OFFICIAL- next four home games at the Emirates are sold-out.

12/11 Arsenal v Liverpool
18/11 Arsenal v Newcastle
21/11 Arsenal v Hamburg
02/12 Arsenal v Tottenham (foregone conclusion really)

Now, who ever said that we would never fill our stadium??

from bbc sport > arsenal:

PREMIERSHIP GATES
Total: 300,007
Average: 60,001
Highest: 60,047 Arsenal 1-1 Everton (28 Oct)
Lowest: 59,912 Arsenal 3-0 Sheff Utd (23 Sep)

good to see its over the 60,000 mark

Their devoting the top tier to trophies won.

Second to "Arsenal" Banners.

And the bottom to sponsors - :ohno:

Their devoting the top tier to trophies won.

Second to "Arsenal" Banners.

And the bottom to sponsors - :ohno:

Is this the exposed concrete tier ends you're talking about?
The sooner something is done about them the better, they really affect the aesthetics of the stadium.

Subway Loyal? Or just unsold seats?

http://img93.imageshack.us/img93/3143/dsc00576xq9.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Subway Loyal? Or just unsold seats?

http://img93.imageshack.us/img93/3143/dsc00576xq9.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

:lol:

In North London travelling to and from a match is a bastard! A lot people leave early but because traffic and ques at the stations is really bad. I heard it wasn't to impressive when they had Highbury.

:lol:

In North London travelling to and from a match is a bastard! A lot people leave early but because traffic and ques at the stations is really bad. I heard it wasn't to impressive when they had Highbury.

Holloway road station needs to be modified so the west side takes its share of the crowd. The roads on the east side of the stadium are horrendous what with Arsenal and Finsbury Park station being there and only one small road connecting them. Also, the North bridge has quite a few stairs which makes it even slower.

Having said all that, those fans should be ashamed of themselves for leaving before the match has ended!

Is this the exposed concrete tier ends you're talking about?
The sooner something is done about them the better, they really affect the aesthetics of the stadium.

that is also for me the only problem i have with this otherwise beautiful stadium

:lol:

In North London travelling to and from a match is a bastard! A lot people leave early but because traffic and ques at the stations is really bad. I heard it wasn't to impressive when they had Highbury.
I fucking hate fans who do that. Loads do it at United. I've never left early for any reason. I don't get it, you pay to watch the match so why leave early. The traffic will be bad anyway and what's the rush. Its 7pm on a Sunday, where's there to go?

Apparently there was something in the matchday programme that said the concrete would be covered up by the end of the year.

I fucking hate fans who do that. Loads do it at United. I've never left early for any reason. I don't get it, you pay to watch the match so why leave early. The traffic will be bad anyway and what's the rush. Its 7pm on a Sunday, where's there to go?

Over here they are called part time fans. In our CFL stadium the remaining fans often hurl very nasty comments in the direction of leaving fans. Even fellow supporters.

I fucking hate fans who do that. Loads do it at United. I've never left early for any reason. I don't get it, you pay to watch the match so why leave early. The traffic will be bad anyway and what's the rush. Its 7pm on a Sunday, where's there to go?

The worst thing is, whereas they used to leave early if the result was a foregone conclusion, now they leave when it's a tense 1-1 scoreline. The best goals to celebrate are usually the ones that come in the last few minutes. Their loss. I'm sure if clubs sold 85 minute tickets, those people would buy them.

so its the 92nd minute and they are 3-nil up...and they left,,,the b@stards
happens everywhere

I have been to 7 matches at Ashburton this season, and I can safely say it is a bastard to get out of if you wait till the end. It's not nice when it's cold like it is at the moment. Obviously I stay if it's close. Like I did when we played Everton and it was 1-1. However against Porto, Liverpool and Watford when the game was buried then fuck it, get out of there before the rush.

Saw an interesting blurb in the local rag here in Melbourne about the way stadiums in England deal with lack of sunlight into stadiums such as Arsenal and Liverpool.

By the looks of the pictures they used these large hydroponic lamps that sit about 3 metres above the surface to help the turf grow due to the lack of natural sunlight.

Apparently English stadiums are work leaders in the technology.

Saw an interesting blurb in the local rag here in Melbourne about the way stadiums in England deal with lack of sunlight into stadiums such as Arsenal and Liverpool.

By the looks of the pictures they used these large hydroponic lamps that sit about 3 metres above the surface to help the turf grow due to the lack of natural sunlight.

Apparently English stadiums are work leaders in the technology.

the Emirates has also been designed in such a way so that maximum sunlight can get to the pitch...this explains the low sloping roof..as requsted by Arsene Wenger himself
the pitches at most Prem league grounds now is of a very high standard

Most, but not all

http://img214.imageshack.us/img214/9482/sflarg13mcxp6.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

^^ Thats Old News, but dont expect any less from you

Saw an interesting blurb in the local rag here in Melbourne about the way stadiums in England deal with lack of sunlight into stadiums such as Arsenal and Liverpool.

By the looks of the pictures they used these large hydroponic lamps that sit about 3 metres above the surface to help the turf grow due to the lack of natural sunlight.

Apparently English stadiums are work leaders in the technology.Nope, they copied it from PSV Eindhoven.

How well does it work?

^^ Fabulously

As I was watchin the Match of The Day highlights of the GUNNERS beating Spurs, I noticed Arsenal have covered up the bare concrete inside the stadium, post some pictures if you got any....

I fucking hate fans who do that. Loads do it at United. I've never left early for any reason. I don't get it, you pay to watch the match so why leave early. The traffic will be bad anyway and what's the rush. Its 7pm on a Sunday, where's there to go?


Ditto. Don't come crying to me if you miss a late goal, you only have yourself to blame. Still, I've always felt United fans should be more keen to hang on as we're a bit better served in that regard, eh? Doesn't always happen, though.

Why the hell have they gone to the trouble of building a new stadium and seemingly done nothing to improve the congestion of dealing with another 22,000 people? You can 'upgrade' Arsenal Tube station all you like (although it's not clear how and being under ground, it wouldn't be cheap) but that's not going to handle all the extra traffic is it?

For a development that sits at the apex of two train lines, what was wrong with a proper bespoke rail station? Surely this would enable some sort of park-and-ride or other mass transit scheme much more effectively. They've done it at Wembley and it's been kind of used at Old Trafford over the years.

Either it's happening and is both ineffectual and not stated above or it's simple opportunity missed. See below to get an idea how easy it could be if the collective will was there.

http://www.arsenal.com/images/wallpapers/emirateswallpaper3_1280.jpg

As I was watchin the Match of The Day highlights of the GUNNERS beating Spurs, I noticed Arsenal have covered up the bare concrete inside the stadium, post some pictures if you got any....

http://cache.gettyimages.com/xc/72701000.jpg?v=1&c=MS_GINS&k=2&d=8AF8AF6A335E5B08C2CE892C5C7553AC

http://cache.gettyimages.com/xc/72700879.jpg?v=1&c=MS_GINS&k=2&d=8AF8AF6A335E5B085B9C3A21A72E136A

http://cache.gettyimages.com/xc/72701000.jpg?v=1&c=MS_GINS&k=2&d=8AF8AF6A335E5B08C2CE892C5C7553AC

http://cache.gettyimages.com/xc/72700879.jpg?v=1&c=MS_GINS&k=2&d=8AF8AF6A335E5B085B9C3A21A72E136A

Anyone got a pic of what really happaned that day?

i.e......

Robert Van Pervie isa
Cheating c***, cheating c***, cheating c***
Cheating c***, cheating c***, cheating c***
CHEATING C***!

^^ you deserved to lose no matter what you say, and this is a stadium thread stop bringing it down again.

^^ you deserved to lose no matter what you say, and this is a stadium thread stop bringing it down again.

Yep, Graham Poll deserved to win. I have to admit you're right so I'll stop.

http://cache.gettyimages.com/xc/72701000.jpg?v=1&c=MS_GINS&k=2&d=8AF8AF6A335E5B08C2CE892C5C7553AC

http://cache.gettyimages.com/xc/72700879.jpg?v=1&c=MS_GINS&k=2&d=8AF8AF6A335E5B085B9C3A21A72E136A

looks much better now ..all it needs is The old Clock in there to give it a nice touch

Anyone got a pic of what really happaned that day?

i.e......

Robert Van Pervie is a..

i liked Berbatovs fly

Yep, Graham Poll deserved to win. I have to admit you're right so I'll stop.

first goal was onside(check the new offside rule)
RVP was hacked down, stonewall penalty
the second was maybe not penalty, but tackling from behind inside the box:ohno: ?

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20060703/ai_n16513318

first goal was onside(check the new offside rule)
RVP was hacked down, stonewall penalty
the second was maybe not penalty, but tackling from behind inside the box:ohno: ?

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_20060703/ai_n16513318

He handled before he was fouled. A free kick should've been given to Tottenham. I didn't say the first goal was offside I just think that Poll was apolling. Also Chimbonda made contact with the ball before Rosicky, and I didn't need a replay to show that, the ball went in a different direction straight after he went in.

To those who complan, it's a North London Derby. Once you know what it's about then you'll where I'm coming from. Anyway, I think I've said enough.

I think some of the major decisions did go our way, although two offside decisions when ade went through one on one with the keeper were wrong.
Anyway here are some of those pics of the stadium when the banners are up.

http://static.flickr.com/121/312983013_2681ae8fe7_b.jpg

http://static.flickr.com/104/312985556_0428eb99d0_b.jpg

http://static.flickr.com/108/312785244_6008b35818_b.jpg

http://static.flickr.com/104/312788482_4b219bd66b_b.jpg

http://static.flickr.com/104/312793934_76aa974ba3_b.jpg

http://static.flickr.com/104/304383234_e6b91d7947_b.jpg

How many rows are there in that bottom tier? Also how many on the top tier at the corners (smallest) and mid tiers (largest parts)?

The red banners look great, are they there to stay?

nice pics. looks much better now.

nice pics. looks much better now.

i'll second that it was the only thing i didnt like about this stadium but its a major improvement

Whats happening with Highbury? Will it be torn down?

Whats happening with Highbury? Will it be torn down?

Its going to be converted into flats retaining the original art deco stands & replacing the newer stands with a garden where the pitch is.

Whats happening with Highbury? Will it be torn down?

Check out the website
http://www.thestadium-highbury.com/stadium_main.htm

Hehe cool. :) I wonder how many Gunners fans will buy apartments in that?

those are some amazing shots up there

and how clever to put their acheivements..lol we're so gud that they ran out of space!!!

i kno this is off topic but who has an arsenal top and wat name is on the back??

I have. I got Rosicky on the back of mine. :)

im gonna get a rosicky shirt too, I wanted to get baptista but i dont know he could leave.

Does anybody else like the yellow away kit better than the home???

im gonna get a rosicky shirt too, I wanted to get baptista but i dont know he could leave.

Does anybody else like the yellow away kit better than the home???

