They have been written about many times on SSC on how much we don't like them, but in your opinion which is the worst identikit stadium in the UK?

Here is the lineup:

http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/europe/united_kingdom/wales/swansea_stadium1.jpg

Swansea - Liberty Stadium

http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/europe/united_kingdom/wales/cardiff_city1.jpg

Cardiff - Cardiff City Stadium

http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/europe/united_kingdom/england/south_east/reading_madjeski2.jpg

Reading - Madjeski Stadium

http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/europe/united_kingdom/england/south_east/southampton_st_mary1.jpg

Southampton - St Mary's Stadium

http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/europe/united_kingdom/england/south_east/milton_keynes_dons2.jpg

Milton Keynes - MK Dons Stadium

http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/europe/united_kingdom/england/west_midlands/coventry_ricoh2.jpg

Coventry - Ricoh Arena

http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/europe/united_kingdom/england/west_midlands/stoke_britannia2.jpg

Stoke On Trent - Britannia Stadium

http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/europe/united_kingdom/england/east_midlands/derby_pride_park1.jpg

Derby - Pride Park

http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/europe/united_kingdom/england/east_midlands/leicester_walkers2.jpg

Leicester - Walkers Stadium

http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/europe/united_kingdom/england/yorkshire_humber/doncaster_keepmoat1.jpg

Doncaster - Keepmoat Stadium

http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/europe/united_kingdom/england/north_east/darlington_williamson1.jpg

Darlington - The Williamson Motors Stadium

http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/europe/united_kingdom/england/north_east/sunderland_light1.jpg

Sunderland - Stadium of Light

http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/europe/united_kingdom/england/north_east/middlesbrough_riverside1.jpg

Middelsbrough - Riverside Stadium

I tried to add a poll to this thread for each of the stadiums, but I didn't type quick enough and ran out of time. Anyway I look forward to hearing your responses.

Darlington or Leicester.

I dunno what people expect they were all built during the same era, it took the grounds of old years of piecemeal development to get their own identities and quirks!

worst identikit stadium

Isn't this an oxymoron?

I dunno what people expect they were all built during the same era, it took the grounds of old years of piecemeal development to get their own identities and quirks!

Very true, I suppose.
I would say Cardiff's Stadium, but I haven't been so can't really pass accurate judgement. But out of the ones i've been to it would definately be the Walkers.
Best was probably the Brittania.

Got to be Leicester, Southampton or Darlington, Darlo more because of the ridiculous contrast of capacity and actual attendance.

Sunderland's is actually a pretty impressive and imposing stadium that although built in the same era as the rest of those is a cut above due to it's sheer size and atmosphere (also it's the only one with two tiers behind the goal).

Definately not Sunderlands. It has a red brick facade, and with two tiers down one side and behind one of the goals, it is actually quite unique. Likewise MK Dons, which despite being my least favourite football club, do have a nice new stadium.

None of them will win any design awards, but for me, it's the out of town ones that are truly dire. Readings depresses me everytime I ever drive past. Darlingtons, Leicesters or Southamptons are pretty poor.

Cardiff's at least has one stand different (as does Reading and Cov) and little things like signage outside being bilingual gives a sense of place. It's location near to the old ground and traditional pubs also-for me-means it is undeserving of the award.

I'll also echo what was said earlier. These are all new stadia and as such start life looking pretty similar. The same can be said for many traditional grounds when they were built, typically with one covered grandstand, and three open terraces. As clubs succeed and fail, and developments occur around the grounds, they will each develop differences.

Anyway, I'll vote for Reading in this, but more based on location.

Definitely Leicester's as I have always said. With most of the others at least there are some slight differences in the stands, e.g. Derby's one stand with two tiers, Sunderlands two tiers, Reading's curverd corners at the top etc. But with Leicester's it basically one boring uniform stand around all four sides.

MK Don's is a quality ground and shouldn't really be included.. I have been to most of these and by far the worse in terms of quality is Rioch.. I hate all of these grounds but i don't mind the ones that haven't been moved to far from their original home or city centre location. Therefore Leicester is one of the best of the above.. My least favourite and one of the reasons i hate Reading so much is the (i can't even be bothered to spell it). As far as i'm concerned if i get a train to a town centre on a match day i shouldn't have to get a bus to a business park next to the motorway to get to the football ground...

