Connect with us

Culture

Special report: Why Forest may abandon City Ground 'masterplan' for new stadium

Published

on

Special report: Why Forest may abandon City Ground 'masterplan' for new stadium

It doesn’t take long in conversation with Tom Cartledge, the Nottingham Forest chairman, to realise that the dispute threatening the future of the City Ground has accelerated the possibilities of a stadium move.

“The club continue to be frustrated,” Cartledge tells The Athletic in relation to Forest’s standoff with Nottingham City Council, which owns the land where the team play. “Neither the leader of the council, the CEO nor any of the commissioners appointed by central government have reached out to the club.

“Nobody is knocking on the door. Nobody is trying to start the relationship again and say, ‘How do we find a way?’. And in the meantime, other councils and landowners are providing opportunities that we have to consider.”

It is three months since Cartledge spoke to The Athletic about his “masterplan” to upgrade the City Ground into a 40,000-capacity stadium with two new stands bankrolled by the club’s Greek owner, Evangelos Marinakis.

Cartledge showed off the designs. He talked about wanting to create something special and long-lasting at the riverside setting that has been the club’s home for 125 years.

Advertisement

Yet he also accompanied it with a stark warning that the whole project might have to be reconsidered if Forest could not agree terms over a new lease with the council — and that, in a nutshell, is exactly what has happened. Nothing is moving, attitudes have hardened and, as it stands, the entire negotiation is going nowhere fast.

What does all this mean for a stadium regarded as one of the gems of English football?

Well, for starters, the impasse has led to a rethink from Marinakis when it comes to the “corner boxes” of executive suites that were meant to go either side of the Trent End before the end of the season. Work started in February to prepare the ground, including bringing down one of the floodlights and replacing it in a new position.


An artist’s impression of the proposed new ‘corner boxes’ at the City Ground (Nottingham Forest and Benoy)

That, however, has been put on hold. The development would cost up to £7million ($8.7m) and Forest, according to Cartledge, want more clarity from the council “before we spend significant money on capital projects”.

On a wider level, however, Forest’s ongoing dispute with their landlord has left the club contemplating what could, in theory, be one of the most seismic and important decisions in their history.

Advertisement

When Cartledge uses the word “opportunities” he is talking about possible sites where Forest can explore a Plan B — putting up a 50,000-capacity stadium in another part of the city. One area that has been discussed is Toton, six miles south west of the city centre.

The Athletic has been to see the relevant site, earmarked originally for the now-abandoned HS2 railway project. It is land owned by Nottinghamshire County Council. In the coming weeks and months, we can expect more and more discussion about the pros and cons of staying at the City Ground or building something new elsewhere.

“That (Toton) is one of several potential spots,” says Cartledge. “It’s not as easy as to say, ‘Here’s a piece of land, go and build a stadium’. There are highways, transport and connectivity issues. But it’s fair to say we are progressing due diligence on different sites.”


Through the estate, past the Toton Fish Bar, a hairdresser’s called Flicks and some typical Nottingham suburbia, you will eventually come to a mini-roundabout on Epsom Road where you can hear the hum of industry from the railway sidings on the other side of the trees.

The River Erewash is nearby, running along the county border between Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire. There is a Tesco supermarket on the other side of Stapleford Lane, a tram stop and a garden centre, Bardills, that has its own history with the city’s major football club.

Advertisement

In 1898, when Forest moved to the City Ground, the nurseryman and landscape gardener William Bardill was on their committee. Bardill was put in charge of the playing surface and is credited in the club’s official history book for creating a pitch “that was soon recognised as one of the best, even the finest, in the country”.

Today, Bardills looks out on the stretch of dual-carriageway that is named after Brian Clough, Forest’s two-time European Cup-winning manager, and leads all the way from Nottingham to Derby.

And, yes, it feels strange — very strange, indeed — to look down at Toton Sidings from the grassy embankment off Banks Road and try to imagine what it would be like with a gleaming new stadium dominating the skyline and a different set of match-day routines.

“All mist rolling in from the Erewash…”

OK, let’s not get too far ahead of ourselves. For now, it is only an idea. That idea is in its embryonic stages and, before anything, Forest are acutely aware they need to undertake a long period of consultation with fans, understanding the sensitivities and why many supporters might find it unsettling.

Advertisement

These are always emotive subjects. Some fans might be receptive to a move, others will hate the idea.


