Can anyone shed any light on this?

[Plymouth Gull]

Now, before anyone says it, I know it's only Wikipedia, and I know anyone can edit it, but, this little detail caught my attention..

"The club are looking to buy the houses behind the away end and building an extension to the away end and also to acquire the school (Westlands) and build a bigger grandstand to increase the capacity to around 9,000."

Now, obviously we're redoing the Grandstand (without buying the school), but if that first line is correct, about buying those houses, would that mean improving the away end? I've heard nothing about any developments on that, and I know it's Wiki so it's most likely bullpoo, but I just thought I'd ask to see if anyone had heard anything relating to that..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torquay_United" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Also, hoping to get the Argyle thread up tonight

[united09]

I doubt its true Nick but you never know. I wouldn't of thought we would need to buy the houses anyway as there is a fair gap of land between the awayend and the houses that could be built on.

[stevegull]

Can never tell with wiki, but i doubt it's true. There would have been some kind of official line from the club.

Also remember reading on their once that Rowe-Turner spurned the advances of Juventus and AC Milan as he thought European football was beyond him...

[Plymouth Gull]

I too doubt it's true, but it just seemed like a strange thing to 'make up'. The ridiculous ones, like you say with Rowe Turner, are obvious but this one is quite subtle, which made me a little bit less sure.

[Dave]

To be honest Nick, if this is true i will eat my hat, and i dont have one, i dont think the club could buy the school even if it wanted to, or had enough money, add the cost of buying the houses behind to the cost of buying the school, and thats before you have paid for the ground extentions, nah this is wiki style joke methinks.

[Gullscorer]

I believe the elevation of any new building needs to comply with laws relating to the blocking of light from neighbouring properties.

[Glostergull]

I think if you do a bit of trawling in various archives in Bristol you will find that the Rovers board sanctioned the purchase of houses immediatly in the vicinity of their ground. The main reason was that when they let them out there was a stipulation in the contract that they could not object to any planning application Rovers made.
I did wonder if this contravened any civil rights but If this rumour is true and I do tend to treat Wiki as Rumour more often than not, it is likely that a plan to buy up houses backing onto the away end (which incidentaly includes our old house at no.77) it will have something to do with making sure that residents cannot object to any applications we put in. I think they will find that there is more than one of them that is owned by a landlord who lets them out as flats. no77 certainly is.
In my opinion it is more than likely a red herring. No doubt landed at Brixham.