Uninspirational new stadia in the UK [Archive]

redTom

August 3rd, 2007, 02:27 PM

All built / proposed in the last 12ish years.

Middlesborough:
http://www.euro-goal.info/eurox/england/images/stadiums/a/Cellnet%20Riverside%20Stadium.jpg

Derby:
http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/town/park/yfh45/Derby32.jpg

Southampton:
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/41009000/jpg/_41009316_southampton_pa_416x300.jpg

Leicester:
http://www.ercrugby.com/images/news/walkers_stadium.jpg

Stoke:
http://www.musco.com/projshow/images/britanniastadium.jpg

Reading:
http://www.arsenal.com/Images/g/ground_reading.jpg

Coventry:
http://www.thefa.com/NR/rdonlyres/4AEF4E82-686D-40A0-AAD1-BA95A876FCD0/95443/CoventryCity_Ricoh_L.jpg

Sunderland:
http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/europe/united_kingdom/england/north_east/sunderland_stadium_of_light2.jpg

Hull:
http://www.eriding.net/media/photos/geography/040430_amoore_mp_geo_hull_kcstad2.jpg

Cardiff (render):
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/42233000/jpg/_42233090_new_stadium06_203.jpg

Granted, some designers have made more of an effort than others to make parts of their stadia unique but it just seems to be cost over character most of the time. I'm sure it is possible to be a little bolder with design features without spending loads more money.

Peyre

August 3rd, 2007, 02:53 PM

All of those stadiums are mind numbing-ly dull. Only the KC has a bit of character, particularly considering the relative size of the club.

marrio415

August 3rd, 2007, 04:33 PM

thers nothing wrong with sunderlands stadium have you seen the the exterior of the main stand and the interior aint bad either

redTom

August 3rd, 2007, 05:02 PM

was in two minds whether to put Sunderlands in but that corner image just looked very similar to all the others. Admittedly a bit more thought has gone into the finer details than some of the others.

Was hoping to go there this season, and see for myself but the buggers have cut our allocation by 600 so i might struggle for a ticket!

CharlieP

August 3rd, 2007, 05:41 PM

The Ricoh Arena stands out from the rest of those - that big white wall with the windows in it is ugly as sin...

Telfordboy

August 3rd, 2007, 05:45 PM

Speaking of which, have you seen the shockingly hideous New Meadow? :puke:

Sparks

August 3rd, 2007, 05:51 PM

Economics, all clubs want new stadiums for the cheapest possible price.

Having an innovative and challenging new design will bring in no more money than a simple bowl would do, it would however cost a lot more.

None of the clubs in the above list are particularly rich, The Stadium of Light cost £23 million for a 42.000 seat stadium, which is fantastic, you wouldn't turn that down.

redTom

August 3rd, 2007, 05:52 PM

Some of these grounds wouldn't seem half as bad if they weren't built in out of town retail parks / derelict docklands.

At least Leicester made an effort to keep their new ground in a community.
comes down to how much the land value is i guess as well.

legolamb

August 3rd, 2007, 06:53 PM

You can't seriously lump Hull's KC Stadium in with some of those others. It's one of the best new stadiums built in the country in the last 10 years.

It was voted the best stadium in the UK a couple of years ago in asurvey of Football fans across the country conducted by the FA.

It is also as central to the 'community' as it is possible to be. It is in a public park on a major road, five minutes from the city centre and Paragon station. It is owned by the council, and as such boasts scores of facilities and initiatives that are 'community' based (Cybercafes, Learning centres, Conference arena, etc.)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/threecounties/content/images/2005/05/20/kc_stadium_hull_empty_400x300.jpg

http://www.bizweek.biz/2006/img/big_stadium2.jpg

http://photo.net/bboard-uploads/00AsUP-21507084.jpg

http://www.ukstudentlife.com/Travel/Tours/England/Hull/KCStadium.jpg

Telfordboy

August 3rd, 2007, 08:30 PM

Yeah the KC is much better than the likes of Pride Park and St Mary's.

JamesWales

August 3rd, 2007, 08:38 PM

The problem is the lack of democracy in football, a useless football licencing authority and the way OTT capitalist nature of contemporary football. This kind of dull crap doesnt happen in other countries, where the fans have more say, the clubs are more ingrained within their communities and where fans feelings towards new stadia are considered.

As for Cardiffs new ground, I am sure it will be dull in design, but at least it will have its own railway station and will be located in the community in which it has stood for a century.

We will continue to have dull uninspiring new stadia for years to come. They look cheap, they are often poorly located, with bad public transport links, the atmosphere within them is frequently atrocious, they are expensive to get into and once inside you feel like a customer at a cinema. I'd urge all people with a concern in these matters to join the FSF (football supporters federation) or standupsitdown, who are campaigning to allow standing to be returned in football...

We need progress but not at a price that rips the heart out of the culture and history of this sport and it's supporters. We need to look to Germany in this regard. Magnificent socially inclusive stadia that offer supporters a choice whether to sit or stand.

Sorry to rant, but I feel extremely passionate about football.

BeestonLad

August 3rd, 2007, 09:22 PM

The worst one is Leicesters by far. With Derby you have another tier on one of the stands, Sunderlands has two tiers for part of the ground too. Readings has slightly different seating patterns and Hulls also is a bit different. Where as Leicesters is just that bog stadard one tier all the way around nothing much to differentiate each stand

JamesWales

August 3rd, 2007, 09:51 PM

Yep as a Leicester fan I can confirm it is pretty shite. Literally the only distinguishing feature is that it has some crappy lino around the roof of the stand with pictures of old players on it. When I was younger Filbert street was like heaven to me. It was flawed, but you knew where you were, the atmosphere was cracking, and from the top of the double decker stand you had a great view of Leicester which was great when the football was crap (which it very rarely was in the late 1990's)

Gherkin

August 3rd, 2007, 10:15 PM

Speaking of which, have you seen the shockingly hideous New Meadow? :puke:

Leave it alone, it's only small! It's far better than that ghastly stadium in Telford (if that can be classed as a new stadium), but it isn't a patch on Gay Meadow.

Here's some recent aerial pics of the new stadium in Shrewsbury:
http://www.newmeadow.com/spgm/index.php?spgmGal=aerial_jul07

Scarecrow

August 3rd, 2007, 10:20 PM

Like a miniature version of EFC's Kirkby proposal!

Telfordboy

August 3rd, 2007, 11:51 PM

Leave it alone, it's only small! It's far better than that ghastly stadium in Telford (if that can be classed as a new stadium), but it isn't a patch on Gay Meadow.

Here's some recent aerial pics of the new stadium in Shrewsbury:
http://www.newmeadow.com/spgm/index.php?spgmGal=aerial_jul07

The hell it is! New Meadow is a cheap and tacky piece of shit. Looks like its made of lego it poor on form and asethetics AND its in an out of town location PLUS the whole planning process was dodgy as fuck. Yeah selling the Gay Meadow for residential development yeah thats a good idea.
The New Bucks Head remains in the same place its always been on Watling Street. The fans frequent the same pubs they always have AND on the rare occassion that there are away fans the atmosphere is cracking.

http://i159.photobucket.com/albums/t129/gradymclean/haybridge-rd-c0033.jpg

Gherkin

August 4th, 2007, 01:58 AM

What's become of Telford United? How's the hotel on-site doing? I used to drive past it every week and wonder if anyone went to a hotel overlooking a desolate football ground. I miss Gay Meadow! At least they aren't replacing it with a Tesco.

Telfordboy

August 4th, 2007, 02:23 AM

The hotel does very well actually and as for AFC Telford United, well 2 promotions in 3 years since we 'died'. We're now just one tier below where we were and our attendances have increased massively. Good enough?

I always sit in the 'F' ^^ :D

Its pretty good for a Conference North ground imo.

MoreOrLess

August 4th, 2007, 08:53 AM

Not that I'm a fan of this brand of design(other than the Rioch and KC) but alot of these grounds look they way they do to enable expansion, if/when that happens I'd guess many of them will become more individual.

Chrisyd

August 4th, 2007, 11:13 AM

The only side at Coventry which I doubt can be expanded is the one with the white wall, behind it is the indoor arena, restaurants and the wonderful new casino (although that is under ground)

legolamb

August 4th, 2007, 12:29 PM

Hull's stadium has a 25,000 capacity, but was built with the ability to be expanded to 35,000 (which the Tigers used to top easily through most of the 60's and early 70's)

:)

http://stadiony.net/stadium.php?s=169
Get a load of that roof!

ccfc-4-life

August 4th, 2007, 12:52 PM

The only side at Coventry which I doubt can be expanded is the one with the white wall, behind it is the indoor arena, restaurants and the wonderful new casino (although that is under ground)

you're right, that is the only stand that cant be expanded...

if the rest was expanded the stadium would look like celtic park, or St James' Park (with the 60k capacity)

Leeds No.1

August 4th, 2007, 01:41 PM

Stadia generally aren't inspirational; I suppose Beijing's olympic one is. Wembley maybe but in the end its a normal stadium with an arch stuck on it.

I can't say any UK stadium I know of is inspirational.

RobH

August 4th, 2007, 02:30 PM

I think Beijing's stadium's a bit of a monstrosity actually, the aqua cube is a much more aesthetically pleasing design at least to me.

BTW, I think Pride Park is actaully quite a good stadium (and no, I'm not a Derby fan).

nosehairuk

August 4th, 2007, 05:02 PM

You can add Darlington to the list as well. Mini Riverside.
http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/1696/darlostadfl3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Paul D

August 4th, 2007, 05:09 PM

Gherkin

August 4th, 2007, 06:03 PM

Starscraper

August 4th, 2007, 07:22 PM

Telfordboy

August 5th, 2007, 01:20 PM

I challenge anyone to find a better Conference North/South ground.

I thought you said it was ghastly? :dunno:

I agree that its probably the best in the conf north/south :yes:

Gherkin

August 7th, 2007, 01:40 AM

^^^ I meant it's the best of the worst. ;)

Scarecrow

August 7th, 2007, 06:04 PM

I challenge anyone to find a better Conference North/South ground.

Give it a few years and you can have Elland Road. ;)

Toadboy

August 7th, 2007, 06:28 PM

Give it a few years and you can have Elland Road. ;)

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

RSWB

August 7th, 2007, 08:10 PM

I think this will be one of the most unique looking stadiums when built - Brighton & Hove albion's new stadium.

http://img234.imageshack.us/img234/6281/falmerstadium02ia3.jpg

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1290/1047022369_079599e295_o.jpg

legolamb

August 7th, 2007, 08:25 PM

Yeah. The new B&H Albion stadium looks great and cleverly blends with it's surroundings.

Gherkin

August 7th, 2007, 11:36 PM

Give it a few years and you can have Elland Road. ;)

What Toadboy said, but with one more of these: :lol: .

