daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Forums > Stadiums and Sport Arenas

Stadiums and Sport Arenas » Completed | Under Construction | Proposed | Demolished



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools
Old December 7th, 2010, 07:57 PM   #421
bifdy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 45
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Hughes View Post
without the national stadium, (which a lot of other cities will never have), it's not so remarkable IMO.
but the fact that London does have a national stadium that holds 90,000 is quite remarkable and is THE main component in what makes London the stadium capital of the World! a stadium which after only 3 or 4 years is already iconic and built on the same site as the old Wembley stadium which has hosted the commonwealth games, olympics, European Championship Final and World Cup Final. the Champions League Final, Cup Winners Cup Final. English Domestic Cup Finals, Rugby League Finals & internationals, Rugby Union games, NFL, motorsport and whatever else it has hosted over the years.

yes our national stadium is rather special.

even if you ignore all the other football stadiums, Wembley is important enough by itself as the "spiritual" home of a worldwide sport which stands with twickenham, lords & wimbledon as the Worlds most important stadiums in their respective sports.

and when you consider the other stadiums, as small as they may be, they are the homes of household names tottenham, arsenal, west ham, chelsea, fulham ect...

but you go ahead and ignore probably the Worlds most famous stadium to discredit London. it is quite reasonable after all!
bifdy no está en línea  

Sponsored Links
Old December 7th, 2010, 09:30 PM   #422
Tom Hughes
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,491
Likes (Received): 989

Quote:
Originally Posted by bifdy View Post
but the fact that London does have a national stadium that holds 90,000 is quite remarkable and is THE main component in what makes London the stadium capital of the World! a stadium which after only 3 or 4 years is already iconic and built on the same site as the old Wembley stadium which has hosted the commonwealth games, olympics, European Championship Final and World Cup Final. the Champions League Final, Cup Winners Cup Final. English Domestic Cup Finals, Rugby League Finals & internationals, Rugby Union games, NFL, motorsport and whatever else it has hosted over the years.

yes our national stadium is rather special.

even if you ignore all the other football stadiums, Wembley is important enough by itself as the "spiritual" home of a worldwide sport which stands with twickenham, lords & wimbledon as the Worlds most important stadiums in their respective sports.

and when you consider the other stadiums, as small as they may be, they are the homes of household names tottenham, arsenal, west ham, chelsea, fulham ect...

but you go ahead and ignore probably the Worlds most famous stadium to discredit London. it is quite reasonable after all!
Is this a..... "maybe it's because I'm a Londoner" moment?

FYI: I've been to Wembley quite a few times actually, old and new. The old one was iconic (if you think external features count for anything), and had a wonderfull atmosphere, but the viewing distances were atrocious. For the new one, apart from the over-engineered arch, what is so iconic? The stadium is a totally c-value led exercise in fitting in the corporates, at the expense of all other good footy stadium design. It really is nothing remarkable or unusual in world stadium terms. As a consequence the atmosphere is nowhere near as good as the old stadium which even had a track to contend with. This is due to poor proportioning of the tiers, fragmentation of the crowd and the poorly located video screens. There are several much smaller stadia in the league with vastly superior atmospheres. Incidentally, I have also never seen Q's like those for toilets at it too (anywhere). It's easy to see where all the surplus facilities went. Tbh, IMO The Millenium wipes the floor with it on most things, atmosphere, viewing quality and viewing distances and certainly value for money, although smaller. The sliding roof meaning it is more flexible and superior technically too. At almost £1bn you dont expect to still get wet on the front sections.

However, going back to my comparison with Buenos Aires, if you take off your London bias, and then compare the number of medium to large stadia in BA.... all equally full of character (have you ever seen the Bombonera for instance?), then you would realise your assertion is misguided. Wembley or not, temporary olympic stadium or not. One club stadium over 43k cannot possibly compare to BA's at least 11 over 42k, and the multitude below that figure. There is also speculation of Argentina/Uruguay joint bid for a future world cup which no doubt would prompt new developments.

