What were the other New Wembley designs?

[easysurfer]

Does anybody remember if there were other designs proposed for our national stadium either in London or elsewhere? I can't remember seeing much competetion for Lord Fosters superb design. If you have any images of the other proposed national stadiums could you please post them. Obviously the Wembley they chose is the best but i'm interested to see what might have been. Thanks

[Madman]

Cant find a design comp for the stadium, there might not have been a proper one as Foster seems to have spent ages altering the design of the stadium after being chosen to design it...

http://www.ajplus.co.uk/images/reports/fullsize/AJNOV991814AM.JPG

Arch substituted for four-mast design

New Wembley Stadium, Wembly , Greater London
Date: 2000
Source: AJ

Foster and Partners spiked its four-mast design for Wembley Stadium for this week's planning application because it resembled a circus tent and lacked uniqueness, Lord Foster told the AJ this week.


The £475 million 90,000-seater scheme is now crowned with a steel 'triumphal arch', half the height of Canary Wharf. The new design, done with hok Lobb, was unveiled this week in a 14kg application to Brent planners. They will pore over nearly 3km of drawings - enough to cover a third of the Wembley pitch.


Lord Foster overhauled the design with his 153m-high rim of steel little more than a week after the original design was unveiled in late July. He said: 'The arch is much more about permanence and less associated with temporary structures like circus tents, or with other stadia around the world like Paris, Munich and Turin which all have masts. The arch is also more economic, using two-thirds the steel of the masts.'


The uprights formed a barrier between the ground and the famous 1km Wembley walkway that now leads to the concrete twin towers, said Foster. The masts would have interfered with views down the approach from three banqueting halls on the Wembley facade.


The stadium will still feature a removable steel and concrete platform that will rise 6m above the football pitch to contain a 400m running track. This would take six months to bolt together and cost around £20 million, lowering capacity to 68,000 spectators and involving adding more seats at the back of the stadium or reconfiguring lower tiers. The latter option is preferred because it will keep fans closer to the action.


The roof will not cover the pitch but can move back and forth to overhang seating areas around it. The stadium was acoustically designed and hemmed the pitch edge to capture the 'inimitable Wembley roar', said Foster. It is due for completion in 2003 and will include 145,000m2 of support space totalling the area of Canary Wharf tower. This will include 2000 wcs (more than any other building in Britain), 27 escalators, three banqueting halls for 5000 people, 400 seats for wheelchair users, 400 media positions and 478 food and drink shops.


Sport England has granted £120 million towards the scheme by Wembley National Stadium Ltd. Chairman Ken Bates said leading the initiative was like managing the England football team: 'People are happy to tell you what to do, but they don't want the job.' He defended the modest 3500 car-parking spaces, arguing they tied in with Government policy to encourage people to use public transport.


Meanwhile, England boss Kevin Keegan is reported to have objected to the masts because they looked like the Stade de France, Paris. One commentator at the press launch, covered by more than 10 TV crews and all the national dailies, said the scheme had swapped Millennium Dome-like masts for Millennium Wheel-like curved steel.

[carlspannoosh]

This is the only other proposed design I could find for Wembley, but there is another design Ive seen somewhere for an alternative Birmingham national stadium.
http://www.panstadia.com/vol6/62c-big.jpg

[Madman]

This is the only other proposed design I could find for Wembley, but there is another design Ive seen somewhere for an alternative Birmingham national stadium.
http://www.panstadia.com/vol6/62c-big.jpg

I think thats the original four mast scheme Foster designed for Wembley that the article above refers to.

[carlspannoosh]

It is indeed.
This is the Birmingham design I mentioned.
http://www.panstadia.com/vol8/82cov-big.jpg

[eddyk]

' can't remember seeing much competetion for Lord Fosters superb design'

Actually the 4 mast one was approved and was the one going to be build.

The Birmingham had a bid for the national stadium, and the plans were put on the shelf...then Foster came in with the stadium they're building now.

[JDRS]

I'm glad they built the arch. Looks much better than the two above designs.

[Peyre]

yep they picked the right one :)

[Scarecrow]

I remember one from around '95 that seemed to be covered in giant television screens, like Piccadilly Circus. Seemed a bit crap at the time too. :)

[easysurfer]

' can't remember seeing much competetion for Lord Fosters superb design'

Actually the 4 mast one was approved and was the one going to be build.

The Birmingham had a bid for the national stadium, and the plans were put on the shelf...then Foster came in with the stadium they're building now.

I'm glad they did change it. Was it foster who decided to alter it because he thought an arch would have a greater impact or did the FA ask him to come up with something better.
On another note do you think they could put a red light strip through the arch as well as the white one to represent England's colours; it would look a lot more colourful and luminous. What do you think?

[JDRS]

That's a good idea actually. Would certainly make more of an impact although from afar maybe white is more visisble than red.

[Butcher]

The arch looks so cool. Plus, it will actually be a visible part of the skyline.

[JDRS]

I heard that the arch will flash the colours of the team that scores. Not sure if it's a rumour though?

[Bachy Soletanche]

yep they picked the right one :)

Right design, wrong place though, rummble-rummble... etc...

[vertigosufferer]

I'm not even near Wembley, but even I know that Wembley was the only place, the New National Stadium should be.

I like the Arch, does this mean we have finally broke free from our love affair of the old Twin Towers?

