ENGLAND - Stadium and Arena Development News [Archive] - Page 9

tko12345

July 15th, 2006, 03:40 PM

I think work has started on the deconstruction of the east wing at Wimbledon’s centre court. Even though I haven’t read any official announcement so I may be wrong but it looks like it on the webcam.

In its place will be the new east wing which will double the space already available and create a new restaurant and improved bar facilities.

This is part of the larger redevelopment of centre court which includes
• New light weight retractable roof
• Seating expansion from 13,800 to 15,000
• Replacement of current seating with new wider and more comfortable ones.

They hope to have the building up and running in time for next years championships. So a lot of work has to be done between now and next year.

What Wimbledon looks like now. and with new east wing
http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/7696/39708173centrecourt2003nr8.gif http://img216.imageshack.us/img216/3667/39708175centrecourt2009yj3.gif

What Wimbledon will look like now and in 2009 after all the improvements have been made.
http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/1381/untitled1kq6.jpghttp://img215.imageshack.us/img215/885/39708171aerial1ln1.gif

Webcam of east wing
http://img89.imageshack.us/img89/6451/camputer42ly6.jpg

eddyk

July 15th, 2006, 03:56 PM

Will look great when completed.

Real expensive looking.

CharlieP

July 15th, 2006, 03:59 PM

I heard they were going to build a new No. 2 Court - does anybody know anything about that?

Loranga

July 15th, 2006, 04:27 PM

Maybe OT, but when do you think artficial turf will be enough suitable to play tennis on?

CharlieP

July 15th, 2006, 04:36 PM

Tennis has been played on artificial turf for years.

pompeyfan

July 16th, 2006, 11:15 AM

i like that idea

skaP187

July 16th, 2006, 11:57 AM

Wimbeldon artificial? no way, this is English tradition man, keep it real!
I like the centre court the circle form of the stadium, yep it has got class
def.

NavyBlue

July 16th, 2006, 01:37 PM

A retractable roof on a tennis court!!!

Now where have I seen that before??? :cheers:

pompeyfan

July 17th, 2006, 07:28 AM

A retractable roof on a tennis court!!!

Now where have I seen that before??? :cheers:

Melbourne

invincible

July 17th, 2006, 07:52 AM

^ lol.

London and Melbourne go hand-in-hand with misguided reputations of rainyness. Although the Yarra did break its banks once and flood all the courts.

Anyway, build the roof right and natural grass will work fine. Artificial turf is used at the Australian Open because the tennis courts are removed right after the event to make way for other sports (it's getting a swimming pool next year).

Tyson

July 17th, 2006, 08:15 AM

The Australian Open at Melbourne Park is not played on artifical turf exactly. I presume by artifical turf you mean fake grass. Australian Open is a hardcourt event played on the surface called Rebound Ace which is made from rubber and fibreglass and other things.

Wimbledon needs the roof because of the rain since there is at least one day rained out every year. Melbourne Park's has two roofed stadiums and I think the main reason is not for rain but so the stadium can be properly temperature controlled. Australian Open is played in summer and the air temperatue can at times exceed 40 degrees C. The roofed stadiums each have air conditioning. Probably another reason why matches at Melbourne Park are often played at night.

Durbsboi

July 17th, 2006, 10:08 AM

Finally a retractable roof at wimbledon, about time i'd say, how many matches are rained out!

BaronVonChickenpants

July 17th, 2006, 10:30 AM

A retractable roof on a tennis court!!!

Now where have I seen that before??? :cheers:

the differance being that Melbourne was purpose built with a roof,whereas Wimbledon are having to do it to an exisiting,very old,open air court
i wonder how many other stadia there are around that have had a retractable roof added at a later date(especially an old staduim)there can't be many

i'm not sure i see the point in this though,the money would be much better invested in grass roots tennis,is not like much time is lost.Ever since i can remember,there have only been a couple of times that the tournament has either had to use the middle sunday,or over-run into the 3rd week.And i can't see that centre court is going to be used for other events,like Melbourne does
as has been said,it doesn't rain that much in SW19

Giorgio

July 17th, 2006, 11:15 AM

BaronVonChickenpants

July 17th, 2006, 02:01 PM

from The Times.........

MCC, the owner of Lord’s, has been offered a potential windfall in excess of £40 million by developers who have acquired the lease from Network Rail on a strip of land running 170 metres alongside Wellington Road at the Nursery End. They plan to build apartments that would not only overlook the ground but have the cachet of being inside it.
Few MCC members will be aware that the club does not own this land, which is 42 metres in depth, but leases it from RL Partnership and Network Rail (formerly Railtrack), which built the original Underground lines that run beneath this section of the ground. RL Partnership has the rights to acquire a 999-year lease. MCC cannot develop the land and has only a further two years before the expiry of its temporary consent from Westminster City Council for a hospitality centre.

RL Partnership, which is based in St John’s Wood, presented its plans to MCC last July. Although the club still holds a 130-lease, this is seen in the context of its history as a depreciating asset. In order to interest the most famous cricket club in the world further, RL Partnership is offering it a lump sum in cash and the ground floor of the proposed development, which would extend over approximately 25,000 sq ft.

According to Peter Wetherell, of Wetherells, an estate agent in Central London, this would be worth £20 million. Planning permission has yet to be obtained from Westminster City Council, although negotiations are under way.

Original proposals were submitted to Maurice de Rohan, the chairman of MCC’s estates sub-committee, more than two years ago. The land was offered at public auction in 1999 after MCC declined to purchase it for a figure thought to be around £1 million — a decision the club might now be regretting — and was sold for £2.35 million to RL Partnership.

The planned apartments could incorporate businesses, and underground car parking would provide 400 spaces. Those in the penthouse suites are likely to benefit from a grandstand view of the action.

Of the original railway lines, one is still operative but two are disused. It is thought inappropriate that the 18,000- plus members who own the club should receive any windfall themselves and the developers hope that £6 million would go towards the Chance to Shine initiative for furthering the game among young people. The remaining funds could be spent on developing a ground whose capacity, around 30,000, is the most sizeable of any Test venue in the country, but not considered large by comparison with grounds in Australia.

CharlieP

July 17th, 2006, 02:21 PM

It's pushing it a bit to say that Lord's would be extended if these apartments were built!

CharlieP

July 17th, 2006, 02:25 PM

']:eek:
Air-Conditioned stadium...
Thats amazing!

Why is that amazing? There are plenty of larger indoor buildings (if that's not a tautology) that have air conditioning - e.g. exhibition centres, factories etc...

cphdude

July 17th, 2006, 02:49 PM

Looks pretty good, and I must say, long overdue....The roof aswell. This year the rain warent to bad, but some years it is pretty redicules...

BaronVonChickenpants

July 17th, 2006, 03:16 PM

It's pushing it a bit to say that Lord's would be extended if these apartments were built!

The remaining funds could be spent on developing a ground whose capacity, around 30,000, is the most sizeable of any Test venue in the country, but not considered large by comparison with grounds in Australia.

this is the most important part of the story,though they are jumping the gun a bit.Not sure what part of Lords could be extended,except the Tavern stand.Think the mound stand could continue right round to the Pavillion

tko12345

July 17th, 2006, 06:50 PM

The retractable roof is to allow game to be played even in the rain so that Wimbledon don’t have to give money back to supporters like they do now if a day has been rained off. So a good financial move in my opinion.

This development as well as the court 2 which was built in 1997 is part of long term development plan which was created in 1992. This was to help keep Wimbledon such a unique and amazing tournament for the players and spectators. The roof is the final piece of this development plan I think.

Just to clear things up the roof is not being built yet, it the east wing being built. The roof at the earliest will be constructed after the 2007 tournament but I have feeling the roof won’t start construction until after the 2008 tournament.

Mo Rush

July 17th, 2006, 07:35 PM

Giorgio

July 17th, 2006, 07:46 PM

Why is that amazing? There are plenty of larger indoor buildings (if that's not a tautology) that have air conditioning - e.g. exhibition centres, factories etc...
Lmao..that was unnecessary.
I think its cool that stadiums can be airconditioned.

Please dont question me again pointlessly. :)

i_am_hydrogen

July 18th, 2006, 08:02 AM

I've been watching Wimbledon since I was knee high. It is the greatest of all tennis tournaments. For me, Centre Court is the Wrigley Field of tennis stadiums. I understand the need to build a retractable roof, as London can be quite rainy in general and particularly so during this great tournament. From an economic standpoint, it makes perfect sense. Nevertheless, I have my reservations. I don't like to watch tennis played indoors--it's too reminiscent of the Davis Cup, which has a stale feeling to it. I feel like Centre Court will lose some of its mystique if the roof is relied upon too often.

Madman

July 18th, 2006, 08:09 AM

Tbh i think the roof wont be used that much, i mean i think in this years tournament it rained for part of one or two of the days (there are benefits to global warming ;)

pompeyfan

July 18th, 2006, 08:26 AM

BaronVonChickenpants

July 18th, 2006, 10:30 AM

tko12345

July 18th, 2006, 11:24 AM

If you look at the long term and say that about 15 days will be rained off over the course of the next 20 years, Say 1 million pound a day in lost revenue like which is what they had to pay back this year, then that could create a extra 15 million pound which they would have lost. So the roof will pay for itself in the long term.

I do agree though that a lot of people will still be left out of pocket, I don’t know how they are going to get round that problem.

Mo Rush

July 19th, 2006, 05:00 PM

Noostairz

July 20th, 2006, 12:41 AM

Caborn backs 2018 World Cup bid (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/5196720.stm)
Wednesday, 19 July 2006, 19:54 GMT 20:54 UK

Sports Minister Richard Caborn says there is "a very good chance" England will bid to host the 2018 World Cup.

As Sports Minister I'd be disappointed if we didn't [bid] because I'd be at the forefront of pushing it," he said.

"You look at places like the Emirates Stadium and football grounds up and down the country and we have some of the best stadia in the world."

A study looking into the costs and benefits will be made in the next few months before a possible bid in 2009.

"We will be looking at what our strengths and weaknesses are and will look to address those issues before we make a formal bid," added Caborn.

"If we're going to do it, we've got to do it right, and it's got to be well thought out."

Caborn believes the 2012 Olympics will provide a solid test of the country's infrastructure.

"In the Olympics themselves, football will be one of the sports to actually go around the country," he added.

"It will be at Hampden Park (in Glasgow) and in Cardiff and at Aston Villa's stadium and will finish at the great Wembley.

"The 2012 Games will be a great showcase, and I have no doubts at all that if we really want to make a bid for 2018 then we have the stadia, and indeed the organisation that can more than manage that.

"Wembley will be the greatest stadium in the world, and will be a real credit to the nation."

Noostairz

July 20th, 2006, 12:47 AM

a copy and paste from a previous post of mine - the likely venues:

1) wembley, 90,000 (london)
2) emirates, 60,000 (london)
3) old trafford, 75,000+ (manchester)
4) city of man, 48,000 (manchester)
5) st james' park, 52,000+ (newcastle/northeast)
6) stadium of light, 48,000+ (sunderland/northeast)
7) new anfield, 61,000 (liverpool) - has planning permission
8) new everton, 50,000? (liverpool) - rumours
9) villa park, 42,573+ (birmingham)
10) city of birmingham stadium, 50,000+ (birmingham) - proposed

^ = ten stadiums in five different cities/regions, followed by five+ other stadiums in five+ other different cities/regions taken from the following list:

southampton (32,000 - expansion easy), reading (24,200 - expansion planned), hull (25,504 - expansion planned), boro (35,100 - expansion easy), derby (33,597 - expansion easy), leicester (32,500 - expansion easy), coventry (32,000), mk dons (32,000), brighton (23,000 - planned)...

not forgetting the huge potential for massive redevelopments or total relocations for clubs from the following areas: sheffield, leeds, nottingham, east anglia and bristol.

Noostairz

July 20th, 2006, 12:57 AM

for a little look at england's latest purpose-built, 60,000 capacity, soon-to-be-uefa-five-star football stadium...

CLICK HERE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFgJq6FDPNU&NR).

:banana:

kingdomca

July 20th, 2006, 04:24 AM

i can't see that the money given back to fans will come anywhere near to repaying for the millions spent on that roof.Plus,what about court number 1,and all the other outside courts?they won't have a roof over them,so what happens to the fans who are ont hese courts when the rain comes?

It guarantees tv companies that there is always a match on and of course it quarantees that the big games, finals and semis will be played as planned.

Thats a very big difference. I watch very little tennis, basically just the latter stages of Wimbledon and if those games are delayed, I probably end up not seeing them and I would think its the same for most other potential viewers.

Wimbledon cannot risk going on like that, which is why they have decided to build it.

No need to put roofs on other courts though, which I am sure they will not do.

As for court no 2, i believe its going to have a temporary stand which will be removed each year after the championships, because of the locals

CharlieP

July 20th, 2006, 10:51 AM

Just about every post I've seen about a potential England World Cup simply seems to list the biggest stadia in descending order, but there's a lot more to it than that - in the last World Cup, Düsseldorf's Rheinstadion wasn't chosen, despite being larger than a lot of venues that were, because it was felt that there were already enough host cities in the Ruhr area, and it was deemed to be better to have a more even geographic spread.