Wild@Heart

August 8th, 2007, 02:29 AM

Brighton are going to lead the way in terms of the size of their club and (potentially, hopefully) the quality of the stadium they're about to build. Design-wise, Falmer reminds me of the Leipzig stadium built for the 2006 World Cup in Germany:

http://www.southcn.com/sports/2006wc/data/200603270702_1265169.jpg

The new Leipzig stadium sits within the footprint of their previous 1950s complex and they've done a great thing by grassing over the old terraces. I think it looks fantastic! Maybe this was the inspiration for the grassy Brighton design...? Get it built!!!

CharlieP

August 8th, 2007, 11:18 AM

CharlieP

August 8th, 2007, 11:19 AM

Give it a few years and you can have Elland Road. ;)

:applause: :applause: :applause:

cardiff

August 10th, 2007, 11:30 AM

Now thats more like it! it looks great. How much extra cost for something that looks impressive and gives a better image of your club (and city).

daveylad2

August 11th, 2007, 01:28 AM

Give it a few years and you can have Elland Road. ;)
Maybe the conference teams will have more luck than Everton at Elland Road. They have never been able to do fuck all in it against Leeds, apart from when they had had Dixie Dean and then Wayne Rooney.

Chris H

August 11th, 2007, 03:01 AM

I was up at the Ricoh Stadium a couple of weeks ago as my beloved Sky Blues were playing La Liga side Espanyol for a friendly (I say 'friendly, two players were sent off, there were a couple of brawls and Ian Dowie got red-carded into the stands... this 'is' Coventry remember).

The interior of the stadium is actually pretty nice (the pitch surface was the best I've ever seen) although from some angles the 'white wall' does look a bit out of place and like an afterthought. Sadly, the exterior is quite simply bloody awful. It's only two years old but looks a lot more aged, being tatty and clad in cheap materials. There is no continuity to the exterior of the stadium, which looks a little like it was thrown together in various different styles. Many of the personalised bricks look tatty too now (mine, which read 'Shit On The Villa', never made it onto the fan wall for some reason). In fact it looks pretty-much unfinished in parts. It's not helped by being partially connected to a 6,000 seater entertainment arena. The area immediately surrounding the stadium is also unlandscaped, completely litter strewn and generally unkempt. I actually preferred Highfield Road Stadium, as it was a nice-looking (for its age) and very tidy ground which generated a good atmosphere. Also, being of 23,600 capacity, even when we got only 16,000 inside, it did'nt look like a ghost town.

Some of the previous posts made me laugh when questioning whether the Ricoh could be expanded. It's a 32,609 capacity stadium and Coventry's average attendence last season was around 18,500 (14,000 short of full capacity). The best attendence was for a game againist Premiership Middlesbrough in the 4th round replay of the FA Cup, when 28,500 turned up.... still a good 4,000 short of full capacity.

IMHO, the stadium will never expand beyond 32,600 as the fan base simply is'nt there, unless Coventry miraculously evolve into the next Man Utd over the next decade and attract thousands of fans from outside of the city, as Old Trafford does. I can't see it happening somehow, and I love my Sky Blues (why ? I can't answer that, but I'm sure my therapist can.....).

Dr Pepper

August 12th, 2007, 01:14 AM

The original plan was for Coventry to build this. A state of the art 44000 seat stadium with retractable roof and sliding roof. A combination of relegation and general club mis-management killed it off. Pity. It would have looked so good.

http://i10.tinypic.com/4kx9bue.jpg

Instead we now have this. There is a railway on one side and a conference facility on the other making future expansion (if it were ever needed) rather difficult.

http://i10.tinypic.com/4qncsba.jpg

Paul D

August 12th, 2007, 03:07 AM

Maybe the conference teams will have more luck than Everton at Elland Road. They have never been able to do fuck all in it against Leeds, apart from when they had had Dixie Dean and then Wayne Rooney.

They won there in the 80's in the cup too,Leeds were in a lower division then though,that sounds familiar.:cheers:

spud

August 12th, 2007, 10:45 AM

christ you're all a bunch of moaning basturds...:lol:

design costs money & time...flatpack stadia are cheap as chips, easy to build and easy to expand...

the likes of bolton & arsenal can't really expand their stadiums where as teams like sunderland can and have expanded by simply add another tier....

i'd have a flatpack stadia every time....

Scarecrow

August 12th, 2007, 10:46 AM

Don't forget the semi against Spurs in '95 Paul.

ill tonkso

August 13th, 2007, 01:39 AM

http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m6/markbewsey/pompey1.jpg
Dont Worry, Portsmouth got the worst of it...

spud

August 13th, 2007, 09:41 AM

http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m6/markbewsey/pompey1.jpg
Dont Worry, Portsmouth got the worst of it...

don't worry, it'll never get built.....

clarky

August 14th, 2007, 11:58 PM

http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m6/markbewsey/pompey1.jpg
Dont Worry, Portsmouth got the worst of it...

Great design but im afraid thats a bit to ambitious for this country expect something more like the new Derby county stadium instead.

city_thing

August 15th, 2007, 07:02 AM

I love that portsmouth stadium design, very sleek and modern. I don't understand why you guys don't like it....

spud

August 15th, 2007, 08:39 AM

RobH

August 15th, 2007, 05:07 PM

...and if you lose you could always move to Portsmouth.

ill tonkso

August 15th, 2007, 09:07 PM

I love that portsmouth stadium design, very sleek and modern. I don't understand why you guys don't like it....

The area it is in is the wrong place for a stadium full stop. Thats why.

cardiff

August 16th, 2007, 10:45 PM

Its not a housing estate, it next to the main station, ferrys arrive from gosport at the station as well, there is the main development of Gunwharf quays next to it with the spinnaker tower and east side plaza tower. The other side has the Naval dockyard museum with Victory, Warrior and Mary Rose etc. - all of which means it is totaly the wrong place for a stadium!!!!!

Toadboy

August 17th, 2007, 09:47 AM

it's a stadium inside a housing estate........seriously,who'd live there??

pompey should stop deluding themselves and build a 'simple flatpack' waterfront stadium......and i'll put my house on it thats what they'll end up with..

You'll probably find it's the housing that will pay for the stadium - no homes no stadium. I can't see what's wrong with the relationship between the stadium and residential/commercial development.

Kobo

August 17th, 2007, 08:50 PM

The area it is in is the wrong place for a stadium full stop. Thats why.

I don't understand whats wrong with the area, its right next to the train station perfect for transport. Am I correct in thinking its in Portsmouths city centre, (i've never been) hence lots of pubs and shops and things to do before and after game. A hell of a lot more interesting then outside the city next to an industrial park. Please explain further whats wrong with this area.

spud

August 18th, 2007, 08:43 AM

You'll probably find it's the housing that will pay for the stadium - no homes no stadium. I can't see what's wrong with the relationship between the stadium and residential/commercial development.

i know all to well.......

oldham athletic want to fund the redevelopment of boundary park by building a couple of hundred apartments next to the stadium..........and because of the apartments the local residents in large numbers have objected to the proposal..

but if oldham athletic submitted plans to just build 3 new stands it would get approved tomorrow....

cardiff

August 18th, 2007, 11:39 AM

The fact is that it is an historic area within Portsmouth (which there are is only a few of - actually there are lots but not like this area anyway) and the stadium would mean moving HMS Warrior from what is a prominant position at the entrance to the harbour and also mean a possible downfall in tourist numbers to the historic dockyard (which is about 30 second walk from the proposed stadium) on match days. The Historic area has a few bars and pubs which the stadium would block. The height of the stadium would diminish the percieved height of the Spinnaker tower (which isnt masive) and conflict with what is becoming an icon of Portsmouth. There are plenty of other areas near to this location that could be redeveloped more succesfully. The stadium design is great, just the location is 'inapropriate'.

Chris H

March 26th, 2008, 12:52 AM

you're right, that is the only stand that cant be expanded...

if the rest was expanded the stadium would look like celtic park, or St James' Park (with the 60k capacity)

Well, I'm a lifelong Sky Blues fan, but the new stadium is bloody awful. It's almost been purposely misdesigned, and there has been no real attempt to complete the landscpaing around it... much of which is still grubby, litter-strewn wasteland.

The corporate boxes are, for whatever reason, built atop the two-tiered and the top tier looks hopelessly small and out-of-sync with the rest of the stadium. The boxes should've been built between the two tiers and the upper tier should've been larger. It's by far the worst new stadium in the UK in terms of aesthetics. I took along a friend of mine from Sheffield last season and he he asked 'so when's it going to be finished then ?', as the outside of the stadium looked so grubby already. It just looks half-finished, but then again it is in Coventry, so if it looked even half-decent it simply would'nt fit in.

I've visted St Mary's (this weekend actually !), the Walkers Stadium and the Madjeski and yes, they are all uniformly dull and inspiring 'blandbowl' designs, but at least they have been well-finished and are tidy-looking, giving the impression of some kind of quality. The Ricoh is just a bodged mess of a stadium and is already starting to look dated.

ccfc-4-life

March 26th, 2008, 11:43 AM

Well, I'm a lifelong Sky Blues fan, but the new stadium is bloody awful. It's almost been purposely misdesigned, and there has been no real attempt to complete the landscpaing around it... much of which is still grubby, litter-strewn wasteland.

The corporate boxes are, for whatever reason, built atop the two-tiered and the top tier looks hopelessly small and out-of-sync with the rest of the stadium. The boxes should've been built between the two tiers and the upper tier should've been larger. It's by far the worst new stadium in the UK in terms of aesthetics. I took along a friend of mine from Sheffield last season and he he asked 'so when's it going to be finished then ?', as the outside of the stadium looked so grubby already. It just looks half-finished, but then again it is in Coventry, so if it looked even half-decent it simply would'nt fit in.

I've visted St Mary's (this weekend actually !), the Walkers Stadium and the Madjeski and yes, they are all uniformly dull and inspiring 'blandbowl' designs, but at least they have been well-finished and are tidy-looking, giving the impression of some kind of quality. The Ricoh is just a bodged mess of a stadium and is already starting to look dated.

I couldn't agree more with what you said there Chris.

Yeah, it annoys me when I think about the thousands of away fans who must feel uncomfortable sitting in the stadium or just ashamed, but who can blame them? we got a cheap and bland version of a cheap and bland design!:lol:

GNU

March 26th, 2008, 03:24 PM

Well, I'm a lifelong Sky Blues fan, but the new stadium is bloody awful. It's almost been purposely misdesigned, and there has been no real attempt to complete the landscpaing around it... much of which is still grubby, litter-strewn wasteland.

The corporate boxes are, for whatever reason, built atop the two-tiered and the top tier looks hopelessly small and out-of-sync with the rest of the stadium. The boxes should've been built between the two tiers and the upper tier should've been larger. It's by far the worst new stadium in the UK in terms of aesthetics. I took along a friend of mine from Sheffield last season and he he asked 'so when's it going to be finished then ?', as the outside of the stadium looked so grubby already. It just looks half-finished, but then again it is in Coventry, so if it looked even half-decent it simply would'nt fit in.

I've visted St Mary's (this weekend actually !), the Walkers Stadium and the Madjeski and yes, they are all uniformly dull and inspiring 'blandbowl' designs, but at least they have been well-finished and are tidy-looking, giving the impression of some kind of quality. The Ricoh is just a bodged mess of a stadium and is already starting to look dated.

