I'm with
@Carpy on this. Whatever your colour in politics, to be seen as someone who is at the wheel as a football club goes to the wall is politically damaging. If OCC really hadn't cared about OUFC, why have they leased the club the land? They could have said no at the earliest opportunity.
The road closure/diversion/bridge thing is an aspect I simply don't know which way things will turn. If a bridge is deemed unsafe or unsuitable but a temporary road closure is deemed the best option, that can't be one point to derail all of this, can it? It would be unduly harsh to throw out a colossal project of this side for a detail that
reduces road travel.
Cllr Miller can wave his finger all he likes. As I've mentioned before on this thread, he talks big but what he demands of the club is what the club has to do anyway.
I still don't think that the club's position on this has helped by suggesting there would be one, taking it out, putting forward an alternative and now applying for a bridge has been helpful. The communication regarding the number of hours roads would be closed for and events at the stadium hasn't helped either. There's been a lot of good, professional work in the application up to now but the rockiest and least convincing parts (aside from finance which is on the owners) is with the access from Parkway to the new stadium site.