I have an away kit with 'Toure' on the back. I don't like it as much as our red (home) one tho. The red design looks really good with a pair of jeans.

I wanna get a Lehmann goalkeeping top. 'Cos they are thicker and better for winter.

Arsenal to host Brazil v Portugal international

Arsenal Football Club is delighted to announce that Emirates Stadium will host a match between Brazil and Portugal at 8pm on Tuesday 6th February 2007, the second international friendly to be held at the new 60,000 capacity stadium.

In testament to Emirates Stadium and the success of the match between Brazil and Argentina in September last year, the venue will hold this second international match less than six months since the stadium opened.

Key players such as Ronaldinho, Kaka and Arsenal's very own Gilberto are likely to feature, with the opposition line-up from Portugal set to be equally impressive, including stars like Ronaldo, Quaresma, Nani, and Deco.

The match will be both teams' first international fixtures of the year. The last time the two sides met was in April 2003 when Portugal beat five times world champions, Brazil, 2-1 in Porto. Scolari had already taken charge of Portugal, but this will be Dunga's first game against the Portuguese and he will be keen to extend his five match unbeaten run since becoming coach after the World Cup.

Arsenal Star, Gilberto, said: "I'm so pleased that my national side Brazil will again have the chance to play at my home ground, Emirates Stadium. I'm lucky enough to play there with Arsenal and playing there back in September with Brazil was really special. It's a great stadium to play in, the atmosphere is fantastic for all supporters and I'm really looking forward to the match."

Head Coach of the Portuguese National Team, Luiz Felipe Scolari, commented: "It will be the second time I'll face Brazil since I took charge of the Portuguese team. To me it's of course a special moment and I'm really looking forward to the match. I'm sure it will be an entertaining event given the enormous quality and talent of the players involved."

The FPF President, Gilberto Madaíl, commented: "This match could have been a dream semi-final of the World Cup 2006 for a lot of people and I'm sure it will generate a wonderful atmosphere given that this is another great opportunity for the vast Portuguese community living abroad and particularly those living in Great Britain to watch our time play."

The CBF president, Ricardo Terra Teixeira, enthused: "This announcement follows Brazil's successful international friendlies against Argentina and Wales in London last year. We are delighted to be returning to the fantastic Emirates Stadium to take on one of the best teams in the world in front of what we are sure will be another sell-out crowd."

http://www.arsenal.com/article.asp?thisNav=News&article=439374

^^ A testament to the Emirates stadium

What a night in London and the U.K febuary 6.

England Spain in Manchester.
Brazil Portugal at Emirates.
Greece South Korea at Craven Cottage.
And last but not least the match i will be attending Australia Demark at Loftus.

i think London gets so many international matches of other countries because of the large ex-pat population of the respective countries, the large numbers of players from those nations playing in england(the case with Aus) or that it can provide the facilities,

i think London gets so many international matches of other countries because of the large ex-pat population of the respective countries, the large numbers of players from those nations playing in england(the case with Aus) or that it can provide the facilities,
In Australia's case that's one reason . . . others include

- Over 100 Aussies are based in European clubs and these clubs are very reluctant to release them to play in OZ. It comes down to the point where clubs force them to be considered 'unavailable' by faking injuries.

- Quality opposition are reluctant to travel down to the southern hemisphere in the short allocated time . . . too taxing on the body I guess.

I don't mind playing a couple friendlies in London if it mean the NT gets a good hit-out against quality teams . . . we definitely don't lack support over there.

QPR must be desperate for cash:lol:

i kno this is off topic but who has an arsenal top and wat name is on the back??
I kept waiting and waiting for the right moment to get mine. Emirates is the shirt sponsor for i forget how many years, like 7 or something?... and Henry just signed a 4-yr. contract last summer, so this was the perfect time. I have an 06/07 home kit w/ #14 Henry on the back. And the Premiership patch on the left sleeve.

Does anybody else like the yellow away kit better than the home???
I prefer the red home, but I have always liked the yellow away better than the blue away. i wish they would quit switching every few years or so. Yellow > Blue.

The red design looks really good with a pair of jeans.
True dat.

QPR must be desperate for cash:lol:


thats hardly news is it?

Just sorted a ticket for Arsenal v United (in with the home fans, but don't tell anyone) at Emirates the weekend after next. My mate's a Belfast Gooner and is returning the favour for when I sorted out a pair at OT once - in 1996. You could say it's a bit overdue...

I'm looking forward to my first visit to the place. I hope its as impressive as it is widely reported to be. I suspect we'll also be making something of a pilgrimage to Highbury en route.

As the Gooner rating wil be quite high in this thread, I wondered what features of the place and the matchday experience you would recommend.

Anyone?

bored. browsing. waiting for the liverpool game to start. found a couple of good pics:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/55/396953967_0ad1a8c394_b.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/137/396963802_4fd4d28822_b.jpg

Nice place and all, but what was the guy on who said it was very similar to the new Wembley?!

Will Emirates ever get UEFA Five Star Status?

Will Emirates ever get UEFA Five Star Status?

It should do. I cannot see why it would not. At the moment I think Old Trafford is the only 5 star club ground in England.

Will Emirates ever get UEFA Five Star Status?

I have heard (I'll emphasis the HEARD part of that, so everyone can feel free to correct me if I am wrong), that it won't be given UEFA Five Star status, at least not in its current state. Not because of the stadium itself, but because of some of the other conditions that go with the Five Star status - car parking being the main one mentioned.

Can anyone confirm if this is true?

that can be true
Because of the bad infrastructure of the Celtic Park the stadium isn't a 5 star stadium (actually this was written in the Stadionwelt magazine)

It should do. I cannot see why it would not. At the moment I think Old Trafford is the only 5 star club ground in England.

Actually, Wikipedia says this:

Behind Wembley Stadium, Old Trafford has the largest ground capacity of any English football stadium, with a capacity of just over 76,000, and it is the one of only two UEFA 5-star stadia in England.

I was wondering which one the other one would be as I'm sure Wembley hasn't (officially) got it yet - although it surely will. The other one must be Emirates. It's hosted Brazil v Argentina, after all.

isn't there a list at uefa.com?
i couldn't find anything

^^
wikipedia has a list here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:UEFA_5_star_stadiums)

Though not listed, the new Wembley Stadium has become the 26th Stadium to be given the 5-star rating.


I wonder why Emirates didn't get it :?

^^
wikipedia has a list here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:UEFA_5_star_stadiums)




I wonder why Emirates didn't get it :?

Sükrü Saracoglu is 5 star but not listed?
f... uefa page

Villa Park (which is actually a rotting dump)

that's why they have the FA Cup Semis there

Here is uefa's requirements for a 5 star stadium:

Criteria for UEFA 5 Star rating
Minimum capacity of 50,000 (5-star venues) / 30,000 (4-star venues) – individual seats with backrests. (Venues that still have individual seats without proper backrests will still continue to be accepted. In future, however, closer attention will be paid to this aspect, and which will influence the committee’s decision regarding the addition of venues to these list categories.)
Pitch dimensions of 105 x 68 m. The field of play must be in pristine condition and be prepared accordingly for a final (quality of grass, irrigation, smooth surface, etc.).
Protective fences around the field of play are not acceptable. Venues which have such installations will not be included on the list.
Sufficient room around the field of play for advertising boards and at least 18 TV cameras. In addition, there must be enough room between the goals and the first row of spectator seats behind both goals for a maximum of 150 photographers.
First-rate dressing-rooms for both teams and the referees (equal size and furnishings for both teams, spacious, bright and clean).
Suitable and appropriately equipped drug-testing room.
Floodlighting of a minimum intensity of 1,400 lux (eV) in the direction of the main camera, and of 1,000 Lux (eV) towards the other areas of the stadium, plus an efficient emergency power supply able to provide, without interruption, the same luminous light intensity as the main lighting.
Modern security installations (access monitoring system, adequate PA system, etc.).
A permanent TV surveillance system in colour that is able to monitor the movement of spectators, as well as their behaviour inside and outside the stadium. This installation must also be able to produce still shots of any troublemakers, which can then be distributed immediately to the security officers / stewards in the stadium.
Clear signage that everyone can understand inside and outside the stadium, as well as in its immediate vicinity.
Suitable covered seats for disabled spectators and their accompanying persons (minimum of two sectors with at least 50 places each). The areas for disabled spectators must be adequately equipped with toilet facilities and a refreshment bar.
Acceptable sanitary facilities for spectators (both sexes) in terms of numbers, cleanliness and standards. Toilets without seats will no longer be accepted for spectators of either sex.
Provision of first-rate media facilities in terms of camera positions, working places, TV studios, etc., in accordance with the “UEFA Guidelines for Media Facilities”.
Adequate first-class facilities must be provided for VIPs, including a minimum of 150 places in the Honorary Tribune VIP box.
International airport(s) able to cope with the huge extra demands of a UEFA final (capacity for up to 60 charter flights per day in addition to the normal, scheduled flights)
Adequate hotel accommodation. For UEFA and its partners, at least 1,000 five-star hotel rooms (UEFA Champions League) / 500 rooms (UEFA Cup) are needed. In addition, enough other hotel accommodation in all types of category must be available.

Looking at the requirements, I have no idea why the Emirates is not listed?

if a stadium wants to host a final it can be listed
inquiry -> listed
thats what i thought

oh okay, Villa Park must be 4 star. Wembley must have its award already, it certainly meets all the stats.

I wonder if Twickenham could be a 5 star stadium if football were to be played there?

I wonder if Twickenham could be a 5 star stadium if football were to be played there?

It certainly seems to meet the criteria uefa have laid down...so I can't see why not.

the 5-stars rating system is all about fullfilling minimum requirements for various things as posted above.
If Wembley, theoretically, had a too-small dressing room for the ref, then they couldnt get 5 stars, while cutting a massive 40,000 off capacity would be no problem.

It isnt an overall evaluation of quality.

As for Emirates, I dont know, perhaps they havent applied?
why would they want 5 stars?

They will never get a final. In fact they will probably never host a world cup game either, given that Chelsea will probably build something that beats Emirates before England become hosts.

Chelsea haven't got the fanbase for a bigger stadium than the Emirates.

The only club in London that could build a stadium that would, at least, equal the Emirates is Spurs and thats without being biased.

You're right, but even that would be at a stretch. 50-55k would be about right for Spurs.

You're right, but even that would be at a stretch. 50-55k would be about right for Spurs.

I agree but Tottenham have a very big fanbase BUT they're pretty fickle. All it would take is for Spurs to finish top four and then it'll be 60-65k.

There are 8 teams in and around London, all of them average around their capacity. clearly demand is huge.

Reading are expanding to near 40,000, that would have to be considered ridiculous by the conservative estimates mentioned here. I dont think it is.

But its all a pointles discussion to me, as its all about prices. Chelsea can fill anything if they price it accordingly. They want a new stadium, and I just don see them moving away to up capacity by 5,000. then they may as well stay.