:lol: Ricoh Arena?

Well, weve got a similar problem here in Germany. Right now quite a few 20-30k stadiums are being built, and if we dont watch out theyll all end up looking the same.
One which stands out a bit is the new SAP-Arena which comes with a decent exterior.

http://www.tsg-hoffenheim.de/assets/downloads/Stadion2.jpg

Interior wise its the same old story though:

http://www.tsg-hoffenheim.de/assets/downloads/Stadion3.jpg

wearethefuture

March 26th, 2008, 06:15 PM

Chester City's Deva Stadium is incredibly bland and uninspirational, on a dull day it looks even duller. Ricoh arena looks very bland, 3/4 of Plymouth, Shrewsbury, Colchester's new one, Darlington, in fact a lot of the new ones. Now i'm not saying that all new stadiums lack atmosphere or inspiration, i think Wembley and Emirates prove exceptions to this rule, but there does seem a desire for sanitary, non-descript flat pack stadiums in recent years something i see as being a problem in the future, when clubs will be desperate for a bit of character or uniqueness.

EssexDan86

March 26th, 2008, 06:46 PM

I'd like to think the new Southend United stadium, which has just been approved, is a little different - mainly because of how it incorporates a retail park into its shape!

http://www.southendunited.premiumtv.co.uk/javaImages/6/35/0,,10444~3093766,00.jpg

http://www.southendunited.premiumtv.co.uk/javaImages/a7/20/0,,10444~3088551,00.jpg

Not that we'll be able to fill it if we stay in League 1!

wearethefuture

March 26th, 2008, 08:30 PM

Looks allright that, interesting roof (however looks a little warehouse like). What the hell is that second tier all about (similar to Mk Dons and Ricoh Arena), looks a bit weird without it running the whole length of the pitch and having massive bits of it missing. The way the spectators enter at the back of the stand is a positive as is the fact that it is quite unique in its design.

GNU

March 26th, 2008, 09:45 PM

http://www.southendunited.premiumtv.co.uk/javaImages/6/35/0,,10444~3093766,00.jpg

Looks like a golf club/racket

Vanguard

March 27th, 2008, 11:39 AM

wearethefuture

March 27th, 2008, 12:48 PM

Meh, could be like Italy where they've had one new stadium built in the last 50 years, and that was for the 1990 WC.:ohno:

Anyways, surely a new stadium is about comfort for the fans who go to the games, not for the satisfaction a bunch of architecture junkies who will probably whinge regardless?

I am a fan that goes to games, weekly, maybe a new stadiums main aim is all about comfort, but surely that doesn't mean they all have to be identical/similar in design to achieve this. Brighton's new stadium looks comfortable, unique and maybe even eco-friendly but also looks as if it will have some kind of character and atmosphere. That should be the main aim of a new stadium; atmosphere, character and uniqueness, it is going to be comfortable regardless. I'd much prefer to see a game at Roots Hall than at that place, forget comfort, i don't go to games to be comfortable. Eventually in League 1/2 there will be very few 'home' games.

Salif

March 27th, 2008, 01:14 PM

Southend's new stadium looks a bit like a piece of sperm.

Schmeek

March 27th, 2008, 08:56 PM

I am a fan that goes to games, weekly, maybe a new stadiums main aim is all about comfort, but surely that doesn't mean they all have to be identical/similar in design to achieve this. Brighton's new stadium looks comfortable, unique and maybe even eco-friendly but also looks as if it will have some kind of character and atmosphere. That should be the main aim of a new stadium; atmosphere, character and uniqueness, it is going to be comfortable regardless. I'd much prefer to see a game at Roots Hall than at that place, forget comfort, i don't go to games to be comfortable. Eventually in League 1/2 there will be very few 'home' games.

Yes I concur. I think being too comfortable is actually a problem for football. It's one of the reasons why atmosphere is disappearing - I don't want to be a detached entity, sitting in a cinema. It want it to be raw and rough round the edges, and to feel as if I can influence what I am seeing somehow.

redTom

March 27th, 2008, 09:03 PM

but maybe sperm is more appropriate! Seriously, what is the fixation with football grounds plonked on retail parks?

I guess its down to cost at the end of the day. Unless old rickety wooden stands are transported to out of town, new grounds are never going to recreate the character of stadia built 100 years ago.

I haven't visited either yet but from what i've seen of The emirates and Wembley, i don't think you can omit them from lacking character just because they're the biggest 'new' grounds in the land.

Its quite often the location that they are built in which gives them their uniqueness as well.

from personal experience though, i'd rather have a spec behind a post at Kenilworth Road over 3ft of leg room at a Madejski any day.

Maybe thats just me though...

Starslight

March 27th, 2008, 10:04 PM

sterock85

March 29th, 2008, 04:15 AM

Stadiums being built out of town or outside the actual city is just horrible.

Chris H

April 16th, 2008, 11:44 PM

OMG, and I thought the Ricoh Arena was bad. That Southend Utd stadium looks like a shocker, with a bloody great long retail park sticking out of it like a spear in a wounded animal.

Yurrgh.... Surely they can separate the two structures as this looks truly terrible ?

Suburban Knight

April 18th, 2008, 12:20 PM

I think the southend stadium looks pretty good - somethign different to all the bland identikits.

OperateOnMe

April 18th, 2008, 10:40 PM

Well I know you have to take a fly sqautter with you when you go for a picnic on the beach (Southend) but this is taking it too literally.

RobH

April 19th, 2008, 01:15 PM

It's the national badminton stadium don't ya know.

Pompey77

May 10th, 2008, 01:58 AM

JamesWales

May 10th, 2008, 09:17 PM

After today’s opening game at The Swalec stadium (sophia gardens) i really think it qualifies for inclusion here. People keep saying it represents huge ambition on Glamorgan’s part but that is all it is.

At first it seems remarkable that they have built all that they have for £9m until you actually see it and then you understand how. I can appreciate it was done on a budget in a desperate attempt for test status, which they have now gained, but it has ended up looking like a third rate venue from the colonies. This is a fantastic thing for Glamorgan and Cardiff in general but not worthy of test status.

Sorry Glamorgan but this ground does not disserve the opening test in next years ashes. I can’t help thinking its a bit embarrassing that an ashes test will be played there. This is exactly the problem with the ECB's plans we will end up with 9 or 10 mediocre venues rather than 3-4 fantastic ones.

Honestly, I couldn't agree less. I went to the game against Gloucestershire yesterday and it's a fantastic stadium, built at very good value. The concourses are 'open' underneath and the whole stadia has a really nice airy feel about it. It has four unique stands, is set in the central park in the city centre. It is certainly unique, and not worthy of comparison to the identikit football stadia being mentioned here!

It is on the smaller side of test cricket venues, but my understanding is that it is larger than Trent Bridge, so it's large enough. Admittedly the riverside stand is small, but this stand contrasts beautifully with the park in the background..

Soooooooo, while I accept that it may or may not be worthy of holding the first test match, it is certainly a fine cricket stadium, and whatever it is, it certainly cannot be cconsidered an 'uninspirational new stadia' in my opinion. Anyone visiting the ground will really enjoy it I think.

There's some decent shots from last night here:
http://cupfinalseuropeanmisc.fotopic.net/c1508027.html

:)

Schmeek

May 10th, 2008, 10:39 PM

Looks alright to me. Who won?

JamesWales

May 10th, 2008, 10:43 PM

Looks alright to me. Who won?

Gloucestershire! A good weekend if you support them and Bristol City!

BeestonLad

May 11th, 2008, 09:05 PM

It isnt larger than Trent Bridge, and it is a pretty uninspirational design but thats what you get for that money so fair play!

JamesWales

May 11th, 2008, 10:25 PM

It isnt larger than Trent Bridge, and it is a pretty uninspirational design but thats what you get for that money so fair play!

I'm not normally one for the splitting of hairs, but cric info states Trent Bridge's capacity as 15,350 while Sophia Gardens/SWALEC's total is 15,829. I appreciate that Trent Bridge is increasing though, so I may be wrong, if that has already happened.

Guys, I'm not claiming Sophia Gardens to be the greatest cricket ground around, I wish it were 2-3000 seats bigger but having been there on friday, I can confirm that while it's not perfect, it is far from being uninspirational in both design, colouring, stand variety, location and most other aspects of how we are judging these mostly footballl stadia on this thread.

The irony is that what Glammy have achieved with the stadium, and the ashes is probably the biggest inspiration possible to 90% of the county sides.

Best Test stadium in the UK? NO.
Lovely Location and Stadium? YES.
Uninspirational? NOT REALLY.

cardiff

May 12th, 2008, 01:11 AM

JamesWales

May 12th, 2008, 01:24 AM

Well after starting this thread i wouldnt say that the swalec stadium was uninspirational (though the name definately is - should be sophia gardens!) but neither is it beautiful or amazing either, but the great thing about it is the parkland that it is in makes it beautiful and amazing also the colours of the seats add a bit of difference and in total makes it something a bit different.

Maybe there is a bit of rivalry ahead of this weekends game! lol Also there is another test match to be held at the stadium.

I agree. It doesn't deserve a place in a thread about the worlds greatest cricket arenas, but at the same time, we exist in a cricketing country where many professional sides play in creaking grounds of little more than 5,000 so anything new, of fairly unique design and of 16,000 capacity, by definition (and having visited it by practice) isn't 'uninspirational.'

With the greatest of respect to Shrewsbury Town, Chester City and the like of other football stadia being mentioned in this thread, I think we can all agree that Sophia Gardens is not the cricketing equivalent.

I'd like to point out too that this isn't me just defending it 'cos it's in Cardiff. I think the new Cardiff City stadium-while functional etc-is as uninspirational and depressing as they come.

BeestonLad

May 12th, 2008, 11:11 PM

I'm not normally one for the splitting of hairs, but cric info states Trent Bridge's capacity as 15,350 while Sophia Gardens/SWALEC's total is 15,829. I appreciate that Trent Bridge is increasing though, so I may be wrong, if that has already happened.

Guys, I'm not claiming Sophia Gardens to be the greatest cricket ground around, I wish it were 2-3000 seats bigger but having been there on friday, I can confirm that while it's not perfect, it is far from being uninspirational in both design, colouring, stand variety, location and most other aspects of how we are judging these mostly footballl stadia on this thread.

The irony is that what Glammy have achieved with the stadium, and the ashes is probably the biggest inspiration possible to 90% of the county sides.

Best Test stadium in the UK? NO.
Lovely Location and Stadium? YES.
Uninspirational? NOT REALLY.

Like I say for the money that was paid the tranformation is pretty remarkable. Just a pity about the blue seats! And Trent Bridge is over 17,000 now as the new stand has been completed!

Zim Flyer

May 13th, 2008, 12:11 AM

After today’s opening game at The Swalec stadium (sophia gardens) i really think it qualifies for inclusion here. People keep saying it represents huge ambition on Glamorgan’s part but that is all it is.