Toton sidings, one possible stadium site being considered by Forest (Rui Vieira/PA Images via Getty Images)

Cartledge, in particular, is aware of local feeling, given that he grew up in Nottinghamshire and has been going to matches at the City Ground since the early 1980s. It is all he has ever known and if you want to know why the former manager, Steve Cooper, used to say it “oozed football soul”, there is a 4,000-word love letter here courtesy of one of its biggest admirers.

Critically, though, the issues with the council come at a time when Forest — deducted four points this season for breaking the Premier League’s profitability and sustainability rules — feel the only realistic way to challenge the elite teams is to generate more revenue.

Uppermost in Forest’s mind is finding a way to do this on non-matchdays — something that has been missing from their ground for many years — and accommodating the thousands of fans who cannot get tickets. Forest reckon they could have sold 50,000 for some games since their return to the top division.

Against that backdrop, Forest’s decision-makers are open about the fact they have to consider every option and, to quote Cartledge, there is “a discussion to be had about, ‘Yes, the City Ground is our home, but just imagine if we did something amazing.’”

Advertisement

On top of that, the club have been re-evaluating everything since negotiations fell through recently over a multi-million-pound deal to buy land off the eastbound A52 for a new training ground.

go-deeper

GO DEEPER

We ranked every Premier League stadium so you could shout at us

Unreported until now, the deal is off because of what Cartledge describes as “a financial disparity between what we believe the land is worth and what the land-owners are asking”. And that is disappointing when Forest’s hierarchy had drawn up some exciting plans and fully expected it to go through in February. The club readily admit their training ground is not big enough.

So what next? Forest, it transpires, have already started looking elsewhere. The relevant people are wondering whether they should think more ambitiously and take their lead from Manchester City, the reigning Premier League champions.

“Because of the noise being created out of the disruption of whether we stay or go, we are getting quite a lot of interesting things put our way,” Cartledge explains.

Advertisement

“The terms on that (training ground) project are prohibiting us, but other things have come forward that have given us time to think. Where do we want to be? Where are those campuses where we can try to put all of this together in the way Manchester City have done?”

City are the only club in the Premier League who have a stadium and training ground on the same complex — and this is one of the ideas Forest think is worth exploring at a time when Marinakis has set aside a huge pot of money for development.

“Mr Marinakis is incredibly ambitious,” says Cartledge. “If we did something with those two things together — the training ground and the stadium — you do that only once. When it comes to these big decisions, he takes an enormous amount of pride and responsibility in getting it right.”


Another area of interest to Forest recently can be located on the other side of Meadow Lane, Notts County’s stadium, on a large expanse of industrial land where there is an incinerator plant and a waste-collection unit.

It is on the other side of the Nottingham Canal from the Hooters bar, a short walk from the city’s railway station.

Advertisement

One option for Forest is to leave the City Ground (foreground) for an area of industrial land (circled), next door to Notts County (David Goddard/Getty Images)

That idea has not progressed, however, because the land is permitted only for industrial use. The city council has indicated there is no scope for that to change. That, in turn, explains why Forest have been looking at the suburbs. At least four sites have been discussed, Toton in particular.

Those talks will continue even if Forest, 17th in the Premier League table, drop into the relegation places — but there have to be some awkward questions, too, about how the dispute with the council was ever allowed to reach this stage.

In 2019, Forest announced, via a blaze of publicity, that they had been granted a new 250-year lease. Nicholas Randall, then the chairman, said he was “delighted” to secure the future of the club’s home ground. Yet, for reasons unexplained, Randall did not follow that up by telling the club’s supporters the agreement was never, in fact, completed.

In reality, Forest have continued operating by the terms of their old lease, which has 33 years to run and, before starting a major redevelopment at huge expense, the club need the securities and insurance of a much longer agreement.

“The rent, if you add it up for the next 33 years, comes to about £9.5million,” says Cartledge, who replaced Randall as chairman in August. “The proposed rent the council wants us to pay over 250 years is more than £250m.

Advertisement

“So if we are talking openly about the Football Association’s desire for financial stability and the future of clubs to be secure, it is simply wrong for us to sign up and put this club in a position where we have to pay £250million in rent to stay here.”

Supporters of a certain generation might recall this is not the first time that relations between the club and landlord have been fractious because of their lease agreement.

In 1991, the council proposed Forest’s annual rent went up from £750, as agreed in 1963, to £150,000. In the end, the two sides compromised at £22,000. Clough threatened to quit if the council got its way with a proposal for Forest and Notts to share a ‘super stadium’ on the old Wilford power station.

This time, however, the issue is complicated by the Labour-run council issuing a Section 114 notice in November to declare itself, in effect, bankrupt, meaning the government has sent in commissioners to take control.