With that in mind, I would approach the bid from the other direction and pick the host cities first. Working from the list of the largest urban areas in England over 300,000 population, this is my take on things:

London - Wembley Stadium (90,000) - final, quarter-final.
West Midlands - City of Birmingham Stadium (50,000) - third-place playoff.
Greater Manchester - Old Trafford (76,000) - semi-final.
West Yorkshire - new Leeds stadium (50,000) - quarter-final.
Tyneside - St. James' Park (60,000) - semi-final.
Liverpool - New Anfield (60,000) - quarter-final.
Nottingham - City Ground (40,000).
Sheffield - Hillsborough (40,000).
Bristol - new stadium (40,000).
Brighton/Worthing/Littlehampton - no, what would be the point?
Portsmouth - Fratton Park (40,000).
Leicester - no, already using Nottingham.
Teesside - Riverside Ground (40,000).
Bournemouth - no, see Brighton!
Reading/Wokingham - Madejski Stadium (40,000).
The Potteries - not sure.
Coventry/Bedworth - no, already using Birmingham.
Birkenhead - no, already using Liverpool.
Southampton - no, already using Portsmouth.
Hull - Kingston Communications Stadium (40,000).

That's 13 stadia - if you add the Stadium of Light (60,000) as the fourth quarter-final venue, or add Emirates (60,000) as the third-place playoff venue and use Birmingham for a quarter-final instead that's 14, so to keep a nice geographic spread remove Hillsborough and either the Riverside Ground (if using Sunderland) or Madejski (if using Emirates).

How's that for off the top of my head? :)

LMCA1990

July 20th, 2006, 11:04 AM

i think england is a good contender for the 2018 wc. i understand the others are australia, canada, china, mexico, netherlands-belgium (joint bid), new zealand, saudi arabia, and spain. the only ones that come close in possible venues are australia, canada, and mexico.

CharlieP

July 20th, 2006, 11:19 AM

New Zealand?! I don't know where you heard that, but it's got to be a pisstake. They don't even have the stadia to do the 2011 Rugby World Cup justice (60,000 in Auckland for the final, 50,000 in Christchurch and the remainder under 40,000, many of them glorified cowsheds), so they don't stand a snowflake's chance in hell of accomodating a 32-team soccer World Cup...

SE9

July 20th, 2006, 12:38 PM

Lostboy

July 20th, 2006, 12:52 PM

Celt Lover,

I would have thought slim to none.

The fact that a few teams from Wales play in the English League has no bearing on it all, this is international competition not domestic (and besides we don't have "joint leagues", just some teams playing in our league, rather like Berwick playing in the Caledonian League, it doesn't make us have joint leagues with Scotland. Besides all proper joint bids, like that of Japan and South Korea, have an even number of stadia, so they can take between them an even number of semi-finals, quarter-finals, round of 16 and group stage matches and with one taking the opening and third place, whilst the other takes the final. This would not be the case with Wales, this little nation does not have eight to ten good stadia to offer. So would it be a joint-bid (in which case it would be extremely unpopular with FIFA, or would it be an English Bid using Cardiff's Stadium (in which case something unneccessary for a country with as many stadia as we have, and a strong league) and then do they get qualification, for providing one measely stadium. It brings up so many problems and solves so very few. I don't see, what if anything would be gained from using one of the Barbarian's Stadia. It would dilute our bid for the sake of bringing onside, a small and insignificant nation, whose votes we wouldn't need, and who hate us anyway.

Certainly if we start to use Celt Stadia for are bid, I will actively support the other bids, just as I will cheer against each and every team that the Great Britain Football Team plays against in 2012 Olympics.

MoreOrLess

July 20th, 2006, 01:13 PM

Is there any chance of Hampden Park, or more importantly, Millenium Stadium being used?

England and Wales are joint leagues, so the Millenium Stadium should be used imo.

It looks as if our 2 rivals so far are Australia and Belgium & Holland (joint bid)

The Millenium is IMHO far more likely to be used if only because of the lack of suitable stadiums in the South West of England although a new shared stadium in Bristol would also be an option.

Lostboy

July 20th, 2006, 01:22 PM

That would be like saying "well there aren't enough stadia in East Germany, lets give one to Poland". Its ridiculous, Wales for the purposes of football is a foreign country, we are not a tiny nation in need of using their stadium. If there is a lack of one in the South-West, then as a South-Westerner, I say build one in Bristol. We have a top league Rugby Club, and in general Rugby competes with Football for the title of biggest sport in the region. Whose not to say that Bristol's underperforming football teams might not make it to the Premier League one day? Certainly for a city our size, it would be a surprise if they didn't. Bristol is the biggest city in Southern England, bar London, it can take a 40,000+ Stadium.

MoreOrLess

July 20th, 2006, 02:43 PM

Mo Rush

July 20th, 2006, 02:54 PM

England don't really have any issues with stadia...I suppose presenting the correct mix of stadia when you're spoilt for choice would be the main issue..but 2018 is a long time away...if brazil can't host 2014, i say england steps in and brazil can host 2018.

Wezza

July 20th, 2006, 03:07 PM

I think it'll come down to Australia or England. I can't see Netherlands-belgium getting it with a joint bid. Something England has over us at the moment is more suitable stadia.

P.S. I notice there seems to be a trend in England of renovating/expanding 2 sides of the stadium & leaving the others, then coming back later to do the others. Is it a money thing or just because it causes too much of a disruption during the premiership?

Jack Rabbit Slim

July 20th, 2006, 03:22 PM

P.S. I notice there seems to be a trend in England of renovating/expanding 2 sides of the stadium & leaving the others, then coming back later to do the others. Is it a money thing or just because it causes too much of a disruption during the premiership?
Yer, this does seem to be the case with quite a few English stadiums. Basically, the football leagues in England are the oldest in the world, and a lot of the current stadiums were built a long time ago, in most cases with limited funds and small capacities; then as the clubs and league became more successful and gained more money, the desire for bigger capacity stadiums increased. Building a new stadium these days is pretty costly; if you build a stadium in a different location, you also have to pay for the land (and land in English cities is like gold dust), if you demolish the existing stadium, the club has nowhere to play and loses ticket money. So most clubs choose the option of gradually expanding their stadiums, building one new stand at a time, which can leave the stadium looking a bit of a mess sometimes, but I think most clubs these days are now choosing to build new stadiums rather then re-vamp the existing ones: Arsenal, Liverpool, Everton, Birmingham etc etc.

:cheers:

JOBINHO

July 21st, 2006, 02:22 AM

England should get it for 2018 MARK MY WORD FREINDS :)

kingdomca

July 21st, 2006, 06:43 PM

The remaining funds could be spent on developing a ground whose capacity, around 30,000, is the most sizeable of any Test venue in the country, but not considered large by comparison with grounds in Australia.

this is the most important part of the story,though they are jumping the gun a bit.Not sure what part of Lords could be extended,except the Tavern stand.Think the mound stand could continue right round to the Pavillion

But its not exactly as if those stadiums in Australia have often been well-populated.
Its a strange comparison, anyway, if it should be like Australia it means sharing football stadiums.

I think Lords will be expanded and improved. Their staging agreement runs out soon and surely they must offer something to remain the leading venue for another long term contract, but it will probably be a very limited expansion

Mo Rush

July 21st, 2006, 09:05 PM

The Concerned Potato

July 22nd, 2006, 03:26 AM

UK bid (unrealistic because of the whole host nation being give a bye into the tournament thingy)

London (2 stadiums max per city right?)

- Wembley (90,000)

http://www.wembleystadium.com/NR/rdonlyres/56E9CDE0-6CB8-4162-9DED-676E07AAE19A/89989/aerial_big.jpg

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

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/01/Newwembley.jpg

- Emirates (60,000)

http://www.arsenal.com/images/wallpapers/emirateswallpaper8_800.jpg

http://img226.imageshack.us/img226/7470/front7tl2qv.jpg

Birmingham (55,000?)

- will have a new stadium by then (and Vile Park smells so..)

http://www.digitalbrain.com/knhadriang98/web/City%20of%20Birmingham%20Stadium/landscape.jpg

Manchester

- Old Trafford (COM will be overlooked, as were many decent stadiums in Germany)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/54/CIMG1475.JPG

Liverpool

- New Anfield (60,000)

http://www.wblsc.co.uk/mediac/400_0/media/New~Anfield~2.jpg

http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1990000/images/_1992484_newanfield300.jpg

Leeds

- renovated Elland Road (currently 40,000, probbaly expanded to 48,000)

http://www.digitalbrain.com/knhadriang98/web/Stadiums/Leedsfg.jpg

Newcastle

- St. James' Park (52,000)

http://www.digitalbrain.com/knhadriang98/web/Stadiums/Newcastlefg.jpg

http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/town/park/yfh45/newcast11.jpg

Cardiff

- Millennium Stadium (74,500)

http://www.digitalbrain.com/knhadriang98/web/Stadiums/cardiff24.jpg

Glasgow

- either Celtic Park (61,000) or Hampden Park (52,500)

http://www.uefa-archiv.de/Stadien/GlasgowC.jpg

http://www.upyarkilt.com/hampdenuefa.jpg

Belfast/Lisburn (wherever)

- new national stadium (probbaly 42,000 according to reports)

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/40865000/jpg/_40865817_maze-203.jpg

i predict they MAY choose to build a new stadium in East Anglia, because their are no decent stadiums in the east of the UK. perhaps Sheffield Wednesday and United will decide to have one stadium aswell. i dunno about the South Coast, i guess we'll have to see if Fratton Park gets a SIGNIFICANT redeveloment lol

previous WC's have shown you don't necessarily need MASSIVE stadiums. maybe about 7 40,000-48,000 seater stadiums, maybe 2 55,000+ stadiums for the semi finals and then one huge stadium for the final. you only need about 10 venues anyway, so it'd be unfair (for the rest of the country) to use 2 stadiums in places like Birmingham, Liverpool and Manchester as you're not spreading the World Cup around the country properly. obviously London will get 2 venues (like Paris in France 98) because the city is so massive. in Germany, many top notch stadiums were overlooked (such as the AWD Arena and Borussia Park) because they wanted to spread it out geographically (even Leipzig got a big venue, and their team is playing in the 4th tier of german football!)

CharlieP

July 22nd, 2006, 12:55 PM

The Compton and Edrich stands could be extended slightly - the lower tier between the new grandstand and the media centre looks ridiculous...

Mo Rush

July 22nd, 2006, 03:15 PM

The Compton and Edrich stands could be extended slightly - the lower tier between the new grandstand and the media centre looks ridiculous...
compton and edrich stands could be extended slightly..but would it be necessary in the long run?, is it not possible for these extensions to be temporary and be incuded if need be?

BaronVonChickenpants

July 22nd, 2006, 06:58 PM

compton and edrich stands could be extended slightly..but would it be necessary in the long run?, is it not possible for these extensions to be temporary and be incuded if need be?

i would have thought that the mound stand could be extended,with the outdated Tavern stand making way for it to sweep right round to the Pavillion

Seth Gecko

July 22nd, 2006, 09:24 PM

No one in their right mind would allow a World Cup match to be hosted in the snake pit that is Celtic Park. No way! That is not the sort of place I want tourists going, unless they think the whole country is like that!

Plus it is the least likely stadium in Glasgow to ever be chosen for such an event by anyone, since there are two 5 star stadia there, that don't fall down when its windy!

Mo Rush

July 23rd, 2006, 12:27 AM

its 2 stadia in a maximum of one city. every other city only one stadium.

Its AlL gUUd

July 23rd, 2006, 01:42 AM

if only London could have 3, we could add Twickenham

panamaboy9016

July 23rd, 2006, 02:42 AM

I really think ENgland will get a World Cup, either the 2014 or the 2018. So then they'll have a World Cup and an Olympic hosting game.

MoreOrLess

July 23rd, 2006, 01:29 PM

if only London could have 3, we could add Twickenham

Theres also of course the possibility of the Olympic stadium and new/redevolped grounds for Chelsea/Spurs. I doubt thats really a hard and fast rule so much as a recommendation though in order to avoid bias distirbution fo venues for political reasons. Just as big a debate would I'd guess surround the high number of likely venues in the North West(Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, Sheffield).

Lostboy

July 23rd, 2006, 01:44 PM

The divide between England and Wales is obviously vastly different than between Germany and Poland, we might have different nation teams but we have the same goverment, have linked leagues and the stadium itself has been used for big English events. As a fellow south westerner I'd preffer to see it used rather than(although both would be nice) a new Bristol stadium if only because its much more likely I'd be able to get tickets.

I'm sorry but in footballing and cultural terms the divide that seperates us from them is as great as the divide between Germany and Poland. We don't have linked leagues, we have a very few clubs (Swansea, Cardiff, Wrexham and Newport are the only ones to my knowledge) playing in our league, and this gives a great headache to UEFA and FIFA.

Besides who says the Celts won't demand qualification as a part of the deal, thus complicating our bid further. I doubt FIFA would allow you to have your precious little Cardiff Stadium used unless we are a joint bid, and how would that be possible when we provide so much more of the stadia than they. A Cardiff Stadium will jeopardise an England Bid, we shouldn't even consider it.