I agree, spurs are better supported generally, but it doesnt matter that much.
Spurs problem is they cant build a stadium and gamble on crowds at a certain price level the way Chelsea can. They have to be careful
Chelses can just lower the prices and so what.
Who knows what Abramovich may seek. Large sections of affordable tickets to build chelsea´s support and brand would seem logic for a guy whose aim is to make them one of the biggest clubs in the world and, and then combine it with all the expensive seat as facilities etc.
He is unlikely to build anything "junior" to the many 60-65K impressive venues built recently

There are 8 teams in and around London, all of them average around their capacity. clearly demand is huge.

Reading are expanding to near 40,000, that would have to be considered ridiculous by the conservative estimates mentioned here. I dont think it is.

But its all a pointles discussion to me, as its all about prices. Chelsea can fill anything if they price it accordingly. They want a new stadium, and I just don see them moving away to up capacity by 5,000. then they may as well stay.

I agree, spurs are better supported generally, but it doesnt matter that much.
Spurs problem is they cant build a stadium and gamble on crowds at a certain price level the way Chelsea can. They have to be careful
Chelses can just lower the prices and so what.
Who knows what Abramovich may seek. Large sections of affordable tickets to build chelsea´s support and brand would seem logic for a guy whose aim is to make them one of the biggest clubs in the world and, and then combine it with all the expensive seat as facilities etc.
He is unlikely to build anything "junior" to the many 60-65K impressive venues built recently

In way I agree with what you say about chelsea building something. Overall, Tottenham are one of the most well run clubs there is. Financially they're one of the most stable in World. Also Tottenham have said that they will announce their decision on what to build, at WHL or whatever site, within the next year, this was announced in January. In all honesty Tottenham will not find it hard to be sponsored etc when trying to find money for a new stadium. Tottenham are a big brand, not bigger than Arsenal, Liverpool, Man Utd or what Chelsea will become but still they're not to be under estimated.

Can't wait to find out what's planned for Spurs in the future.

Ideally, I would want a 55,000 seater in the land just North of WHL.

Not in a bowl shape like Ashburton. 4 distinct stands joined in the corners (I suppose like WHL but bigger actually!)

The seats at WHL have nothing to do with the club colours. Would like to see white seats and dark blue THFC lettering, I think that'd look class.

Can't wait to find out what's planned for Spurs in the future.

Ideally, I would want a 55,000 seater in the land just North of WHL.

Not in a bowl shape like Ashburton. 4 distinct stands joined in the corners (I suppose like WHL but bigger actually!)

The seats at WHL have nothing to do with the club colours. Would like to see white seats and dark blue THFC lettering, I think that'd look class.

You've got good ideas. The talk of the town is that the smallest capacity will be 55,000 but Spurs have a very exciting future ahead of them so it's hard to say what will be built but I look foreword to the day it's announced :cheers:

new aerial:

http://static.sky.com/images/pictures/1515908.jpg

^^ Have you got that pic in higher resolution? It'd be great for the 2018 stadia thread if it weren't so grainy :)

^^ Have you got that pic in higher resolution? It'd be great for the 2018 stadia thread if it weren't so grainy :)

unfortunately not, brother. unfortunately not.

Shame, brother, shame :(

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l242/hotsoupdaley/thierryhenrybarca.jpg

Great addition to the thread...

Oh well. I spose it's a decent excuse to put some pics of the completed stadium onto the thread.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v257/carlspannard/253227893_3fb14741eb_o.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v257/carlspannard/442649067_c15aef4241_b.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v257/carlspannard/537759645_c48915d102.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v257/carlspannard/460035517_e2d0f34c51_b.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v257/carlspannard/488083186_25af6d5432_b.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v257/carlspannard/481419717_db7e032e74_b.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v257/carlspannard/488083252_9dc8cf6132_b.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v257/carlspannard/3606990556882151d9dbzf0.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v257/carlspannard/300462791_f510868f5b_b.jpg

It looks like a "little" Wembley

it would be great if they could fill in the corners to take the capacity to 68,000-70,000+ is this possible? if not is there any way this stadium can be expanded?

Does anybody know why the Emirates Stadium has not been classified as a Uefa 5 star Stadium yet?

They haven't applied to UEFA

thanks for those carlspannard

Too bad no stars will be playing in that stadium for arsenal nomore......rosisky? adebayor?? these are mediocore players.

Not sure Arsenal was ever about the stars, more the collective. Thierry Henry used to let his feet do the talking, in the last couple of years it was his mouth doing the moaning. The exterior of the Emirates is far more pleasing than the run of the mill interior

Not sure Arsenal was ever about the stars, more the collective. Thierry Henry used to let his feet do the talking, in the last couple of years it was his mouth doing the moaning. The exterior of the Emirates is far more pleasing than the run of the mill interior

i wouldn't call it 'run of the mill interior' anyway these days it would be hard to come by a totally different bowl shape to those that already exist today. But the actually interior of the stadium, facilities and service provided is top class, more then any other club stadium in the world.

...

i dont think its a case of should you expand but more can you expand, give the shape of the stadium, where the roof supports are etc it looks very difficult and the stadium would have to become much squarer too

...

Too bad no stars will be playing in that stadium for arsenal nomore......rosisky? adebayor?? these are mediocore players.

Who should they sign? Landon Donovon? Clint Dempsey? :lol:

surely it just means it would cost more to take the roof off expand and build another, surely the roof isn't fundamental to the stabilty of the structure??

oh i agree it is possible it just looks as if it would be very costly

i suppose with the right ammount of money any stadium could be expanded right?

I hope arsenal do expand, they could easily fill an 80,000+ stadium weekly i think...

i agree it seemed very narrow minded to only have a 60,000 capacity when demand for tickets are so high and are pushing the average fan out of the game with high pricing, im glad to see liverpool are making an attempt to overcome this but the emirates should have at least been a 70,000 seater to begin with especially if they have the aspirations that they do of being the top club in the country

the local council allowed max 60k capacity

I think it was the maximum capacity permitted by Islington Council. They regarded it the maximum size that the local infrastructure could support. I suppose they could have looked for a site outside of the borough but the fans and club were determined to stay in Islington.

i thought i remembered something about a limit but wasnt sure enough to say, i mean i knew they put a height restriction on the site, hence the sloping roof but thanks that obivously clears up the capacity issue

...

Maybe Arsenal should start a campaign for the use benches or terraced areas. If succesful we could get 80 or 90000 into the stadium without having to make it bigger.:)

Do people really think Arsenal are going to enlarge the Emirates. It's been built, it holds 60k, end of it. Arsenal are on the slide anyway, 40k will soon be big enough

Do people really think Arsenal are going to enlarge the Emirates. It's been built, it holds 60k, end of it. Arsenal are on the slide anyway, 40k will soon be big enough

No I dont think Arsenal are going to expand the stadium in the forseeable future.
As for Arsenal's future form on the pitch,the bottom line is qualifying for the Champions League and I still dont think there are 4 better teams in the Premier League than Arsenal.Anymore talk about possible future form I think will leave to a football forum.

is a expansion possible?

Is it feasible? I would guess yes, though no doubt it would be expensive. Is it likely to happen within the next 10 or 15 years? I would say no.

would be maybe the the 1st expansion of an stadium which has got a oval/LaOla tier

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l242/hotsoupdaley/thierryhenrybarca.jpg

http://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/images/articles/5281-11.jpg

you worried yet? you should be. Your skint already. imagine if we pip you to CL next year?

Goons would be ruined.

http://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/images/articles/5281-11.jpg

you worried yet? you should be. Your skint already. imagine if we pip you to CL next year?

Goons would be ruined.

LOL Arsenal have been pretty successful compared to Spurs:lol:

Im not even an Arsenal Fan, stop taking the thread off topic please.

you worried yet?

we are, is Martin Jol mentally healthy? 16m for Bent?

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l242/hotsoupdaley/thierryhenrybarca.jpg

I can't stand this picture anymore but I can't help thinking how it would look with Cesc in a Real Madrid strip :bash:


PETER HILL-WOOD OUT! David Dein was the only thing standing between Dein from being Doug Ellis or Ken Bates

we are, is Martin Jol mentally healthy? 16m for Bent?

Yes he is. Levy was the one who made the final decision, also Darren Bent has scored 33 goals in the Premier League in the past two seasons. The only players to have scored more than that is Henry and Drogba. People would say that Berbatov is a player worth £25m+ but he scored the same amount of goals as Bent did last season in the Premier League. Also Bent is only 23 and yet he has done a lot. I'm sorry but to question a £16m price tag on a player who got 20 goals in the Premier League (2005/06 season) is pretty rediclous. Bent is worth every penny and he's a great addition to an already brilliant strike force of three who scored 63 goals between them last season.

Anyway, I we're getting side tracked here.

i think its more a case of not bent being over priced but henry being so underpriced, if henry had gone for the region of 25-30million then 16million for bent would have been a more reasonable price, i mean torres is being sold for 26million and as has been pointed out bent is a reliable goal scorer. barcelona are the ones laughing at all this for the stupidly cheap price they paid for one of the worlds best strikers

Yes! Does anyone know why he went for so little?? it seems bizarre

i think its more a case of not bent being over priced but henry being so underpriced, if henry had gone for the region of 25-30million then 16million for bent would have been a more reasonable price, i mean torres is being sold for 26million and as has been pointed out bent is a reliable goal scorer. barcelona are the ones laughing at all this for the stupidly cheap price they paid for one of the worlds best strikers

years remaining in his contract maybe....that what makes him cheap...maybe..i dont know..how about viera then? the same case?

http://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/images/articles/5281-11.jpg

you worried yet? you should be. Your skint already. imagine if we pip you to CL next year?

Goons would be ruined.

Oh my god not Darren Bent! Arsenal don't stand a chance now watch out Spurs have Bent.

You complete Window Licker! West Ham are gonna finish above Spurs and Arsenal will be 3rd.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

I've read and heard some deluded comments in my time but thaT tops them at the moment...West Ham above Spurs and Arsenal third, please stop :rofl:

Anway, we're getting side-tracked here.....

Why not? West Ham have bought much better then you.

Why not? West Ham have bought much better then you.

the amount of money spent in the transfer window has nothing to do with how well a team will perform in the coming season, who is to say that West Ham's signings wont just be like Shevchenko and not perform? I personally believe Arsenal will finish out of the top 4-maybe 5th-and Spurs will take 4th...

the amount of money spent in the transfer window has nothing to do with how well a team will perform in the coming season, who is to say that West Ham's signings wont just be like Shevchenko and not perform? I personally believe Arsenal will finish out of the top 4-maybe 5th-and Spurs will take 4th...

Yeah alright Arsenal scored more goals then Tottenham last season without our two main strikers for half of the season. Plus Tottenham's goal difference last season was +3 which is pathetic and Arsenal's was +28. Now I cannot see how on earth Tottenham are gonna improve on that with Bent + Bale and the other sub standard signings where as Arsenal have bought the French Right Back of the Year, Sagna and 54 goals in 06/07 for club and country, Eduardo. Remind me not to ask your advice if I'm going to place any bets.

hehe. This page looks funny one season later. :lol:@Tottenham fans:lol:

:lol: It doesn't stop them from saying the same every year though does it.