The council says it has “a statutory duty to ensure best value for taxpayers”. Forest, however, say it is exorbitant that the current rent is £250,000 and the council allegedly wants almost four times that amount.

Advertisement

Cartledge says he has not had a response to “a very strong letter” he has written to the council to argue that the proposed terms are unreasonable.


Evangelos Marinakis has grand plans for Forest (Naomi Baker/Getty Images)

Four local MPs — three Labour and one Conservative — have tried to apply pressure on Forest’s behalf but they have found out, Cartledge says, that “the council’s predicament is very challenging and it’s hard for politicians to become involved now the commissioners are running it”.

David Mellen, the council’s recently departed leader, has said Forest cannot expect “mates’ rates”. However, the club’s frustrations stem, in part, from the absence of any real dialogue to find a compromise.

“We had dialogues with some of the junior officers, but nobody senior came forward,” says Cartledge. “That’s important context for the fans to understand. We are not just sitting here in a black hole waiting and hoping. We are trying to be proactive.”

The Athletic contacted Nottingham City Council for comment.

Advertisement

One of the reasons Cartledge was appointed by Forest is that he is the chief executive of Handley House Group, the parent company for four international businesses specialising in design and architecture. One of those is the Nottinghamshire-based Benoy, which has designed the plans for a new-look City Ground and would also be prominently involved in any stadium move.

In the meantime, word has got back to Forest’s hierarchy that the Jockey Club, owners of Nottingham racecourse, had a lease dispute of its own with the council and it lasted seven years. So how long do the club wait when Marinakis is impatient, as well as ambitious, and many fans feel frustrated that not a brick has gone down since the initial stadium development was announced five years ago?

All that can really be said for certain is that safe-standing areas will be installed at the City Ground over the summer and the roof will be solar-panelled as part of a new agreement with E.ON to be the club’s sustainability partner.

“Across all of our projects – new ground, existing ground, training ground; whatever we pursue – the owner is absolutely adamant the club should start to look to a future whereby we have no carbon footprint,” says Cartledge.

“Regardless of whether we are staying or going, the owner feels it is important for the goodness and wellbeing of the world. He won’t let the council delays stop us from doing what is right.

Advertisement

“We will work together on solar panelling and other energy-saving initiatives. And, critically, if the progress on other sites and discussions about where we want to go mean it is right to move, E.ON will form part of the team, looking at how a new stadium could be built off-grid and carbon-neutral.”

(Top photo: Darren Staples/AFP via Getty Images)

Culture

Is Emily Brontë’s ‘Wuthering Heights’ Actually the Greatest Love Story of All Time?

Published

on

Is Emily Brontë’s ‘Wuthering Heights’ Actually the Greatest Love Story of All Time?

Margot Robbie and Jacob Elordi in Emerald Fennell’s adaptation of “Wuthering Heights.”

Advertisement

Warner Bros.

Catherine and Heathcliff. Since 1847, when Emily Brontë published her only novel, “Wuthering Heights,” those ill-starred lovers have inflamed the imaginations of generations of readers.

Who are these two? Definitely not the people you meet on vacation. The DNA of “Wuthering Heights,” set in a wild and desolate corner of Northern England, runs through the dark, gothic, obsessive strains of literary romance. Heathcliff, a tormented soul with terrible manners and a worse temper, may be the English novel’s most problematic boyfriend — mad, bad and dangerous to know. What redeems him, at least in the reader’s eyes, is Catherine’s love.

Advertisement

As children growing up in the same highly dysfunctional household, the two form a bond more passionate than siblinghood and purer than lust. (I don’t think a 179-year-old book can be spoiled, but some plot details will be revealed in what follows.) They go on to marry other people, living as neighbors and frenemies without benefits until tragedy inevitably strikes. In the meantime, they roil and seethe — it’s no accident that “wuthering” is a synonym for “stormy” — occasionally erupting into ardent eloquence.

Take this soliloquy delivered by Catherine to Nelly Dean, a patient and observant maidservant who narrates much of the novel:

This all-consuming love, thwarted in the book by circumstances, has flourished beyond its pages. Thanks to Catherine and Heathcliff — and also to the harsh, windswept beauty of the Yorkshire setting — “Wuthering Heights,” a touchstone of Victorian literature, has become a fixture of popular culture.

Advertisement

Laurence Olivier and Merle Oberon played Heathcliff and Catherine in William Wyler’s 1939 multi-Oscar-nominated film adaptation.