[kebabmonster]

http://www.solihull-online.com/stadium.htm

[kebabmonster]

According to this Website, two bids (Wembley and Manchester) were shortlisted
out of 5, the other 3 being Birmingham, Sheffield and Bradford.

http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm199899/cmselect/cmcumeds/124/9041502.htm

[dronkula]

One of the reasons giving for switching the Masts with the Arch was that the (then) new Stade de France had masts on it as well.

So, we didn't want to copy the French and instead came up with something much better.

[WeasteDevil]

As far as I remember, the Manchester one was a scaled up City of Manchester Stadium with retractable seats over the running track, as at the time, the stadium was supposed to be a true national stadium, not simply a football stadium.

There were rumours that in a 100,000 seat configuration it was offered to United in exchange for OT in a similar way that COMS was offered to City in exchange for Maine Road. United told them where to go.

When Manchester lost out to London, the government did supply cash towards the building of COMS for the Commonwealth Games.

[Biosonic]

According to this Website, two bids (Wembley and Manchester) were shortlisted
out of 5, the other 3 being Birmingham, Sheffield and Bradford.

http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm199899/cmselect/cmcumeds/124/9041502.htm

I don't recall it being Manchester and London - I thought Manchester was excluded in the first round?

As I remember, Wembley was selected as the preferred site with Brum/NEC 2nd, but Wembley was told it had to submit more information on funding, design etc. They didn't in the time allowed and Birmingham was told to dust off its bid and prepare to submit. Then Wembley was given another extension of time and submitted a bid approx £300m more than the Birmingham one. The rest, as they say, is history.

Now I am not turning this into a whole "London gets everything" thread, but the conduct of all involved was farcical and underhand.

There should have been an architectural competition to come up with a stadium REGARDLESS of location, which would then be tailored to suit its site. There should have then been a competition to decide on the host city. The way it was done was such that if a city with a poorer site but better design (London) submitted a bid then it stood a chance of beting a better location but lesser design (Birmingham, Manchester, Sheffield).

Does the the new stadium have a running track? It was certainly in the design remit and Sport England gave a huge grant provided that there was to be a running track.

That said, I love the design and this will be the best stadium in the world - a real symbol for the UK, England and London. :)

I just object to the corruption of the FA and the skulduggery of those involved.

[Madman]

I think it was unrealistic to offer a competition for the stadium anywhere other than London.

[WeasteDevil]

I think it was unrealistic to offer a competition for the stadium anywhere other than London.

Why? It's supposed to be the national stadium, yet the majority of the country's population live over 100 miles from it, some over 200 miles from it. IMO it should have been built in a central location, not in the very South East corner of the country. Don't bother thinking of Newcastle fans or the like that may have to travel silly distances to get there on a cup final day though eh?

[kebabmonster]

The choice of London was the best. Though it's a trek, it's a day/weekend out.

What annoys me is that it was always going to be in London, no matter what. Why waste everyone's time and get other cities hopes up by having a national competition for the location though?

[vertigosufferer]

It should always have been London, but I think FA Cup Semi-Finals should be played at more mutually agreeable venue's to suit the traveling requirements of the fans involved.

We need to keep FA Cup Final day special, having the Semi-Finals played there, will take away the prestige a little.

[MoreOrLess]

Does the the new stadium have a running track? It was certainly in the design remit and Sport England gave a huge grant provided that there was to be a running track.

I just object to the corruption of the FA and the skulduggery of those involved.

It has the ability to add a raised platform covering some of the lower stands giving a 68,000 capacity.

The goverment actually comes out of the whole affair alot worse than the FA IMHO as we now know that Wembley would never have been a suitable stadium for the olympics due to the lack of space to construct other facilities around it. If they'd have gone with a typical athletics stadium design for Wembley we would now be left with a stadium in which a track thats never used would push the fans miles away from the action. Even a sliding stand type design would most likely have not produced the best views, look at the Stade De France in football mode.

http://sabin.ro/sabinnew/album94/poze0031.jpg

As things stand now the downsized olympic stadium will be the new national athletics stadium with I'd guess the raised track at Wembley only being used if London hosts a world athletics championship or commonwealth games(most likely some time before that happens anyway as I'd guess other cities will bid for those events now London has 2012).

[Biosonic]

So the redevelopment of Wembley gets to keep its grubby mitts on Sport England's grant because it is POSSIBLE that a running track be installed, even though the chances are it never will be. See what I mean?

I think I am in agreement with you MoreOrLess - the goverment were behind all of this and it's amazing how no-one's got the chop. Actually it's not amazing, the only way you seem to lose your job in this goverment is if you shag the secretary or actually speak out against 'official policy'...

I don't think London IS the obvious choice for the National Stadium, and I think Wembley is one of the worst places something like this could be housed - it is just so difficult to get to on matchdays (or any day for that matter).

I do believe the NEC was the better site - but then I would say that wouldn't I? ;)

There is an element of peeved-ness in what I say, but that was because London pipped us on the stadium and the Millennium Project (and we know what a cop-out that was). There was an expectation in Brum that if we didn't get one then we would get the other. And we got neither :(

[raswok15]

Not sure if the pic below was ever proposed officially - the design incorporates twin towers (I still prefer the new wembley arch design). Found the picture via google. Does anybody know more about it?
http://www.netpulse.co.uk/wembley(tour).jpg

[Rigadon]

The goverment actually comes out of the whole affair alot worse than the FA IMHO as we now know that Wembley would never have been a suitable stadium for the olympics due to the lack of space to construct other facilities around it.If they'd have gone with a typical athletics stadium design for Wembley we would now be left with a stadium in which a track thats never used would push the fans miles away from the action.