BTW What part of the South-West are you from, with your self-hating stance, your probably a moonraker.

Lostboy

July 23rd, 2006, 01:50 PM

its 2 stadia in a maximum of one city. every other city only one stadium.

I thought it was the case that in only one city can two stadia count twoards the minimum requirements (ten) of stadia for the World Cup, after those minimum requirements for the WC then you are unlimited in the number of cities that can provide more than one stadia.

The England Bid for 2006, was going to have:-

16 Stadia
12 Cities
with two stadiums each in London, Birmingham, Manchester and Liverpool.

I'd say that would be a nice bid, we'd be providing more cities than SA and France and an equal number with Germany, but with more stadia.

The Concerned Potato

July 24th, 2006, 12:05 AM

Pho-sure

July 24th, 2006, 12:13 AM

Already bagged the Olympics, now the UK wants World Cup? That's abit greedy isn't it? LOL

The Concerned Potato

July 24th, 2006, 12:20 AM

Already bagged the Olympics, now the UK wants World Cup? That's abit greedy isn't it? LOL

most people in England would choose a World Cup over an Olympics (including me).

although my cousin is gold medal-winning 100m sprinter Mark-Lewis Francis

he won the gold in the relay (where he fended off the challenge of Maurice Greene in Athens)

and it'd be good to see him have the chance of participating in an Olympics in his home country :)

Mo Rush

July 24th, 2006, 01:30 AM

Already bagged the Olympics, now the UK wants World Cup? That's abit greedy isn't it? LOL
i dont think so...its not the UK...its england the birthplace of football or as some would argue its scotland...but what the heck...it shud be awesome.

Lostboy

July 24th, 2006, 05:04 PM

Already bagged the Olympics, now the UK wants World Cup? That's abit greedy isn't it? LOL

England, not the UK wants the World Cup. The bid will have nothing to do with Celts.

CharlieP

July 24th, 2006, 05:23 PM

Already bagged the Olympics, now the UK wants World Cup? That's abit greedy isn't it? LOL

England, not the UK wants the World Cup. The bid will have nothing to do with Celts.

Paradoxically, the Olympics is (as the IOC is always at pains to point out) hosted by cities not countries, but will see soccer matches hosted further afield than in a theoretical England World Cup...

2005

July 24th, 2006, 10:34 PM

Found some good pics today :)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v201/darren_smith31/4a49d01c.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v201/darren_smith31/b6a1ed63.jpg

http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n250/EssexPaxtonite/101_0191.jpg

http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n250/EssexPaxtonite/101_0377.jpg

http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n250/EssexPaxtonite/101_0193.jpg

On the 30th July Tottenham will play Inter Milan. Shame I haven't got tickets as all the tickets sold out with three weeks to go before kick-off.

Something thats always made me proud to be a Tottenham fan. The singing at the Lane.

MARTIN JOL'S
BLUE & WHITE ARMY!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5D479gtXgo&search=white%20hart%20lane

Something you don't happening at many stadiums today. Paxton road and the Park Lane sing it out after the last home game of the season.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkbFVGD3e6Y&search=TOTTENHAM

This vid isn't a one off. I sat between it at Spurs first home game of last season in line with the half way line in the East upper. Trust me its fecking awesome when you experiance sing song between rival stands.

Whoopee Cushion

July 24th, 2006, 10:37 PM

WHL is actually one of the better English stadiums! It's cute! A nice wee small stadium for a nice wee family club!

2005

July 24th, 2006, 10:52 PM

WHL is actually one of the better English stadiums! It's cute! A nice wee small stadium for a nice wee family club!

Sorry whats that Rangers haven't won three European trophies? I thought as much.

The Concerned Potato

July 24th, 2006, 10:56 PM

Sorry whats that Rangers haven't won three European trophies? I thought as much.

a perfect example of taking the bait....

JimB

July 25th, 2006, 12:46 AM

a perfect example of taking the bait....

True.

But it also happens to be a rather effective riposte!

Next time, 2005, you could also mention how Spurs thrashed Rangers and truly put them in their place the only time the two clubs met in European competition.

Mo Rush

July 25th, 2006, 12:53 AM

most people in England would choose a World Cup over an Olympics (including me).

although my cousin is gold medal-winning 100m sprinter Mark-Lewis Francis

he won the gold in the relay (where he fended off the challenge of Maurice Greene in Athens)

and it'd be good to see him have the chance of participating in an Olympics in his home country :)
not a problem since england will get 2018 in addition to london getting 2012 :)

skaP187

July 25th, 2006, 05:52 PM

any news about the extension

JimB

July 25th, 2006, 06:48 PM

any news about the extension

Sadly not.

As far as the vitally needed capacity increase for White Hart Lane is concerned, every day is Groundhog day.

2005

July 25th, 2006, 07:38 PM

Sadly not.

As far as the vitally needed capacity increase for White Hart Lane is concerned, every day is Groundhog day.

It is like a groundhog day to be honest. Everyday is the same apart the Annual General Meeting. We Spurs fans get told f*** all everyday. The latest I've read is that in the Birmingham matchday programme club chairman (president) Daniel Levy told supporters that the local council said Tottenham could take the capacity at WHL to 45,000 but Levy said no as he wanted 52,000. I think we'll hear something rather soon. Last month Tottenham sold their 25,000 season ticket allocation with a waiting list of 20,000! Also we have arond 60,000 memebers. Tottenham lose millions every month as they know the stadium is just way too small for the size of it's support.

terryfied

July 25th, 2006, 10:17 PM

It is like a groundhog day to be honest. Everyday is the same apart the Annual General Meeting. We Spurs fans get told f*** all everyday. The latest I've read is that in the Birmingham matchday programme club chairman (president) Daniel Levy told supporters that the local council said Tottenham could take the capacity at WHL to 45,000 but Levy said no as he wanted 52,000. I think we'll hear something rather soon. Last month Tottenham sold their 25,000 season ticket allocation with a waiting list of 20,000! Also we have arond 60,000 memebers. Tottenham lose millions every month as they know the stadium is just way too small for the size of it's support.

I'm always hearing how the likes of Spurs, Everton, Chelsea and Liverpool, could/should be playing to gates 50,000 plus gates, why aren't they?

The clubs I've named have been to slow to evolve, and are now paying the price.

Old Trafford may not be the nicest looking stadium in the UK, but Man Utd were extending their stadium even when they weren't winning anything.

Newcastle, who haven't won anything for years, have extended their stadium; whilst Sunderland, another club without recent success, and Arsenal have built new stadia.

JimB

July 25th, 2006, 11:58 PM

I'm always hearing how the likes of Spurs, Everton, Chelsea and Liverpool, could/should be playing to gates 50,000 plus gates, why aren't they?

The clubs I've named have been to slow to evolve, and are now paying the price.

Old Trafford may not be the nicest looking stadium in the UK, but Man Utd were extending their stadium even when they weren't winning anything.

Newcastle, who haven't won anything for years, have extended their stadium; whilst Sunderland, another club without recent success, and Arsenal have built new stadia.

1. Utd only started redeveloping Old Trafford in 1992, when the Stretford end was rebuilt to match the rest of the lower tier, to conform with Taylor Report requirements. So OT's capacity expansion didn't begin until Utd were already the top club in the country.

2. Sunderland built their stadium very cheaply (and it shows) with the aid of a hefty European grant. Furthermore, Sunderland is a one club city, so it was easy to find a new site.

3. Arsenal were only able to afford their new stadium because:

a) They benefitted from 10-15 years of success and Champions' League cash.

b) Highbury is situated in a relatively desirable area. Consequently Arsenal can recoup a huge amount of their investment from selling housing at Highbury.

c) Part of the Ashburton Grove deal involved Arsenal (scandalously) benefitting from CPO's to build further residential developments by the new site, further helping them to repay the debt.

Spurs cannot do what Sunderland did. We cannot move to just any site in London. We will not get a European grant.

Neither can we do what Arsenal did. White Hart Lane is in one of the poorest areas of London and there will be little to gain from developing housing.

terryfied

July 26th, 2006, 12:18 AM

1. Utd only started redeveloping Old Trafford in 1992, when the Stretford end was rebuilt to match the rest of the lower tier, to conform with Taylor Report requirements. So OT's capacity expansion didn't begin until Utd were already the top club in the country.

They started to re-develop the Scoreboard end in 1971, making most of that end seated, they have rebuilt parts of Old Trafford every few years since then, ending up with what we have today.

JimB

July 26th, 2006, 12:39 AM

They started to re-develop the Scoreboard end in 1971, making most of that end seated, they have rebuilt parts of Old Trafford every few years since then, ending up with what we have today.

Every stand at WHL was redeveloped between 1980 and 1998.

But we're talking about capacity increases here.

And OT's capacity didn't start on an upward curve until the North stand was redeveloped in 1995-6.

Utd had been the top team in the country for a few years by then.

2005

July 26th, 2006, 12:51 AM

terryfied

July 26th, 2006, 04:54 PM

terryfied

July 26th, 2006, 05:09 PM

Every stand at WHL was redeveloped between 1980 and 1998.

But we're talking about capacity increases here.

And OT's capacity didn't start on an upward curve until the North stand was redeveloped in 1995-6.

Utd had been the top team in the country for a few years by then.

Old Trafford's capacity actually dropped from 58,000 in 1988 to 43,000 in 1996, following the Taylor report, it then started on an upward trend to the present day, so in that respect you are correct.

Fillet Tower

July 26th, 2006, 06:41 PM

Terryfied, Tottenham Chairman Daniel Levy last year told "thespursweb"

"Priority one is the first-team, priority two is the academy and the stadium has to be the third priority, because it's not under our control. I'm not hugely optimistic. We've put an enormous amount of effort into lobbying and drawing up plans, but it's not in our control."

"We are in an incredibly deprived area, with poor transportation, and I
don't see any immediate short-term solution."

Perhaps your only solution is to make a move at some point. I remember A site near Ally Pally being mentioned when Arsenal were looking for land. I wonder if that is still available, although the transportation there is probably worse than WHL. But as was said, the current stadium site probably wouldn't generate a lot of money needed for the move and knowing that lovely London mayor of ours, there would be a lot more spanners in the works. (build 5 blocks of flats around the stadium and you'll be fine!)

2005

July 26th, 2006, 07:48 PM

Perhaps your only solution is to make a move at some point. I remember A site near Ally Pally being mentioned when Arsenal were looking for land. I wonder if that is still available, although the transportation there is probably worse than WHL. But as was said, the current stadium site probably wouldn't generate a lot of money needed for the move and knowing that lovely London mayor of ours, there would be a lot more spanners in the works. (build 5 blocks of flats around the stadium and you'll be fine!)

Your right there. I know that Tottenham are a very well run club and can spend the cash in the transfer market but Tottenham do not have the money to move.

A few months ago the club looked at a site in Tottenham Hale but rejected it as an idea as the board thought the area was "too small". I know that Tottenham want to build something big but how big? I wouldn't say Spurs could get 60,000 at the mo as the past 15 years haven't been exciting and not enough to attract that size crowd but to be honest though Spurs could fill 60,000. Like I've said before, Tottenham sold 25,000 season tickets with a waiting list of 20,000. In all Tottenham could've had 45,000 season ticket holders. Then add that to the members that Tottenham have. I would say that Tottenham could only get 50-53,000 every game in a season at this moment in time.

Its going to be interesting to hear what the board have to say during the Annual General Meeting in a few months time. It is one of those "cross your fingers" moments now.

Its AlL gUUd

July 27th, 2006, 12:55 AM

Imagine Spurs build a 60k stadium as well. Thats how many big stadia in London :runaway:

Mo Rush

July 27th, 2006, 01:14 AM

Imagine Spurs build a 60k stadium as well. Thats how many big stadia in London :runaway:
quite a few stadia...enough for a world cup in london :D j/k

Slimboy Fat

July 27th, 2006, 02:23 AM

I would say that Tottenham could only get 50-53,000 every game in a season at this moment in time

what happened to the 250000?

JimB

July 27th, 2006, 01:03 PM

what happened to the 250000?

Oh dear. Bubomb's back!

JimB

July 27th, 2006, 05:52 PM

Not strictly related to the development of White Hart Lane but this, about the Olympic Stadium, is from the Telegraph today:

Caborn and Livingstone have different goals for stadium
By Mihir Bose

There is growing tension between Richard Caborn, the sports minister, and Ken Livingstone, the Mayor of London, about plans for the post-Olympic use of the 2012 stadium. London's bid promised that after the Olympics, the stadium would be scaled down from 80,000 seats to 25,000 to provide a permanent modern home for athletics.

Livingstone is very keen for it to be used for athletics and has promised to underwrite losses of up to £10 million a year at the Olympic Park after 2012.

The London Development Agency plan is that in 2013 Crystal Palace, where the IAAF Grand Prix will be staged this weekend, will have a bulldozer put through its old and decrepit arena and from that year all major athletics events will be held in the Olympic stadium.