BTW..... Fulham and "household name" hardly goes together does it? Apart from Arsenal, the rest put together have won less league championships than Everton (and we haven't even won one in 23 yrs)..... and the lot of them have won less than LFC and EFC put together..... (and the kopites haven't won a league in 20yrs) so household name descriptors is a misplaced argument in this case, or any other don't you think?
Tom Hughes no está en línea  
Old December 8th, 2010, 07:59 AM   #423
ExSydney
Melbourne-Sydneysider
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 370
Likes (Received): 78

Quote:
Originally Posted by ArrHo View Post
London has 29 stadiums and a total capacity of:

647,736

and thats not including the extra one being constructed for the olympic games which brings it up to 30 and a total cpacity of 727,736

Beijing has 30 stadiums and a total capacity of:

502,113

Sydney has 28 stadiums and a total capacity of:

523,500

Melbourne has a total of 41 stadiums and a total capacity of:

947,017

i think my source may be inconcsistent with its inclusions as with Melbourne it counts racing circuits and it didnt with any other city, but in its lists this is the outcome

No of Stadiums:

1. Melbourne (41)
2. Beijing (30)
3. London (29)
4. Sydney (28)

Capacity:

1. Melbourne (947,017)
2. London (647,736)
3. Sydney (523,500)
4. Beijing (502,113)

My source is: http://www.worldstadiums.com/
Take away around 330,000 off the Melbourne figure.World Stadiums include Horse Racing tracks and motor racing circuits for Melbourne.It doesnt for any of the other cities you listed.
ExSydney no está en línea  
Old December 8th, 2010, 08:16 AM   #424
Solopop
Solopop
 
Solopop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,113
Likes (Received): 99

That's because most cities those are around 20kms from the centre, Melbourne's are around 5km from the city centre.
Solopop no está en línea  
Old December 8th, 2010, 11:12 AM   #425
ArrHo
Registered User
 
ArrHo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Bristol
Posts: 728
Likes (Received): 19

and i think you'll find i had already noted that in my post
__________________
London is my Head, while Bristol is my Heart.
ArrHo no está en línea  
Old December 8th, 2010, 11:36 AM   #426
Solopop
Solopop
 
Solopop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,113
Likes (Received): 99

I was justifying why you did it.
Solopop no está en línea  
Old December 8th, 2010, 07:50 PM   #427
the spliff fairy
ONE WORLD
 
the spliff fairy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: london
Posts: 7,984
Likes (Received): 6213

London (contiguous city, not metro) - if you include the Olympcis u/c - has 950,000 capacity, with 2 more large stadia planned on top. If you dont include horse racing or circuits it's still 870,000.
the spliff fairy no está en línea  
Old December 8th, 2010, 11:37 PM   #428
Tom Hughes
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,491
Likes (Received): 989

Quote:
Originally Posted by the spliff fairy View Post
London (contiguous city, not metro) - if you include the Olympcis u/c - has 950,000 capacity, with 2 more large stadia planned on top. If you dont include horse racing or circuits it's still 870,000.
****-er-neys.... dont ya love em? If you listen to them London's the biggest city in the world........ except it isn't even close! No wonder England got trashed for the world cup! Stick to the spliffs my friend, because you live in fantasy world.

City of stadiums? Ask Simon Inglis...... cos it aint Londres, by a long chalk!
Tom Hughes no está en línea  
Old December 9th, 2010, 12:52 AM   #429
JimB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 11,016
Likes (Received): 4783

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Hughes View Post
****-er-neys.... dont ya love em? If you listen to them London's the biggest city in the world........ except it isn't even close! No wonder England got trashed for the world cup! Stick to the spliffs my friend, because you live in fantasy world.

City of stadiums? Ask Simon Inglis...... cos it aint Londres, by a long chalk!
You clearly have a bit of a chip on your shoulder about London. But never mind.....

First of all, you question the validity of including Wembley because "it's the national stadium". Rather bizarre reasoning!

Then you want to criticize Wembley for its lack of atmosphere. Is it worth pointing out to you that fans make atmosphere - not steel and concrete? If Wembley was full of eastern Europeans or Turks, I'm pretty sure no one would be complaining about its atmosphere!

Next, you have a pop at the cost of building Wembley - as if that is relevant to the thread.

Finally, you seem to want the physical laws of wind and rain to cease within Wembley's embrace. It's a magical place, certainly. But not that magical! Go to the front rows of any open air (but roofed) stadium in the world and you WILL still get wet if it rains and the wind is swirling around. No exceptions to that rule, I'm afraid. My seat at White Hart Lane is 17 - yes, seventeen - rows back and I sometimes still get rained on.