I agree with the second sentence but not the first. Wembley wll be better as a dedicated football stadium but they shoudl not have stolen the lottey money by claiming it would be multi purpose. The whole episode was appalling because of both the government and the FA.

[Peyre]

Right design, wrong place though, rummble-rummble... etc...

rubbish :)

let rip years of history out of the ground and move it to somewhere far less exciting.

[johnnypd]

Why? It's supposed to be the national stadium, yet the majority of the country's population live over 100 miles from it, some over 200 miles from it. IMO it should have been built in a central location, not in the very South East corner of the country. Don't bother thinking of Newcastle fans or the like that may have to travel silly distances to get there on a cup final day though eh?

due to better rail links such as the east coast mainline it is actually quicker to get from newcastle to london on the train than it is to get to birmingham.

[daveylad2]

The Bradford one.

http://www.bobrowski.co.uk/Images/Odsal/300ODSAL1.jpg
http://www.bobrowski.co.uk/PROJECT%20FILES/Stadia/Bradford.htm

[gorgu]

As a neutral I have to say the idea of having the English national stadium anywhere but Wembley is just preposterous, it is like moving Hampden to Edinburgh, there would be national outcry!

Actually I am all for demolishing both Murrayfield and Hampden and building a super stadium like you guys (and the Welsh) have, half way between Edinburgh and Glasgow.

But as with Wembley it will never happen all the traditionalists in this country would choke on their porridge at the thought!

[Peyre]

Birmingham is not easy to get to. London is the best connected city in the world, end of story.

[Zim Flyer]

As a neutral I have to say the idea of having the English national stadium anywhere but Wembley is just preposterous, it is like moving Hampden to Edinburgh, there would be national outcry!

Actually I am all for demolishing both Murrayfield and Hampden and building a super stadium like you guys (and the Welsh) have, half way between Edinburgh and Glasgow.

But as with Wembley it will never happen all the traditionalists in this country would choke on their porridge at the thought!

totaly agree.

[Zim Flyer]

So the redevelopment of Wembley gets to keep its grubby mitts on Sport England's grant because it is POSSIBLE that a running track be installed, even though the chances are it never will be. See what I mean?

I think I am in agreement with you MoreOrLess - the goverment were behind all of this and it's amazing how no-one's got the chop. Actually it's not amazing, the only way you seem to lose your job in this goverment is if you shag the secretary or actually speak out against 'official policy'...

I don't think London IS the obvious choice for the National Stadium, and I think Wembley is one of the worst places something like this could be housed - it is just so difficult to get to on matchdays (or any day for that matter).

I do believe the NEC was the better site - but then I would say that wouldn't I? ;)

There is an element of peeved-ness in what I say, but that was because London pipped us on the stadium and the Millennium Project (and we know what a cop-out that was). There was an expectation in Brum that if we didn't get one then we would get the other. And we got neither :(

not this old argument again, did you find it in an old drawer and dust the cobwebs of it :laugh:

[gothicform]

actually over half of englands population lives within 100 miles of london.

[eddyk]

There ya go then Gothic.


All they're looking at is the miles.

[vertigosufferer]

..also the masterplan for Wembley as a whole, is very enticing. It will be very connected and easy to get too, but more importantly in 10 years time, it will be a place you could quite easily spend a few hours in before the match, instead of adopting a quick-in-quick-out policy. It will take time though.

[WeasteDevil]

actually over half of englands population lives within 100 miles of london.

If it had been in Birmingham, then what would the percentage of the population living within 100 miles of it?

[Rigadon]

Birmingham is not easy to get to. London is the best connected city in the world, end of story.


The question is whether the NEC is better connected than Wembley and with its own airport and station on the WCML, it is. Not that I think thats the most important criteria.

[Biosonic]

actually over half of englands population lives within 100 miles of london.

In all fairness Gothicform, that doesn't mean anything. I am not sure of the proportion of the population that lives within 100 miles of Birmingham but it is pretty high, and the transport links to the Birmingham site are far superior to Wembley.

Over 50% of England's population may live within 100 miles of London, but how many can get to Wembley in 2 hours? You'd be hard pushed to get someone outside of London to get there in that time.

[lyonsdown]

In all fairness Gothicform, that doesn't mean anything. I am not sure of the proportion of the population that lives within 100 miles of Birmingham but it is pretty high, and the transport links to the Birmingham site are far superior to Wembley.

Over 50% of England's population may live within 100 miles of London, but how many can get to Wembley in 2 hours? You'd be hard pushed to get someone outside of London to get there in that time.

You can get from Birmingham to Wembley pretty quickly if you go by train (less than two hours), especially if the trains are going to stop at the new station they're building and I don't think it would take all that long from Manchester and Leeds either if you drive though I guess it would take a fair bit longer.

[U475 Foxtrot]

The A40 and North Circular are a nightmare when large events are on.

A friend of mine worked for HOK sport and the sums on money involved in this project have been ridiculous. Before work had even started on site project managers, structural engineers and architects were raping the project.

The best location would have been the NEC site bar none (which I kept pointing out to him and actually agreed with). It had support from the national clubs, supporters associations along with easy access from an international airport, the M1, M40, M42, M5, M6 and a regional train station. There are huge car parks by the NEC and Airport and the only problems I could see were if big games clashed with the Motor Show or Crufts (?)

However the money (700m?) to pay for the new Wembly stadium, infrastructure and conference/hotel complexes would only have been possible in London but I guess after what I’ve been told the proportion and costs of corporate seats vs supporters seats the FA don’t really give a fuck about the public.