However, the government are petrified of being left with a post-Olympics white elephant. Caborn makes no secret of his experience from Sheffield that athletics just does not earn enough money to justify a stadium on its own. While there has been talk of having a Premiership rugby club being based at the stadium, Caborn is convinced only a football club can provide the regular income that will ensure there is not a drain on public money.

Caborn is much taken by the example set by Manchester after staging the Commonwealth Games. The athletics track was removed, the stadium converted for football use and Manchester City moved in, paying £4 million a year ground rent. The football solution has worked well and the arena can be used for athletics, though there is no athletics stadium as such.

This led the government to commission KPMG, an accountancy firm, to talk to all the London football clubs - including West Ham, Tottenham, Fulham, QPR and Charlton - about possible use of the Olympic stadium.

Tottenham, with limited options at White Hart Lane , have been looking for a new ground and are keen, as are West Ham. However, insiders say the work done by KPMG was not thorough enough. Now everyone involved in 2012 - the government, the mayor, the 2012 organising committee and the Olympic Development Authority - are working on plans involving the future shape of the Olympic stadium. I am told they are working on three models.

Model 1 would see the stadium reduced to a 25,000-seater after the Olympics with athletics at its core, plus multi-purpose use or use by a rugby club.

Model 2, the one West Ham would like, would see the introduction of a 40,000-seater football stadium incorporating a running track, a bit like the old Wembley.

Model 3, the one Tottenham would be keen on, would see the stadium converted purely for football, seating 50,000 with no running track, the modern way for football.

However, in order to fulfil London's bid promise, athletics would be accommodated elsewhere in the Olympic Park, perhaps combined with the hockey stadium.

Livingstone favours Model 1 and Caborn Model 3. An insider told me: "Richard sees football as the only solution. I am sure if push comes to shove Ken will realise that athletics on its own can never sustain the stadium. But the problem for Richard is if you go for a football solution, then there might be concerns that public money has gone to giving a stadium to a football club which is a private company."

2005

July 27th, 2006, 06:12 PM

I don't want to see Spurs in shitty Stratford!

MoreOrLess

July 27th, 2006, 06:37 PM

I'm supprized Spur's would be happy with 50,000 given the opportunity to go up to 80,000 and the fact it would be possible to devolp WHL to 52,000.

Having the post games running track in another stadium certainly makes sense, theres never going to be the demand for 40,000 plus atheltics capacity outside of a Commonwealth Games or World Championships and both of those could use the new Wembley.

Fillet Tower

July 27th, 2006, 06:38 PM

I don't want to see Spurs in shitty Stratford!

It should be a much improved area by the time the Olympics arrive there. Excellent transport too. I know how much you Tottenham fans love your North London history though! But, would it be worth the move (and the banter that will come with it!) to help your team progress?... And is 6 years too long to wait?

2005

July 27th, 2006, 06:58 PM

It should be a much improved area by the time the Olympics arrive there. Excellent transport too. I know how much you Tottenham fans love your North London history though! But, would it be worth the move (and the banter that will come with it!) to help your team progress?... And is 6 years too long to wait?

I know what your saying and all but Tottenham just can't leave NL. Just about every Spurs fan refuses to leave NL. We have been in Nl ever since we were established. Also the distance is a bit too far.

http://i7.tinypic.com/214a8gh.jpg

skaP187

July 27th, 2006, 07:23 PM

MoreOrLess

July 27th, 2006, 07:27 PM

??????? Why are they building an olympic stadium in the first place then??????
Come on, Wembley will be finished in 2012 wouldn't it ????? :runaway:

Wembley in athletics mode will have a capacity of 68,000, large enough for the world champs or commonwealth games but not for the Olympics. Plus the area around Wembley has very little room for the devolpment of other Olympic facilties(stadiums, park, village etc).

skaP187

July 27th, 2006, 07:33 PM

Wouldn't it have been cheaper to redevelop Wembley to for instance a 120.000 cap footballmode and 90.000 atletic mode? or just design a new olympic stadium like that and start a little earlier with constructing and not rebuilding Wembley??? (or am I cursing now?)

2005

July 30th, 2006, 05:59 PM

Tottenham beat Inter Milan today 2-1. Before the game a few people on the the Spurs forum I go on said that they shall take some pics of the Lane. Shall post the pictures as soon as possible.

Roar

July 30th, 2006, 08:26 PM

JimB

July 31st, 2006, 01:40 AM

What do you see as a desirable capacity for Spurs?

I say for Spurs possibly 50,000.

I am very happy our new stadium holds 60,000. Although I think we would have been able to sell 70,000 without fail.

I see what you tried to do there. Close.....but no cigar.

Despite twenty years of failure and mediocrity, Spurs have the maximum allowable 23,000 season ticket holders and a season ticket waiting list of more than 20,000. In other words, had we the capacity, we could have sold some 45,000 season tickets this year. That's 45,000 seats sold for every game, without taking into account Spurs members, more occasional fans and away fans. After twenty years of rubbish. 50,000? Pah! Not enough.

Imagine what Spurs would need if we finally started to enjoy the sort of success that Arsenal have enjoyed over the past fifteen or so years.

The truth is that Spurs would need every bit as big a capacity as Arsenal.

The Concerned Potato

July 31st, 2006, 02:00 AM

Tottenham beat Inter Milan today 2-1. Before the game a few people on the the Spurs forum I go on said that they shall take some pics of the Lane. Shall post the pictures as soon as possible.

that 2-0 win over Birmingham in the friendly doesnt feel so bad now :)

i tried telling them that Spurs are a team that narrowly missed out on CL football last season and yet they all started moaning expecting to win

tocino

July 31st, 2006, 02:02 AM

I am very happy our new stadium holds 60,000. Although I think we would have been able to sell 70,000 without fail.

don't be ridiculous

JimB

July 31st, 2006, 02:17 AM

that 2-0 win over Birmingham in the friendly doesnt feel so bad now :)

i tried telling them that Spurs are a team that narrowly missed out on CL football last season and yet they all started moaning expecting to win

Don't worry.

Birmingham are in good company this pre season! As well as the Serie A champions, Spurs have beaten the team that finished second in France (Bordeaux); on the following day, the team that finished 8th in France (Nice); and the team that finished 6th in Spain (Celta Vigo).

And the best of the lot...............the mighty Stevenage.

After that sort of pre season record, needless to say, we will subsequently lose our first five Premiership matches and get dumped out of the UEFA Cup in the qualifying round for the group stage!

2005

July 31st, 2006, 11:24 AM

http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n250/EssexPaxtonite/100_1323.jpg

http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n250/EssexPaxtonite/100_1342.jpg

http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n250/EssexPaxtonite/100_1342.jpg

http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n250/EssexPaxtonite/100_1341.jpg

http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l73/Tommo12/DSC00037.jpg

http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l73/Tommo12/DSC00042.jpg

http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d157/Ginola90/07bn3.jpg

What a lovely pitch :cheers:

Roar

August 1st, 2006, 07:42 PM

don't be ridiculous

Sorry, ofcourse, what the hell was I talking about!!! 90,000 I mean. We have over 40,000 People on the waiting list and it's growing.

2005

August 1st, 2006, 09:10 PM

Sorry, ofcourse, what the hell was I talking about!!! 90,000 I mean. We have over 40,000 People on the waiting list and it's growing.

Just fuck off if your gonna be an idiotic prick! Same goes to anyone that tries to recreate the stupid arguments that me and Sitback used to have. Its a waste of time.

Roar

August 3rd, 2006, 12:44 PM

Just fuck off if your gonna be an idiotic prick! Same goes to anyone that tries to recreate the stupid arguments that me and Sitback used to have. Its a waste of time.

I was in the direction of tocino.

2005

August 3rd, 2006, 05:00 PM

I was in the direction of tocino.

I know man. Its just that its childish when people of different clubs etc argue.

Anyway a few more pics.

http://img322.imageshack.us/img322/297/71525580yd0.jpg
http://img330.imageshack.us/img330/9530/dsc00012va3.jpg
http://img411.imageshack.us/img411/397/dsc00007ot4.jpg
http://img244.imageshack.us/img244/5/dsc00013bb9.jpg

matherto

August 3rd, 2006, 05:41 PM

Sorry, ofcourse, what the hell was I talking about!!! 90,000 I mean. We have over 40,000 People on the waiting list and it's growing.

you won't sell out the current capacity much

Disraeli

August 4th, 2006, 02:29 AM

Any pics of how White hart lane looked during the early 90's before redevelopments?

clockender

August 4th, 2006, 10:54 AM

you won't sell out the current capacity much

We will sell out every league and CL game no problems, wanna wager?

tv123

August 4th, 2006, 11:53 AM

We will sell out every league and CL game no problems, wanna wager?

from Arsenal-Mania:

"The tickets for the Aston Villa game went on sale to Red Members at 9.30am.(For those of you unfamiliar to how buying tickets online works for an Arsenal game at the Grove, you have to go to a stadium outlay which shows different blocks and quadrants.) You then buy your tickets, I bought my tickets block 127 row 16 seats 993, 994, 995, at around 9.32am, put in my card details and went back to the stadium outlay(where you can choose where to sit.) When i got back to that screen all the blocks were sold out.
So I'd say that tickets sold out within 5 minutes of them going on sale to Red Members."

2005

August 4th, 2006, 12:03 PM

Any pics of how White hart lane looked during the early 90's before redevelopments?

1980s
http://digilander.libero.it/stadiapostcardsdgl/mondocolore3_file/image038.jpg

1974
http://www.thequake.com/parklane74.jpg

2005

August 4th, 2006, 12:08 PM

from Arsenal-Mania:

"The tickets for the Aston Villa game went on sale to Red Members at 9.30am.(For those of you unfamiliar to how buying tickets online works for an Arsenal game at the Grove, you have to go to a stadium outlay which shows different blocks and quadrants.) You then buy your tickets, I bought my tickets block 127 row 16 seats 993, 994, 995, at around 9.32am, put in my card details and went back to the stadium outlay(where you can choose where to sit.) When i got back to that screen all the blocks were sold out.
So I'd say that tickets sold out within 5 minutes of them going on sale to Red Members."

Good for him!

Post it on the Emirates thread FFS. And stop stupid bickering. You wanna cus each others clubs then fine but do via PM please.

Noostairz

August 4th, 2006, 04:24 PM

end of july pics:
http://www.mkdonsrus.com/arielden2a.jpg

http://www.mkdonsrus.com/arielden1a.jpg

Abdi

August 4th, 2006, 04:28 PM

i kind of like the look of WHL and im a GOONER, i would think spurs could fill a 52,000 capacity stadium and thats it.

BaronVonChickenpants

August 4th, 2006, 04:31 PM

There building a 30,000 capacity stadium for a club called Milton Keynes Dons that are.....well....some where in the table of the third teir of English football http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/eng_div_2/table/default.stm

Very nice stadium tho a lot better than the cack that Coventry City, Leicester city and Southampton produced.

Coventry's is a great staduim.went there last season,its differant form Soton and leicester,one side is small with a second tier and exec boxes,the other 3 sides are massive(the biggest single tiers i've ever seen)and the noise was fabulous

2005

August 4th, 2006, 05:26 PM

i kind of like the look of WHL and im a GOONER, i would think spurs could fill a 52,000 capacity stadium and thats it.

At the moment its looks like 52,000 or a bit more. I don't know exactly the demand, what I do know is that Tottenham could have had 45,000 season ticket holders this year. Its very frustrating for the club at the moment. As I've said before Tottenham have sold their 25,000 ST (was told its 25k not 23k) and had a waiting list of 20,000. In all I think we will leave (fingers crossed we don't but looking at the situation now its like that) and if we do 55,000 capacity is what Tottenham should be looking at. Tottenham may have been rather unsuccessful in the past 15 years but that doesn't mean we don't have fans. Mark my word when Tottenham get into the Champions League they will be able to fill 60,000. We do have a shed load of plastic fans to be honest.

Its all ifs and maybes to be honest but Tottenham do have a BIG fanbase.

Abdi

August 4th, 2006, 06:17 PM

http://www.brandrepublic.com/bulletins/br/article/490179/arsenal-named-oremiership

i reckon arsenal could of fill up a 76,000 stadium week in week out.

2005

August 4th, 2006, 06:44 PM

Arsenal is becoming a big brand no doubt. Other clubs are too. Chelsea will soon be wealthy and won't have much use for that Russian. Liverpool could be a new Arsenal. Spurs are trying lay down the foundations at the moment. We'll wait and see what happens in the future but as far I am concerned football is all about what happens on the pitch.

Abdi

August 4th, 2006, 08:14 PM

Abdi

August 4th, 2006, 08:19 PM

and i or so hope tottenham get a big stadium too or atleast expand to around 55,000 or over then the derby would really be big, probably biggest in england as its been getting better over the years.

2005

August 4th, 2006, 10:20 PM

and i or so hope tottenham get a big stadium too or atleast expand to around 55,000 or over then the derby would really be big, probably biggest in england as its been getting better over the years.

True. 3 FA Cup Semis, one of which (93) might be shown on Sky 3 tonight in that programme "Football Years" Its on at 10pm, in the space of 8 years. We were so DUMB to sack George back in 2001. I was 12 (about to become 13) at the time and I shouted at the TV "You fucking idiots!". I did like the fact he won us something. A through and through Goon.