At first it seems remarkable that they have built all that they have for £9m until you actually see it and then you understand how. I can appreciate it was done on a budget in a desperate attempt for test status, which they have now gained, but it has ended up looking like a third rate venue from the colonies. This is a fantastic thing for Glamorgan and Cardiff in general but not worthy of test status.

Sorry Glamorgan but this ground does not disserve the opening test in next years ashes. I can’t help thinking its a bit embarrassing that an ashes test will be played there. This is exactly the problem with the ECB's plans we will end up with 9 or 10 mediocre venues rather than 3-4 fantastic ones.

I disagree, I think it is brilliant and I was really proud of Glamorgan watching it on the tele on Friday.

It is no Trent Bridge or the Oval but it is certainly better than Headingley. I thought the tree's in the back ground looked lovely and the press box looks good as well.

This picture from the Telegraph shows why the ground for me totally rocks and I love it to pieces:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/graphics/2008/05/09/scglam109.jpg

This ground is good for BRITISH cricket and takes it to a whole new level in the growth of the game.

Toadboy

May 13th, 2008, 10:41 AM

The irony is that what Glammy have achieved with the stadium, and the ashes is probably the biggest inspiration possible to 90% of the county sides.

Nail on the head.

The developments at Durham, Hampshire and now Glamorgan are a driver for change and the awarding of big games includung the Ashes is incentive and reward for taking the risk.

CharlieP

May 13th, 2008, 01:48 PM

I disagree, I think it is brilliant and I was really proud of Glamorgan watching it on the tele on Friday.

I never realised you were Welsh, Zim.

It is no Trent Bridge or the Oval but it is certainly better than Headingley.

Fair comment!

Gherkin

March 5th, 2009, 06:04 PM

Hate to say it... my local Shrewsbury Town's Prostar stadium:

http://i603.photobucket.com/albums/tt118/awaren8/newmeadow.jpg

...although I haven't been to a match there yet. (would you pay £19 for a home game against Rochdale?)

The corners are due to be filled in next summer, taking the capacity up from 10,000 to about 12,500. Why can't I find the thread for it?

Review here:
http://www.footballgroundguide.com/shrewsbury_town/

KiwiBrit

March 5th, 2009, 07:10 PM

Whats happened to Gay Meadow Gherkin?

Gherkin

March 6th, 2009, 12:19 AM

KiwiBrit

March 6th, 2009, 03:43 AM

My in-laws used to live in Myddle, so I'd often go to a game when we visited them.

Wolds Mariner

March 8th, 2009, 08:05 PM

^^ Reduced to rubble. Only piles of mud remain on the site of the old stadium. The site's going to be developed into a Tesco (:|) and riverside apartments... but going past it on the train the other day I couldn't see any signs of work. Credit crunch?

It was always difficult to see how they could re-develop Gay Meadow, but it had character. I enjoyed my two visits there, particularly the last League game played there.

ben77

March 10th, 2009, 01:27 PM

Tesco's what a surprise eh.. Bet you that going to be a really nice riverside development!!

Gherkin

March 12th, 2009, 09:02 PM

Here's a nice aerial photo showing Gay Meadow (now demolished)

The building bottom left is a school - which has had to grow quite tall as a result of not being able to build over the stands of Gay Meadow. It would be nice to see new school playing fields on the old site but I suspect Tesco wll pay more for the land!

http://i603.photobucket.com/albums/tt118/awaren8/gaymeadow1.jpg

More here: http://www.aeropic.co.uk/photo_database/shrewsbury.htm

birkyboy

March 12th, 2009, 10:40 PM

Anyone who has been to a football match will know that rush of excitement when first catching sight of the floodlights and stands. Once inside there is an almost exultant feeling as you emerge onto the terrace or into the stand, and see the arena for the first time.
The experience of visiting a football ground is inseparable from the game itself, for every ground provides a different backdrop and different atmosphere colouring your entire appreciation of a football match.

These two paragraphs are taken from the introduction of Simon Inglis book 'The Football Grounds of England and Wales' 1984. A fantastic read for stadium connoisseur. Can you imagine if he did an updated version for 2009, what a boring book that would be.

Gherkin

March 12th, 2009, 10:52 PM

^^ At least Shrewsbury had good reason to move! Look how close to the the river the ground was! Every season a handful of games had to be postponed because the first few rows of seats were underwater!

I love walking out into a stadium - whether it's a retail park stadium or a proper stadium. I still think he'd have something to write about.

soupçon

March 13th, 2009, 01:44 AM

Schmeek

March 13th, 2009, 01:45 PM

^^correct. I thought I recognised those words a few posts above from somewhere....
What happened to Inglis? Has he given up the ghost with regards to books, or has he become a ghost..
I would love to see a new installment, regardless of the bland nature of modern stadia (especially in the lower divisions).

JamesWales

March 13th, 2009, 03:30 PM

Inglis did write a book about Buenos Aires..a city that has an absurd number of stadia.

I agree though, his truly excellent football grounds of great britain needs re-releasing.

markmcd1976

March 15th, 2009, 02:32 AM

He's also written books about Villa Park, Sporting venues in Brum and Manchester and a great book about Archibald Leitch, so he's still writing.

BeestonLad

March 15th, 2009, 12:23 PM

This ground certainly takes the bland identikit stadiums to a new level of shitness

http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r60/big_fat_yorkshire_pudding/SDC10810.jpg

Portobello Red

March 15th, 2009, 12:46 PM

They look like flat pack sheds bought from here (with Old Trafford being the biggest flat pack stadium of them all) :

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2090/2176065409_988005f542_o.jpg

http://www.flickr.com/photos/gregorybrown/2176065409/

Gherkin

March 15th, 2009, 03:05 PM

This ground certainly takes the bland identikit stadiums to a new level of shitness

There was a rumour on here not too long ago that the stadium had won an international cladding competition :lol:

BeestonLad

March 15th, 2009, 03:18 PM

There was a rumour on here not too long ago that the stadium had won an international cladding competition :lol:

:lol: The cladding is simply sublime

Dan_NUFC

March 15th, 2009, 03:28 PM

I visited the KC Stadium yesterday to see Newcastle play Hull and I wasn't impressed. Fair enough it is different to the likes of the Riverside and Pride Park, but it was just bland and had nothing impressive about it in my opinion.

Gherkin

March 15th, 2009, 07:40 PM

^^ I haven't been to the ground, but from photos it looks like a smaller City of Manchester Stadium (especially once it's expanded). It has bags more character than Southampton, Leicester, Derby etc

Interesting video:

V590WKPJi7E&feature=related

up the tigers

March 15th, 2009, 07:57 PM

I think you've got to consider when it was built in 2002 we were a middle of the table side in division 3 so never in our wildest dreams would we expect to be where we are now. The design and capacity obviously reflected our modest ambitions at the time and until this season theres been very few times when we've had sell outs. There are plans to build above the east stand so it mirrors the west so that would bring the capacity to 30000 which i'm sure we would have easly filled most times this season.

As for bland, yes its a new stadium, but its way more interesting than the above stadia mentioned.

JamesWales

March 16th, 2009, 01:01 AM

This ground certainly takes the bland identikit stadiums to a new level of shitness

http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r60/big_fat_yorkshire_pudding/SDC10810.jpg

I've stated a few times on SSC that I'm no great fan of Cardiffs new ground (aside from it's location, which is pretty perfect). However,

At least it has outside walls..
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ryanhubbard/3077344768/

And is more interesting than this greylord.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/duncanholley/2166802428/in/set-72157603437882174/

Anyway, I agree that Cardiff's ground is a bit naff, but it's the first new ground where the club have officially stated that standing will be tolerated (in the new grange end) so that alone will make it more interesting.

Karldiff

March 16th, 2009, 03:44 PM

This ground certainly takes the bland identikit stadiums to a new level of shitness

http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r60/big_fat_yorkshire_pudding/SDC10810.jpg

As a Cardiff City fan I find it very difficult to argue with your summary.

At least we are only moving across the road so we'll get to drink in the same pubs etc and it's only a 10 min walk from the city centre. But on aesthetics your heart does sink a bit when you see it.

Republica

March 16th, 2009, 08:33 PM

Introduce safe standing areas, weak beer sold in grounds during the game, some crappy fireworks at the beginning during games, even decent pre match entertainment and a consistent pre match build up to get the fans going and an FA subsidy from TV money that must be used for reducing ticket prices and you turn any identikit stadium into a great day out.

BeestonLad

March 16th, 2009, 11:07 PM

As a Cardiff City fan I find it very difficult to argue with your summary.

At least we are only moving across the road so we'll get to drink in the same pubs etc and it's only a 10 min walk from the city centre. But on aesthetics your heart does sink a bit when you see it.

Its not all bad then! It is a shame that more and more teams are having to resort to this bog standard design when it comes to moving stadiums. I do agree with the other poster in that Leicester City's ground is equally as poor design but actaully in a worse location. I find it funny that posters in the East Midlands Forum regard the Walkers stadium as a better ground than Forest's City Ground :lol:

JamesWales

March 17th, 2009, 01:13 PM

Schmeek

March 18th, 2009, 02:16 AM

Snap.

That's great news James, about the standing being tolerated. Hopefully it will be an trend which catches on..? I do think the standing issue is gathering some kind of momentum atm, and I'm actually starting to believe that one day we could actually have proper safe standing areas introduced in the uk.
Just thinking, if they are to tolerate standing, then surely the logical option is to install SSareas in that stand (the german kind with bars behind the seats)?

Also, what is the new ground gonna be called? Will it be sponsored, and do we have a confirmed capacity yet (no doubt they'll be kicking themselves for not making it a tad bigger should Cardiff go up!)?

Must say it is looking pretty awful from the outside. Really cheap and nasty. But I think the inside will be ok as far as I can tell.

Wendigo Wendigo

March 18th, 2009, 12:29 PM

What happened to Inglis? Has he given up the ghost with regards to books, or has he become a ghost..
I would love to see a new installment, regardless of the bland nature of modern stadia (especially in the lower divisions).

I heard him being interviewed a couple of years ago and he said that, with the pace of change in British stadiums (new stands and grounds going up all over the place), there's no point bringing out a new edition, as it'd be out of date by the time it hit the bookshops, which is what happened with the last edition that came out.

EnglishKevin

April 5th, 2009, 08:54 AM

Jesus , I can't believe they've built something so shitty.Looks like a warehouse.

reading general

April 15th, 2009, 10:18 PM

Anyway, I agree that Cardiff's ground is a bit naff, but it's the first new ground where the club have officially stated that standing will be tolerated (in the new grange end) so that alone will make it more interesting.

lucky gets. been arguing this for years at the madejski. but if it caught on nationally it has been stated that it will not happen at reading because of the way the stadium is built.
certainly keep you doing that ayatollah thing if your standing. thats definately unique. hope you lose the yobs too.

Dan-87

April 16th, 2009, 01:35 PM

Steel City Suburb

April 16th, 2009, 06:41 PM

I watched Man U v Porto last night, how nice is Porto's ground on the inside?!