Adam Crozier the then CEO made a hash of this and then left with his tail between his legs to become Consignia’s (sorry the Post Office) chief exec and close half the Post Offices in the country. What a cunt. If I ever meet him I’ll bite his cock off and spit it down his throat. He is a most despicable man who has inconvenienced and cost everyday people too much money, worry and time.

IMO Old Wembley should have been made the National Football Museum with corporate days where you could play on the hallowed turf while the National Stadium was at built at Bickenhill (which I believe was budgeted at £150m) for the benefit of the country rather than a select few.

[gothicform]

i know it doesnt mean anything bio, except it makes the claims about people living close to birmingham redundant. i agree the whole process was badly managed and ended up costing a lot more than it should

[ManchesterISwonderful]

i know it doesnt mean anything bio, except it makes the claims about people living close to birmingham redundant. i agree the whole


Because they do. And not everyone travels to matches via rail.

It should've been in Brum. End of.

[dgnr8]

Sunderland against Newcastle in one fa cup semi final, Middlesbrough and Darlington in the other (hypothetically). So not only do they all have to fuck off down to London for a bleedin' semi final, but then they've got to fuck off back down there for the final. Which blows the "day out in London" thing out of the water. You go to Wembley for a cup final, for the experience. You don't go for the penultimate game. Makes no sense whatsoever.

I'd be less critical of the decision to house it in London if the FA hadn't acted like money grabbing bastards by stipulating every semi final must be at Wembley (for what, 20 years?).

[Zim Flyer]

Sunderland against Newcastle in one fa cup semi final, Middlesbrough and Darlington in the other (hypothetically). So not only do they all have to fuck off down to London for a bleedin' semi final, but then they've got to fuck off back down there for the final. Which blows the "day out in London" thing out of the water. You go to Wembley for a cup final, for the experience. You don't go for the penultimate game. Makes no sense whatsoever.

I'd be less critical of the decision to house it in London if the FA hadn't acted like money grabbing bastards by stipulating every semi final must be at Wembley (for what, 20 years?).

I agree the Semi finals should be held at other grounds, just to make the FA Cup final day that much more magic.

Unfortunately I guess they have no choice considering the amount of money needed to build the New Wembly.

[dgnr8]

I'm upset they've gone all red with the seat colours. They should've had a blue middle tier. And "Wembley" written on't seats.

[terryfied]

Sunderland against Newcastle in one fa cup semi final, Middlesbrough and Darlington in the other (hypothetically). So not only do they all have to fuck off down to London for a bleedin' semi final, but then they've got to fuck off back down there for the final. Which blows the "day out in London" thing out of the water.

:applause:

You're spot on there, dgnr8.

[Sparks]

I'm upset they've gone all red with the seat colours. They should've had a blue middle tier. And "Wembley" written on't seats.

Agreed this was one of the original renderings, I don't know why they scrapped it. :bash:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v237/Sparkynufc/wembley_07_large.jpg

[easysurfer]

Won't they have, at least, wembley written on the seats? They need to break it up a bit with a different colour or maybe white instead of the blue.

[Dr Pepper]

It hasn't been mentioned here before but there was a bid to build the national football stadium here in Coventry. The bid was somewhat opportunistic, and I'm not sure how serious the council were, but it did have a few things in it favour. The council's case was a follows;

The proposed site is where Coventry City's new Ricoh Arena now stands. It was a 105 acre brownfield site, (Birmingham's proposal would have been on greenbelt), that already had planning permission for a new football stadium.

Due to land having already been purchased and planning permission granted a national stadium could have been built for £250m. Birmingham gave their costs as £324m.

Once given the go-ahead the stadium could have been ready by 2004.

18 million people live within a hours drive of Coventry because Coventry is minutes from connections to the M6, M5, M42, M1, M69, M45, M54 and M40. In fact the proposed site was just a Chris Waddle penalty from a junction of the M6.

The site apparently qualified for £37m of British and European regeneration funding. The Birmingham and Wembley sites didn't.

Coventry, Birmingham and East Midlands airports are with a 45 minute drive.

The site has a national rail line running through it on which a new station could have been built. The rail journey times to Euston are about an hour.

The site is within 30min drive from the proposed national football training centre in Burton on Trent.

No renders were ever made and the proposal was overlooked by more prominant ones from larger cities. However, as has been stated in these threads before, it does make sense to have an English National Stadium in the heart of England. Especially when a lot of time and money could have been saved.

[dom]

Those two figures exclude interest on the bank debt, the cost of wembley before debt is just under 400 million. the bonds are for around 800 million.

i will say this again. it is the national stadium, it is wembley, the home of football, the stadium should not have been built elsewhere. if the name 'wembley' didn't mean so much to football then there would be more of a case for moving it. but you don't see the italians, germans or french daring to move their national stadiums out of the capital city.

it'd be like moving the houses of parliament outside london!

[spud]

If it had been in Birmingham, then what would the percentage of the population living within 100 miles of it?

more than the percentage within 100 miles of london....i reckon upwards of 70%

[Gherkin]

No renders were ever made and the proposal was overlooked by more prominant ones from larger cities. However, as has been stated in these threads before, it does make sense to have an English National Stadium in the heart of England. Especially when a lot of time and money could have been saved.

Are you sure no renders were released? I can't find one but I remember it looked very similar to the Bradford proposal - very square shaped and glassy.

?

