kids not playing on a dog shit, rabbit hole strewn piece of irregularly mown scrub grass. After all it is character building...

 

 

[jess]

You think there'll be less cars using the stadium than what currently use the AECC?

 

Less parking next to it due to bigger numbers in cars and more on buses and walking.

 

How many bus routes go past the AECC? I'd suggest the majority of fans will still need a bus into Aberdeen then a bus to AECC for a concert.

 

What I will say about AECC, and I wouldn't be massively against it (that's not the point I'm making), is that buses would reach it quicker than Kingsford. But I just don't see how the overrall picture is a better one than Kingford, and how if Kingsford fails that AECC could be viewed as a possibility.

 

A couple, but as you say it would be an actual shuttle bus along King Street for those going to or from town for another one, rather than up to 40 minutes back.

 

If Kingsford fails, it would be stupidity for the club to spend more money embarking on a plan somewhere that isn't earmarked for a stadium in the LDP or has good transport links. If they lose this, they just have to accept Aberdeen Council are only going to let them build at Pittodrie, Kings Links or Loirston.

 

Possibly, but I don't understand why they say there is no evidence ACC would like to purse a football stadium with the club. Well obviously there's not going to be. Have they asked?

 

 

But, I think Kingsford will get the go ahead. The main concerns are pedestrian safety, and Aberdeen will have to spend a fair bit on footbridges, on bus laybys and on widening paths, decreasing the width of the dual carriageway, and all the other wee things road traffic management have suggested in their report.

 

I was thinking it might but given Aberdeenshire Council's objection and threats and Strategic and Economic being against it I don't think so anymore.

 

Other than that - traffic, it's going to be a problem anywhere, and would have been just as bad if not worse at Loirston, which the council passed. There wasn't loads of parking at Loirston which got passed. The shuttles bus idea was flawed at Loirston, passed.

 

There was a huge condition on the buses at Loirston, if I remember correctly, 73% would get there by bus and Aberdeen had to prove it would happen. At Kingsford the club wants close to the opposite, and the council don't believe it wouldn't be closer to 90%.

 

 

The only reason really for any councillor rejecting this will be they believe Aberdeen need to stay in the city centre for economic reasons. I think that's a weak reason and would be astonished if that happened.

 

That could be the reason but not the reason given...

 

 

All true, but it also says in the stadium application that Aberdeenshire council offered the club land for a new stadium at Blackburn, Balmedie and Portlethen. I don't know why their attitude is so anti-Kingsford - maybe because it's not actually in Aberdeenshire?

 

Pandering.

[Dunty]

Less parking next to it due to bigger numbers in cars and more on buses and walking.

 

Not convinced the numbers will be that different. Yes, probably a bigger percentage of fans live within walking distance of the AECC than Kingsford, but it won't make a huge difference to car use or public transport, because the vast majority won't live within walking distance.

 

Essentially, the argument for AECC over Kingsford is it maybe takes 10 minutes off the journey to get there for some (but might take longer to get out of the place afterwards) and it makes people feel better because on a map it's within the city.

 

 

A couple, but as you say it would be an actual shuttle bus along King Street for those going to or from town for another one, rather than up to 40 minutes back.

 

Granted, I'll give you that one. The shuttle bus journeys would be shorter. If AECC was the option I would support it.

 

But it's important to note there would still be a need for shuttle buses, and it'd be heavily reliant on them, same as Kingsford. It's not a big improvement on Kingsford, and the point I'm making is I can't see why Kingsford would be rejected but AECC passed.

 

Lets also not forget why the new AECC isn't being built there, because of space restrictions and because the transport links are better at Bucksburn. Aberdeen would have a hard job convincing everyone that a 20,000 capacity stadium there is better than a 4,000 capacity AECC.

 

 

Possibly, but I don't understand why they say there is no evidence ACC would like to purse a football stadium with the club. Well obviously there's not going to be. Have they asked?

 

Apparently so, George Yule says they investigated that site. They say that ACC requires a land receipt from the sale of the land to help pay off the new AECC, essentially meaning the club won't get it cheap so it's a lot more expensive than Kingsford. They also said it doesn't have room for the stadium and training facilities, though if Kingsford is rejected that might not be an issue because the only way they can still build a dual facility in that case will be in Aberdeenshire. They also said permission has already been given anyway to another developer to build there.

 

What I also don't understand, and didn't understand long before Kingsford ever came on the scene. Why were fans so against Loirston but happy for the AECC site? The walk is pretty much the same.

 

 

There was a huge condition on the buses at Loirston, if I remember correctly, 73% would get there by bus and Aberdeen had to prove it would happen. At Kingsford the club wants close to the opposite, and the council don't believe it wouldn't be closer to 90%.

 

Not trying to be cheeky, but I've read that three times and don't understand what you mean.

 

[brunstanesheep]

What exactly happens at the meeting on Wednesday? will we get a good idea of the decision then?

[jess]

Granted, I'll give you that one. The shuttle bus journeys would be shorter. If AECC was the option I would support it.

 

But it's important to note there would still be a need for shuttle buses, and it'd be heavily reliant on them, same as Kingsford. It's not a big improvement on Kingsford, and the point I'm making is I can't see why Kingsford would be rejected but AECC passed.

 

There would be a need for shuttles along King Street. It would take less time, the same bus could be used much more and presumably would mean far less buses needed. Kingsford needs private hires from every corner of the city to the ground. It's like a Kingsford but with public routes from everywhere to Kingswells P&R.

 

Apparently so, George Yule says they investigated that site. They say that ACC requires a land receipt from the sale of the land to help pay off the new AECC, essentially meaning the club won't get it cheap so it's a lot more expensive than Kingsford. They also said it doesn't have room for the stadium and training facilities, though if Kingsford is rejected that might not be an issue because the only way they can still build a dual facility in that case will be in Aberdeenshire. They also said permission has already been given anyway to another developer to build there.

 

I've read Yule's newspaper letter about the AECC just now. When you have to list "community sports hub, training academy and new stadium with associated parking" there's a whiff of unwillingness. It would be helpful to know basic estimated costs for the locations they look at. I read a few times the council panicked at the club trying for Kingsford and suddenly identified land by the beach but the club weren't interested. Also would be helpful to know where this is. I reckon the strange ground conditions unallocated land next to Seaton.

 

What I also don't understand, and didn't understand long before Kingsford ever came on the scene. Why were fans so against Loirston but happy for the AECC site? The walk is pretty much the same.

 

Perceived bus links and direction of travel. A much stranger thing is how fans were so against Loirston but militantly in favour of Kingsford. My biggest worry is it's because we're winning and no one gives a shit about anything while that happens. All For Aurora is really All For McInnes Staying And Winning And We Will Reach The Champions League.

 

 

Not trying to be cheeky, but I've read that three times and don't understand what you mean.

 

A condition for Loirston was near 75% would take the bus, and there was to be some astronomical number like 140 Park and Ride buses.

 

The council seem to be very strong on too much car use. They don't believe people would use the buses since there are so few links.

[tom_widdows]

What exactly happens at the meeting on Wednesday? will we get a good idea of the decision then?

 

Depends on the media spin but I think the Planners have already made up their minds and a decision will be issued by October 1st.

 

[jess]

Depends on the media spin but I think the Planners have already made up their minds and a decision will be issued by October 1st.

 

Could they somehow say no to the stadium only or would it be an outright no and try again?

[Garlogie_Granite]

Could they somehow say no to the stadium only or would it be an outright no and try again?

No the application is as a single development.

 

If the worst happens and the stadium is rejected, I don't want the training facilities anywhere near Westhill, these cunts should in no way gain any direct benefit from AFC after this, and I hope the club sees the same.

 

What the anti-mob amongst fans seem to be missing, is that there is nowhere else. You can greet all you want, but it's not going to be Pittodrie redeveloped, and you run the real risk of this now going outwith the city and into Aberdeenshire. It was mooted long ago that Wiggy had dibs on land near Portlethen that was a fall back option. Obviously the fact it's out of the city is why not much has been made of this, but this looks awfully like the last chance to keep the stadium within the toon

[manc_don]

Jess, we asked 100AkS to provide evidence of this, but where has it been proven the council offered up land by the beach? Obviously I wouldn't accept a statement about it from the idiots on the NTK website as they are the purveyors of fake news.

[tom_widdows]

Could they somehow say no to the stadium only or would it be an outright no and try again?