I've only been to the Ricoh (Coventry) and Walkers (Leicester) of the list and i have to say they are both quite souless when you actually get to your seat - but Coventry's is at least more interesting from the air because of it's unique shape.

http://www.stadiumdb.com/images/stadiums/europe/england/coventry/ricoh-arena.jpg

An aside but my friend is a die hard Coventry fan and i always like to joke and ask him why they stuck a squash court on the side of it (it's a bit bigger than that obviuosly and has a casino etc in it, and no squash courts to my knowledge)

I've only been to the Ricoh (Coventry) and Walkers (Leicester) of the list and i have to say they are both quite souless when you actually get to your seat - but Coventry's is at least more interesting from the air because of it's unique shape.

http://www.stadiumdb.com/images/stadiums/europe/england/coventry/ricoh-arena.jpg

An aside but my friend is a die hard Coventry fan and i always like to joke and ask him why they stuck a squash court on the side of it (it's a bit bigger than that obviuosly and has a casino etc in it, and no squash courts to my knowledge)

I love the shape, gives the stadium an identity and makes the stadium stand out from the rest or the dull stadiums. The 'squash-court' (:lol:) also has an 8,000 seat music venue along with various conference facilities with a state-of-the-art gym, a hotel and the casino mentioned also (which is actually a very nice place to spend a night out).

For every new ground that gets built in this country, a little part of the game i grew up loving seems to die.

Yes, new stadia may make the clubs more money but i think overall its to the detriment of the paying fans enjoyment.

overall its to the detriment of the paying fans enjoyment.

Is this a joke. How many grounds did you visit in the 80's?

Some of the stadia listed on this thread may not be the most architecturally sophisticated or aesthetically pleasing, but in terms of facilities, view and general comfort they are far better than some of the over romanticised old shitholes that used to pass as football grounds.

maybe i am romanticising it a bit, as i've only visited the old style grounds in the last ten years or so.

But from a personal stand point i'd take an 'old' ground over a new build every time for getting a better atmosphere, and therefore enjoying my day out at the match more.
As has been said before, it's the setting and surroundings what can make a difference as well.

Guess it boils down to the different reasons what we go to the football for. For me, the banter and atmosphere can often be as big a factor as to enjoying the day as the actual football on display.

Shrewsbury Town? I guess it's too small to be on the list.

http://www.shrewsburytown.com/javaImages/62/9b/0,,10443~3316578,00.jpg

But at £10million for 10,000 seats it's probably the cheapest on the list (per seat). Plans are in place to fill in the corners if Shrewsbury get promoted to (the dizzying heights of) League One, which would bring the capacity up to about 12,500.

Shrewsbury Town? I guess it's too small to be on the list.

http://www.shrewsburytown.com/javaImages/62/9b/0,,10443~3316578,00.jpg

But at £10million for 10,000 seats it's probably the cheapest on the list (per seat). Plans are in place to fill in the corners if Shrewsbury get promoted to (the dizzying heights of) League One, which would bring the capacity up to about 12,500.

If you're going to bring in Shrewsbury you might as well mention Bournemouth and Colchester too - and of the three Colchester's is by far the worst new ground that I've been to.

* Edit - actually I think its probably the worst current ground I've been to full stop.

For every new ground that gets built in this country, a little part of the game i grew up loving seems to die.

Yes, new stadia may make the clubs more money but i think overall its to the detriment of the paying fans enjoyment.

Funny how all of the clubs are even worse off than they were before!! And the only reason they're all not going to the wall is because they're fleecing the loyal fans to pay for the debt..

Is this a joke. How many grounds did you visit in the 80's?

Some of the stadia listed on this thread may not be the most architecturally sophisticated or aesthetically pleasing, but in terms of facilities, view and general comfort they are far better than some of the over romanticised old shitholes that used to pass as football grounds.

Well put it like this.. I don't like going to any of these new ground whereas i did like going to the grounds that were there before.. Personally i'm only there to watch the game, not to have a nice beer or something to eat.. The difference nowadays is because you're paying £30+ you expect good facilities whereas when i used to pay a £10 i couldn't care less.

If you ask any Derby, Leicester, Southampton fan i think they will all tell you they preferred their previous ground and if you check the clubs bank balance i'd put money on that they are in miles worse positions now...

I acknowledge the need for a move, but I preferred going to Ninian Park far more than the Cardiff City stadium.

As such, the new stadium would be far enhanced with some terraced areas, although to be fair, Cardiff fans still stand in their thousands anyway.

Cardiff fans were lucky to have been able to keep terracing for so long while they were at Ninian Park anyway, it's a ridiculous ruling forcing teams to change their grounds (like the "temporary stand" debacle at the Priestfield stadium, which now sits there unused and empty. I believe that the addition of Safe Standing areas would turn these "soulless" bowls into something atleast interesting, and would surely help create a better atmosphere.