Since then, the volatile Heathcliff has been embodied by a succession of British brooders: Richard Burton, Ralph Fiennes, Tom Hardy. At least for Gen X, the definitive Catherine will always be Kate Bush, dancing across the English countryside in a bright red dress in an indelible pre-MTV music video.

Advertisement

Now, just in time for Valentine’s Day, we’ll have Emerald Fennell’s new R-rated movie version, with Margot Robbie (recently Barbie) as Catherine and Jacob Elordi (recently Frankenstein’s monster) as Heathcliff.

Is theirs the greatest love story of all time, as the movie’s trailer insists? It might be. For the characters, the love itself overwhelms every other consideration of feeling. For Brontë, the most accomplished poet in a family of formidable novelists, that love is above all a matter of words. The immensity of Catherine and Heathcliff’s passion is measured by the intensity of their language, which of course is also Brontë’s.

Here is Heathcliff, in his hyperbolic fashion, belittling Catherine’s marriage to the pathetic Linton:

Advertisement

Which is what romance lives to do. It’s a genre often proudly unconstrained by what is possible, rational or sane, unafraid to favor sensation over sense or to pose unanswerable questions about the human heart. How could Catherine love a man like Heathcliff? How could he know himself to be worthy of her love?

We’ll never really have the answers, which is why we’ll never stop reading. And why no picture will ever quite match the book’s thousands of feverish, hungry, astonishing words.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Culture

Annotating the Judge’s Decision in the Case of Liam Conejo Ramos, a 5-Year-Old Detained by ICE

Published

on

Annotating the Judge’s Decision in the Case of Liam Conejo Ramos, a 5-Year-Old Detained by ICE

One of the many unsettling images to emerge from the recent ICE surge in Minneapolis was that of 5-year-old Liam Conejo Ramos, in his blue bunny hat, standing in the January cold with the hand of a federal officer gripping his Spider-Man backpack.

Liam and his father, Adrian Conejo Arias, an asylum seeker from Ecuador, were taken from Minnesota to Texas and held at a detention facility outside San Antonio. Lawyers working on their behalf filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, an ancient judicial principle forbidding the government from holding anyone in custody without providing a legally tenable reason for doing so. On Saturday, Fred Biery, a federal judge in Texas’ Western District, granted their petition, freeing them.

Advertisement

That’s the boilerplate. But Judge Biery’s decision — which has gotten a lot of attention in legal circles and beyond — is much more than a dry specimen of judicial reasoning. It’s a passionate, erudite and at times mischievous piece of prose.

That may not have surprised some Texas court watchers. Judge Biery, who was appointed to the federal bench by President Bill Clinton in 1994, is known for his wit and writerly flair. His judicial order in a 2013 case involving San Antonio strip clubs is famous for its literary allusions (“to bare, or not to bare”) and its cheeky double entendres. A 2023 profile in San Antonio Lawyer magazine called him “a judge with a little extra to say.”

The extra in this case transforms what might have been a routine decision into a thorough scourging of the Trump administration’s approach to governance. This text isn’t much longer than one of Mr. Trump’s Truth Social posts. In fewer than 500 words, Judge Biery marshals literature, history, folk wisdom and Scripture to challenge the theory of executive power that has defined Trump’s second presidency.

Advertisement

It’s worth looking at how he does it.

OPINION AND ORDER OF THE COURT

Advertisement

Before the Court is the petition of asylum seeker Adrian Conejo Arias and his five-year-old son for protection of the Great Writ of habeas corpus. They seek nothing more than some modicum of due process and the rule of law. The government has responded.

He starts by juxtaposing the grandeur of habeas corpus with the modesty of the father and son’s claims, implying that what makes the writ “Great” is precisely its ability to protect the basic right of ordinary people not to be locked up arbitrarily. It does this by requiring that the government either provide reasons for holding them in custody or else let them go.

Advertisement

Judge Biery’s footnote directing readers to Blackstone’s commentaries and Magna Carta may be intended to give a remedial lesson to members of the administration. His larger point, though, is that to flout the guarantee of habeas corpus — as he insists the current deportation policy has done — is to threaten the integrity of the American constitutional order itself.

The case has its genesis in the ill-conceived and incompetently-implemented government pursuit of daily deportation quotas, apparently even if it requires traumatizing children. This Court and others regularly send undocumented people to prison and orders them deported but do so by proper legal procedures.

Advertisement

He calls attention to the grandiosity and sloppiness of the administration’s position while suggesting that its overreach reflects a more sinister intention.

Apparent also is the government’s ignorance of an American historical document called the Declaration of Independence. Thirty-three-year-old Thomas Jefferson enumerated grievances against a would-be authoritarian king over our nascent nation. Among others were:

Advertisement

1. “He has sent hither Swarms of Officers to harass our People.”