Tottenham have been pathetic in comparison to Arsenal in the past 15 years to be honest. Looking back on what happened in May, I think its a blessing in disguise. You can't run before you walk ya know. Also the best way to find out how to become winners is to lose. I feel that what happened will make Tottenham stronger. I look at the both club's fantastic buying policy and academys and think that one day there will be a fight between the two for the title. I know most will laugh at that but honestly watch out for the players at both clubs.

I remember reading somewhere that a tabloid said Tottenham have plans for a U shaped third tier to run through the Paxton (North S), West Stand and the Park Lane (South S) I think it was said last year. Would be great if its built though its just another rumour. I haven't heard anything official from the club on anything about the stadium.

mikeeagle

August 4th, 2006, 10:55 PM

@ 2005: Nice pics. I really like that stadium! :scouserd:

Would it be possible to add a third tier on all 4 sides? Would be interesting to see more areal/outside photos from different directions. Can you find it in Google Earth?

Abdi

August 5th, 2006, 12:39 AM

True. 3 FA Cup Semis, one of which (93) might be shown on Sky 3 tonight in that programme "Football Years" Its on at 10pm, in the space of 8 years. We were so DUMB to sack George back in 2001. I was 12 (about to become 13) at the time and I shouted at the TV "You fucking idiots!". I did like the fact he won us something. A through and through Goon.

Tottenham have been pathetic in comparison to Arsenal in the past 15 years to be honest. Looking back on what happened in May, I think its a blessing in disguise. You can't run before you walk ya know. Also the best way to find out how to become winners is to lose. I feel that what happened will make Tottenham stronger. I look at the both club's fantastic buying policy and academys and think that one day there will be a fight between the two for the title. I know most will laugh at that but honestly watch out for the players at both clubs.

I remember reading somewhere that a tabloid said Tottenham have plans for a U shaped third tier to run through the Paxton (North S), West Stand and the Park Lane (South S) I think it was said last year. Would be great if its built though its just another rumour. I haven't heard anything official from the club on anything about the stadium.

i see what your saying

Its AlL gUUd

August 5th, 2006, 03:31 AM

I agree the Ricoh Arena (Coventry) isnt the normal boring stadia, its pretty kool and different

Noostairz

August 5th, 2006, 01:06 PM

the ricoh arena
home to: coventry city fc
capacity: 32,000
built: 2005

http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/4770/ricoharena2do2.jpg

http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/2066/9bq4.jpg

CharlieP

August 5th, 2006, 05:12 PM

http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/2066/9bq4.jpg

I'm sorry, but that side stand (with "Ricoh" written on it twice) is ugly as hell...

NeilF

August 5th, 2006, 06:33 PM

I like the Ricoh from outside. Inside, I dunno, new stadia have no excuse for looking as poorly as it does!

Roar

August 5th, 2006, 08:54 PM

you won't sell out the current capacity much

Sold out against Aston Villa with weeks to go.

Abdi

August 5th, 2006, 10:15 PM

Sold out against Aston Villa with weeks to go.

forget what he says arsenal use to sell out wembley every game to a stricted capacity.

2005

August 5th, 2006, 10:22 PM

forget what he says arsenal use to sell out wembley every game to a stricted capacity.

Sorry, is it me or is this thread about WHL and Tottenham Hotspur not Emirates and Arsenal ;)

Noostairz

August 6th, 2006, 05:35 PM

I'm sorry, but that side stand (with "Ricoh" written on it twice) is ugly as hell...

no need to apologise - i didn't design it!

JacobRit

August 6th, 2006, 08:51 PM

Plastic stadium for a plastic team!

The Concerned Potato

August 6th, 2006, 11:05 PM

i really hope MK Dons change their name to Milton Keynes FC and cuts off ALL ties to Wimbledon FC. there's probably NO Wimbleldon fans who continue to support this team, especially with the emergence of AFC Wimbledon. and "MK" fans must feel kinda in limbo over whose team it is. it's gotta look and feel like something that truly belongs to the city.

on the stadium, like a typical retail park, it's cheap 'n' cheerful.

BaronVonChickenpants

August 7th, 2006, 11:10 AM

I'm sorry, but that side stand (with "Ricoh" written on it twice) is ugly as hell...

think the mistake Coventry amde there was not inclusing a second level of exec boxes on that side,insteand of the large white cladding it has now.But the rest of the staduim is fime.Its very light,and clean,a big improvment on Highfield Road.The acoustics inside are also impressive

2005

August 9th, 2006, 12:32 PM

Brazil might play Wales at White Hart Lane on 5th September.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/internationals/4775293.stm

Abdi

August 10th, 2006, 02:37 PM

maybe their looking to stay in north london after the argentina game.

Diaby

August 11th, 2006, 12:40 AM

Toshack might put out a younger team for that match
Click Here (http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2002390000-2006360731,00.html)

Abdi

August 11th, 2006, 04:10 PM

Looks like a tour in north london for Brazil.

2005

August 11th, 2006, 05:40 PM

Looks like a tour in north london for Brazil.

Yep :banana:

Azabaxe

August 11th, 2006, 10:25 PM

2005, doesn't your sig apply more to the Arsenal than to Spurs?

2005

August 11th, 2006, 10:48 PM

2005, doesn't your sig apply more to the Arsenal than to Spurs?

Today I would say it applies to both but in history Spurs. Up until Arsese Wenger arrived Arsenal were known as "Boring boring Arsenal", that was sung by their own fans. For 9 years (95-04) Tottenham really didn't play football. Now they do as they have a clever coach called Martin Jol who is a typical dutchman who loves the Total football system. Spurs play attractive football now. Anyway that qoute is not saying that it applys to anyone, although at the time it was, it is just the opinion of a great footballer and in my opinion he is right.

Talking of exciting football.
http://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/news/articles/brazilatthelane.html :)

Azabaxe

August 11th, 2006, 11:20 PM

You're 18. You couldn't have possibly seen anything but "glory, glory" Arsenal.

JimB

August 12th, 2006, 12:55 AM

You're 18. You couldn't have possibly seen anything but "glory, glory" Arsenal.

Crawl back off to the Emirates thread.

There's a good lad.

Azabaxe

August 12th, 2006, 05:15 PM

Takes a lot more than that to shoo me off, son. And this has nothing to do with you, Jimmy boy. So if you want beef, go on the street and get yourself some, because you'll get nothing else from me.

2005

August 12th, 2006, 06:16 PM

You're 18. You couldn't have possibly seen anything but "glory, glory" Arsenal.

Sure about that?

When I started work at the Spurs store back 2004 Spurs brought out a DVD looking at the famous side of 1961. I watched it on the screens in the shop whilst I wasn't serving customers. I didn't watch all of it but I did watch enough to know that they are, without a shadow of a doubt, one of the greatest sides of all time. They played football in way that country hadn't seen before. It was at lighting pace. In all Tottenham scored 115 League goals. They won their first ten games, a record still to be beaten in the top flight. They are the past and so are the Arsenal team of 2004. Both great teams and both from the past.

JimB

August 12th, 2006, 07:53 PM

JimB

August 12th, 2006, 07:55 PM

Takes a lot more than that to shoo me off, son. And this has nothing to do with you, Jimmy boy. So if you want beef, go on the street and get yourself some, because you'll get nothing else from me.

You're quite welcome here if you wish to talk about White Hart Lane.

But not if all you're interested in is infantile arguments about football teams.

Azabaxe

August 12th, 2006, 10:15 PM

Sure about that?

When I started work at the Spurs store back 2004 Spurs brought out a DVD looking at the famous side of 1961. I watched it on the screens in the shop whilst I wasn't serving customers. I didn't watch all of it but I did watch enough to know that they are, without a shadow of a doubt, one of the greatest sides of all time. They played football in way that country hadn't seen before. It was at lighting pace. In all Tottenham scored 115 League goals. They won their first ten games, a record still to be beaten in the top flight. They are the past and so are the Arsenal team of 2004. Both great teams and both from the past.

My wife (unknowingly) bought me a book titled "The Glory Game" about that side. The one thing that struck me was the chracterization of Bill Nicholson as a man who would not be satisfied with a win unless it was achieved with style. I think these days that attitude has been misconstrued as a willingness to trade an ugly or workmanlike win for a stylish loss. Old Nicholson doesn't strike me as a loser.

I am a gooner, but an American one, and we Americans gooners really care about Spurs as much as we care about Villa. This is not a careless disregard of history (I make my living teaching it, so I understand its significance), it's just that we don't invest nearly as much emotional capital into sports in general as other nations do. Having said that, my favorite Arsenal side was not the one from 03-04, but the 02-03 that gave away the title to ManU. I have never seen football like the kind played by that side in the fall of '02, and I include here the Denmark side of '86, the Milan sides of 88-91 and the Napoli of 87-88.

I bring up these sides because the 02-03 Arsenal, like the '86 Denmark, was a losing side that maybe old man Nicholson would have liked, and their football was described perfectly by your sig.

Lastly (phew!), about you stadium. Would your club finance any public infrastructure changes incurred by expansion of the venue? Would they have to borrow heavily like the Arsenal did?

2005

August 12th, 2006, 11:33 PM

My wife (unknowingly) bought me a book titled "The Glory Game" about that side. The one thing that struck me was the chracterization of Bill Nicholson as a man who would not be satisfied with a win unless it was achieved with style. I think these days that attitude has been misconstrued as a willingness to trade an ugly or workmanlike win for a stylish loss. Old Nicholson doesn't strike me as a loser.

I am a gooner, but an American one, and we Americans gooners really care about Spurs as much as we care about Villa. This is not a careless disregard of history (I make my living teaching it, so I understand its significance), it's just that we don't invest nearly as much emotional capital into sports in general as other nations do. Having said that, my favorite Arsenal side was not the one from 03-04, but the 02-03 that gave away the title to ManU. I have never seen football like the kind played by that side in the fall of '02, and I include here the Denmark side of '86, the Milan sides of 88-91 and the Napoli of 87-88.

I bring up these sides because the 02-03 Arsenal, like the '86 Denmark, was a losing side that maybe old man Nicholson would have liked, and their football was described perfectly by your sig.

Lastly (phew!), about you stadium. Would your club finance any public infrastructure changes incurred by expansion of the venue? Would they have to borrow heavily like the Arsenal did?

I've read The Glory Game and it is not about the 61 side. It is infact about the 1971/72 side that won the UEFA Cup. fantastic book, up there with Fever Pitch in the world of football books. I would recommend it to anyone.

http://images-eu.amazon.com/images/P/1840182423.02.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

I agree with what you said about the 03 Arsenal side......although I don't want to! :lol:

About your question. I do not have a clue. I do pray everyday (lol) that Spurs will one day announce they have plans to take the capacity up to 50-55,000 etc. The person that needs to answer that question is JimB.

Abdi

August 13th, 2006, 08:11 PM

i would like to see more permiership clubs with higher capacity's

Disraeli

August 13th, 2006, 10:51 PM

i would like to see more permiership clubs with higher capacity's

I like bananas.

pc7776

August 18th, 2006, 01:24 AM

Is there genuine demand there to fill a 55000 seater - week in week out?

2005

August 18th, 2006, 12:37 PM

Is there genuine demand there to fill a 55000 seater - week in week out?

Yes. Tottenham had a big demand for season tickets during the summer. In all 23,000 (JimB you were right) were sold within a couple of days with a waiting list of over 20,000. Add to that the members and the away fans. In all 55,000 is a capacity that Spurs can fill week in week out in the Premier League.

skaP187

August 19th, 2006, 11:17 AM

are there (more) renders of the supposed extension?

Abdi

August 20th, 2006, 04:43 PM

bolton 2-0 tottenham and a 35 yard goal by ivan campo not so good.

JimB

August 20th, 2006, 09:09 PM

bolton 2-0 tottenham and a 35 yard goal by ivan campo not so good.

Firstly (just to get it out of the way), Spurs lost what will be one of the hardest games of the season - away to Bolton. Arsenal could only draw what will be one of the easier games of the season - home to Aston Villa.

Secondly, how many times do people normally have to repeat something before it eventually sinks in? This is an architecture forum and a stadium thread. If you want to discuss football, there are plenty of other places for you to go.

Clear?

eddyk

August 28th, 2006, 01:37 PM

http://cache.gettyimages.com/xc/71714237.jpg?v=1&c=MS_GINS&k=2&d=17A4AD9FDB9CF19390335F8FA9CA92A673D1B62376FD19CE329DF394FE942516
http://cache.gettyimages.com/xc/71714239.jpg?v=1&c=MS_GINS&k=2&d=17A4AD9FDB9CF19390335F8FA9CA92A673D1B62376FD19CE810F755E003CBEB8

BobDaBuilder

August 28th, 2006, 02:03 PM

Scandalous! :puke:

What next, a McDonald's to be built into the side of Buckingham Palace?

vertigosufferer

August 28th, 2006, 03:45 PM

BaronVonChickenpants

August 29th, 2006, 10:06 AM

No, I can see the justification and sensibility in having a roof on the main court. What if a final had to stretch over 3 days, because of heavy rain. Close the roof, match completed, not waiting in the locker rooms, for frustrated tennis players.