Could no one try and replicate that, a large kop at one end, lose one of the tiers from one of the two sides at the longer sides of the pitch and it would be a brilliant stadium.

reading general

April 16th, 2009, 09:03 PM

That picture of Cardiffs ground is fucking terrible.
Mind you the location is spot on and makes me jealous as ours is stuck out in an industrial estate. I'm fed up with the match day experience at the Madejski nowdays, it's so boring and tedious but sadly most grounds will go the same way unless locations are chosen with supporters in mind.
yep. be nice if there was a pub near it.
i i'm happy i sit in y26 at least occasionally theres a bit of atmosphere. sat in the north once, a whole lot of moaning before the game even began. sat in the west twice, people dont even stand or clap when we score. god i loved the southbank!

Schmeek

April 16th, 2009, 09:59 PM

I actually quite liked the Madjeski when I went a few months back, one of the best identikit stadiums anyway...
Must agree with what has been said though, the location is hideous. Great for hopping straight back onto the M4 afterwards (and a hasty trip back home) but it was so dull and desolate. Not a pub or even house in sight for miles around.. that would do my head in week after week.

No wonder the crowd were so quite and uninspiring - they were bored to death by the time they got to their seat. (and the comprehensive 0-2 defeat didn't help either!)

reading general

April 16th, 2009, 10:40 PM

No wonder the crowd were so quite and uninspiring - they were bored to death by the time they got to their seat. (and the comprehensive 0-2 defeat didn't help either!)
reading fans have been spoilt over the last few seasons and now have this premier league 'entertain us then we might sing, lose and we boo' attitude. 2 seasons in the premier league and we think were a fallen giant and deserve a place there.i'd love to be in the premier league (not going to happen this time round, hmm) but i'm still happy not to be in the bottom two divisions. atmosphere has been good in the past when the ground was nowhere near full.

Schmeek

April 17th, 2009, 12:10 AM

^^How refreshing to hear such an honest evaluation..

Dan-87

April 17th, 2009, 02:21 PM

That's definitely true about alot of the fans (not all mind you)
To be completely honest, I thought the Premier League was a huge anti climax after years of wanting to get there. Players are twats, everythings run by clueless idiots and the majority of supporters are clueless idiots aswell. I've found it so hard to get excited about the prospect of promotion again.

Karldiff

April 17th, 2009, 04:30 PM

I'm a Cardiff City fan and we've been shit for pretty much the whole of the 25 years I've been following them. Seriously shit. I'm not counting chickens but there is a possibility that we could go up to the Premiership this season. This is supposedly the holy grail.

Yet the prospect of being in a relegation dogfight from September onwards, being patronised by the likes of Mark Lawrenson, being subject to 'bubble' trips every week and having to bring in a shedload of overpriced players with zero attachment to anything but money does not really get my juices flowing. I have to say that it's a rather unappetising prospect at the moment. Considering that the whole purpose of football is about onward progression I question what I'm doing.

I

reading general

April 17th, 2009, 09:30 PM

maybe they should have there european super league and we can have a proper top division again without the risk of ruining clubs just to stay in it. southampton and charlton spring to mind. then theres leeds.

trmather

April 18th, 2009, 08:31 PM

I'd rather have a bunch of identikit stadiums than the old, decrepid, unrepairable stadiums that they replaced.

G.C.

April 19th, 2009, 05:46 AM

I'd rather have a bunch of identikit stadiums than the old, decrepid, unrepairable stadiums that they replaced.

Jesus. I take it you're a sky era football *sn1gger* supporter?

Toadboy

April 19th, 2009, 01:52 PM

Jesus. I take it you're a sky era football *sn1gger* supporter?

Don't be so flippant, did you go to football in England through the 70's and 80's?

Maybe it's a reference to unsafe stadiums, clubs taking money at the gate and treating the fans with contempt, no toilets, cages, poor viewing by insuffcient rake, pillars, sub terrainien terracing, etc.

Anyone who went to Norwich, Ipswich, West Ham, Everton, Leicester, Middlesborough, Sunderland, Newcastle, Chelsea...fuck me this list could run for ever...as an away fan (and many home fans) will vouch for the abysmal, dangerous and wretched conditions people were expected to put up with. It wasn't universal, many grounds developed organically and steadily over the year but the majority rotted while directors, players and agents bled money out of the clubs depriving them of the reinvestment required to modernis the stadia.

Identikit is tat but it's what could be put in place at the time.

Anfield, Villa Park, Old Trafford, Stamford Bridge, White Hart Lane, The Valley etc. are examples of modernisation retaining something of a proper football ground feel but even they are massive comprimises.

Noostairz

April 19th, 2009, 06:55 PM

totally agree, Toad.

trmather

April 19th, 2009, 07:59 PM

Jesus. I take it you're a sky era football *sn1gger* supporter?

I'd rather go to a match and be able to watch the game instead of being crushed to death mate, I'm just saying.

Schmeek

April 19th, 2009, 10:11 PM

^^So the people of Cardiff are much less likely to be crushed to death next season? And I suppose that's why they're moving in the first place aint it...

cardiff

April 20th, 2009, 10:31 AM

Zim Flyer

April 20th, 2009, 11:14 AM

Safety is probably not so much an issue to the designer as price, a good looking stadium would be just as safe as an identicate one. The fact that we are replacing stadia in the UK isnt about improoving safety for safety sake but because the old stadia are passed their use by date.

exactly, any stadium, football or cricket needs to look at it's income for out of season so stadiums are built with corporate hospitality or hotels in mind as well as the sport they specialise in.

ben77

April 20th, 2009, 02:21 PM

Safety is probably not so much an issue to the designer as price, a good looking stadium would be just as safe as an identicate one. The fact that we are replacing stadia in the UK isnt about improoving safety for safety sake but because the old stadia are passed their use by date.

I would say that the only reason we are building new stadiums in the UK is to make more money..

ArchieTheGreat

April 21st, 2009, 12:10 PM

I'd rather have a bunch of identikit stadiums than the old, decrepid, unrepairable stadiums that they replaced.

Personally I preferred Leeds Road to the Galpharm stadium. A lot better atmosphere and I prefer to stand.

Dan-87

April 21st, 2009, 01:52 PM

Safe standing terraces NEED to be introduced into stadiums over here!!
Could well be the saviour of many shitty grounds atmosphere.

TSRJames

April 21st, 2009, 02:36 PM

At Leeds we are lucky to have enough land around ER to be able to expand and improve facilities as much as we like. Only the South Stand is limited due to Elland Road passing behind it, but Bates has already vastly improved facilities in that stand and had it recladded so it doesn't look like a concrete car park. Any south stand redevelopment would include making it steeper or to re-route Elland Road further back, closer to the Old Peacock Pub and the shops.

The new development behind the East Stand (newest and largest stand - 17k cap) has been approved by LCC and the next step (as mentioned again in the match programme on Saturday) is for a new SW corner and West Stand to mirror the East, followed by adding an additional tier to the Kop. This will be done before the 2018 WC.

I'm glad we never moved to Ridsdales proposed 60k+ bowl near the M1 - with a new West Stand and Kop, we should be able to reach 60k anyway, while keeping a 'traditional' layout, atmosphere and heritage of having over 100 years of football at ER. :cheers:

ben77

April 21st, 2009, 03:43 PM

Don't be so flippant, did you go to football in England through the 70's and 80's?

Maybe it's a reference to unsafe stadiums, clubs taking money at the gate and treating the fans with contempt, no toilets, cages, poor viewing by insuffcient rake, pillars, sub terrainien terracing, etc.

Anyone who went to Norwich, Ipswich, West Ham, Everton, Leicester, Middlesborough, Sunderland, Newcastle, Chelsea...fuck me this list could run for ever...as an away fan (and many home fans) will vouch for the abysmal, dangerous and wretched conditions people were expected to put up with. It wasn't universal, many grounds developed organically and steadily over the year but the majority rotted while directors, players and agents bled money out of the clubs depriving them of the reinvestment required to modernis the stadia.

Identikit is tat but it's what could be put in place at the time.

Anfield, Villa Park, Old Trafford, Stamford Bridge, White Hart Lane, The Valley etc. are examples of modernisation retaining something of a proper football ground feel but even they are massive comprimises.

I was more than happy with all of those grounds listed. I'm not to bothered about having a meal at half time and as long as i can see the game i'm happy. I think people forget that a game of football only lasts 1 hour and 45minutes. I'd rather stand for a £10 than pay £27 to sit next to some divvie and i'd rather not have a burger than pay £3.60 for something that probably should even be allowed to be served. Better facilites my arse they are all just trying to rip us off.

Gherkin

April 21st, 2009, 04:41 PM

Was the Hillsborough disaster responsible for all new stadia to be all-seater or was it just a big push? And do the people at the top consider all standing grounds to now be unsafe?

Welshlad

April 21st, 2009, 04:54 PM

Well, the Taylor Report was conducted because of Hillsborough, but the Taylor report didn't just look at Hillsborough (i think)....
so its a bit of both

Toadboy

April 21st, 2009, 05:52 PM

Being cynical Hillsborough was used to change the demographics and business model.

Terracing was not to blame.

Toadboy

April 21st, 2009, 05:53 PM

I was more than happy with all of those grounds listed. I'm not to bothered about having a meal at half time and as long as i can see the game i'm happy. I think people forget that a game of football only lasts 1 hour and 45minutes. I'd rather stand for a £10 than pay £27 to sit next to some divvie and i'd rather not have a burger than pay £3.60 for something that probably should even be allowed to be served. Better facilites my arse they are all just trying to rip us off.

Jesus.

ben77

April 24th, 2009, 10:22 AM

Jesus.

Yeah nice one!! The only things that have improved at the football since the Taylor report with the introduction of new stands & stadiums is the ticket barriers and stewarding (although now we seem to be getting seriously over zealous stewarding at most places i go to).
I honestly can't see how football as an experience has improved:
Atmosphere has decreased
Prices have increased
Quality of beer not improved
Quality of food not improved

Where does the revenue come from (your pocket) and does it go back into the club (course it doesn't). Generally its going into over paid players & agents pockets and the majority of clubs now owe a huge amount of debt compared to 20 years ago.. Clubs and fans haven't benefitted at all.

Anyway i'm off to Cambridge this weekend to pay £14 to stand at the football. I'm not a Cambridge fan but it can't get much better than that.

Dan_NUFC

May 6th, 2009, 03:26 PM

Yeah nice one!! The only things that have improved at the football since the Taylor report with the introduction of new stands & stadiums is the ticket barriers and stewarding (although now we seem to be getting seriously over zealous stewarding at most places i go to).
I honestly can't see how football as an experience has improved:
Atmosphere has decreased
Prices have increased
Quality of beer not improved
Quality of food not improved

Where does the revenue come from (your pocket) and does it go back into the club (course it doesn't). Generally its going into over paid players & agents pockets and the majority of clubs now owe a huge amount of debt compared to 20 years ago.. Clubs and fans haven't benefitted at all.

Anyway i'm off to Cambridge this weekend to pay £14 to stand at the football. I'm not a Cambridge fan but it can't get much better than that.