As to Buenos Aires, yes, it does have a lot of stadiums. More than I realised, even. And bigger.

But the biggest - River's Monumental / Antonio Vespucio Liberti stadium - is only 66,000. London already has two completed and considerably bigger Stadiums, with a third near to completion. Whether or not London's Olympic stadium will remain at 80,000 or will be reduced to 60,000 is not yet clear.

As to quality, many of BA's stadiums are old and crumbling, with only rudimentary facilities. London's stadia are streets ahead in that respect.

Then there's the issue of fame and iconic status. Sure, La Bombonera is both famous and iconic. River's stadium? Possibly, to a limited extent. But none of the others are famous outside of South America.

Compare and contrast to London. Whether you like it or not, the new Wembley IS both famous and iconic. It still lacks the charm and sense of history of its predecessor. But it's in the exact same place. It's still the home of football. And the name survives. Wembley......it still has a magical aura that resonates with football players and fans the world over. And the arch? "Over engineered", according to you. Perhaps. But still instantly recognizable.

Of course, London also has Twickenham - home of rugby; Lords - home of cricket; Wimbledon - home of tennis.

As to London's other football stadiums, I would agree that they're not especially iconic in their own right (though Highbury probably was, in a way). But simply by virtue of being Premier League grounds - and consequently beamed into sitting rooms and bars all over the world on a weekly basis - the likes of Emirates, Stamford Bridge, White Hart Lane, Upton Park and Craven Cottage are, to varying degrees, globally famous in a way that Argentine football stadia (other than La Bombonera and Monumental) can never hope to be.

Finally, you said in an earlier post that Buenos Aires stadiums were bound to be upgraded if, as seems likely, Argentina / Uruguay are handed the centennial World Cup in 2030. That's possibly true. But it's also twenty years in the future. And, by that time, you can guarantee that London will also have seen a new wave of stadium development. A likely list:

New or redeveloped stadium with increased capacity for Spurs or West Ham (whichever doesn't get the Olympic stadium).

New 60K stadium for Chelsea.

Increased capacity Lords and Oval cricket grounds.

Increased capacity of Emirates.

Charlton, Crystal Palace, Watford, QPR, Fulham quite likely to undertake some stadium redevlopment / relocation at some point within the next 20 years.
JimB no está en línea  
Old December 9th, 2010, 01:39 AM   #430
Rev Stickleback
Registered User
 
Rev Stickleback's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,107
Likes (Received): 1919

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Hughes View Post
IMO The Millenium wipes the floor with it on most things, atmosphere, viewing quality and viewing distances and certainly value for money, although smaller. The sliding roof meaning it is more flexible and superior technically too. At almost £1bn you dont expect to still get wet on the front sections.
I've only been to the Millennium Stadium once. It was raining and I was stuck in the lower tier behind the goal. My impression of the place was that it was a dark dingy hole with a dreadful view, so it always strikes me as odd that so many rave about the place. I must go back there one day and sit somewhere else.

As for Wembley, I think it gets knocked because people do expect it to be exceptional. It does suffer greatly from the fact that it was designed with the corporate fan in mind, and all others are compromised to give them the best. And the accoustics are quite poor.
Rev Stickleback no está en línea  
Old December 9th, 2010, 01:54 AM   #431
Tom Hughes
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,491
Likes (Received): 989

Quote:
First of all, you question the validity of including Wembley because "it's the national stadium". Rather bizarre reasoning!
Where? All I stated was that despite not having a national stadium BA had nearly a dozen club stadiums over 42k.... London has 2. No "validity" questioned at all....

Quote:
Then you want to criticize Wembley for its lack of atmosphere. Is it worth pointing out to you that fans make atmosphere - not steel and concrete? If Wembley was full of eastern Europeans or Turks, I'm pretty sure no one would be complaining about its atmosphere!
Well done, people make atmosphere. Good stadium design can enhance that, and unfortunately (or not, dependent on your viewpoint) London is not Turkish or eastern European, not sure what your point was there tho tbh. Wembley is very poor in this respect.... I gave a direct comparison to The Millenium. (which I have also been to)


Quote:
Next, you have a pop at the cost of building Wembley - as if that is relevant to the thread.
Didn't have a pop.... just stated a fact.... it was very very expensive...... and IMO having been there is it's not that good.