 

It is one Application.

The answer will either be:

a) APPROVAL - No chance of this as certain consultants require conditions to be imposed

b) CONDITIONAL APPROVAL

c) NO

 

there is also secret answer (d) which is the same fate that Bellfield suffered (Anyone remember Bellfield? That was apparently going to create a regional centre for sporting excellence with a football stadium, Olympic size swimming pool, community facilities etc about 1.7miles closer to the city centre than Kingsford?).

Called in by the Scottish executive, dumped in a pile and forgotten about. My cynical view of this outcome is 'its no unless you grease a couple of palms'

[Dunty]

No the application is as a single development.

 

If the worst happens and the stadium is rejected, I don't want the training facilities anywhere near Westhill, these cunts should in no way gain any direct benefit from AFC after this, and I hope the club sees the same.

 

 

 

Except the town of Westhill isn't against it. It's a few hundred nimbys. The ones who would benefit from the facilities have publicly backed it.

[RicoS321]

there is also secret answer (d) which is the same fate that Bellfield suffered (Anyone remember Bellfield? That was apparently going to create a regional centre for sporting excellence with a football stadium, Olympic size swimming pool, community facilities etc about 1.7miles closer to the city centre than Kingsford?).

Called in by the Scottish executive, dumped in a pile and forgotten about. My cynical view of this outcome is 'its no unless you grease a couple of palms'

 

To be fair, Bellfield was also attached to a Euros bid wasn't it? When that got shelved, unsurprisingly, it was quietly slipped into the background as the government wouldn't fund it and there was no chance of the dons affording it. Were they not going to have a stadium that could be conveniently flatpacked up and down from 20-35K as and when required? I remember all sorts of stories in the rag in those days.

[RicoS321]

Perceived bus links and direction of travel. A much stranger thing is how fans were so against Loirston but militantly in favour of Kingsford. My biggest worry is it's because we're winning and no one gives a shit about anything while that happens. All For Aurora is really All For McInnes Staying And Winning And We Will Reach The Champions League.

 

It is weird isn't it? Loirston was at least in the city, demonstrably so. Was it just bad timing? Would it have got more support if the AWPR had been well into construction? The transport plan - albeit still fairly shite - was ten times better than Kingsford. It was just about walkable from the station (3.4 miles uphill is a bit of a trek like, but fine on the way home) with the obvious option of opening a new station in the future. The additional journey time over Kingsford for those from the North with the AWPR would be about 10 minutes max. I didn't like Loirston, but I just don't get the clamour for Kingsford at all, it's clearly an inferior location.

[donsdaft]

What's all this about walking distance?

 

Have we moved to the Amalfi coast while I wasn't looking?

 

Tuesday night in February.

Howling a gale

Sleet going sideways

Hamilton at home.

 

3.4 miles uphill alongside minging duel carriageways, lorries plowing through giant puddles of muddy water.

Then home again after a 0-0 draw.

 

Diehard right enough.

[jess]

No the application is as a single development.

 

If the worst happens and the stadium is rejected, I don't want the training facilities anywhere near Westhill, these cunts should in no way gain any direct benefit from AFC after this, and I hope the club sees the same.

 

What the anti-mob amongst fans seem to be missing, is that there is nowhere else. You can greet all you want, but it's not going to be Pittodrie redeveloped, and you run the real risk of this now going outwith the city and into Aberdeenshire. It was mooted long ago that Wiggy had dibs on land near Portlethen that was a fall back option. Obviously the fact it's out of the city is why not much has been made of this, but this looks awfully like the last chance to keep the stadium within the toon

 

I think it would be training facilities there in another application and stadium who knows where. It simply won't be Aberdeenshire unless right next to a train station and again it would help to know where the land at Dyce was that the council identified 4 years ago.

 

Jess, we asked 100AkS to provide evidence of this, but where has it been proven the council offered up land by the beach? Obviously I wouldn't accept a statement about it from the idiots on the NTK website as they are the purveyors of fake news.

 

Read it on afc chat and facebook from people who'd posted about Westhill before it was announced.

 

I didn't like Loirston, but I just don't get the clamour for Kingsford at all, it's clearly an inferior location.

 

We were shit. You value things more when not winning, a better perspective.