[Jack Rabbit Slim]

How on earth did u manage to drag up this thread???

[Dr Pepper]

You may be thinking of the renders for the original design of the Coventry City stadium. It was called Arena 2000. Relegation and general club mis-management put paid to it. The Ricoh Arena, built instead, is a much inferior design but at least we have a new 32,000 seat stadium.

[CharlieP]

if the name 'wembley' didn't mean so much to football then there would be more of a case for moving it. but you don't see the italians, germans or french daring to move their national stadiums out of the capital city.

The Italians and Germans don't have national stadia per se...

[LocksRocks]

I think the worst fact of the matter is so much money was given to Wembley PLC, I can only imagine all the value is in the name and the site without the existing stadium. To be fair the last time I visited Wembley it was a shambles and was over due to be knocked down. I don't really have a problem with a new national stadium being built in London, every week footaball fans travel the length and brenth of the country watching terrible games in the freezing cold, If you club makes it to the cup final it's a big day out, your over the moon.

I feel that if a 'National Stadium' had been built in Birmingham it would have had to compromise to having a running track and turn out being a below par football stadium like the what happened in Turin. It was always going to be built in London, there is no way they could have sold enough seats to fund the project eslewhere, I reckon when it is opened no one will mention a word of it's cost and just be over welmed by what a fantastic place it is.

[Its AlL gUUd]

^^ I agree, if it was anywhere else but London i think the stadium would've been below par.

[WeasteDevil]

What an absolutely stupid thing to say!

[Biosonic]

Hey!

Let's just remind ourselves that the original criteria for the National Stadium was that it was to be able to hold athletics events. But the corrupt, deceitful FA got rid of that, but kept hold of the grant they received from Sport England for the athletics track (£80m as I recall).

Let's take a nice close look at Wembley. Take away the arch and you have a fairly bog standard stadium. Yeah, the finishes to the changing rooms, conference facilities and corporate boxes are higher than the norm, and apparently there are plenty of toilets now, but architecturally the stadium is bland and boring. Norman Foster has lost his way in recent years and this stadium design epitomises that - big, bloated, uninteresting and overpriced.

All mouth and no trousers.

[majormystery]

Hey!

Let's just remind ourselves that the original criteria for the National Stadium was that it was to be able to hold athletics events. But the corrupt, deceitful FA got rid of that, but kept hold of the grant they received from Sport England for the athletics track (£80m as I recall).

Let's take a nice close look at Wembley. Take away the arch and you have a fairly bog standard stadium. Yeah, the finishes to the changing rooms, conference facilities and corporate boxes are higher than the norm, and apparently there are plenty of toilets now, but architecturally the stadium is bland and boring. Norman Foster has lost his way in recent years and this stadium design epitomises that - big, bloated, uninteresting and overpriced.

All mouth and no trousers.

But if it had been built in Birmingham you'd have said exactly the same about it right.

[cinosanap]

To be honest, he is right.
I thought it would have been something truly great. Something that will make it a step above other world stadiums. I can't say there is that much differenec in looks than say Porto, Arsenal and a few other teams grounds.

Hampden is the same. It looks a little different than a lot of stadiums from that time but they really ruined it on the inside. But atleast Wembley is getting government funding.

[Mo Rush]

As far as I know wembley stadium can accommodate a platformed athletics track, and those responsible for claiming the athletics grant should be responsible to pay the required amount for the athletics track when or if its needed in future.

[3SPIRES]

I remember when Coventry applied to get the national stadium. It was a no-goer from the start, the plan was for an 80,000 ground to be shared by Coventry City F.C. Could you imagine 15,000 people watching Cov v Southend in a 80,000 stadium - the atmosphere would be even worse than it is in the Ricoh!

[BaronVonChickenpants]

i thought the atmosphere at the Ricoh was pretty good when i went there for the opening game

[3SPIRES]

That was because it was the opening game. I think the problem with the atmosphere is down to the roofs being too high...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/coventry/content/images/2005/07/14/ricoh_july_gallery_01_470x300.jpg

I've heard the away fans will be moved into the corner next year which will improve the atmosphere.

[cinosanap]

I think it is best when roof slope downward a bit. That way it appears more closed.

[BaronVonChickenpants]

That was because it was the opening game. I think the problem with the atmosphere is down to the roofs being too high...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/coventry/content/images/2005/07/14/ricoh_july_gallery_01_470x300.jpg

I've heard the away fans will be moved into the corner next year which will improve the atmosphere.


well if they can generate a good atmosphere once,they can do it again....nothing to do witht he design of the staduim..its down to the people in it...i like the high roof..gives the place a light airy feel...this has to be my favourite of all the modern stadiums i have visited..and a lot better than Highfield Road

[Salif]

Those two figures exclude interest on the bank debt, the cost of wembley before debt is just under 400 million. the bonds are for around 800 million.

i will say this again. it is the national stadium, it is wembley, the home of football, the stadium should not have been built elsewhere. if the name 'wembley' didn't mean so much to football then there would be more of a case for moving it. but you don't see the italians, germans or french daring to move their national stadiums out of the capital city.

it'd be like moving the houses of parliament outside london!

Italy and Germany do not have a national stadium and the French whilst remaining in Paris moved from their traditional home of the Parc des Princes to a new site at Saint-Denis (and didn't they grace it well!).

If historical reasons are behind locating the new national stadium at Wembley then that is wrong. Sounds more like being stuck in the past, sometimes it's time to move on to something else.