Quote:
Finally, you seem to want the physical laws of wind and rain to cease within Wembley's embrace. It's a magical place, certainly. But not that magical! Go to the front rows of any open air (but roofed) stadium in the world and you WILL still get wet if it rains and the wind is swirling around. No exceptions to that rule, I'm afraid. My seat at White Hart Lane is 17 - yes, seventeen - rows back and I sometimes still get rained on.
Strange, mine at GP is just 15 rows up, I've never been rained on.... ever! But that's a complete irrelevance for more importantly, at almost £1bn, I wouldn't expect to be rained on even if I was playing, nevermind while watching.

Quote:
As to Buenos Aires, yes, it does have a lot of stadiums. More than I realised, even. And bigger.

But the biggest - River's Monumental / Antonio Vespucio Liberti stadium - is only 66,000. London already has two completed and considerably bigger Stadiums, with a third near to completion. Whether or not London's Olympic stadium will remain at 80,000 or will be reduced to 60,000 is not yet clear


As to quality, many of BA's stadiums are old and crumbling, with only rudimentary facilities. London's stadia are streets ahead in that respect.

This is the point.... and yes it is typical Londoner, no chip required actually. You simply "expect" that London is the biggest, the best.... etc, without even considering or researching the rest. Football and big cities exist in the rest of the world..... BA is vast.

Quote:
Then there's the issue of fame and iconic status. Sure, La Bombonera is both famous and iconic. River's stadium? Possibly, to a limited extent. But none of the others are famous outside of South America.
Few of London's are famous outside of er... London..... and in general terms these are monsters compared to most on offer in London. I have been in ALL of London's main stadiums, I have also been in a few of BA's. There is no comparison.



Quote:
Of course, London also has Twickenham - home of rugby; Lords - home of cricket; Wimbledon - home of tennis.
This is the trump card of course, The "home of" descriptor is a goodun but there's nothing exceptional in stadium terms either. BTW, there are a few tennis stadia in BA too, one almost as big as the centre-court.

Quote:
As to London's other football stadiums, I would agree that they're not especially iconic in their own right (though Highbury probably was, in a way). But simply by virtue of being Premier League grounds - and consequently beamed into sitting rooms and bars all over the world on a weekly basis - the likes of Emirates, Stamford Bridge, White Hart Lane, Upton Park and Craven Cottage are, to varying degrees, globally famous in a way that Argentine football stadia (other than La Bombonera and Monumental) can never hope to be.
Argentine footy is at a higher level than England's can ever hope to be..... however, I'm not sure of the relevance. Highbury, the best on offer..... is history! It's gone! I don't really fall for the sky hype.... this is the premiership therefore it is best...... Sorry, it's pure myth! Apart from the emirates, the rest are quite small stadia in BA terms, and there isn't that many of them either, is there?


Quote:
Finally, you said in an earlier post that Buenos Aires stadiums were bound to be upgraded if, as seems likely, Argentina / Uruguay are handed the centennial World Cup in 2030. That's possibly true. But it's also twenty years in the future. And, by that time, you can guarantee that London will also have seen a new wave of stadium development. A likely list:

New or redeveloped stadium with increased capacity for Spurs or West Ham (whichever doesn't get the Olympic stadium).

New 60K stadium for Chelsea.

Increased capacity Lords and Oval cricket grounds.

Increased capacity of Emirates.
Soz, the oval is a small cricket stadium in world terms.... it always will be! BA's Stadia are mainly 1st/2nd generation stadia, some are near the end of their lives, designed when BA's population was half of it's current level and drastically reduced in capacity in recent years. Expansions/redevelopments are planned for nearly all of them, and even with the proposed redevelopments in London.... it still falls well short of BA. Simon Inglis named it the "city of stadiums" for a reason, he even devoted a book to it. Wonder if he ever got round the 36 stadia he identified.
Tom Hughes no está en línea  
Old December 9th, 2010, 02:51 AM   #432
JimB
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 11,016
Likes (Received): 4783

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Hughes View Post
Where? All I stated was that despite not having a national stadium BA had nearly a dozen club stadiums over 42k.... London has 2. No "validity" questioned at all....