Shame they couldn't whack the capacity to 20k ;), a 1,200 increase doesn't seem much, but obviously there are feasability restraints on making it 20,000 capacity.

What if a final had to stretch over 3 days?well,it hasn't happened in a 100 years or so,but the last time a final over ran,onto the Monday,it was the best atmosphere ever at a Wimbledon final.That was becuase normal fans managed to get in,rather than the Pimms brigade

tv123

September 5th, 2006, 04:12 PM

Tickets are available tonight as Ronaldinho and an all-star Brazilian cast face Wales at the Lane - please arrive early!

Fans can purchase tickets from our Park Lane and Paxton Road Ticket Offices for this prestigious international friendly. Kick-off is 7.30pm, so please try to arrive in plenty of time.

Now coached by 1994 World Cup winning captain Dunga, Brazil showed what they are all about when they beat old rivals Argentina 3-0 on Sunday.

Barcelona star and twice FIFA World Footballer of the Year Ronaldinho sat out that game with a thigh problem but Dunga has hinted that he will be starting against Wales.

Dunga said: "Ronaldinho was disappointed not to be able to feature in the match against Argentina, but I am pleased to announce he is now fit and will play in Tuesday night's match against Wales.

"The Brazil football team has come to London - one of the footballing capitals of the world - to play great football, and Ronaldinho wants to be a part of that and will start on Tuesday."

Ronaldinho is joined by Robinho, Edmilson, Alex, Fred, Kaka - who scored a wonderful goal against Argentina - and new hero Elano of Shakhtar Donetsk - he scored twice - in the squad for the two friendlies.

Wales - so unlucky to lose 2-1 to a late goal against the Czech Republic in Euro 2008 qualifying on Saturday - include former Spurs favourite Simon Davies, Craig Bellamy and Ryan Giggs.

David Collins, Football Association of Wales secretary general, said: "We have assembled a fantastic squad, and it will be great to see the likes of Bellamy and Giggs going up against the might of Brazil - it is set to be a real showcase of their talents."

Here is the Brazil squad in full: Gomes (PSV Eindhoven), Fabio (Cruzeiro), Cicinho (Real Madrid), Maicon (Inter Milan), Marcelo (Fluminense), Gilberto (Hertha Berlin), Luisao (Benfica), Alex (PSV Eindhoven), Lucio (Bayern Munich), Juan (Bayer Leverkusen), Gilberto Silva (Arsenal), Edmilson (Barcelona), Dudu Cearense (CSKA Moscow), Kaka (AC Milan), Ronaldinho (Barcelona), Elano (Shakhtar Donetsk), Julio Baptista (Real Madrid), Robinho (Real Madrid), Fred (Olympique Lyon), Vagner Love (CSKA Moscow), Rafael Sobis (Internacional, Daniel Carvalho (CSKA Moscow).

http://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/news/articles/brazilatthelane.html

http://i75.imagethrust.com/i/614719/roniespur.jpg (http://www.imagethrust.com)

LoyalPrestonian

September 9th, 2006, 11:14 AM

Deepdale stand is delivered
Preston are aiming to start work on their new £6m-plus Pavilion Stand before the end of the year – and have it open for next season.
Deepdale officials were today celebrating planning approval.

But chairman Derek Shaw admitted: "We still have a long way to go before the bulldozers move in."

Councillors yesterday granted permission for the project, which incorporates a public health clinic attached to the 5,000-seater stand.

North End say they and their partners, the Primary Care Trust, now have to sit down to thrash out the final details
before contracts are signed and the work can get underway.

"It's tremendous news that planning permission has been given," said Shaw today.

"But there is still an awful lot of work to be done before things can start.

"Just because the council have given us the go ahead doesn't mean to say the demolition crews will be moving in just
yet.

"There are a lot of legal things to do now before we can get going.

"We would start tomorrow if we had the money in place and the lease signed. But these things take time."

Shaw admitted he was expecting the bulldozers would be in within a matter of weeks and work on completing the redevelopment of Deepdale would get underway before Christmas – a decade after it began with the opening of the Sir Tom Finney Stand.

North End hope to have fans sitting in the new Pavilion by the time next season kicks off.

"Without a doubt, that's what we would like," said Shaw.

"Hopefully we will have a superb four-sided stadium by next August.

"That is our aim. But we have to get things signed, sealed and delivered before we can shift a brick.

"There is no exact timescale at the moment.

"That will depend on how quickly we can get the paperwork done and get started.

"But we would like something to start on site before the end of the year. And hopefully it will be up and running by the start of next season."

The new stand, which will house executive boxes and hospitality suites, has been on the drawing board since the club completed its third side, the Alan Kelly Town End.

But a lack of finance, initially caused by the collapse of the ITV Digital deal, put the scheme on hold.

North End confessed only promotion to the Premiership – or the emergence of a wealthy benefactor – would provide the capital needed to complete the stadium.

But, after three near-misses in five seasons in the play-offs, a deal with PCT was struck this summer to go ahead with the scheme as a partnership, with income from a health clinic providing the funds needed to service a bank loan for the project.

"We have done an enormous amount of work along with our partners the PCT – hundreds of hours work – getting to where we are now," said Shaw.

"We have to push on now to get together and get the leases completed. We also have to finalise the deal with the bankers, who have been very much involved at every step of the way.

"All we were missing was one vital ingredient – planning
approval. And now that has been given we can move on.

"We can't say exactly when things will happen. But I can say it will be as soon as we can get everything together.

"We can't possibly do anything until we have got the signatures on the lease with the PCT. But they are very keen and very supportive, they want this scheme to happen just as much as we do."

Original estimates of cost put the new stand at around £5m.
But, while Shaw refuses to put a new figure on the work, he said today: "It is going to be more than that – certainly more than £6m.

"The old Pavilion Stand is an eyesore – an embarrassment. So is the old training ground. And the sooner they are both redeveloped, the better for everyone, especially the people who live around the ground."

http://editorial.jpress.co.uk/web/Upload/PRES/TH0_69200643mellor_simpson.jpg

skaP187

September 9th, 2006, 01:31 PM

See New liverpool stadium thread
hahahahahahaha
After Arsenal/ Benfica and Liverpool/ Sporting
The excpected design of Everton will be more or less...
http://i8.tinypic.com/4dlr7kn.jpg
http://i1.tinypic.com/345zwc8.jpg
http://i4.tinypic.com/2vnfdzq.jpg

Joke, they wish they would

tv123

September 9th, 2006, 01:38 PM

new WHL..

http://i72.imagethrust.com/i/303828/whl.jpg (http://www.imagethrust.com)
:lol:

skaP187

September 9th, 2006, 02:47 PM

pppffffffffffffwwwwwwwwwwwwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Its AlL gUUd

September 9th, 2006, 06:20 PM

Liverpool are actually copying Bolton because they are designed by the same architects, not sporting u tool.

skaP187

September 9th, 2006, 07:15 PM

And architects don't copy architects???GTFOOH!

matherto

September 9th, 2006, 07:43 PM

The fact that Everton aren't going to be getting a new stadium for a long time yet seems frankly irrelavant, I'd like to know why you think that any new one will look like the Dragao, cause it has blue seats maybe?

Roar

September 9th, 2006, 08:06 PM

new WHL..

http://i72.imagethrust.com/i/303828/whl.jpg (http://www.imagethrust.com)
:lol:

:eek2:

Aka

September 9th, 2006, 09:03 PM

:eek2:

Actually, is more like this by now:
http://stadiony.net/pictures/por/estadio_municipal_de_braga/estadio_municipal_de_braga03.jpg

Its AlL gUUd

September 9th, 2006, 09:05 PM

Plus the Luz is a copy of the emirates

Useless thread

Aka

September 9th, 2006, 09:17 PM

Plus the Luz is a copy of the emirates

:|

eddyk

September 9th, 2006, 10:07 PM

Emirates was designed first apparently.

And yes...new Anfield is more of a copy of the Reebok stadium...than that portuguese one.

Fook, the Portuguese stadium is a copy of the Reebok stadium if anything.

Lostboy

September 9th, 2006, 10:24 PM

I think given there is a limited number of ways you can make a very specialised building like a football stadium, which must satisfy both its requirements of being well designed for spectators to watch a game of football and satisfy safety requirements in each country, that an awful lot of stadiums are going to inevitably look very similar.

Aka

September 9th, 2006, 11:17 PM

The project for the Emirates was made first? OK, I believe you... if you show me anything that proves it...

Its AlL gUUd

September 10th, 2006, 12:06 AM

ask the architects they'll tell u

Aka

September 10th, 2006, 12:23 AM

Fillet Tower

September 10th, 2006, 10:23 AM

Have you asked them? How do you know it then?..........................................................................................................

At least I know that the Luz project is from late 2001. It took more than 5 years for Arsenal to build it?

Arsenal made their first request for the Ashburton Grove planning application in november 2000. This was after the design had been chosen. Besides, does it really matter? It's HOK's design, not Arsenal's nor Benfica's.

Verbal Kint

September 10th, 2006, 11:24 AM

Everton would do well to copy the Dragao. But if they don't, there's plenty of other decent Portugeuese designs to choose from!

2005

September 10th, 2006, 12:05 PM

new WHL..

http://i72.imagethrust.com/i/303828/whl.jpg (http://www.imagethrust.com)
:lol:

Arsene Wenger

http://www.smithandkeene.com/Images/Broke.jpg

:lol:

The Concerned Potato

September 10th, 2006, 11:03 PM

i found a render of what Villa Park will look like when they close the corners

http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/humanbody/images/mind/disgust/morescience_disgust/toilet.jpg

skaP187

September 11th, 2006, 10:36 AM

Plus the Luz is a copy of the emirates

Useless thread

Yeah, but it's fun!!!

Durbsboi

September 11th, 2006, 01:04 PM

skaP187, u one cock eyed guy!

SimLim

September 11th, 2006, 01:27 PM

Skap187 - You are one lame sad pathetic irrelevent person.

nosehairuk

September 11th, 2006, 01:59 PM

This picture actually belongs in the Biggest Tier In The World thread. Look at that 2nd tier behind the scoreboard. :jk:

http://stadiony.net/pictures/por/estadio_municipal_de_braga/estadio_municipal_de_braga03.jpg

Durbsboi

September 12th, 2006, 10:14 AM

wat stadium is that?

canarywondergod

September 12th, 2006, 11:28 AM

wat stadium is that?

It is the Estadio Municipal de Braga in Portugal

Here's a link http://www.stadiumguide.com/braga.htm

skaP187

September 12th, 2006, 03:35 PM

I like that stadium! it's unique! (and Holland won there game there!)

Aka

September 12th, 2006, 04:24 PM

http://stadiony.net/pictures/por/estadio_municipal_de_braga/estadio_municipal_de_braga05.jpg
http://stadiony.net/pictures/por/estadio_municipal_de_braga/estadio_municipal_de_braga02.jpg
http://stadiony.net/pictures/por/estadio_municipal_de_braga/estadio_municipal_de_braga04.jpg
http://stadiony.net/pictures/por/estadio_municipal_de_braga/estadio_municipal_de_braga01.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/pt/5/52/Estadio_braga.jpg

Bigmac1212

September 13th, 2006, 01:36 AM

http://i8.tinypic.com/4dlr7kn.jpg
http://i1.tinypic.com/345zwc8.jpg
http://i4.tinypic.com/2vnfdzq.jpg

Which stadium is that?

Aka

September 13th, 2006, 03:23 AM

Which stadium is that?

Estádio do Dragão, in Porto, Portugal. Is FC Porto's homeground.

london lad

September 13th, 2006, 04:57 AM

Estádio do Dragão, in Porto, Portugal. Is FC Porto's homeground.

Funny that as I thought it was Boltons ground ;)

Malso

September 14th, 2006, 08:57 PM

Simon Jordan: Blimey, Peter, what a right load of ****ing horse manure that was this evening.

Peter Taylor: We're a side in transition, Simon, and we need time to gel into an efficient CCC team.

SJ: Well, I spent the past two seasons watching that pillock Dowie making the defence pump high balls to a midget. Now we're pumping high balls to two big b***ards who nod it down and lose it. What's the point in that, for ****'s sake?

PT: We need strong forwards in this division. We can't depend on aging player past his prime like Dougie, and Clinton I don't really rate in the first place.

SJ: Jesus ****ing Christ, you remind me of that w*nker Trevor Francis. He couldn't bleedin' wait to drop the best striking partnership in the division at the time, Dougie and Clinton, and bring in that pair of numpties Akinbiyi and Adebola. A useless pair of planks, and they cost me a ****ing fortune.

PT: Give it time, Simon. it's early days, yet.

SJ: Early ****ing days! We're seven games into the season and we look crap. Even when we were winning we didn't look much cop but now we're ****ing terrible. And this Sushi Pookey or whatever his name is. He don't look much like a Finn to me...not like Aki or Mikkel?

PT: Shefki Kuqi's an ethnic Albanian from Kosovo who's taken Finnish nationality.