The costs have risen by an astronomical amount eating up money that was otherwise intended for grassroots projects in England. No coincidence that the proposed national football academy near Burton has since been scrapped. All very well having a nice new stadium but it's a shame we can't produce the players needed to grace it.

I hate to say it but the name Wembley does not mean that much to anyone, any special meaning behind the name is now just a myth. Sadly it's special meaning has been lost in a tide of poor quality football and a run down area of North West London. Infact if anything the name Wembley used to spur opposition national sides to perform better when playing there against England.

There is nothing wrong in locating national institutions outside of London, I'm not saying I agree nor disagree with Wembley stadium but let's not kid ourselves that London is the only place in the UK where such 'icons' can be built.

And why do we need a national stadium anyway?

Few countries have a national stadium and prefer to spread matches amongst other stadiums. As we have done in recent years, this has been quite a success giving people who wouldn't otherwise have the time & money the chance to see their national side play.

Having visited Wembley recently I really hope they plan to rebuild the entire surrounding area real soon btw.

[Mo Rush]

Italy and Germany do not have a national stadium and the French whilst remaining in Paris moved from their traditional home of the Parc des Princes to a new site at Saint-Denis (and didn't they grace it well!).

If historical reasons are behind locating the new national stadium at Wembley then that is wrong. Sounds more like being stuck in the past, sometimes it's time to move on to something else.

The costs have risen by an astronomical amount eating up money that was otherwise intended for grassroots projects in England. No coincidence that the proposed national football academy near Burton has since been scrapped. All very well having a nice new stadium but it's a shame we can't produce the players needed to grace it.

I hate to say it but the name Wembley does not mean that much to anyone, any special meaning behind the name is now just a myth. Sadly it's special meaning has been lost in a tide of poor quality football and a run down area of North West London. Infact if anything the name Wembley used to spur opposition national sides to perform better when playing there against England.

There is nothing wrong in locating national institutions outside of London, I'm not saying I agree nor disagree with Wembley stadium but let's not kid ourselves that London is the only place in the UK where such 'icons' can be built.

And why do we need a national stadium anyway?

Few countries have a national stadium and prefer to spread matches amongst other stadiums. As we have done in recent years, this has been quite a success giving people who wouldn't otherwise have the time & money the chance to see their national side play.

Having visited Wembley recently I really hope they plan to rebuild the entire surrounding area real soon btw.

what is the final cost of wembley standing at for now?

[Salif]

what is the final cost of wembley standing at for now?

£757 million

http://www.wembleystadium.com/ask_wembley.htm

Whilst it does say some of that's gone on transport infrastructure and that the stadium will operate at a profit that is of little relevance to grassroots football in this country which has fallen even further behind our European neighbours.

[Mo Rush]

£757 million

http://www.wembleystadium.com/ask_wembley.htm

Whilst it does say some of that's gone on transport infrastructure and that the stadium will operate at a profit that is of little relevance to grassroots football in this country which has fallen even further behind our European neighbours.

ouch. that is enough to pay for new and upgraded stadia for the 2010 world cup. construction costs are lower in south africa but still....thats R10.35 billion south africa is spending about R8.5 billion, =5 new and 5 upgraded stadia

[Salif]

ouch. that is enough to pay for new and upgraded stadia for the 2010 world cup. construction costs are lower in south africa but still....thats R10.35 billion south africa is spending about R8.5 billion, =5 new and 5 upgraded stadia

I am led to believe the total cost for the upgrading and building of stadiums for the recent 2006 World Cup in Germany has a price tag of not too much higher then the Wembley figure.

[high_flyer]

Well its built now, we can't deconstruct it and recoup the money, so lets just move on and enjoy it!! People do like to pick over old bones

[Salif]

Well its built now, we can't deconstruct it and recoup the money, so lets just move on and enjoy it!! People do like to pick over old bones

Heaven forbid people should want to talk about things.

[eddyk]

Who cares if it would have cost a trillion.
What dif does it make?

[Salif]

Who cares if it would have cost a trillion.
What dif does it make?

£999,999,999,243,000,000

[majormystery]

Sorry Salif. Its generally accepted a trillion pounds is £1,000,000,000,000.
So the difference is really £999,243,000,000.

[eddyk]

I see I have made my point.

[high_flyer]

Heaven forbid people should want to talk about things.

Look there's talking about things, and I am all for debating decisions made by "experts, the government etc", but then it just gets pointless because at the end of the day thats all you can do about it now, talk, as the money has been spent, and a wonderful stadium has been constructed (finally)

Yes it probably was too expensive, yes it shouldn't have taken so long, but I'm sure (well hope) everyone involved has learnt lessons from this, and hope not to make the same mistakes again.

[-TD-]

The plan for Coventry's stadium was when we were in the Premiership. And maybe it was an outside shot seeing as Coventry would never be chosen after Brum and London. Also, you can't say the atmosphere was rubbish when you are only there for the odd matches. By the way, we are averaging just below 20,000 this year, which is high for a Div1 team.

[El Paulo]

Sorry Salif. Its generally accepted a trillion pounds is £1,000,000,000,000.
So the difference is really £999,243,000,000.

This is somewhat missing the point - I'd like to ask for what reasons the Wembley site was chosen in the first place??

IMHO the decision wasn't made for reasons of affordability, aesthetics, flexibility, accessibility, weight of public opinion...

If that's the case (and I'm just raising the question), could it SIMPLY have been because of Wembley's tradition, history etc, etc? Because if that was the case then why bother having a competition for a National Stadium in the first place? They could have saved everyone else the trouble and just had a redesigning competition.