If you ask any Derby, Leicester, Southampton fan i think they will all tell you they preferred their previous ground and if you check the clubs bank balance i'd put money on that they are in miles worse positions now...

Yeah right - it's the cost of the stadia that's the problem, not overpaid and under-performing footballers. :ohno:

Pride Park Stadium was about £30m to build IIRC. Capacity is at least 15,000 more than the Baseball Ground. At £25 per head that makes £375,000 extra per game. So after just 80 games the ground is paid for (and I've not even mentioned the dreaded corporate facilities). OK I know I'm over-simplifying the cash flow situation, interest payments etc. but you get the idea.

As to whether I preferred the previous ground I'm not sure now. I think I'd prefer Pride Park Stadium if it wasn't for the dull design of Pride Park itself (the development area). From both an architectural and landscape point of view the surroundings are a big wasted opportunity. I much preferred walking down the terraced streets of Normanton. The Baseball Ground was a hole with some appalling lines of sight , but the atmosphere inside was magical.

elm park in reading, was a hole for visitors and brilliant for reading fans. but there is no way we would have seen a couple of years of premier league football at elm park. we would still be a 3rd/4th division club (and still could be. ahem) or worse still out of business. my biggest gripe with the madejski stadium is it must be futher away from a pub than any other teams ground.
besides lots of young fans don't remember elm park anyway. its been 10 years.

^^ hang about in 1995 in if the premier league wasn't reduced in side you would've been promoted second.

Old Trafford 1993

http://www39.homepage.villanova.edu/jong.lim/oldtrafford1993.jpg


Old Trafford 2010

http://www.sportsposterwarehouse.com/catImages/oldtrafford07gb-1.jpg


A few years of success and you never know, any one of those stadiums could have potential...



...but they can dream I guess! :lol:

^^ hang about in 1995 in if the premier league wasn't reduced in side you would've been promoted second.

you're right. but at the time there was talk of not being allowed to use elm park. using lofus road instead. getting promoted then would have really finished us.

like the "temporary stand" debacle at the Priestfield stadium, which now sits there unused and empty.

Just think, if the Albion had been tenants for a third season you could have had a proper stand there. Its very strange going in that temporary stand though as you can see the remains of the old terrace underneath - such a waste.

A few years of success and you never know, any one of those stadiums could have potential...

...to be a bigger identikit stadium?

The funny thing is, 15 years ago Old Trafford was the only club stadium in the country with a coherent masterplan, and every other ground was a hodge-podge of mismatched stands. Now identikit stadia are cropping up left, right and centre, and Old Trafford is unbalanced with mismatched stands. :lol:

It is exquisitely fugly.

I think either Darlington or Middlesbrough.

Darlington because of the ridiculous situation of having a 27,000 seater stadium for a team in the lowest league and historically isn't huge. But I can let them off because it's not the fans fault, and not really the clubs either, they just had an owner that was completely out of touch with reality.

Middlesbrough on the other hand couldn't draw fans to their ground even when they were in the Premiership. And Middlesbrough is a shithole.

Bowls just so happen to be the most effective stadium design for spectator viewing they just so happen to be the most common used.

I'd put some of these in the cheap section though

Pride Park
Darlington
Riverside

But MK Dons stadium and the Ricoh arena certainly dont deserve to be on this list.

What do you expect these league 2/3 clubs to do...hire Calatrava to design one for them?

Cardiff fans were lucky to have been able to keep terracing for so long while they were at Ninian Park anyway, it's a ridiculous ruling forcing teams to change their grounds (like the "temporary stand" debacle at the Priestfield stadium, which now sits there unused and empty.

The wobbly stand behind the goal isn't used any more? I can't say I'm surprised, it was a little disconcerting standing at the top of that thing!

Bowls just so happen to be the most effective stadium design for spectator viewing they just so happen to be the most common used.

I'd put some of these in the cheap section though

Pride Park
Darlington
Riverside


I've quite liked Pride Park when I've been there. Not the location, that's crap. But the stadium itself was alright and the Derby fans always fill it and make lots of noise.

Is this a joke. How many grounds did you visit in the 80's?

Some of the stadia listed on this thread may not be the most architecturally sophisticated or aesthetically pleasing, but in terms of facilities, view and general comfort they are far better than some of the over romanticised old shitholes that used to pass as football grounds.Indeed. At least none of the new grounds have killed supporters by the dozen...yet.