Spurs had Arsenal shaking in their boots this season, especially with signing Darren Bent :lol:

Yeah, he was worth so much more than Henry wasn't he :doh:

Let's do an end of season trophy count shall we?

Let's do an end of season trophy count shall we?Now I know you don't want to compare trophy cases... ;) Regardless, wrong forum for such trivialities. I prefer this site be reserved for the civil fare.



Not much news here since the late winter press articles alluding to the club making long term plans for expansion. Which are all based on transport improvements and completing the sales of Highbury, anyway, so we're looking at 5+ years off. Not surprising, seeing as the need is tentative depending on your perspective.

From my relatives in Islington I'm told the club are monitoring the architecture of the proposed renovations in Marseille (insert ironic jokes about French ties here) as one example of building another layer above stands with the undulating form. It's not favored but if the cost effectiveness proves all the better, then it's another option.

Most realistic form suggested by those with building expertise suggest a 1 time addition that would most likely add another tier, one that looks like an extension of the existing upper tier but would probably not allow access between the two. This to accommodate the structural supports of the new tier. Capacity would then top off between 77 and 83k. Any expansion less than that would undoubtedly not be cost effective, so it's 15k plus or not worth it. At the same time, much larger than that would not really be worth it given the resulting distances from the pitch, access concerns, safety, etc. They don't expect anything will be formally proposed by the club until Highbury is sold, however, and will most likely be tied to the urgency presented by a possible World Cup bid: If England wins the 2018 bid then expect Arsenal to expedite an expansion to ensure the Grove is one of the sites, as the extra revenues and exposure from this would greatly off set the costs of the project.

Cheers! :cheers:

Two Years On: It isn't just about the football
http://www.arsenal.com/article.asp?thisNav=News&article=493946

Now I know you don't want to compare trophy cases... ;) Regardless, wrong forum for such trivialities. I prefer this site be reserved for the civil fare.



Not much news here since the late winter press articles alluding to the club making long term plans for expansion. Which are all based on transport improvements and completing the sales of Highbury, anyway, so we're looking at 5+ years off. Not surprising, seeing as the need is tentative depending on your perspective.

From my relatives in Islington I'm told the club are monitoring the architecture of the proposed renovations in Marseille (insert ironic jokes about French ties here) as one example of building another layer above stands with the undulating form. It's not favored but if the cost effectiveness proves all the better, then it's another option.

Most realistic form suggested by those with building expertise suggest a 1 time addition that would most likely add another tier, one that looks like an extension of the existing upper tier but would probably not allow access between the two. This to accommodate the structural supports of the new tier. Capacity would then top off between 77 and 83k. Any expansion less than that would undoubtedly not be cost effective, so it's 15k plus or not worth it. At the same time, much larger than that would not really be worth it given the resulting distances from the pitch, access concerns, safety, etc. They don't expect anything will be formally proposed by the club until Highbury is sold, however, and will most likely be tied to the urgency presented by a possible World Cup bid: If England wins the 2018 bid then expect Arsenal to expedite an expansion to ensure the Grove is one of the sites, as the extra revenues and exposure from this would greatly off set the costs of the project.

Cheers! :cheers:

GunnerJacket that is some top class info I have been desperately trying to find out if Arsenal had even mentioned expansion I'm just wondering how likely you reckon this is going to happen? And also do you know if the club have considered digging into the ground and sticking in 1 or 2 more rows or finding somewhere else to put a few more seats in as demand certainly seems to be very high? As a well known supermarkets says "every little helps"

Any possible expansion would be a long way into the future and as such is not on the agenda.No plans whatsoever. None. Can't go downwards as there are important sewage and flood relief systems that run directly underneath the stadium.

GunnerJacket that is some top class info I have been desperately trying to find out if Arsenal had even mentioned expansion I'm just wondering how likely you reckon this is going to happen? And also do you know if the club have considered digging into the ground and sticking in 1 or 2 more rows or finding somewhere else to put a few more seats in as demand certainly seems to be very high? As a well known supermarkets says "every little helps"

Any possible expansion would be a long way into the future and as such is not on the agenda.No plans whatsoever. None. Can't go downwards as there are important sewage and flood relief systems that run directly underneath the stadium.
Not only would the club risk damaging underground utilities at that point but the line of sight from the back rows of the first tier would make it impossible to see the near side of the pitch. So, no going downward.

Given the rapid changes in credit and interest rates of late I'm sure as Carl is intimating that any plans are being pushed even farther off. I'm told the improvements to the local transit system won't be happening till just before the Olympics, and even that may not be of enough capacity to permit a sizable expansion of the Grove. But the club can ill afford to increase edbt at this point anyway, so for now I suspect the only work being done is the casual discourse with the architects and engineers about general schematic designs, with the earliest possible construction taking place at 2016. More likely they'll go beyond that, anyway. C'est la vie.

Cheers.:cheers:

Not only would the club risk damaging underground utilities at that point but the line of sight from the back rows of the first tier would make it impossible to see the near side of the pitch. So, no going downward.

Given the rapid changes in credit and interest rates of late I'm sure as Carl is intimating that any plans are being pushed even farther off. I'm told the improvements to the local transit system won't be happening till just before the Olympics, and even that may not be of enough capacity to permit a sizable expansion of the Grove. But the club can ill afford to increase edbt at this point anyway, so for now I suspect the only work being done is the casual discourse with the architects and engineers about general schematic designs, with the earliest possible construction taking place at 2016. More likely they'll go beyond that, anyway. C'est la vie.

Cheers.:cheers:

Thanks for that information provided it cleared up a lot of questions I had. It's a shame that expansion would be so problematic, I really think that if tickets were set at the right price Arsenal could pull in another 10-15,000 comfortably. But obviously it wouldn't be worth at least for the foreseeable future. But who knows maybe by 2012 maybe with transport improvements and consistently strong attendances and strong league finishes maybe Arsenal will take the plunge and expand.

Surely if arsenal are ever to expand, the only way the can is to converted the stadium into a total bowl i.e without the wavy bits at the corners and then put in a new roof. Someone please enlighten me - i am no architect or civil engineer!!

Surely if arsenal are ever to expand, the only way the can is to converted the stadium into a total bowl i.e without the wavy bits at the corners and then put in a new roof. Someone please enlighten me - i am no architect or civil engineer!!

I have read/heard somewhere that they could possibly raise the roof and add extra tiers underneath, although they would obviously have to widen the roof, let alone get planning permission for the increase in height. Also, judging by photos, it looks possible to lower the pitch and add about 5 to 7 rows, thus narrowing that huge ugly gap, although I'd guess that would only add a couple more thousand seats to the capacity and I have no idea how much that would cost per seat.

I wouldn't expect any of this to happen until the current build is all paid for anyway. Having said that, if the current demand for tickets holds up, I can definately see it happening a few years in the future.

Not if you don't sell all those flats it won't.

A crude example of how i think they could expand the emirates in the future, at either end at least. Although they would lose the boxes and suites at either end it would increase capacity and improve atmosphere.

http://img156.imageshack.us/img156/3479/emirates1ye5.jpg

But the fans at the BS tier won't see the pitch :D

A crude example of how i think they could expand the emirates in the future, at either end at least. Although they would lose the boxes and suites at either end it would increase capacity and improve atmosphere.
You had to sacrifice corporate boxes and seats. Even if you increase the overall capacity the revenue for the club will certainly drop. That doesn't make sense. At least not to the people in charge of the club.

But the fans at the BS tier won't see the pitch :D

Who cares about those guys? :D

I don't think that Arsenal would be able to lower the pitch due to the stand in the corners being a lot closer to the pitch than at the sides or the ends. It wouldn't be worth it. Also even if they did what i suggested i think it would add between 5-10,000 at most, depending on how far they were to extend around the bowl and even then they would lose out on money from the suites and boxes. However that is the only way i can see the Emirates expanding without facing major structural issues.

A crude example of how i think they could expand the emirates in the future, at either end at least. Although they would lose the boxes and suites at either end it would increase capacity and improve atmosphere.

http://img156.imageshack.us/img156/3479/emirates1ye5.jpg

Nice design, but they will never give up the boxes and stuff. That´s where the money is.
If there is any ´easy´option then it would be the corners on the second level. It would just need filling up.
To my opinion it would make this stadium look more powerfull as the corners are a bit low at this moment.
Nice stadium by the way.

If there is any ´easy´option then it would be the corners on the second level. It would just need filling up.

You aren't able to in the current format as the supports that hold up the roof are there.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/images/2006/07/18/emirates2_440x330.jpg

You aren't able to in the current format as the supports that hold up the roof are there.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/images/2006/07/18/emirates2_440x330.jpgTrue, but the support for the roof, in theory, could be realigned or redirected. Suspension lines from exterior columns, perhaps? Or, more likely, a structural arch straddling that corner to hold both the additional stands and the roof.

The problem with this approach, though, is that it would yield a low return on investment, as I'm guessing each corner would only produce an additional 2-3k seats at best. Building the frame for the tier is one thing, but the adjustments required for the roof and additional concourse areas would be expensive for what would be the cheapest seats in the house.

For this reason I'm assuming they'd have to do one whole end with a new roof on that end that is tied into the existing secondary structural beams that run across the pitch. This way you could add on around the whole end and maybe gain another 5-7k seats, with no/minimal impact on existing structure. Then you could eventually do the same at the other end and later one each side, eventually building a new roof 1/4 at a time.

Perhaps it's time I break out the pencils and try my hand at this in a visual sense?! I'll try that after the holidays. :cheers:

http://img156.imageshack.us/img156/3479/emirates1ye5.jpgSurprisingly I don't think I've seen this section image before. Thanks!

What I would love to see them do is take one side and add a fashion of premium seating at the top of the lower tier, then, as a counter, reconstruct the end portions of that tier such that they extend outward from that 2nd, smaller tier, preferably coming much closer to the endline (in essence, merging those tiers at each end). They could use retractable seating for the first few rows so as to accommodate conditions for FIFA matches. It would likely be a costly adjustment for a probable 0 net gain in capacity or attendance but would certainly provide a more traditional feel and allow the fans at the ends to feel more involved.

All

I still don't quite understand why the design of the emirates didnt allow for a steeper first tier. it does absolutely nothing for the atmosphere in the ground!!

is there an height limit in the area?

there was an also a noise limit as well, although surely you would want to retain as much atmosphere as possible

Tonight: 9 world cups will be in Emirates Stadium.

does anyone know how far exactly the edge of the pitch is from the front of the stand behind the goal??

Someone mentioned that the reason why they can't dig down is because of utilities is this true??

If so, surely it is just a case of moving these utilities, it's been done before...

Maybe this one helps
Black (Emirates)
Red (Türk Telekom Arena).