I also can't help thinking what would have happened to that part of London if the stadium had moved - it would now be a ghost town - thank God for the FA for doing the councils' job for them.

[BaronVonChickenpants]

This is somewhat missing the point - I'd like to ask for what reasons the Wembley site was chosen in the first place??

IMHO the decision wasn't made for reasons of affordability, aesthetics, flexibility, accessibility, weight of public opinion...

If that's the case (and I'm just raising the question), could it SIMPLY have been because of Wembley's tradition, history etc, etc? Because if that was the case then why bother having a competition for a National Stadium in the first place? They could have saved everyone else the trouble and just had a redesigning competition.

I also can't help thinking what would have happened to that part of London if the stadium had moved - it would now be a ghost town - thank God for the FA for doing the councils' job for them.

From somebody who lives in that part of the worls,number 1,it would not be a ghost-town without the staduim,the place has survived perfectly well in the years the staduim has been shut
2)one of the reasons it was chosen is that it has, excellent public transport links,especially in an age where people are enouraged to use public transport and not rely on the car....2 rail lines,3 tube lines,2 of which interlink with mainline services....3 stations all very close to the staduim

[El Paulo]

From somebody who lives in that part of the worls,number 1,it would not be a ghost-town without the staduim,the place has survived perfectly well in the years the staduim has been shut
2)one of the reasons it was chosen is that it has, excellent public transport links,especially in an age where people are enouraged to use public transport and not rely on the car....2 rail lines,3 tube lines,2 of which interlink with mainline services....3 stations all very close to the staduim

I apologise for point number 1, it was low! I am rightly rebuked!

However, it was only closed and with a view to it being reopened. That must have been some encouragement to local businesses etc. Having the national stadium on your doorstep (even one in renovation) MUST do something for the local economy. As regards the public transport - it's great public transport... if your travelling from within London. Most people have got to get to London first.
On another point, if the links were so great, why was improvement of local transport links made such a big part of the bid - and the FA themselves insisted that infastructure be improved, did they not?

But the question I wanted an answer to was what reason (other than Wembley's history and tradition) was this site chosen for the national stadium in the first place? What other merit does it have? :)

[BaronVonChickenpants]

I apologise for point number 1, it was low! I am rightly rebuked!

However, it was only closed and with a view to it being reopened. That must have been some encouragement to local businesses etc. Having the national stadium on your doorstep (even one in renovation) MUST do something for the local economy. As regards the public transport - it's great public transport... if your travelling from within London. Most people have got to get to London first.
On another point, if the links were so great, why was improvement of local transport links made such a big part of the bid - and the FA themselves insisted that infastructure be improved, did they not?

But the question I wanted an answer to was what reason (other than Wembley's history and tradition) was this site chosen for the national stadium in the first place? What other merit does it have? :)


i don't think the prospect of a new staduim is enough to keep small business's going for 6 years
as for public transport,as i said,there are two mainline services that go right past the staduim......the Chiltern line,which is an excellent line,goes to the Midlands...while the silverlink Metro links up with the main line coming out of Euston,which serves the north
the Metropolitain line goes right out into Buckinghamshire,which stops at Wembley
the alternative is to drive down to a place like Amersham,park up,get on the Met line,and at Wembley in under 20 mins

[El Paulo]

i don't think the prospect of a new staduim is enough to keep small business's going for 6 years
as for public transport,as i said,there are two mainline services that go right past the staduim......the Chiltern line,which is an excellent line,goes to the Midlands...while the silverlink Metro links up with the main line coming out of Euston,which serves the north
the Metropolitain line goes right out into Buckinghamshire,which stops at Wembley
the alternative is to drive down to a place like Amersham,park up,get on the Met line,and at Wembley in under 20 mins

So there's a back-route to Moor St/Snow Hill on the Chilton, which requires a change in Birmingham (unless your travelling from Birmingham) and a line that serves "The North", but you've got to get a connection before you can take advantage of it. That's one direct line that serves Wembley for train passengers from the whole of "The North" (except for specials).
It can't have been because of these great transport links that Wembley was chosen to host the national stadium?

But this isn't really the question I wanted answering, it was this one...
what reason (other than Wembley's history and tradition) was this site chosen for the national stadium in the first place? What other merit does it have?

I know the decision is long gone, but I honestly cannot see another reason! For matters of balence - the NEC would probably not have been much better than Wembely because the roads get pretty snarled up round there at the best of times - but if it was chosen then maybe improvements would have been made in the transport links there instead of the poor situation we have at the moment.

[BaronVonChickenpants]

So there's a back-route to Moor St/Snow Hill on the Chilton, which requires a change in Birmingham (unless your travelling from Birmingham) and a line that serves "The North", but you've got to get a connection before you can take advantage of it. That's one direct line that serves Wembley for train passengers from the whole of "The North" (except for specials).
It can't have been because of these great transport links that Wembley was chosen to host the national stadium?

But this isn't really the question I wanted answering, it was this one...