I can't comment on Pride Park, but the much loved Baseball Ground went down below the pitch giving at best a worm's eye view for those at the front. I miss terraces as much as the next misty-eyed romantic, but being 6 foot 4 I had the luxury of seeing most of the pitch and not caring about blocking the view of others who probably could only see half the game. And most who have travelled the country will have a flowing urine story (mine being at Birmingham City).

Some really bad old stadiums: The Den, Parkhead (crumbling wreck), Burnden Park (supermarket), Belle Vue, Griffin Park (poor view), Brammall Lane (cricket ground), and too many others to mention all of which have been or would be improved by well designed seating. Club owners must have had a really poor opinion of their paying customers.

Several of the teams I have followed as a child and adult have lost or sold their grounds to property developers. My guess is most at Gillingham, Cambridge(s) United and City, and Maidstone United would love one of those soulless bowls.

...like the "temporary stand" debacle at the Priestfield stadium, which now sits there unused and empty.
I was in the temporary stand for the first game of this season. Awful stand and the amenities are poor. But we weren't told to sit down at the back :) We lost 5-0 lol :(

Well I generally meant it's not used anymore for home fans, partially because we got relegated, but also because the upkeep, seperation of fans with stewarding and all that. Instead the Town Enders got moved to the Rainham end, and on certain games against specific teams it looks as if it's not open anyway!

My guess is most at Gillingham, Cambridge(s) United and City, and Maidstone United would love one of those soulless bowls.

In my opinion, the majority of Gills fans love the stadium we have now, the only negative aspect being the temporary stand (which is generally, the stand most non home fans see). The Amenities we have in the home ends are pretty terrific, the only downsides to where we are is the inability to park around, and the lack of future expansion. That and our dodgy chairman has sold the ground (to himself) and is most likely going to fleece us dry ala Rotherham, forcing us to move.

Comparing apples to oranges.

The demolished "stadiums" mentioned were barely legal structures, designed to be used as a pen for men for 2 hours a week. It cost a few pence and later a few pounds to get in. Columns doubled up as p*ss pots. They changed incredibly during their 100+ year histories.

You can't compare a modern stadium with at most 5-10 years of history designed to provide a modicum of comfort to that!

I go to the walkers stadium quite often and truth be told I really don't care what it looks like once I'm inside. There have been some incredible nights and a lot of dull ones and none of those memories involve the structure itself. I'm sure if LCFC spent several hundred million quid the setting could be more special but then we don't have that luxury. And I quite like the way the Walkers looks from the outside especially from the river.

I just hate the name "walkers stadium" that's all.

^^ big fan of the walkers too. a corner of it belongs to reading!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxW-Sxa3fTY

I'd say Leicester or MK Dons, but that is probably tainted by a dislike of their teams as much as anything else.
I started falling out of love with football when my team sold their own ground to become tenants at an almost identikit stadium some 6 or 7 years ago :-(

^^ big fan of the walkers too. a corner of it belongs to reading!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxW-Sxa3fTY
hhhaa I remember that game as well sat in the corner at opposite end of the ground :) good showing from the royals that day

deffinately the liberty,its just so F***in ugly ive been there many times with the rugby and the inside is just a mass of concrete,ive been to the keepmoat and i thought it was a great little ground perfect for the size of the club and its finances. Darlo is a joke tho, 1500 fans in a 30,000 seater arena what were they thinking.The atmosphere in the Ricoh isnt the best either to be fair its a bit to big for Cov although i do like the ground.

as bland as the walkers maybe in general, it does have some qualities that raise it above some of the others.

from a design point of view, at least we have a focus point on the outside, rather than just a block of concrete with some doors in it...

from the outside, yes it could have been better but, as you can see, the main function area at least is distinguishable:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f8/Walkers_stadium.jpg

deffinately the liberty,its just so F***in ugly ive been there many times with the rugby and the inside is just a mass of concrete,ive been to the keepmoat and i thought it was a great little ground perfect for the size of the club and its finances. Darlo is a joke tho, 1500 fans in a 30,000 seater arena what were they thinking.The atmosphere in the Ricoh isnt the best either to be fair its a bit to big for Cov although i do like the ground.

If you think the Liberty is the ugliest you either need to get out more or you need to renew your glasses ...or possibly you're an idiot ....
...OR all of the above.

If you think the Liberty is the ugliest you either need to get out more or you need to renew your glasses ...or possibly you're an idiot ....
...OR all of the above.

Swansea's ground on the inside is ugly, there's too much plain concrete on display, if it was covered with say cladding, paint or adverts would look do much nicer. The outside however is fairly nice

True.