So i would guess edge-pitch is around 7-8m
http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/6623/44vc4.jpg

maybe if they extended the grass to the stand it wouldn't look so far.

lowering the pitch and addin 3-5 rows woul be better :D
cap would be maybe than 65k

lowering the pitch and addin 3-5 rows woul be better :D
cap would be maybe than 65k

yep but apparantly there are utilities running underneath and it would ruin the sightlines. That is according to gunner jacket earlier in the thread.

However i am not so sure, and you can move the utilities if needs be, it has been done before.

yep but apparantly there are utilities running underneath and it would ruin the sightlines. That is according to gunner jacket earlier in the thread.

However i am not so sure, and you can move the utilities if needs be, it has been done before.The issues would be the type of utilities (fiber optics - easy; Sewer - hard!) and the aforementioned sightlines. Look at the section image above and draw a line from the rear of the first tier to the near edge of the field. Now imagine that same edge of the field but 2 meters straight downward, the line of sight from those rear seats becomes steeper and possibly impaired by the existing seats in front. The more you lower the pitch to increase seating, the likelihood the depth required will lead to poor sightlines for the back of that first tier. Regrettably.

The issues would be the type of utilities (fiber optics - easy; Sewer - hard!) and the aforementioned sightlines. Look at the section image above and draw a line from the rear of the first tier to the near edge of the field. Now imagine that same edge of the field but 2 meters straight downward, the line of sight from those rear seats becomes steeper and possibly impaired by the existing seats in front. The more you lower the pitch to increase seating, the likelihood the depth required will lead to poor sightlines for the back of that first tier. Regrettably.


but surely that will only effect if you if you are looking dead at the ground behind the goal. You surely will be able to see the goal and the pitch fine?

What about altering the angle?

I thought maybe they could curve the end stand just as soon as the grass finishes and get rid of the club level behind the north goal and then extend the stand up until the wall?? Then move the pitch more towards the south stand then you would have a unique looking bowl, and a pitch a nice distance away at both sides, and lose minimal club level??

Also is it definately a sewer??

My hope is that they use there brain one day and close Holloway road and arsenal stations and build a new station next to the emirates, called Holloway Arsenal or something. The tracks run more or less underneath.

did u get my reply btw??

but surely that will only effect if you if you are looking dead at the ground behind the goal. You surely will be able to see the goal and the pitch fine?The goals, sure, as well as most of the pitch. What would become obscured would be whatever is the nearest part of the pitch to you, meaning one touchline or endline. Picture Sagna making a run up the side and you only being able to see him from the waist up amidst the heads of spectators in front of you.
What about altering the angle?My preference, but likely yield the smallest increase in capacity (or possibly a small decrease!) and would be costly for what wouldn't yield an impact on revenues.
I thought maybe they could curve the end stand just as soon as the grass finishes and get rid of the club level behind the north goal and then extend the stand up until the wall?? Then move the pitch more towards the south stand then you would have a unique looking bowl, and a pitch a nice distance away at both sides, and lose minimal club level??Very much what I propose above, but again because this wouldn't produce a profitable return on investment it would only be done in conjunction with expansion efforts elsewhere in the stadium. Thus, barring a large influx of slush money from some shadowy Uzbeki this is a no go.
Also is it definately a sewer??I don't know, merely pointing out that there may be something underneath that makes going deeper nigh impossible. I doubt it's a trunk line, given that the site has rail/road ravines along 3/4 of the sides, but I was surprised that given the height restrictions the club didn't explore digging into the ground deeper than they did. Hence my suspicion.
My hope is that they use there brain one day and close Holloway road and arsenal stations and build a new station next to the emirates, called Holloway Arsenal or something. The tracks run more or less underneath.I haven't found anything online concerning transportation plans, but I know they're hurrying some plans to accommodate the Olympics. Long term plans for the area included (I thought) something akin to a bus terminal or part-time rail stop to support the whole site after the Queensland Road development is complete. Perhaps something will come about. I hope so, as that would facilitate any future expansion of the stadium.

The goals, sure, as well as most of the pitch. What would become obscured would be whatever is the nearest part of the pitch to you, meaning one touchline or endline. Picture Sagna making a run up the side and you only being able to see him from the waist up amidst the heads of spectators in front of you.

Then surely we do as highbury (north bank) and have pitch level at waist height. or whatever the height of the champions league billboards is.

Some people will be looking up at players but some people liked that!

My preference, but likely yield the smallest increase in capacity (or possibly a small decrease!) and would be costly for what wouldn't yield an impact on revenues.
Very much what I propose above, but again because this wouldn't produce a profitable return on investment it would only be done in conjunction with expansion efforts elsewhere in the stadium. Thus, barring a large influx of slush money from some shadowy Uzbeki this is a no go.

Unfortunately Usmanov just ain't quite rich enough. I still can't fathom why it was designed like this.

I don't know, merely pointing out that there may be something underneath that makes going deeper nigh impossible. I doubt it's a trunk line, given that the site has rail/road ravines along 3/4 of the sides, but I was surprised that given the height restrictions the club didn't explore digging into the ground deeper than they did. Hence my suspicion.

Good point, although the club opted for a difficult to expand 60,000 seater so they might not be that thoughtful...

I haven't found anything online concerning transportation plans, but I know they're hurrying some plans to accommodate the Olympics. Long term plans for the area included (I thought) something akin to a bus terminal or part-time rail stop to support the whole site after the Queensland Road development is complete. Perhaps something will come about. I hope so, as that would facilitate any future expansion of the stadium.

I can't think of where or why they'd put a bus station there, No buses run near there. it's off the main road.

The current Arsenal station is pointles, it's too close to Finsbury so people only really use it in the peaks and on match days, and holloway road is closed on match days because of lifts, it would only make sense.

Some people will be looking up at players but some people liked that!Except perhaps Arshavin. He's only what, 5'6"?!!
Unfortunately Usmanov just ain't quite rich enough. Good, then maybe he won't be able to buy the club. Or better yet be forced to sell to someone with dignity.
I still can't fathom why it was designed like this.
...
Good point, although the club opted for a difficult to expand 60,000 seater so they might not be that thoughtful...To be honest I truly think they didn't suspect the demand would grow as rapidly as press reports are indicating (40k waiting list?!!!) and wanted to make sure they didn't build too big at first. Don't they already make as much on match day revenues as any club going? If so it means expansion may not necessarily yield a higher return on costs on a per-seat basis. Still, the adage remains - Anything is possible given the right amount of time, money and will.
I can't think of where or why they'd put a bus station there, No buses run near there. Maybe I'm recalling an expressed need (based on your comments) rather than a commitment. I just recall there was an aspect of public transportation improvements to be included in the Queensland Road portion of the project.

I suspect they'll have to propose something as dramatic as you're suggesting, though, in order to grow on that site. Hopefully Highbury will be sold off by 2011 and they can focus their development energies on this.

As far as transportation issues go, arsenal are lucky to boost the best links, certainly in london, that i know of. Right now its a disgrace that drayton park, holloway road and caledonian road are closed on matchdays. Add to that finsbury,arsenal, highbury & islington -all 6 within 15 minutes of the ground not to mention buses!! - there is tremendous potential there. I think you will find spurs a proposing a similar size stadium with just two stations serving it!

With regards to the possibility of expanding by going downwards I found this.
"Three Thames Water main sewers run beneath the site. Two of these pass through the site from north
to south, one at a depth of 3m and the other at 8m. The deeper of these forms part of a storm relief
system for the area which discharges into a primary storm relief sewer crossing the site from east
to west at a depth of 17m. "

It is under the heading Site Constraints.

http://www.burohappold.com/BH/NWS_2005emiratesstadium.aspx

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/229/475866493_fbd89dc43c_b.jpg
Apparently Arsenal are planning to cover the concrete areas behind the badges around the exterior of the stadium with this mural.Cool.
http://photos-e.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc1/hs199.snc1/6760_127054557712_20669912712_2417068_6009119_n.jpg

http://photos-f.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc1/hs199.snc1/6760_127054562712_20669912712_2417069_6803589_n.jpg

Very nice stadium.:banana::banana:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/229/475866493_fbd89dc43c_b.jpg
Apparently Arsenal are planning to cover the concrete areas behind the badges around the exterior of the stadium with this mural.Cool.
http://photos-e.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc1/hs199.snc1/6760_127054557712_20669912712_2417068_6009119_n.jpg

http://photos-f.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc1/hs199.snc1/6760_127054562712_20669912712_2417069_6803589_n.jpg

great pictures...

Wembley is better

naaa

I don't like those wavy look like stands. And I miss Highbury! That was such a stadium. The most original atmosphere ever!

the issue i have with the gap behind the goal is not only that its put the fans further back ( which only affects the few that are sitting in the stadium in theese sections ) , but the fact that it looks awful in TV .

and why does it look awful in TV ? its the athletics track brown colour of the gap that gives an overall shitty apperance. why dont they either :

paint / put a red arsenal banner on it instead ?

or ( this migth actually look better , as a nice contrast to all the red and the green pitch ) paint it blue with white fly emirates letters ? ( extra money ? ;) )

if they did one of theese two ,the gap wouldnt bother me as much ...

Some pics from flickr
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1349/997842713_2e5155c7f5_b.jpg
http://www.flickr.com/photos/pabloqtoo/1242770166/sizes/o/

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1234/1242770166_d98b076a98_o.jpg
http://www.flickr.com/photos/pabloqtoo/1242770166/sizes/o/

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/187/487117607_80b618eb56_b.jpg
http://www.flickr.com/photos/48028479@N00/997842713/sizes/l/

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3095/2601266703_f012667fda_o.jpg
http://www.flickr.com/photos/chris-beaumont/2601266703/sizes/o/

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3118/3126126577_e9c75e6b2e_b.jpg
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dgbalancesrocks/3126126577/sizes/l/

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1116/1429216464_33011c1c15_o.jpg
http://www.flickr.com/photos/47318828@N00/1429216464/sizes/o/

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3179/2922768274_b699e7bd0e_b.jpg
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tfidonnie/2922768274/sizes/l/

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1349/997842713_2e5155c7f5_b.jpg
old or new building?

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1349/997842713_2e5155c7f5_b.jpg
old or new building?
New. It is one of the Drayton Park entrances.

Why green?

Its Aqua rather than green. As to why? dunno

Doesn't look classy like the stadium.

All opinions at the end of the day. Its a part of the stadium that doesn't often get noticed. Kind of reminds me of the old west stand / clock end entrance. Again only away fans and Arsenal regulars would have normally been aware of it.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3101/2340961712_eba3a72852.jpg

nice hd videos

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ZHshDe6XDE&hd=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DokXit520NU&hd=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hgUXXpGC1A&hd=1

They should close the corners on the upper ring. New the second/third tire looks to small mop.
Very nice stadium though.

They should close the corners on the upper ring.

they cant, the round design of the stadiums exterior wont allow it.

they cant, the round design of the stadiums exterior wont allow it.