I know the decision is long gone, but I honestly cannot see another reason! For matters of balence - the NEC would probably not have been much better than Wembely because the roads get pretty snarled up round there at the best of times - but if it was chosen then maybe improvements would have been made in the transport links there instead of the poor situation we have at the moment.



well,i'm not sure we know,or if the reason behind the decision wAS made public
perhaps,like you suggested,it was to help re-generate an area that needed it,the design of the staduim may have been prefered(from what i saw of the B'ham design,they got that right)
and.or perhaps they decided that the NEC site had enough going on there as it was,plus the fact that Brum got the NIA and the ICC
And who knows if the NEC site could handle 90k all turning up at once,like football crowds do,unlike people going to exhibitions who tend to turn up and go home in dribs and drabs.I'd hate to be at that station just after the final whistle blew(is one station enough for a staduim of this size?),and heaven knows what the traffic would be like(its bad enough at the best of times)
the fact that Wembley had been around for 80 odd years may have swung it,we know its not perfect,but it works(sort of)
On paper,the NEC ticks all the right boxes,mainline station,international airport,motorway on its doorstep....i wonderif one day,another large staduim is built on that site...where are Birmingham City thinking of building that new sliding roof staduim?

[freeluas]

What has all this got to do with 'The other Wembley plans'' ?

[El Paulo]

well,i'm not sure we know,or if the reason behind the decision wAS made public
perhaps,like you suggested,it was to help re-generate an area that needed it,the design of the staduim may have been prefered(from what i saw of the B'ham design,they got that right)
and.or perhaps they decided that the NEC site had enough going on there as it was,plus the fact that Brum got the NIA and the ICC
And who knows if the NEC site could handle 90k all turning up at once,like football crowds do,unlike people going to exhibitions who tend to turn up and go home in dribs and drabs.I'd hate to be at that station just after the final whistle blew(is one station enough for a staduim of this size?),and heaven knows what the traffic would be like(its bad enough at the best of times)
the fact that Wembley had been around for 80 odd years may have swung it,we know its not perfect,but it works(sort of)
On paper,the NEC ticks all the right boxes,mainline station,international airport,motorway on its doorstep....i wonderif one day,another large staduim is built on that site...where are Birmingham City thinking of building that new sliding roof staduim?

I would have loved to have seen the stadium in the midlands but seeing Wembley in the flesh is getting the juices flowing now, and hey, it's a damn good design - though I'm still a bit bitter!!!
I think what a stadium could have brought to Birmingham would have been a metro extension out to the airport and maybe even on to Coventry, they might even have considered four-tracking the West Coast Mainline through the midlands, they were suggesting reopening some other lines, and maybe built another runway. But not to be! Ironically, those things are the very things that I believe Brum desperately needs and a stadium could have delivered that indirectly.

Being a Blues fan, I really liked the plans for the Eastside stadium but that design lost out because we weren't shortlisted for a Super Casino. O well.

Well Baron (love the name by the way!), maybe all I needed was a bit of therapy - having a patriotic heart an' all - they say talking is healthy and I do feel a lot better! :)

[El Paulo]

What has all this got to do with 'The other Wembley plans'' ?

Feel free, freeluas, to get us back on track. :)

[BaronVonChickenpants]

What has all this got to do with 'The other Wembley plans'' ?


whats this got to do with you?

[BaronVonChickenpants]

I would have loved to have seen the stadium in the midlands but seeing Wembley in the flesh is getting the juices flowing now, and hey, it's a damn good design - though I'm still a bit bitter!!!
I think what a stadium could have brought to Birmingham would have been a metro extension out to the airport and maybe even on to Coventry, they might even have considered four-tracking the West Coast Mainline through the midlands, they were suggesting reopening some other lines, and maybe built another runway. But not to be! Ironically, those things are the very things that I believe Brum desperately needs and a stadium could have delivered that indirectly.

Being a Blues fan, I really liked the plans for the Eastside stadium but that design lost out because we weren't shortlisted for a Super Casino. O well.

Well Baron (love the name by the way!), maybe all I needed was a bit of therapy - having a patriotic heart an' all - they say talking is healthy and I do feel a lot better! :)


oh dear,your a blues fan?glad you didn't mention Saturdays score.....wanted to go to St andrews(have never been)but got stuck with my family boxing day
enjoy the Prem....promotion looks a cert

[El Paulo]

oh dear,your a blues fan?glad you didn't mention Saturdays score.....wanted to go to St andrews(have never been)but got stuck with my family boxing day
enjoy the Prem....promotion looks a cert

You said the "P" word - it's not passed my lips this season!

One game doesn't make a season though, so I'm not going to "rub it in" - QPR are a proper football club IMO. All the best in the coming months by the way. :okay:

[BaronVonChickenpants]

You said the "P" word - it's not passed my lips this season!

One game doesn't make a season though, so I'm not going to "rub it in" - QPR are a proper football club IMO. All the best in the coming months by the way. :okay:



all the best to you too.......can you sell us DJ Campbell as well?

[El Paulo]

all the best to you too.......can you sell us DJ Campbell as well?

Yeh, take him! From what I hear, Steve Bruce has got the crazy idea that he needs another striker in January :ohno: so there maybe a few going spare at St Andrew's soon. We are in more need of a defender if Upson goes :bash:

Anyway, I'm feeling a bit edgy - freeluas might be on our case again! Happy New Year!

[embe]

If you need a new striker, we've got a youngster called Mark Nygaard. Absolutely superb, high goal scoring record. You can have him for a million :wink:

[BaronVonChickenpants]

If you need a new striker, we've got a youngster called Mark Nygaard. Absolutely superb, high goal scoring record. You can have him for a million :wink:


or even Stefan Moore...very promising

[freeluas]

The chances of Birmingham playing at Wembley must be what? xx to 1. is that fucking stadium finished yet?

[El Paulo]

The chances of Birmingham playing at Wembley must be what? xx to 1.

Tell me something I don't know! ;)