Cracking post fella, I agree fully. Eventually the bubble will burst and the crowds will fall and fall. People will decide to stay in the pub and watch the game there, drink proper beer and stand to their heart is content than pay 40 quid to go to a shite, plastic bowl and get bossed around by some wanker who was bullied at school.

TRHK

September 4th, 2009, 10:23 PM

At Leeds we are lucky to have enough land around ER to be able to expand and improve facilities as much as we like.

Leeds also have the advantage of having dumped millions of pounds worth of debt and leaving their creditors to clean up their mess when they phoenixed their business a few years ago. Does make it a bit easier to find the funds to develop the stadium - on the back of small creditors who will never get paid.

van heckler

September 4th, 2009, 11:47 PM

List of shame

(Inside only)

Emirates Stadium (Arsenal)
Reebok Stadium (Bolton)
KC Stadium (Hull)
Stadium of Light (Sunderland)
DW Stadium (Wigan)
Cardiff City Stadium (Cardiff)
Ricoh Arena (Coventry)
Pride Park Stadium (Derby)
Keepmoat Stadium (Doncaster)
Walkers Stadium (Leicester)
Riverside Stadium (Middlesbrough)
Madejski Stadium (Reading)
Liberty Stadium (Swansea)
Stadium MK (Milton Keynes)
The St Mary's Stadium (Southampton)
Balfour Webnet Darlington Arena (Darlington)

Any more?

Immunda Leodis

September 5th, 2009, 12:26 AM

Zedferret

September 6th, 2009, 11:13 AM

The New Den

Brittannia Stadium - Stoke City. Its just Pride Park missing some corners..

Technicalities

September 8th, 2009, 12:34 AM

Colchester's new ground, although not a bowl - is pretty bland, not inspirational in the slightest. It's also pretty similar to Shrewsbury's new ground (built a year before), though I fractionally prefer the latter.

Gherkin

September 9th, 2009, 11:19 PM

Dan_NUFC

September 10th, 2009, 03:42 PM

City of Manchester Stadium,
Galpharm Stadium.

redTom

September 11th, 2009, 10:17 PM

New Meadow (Shrewsbury)

Built in a retail park, hardly ever fills it's 10,000 capacity and has plans to build in the corners to increase to 12,500. It cost £10m. The best thing about it is the colour of the seats!

I'm guessing an added benefit is it doesn't flood as easily as the old ground.
--------------

A good location and a bit more thinking in the design can make the standard bowl shape a bit more appealing imo.

See Arsenal and Hull

Gherkin

September 12th, 2009, 07:28 PM

I'm guessing an added benefit is it doesn't flood as easily as the old ground.

Yes it's nowhere near the River Severn... It won't flood!

Gay Meadow (now demolished, riverside apartments to fill the site are currently "on hold due to the recession")

http://i856.photobucket.com/albums/ab128/KieranSTFC/Gay%20Meadow/flood_lenny_270.jpg

freeluas

September 13th, 2009, 07:06 PM

New Meadow (Shrewsbury)

http://i856.photobucket.com/albums/ab128/KieranSTFC/New%20Meadow/Shrewsbury-New-Meadow_1221894.jpg

Built in a retail park, hardly ever fills it's 10,000 capacity and has plans to build in the corners to increase to 12,500. It cost £10m. The best thing about it is the colour of the seats!

It may be a little uninspirational but its new, safe, simple but designed to fulfill a function. Everyone has a clear view, is safe and theres room for expansion, if needed. Also there are other sports facilities built as part of the plan. Its a pity the train line cant be used to bring supporters from the town.

Rev Stickleback

September 13th, 2009, 11:18 PM

It may be a little uninspirational but its new, safe, simple but designed to fulfill a function. Everyone has a clear view, is safe and theres room for expansion, if needed.
The problem is that chairmen in the UK don't seem able to ask for even a minimal bit of imagination in the designs.

There are small grounds being built around europe, such as AZ 67's 16000 seat stadium, which manage to be a single tier bowl, yet avoid being completely bland.

The USA has a spell of building bland, completely uninspiring new stadiums in the 1970s, and many of them are now being replaced. Maybe in 20-30 years time many of these single tier bowl efforts will go the same way.

Mind you, if they could bring back terracing, it'd make a world of difference. Brand new German stadiums always have terracing, and are far better as a result.

sterock85

September 14th, 2009, 01:42 AM

I prefer the simple bowl. I love how our ground has the two tiers on one side and single on the other, whilst keeping the height of the roof at the same level.

mph12

September 14th, 2009, 07:28 PM

Leicester City FC (Walkers Stadium)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3342/3229207800_a08d599153.jpghttp://farm4.static.flickr.com/3149/2926914987_3865b172ef_o.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3099/2793096369_00bfaace20_b.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3167/2790304170_bb1f916703_b.jpg

Maybe 20 others like it. But I still love the place!

Leicester 2, Blackpool 1

A double from Matty Fryatt gave City their first win over the Seasiders for 43 years and means City are now unbeaten at the Walkers Stadium for a whole year.

BeestonLad

September 15th, 2009, 12:34 PM

redTom

September 15th, 2009, 01:48 PM

Leicester City FC (Walkers Stadium)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3099/2793096369_00bfaace20_b.jpg

why have you photoshopped in a more pretty looking lake?
Where has the algae gone?! :lol:

mph12

September 16th, 2009, 01:59 AM

Leicester's is one of the worst, at least the likes of Derby, Coventry, MK Dons, Hull, Middlesborough etc break it up with one stand which is slightly different. Leicester has one single uniform tier around all 4 sides :ohno:

Good look with getting your ground built.

CharlieP

September 16th, 2009, 10:15 AM

BeestonLad

September 16th, 2009, 11:57 AM

Good look with getting your ground built.

Owwww good comeback :lol:

BeestonLad

September 16th, 2009, 11:58 AM

The tier out of picture to the left of that photo is ever so slightly different to the rest - it has corporate boxes at the top :lol:

:lol: I take it all back then!

ben77

September 16th, 2009, 03:05 PM

I've never seen it from that angle before it actually looks similar to a very nice out of town business park i once visited in Northamptonshire. The angle i've approached it from before always reminded me of a really crappy business park i once visited in Shepshed.

mph12

September 17th, 2009, 08:45 PM

The tier out of picture to the left of that photo is ever so slightly different to the rest - it has corporate boxes at the top :lol:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3149/2926914987_3865b172ef_o.jpg

It has one tier... so what?
There are too many of these styles of ground. But I think our ground is fine. These will get developed like the old grounds were, if we manage to get world cup games - we'll tag on seats at least one side and it will change how it looks. The grounds are designed for the purpose. Ours performs it's function brilliantly.

I think loads of the old grounds are dumps, i'd rather go to watch football in ours any day thanks.

Immunda Leodis

September 17th, 2009, 11:59 PM

^^Having been to more than half of the 92 league grounds, including the crisp bowl, I'll take the 'dumps' every time.

redTom

September 18th, 2009, 09:43 AM

^^Having been to more than half of the 92 league grounds, including the crisp bowl, I'll take the 'dumps' every time.

yup, same here.

Schmeek

September 18th, 2009, 10:16 PM

markmcd1976

September 19th, 2009, 12:48 AM

Goodison is a great example of a quirky old fasioned football stadium. Some of the sight lines might be a poor and the there are a lot of posts, but I'd rather watch a game there than one of the new boring stadiums.

mph12

September 19th, 2009, 01:26 AM

sterock85

September 19th, 2009, 03:43 AM

Roker Park is in the past, It's our history.

The Stadium of Light is the best thing Bob Murray did for our club.

Without it i can't imagine were we as a club would be right now.

Immunda Leodis

September 19th, 2009, 02:44 PM

I do get the negatives.

But...would Man City fans really want to go back to Maine Rd. Sunderland fans back to Roker Park. Derby fans back to the Baseball Ground. Us back to Filbert St. NOPE!

Look I can see the ground is dull. But on pretty much every other score it's a massive improvement on Filbert Street. Capacity, Access, Facilities, hospitality, views... Perhaps it's what you get used to. I went Leeds last xmas and thought Elland Road was a crap hole.

Can't help thinking a lot of it is nostalgia/memories.

Perhaps we just need a few obstructed views....WE NEED PILLARS!

Yep Elland Road is a shithole but I would hate to move away from it. I think Hillsbrough and Goodison are also shitholes but they are great football grounds. The crisp bowl is sterile, dull and the 3 times when I went the only atmosphere was coming from the away section.

I've been to Maine Road twice and the COM once and I honestly prefer the former. COM is impressive for about 2mins and then it's just boring and sterile like the rest of the new stadiums in this country apart from Wembley.

On the subject of pillars I'd just like to point out that although ER has them in abundance, we still have more unrestricted views in our ground than you do in the Crisp Bowl. :cheers:

Immunda Leodis

September 19th, 2009, 02:58 PM

Roker Park is in the past, It's our history.

The Stadium of Light is the best thing Bob Murray did for our club.

Without it i can't imagine were we as a club would be right now.

In fairness to the SoL at least the architect made an effort. The single tiered stands are very bland esp from the outside but the brick facade of the main stand is fantastic and the roofs sloping down on the 2 tired stands and the roofs sloping up on the single tiered stands to keep the roof level the same is a great touch. On top of that it is clear that it is possible to generate an atmosphere in there. When I went there the atmosphere was good in the away end for most of the game and when Sunderland scored the atmosphere was very good around the whole ground until Leeds equalised and went on to win.

soupçon

September 19th, 2009, 03:03 PM

dannyb

September 21st, 2009, 06:01 PM

I'm a united fan, but i have to say I did love maine road, especailly it's setting in the back streets - felt like you were 'part of' the city and the people, not stuck on some industrial/retail estate next to a motorway (i.e. The Reebok); although as you say this may be a nostalgia thing as the memories instantly bring back a feeling of the nineties as I was quite young at the time and (What's the story) Morning glory had just come out - good times. only been to COMS for the Commonwealth games, so cant really comment.

Hillsborough is a ground I've enjoyed a couple of trips to - a 'proper' football ground, although unfortunately I didn't enjoy the games as much! Will be interesting to see what it's like after the redevelopment, but the plans look good

mph12

September 21st, 2009, 07:59 PM

Yep Elland Road is a shithole but I would hate to move away from it. I think Hillsbrough and Goodison are also shitholes but they are great football grounds. The crisp bowl is sterile, dull and the 3 times when I went the only atmosphere was coming from the away section.

I've been to Maine Road twice and the COM once and I honestly prefer the former. COM is impressive for about 2mins and then it's just boring and sterile like the rest of the new stadiums in this country apart from Wembley.

On the subject of pillars I'd just like to point out that although ER has them in abundance, we still have more unrestricted views in our ground than you do in the Crisp Bowl. :cheers:

Crisp Bowl - its called the Walkers Stadium.
COM/Eastlands is a fantastic Ground.

Schmeek

September 21st, 2009, 11:36 PM

No it's definately the Crisp Bowl..

van heckler

September 22nd, 2009, 04:24 AM

Moulinex? If Wigan is on your list...

How so?

ben77

September 22nd, 2009, 03:45 PM

How so?

Not to sure about that one either..

Molineux developed on its original site over a 15 year period or JJB built in one year and a brand spanking bit of waste ground.. I don't even think this debate is just about the design of the stadium itself its more about clubs leaving their original roots behind (often for a out of town business park type site).

This is where ground like the Crisp bowl at least stand up as it is only a stones throw from the old ground. So although the fans have a crap new ground atleast they still feel close to their roots on a match day..

Immunda Leodis

September 22nd, 2009, 07:47 PM

Molineux has nothing wrong with it, it's where Wolves have always played, the stands have a bit of character and the only thing that spoils it, is the distance of the fans from the pitch. It really can't be placed in the same bracket as the new Ikea stadiums.

soupçon

September 22nd, 2009, 10:17 PM

Immunda Leodis

September 23rd, 2009, 12:10 AM

What difference does it make whether a stadium was built in a couple of years or 15? I'm sure Molineux wasn't a disaster zone throughout my childhood by choice! From the inside (on telly) I don't see too much difference, except that in Wigan the stands may be somewhere near the pitch...

I'm not trying to have a go at Molineux particularly, it just seems that Wigan is being harshly treated. They both seem to be perfectly acceptable stadia.

Does the fact that there used to be a stadium on the same location 50 years ago really make a difference? Is Wembley more inspirational than the Emirates because of this? I don't see why it should be.

Van Heckler just seems to be listing new stadia regardless (presumably as he doesn't see Molineux as a new stadium).

I'm just intrigued as to the criteria for selection as an 'uninspirational' stadium.

Because in the last 15 years more teams have moved stadiums than in the previous 100 and they all have a tendency to look the same all the way around the stadium and all the stadiums tend to look alike. This doesn't seem to be the case when teams upgrade their grounds piecemeal over a decade or two, see Anfield, White Hart Lane, Villa Park and Stamford Bridge as examples of this. Wolves have 4 separate stands which all look different from one another (although this is much more subtle than older grounds that have developed over time.)

I've been to both grounds at least twice and Wigan bored me to tears because it was so uniform, grey, concrete and totally lacked atmosphere whereas Molineux was a great experience (bar the results.) and despite being new it still had a traditional feel about it.

Wembley is more inspirational than the Emirates because it has the arch which defines it from other grounds. The Emirates is very similar to The Stadium of Light in Lisbon and even Spurs are copying the design. :ohno:

mph12

September 23rd, 2009, 03:46 AM

Chogmook

September 23rd, 2009, 07:26 AM

Took some years to create 'Bowl Trafford', thankfully, it expanded further!

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

JamesWales

September 23rd, 2009, 11:52 AM

How so?

Molineux? Definately not.

Not only was it a pioneering stadium in regards of development (pushing the club badly into debt i recall) but when it was all completed around 1994 (?) it was an absolutelt inspirational stadium that literally did inspire other grounds to copy it.

Not only that, but the curvature of the side stands, the difference between single tier and double tier, the four open corners and the distinctive coloured seating means it's a very unique looking stadium.

At the time of it's completion it was one of the finest stadia in the UK, so no Molineux definately should not be in this list!

ben77

September 23rd, 2009, 03:25 PM

I don't like the design of the Walkers. BUT I think you miss the point of why the new ground has been great for the club/city.

We have held international games, we held the Special Olympics, we could look at staging concerts. Now the World cup bid has come along we have the oppurtunity to add seats/improve the ground and make a realistic bid.

Look down the road in Nottingham. They can't really expand, the ground is falling behind in terms of facilities, they can't afford to build a new ground. Sure great history/great location but its holding them back now.

Sure its bland but we have the platform now. In a perfect world I would have Norman Foster designing the New Bernabéu for us.... but I live in the real world.

The benefits mentioned are for the city but have no effect on the football club whatever. 1 international against Jamaica, Special Olympics (give me a break thats for people with learning difficulties, i could be in that if i wanted) and apparently it can't hold large concerts because the ground wasn't built to a high enough quality. On a sell out match day the City Ground & Walkers would bring in roughly the same money so how is the City Ground falling behind. I've been to the Walker a fair few times and it doesn't seem any better than any of the stands at Forest internally (just breze blocks and nothing much else). Fair enough the Walkers can be devloped more easily owing to the amount of land around it but thats about it.

What i am prepared to give the Walkers is that it is very close to the old ground which makes the transition for the true fans much easier to take. To be fair there also weren't really any options of redveloping Filbert Street because of the streets on 2 sides. It was never a classic ground (although i used to love the double decker end). But grounds like City Ground, Goodison, Villa Park, Hillborough are worth hanging on to in my book.

mph12

September 23rd, 2009, 11:24 PM

The benefits mentioned are for the city but have no effect on the football club whatever

Profile/Money

1 international against Jamaica

3

3 June 2003 England 2-1 Serbia and Montenegro Friendly
12 October 2003 Jamaica 0-1 Brazil Friendly
29 May 2006 Jamaica 1-4 Ghana Friendly

Special Olympics (give me a break thats for people with learning difficulties, i could be in that if i wanted)

You certainly could

apparently it can't hold large concerts because the ground wasn't built to a high enough quality.

It was designed for football and built to that standard. We could upgrade the ground for concerts.

On a sell out match day the City Ground & Walkers would bring in roughly the same money so how is the City Ground falling behind.

Hospitality/Conferences/Events
Expansion? Bidding for World Cup Games.

"Nottingham Forest have taken expert advice from international architects in their bid to discover the feasibility of developing and expanding The City Ground for future generations.

And whether or not the site is utilised for World Cup use, the conclusion is that the club may have to move on to a new 'home' in order to meet the demands of meeting those requirements." From the Forest website.

I've been to the Walker a fair few times and it doesn't seem any better than any of the stands at Forest internally (just breze blocks and nothing much else). Fair enough the Walkers can be devloped more easily owing to the amount of land around it but thats about it.

Yeah it's a football stadium, stands and seats. Blocks are there to hold it up.

Fairly important point the land thing:

Forest site:
"I can understand the romance and nostalgia of Forest fans wanting to stay at The City Ground - after all it has been Forest's home for many years.

"But it really is a matter of practicalities of space and operation. You could upgrade the existing facilities and clearly the first area that would be looked at is the Main Stand but any new development would have to satisfy regulations that are in place now - not when it was originally built.

"In replacing the spectator seating areas in the current stadium to modern space standards we would, for example, need an extra 26 per cent of space just to accommodate the existing number of seats - that is before considering any expansion.

"It would probably be possible to increase the capacity up to 35,000 by rebuilding the Main Stand but it would be a compromised development with poor access and put enormous pressure on what is already an awkward and constrained site. It might not be even possible to get a ground safety certificate for such an expansion.

"It is blatantly obvious that the stadium has outgrown its surroundings.

Walkers may be dull. But a far better starting point going forward than the City Ground.

TRHK

June 21st, 2010, 11:49 PM

Falmer Stadium is nearing completion at Brighton.

http://www.geoffpenn.co.uk/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/300px-Falmer_Stadium.jpg

Lots more pictures here - http://www.countdown2falmer.co.uk/index.php

And as it is at the moment:

http://www.seagulls.co.uk/javaImages/c1/bd/0,,10433~8830401,00.jpg

Dr Pepper

June 22nd, 2010, 10:36 PM

I wouldn't describe the Falmer Stadium as uninspirational.

Schmeek

June 22nd, 2010, 11:06 PM

Me niether. Nor would I say it is nearing completion..

TRHK

June 22nd, 2010, 11:21 PM

I was making the point that there are inspirational stadia - Falmer (or The American Express community Stadium to be more correct) is a stunner.

AN aerial view from today:

http://www.northstandchat.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=17066&stc=1&d=1277232843

Bigcat

June 23rd, 2010, 12:42 AM

Yea you're right it's a cracker. Not sure about the name though, 'American Express Community Stadium' is a bit wordy.......

How about 'Amex ComStad' instead, or does that sound too much like an 80's mobile phone?

Faustus

June 23rd, 2010, 12:51 AM

Curious Orange

June 23rd, 2010, 11:36 AM

It may be a nice ground with appealing curves, but looking at a map of Brighton it is literally as far on the outskirts of the city as possible without being surrounded by cows. But then the snobs on this thread should try supporting a club like Gillingham or Cambridge where the ground has been sold and the future is very uncertain. Any old box would do in those circumstances, and would be a vast improvement on what went before.

Exactly Brighton's situation for the last 15 years - the Goldstone was asset stripped in 1995 - I shan't bore you with the rather long winded process the Albion had to endure to get this stadium built, but suffice to say Falmer is the only place a stadium of this size could have been built given modern planning regulations - and at least it is accessible (note the railway station next door!).

Getting back on topic I find it odd that clubs that choose to move, rather than being forced into it, often take the cheap option rather than making a statement of intent. It seems almost paradoxical that the one club that was physically forced to move comes up with something that is so different from the cookie cutter bowl!

P.S. didn't Gillingham build two new stands using the rent they had from some tenants they had between 1997 and 1999? ;)

Immunda Leodis

June 23rd, 2010, 11:10 PM

Curious Orange

June 24th, 2010, 10:24 AM

It was certainly a consideration, yes, mainly because of the AONB status that the land had at the time. It should be pointed out that the site itself was mostly brownfield - I think a total of seven University of Brighton buildings (those nice attractive '60s concrete ones) were demolished to make way for the development.

Having said that, beyond the architecture, there is still a choice about how the stadium is fitted out - and the Albion (or rather Tony Bloom) certainly aren't skimping on that.

JamesWales

June 24th, 2010, 10:36 AM

Falmer Stadium looks very smart (is there scope for enlargement though?)

My belief though is that the game itself is just 90 minutes out of a whole day, and as such, it is the surrounding streets, bars, vibe, experiences, transport infrastructure that add to an experience of going to a football game.

In light of that, can someone confirm how close the stadium is to Brighton town centre, and what the transport links are between the two.

Brighton is a great place, and the last thing I'd want to do if going to a game there is feel like I'm stopping off in a service station!

Technicalities

June 24th, 2010, 01:24 PM

15-20 minute bus ride from town (25 route, very frequent). 9 minutes on the train from Brighton to Falmer Station. (travel voucher on ticket will cover all this)

With regards to 'scope for enlargement' - it has been said many a time that the capacity can be increased to 30,000+ by filling in the corners and adding a second tier to the East stand.. should it be necessary at any point.

Immunda Leodis

June 24th, 2010, 10:52 PM

BHAlad

June 25th, 2010, 12:21 AM

I've been to 40+ grounds in the country and to me that's a long way from town; just hope the amenities are good around it???

:lol::lol: Not really. The uni and village will be no go areas.

There is a concern amongst some supporters about how well the travel plan will actually work once it's built. 4 trains an hour in either direction at the moment and mixed opinions as to whether extra trains will run on match days. If everyone tries to get the last train from brighton and turn up at 2:55 on a saturday it ain't gonna work.

The official line from the club is that they'll try and stagger arrival and exit times by making the concourse bars nice places to be in and encourage people to arrive early/stay late. All the walls will be rendered and decorated with Albion related stuff so no breeze blocks on show, and apparently they'll all have plenty of TVs showing skysports. The club have said that the catering will be of a higer standard than usual as well. I think there's also plans for a supporters pub somwhere in the ground but that hasn't been announced yet.

I'm in two minds as to whether it will work, because people just aren't used to spending that long at a ground. At the end of the day it's an out of town stadium just like all the others.
Most fans have just ignored the possible pitfalls up 'til now because it was such a bastard just to get the thing built:lol: All that said, whatever negatives are, it's better than plaing home games in gillingham and better than an athletics track with no roof.

TRHK

June 25th, 2010, 01:52 AM

Certainly a step up from the usual out of town box stadia ...

http://www.northstandchat.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=17109&stc=1&d=1277420690

Curious Orange

June 25th, 2010, 02:25 PM

Certainly a step up from the usual out of town box stadia ...

http://www.northstandchat.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=17109&stc=1&d=1277420690

Not quite a current photo though - Everest took it yesterday...

Faustus

June 25th, 2010, 05:44 PM

P.S. didn't Gillingham build two new stands using the rent they had from some tenants they had between 1997 and 1999? ;)No, that was unpaid for by the ITV digital deal. Technically the money for those stands is still owed by the chairman...to the chairman.

I suppose the point I was making is clubs like Bolton. Can they still claim to be called Bolton while sited in another town?

Schmeek

June 25th, 2010, 07:24 PM

Certainly a step up from the usual out of town box stadia ...

http://www.northstandchat.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=17109&stc=1&d=1277420690

Looks a bit like Hull's KC stadium.

http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa272/Berbaking/kc_stadium.jpg

Immunda Leodis

June 25th, 2010, 10:45 PM

:lol::lol: Not really. The uni and village will be no go areas.

There is a concern amongst some supporters about how well the travel plan will actually work once it's built. 4 trains an hour in either direction at the moment and mixed opinions as to whether extra trains will run on match days. If everyone tries to get the last train from brighton and turn up at 2:55 on a saturday it ain't gonna work.

The official line from the club is that they'll try and stagger arrival and exit times by making the concourse bars nice places to be in and encourage people to arrive early/stay late. All the walls will be rendered and decorated with Albion related stuff so no breeze blocks on show, and apparently they'll all have plenty of TVs showing skysports. The club have said that the catering will be of a higer standard than usual as well. I think there's also plans for a supporters pub somwhere in the ground but that hasn't been announced yet.

I'm in two minds as to whether it will work, because people just aren't used to spending that long at a ground. At the end of the day it's an out of town stadium just like all the others.
Most fans have just ignored the possible pitfalls up 'til now because it was such a bastard just to get the thing built:lol: All that said, whatever negatives are, it's better than plaing home games in gillingham and better than an athletics track with no roof.

I guess all the shit you've had to go through makes the issue of being out of town a bit trivial.

Are their plans for football special buses? At Leeds we have very regular buses that occasionally are given Police escorts through busy junctions to give priority, although it's only a 5 min ride to/from town it seems to be a very effective way of shifting large numbers quickly. Is there any scope for this in Brighton?

Rev Stickleback

July 23rd, 2010, 12:04 AM

Am I not right in thinking though, that Brighton were forced into making an effort due to the surroundings being quite 'green' with site being a controversial choice for a stadium? Clubs that chose the 'cheap' option of building on brownfield didn't have to consider this and were thus not forced to include it in their design brief...
every generation of stadiums tends to learn from the mistakes of the previous. With the exception of those on the bare minimum budget (Colchester, Shrewsbury etc) there does appear to at least be some effort now to get away from the dull designs of 10 years ago.

Their brief, when designed, was to provide a good level of facilities and the best possible view, and they pretty much achieved that. It was only later, when enough new grounds had been built for them to be noticeably similar, that people really began crying out for change.

I'm sure it must have been said previously in this thread to, that as much as people love the look of grounds that have been developed piecemeal, that development took 100 years for many. Go back to when they were opened, and most were pretty similar too, with a main stand on one side, and three sides of open terracing.

The beauty though is in the detail. It's not just the similarity with grounds of the stands, it's the fact that so many are just so dull and plain. The always-gets-a-mention Archibald Leitch built essentially the same design for 30 years, yet because there was detail in his work, it was interesting to look at and had a degree of beauty, it was never dull and nobody complained about stands at Goodison looking like ones at Fratton Park or White Hart Lane.

I do wonder if any new stadium here will go down the American baseball route and start building new stadiums with a retro look, complete with arbitrarily asymmetrical stands.

Darloeye

September 9th, 2011, 12:10 PM

You can add Darlington to the list as well. Mini Riverside.
http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/1696/darlostadfl3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

NO ITS NOT ! :bash: The Riverside was designed with three stands around the pitch and one bigger single stand. Plus the seating plan shows you their not the same stadium:banana:

canarywondergod

September 9th, 2011, 08:30 PM

Totally agreed with you there, Darlo's stadium looks nothing like the riverside, in fact Pride Park looks more like the Riverside. However Darlington's stadium is very similar to that of Doncasters.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/06/03/article-0-0604BE510000044D-35_468x286.jpg

Darloeye

September 9th, 2011, 08:38 PM

^^^^ Yep Doncasters stadium is the stadium size we should of built.

jandeczentar

September 14th, 2011, 04:58 PM

You want 'inspirational' design, you're going to have to pay extra for it and most clubs in most sports simply don't have the money to spare. They also aren't that ambitious. For them, a new stadium means better facilities (more boxes, food outlets, etc) and a capacity increase which they are looking to get as cheaply as possible. They aren't looking to make an architectural statement and can't afford to.

Gherkin

September 14th, 2011, 06:24 PM

Good design has a longer shelf life though... Quality materials last longer than cheap materials, and good design will motivate fans and the team, something for both to be proud of.

JimB

September 14th, 2011, 07:26 PM

Good design has a longer shelf life though... Quality materials last longer than cheap materials, and good design will motivate fans and the team, something for both to be proud of.

There's a massive difference, though, between what architects (and architecture geeks on boards like this!) consider to be good design and what football fans consider to be good design.

You'll see loads of posters over on the stadium section cooing and swooning over bold and aesthetically pleasing exteriors.

By contrast, the only thing that most proper fans are really concerned with (other than essential facilities) is whether or not a stadium is good for atmosphere.

Take the Emirates, for example. It has won plenty of plaudits for its aesthetics, with the dramatically swooping and curving upper tier. But most fans that I know would far prefer the corners to be filled in. They also hate the fact that the stands are too far from the pitch and that the bottom tier, in particular, isn't steep enough.

The architects of Spurs' proposed, new stadium tried to feed us some guff about the design being a reflection of Spurs' traditional "flowing style" of football. Bollocks! They just think it looks prettier! And besides, Spurs' traditional pattern of play is based on their pioneering and famous Push and Run team - which was all about quick, short passes and third man running. In other words, if the architects really wanted to reflect Spurs' traditional style, the design theme should have been based on.............TRIANGLES!!!

All of that said, the tedious identikit stadia that are all too prevalent in the UK lack atmosphere as well as aesthetic merit. But as jandeczentar said, they are at least cheap to build and offer far better facilities than the stadiums they replaced.

R.K.Teck

September 15th, 2011, 03:36 AM

The architects of Spurs' proposed, new stadium tried to feed us some guff about the design being a reflection of Spurs' traditional "flowing style" of football. Bollocks! They just think it looks prettier! And besides, Spurs' traditional pattern of play is based on their pioneering and famous Push and Run team - which was all about quick, short passes and third man running. In other words, if the architects really wanted to reflect Spurs' traditional style, the design theme should have been based on.............TRIANGLES!!!.

:lol::lol::lol:

ben77

September 16th, 2011, 07:09 PM

There's a massive difference, though, between what architects (and architecture geeks on boards like this!) consider to be good design and what football fans consider to be good design.

You'll see loads of posters over on the stadium section cooing and swooning over bold and aesthetically pleasing exteriors.

By contrast, the only thing that most proper fans are really concerned with (other than essential facilities) is whether or not a stadium is good for atmosphere.

Take the Emirates, for example. It has won plenty of plaudits for its aesthetics, with the dramatically swooping and curving upper tier. But most fans that I know would far prefer the corners to be filled in. They also hate the fact that the stands are too far from the pitch and that the bottom tier, in particular, isn't steep enough.

The architects of Spurs' proposed, new stadium tried to feed us some guff about the design being a reflection of Spurs' traditional "flowing style" of football. Bollocks! They just think it looks prettier! And besides, Spurs' traditional pattern of play is based on their pioneering and famous Push and Run team - which was all about quick, short passes and third man running. In other words, if the architects really wanted to reflect Spurs' traditional style, the design theme should have been based on.............TRIANGLES!!!

All of that said, the tedious identikit stadia that are all too prevalent in the UK lack atmosphere as well as aesthetic merit. But as jandeczentar said, they are at least cheap to build and offer far better facilities than the stadiums they replaced.

Sorry Jim, but i don't really understand the bit about the corners being filled in (they are at the Emirates). I think the issue with the Emirates isn't the stadium but the fans. Hardcore traditional supporter based has been priced out in my view. If Spurs had the same stadium in Tottenham it would be rocking (in my view).

My issue is that new club stadia in the UK are so far behind the rest of the world in terms of quality of design and build that we might as well be on another planet. But to be fair we do have such a massive network of football clubs per population that i suppose cost is the main driver.

JimB

September 17th, 2011, 12:18 AM

Sorry Jim, but i don't really understand the bit about the corners being filled in (they are at the Emirates). I think the issue with the Emirates isn't the stadium but the fans. Hardcore traditional supporter based has been priced out in my view. If Spurs had the same stadium in Tottenham it would be rocking (in my view).

My issue is that new club stadia in the UK are so far behind the rest of the world in terms of quality of design and build that we might as well be on another planet. But to be fair we do have such a massive network of football clubs per population that i suppose cost is the main driver.

1. Re Emirates corners being filled in........I was referring to the upper tier. Architects like it because it looks pretty (yes, I realise that it's all about optimum viewing distances too!). But most fans that I know think that having a wavy upper tier merely emasculates a stadium.

2. Re the fans.....yes, Arsenal's are quiet. But that doesn't mean that a better designed stadium couldn't do more to help. Steeper stands, closer o the pitch would instantly make a big difference.

3.Re Tottenham fans......a few seasons ago, I would have agreed with you. But even we've become a bit crap over the past 18 months or so. The Lane has been shamefully quiet at times.

4. The thing is, most of the clubs that have built new stadia are mid to small sized clubs - and they have understandably opted for the cheapest option because anything else would have bankrupted them. Only Arsenal, of the big clubs, has built a new stadium.

5. Stadiums in most other parts of the world are paid for by local government. Many are consequently vanity projects and can therefore be lavished with aesthetic appeal.

But as a general rule, yes, I know what you mean.