SJ: He looks like an overgrown carpet salesmn from Istanbul to me and ****ing played like one tonight.***ing c***. Cost me a bleedin' fortune as well.

PT: We need players like him to get us out of this league and back to the Premiership, Simon.

SJ: I can't see much ****ing point getting back to the Premiership with this lot. Borrowdale or Granville against Thierry Henry. Kookoo the Turk against John Terry. Don't make me ****ing laugh.

PT: I told you at the interview, Simon, it will all change as the autumn moves on.

SJ: It's all changing now. We're going down the pan. You'd better wake your ideas up, Taylor. The money we got for AJ is running out and the team's getting worse. I'm telling you ****ing straight mate, you are out on your arse if things don't improve soonest. I ****ing......

(here the line fades with a stream of abuse from the chairman)

Calvin W

September 15th, 2006, 04:41 AM

And what exactly are you posting here? What does this have to do with stadiums or arenas?

pompeyfan

September 15th, 2006, 07:24 AM

precisely

Lostboy

October 15th, 2006, 06:33 PM

Reading stadium vision unveiled

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/42187000/gif/_42187462_stadium2.gif

An artist's impression of how the larger Madejski Stadium could look

Reading Football Club has given a glimpse of what its Madejski Stadium would look like if its plans to increase capacity get the go-ahead.
The Premiership club in Berkshire wants to increase its capacity from 24,045 to 38,000 irrespective of league status.

The proposal involves adding extra seating to the north, south and east stands with a new roof constructed over each stand.

A public consultation period will help formulate a planning application.

The images will be displayed at the club until Friday, 20 October and, as part of the consultation process, the club is inviting feedback to enable the local community to put forward ideas and suggestions for consideration.

'Focus point'

Nigel Howe, Reading FC's chief executive, said: "These are extremely exciting times for Reading.

"This expansion would give more people the opportunity to support their team as we attempt to become an established force in the Premiership.

"We believe the stadium has an extremely important role to play as one of the central focus points of the local community."

The west stand will not be affected and it is not intended to increase the on-site car parking capacity.

Wezza

October 16th, 2006, 03:40 AM

Looks good, it would suck to see it get expanded & Reading get relegated though.

Zaqattaq

October 16th, 2006, 03:55 AM

No way will Reading get relegated this year mate

Wezza

October 16th, 2006, 12:17 PM

Hopefully for them they won't, but it's only early days yet!!

Lostboy

October 16th, 2006, 01:48 PM

Zaqattaq

October 17th, 2006, 12:23 AM

Unless Sidwell leaves in January

zee

October 17th, 2006, 12:28 AM

no offense to reading fans but that is a great design for a stadium but will it fill up week in week out??

The Concerned Potato

October 17th, 2006, 12:46 AM

I think there's no chance that Reading will go down this season. While only eight games is hard to show anything from, the fact that they have already got 13 points (when most of the teams that get relegated will have points in the mid-20's and Sunderland last year had just 19) means that they'd have to get only around 10 points or less from the next 30 games. Thats one draw out of every three matches (with the other two being losses). Not going to happen this year.

i'd say mid-30's

and the design is very boring, especially the exterior. fair play to them i guess

pompeyfan

October 17th, 2006, 01:28 AM

hi 20s, low 30's

Benjuk

October 17th, 2006, 04:43 AM

I think there's no chance that Reading will go down this season. While only eight games is hard to show anything from, the fact that they have already got 13 points (when most of the teams that get relegated will have points in the mid-20's and Sunderland last year had just 19) means that they'd have to get only around 10 points or less from the next 30 games. Thats one draw out of every three matches (with the other two being losses). Not going to happen this year.

19 pts was 02/03, last season Sunderland only got 15 pts. Birmingham were relegated with 34.

Traditionally you look at 40 points at the safety mark. Reading should do okay this season, I think the best start a relegated side ever got was Middlesbrough in 96/97, 11 points from 8 games - so Reading are already ahead of that.

Lostboy

October 17th, 2006, 02:58 PM

no offense to reading fans but that is a great design for a stadium but will it fill up week in week out??

Can't guarantee it. But at present the 24,000 capacity is being filled week in and week out, so they might be taking more of a financial risk if they didn't expand it. Besides Reading isn't actually that small, it has a population (not neccessarily in the borough) of around 300,000 comparable to say Sunderland.

and the design is very boring, especially the exterior. fair play to them i guess

To be honest it's very hard to tell from that one small artists impression. I think we'll have to wait until we see proper renderings, far larger than the one I've posted. Some are avaliable at the Reading F.C. Site but you have to register and I can't be bothered to register for something I'm only going to look at once.

nyrmetros

October 17th, 2006, 09:22 PM

all the new stadiums are begininng to look thwe same, just like her in the USA.,

Benjuk

November 3rd, 2006, 03:03 AM

Following on from the recent announcement that England will bid for the 2018 World Cup Finals, with government backing, here's a look at the most likely elements of the bid...

These are all stadiums which are either completed, or in the case of Liverpool and Charlton, are confirmed.
One would hope that by 2018, the likes of Everton, Leeds and Birmingham would have moved to newer stadia.

Wembley, London. 90000
http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_menu/past_future/pictures/future_stadiums/london_wembley2.jpg

Twickenham, London. 82000
http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/europe/united_kingdom/england/london/london_twickenham2.jpg
*strict local by-laws limit the number and nature of fixtures played here.

Old Trafford, Manchester. 76000.
http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/europe/united_kingdom/england/north_west/manchester_old_trafford1.jpg

Stanley Park/New Anfield, Liverpool. 60000
http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_menu/past_future/pictures/future_stadiums/liverpool_stanley1.jpg

Emirates, London. 60000
http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/europe/united_kingdom/england/london/london_emirates2.jpg

St James Park, Newcastle. 52143
http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/europe/united_kingdom/england/north_east/newcastle_st_james_park1.jpg

Stadium of Light, Sunderland. 49000
http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/europe/united_kingdom/england/north_east/sunderland_stadium_of_light1.jpg
*Old picture, North Stand (to left of frame) has another tier of seating now.

Stamford Bridge, London. 42449
http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/europe/united_kingdom/england/london/london_stamford_bridge1.jpg

Villa Park, Birmingham. 43275
http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/europe/united_kingdom/england/west_midlands/birmingham_villa_park1.jpg

City of Manchester, Manchester. 48000.
http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/europe/united_kingdom/england/north_west/manchester_city_stadium1.jpg

Goodison Park, Liverpool. 40200
http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/europe/united_kingdom/england/north_west/liverpool_goodison_park1.jpg
*included for size only, viewing conditions awful - the only thing that makes the ground great is the fans.

Elland Road, Leeds. 40204
http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/europe/united_kingdom/england/yorkshire_humber/leeds_elland_road2.jpg

New Valley, London. 40000
http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_menu/past_future/pictures/future_stadiums/london_new_valley.jpg

That's 13 venues, over 7 cities...
In order to meet minimum FIFA bid standards, either Derby, Leicester, Southampton, Middlesboro, etc, would have to expand their stadium to the required 40k... Or Sheffield Wednesday would have to shoehorn another 200 seats into their place. That's always assuming that FIFA retains it's 40k minimum rather than raising it to 50k, for example.

Finally, does anyone know the official FIFA stance of multipal venues in one city? I know that the minimum requirement is 9 venues across 8 cities, but would 12 venues across 8 cities be acceptable (thus allowing use of City of Manchester as well as Old Trafford, and Twickers/Stamford Bridge as well as Emirates/Wembley)?

Benjuk

November 3rd, 2006, 03:10 AM

Don't think that worked out too well. Never mind.

In view of the recent developments with a UK team for the Olympics, it might be possible to include Scottish and Welsh venues (there aren't any in Northern Ireland worth including) - so we could also have the Millenium Stadium in Cardiff, and a selection of Ibrox, Celtic Park and Hampden in Glasgow, and Murrayfield in Edinburgh.

mikeyraw

November 3rd, 2006, 07:15 AM

You can get around the two stadium thing by circumscribing the letter of the regulations.

For instance, Paris had two Stadia in 98, I think either Parc des princes or the stade de france where listed under a suburb rather than Paris.

Maybe Wembley could be 'in' London, and Emirates could be in Islington, or whatever, I dont really know my suburbs of London. Because Twickenham is in the south, you could list it as somewhere else.

NeilF

November 3rd, 2006, 08:29 AM

5 stadia in London? Why not just include White Hart Lane, the new Olympic stadium and a couple of others and just have a London World Cup? 4 in Liverpool / Manchester? Even your extension to Scotland is myopic, adding another 3 in Glasgow, not to mention that the 42,000 capacity stadium at the Maze in Northern Ireland will also be ready - where does this leave us? 4 teams to automatically qualify? I doubt it. If England is going to bid for it, it is unlikely to do so with the aid of the rest of the UK or indeed, given the centralisation of stadia in Glasgow, not even in partnership with Scotland.

I read something in the Daily Telegraph over the summer that was saying that, apparently, FIFA would be unwilling, or at least, be put off giving, the World Cup to England because its stadia lacks space around them for press and hospitality tents. Look at Emirates, or Anfield - they're all crammed into housing and industrial estates with no real land around them, for the most part.

If England does go for the bid, they should have 10 stadia in 8 cities, those being;

Wembley - Wembley
Emirates Stadium - Highbury
Old Trafford - Manchester (could have a capacity of 95,000 come WC time)
Stanley Park / Anfield (60,000 should be in place by then)
St. James' Park (Problems of expansion have been noted on here, but could increase capacity to at least 60,000 is help was given)
Villa Park (Needs modernising, but with a government supported WC bid, could easily get the help it needs)
Majeski Stadium (if they are planning on upping it to 38,000, the extra 2000 could easily be fitted in)
St Mary's (already 32,000, could easily be expanded to 40,000)

And two of;
K.C. Stadium
Pride Park
City of Manchester
Riverside Stadium
Stadium Of Light

My two choices would be K.C. Stadium in Hull and Pride Park, to give a bit more of a national spread - already got St. James' Park in the North East and Old Trafford in Manchester.

While the K.C. only holds 25,000 at the minute, there are immediate expansion plans to up that to 35,000 by expanding the smaller side of the stadium. The stadium was built with expansion in mind, so is already reinforced in all the right areas. Space for 5,000 or more could easily be found behind the goals.

Pride Park holds nearly 34,000 and could be easily expanded, either by adding capacity onto the back of the main stand, or any of the other stands, or indeed, all of them. Again, given that Pride Park is a relatively new build, and built at a time when Derby were flying relatively high, I'm sure it would have been build with possible expansion in mind and is already reinforced, although I can't be sure of that as I am with Hull.

The main reason for not choosing City of Manchester is that it would concentrate 3 stadia in the North West, which isn't the best thing, and two in Manchester itself. The bid would look better with more spread, even if the capacities were lower.

There you go, 10 stadia in 9 cities, with the possibility of upping that to 13 stadia in 11 cities, which is much more impressive. If the bid was to include Scotland, I'd go for Ibrox and Murrayfield, instead of any of the latter five I mentioned. Still 10 stadia in 9 cities, but considerably larger, better and with better facilities.

P.S. Ibrox over Park Head, because, not to start any more wars or anything here, Park Head isn't a good stadium and has far too many restricted views. Ibrox over Hampden both on levels of access and capacity - there's only about 1,000 difference at the moment, but Rangers are, slowly, adding small amounts of excess capacity to the stadium and Ibrox is easier to get to, especially if you aren't familiar with Glasgow.

Sparks

November 3rd, 2006, 10:25 AM

There is no chance of venues in Scotland or Wales being used, and it's very unlikely that more than 2 venues in London will be used. Twickenham certainly will miss out.

Noostairz

November 3rd, 2006, 01:35 PM

1) wembley, 90,000 (london)
2) emirates, 60,000 (london)
3) old trafford, 75,000+ (manchester)
4) city of man, 48,000 (manchester)
5) st james' park, 52,000+ (newcastle/northeast)
6) stadium of light, 48,000+ (sunderland/northeast)
7) new anfield, 61,000 (liverpool) - has planning permission
8) new everton, 55,000? (liverpool) - planned
9) villa park, 42,573+ (birmingham)
10) city of birmingham stadium, 50,000 (birmingham) - proposed

^ = ten stadiums in five different cities/regions, followed by five+ other stadiums in five+ other different cities/regions taken from the following list:

southampton (32,000 - expansion easy), reading (24,200 - expansion planned), hull (25,504 - expansion planned), boro (35,100 - expansion easy), derby (33,597 - expansion easy), leicester (32,500 - expansion easy), coventry (32,000), mk dons (32,000), brighton (23,000 - planned)...

not forgetting the huge potential for massive redevelopments or total relocations for clubs from the following areas: sheffield, leeds, nottingham, east anglia and bristol.

cphdude

November 3rd, 2006, 01:43 PM

^^that sounds more plouseble....

skaP187

November 3rd, 2006, 01:51 PM

Don't you guys know that WC 2018 will be going to Australia???

skaP187

November 3rd, 2006, 01:53 PM

Ey but serious now, in which cities would be played in the proposal voor the WC 2006?