2. “He has excited domestic Insurrection among us.”

Advertisement

3. “For quartering large Bodies of Armed Troops among us.”

4. “He has kept among us, in Times of Peace, Standing Armies without the consent of our Legislatures.”

Advertisement

As the 250th birthday of American independence approaches, the president is being cast as King George III. The federal government’s indifference to habeas claims places it on the wrong side of the historical divide between individual liberty and unchecked state power, and thus at odds with the founding documents of the Republic.

“We the people” are hearing echos of that history.

And then there is that pesky inconvenience called the Fourth Amendment:

Advertisement

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and persons or things to be seized.

U.S. CONST. amend. IV.

Advertisement

Civics lesson to the government: Administrative warrants issued by the executive branch to itself do not pass probable cause muster.

In constitutional terms, the judge finds that the administration has defied the Fourth Amendment and disregarded the separation of powers.

Advertisement

That is called the fox guarding the henhouse. The Constitution requires an independent judicial officer.

A barnyard metaphor puts the matter in plainer language: Because executive authority has the potential to be predatory, it needs to be checked by the judiciary branch. Judge Biery might also be sending a sly message to his colleagues on the U.S. Supreme Court, who have looked favorably on many of Mr. Trump’s expansive claims of executive branch power.

Advertisement

Accordingly, the Court finds that the Constitution of these United States trumps this administration’s detention of petitioner Adrian Conejo Arias and his minor son, L.C.R. The Great Writ and release from detention are GRANTED pursuant to the attached Judgment.

The language in which the judge renders his decision also sends a message, in this case to the president himself. Capitalization is a hallmark of Mr. Trump’s style, as it is of American legalese. The paragraph granting the petition bristles with uppercase nouns, which makes it all the more striking that the president’s name, otherwise absent from the ruling, is rendered in lowercase, as a card-table verb.

Advertisement

This may be a subtextual swipe at the president’s ego, but it’s consistent with the decision’s fundamental argument, which is that the president — any president — is ultimately smaller than the law.

Observing human behavior confirms that for some among us, the perfidious lust for unbridled power and the imposition of cruelty in its quest know no bounds and are bereft of human decency. And the rule of law be damned.

Advertisement

For Judge Biery, the case involves procedure, and morality too. When he allows himself to express his disapproval — to write judgmentally, rather than judicially — he is in effect arguing that these principles can’t be separated. Due process and human decency are two sides of the same coin.

Ultimately, Petitioners may, because of the arcane United States immigration system, return to their home country, involuntarily or by self-deportation. But that result should occur through a more orderly and humane policy than currently in place.

Advertisement

Philadelphia, September 17, 1787: “Well, Dr. Franklin, what do we have?” “A republic, if you can keep it.”

With a judicial finger in the constitutional dike,

It is so ORDERED.

Advertisement

Benjamin Franklin famously (and perhaps apocryphally) pointed out the fragility of orderly self-government, while the Dutch boy immortalized in the 19th-century novel “Hans Brinker, or the Silver Skates” did what he could to protect his neighbors from the fury of the unchecked sea.

That Judge Biery puts himself in their company suggests that he sees this decision less as a final judgment than as a warning.

Advertisement

SIGNED this 31st day of January, 2026.

FRED BIERY

Advertisement

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Credit: Bystander

Advertisement

After his cautionary conclusion, the judge still has something extra to say, something that shifts the focus away from the rational, secular domain of jurisprudence.

Below his signature, he attaches the widely seen photograph of Liam. Underneath that — after an eloquently anonymous photo credit — are references to two verses from the New Testament. The judge doesn’t quote them, but they speak for him all the same.

Matthew 19:14

Advertisement

The Matthew verse — “But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: For of such is the kingdom of heaven” — is a well-known statement of compassion and care.

John 11:35

Advertisement

So, in its way, is John 11:35, the shortest verse in the English Bible. It is often quoted when things are so terrible that all other words fail:

“Jesus wept.”

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Culture

Try This Quiz on Mysteries Set in American Small Towns

Published

on

Try This Quiz on Mysteries Set in American Small Towns

A strong sense of place can deeply influence a story, and in some cases, the setting can even feel like a character itself. This week’s literary geography quiz highlights thriller and mystery novels set in towns around the United States. (Even if you don’t know the book, each question offers a clue about the state.) To play, just make your selection in the multiple-choice list and the correct answer will be revealed. At the end of the quiz, you’ll find links to the books if you’d like to do further reading.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending