permalink for this thread : http://search.catflaporama.com/post/browse/530879074


craig_pancrack Posted on 26/10 9:37
BOTH sides of the River types!
Clinging on to Yorkshire and Durham means one people with the same shared culture/ industrial heritage being split in two...the River maybe the old border but like the Boro it always has been a unifying factor. Do we want our own county both sides or do we return to the margins of two established big counties where we will disappear from the map? ...plus how many Stockton people have ever considered themselves to have more affinity with Durham than the Boro???

kermit_the_smog Posted on 26/10 9:42
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
In 20 years Stockton and Boro will be the same place in a big city with the centre spreading along Tees Valley.

janplanner Posted on 26/10 10:00
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
give over craig, you can't dictate to people how they should feel about there roots.

craig_pancrack Posted on 26/10 10:26
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
This thread is a response to the North and South Divided threads plus I ask a few questions...but not dictatorial, heck!

Jonny_ov_boro Posted on 26/10 10:28
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
Middlesbrough and stockton = cleveland cleveland = north yorkshire

stump_hole_lover Posted on 26/10 12:16
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
Said this many times before. Clevelands abolition was a political decision encouraged by our big city neighbours N.cl and leeds to make us less appealing to investors and less favourable for government investment. Tees valley has a unique identity and it is only the flat earthers who cling to this yorkshire/durham Craap. We will only see this area decline further until it has some form of city status under one governing authority. Think of the money it would save also getting rid of some of the jobs which are duplicated four or five times with the present system and some of the dead head councillors be could cull.

RedSectorA Posted on 26/10 12:47
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
JoB..WTF?

red_rebel2 Posted on 26/10 12:51
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
The old boundary is just dots on a map. We are no more Yorkshire than we are Danelaw. Middlesbrough grew up right on the fringes of what was Yorkshire, Stockton on the fringes of what was Durham. The Boro has almost no economic, cultural, linguistic, infra-structural or political links with Doncaster, Barnsley or Sheffield, or even Leeds and York, nor Stockton with Newcastle, Sunderland or Durham. Our entire modern existance has been as a joint enterprise. We are an area with a shared history, culture, accent, economy and football team. The river unites us it doesn't divide us.

Corcaigh_the_Cat Posted on 26/10 12:52
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
nail on head!

Jonny_ov_boro Posted on 26/10 12:53
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
I know its not not right red factor, its just how i see it.

RedSectorA Posted on 26/10 12:59
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
If you check out the other thread 'North of the river types' you'll see that there is no perception at all that Stockton is was or will have anything to do with Yorkshire. No disrespect intended, but most of us have no affinity with Durham either; we are from Teesside.

buffaloboro Posted on 26/10 13:13
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
pan , yet again , your logic is thin. You role is akin to Winston's in 1984 - trying to reconstruct a history of over 1000 years. Your audience is mainly kids who haven't been made aware of the historical context of the area they live in. Yes, alot of people came to the area for jobs ( just like a lot have had to leave because of the lack of jobs, as per your man Vinny G and that song you posted on the board ). There was a shared background in the type of work done. BUt following your thought process , that means that at the time when the area had a steel industry etc we shld have been twinned with other steel towns. If Middlesbrough FC didn't exist or wasn't as successful . there prob wldn't be this debate. A lot of people wldn't feel the need to focus on Middlesbrough. Finally, if the tw**s in the Smoke hadn't created the adminstrative district in the 1970's and had left it all alone , your argument wld be dead in the water as people wldn't be aware of it. We all know that Cleveland is a part of Yorkshire & as a name has nothing to do with any area North of the Tees nor in the Tees Valley area. Leave it where it has been for over 1000 years . It is only 8am here , I am off work , so I can debate this all day --- Post edited by buffaloboro on 26/10 13:16 ---

Nedkat Posted on 26/10 13:28
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
A very accurate nail on head !

7_The_Informer Posted on 26/10 13:41
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
Well put Buff. As Bill Lawry would say "Got him Richie". and Richie's reply "Marvellous effort that, really super effort all round". (Can you tell my fingers are twitching with the upcoming Ashes ....).

Tweek Posted on 26/10 13:48
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
People in stockton don't care one jot about the river and have never used it as any form of barrier, so as a North Tees birth i was quite shocked at how insular some so called south of river fans are over this i grew up equal distance between the two and as Boromart said you can see the boro from norton and you can get to the boro from norton in 5 mins which is alot quicker than you can get to stockton we can also see the river. Why then is this such a big deal for people who live and grew up alot alot further from the boro than i ever have (redcar saltburn marske etc). Why is this issue such a big deal to certain people.

Nedkat Posted on 26/10 13:54
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
I don't think it's about the football team, or the location of the Riverside Stadium. It's more about where people were born and live(d). I'm an ex-Thornaby lad, and always thought I lived in a English county called Yorkshire. I used to go to the ABC Minors in Stcokton, and while I was there, I always thought I was in another Englash county called Durham. These local authority districts were created by politicians, some people believe they did it to increase efficiency, I reckon they did it to create particular voting areas in order to seperate the Labour voters from the Conservative voters. At the end of the whole shebang, the River Tees is the border between Yorkshire and Durham, always has been and always will be.

buffaloboro Posted on 26/10 13:57
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
ForzaTweek , you must have attended the same logic class as Craig Pan'. There is no issue for anyone South of the Tees.Personally, I wld love it it everyperson in Durham supported the Boro - bigger gates, more cash for the club etc . Yorkshire folk are comfortable with themselves and what they are.

stump_hole_lover Posted on 26/10 14:09
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
Nedkat:- following your logic as red_rebel said, durham and yorkshire are'nt real boundaries and we all belong in the ancient kingdom of Northumbria!! Its not about the past its about the present and future and until this area is united then we are always going to be dominated politically, culturally and financially by our inbred cousins from the north and south of our region.

buffaloboro Posted on 26/10 14:27
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
Not all, there is no reason why the area can't work together for the common good ( look at the EU , that works ) and still have our historical heritage. Stump , you are taking it too far in the context of what is been talked about.

Nedkat Posted on 26/10 14:28
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
Stump, I understand where your coming from, but I didn't mention the past or the future. I mentioned what it was when ah was a lad ! ned, stop making so many spelling mistakes --- Post edited by Nedkat on 26/10 14:28 ---

TeessideCleveland Posted on 26/10 19:10
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
My main disagreement with the Yorkshire-types is their need to cast off Teessiders in Stockton and Billingham as from another county Stockton and Billingham are part of Teesside and I would think very few there would feel part of Durham Middlesbrough and Stockton evolved together and are culturally and historically one people

TeessideCleveland Posted on 26/10 19:15
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
I hadn't seen the 'North' thread earlier but it proves my point

Link: Teesside

stump_hole_lover Posted on 26/10 19:28
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
Ned, don't know how old you are mate, me I am 39 born in Parkside maternity which means my birth cert say 'north riding of yorkshire'. Means absolutely nothing to me, neither does the fact that i have spent 35 of those 39 years living in Billog ( durham? ). Teesside is my identity and has moulded my life and character, not yorks or durham.

jonny_giles Posted on 26/10 19:30
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
I don't care me like.

Nedkat Posted on 26/10 20:00
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
I'm 9 years older than you, Stumps. All said and done, it's a matter of personal preference, and my personal preference is -- I am a Yorkshireman !

buffaloboro Posted on 26/10 20:48
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
TC , I don't think that the South Boys want to 'cast off' Stockton etc. I really never thought about it until it was mentioned on this board. Just as some people state that Redcar, Marske etc aren't part of Teesside , any mention of the Northern crew not being true Boro fans can only be put down to general banter. It is natural for towns either side of a river to have a degree of commonality , yet , look at national borders . Many folk have more in common with towns across the border but they still retain their identity.

Come_On_Boro_the_1st Posted on 26/10 22:09
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
If you are ever in any doubt about what a barrier a bit of water can be, then ask people from Whitby. Used to be split into two separate communities according to all reports I heard years ago. Dunno if that still holds true. Anyone from Whitby ? As for the Tees. I still think people from North of the Tees are different to us North Yorkshire folk, but I'm happy for anyone to come and support the Boro from wherever.

TeessideCleveland Posted on 26/10 23:56
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
Buffalo maybe Stockton and Billingham should become a 'Yorkshire enclave' accross the Tees - like the bit of Spain accross the Med or the bit of the USA on Cuba Then all of Teesside would still be together --- Post edited by TeessideCleveland on 26/10 23:59 ---

redz69 Posted on 27/10 0:14
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
Ive only lived in 2 places whilst resident, Thornaby and near Yarm. I consider myself a Tees Sider. I cant see any arguement in Durham or Yorkshire because I dont feel part of either. If I was to pick I would label myself as from Cleveland or Teesside, and thats it for me. Same goes with religion, father a Catholic and Mother CofE, me Red Indian.

Trotsky4u Posted on 27/10 0:20
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
Stockton/Boro different sides of the same coin

Grumpy_Paul Posted on 27/10 2:08
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
Buffalo / Ned We all know that Cleveland is a part of Yorkshire and as a name has nothing to do with any area North of the Tees nor in the Tees Valley area. Leave it where it has been for over 1000 years Wrong and right Check your facts gent's. Ever heard of Northumbria ? meaning North of the Humber. See the whole picture. However Boro doesn't really exist as an entity in that context. Thornaby does though, just for you, grandad Ned

buffaloboro Posted on 27/10 2:08
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
TC , not a bad idea. I'll have a word with Mr Bush, see if he can invade the North side ( after all , thats how the Yanks got the Bay in Cuba amoungst other areas ) . Trots' , you wldn't think of Cleveland as an entity at all if the admin folk hadn't messed with your head in the 70's

craig_pancrack Posted on 27/10 12:42
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
BUFFALO my dear adversary across the pond...my logic is not thin and am reconstructing nowt. Here's why Yorkshire is redundant. HISTORICALLY - Yorkshire may have been the legitimate official county name for a 1000 years right up until 1967 however CLEVELAND predates it by a couple centuries and was in fact the first name relating to our specific area. CULTURALLY - While both sides of the Tees were in different counties geographically until 1967, they were always more akin to each other and still are. We evolved from a shared history. Our unique dialect mixing Yorkshire, Durham, Scouse, Irish and others being a clear indication of that we are an entity of our own. POLITICALLY - which is perhaps the most important of all as it relates to the present and future. If splitting Teesside down the river and returning us to Yorkshire and Durham promised great economic and cultural prosperity I would be all for it. In reality , it would mean we would be marginalised and off the map more than ever. It is logical sense and our only hope is for Teesside to unite across the board and stand up for itself. Plus North Yorkshire and Durham dont want us! RED REBEL2 you are bang on... "Our entire modern existance has been as a joint enterprise. We are an area with a shared history, culture, accent, economy and football team. The river unites us it doesn't divide us". ...any takers for the Tees Va***y ????? THIS THREAD END NOW!...fk wheres me valium --- Post edited by craig_pancrack on 27/10 12:52 ---

TeessideCleveland Posted on 27/10 18:22
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
Buffalo I used to think that but apparently USA did not invade to gain it's ownership

Link: Guantanamo

TeessideCleveland Posted on 27/10 18:25
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
'Splitting Teesside down the river and returning us to Yorkshire and Durham would mean we would be marginalised and off the map more than ever. It is logical sense and our only hope is for Teesside to unite across the board and stand up for itself. Plus North Yorkshire and Durham dont want us!' Agree with that

stump_hole_lover Posted on 27/10 18:45
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
Spot on Craig!! Our river unifies us the same way as a river unites the twin towns of Boda and Pest. Thats it!! Stockborobillcaraby!!

buffaloboro Posted on 27/10 20:20
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
TC , as far as I am aware , the Americans got a perputual lease n the land after the american-spanish war of 1898 . I think I am correct in saying that NO Cuban actually signed the deal. Mr Pan' ( who I still owe a pint of Yorkshires finest to when I am next in Saltburn ) - the name CLeveland relates to a set area NOT Middlesbrough, Stockton etc as you know. SO yes, it is correct to use it for Eston, etc but not the rest of that area. There is no denying that there was an economic link in the past ( that was larger in the 1920's - 1960's when there wasn't even this debate , let's be honest when was there a 'lets make a CLeveland COUnty' campaign ? --- Post edited by buffaloboro on 27/10 20:33 ---

ccole Posted on 27/10 20:23
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
I was Born in Durham, though I feel I have little in common with those who live in Sunlun, Peterlee, Leeds, York, etc. I feel a Teessider. Born and grew up on the banks of the tees.

TeessideCleveland Posted on 28/10 0:59
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
In that case Buffalo we have to get rid of any Yorkshire impulses and all stick together as one Teesside united not divided by the Tees I sincerely hope you enjoy (regardless of our differences of opinion)your next visit to what my wife's parents call Saltburn , Teesside(and that is true) When are you next in the UK?

redz69 Posted on 28/10 1:06
re: BOTH sides of the River types!
I bet pound to a penny that if Leeds were doing well we would half the talk of Yorkshire and half the shiite, poke it.