Benjuk

November 3rd, 2006, 03:00 PM

5 stadia in London? Why not just include White Hart Lane, the new Olympic stadium and a couple of others and just have a London World Cup?

No White Hart Lane because it's too small and can't get any bigger.
No New Olympic Stadium because I've limitted it to 'rectangles' without running tracks where possible (not sure about City of Manchester to be honest - haven't been there).

As to the apparent London bias - everything else in England has a London bias, so I figured the FA and government would keep up the theme! :)

4 in Liverpool / Manchester? Even your extension to Scotland is myopic, adding another 3 in Glasgow, not to mention that the 42,000 capacity stadium at the Maze in Northern Ireland will also be ready - where does this leave us? 4 teams to automatically qualify? I doubt it. If England is going to bid for it, it is unlikely to do so with the aid of the rest of the UK or indeed, given the centralisation of stadia in Glasgow, not even in partnership with Scotland.

Not so much myopic. FIFA has gone some way toward accepting that a UK team would be acceptable for the Olympics, so a UK bid wouldn't be so awful - it would all depend on the English FA being able to get Scotland, Wales (and N Ireland if the Maze - which I wasn't aware of - is up to standard) to accept that they were additional to the English bid rather than 'part' of it - and accept that they wouldn't get an automatic spot.

I read something in the Daily Telegraph over the summer that was saying that, apparently, FIFA would be unwilling, or at least, be put off giving, the World Cup to England because its stadia lacks space around them for press and hospitality tents. Look at Emirates, or Anfield - they're all crammed into housing and industrial estates with no real land around them, for the most part.

I can definately believe this. The promotional sites outside the various stadiums in Germany were big... Wembley would be alright, as would Liverpool, Sunderland has a big area behind the North Stand at the moment, but I'm not sure it'll still be empty in 2018.

The only thing I'm dubious about with regard to government backing is the idea that they would pay for stadium extensions. I'm sure government cash would go toward infrastructure, but I'm not sure whether they would finance expansion of stadiums owned by clubs. Why should Derby get 6000 extra seats for 'free', or Hull, Southampton, or Reading, etc., when other clubs are having to pay small fortunes in order to extend their stadiums?

Does anyone know what the English bid in 2006 looked like?

SimLim

November 3rd, 2006, 04:03 PM

2018

Anything from Wolverhampton to Porthsmouth will have close to 50,000 or above stadia. No point in discussing it yet.

SimLim

November 3rd, 2006, 04:05 PM

Don't you guys know that WC 2018 will be going to Australia???

Ye of little knowledge.

The 2010 World Cup is being held in South Africa, with the 2014 tournament set to go to a South American country.

From 2010, every third World Cup is expected to be awarded to a European country.

Barwick added: "If that is the year when it comes back to Europe, we're going to go for it.

"We don't have to decide now how we go about it, we have to learn the lessons of when we didn't get these things and learn the lessons of when we did - like the Olympics.

"I think (bid leader) Lord Coe was very clever, a brilliant guy and a really huge contributory factor, as was the playing of the major officials at the right time."

Coe has already indicated he would be willing to assist the FA in its bid.

England's hopes have also been boosted by the support of Uefa president Lennart Johansson.

"We would certainly support such a project," he said.

Fifa will make its decision in 2010.

skaP187

November 3rd, 2006, 04:23 PM

You take me far to serious (specialy when I mention not to do so...) Thanks anyway!

andysimo123

November 3rd, 2006, 04:41 PM

2018

Anything from Wolverhampton to Porthsmouth will have close to 50,000 or above stadia. No point in discussing it yet.
Portsmouth? 50,000? Plans are to have it expand to 28,000 and then 35,000 I don't think it will ever reach 50,000. Wolves won't be expanding unless they get back into the Top league.

Jack Rabbit Slim

November 3rd, 2006, 04:43 PM

Don't you guys know that WC 2018 will be going to Australia???
Even though I hope that comment was a joke, I'd still like to reitterate what SimLim has said:

The possibility of a WC returning to England in 2018 looks increasingly likely as UEFA have made it clear recently that they want every third WC to be in Europe, and UEFA, as the most profitable and important organisation and market for FIFA, hold quite an importamt role in deciding where a WC will be held.

There is no chance of venues in Scotland or Wales being used
There is an interesting article in the Daily Telegraph today about an England WC in 2018 regarding Scotland and Wales joining the bid, I'll just write a few of the important parts of the article:

"The Goverment have been warned that their bid to stage the WC in England in 2018 must not be pitched as a British tournament. Sports minister Richard Caborn said yesterday that it was Chancellor Gordon Brown's hope that a successful bid would result in matches taking place 'all over the country, which would bring Scotland, Wales and the whole of England into play'.
David Will, the FIFA vice-president who represents the four British nations on the world body said: 'If England win the right to stage the 2018 Cup, it would be impossible for matches to be played in Scotland and Wales. As far as FIFA is concerned Scotland and Wales are, in footballing terms, as much a foreign country as England and France are.'"

................................

So, the issue here seems to be that people who are in favour of an English bid also seem to want to include venues in Scotland and Wales, which obviously can't happen. So you either try for a British bid to get that, or go for an English bid and have nothing to do with S or W.....

I'm torn here somewhat, because on the one hand I would like to see a WC here include great venues like the Millenium stadium, and great cities like Edinburgh and Glasgow, which would enhance a WC experience. But on the other hand, I think England could host a tournament on its own very well, and I don't really want Scotland and Wales to benefit from a British WC when the vast majority of venues would be in England!!

The one thing I really don't like is when people (politicians mainly) start harping on about a British WC, not because of enhancing a bid or whatever, but because it would be 'politically correct' and would avoid the possible resentment of S and W. These days everything has to be 'British', we can't be seen to be hosting an 'English' WC because it might offend someone who says it is unfair to Scotland, Wales or Ireland..... :ohno:

it's very unlikely that more than 2 venues in London will be used. Twickenham certainly will miss out.
It's not extremely unlikely more then 2 stadiums will be used in London, when you consider London's size in relation to other English cities, it is not like in Germany. remember, you are allowed to have (I think) more then one or even two stadiums in any city if the bid first manages to achieve the minimum requirements or 10 stadia in 9 cities. After you have got that you can add other stadiums into the bid if you want. Plus, I don't think using Twickers is out of the question, I mean yes, it is used solely for Rugby, but for a WC....the biggest sporting event in the world...I don't think they would have any objections to allowing it to be used.....So it would not be impossible for a bid to go something like:

Wembley, London - 90,000
Twickenham, London, 82,000
Emirates Stadium, London - 60,000
Old Trafford, Manchester - 76,000 (possibly 90,000+ if they rebuild the remaining stand)
City of Manc stadium, Manchester - 48,000
New Stanley Park stadium, Liverpool - 61,000
New Everton Stadium, Liverpool - 55,000
New Birmingham stadium, Birmingham, 55,000
Villa Park, Birmingham - 42,500 (51,000 with 'filling in' of corner sections of north stand)
St Jame's Park, Newcastle - 52,000 (60,000 with expansion of north/west stand)
Stadium of Light, Sunderland - 49,000 (64,000 with extension)
New or Renovated Leeds United stadium (Elland Road), Leeds - 50,000

and loads of other possiblities:

New or upgraded Sheffield Wednesday or Sheffield United Stadium, Sheffield - 50,000
New or upgraded Britsol City/Rovers stadium, Bristol, 45-50,000
::::::::::::::::::: Portsmouth FC stadium, Portsmouth - 40-50,000
::::::::::::::::::: Reading FC stadium, Reading - 40-50,000
::::::::::::::::::: Plymouth FC stadium, Plymouth - 40-50,000

The problem with people when they look at Australia or England or anywhere else really as a potential WC host, is that they seem to judge a bid squarely on what the country has at present. The whole point of a WC is it involves massive effort and constuction/upgrading of stadiums round the country in question. It is all about what you are prepared to do for a WC. I mean sure, you might say building/upgrading such and such a stadium here might not get fully used after a WC...but so what, if it helps a WC bid, then that's what you do!!

I think, if you look at previous WC hosts, England at this satge (12 years away from 2018) are better prepared for the tournament then anybody else has been previously. Heck, we could probably host one next year if we were asked to...wouldn't be great obviously, as we need a few more high cap stadiums....but still...as I've said be4, look at the sate of Germany's stadiums 12 ago....then compare it today!! Loads of clubs could get promoted or whatever and build new stadiums of their own, so it is impossible to really pick out an accurate venue list at the moment....

:cheers:

pompeyfan

November 4th, 2006, 01:03 AM

Portsmouth? 50,000? Plans are to have it expand to 28,000 and then 35,000 I don't think it will ever reach 50,000. Wolves won't be expanding unless they get back into the Top league.

Portsmouth can handle it

Noostairz

November 4th, 2006, 01:16 AM

wembley stadium, wembley, london, england (90,000):
http://img177.imageshack.us/img177/5469/1wembleyjulyyv9.jpg

http://img120.imageshack.us/img120/1531/akb3.jpg

emirates stadium, ashburton grove, london, england (60,000):
http://img120.imageshack.us/img120/8863/1id4.jpg

http://img120.imageshack.us/img120/5757/insidekg6.jpg

old trafford, trafford park, manchester, england (75,000):
http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/5978/1hr9.jpg

http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/2993/20061014pano04mt2.jpg

city of manchester stadium, eastlands, manchester, england (48,000):
http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/356/1kh5.jpg

http://img503.imageshack.us/img503/5517/cityofman1ch8.jpg

st. james' park, newcastle, england (52,000):
http://img179.imageshack.us/img179/2990/1stjamesparkaboveaw0.jpg

http://img179.imageshack.us/img179/2920/2pf1.jpg

stadium of light, sunderland, england (48,300):
http://img73.imageshack.us/img73/8620/300pxstadiumoflightaerirl5.jpg

http://img125.imageshack.us/img125/5066/2bm9.jpg

Noostairz

November 4th, 2006, 01:25 AM

2 nov:
http://www.mkdonsrus.com/The%20Whole%20Pitch%201.JPG

The Concerned Potato

November 4th, 2006, 01:46 AM

just some of the stadiums likely to be used....

London

- Wembley (90,000)

http://www.wembleystadium.com/NR/rdonlyres/56E9CDE0-6CB8-4162-9DED-676E07AAE19A/89989/aerial_big.jpg

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

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/01/Newwembley.jpg

- Emirates (60,000)

http://www.arsenal.com/images/wallpapers/emirateswallpaper8_800.jpg

http://img226.imageshack.us/img226/7470/front7tl2qv.jpg

Birmingham

City of Birmingham Stadium/Birmingham Sports Village (55,000)

http://www.digitalbrain.com/knhadriang98/web/City%20of%20Birmingham%20Stadium/birds%20eye%20view.jpg

http://www.digitalbrain.com/knhadriang98/web/City%20of%20Birmingham%20Stadium/landscape.jpg

http://www.digitalbrain.com/knhadriang98/web/City%20of%20Birmingham%20Stadium/around%20the%20ground.jpg

http://www.digitalbrain.com/knhadriang98/web/City%20of%20Birmingham%20Stadium/city%20of%20brum%20stadium.jpg

http://www.digitalbrain.com/knhadriang98/web/City%20of%20Birmingham%20Stadium/facilities.jpg

http://www.digitalbrain.com/knhadriang98/web/City%20of%20Birmingham%20Stadium/outside%20ground.jpg

http://www.digitalbrain.com/knhadriang98/web/City%20of%20Birmingham%20Stadium/plan%20view.jpg

http://www.digitalbrain.com/knhadriang98/web/City%20of%20Birmingham%20Stadium/sports%20village.jpg

-Villa Park (42,000)

http://www.germanvillans.de/bilder/villapark.jpg

http://www.stadionwelt.de/stadionwelt_stadien/templates/stadionlisten/england/villa_park/180.jpg

Manchester

- Old Trafford (76,000)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/54/CIMG1475.JPG

- Eastlands (48,000)

http://www.manchester2002-uk.com/sports/manchester-city-stadium.jpg

Liverpool

- New Anfield (60,000)

http://www.wblsc.co.uk/mediac/400_0/media/New~Anfield~2.jpg

http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1990000/images/_1992484_newanfield300.jpg

- New Everton Stadium

(the deceased "Kings Dock" proposal - 55,000)

http://images.icnetwork.co.uk/upl/icliverpool/jul2001/0/6/000BF727-43E6-1B5D-AB4480BFB6FA04E0.jpg

http://www.toffeeweb.com/images/club/kings-dock/new-stadium_1.jpg

Leeds

- renovated Elland Road (currently 40,000, will probably be expanded to 50,000)

http://www.digitalbrain.com/knhadriang98/web/Stadiums/Leedsfg.jpg

Newcastle

- St. James' Park (52,000)

http://www.digitalbrain.com/knhadriang98/web/Stadiums/Newcastlefg.jpg

http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/town/park/yfh45/newcast11.jpg

maybe a stadium for Sheffield too?

i'd expect them to build a new stadium in the East and South Coast of the country too. i mean they built a stadium in Leipzig (which was a football blackspot) because they didnt want most of the stadiums to be located in the West. and over here i would anticipate they wouldnt want most of stadiums in London and the North-West.