Well they can, but it would require building additional supports and either an expansion of the existing roof or and independent roof for the addition. In other words, it would likely be far too costly to do just for a couple thousand seats (if that) per corner. More over, those corner openings are required to help with the air flow and light access that keeps the pitch in such great condition. Allows the atmosphere to feel comparable to an open air stadium without compromising the primary function of the roof.

This is the reason I contend any expansion will likely be a one-time effort and something more substantial than simply filling in the corners. Regardless, we've some time before this happens as they've said they wouldn't press forward with any such concepts until Highbury is closed out.

Apparently Arsenal are also going to move the old Clock End Clock into a more prominent place within the stadium.
Just another trivial thing but it was noticeable on tv particularly behind the goals that up until this season the barriers were still untreated concrete. It looked a bit shoddy frankly.A bit annoying when everything else had a nice finish to it. They have sorted that out and it looks much better.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v257/carlspannard/gun__1251106411_5.jpg

They could attach the new LED advertising boards to the barriers to make the whole place more tidy.

They could attach the new LED advertising boards to the barriers to make the whole place more tidy.
More advertising space, as well!

I'm sure this has been discussed in this thread before, but I've gone thirty pages and couldn't find anything so i'll post the question.
Why is the pitch so big, and the spectators so far from the field?
Other contemporary stadiums don't have this design aspect: allianz arena and eastlands.
It's a big minus IMO.

I'm sure this has been discussed in this thread before, but I've gone thirty pages and couldn't find anything so i'll post the question.
Why is the pitch so big, and the spectators so far from the field?
Other contemporary stadiums don't have this design aspect: allianz arena and eastlands.
It's a big minus IMO.

The pitch has exactly the same size as the aforementioned grounds.

^^ Really? It appears that the Aliianz arena stands are at least a meter or so closer, while Eastlands doesnt seem to have as much space behind the goals - it is this space at Emirates which most puzzles me.

AA:
http://bigliettiseriea.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/allianz_arena_35.jpg

http://www.fussballtempel.net/uefa/GER/Allianz_Arena3.jpg

Emirates:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_kDDzIAlt30A/Rc9b912IK7I/AAAAAAAAAP4/ouLwNe3IEOE/s320/arsenal+emirates+stadium.jpg

http://img140.imageshack.us/img140/6938/emiratesw.jpg (http://img140.imageshack.us/i/emiratesw.jpg/)


Eastlands:
http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/town/park/yfh45/eastlands1.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3031/2588973017_e76eaaa9e7.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3269/2849101245_c072ae89b9.jpg?v=0

http://www.2018england.co.uk/images/cityofmanchester.jpg

IMO, all stadiums should be built as close to the pitch as the Allianz. Even the CoMS could be better though I guess that's the best they could do because of the shape.

Emirates is pretty poor in this respect. What are they using that massive gap for? What is it's purpose?

One big difference between the stadiums shown is that the City and Munich stadiums are built (at least in comparison to Emirates) in the middle of nowhere with relatively few constraints. Maybe its possible that the footprint required to fit 60k given those constraints may have meant that the Emirates bowl needed to be a bit wider than is ideal.It could be that bringing the front row a couple of yards closer would have simply resulted in further flattening of the tiers because of the height restrictions. I am just guessing though.

As far as i know there is an height limit.
So instead of more rows (more height) they created a wider and longer bowl to reach the 60k

^^ Really? It appears that the Aliianz arena stands are at least a meter or so closer, while Eastlands doesnt seem to have as much space behind the goals - it is this space at Emirates which most puzzles me.
It doesn't matter whether the stands are closer. The size of the pitch is 105 x 68 m in either case.

As far as i know there is an heigh limit.
So instead of more rows (more height) they created a wider and longer bowl to reach the 60k
Thats pretty much what I was thinking.

IMO, all stadiums should be built as close to the pitch as the Allianz. Even the CoMS could be better though I guess that's the best they could do because of the shape.

Emirates is pretty poor in this respect. What are they using that massive gap for? What is it's purpose?

The farther away the first row is from the pitch, the more shallow the tier can be and still have equally good sightlines (meaning how good you can see over the head of the person in front of you).
Here is an illustration:
http://img156.imageshack.us/img156/6774/unbenannt1mp.jpg
If the stands were closer to the pitch they also had to be steeper and thus being problematic with the height limit.

I'm sorry but I have no idea how distance from the pitch is connected to how shallow a tier is.

Having the stands further away from the pitch just so that the tiers can be shallower to make sure the stadium doesn't reach a certain height is ridiculous.

I know planning limitations are necessary but they can be stupid sometimes.

It doesn't matter whether the stands are closer. The size of the pitch is 105 x 68 m in either case.

Perhaps I should have explained myself more clearly, but I meant the size of the actual pitch, and its surrounds to the edge of the stands.

I wasnt aware that there was such a low height limit. It makes sense. Cheers :okay:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/shalmaneser/3935301618/

^^ That looks so much better then just the bare concrete

meh, I dont think it looks all that much better...

Has anyone noticed the lack of noise at Emirates? Sure, not for the big games against ManU or Tottham, but against many smaller clubs it seems quiet.
Against Wigan the atmosphere was particularly dull.

Ive heard the stewards are ultra strict here, does anyone know whether there is a specific section where standing is allowed/encouraged? How many sections are there for "ultras", or whatever the English Arsenal equivalent is. Is there such a section?

Also, for anyone who has been to both grounds, what do you prefer out of Highbury and Emirates?

Wigan only took a few hundred supporters, its hard to generate an noise in that situation. The quietness at the Grove is one of its biggest down sides but its not the stadium itself, when there is an atmosphere it holds the sound in really well. Its just that Arsenal fans aren't all that vocal. Thats why Highbury was often called "The Library" by opposing fans.

I do miss Highbury, there was something special about that place but the Grove was probably needed for the long term security of the club and it will develop its own history as the years roll on.

Ive heard the stewards are ultra strict here, does anyone know whether there is a specific section where standing is allowed/encouraged? How many sections are there for "ultras", or whatever the English Arsenal equivalent is. Is there such a section?

If the stewards are strict then standing won't be tolerated at all. There are no ultras in English football (unless you count York City!), and I don't think the Emirates has a Stretford End or Kop where everyone stands.

I've sometimes seen people standing either side of the away fans if they are standing on Match of the Day though.

meh, I dont think it looks all that much better...

Has anyone noticed the lack of noise at Emirates? Sure, not for the big games against ManU or Tottham, but against many smaller clubs it seems quiet.
Against Wigan the atmosphere was particularly dull.

Ive heard the stewards are ultra strict here, does anyone know whether there is a specific section where standing is allowed/encouraged? How many sections are there for "ultras", or whatever the English Arsenal equivalent is. Is there such a section?

Also, for anyone who has been to both grounds, what do you prefer out of Highbury and Emirates?

That's the same all over the world. Old Trafford is like a morgue a lot of the time, and as loud as Anfield can be on a European Cup night against smaller teams the atmosphere is very disappointing. All teams suffer from this problem.

That's the same all over the world. Old Trafford is like a morgue a lot of the time, and as loud as Anfield can be on a European Cup night against smaller teams the atmosphere is very disappointing. All teams suffer from this problem.

Hardly a problem. Why is everyone so intent on manufacturing atmosphere? If United are chasing against any team at Old Trafford, the atmosphere will come. Some countries do it differently, and have more active (which doesn't make them better) supporters. Nevertheless, who exactly is disappointed with the atmosphere? The person watching it on TV?

^^ Yep. As a fan, the atmosphere at the ground and the vocality of the supporters is one part of the club which can be held in esteem. Its only a minor issue, but something I have noticed. I imagine most fans at the ground would prefer a louder atmosphere with more chanting also.

Surprisingly for me, the games in the grounds of smaller clubs like Newcastle and Everton seem a lot louder than that of Arsenal. I just always assumed big club + big stadium = big noise. Not so it seems according to this:
http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/26102007/58/premier-league-sunderland-top-noise-table.html
and
http://answers.polldaddy.com/poll/803596/?view=results

I was wondering whether the new stadium has something to do with the lack of atmsophere, but Telfordboy reminded me of the nature of Arsenal fans.

^^ That noise table looks a bit odd. Even though it is relatively low down the chart, it still has The Emirates Stadium as noisier than Anfield which is slightly surprising given Liverpool's reputation and also the significantly larger Old Trafford. Has success something to do with it maybe?

Just googling a bit more I found this on another forum.
Sky+HD Noise Level League Table

1 - Stoke City - 101.8 decibels
2 - Tottenham Hotspur - 97.58 decibels
3 - Liverpool - 95.4 decibels
4 - Portsmouth - 94.3 decibels
5 - Newcastle United - 94.06 decibels
6 - Aston Villa - 92.2 decibels
7 - Chelsea - 92.06 decibels
8 - Middlesbrough - 91.3 decibels
9 - Arsenal - 90.8 decibels
10 - West Bromwich Albion - 90.26 decibels
11 - Everton - 89.98 decibels
12 - Blackburn Rovers - 89.3 decibels
13 - Bolton Wanderers - 88 decibels
14 - Manchester City - 87.25 decibels
15 - Fulham - 87 decibels
16 - Manchester United - 86.5 decibels
17 - West Ham United - 86.15 decibels
18 - Wigan Athletic - 86.16 decibels
19 - Hull City - 84.6 decibels
20 - Sunderland - 84.05 decibels

So the top team in the first table is bottom in this one.Not much consistency in these charts.

I think the sloping roof of the North Stand reduces a lot of the noise at Old Trafford. Also, in regards to big club = big noise, it is often the opposite. Reason being they attract too many fair weather fans who just like to sit there and watch the game, contributing nothing to the atmosphere. I think that is often related to higher ticket prices as well.

That list can't have been averaged over a few games because there is no way Sunderland and West Ham fans make less noise than Fulham fans! It all depends on the occasion.

I wonder if there is one for away fans as well? You would see massive differences!

They seem to have measured levels in a different way.The top table provides figures as average maximum noise levels with Sunderland at the top with an average peak noise level of 129.2 decibels and Fulham at the bottom with 115.4.

What do you expect from the emirates when the club's target demographic is the monied middle classes. You'll never see rabid London locals (in large numbers) in that stadium, until they lower prices. And that ain't gonna happen.

For all the good "community" work Arsenal do in the VERY deprived area they play in, i'm sure the kids round there would give an arm and a leg to be able to attend a few games a season instead of go to some shitty workshop and i'm sure those same children would have no qualms about singing and shouting.

The emirates sucks big time imho, the view is shit from the lower tier and the fans are too far away, it's cold and it's full of mugs who are there to be entertained. Carling cup games are better. Heck the youth cup final last year was refereshing, full of lots of chavs and rudeboys but at least there was an atmosphere (of sorts).

Also the fucking stewards are dickheads, this sitting down malarky sucks.

and them fucking giving out scarfs at the pompey? game. Apparently that went on general sale four days before the match, I thought wow, then i looked at £35 and travel, drinks, food etc and you know it adds up



That list can't have been averaged over a few games because there is no way Sunderland and West Ham fans make less noise than Fulham fans! It all depends on the occasion.



West ham fans only know one song

^^ That noise table looks a bit odd. Even though it is relatively low down the chart, it still has The Emirates Stadium as noisier than Anfield which is slightly surprising given Liverpool's reputation and also the significantly larger Old Trafford. Has success something to do with it maybe?

Just googling a bit more I found this on another forum.
Sky+HD Noise Level League Table

1 - Stoke City - 101.8 decibels
2 - Tottenham Hotspur - 97.58 decibels
3 - Liverpool - 95.4 decibels
4 - Portsmouth - 94.3 decibels
5 - Newcastle United - 94.06 decibels
6 - Aston Villa - 92.2 decibels
7 - Chelsea - 92.06 decibels
8 - Middlesbrough - 91.3 decibels
9 - Arsenal - 90.8 decibels
10 - West Bromwich Albion - 90.26 decibels
11 - Everton - 89.98 decibels
12 - Blackburn Rovers - 89.3 decibels
13 - Bolton Wanderers - 88 decibels
14 - Manchester City - 87.25 decibels
15 - Fulham - 87 decibels
16 - Manchester United - 86.5 decibels
17 - West Ham United - 86.15 decibels
18 - Wigan Athletic - 86.16 decibels
19 - Hull City - 84.6 decibels
20 - Sunderland - 84.05 decibels

So the top team in the first table is bottom in this one.Not much consistency in these charts.

Spurs were consistently second in both cases!

Bah! Just missing out again. ;)

Spurs were consistently second in both cases!

Bah! Just missing out again. ;)

So they were. Didn't notice that for some reason.;)

Carling cup games are better. Heck the youth cup final last year was refereshing, full of lots of chavs and rudeboys but at least there was an atmosphere (of sorts).

Also the fucking stewards are dickheads, this sitting down malarky sucks.

The cup games at big clubs are always much better because they go on general sale straight away.

The chavs make the atmosphere. When they're in attendance then everyone turns into a rudeboy! :lol:

There's only one thing worse than stewards telling home fans to sit down and that's stewards telling away fans to sit down. Watching the highlights that doesn't seem to happen at premiership grounds thank goodness!

Certain grounds (and you know who you are!) on the other hand...*cough* Leeds *cough*

For the Champions League matches, does the capacity of the Emirates stay at above 60,000 per match?

Yes.

Drove past on Sunday and noticed the 2nd mural was up so I took a pic.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v257/carlspannard/SNC00040.jpg

^^ they look like they need to pull their wedgies out :lol:

What do you expect from the emirates when the club's target demographic is the monied middle classes. You'll never see rabid London locals (in large numbers) in that stadium, until they lower prices. And that ain't gonna happen.

For all the good "community" work Arsenal do in the VERY deprived area they play in, i'm sure the kids round there would give an arm and a leg to be able to attend a few games a season instead of go to some shitty workshop and i'm sure those same children would have no qualms about singing and shouting.
The prices at the new stadium are pretty much comparable to the prices at the all seater Highbury.Expensive but I wouldnt blame the new stadium for those prices.


The emirates sucks big time imho, the view is shit from the lower tier and the fans are too far away, it's cold and it's full of mugs who are there to be entertained. Carling cup games are better. Heck the youth cup final last year was refereshing, full of lots of chavs and rudeboys but at least there was an atmosphere (of sorts).
Architecturally there are some signigicant things I like about it. I think the main entrance side is pretty good. Going to the stadium from that side it looks huge and impressive and it does actually look like a football stadium. On the downside I agree that once you get onto the plinth around the stadium it becomes a cold concrete monolith. Horrible compared to Highbury.
Again on the inside I think the stadium looks very impressive. I agree the gradient is too low on the lower tier but having said that one of the distuishing features of Highbury was the shallow tiers. The clock end could hold up to 18k supporters in its prime..similar capacity to The Kop but looking at it from ground level because of the very shallow tiers at Highbury it looked much smaller.. more like a 7 thousand capacity end.I still loved Highbury nonetheless.In my experiences the upper tier views are fine.
My real hate is the Emirates sponsorship. Terrible name for the Arsenal stadium and the Emirates logo also looks terrible on the exterior.

Also the fucking stewards are dickheads, this sitting down malarky sucks.
Again pretty much how it was at Highbury.


and them fucking giving out scarfs at the pompey? game. Apparently that went on general sale four days before the match, I thought wow, then i looked at £35 and travel, drinks, food etc and you know it adds up

Not mad on this type of thing but again I generally do dislike contrived hamfisted attempts at creating atmosphere.

The prices at the new stadium are pretty much comparable to the prices at the all seater Highbury.Expensive but I wouldnt blame the new stadium for those prices.

That's the point we increased the capacity of our ground, not so we can let more fans in or diversify our match going fanbase, but so the club can extort more money from said fans.

Take the size of the ground, it's set well below demand despite being far larger than highbury, the reason is so they can keep tickets high. Of course we know they were restricted to this capacity at the time, but they could've built the stadium with expansion in mind if you know what i mean.

Do you know how close we were to acquiring land around kings cross btw?

Architecturally there are some signigicant things I like about it. I think the main entrance side is pretty good. Going to the stadium from that side it looks huge and impressive and it does actually look like a football stadium. On the downside I agree that once you get onto the plinth around the stadium it becomes a cold concrete monolith. Horrible compared to Highbury.

I do agree it does have an impossing feel... I don't know if you've ever got the train past it, it does look "impressive" from the railway line.

But i am so dissapointed that they didn't go for the art deco exterior something classy and Arsenal like if you will. I don't like all the new murals it's looking cheesy.

Again on the inside I think the stadium looks very impressive.

The toilets are swish... but the concourse area is just bog standard fare to me... Dark etc

I don't like three tier stadiums with the emirates set up. I wish the mioddle tier was larger, or it was just two tiered. It looks more like an entertainment venue/piece of architecture than a football ground/stadium. And i'm so jealous of tottenham's one tier end. I don't think it looks good on TV either, especially behind the goals.

I agree the gradient is too low on the lower tier but having said that one of the distuishing features of Highbury was the shallow tiers. The clock end could hold up to 18k supporters in its prime..similar capacity to The Kop but looking at it from ground level because of the very shallow tiers at Highbury it looked much smaller.. more like a 7 thousand capacity end.

Wait i'm confused the kop when it was all standing held close to 25,000 did it not? and the clock end all seated only held 6,000, granted when it was terraced it had the corners filled in but i was always led to believe that it held around 15,000.

If you work it out Highbury held 57,000 in the 1980s The east and west stands held 20,000 all seated so maybe a couple of thousand more with the paddocks at the front, that would only leave around 35,000 for standing and the north bank was bigger than the clock end wasn't it? Or are you talking about in the 1930s?

I never went on the clock end tbf, although when I went to Highbury (as a kid) I never really noticed shallowness.

I still loved Highbury nonetheless.

I still don't think we should've left, I think we could've maximised capacity on that site with a few strategic purchases and using the land beind the clock end.

In my experiences the upper tier views are fine.

I've sat behind the goal and on the sides on the lower tier and the view is shit, haven't had the pleasure of an upper tier view, but I think because of the shitty club level it may feel detached from the stadium and the action, no?

My real hate is the Emirates sponsorship. Terrible name for the Arsenal stadium and the Emirates logo also looks terrible on the exterior.

No doubt about it, not only that we vastly undersold the rights and for way too long. i have beef with shirt sponsorship too but that's another issue.

Again pretty much how it was at Highbury.

I'm "young" bruv, my highbury experiences were when i was a child. They closed the stadium when i was at university.

Not mad on this type of thing but again I generally do dislike contrived hamfisted attempts at creating atmosphere.

What annoys me about it is the club are consciously trying to stifle spontanious fan support and turn the club into a corporate family holiday. Money is the only thing they care about. I look back with envy at the old atmosphere in football and especially highbury.

I have no problem with the corporates and the families I just feel that clubs should (be forced to) market to all types of fans not just those with money. I mean have sections for each type of fans.

The reality is that Premier league football clubs don't have enough price points, Arsenal are under pricing the good seats and over pricing the bad seats. What I mean is that in Germany or Italy say the cheap seats/terraces are offset by the price of the good seats. Arsenal's standard ticket range is ludicrous (http://www.arsenal.com/membership/buy-tickets).

The most expensive (non corporate seat) in the prem is way cheaper than in most foreign leagues, but then our cheapest tickets are way more expensive. They only do this because these clubs are in such demand anyway.

If i was being perfectly honest I'd say that i'm embarrassed by a lot of our fans especially as they seem to give us this fluffy reputation which makes us an easy target for mockers. Living in London and having a load of Millwall, West ham and yiddo friends you get it, if you know what I mean.

All this is probably why i'd advocate a return of terracing and more stringent and sensible league wide pricing policies.

No doubt about it, not only that we vastly undersold the rights and for way too long. i have beef with shirt sponsorship too but that's another issue.

At least you don't have a sportsbook website or a bankrupt financial institution on the front of the shirt

^^ all as bad as each other!

Do you know how close we were to acquiring land around kings cross btw?
No idea. All I knew about it was that it was regarded as a possible option, but never saw anything in the way of details.

Wait i'm confused the kop when it was all standing held close to 25,000 did it not? and the clock end all seated only held 6,000, granted when it was terraced it had the corners filled in but i was always led to believe that it held around 15,000[./QUOTE]

If you work it out Highbury held 57,000 in the 1980s The east and west stands held 20,000 all seated so maybe a couple of thousand more with the paddocks at the front, that would only leave around 35,000 for standing and the north bank was bigger than the clock end wasn't it? Or are you talking about in the 1930s?

I never went on the clock end tbf, although when I went to Highbury (as a kid) I never really noticed shallowness.

I thought that The Kop was around 20k during the 70s and 80s but you could be right.In regards to Highbury during the 70s and much of the 80s the capacity was stated as 60,000.The biggest crowds I experienced there were about 55 ish. At that level you were literally sandwiched in.Whether in reality it could ever have gotten within a few hundred of the 60k mark I dont know but the clock end estimate was based on that.You could be right that in practice the capacity was nearer 15. I only mentioned it because it had an obviously low rake.This pic gives an idea of what I mean. Looking at it here you wouldnt have thought it was as big as it was.
http://www.oldgrounds.co.uk/arsenal41.jpg

I've sat behind the goal and on the sides on the lower tier and the view is shit, haven't had the pleasure of an upper tier view, but I think because of the shitty club level it may feel detached from the stadium and the action, no?

Not really, in my experience. In fact you actually feel a bit more on top of the action from the upper tier and the stadium looks more vertical/taller than it does from ground level.

Could anyone post some pictures showing the atmosphere of the stadium during the matches?

Could anyone post some pictures showing the atmosphere of the stadium during the matches?


Atmosphere at the Emirates? Are you on a WUM?

:lol::rofl::lol:

No idea. All I knew about it was that it was regarded as a possible option, but never saw anything in the way of details.

I thought that The Kop was around 20k during the 70s and 80s but you could be right.In regards to Highbury during the 70s and much of the 80s the capacity was stated as 60,000.

Well i've always thought highbury held 57,000 because it held about 70,000 until they put seats on the west stand in 1970, that reduced the capacity to 63,000 then the safety in sports ground act (1975) reduced it further to 57,000 ish.

Our highest crowd (league, dunno about cup) of the 1980s was in 1980/81 vs Aston villa, the last game of the season (when apparently Pele turned up), villa had the whole clock end and won the league coz Ipswich lost (or something like that). But the crowd was "only" 57,482. That was the highest crowd that season too.

Apparently Arsenal fans of the day didn't take to kindly to villa winning the title on our manor and invaded the pitch on mass
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3059/2339972255_0ec853b53b.jpg?v=0

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3291/2340808942_0af9b05c12.jpg?v=0

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2342/2339974175_6e5229f751.jpg?v=0


The biggest crowds I experienced there were about 55 ish. At that level you were literally sandwiched in.Whether in reality it could ever have gotten within a few hundred of the 60k mark I dont know but the clock end estimate was based on that.You could be right that in practice the capacity was nearer 15. I only mentioned it because it had an obviously low rake.This pic gives an idea of what I mean. Looking at it here you wouldnt have thought it was as big as it was.
http://www.oldgrounds.co.uk/arsenal41.jpg

How could you... you show a picture of the yids actually beating us

Like you say i've heard stories of people say that when crowds were really huge your feet barely (if ever) touched the ground. Makes you wonder. Although i've heard lots of stories about how attendances weren't accurate.

For example the game against Tottenham (63/64) that officially got 67,857, I've heard that the real crowd was actually closer to 80,000.

I've also heard stories of the game against Derby (cup replay) in the early 1970s that was re arranged for a daytime game (three day week?) which had an offical gate of around 62,000 was predicted by some to really be 80,000+ (apparently a crush barrier went and we nearly had a major disaster).

The point being that maybe many of these large crowds where people were shoved in were a lot larger than what was declared. Hence why they were so overcrowded... who knows...

Not really, in my experience. In fact you actually feel a bit more on top of the action from the upper tier and the stadium looks more vertical/taller than it does from ground level.

Fair enough, i just would've thought it would cut the atmosphere if you understand. Probably part of the reason why i like stadiums with less tiers.

How could you... you show a picture of the yids actually beating us

It just shows how old that picture was.

Well i've always thought highbury held 57,000 because it held about 70,000 until they put seats on the west stand in 1970, that reduced the capacity to 63,000 then the safety in sports ground act (1975) reduced it further to 57,000 ish.


It was 57,000. There used to be wooden seats in both east and west stands, but standing areas in the front parts where the family enclosures were. I remember turning up one night to see a game Vs Liverpool in a league cup replay (1 of 3 replays!). The stadium was full and there were thousands locked out, including me.

Being a youngster in those days I used to sit on the terrace rails and often got bumped off of them when we scored! :banana:

Your team suck, but the stadium is awesome.


Go on Chelsea!

Another bit of "Arsenalisation" (photos from Flickr)
Plain red
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/176/434294127_0f9e0d51c4_b.jpg
http://www.flickr.com/photos/erase/434294127/sizes/l/

With Cannon
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2465/4069861538_588088626c_b.jpg
http://www.flickr.com/photos/27453474@N02/4069861538/

With Cannon
It just points to the wrong direction

It just points to the wrong direction
Not sure what you mean? Do you mean
old v modern badge?
http://img140.imageshack.us/img140/8374/arsenalcrestb0sk.gif
Or do you mean the picture itself?

^^he means the cannon is supposed to face left not right. Although our first badge it face right

that cannon has been there since the start of the season.

I thought thats what he meant. The current cannon faces right so it is pointing in the correct direction and as you say if he means historically that also wouldn't be strictly true. The cannon has been there since the start of he season but thats the first pic I've seen without it draped in scarves or with people sitting in them. Looks quite good from that angle.The art deco style badge might have looked quite good too. I wouldnt want them to add much more though. I think restraint makes the bowl look classy.

Not sure what you mean? Do you mean
old v modern badge?
http://img140.imageshack.us/img140/8374/arsenalcrestb0sk.gif
Or do you mean the picture itself?
This exactly what I mean. It always pointed to the left. And all of a sudden it switched direction. It looks so wrong.

Well i've always thought highbury held 57,000 because it held about 70,000 until they put seats on the west stand in 1970, that reduced the capacity to 63,000 then the safety in sports ground act (1975) reduced it further to 57,000 ish.

Our highest crowd (league, dunno about cup) of the 1980s was in 1980/81 vs Aston villa, the last game of the season (when apparently Pele turned up), villa had the whole clock end and won the league coz Ipswich lost (or something like that). But the crowd was "only" 57,482. That was the highest crowd that season too.

Like you say i've heard stories of people say that when crowds were really huge your feet barely (if ever) touched the ground. Makes you wonder. Although i've heard lots of stories about how attendances weren't accurate.

For example the game against Tottenham (63/64) that officially got 67,857, I've heard that the real crowd was actually closer to 80,000.


The highest attendance for a game at Highbury is 73,295 against Sunderland on 9 March 1935. Source: "Arsenal. The Football Facts", by Perry Groves. London, John Blake Publishing, 2007.

^^I'm confused, what has that got to do with anything I said?

My post was clearly about the 1970/80s not the 1930s. Regardless of whether we got a crowd of 73,295 in 1935, or the other 70,000+ crowds we got before the mid 1950s, it doesn't mean that was the stadiums capacity in 1964 or dates after. It also doesn't mean that there couldn't be more than 73,295 in the ground on that or any other occassion, that is what we call an official number and there is lots of evidence to suggest they weren't always that accurate.

This exactly what I mean. It always pointed to the left. And all of a sudden it switched direction. It looks so wrong.

looks better to me

^^I'm confused, what has that got to do with anything I said?

My post was clearly about the 1970/80s not the 1930s. Regardless of whether we got a crowd of 73,295 in 1935, or the other 70,000+ crowds we got before the mid 1950s, it doesn't mean that was the stadiums capacity in 1964 or dates after. It also doesn't mean that there couldn't be more than 73,295 in the ground on that or any other occassion, that is what we call an official number and there is lots of evidence to suggest they weren't always that accurate.

It doesn't mean this, it doesn't mean that... What is the point of this discussion, then? Trying to determine Highbury's capacity? Trying to find out what the biggest crowd ever was? What does it matter whether the attendance figures predate or postdate the year 1964? If you don't trust the official attendance figures, what kind of parameters are we supposed to use? Just rule of thumb?

It doesn't mean this, it doesn't mean that... What is the point of this discussion, then? Trying to determine Highbury's capacity?

1. The "discussion" had been resolved

2. It was about determining highbury's capacity in the 1970s and 1980s.

you would've known this if you read what has been written.

Trying to find out what the biggest crowd ever was?

No

What does it matter whether the attendance figures predate or postdate the year 1964?

Because if you knew what you were talking about you know the ground had a different capacity before and after those dates (larger before) and given the fact we were debating the capacity post 1970, crowds pre 1964 have no baring.

If you don't trust the official attendance figures, what kind of parameters are we supposed to use? Just rule of thumb?

I never said I didn't trust the official figures... parameters for what?

I have no idea what the point of your post was except to get involved in a converstation which you didn't understand for the sake of doing so.

^^ "I heard... such & such thing"

"I always thought... such & such thing"

Your assertions are based on hearsay & personal opinion. Those are your parameters.

My assertions are based on figures cited in books. Those are my parameters.

Now do you understand what "parameters" mean?

^^What on earth have you been smoking?

^^ he's a fruit loop schmeek, quite clearly clueless too!

Doing some reseach about the emirates stadium and digging the pitch down, I found some difinitive information about the site constraints

http://www.burohappold.com/BH/NWS_2005emiratesstadium.aspx

Site constraints

The Ashburton Grove site presented Buro Happold with a series of significant engineering design
challenges.

Its triangular shape occupies 70,000 m2 of brownfield land which over the years has been used for a
variety of purposes. Most recently it has been home to a number of industrial units including a waste
transfer station.

The new stadium has been positioned as far to the apex of the triangular site as possible so that the
full development potential of land lying to the south can be realised.

The west side of the site is bounded by a Network Rail 6m high brickwork retaining wall, behind which
lies the East Coast main railway line. Lying next to the east side of the site is a railway cutting within
which run four local rail lines.

Approximately 7m beneath the western wall are two London Underground tunnels for the Piccadilly
line. On the eastern site boundary are two further London Underground tunnels serving the Victoria
line at a depth of 8m.

Three Thames Water main sewers run beneath the site. Two of these pass through the site from north
to south, one at a depth of 3m and the other at 8m. The deeper of these forms part of a storm relief
system for the area which discharges into a primary storm relief sewer crossing the site from east
to west at a depth of 17m.

The sub-surface strata generally consists of made-ground overlying alluvial deposits overlying London Clay. The London Clay generally starts at between 3 to 6 metres below ground level ends to a depth of approximately 25m below ground level.

Due to the variety of industrial uses some of the land was contaminated at upper strata level.

^^ he's a fruit loop schmeek, quite clearly clueless too!

Doing some reseach about the emirates stadium and digging the pitch down, I found some difinitive information about the site constraints

http://www.burohappold.com/BH/NWS_2005emiratesstadium.aspx

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=38471172&postcount=3415
:okay:

^^ ahh nice, I missed that

Atmosphere at the Emirates? Are you on a WUM?

:lol::rofl::lol:

I admit that it doesnt happen anywhere near often enough but the atmosphere is ok for the biggest games.
yw3IJ8pFsWs
Generally though lack of atmosphere is obviously a problem and I know that Red Action do put a fair bit of effort in but they are in the wrong part of the stadium imo if they want to make a difference. In a stand with a roof noisier fans should be at the back as the acoustics mean that their voices echo around the stand and the chants catch on more.Thats how it used to be back in the day anyway.

There are rumours that the Arsenal Stadium may be expanded. However, the stadium's design would not support any expansion, and if there were any real expansion plans, I should be against it.

Money is a big problem for Arsenal at the moment, they cannot afford to expand the ground for a long while.

In yesterdays program they say the biggest attendance to be 73,295 in 1935 against Sunderland.

Maybe with smaller seats they could get more in the ground but whether it would be allowed I am not sure.

A night at the Emirates. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8oGGm13qWo)

Ireland V Brazil at the Emirates on Tuesday. Might be a good idea to cover this mural up for that game.:)
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4025/4359925763_1504197898.jpg

Spanoosh do you know how much we get for these international friendlies?

Spanoosh do you know how much we get for these international friendlies?

No I don't. I would be interested to know though.

Stadium is beautiful, modern, large, but the atmosphere is terrible, as in the theater.