Well done, people make atmosphere. Good stadium design can enhance that, and unfortunately (or not, dependent on your viewpoint) London is not Turkish or eastern European, not sure what your point was there tho tbh. Wembley is very poor in this respect.... I gave a direct comparison to The Millenium. (which I have also been to)




Didn't have a pop.... just stated a fact.... it was very very expensive...... and IMO having been there is it's not that good.



Strange, mine at GP is just 15 rows up, I've never been rained on.... ever! But that's a complete irrelevance for more importantly, at almost £1bn, I wouldn't expect to be rained on even if I was playing, nevermind while watching.




This is the point.... and yes it is typical Londoner, no chip required actually. You simply "expect" that London is the biggest, the best.... etc, without even considering or researching the rest. Football and big cities exist in the rest of the world..... BA is vast.



Few of London's are famous outside of er... London..... and in general terms these are monsters compared to most on offer in London. I have been in ALL of London's main stadiums, I have also been in a few of BA's. There is no comparison.





This is the trump card of course, The "home of" descriptor is a goodun but there's nothing exceptional in stadium terms either. BTW, there are a few tennis stadia in BA too, one almost as big as the centre-court.



Argentine footy is at a higher level than England's can ever hope to be..... however, I'm not sure of the relevance. Highbury, the best on offer..... is history! It's gone! I don't really fall for the sky hype.... this is the premiership therefore it is best...... Sorry, it's pure myth! Apart from the emirates, the rest are quite small stadia in BA terms, and there isn't that many of them either, is there?




Soz, the oval is a small cricket stadium in world terms.... it always will be! BA's Stadia are mainly 1st/2nd generation stadia, some are near the end of their lives, designed when BA's population was half of it's current level and drastically reduced in capacity in recent years. Expansions/redevelopments are planned for nearly all of them, and even with the proposed redevelopments in London.... it still falls well short of BA. Simon Inglis named it the "city of stadiums" for a reason, he even devoted a book to it. Wonder if he ever got round the 36 stadia he identified.
1. You originally wrote, "without the national stadium, (which a lot of other cities will never have), it's not so remarkable IMO."

It's a rather pointless statement, isn't it? Because London does have the national stadium.

2. Wembley isn't that poor for atmosphere. I've been there four times with Spurs. The atmosphere is so so. Not great, maybe. But then, neither is the Millenium stadium, IMO - even with the roof closed. Like all really big stadia, Wembley suffers from imperfect conditions for atmosphere.

3. Wembley did cost more than it should have. Partly because of political interference. Partly because of **** ups on the part of Multiplex and its sub contractors. And partly because property in London is so damned expensive that it cost £120 million before demolition of the old stadium had even begun. But that doesn't mean that it's disappointing. It's still an outstanding stadium that has a genuine, jaw dropping wow factor - for its sheer scale, if nothing else.

4. Again, I repeat, £1 billion or £100 billion wouldn't buy the capacity to change the behaviour of rainfall in windy conditions. Rain doesn't just fall vertically, you know.

5. What on earth is "typical Londoner" about not being au fait with the number and size of BA's stadiums? I bet that people in Liverpool know no more about BA's stadiums than Londoners. Would such ignorance therefore make it "typical scouser" behaviour too??????? I repeat, you have a chip on your shoulder about London. Time you grew up a bit, I think.

6. Few of London's stadiums are famous outside of....London???? Really? You believe that? Bless! The simple truth is - whether you choose to accept it or not - there are no really famous or iconic stadiums in BA other than La Bombonera or, to a lesser extent, River's Monumental stadium. London is far ahead in that respect.

7. You can choose to believe that there's nothing exceptional about Wembley, Lords, Twickenham and Wimbledon if you like. But they are iconic nevertheless - because of what they represent as much as because of what they are. Perhaps it's not a concept that you understand. But players and fans of football, cricket, rugby union and tennis from all over the world do.

8. The Argentina national team is marginally better than England's currently. Both are poor. I will concede, however, that Argentina has far better individual talent - just badly managed. But, in terms of domestic leagues, England are streets ahead. The Premier League is watched by billions and passionately followed in every corner of the globe. To the extent that Argentine domestic football is broadcast beyond Latin America, it is relegated to obscure channels or insomniac scheduling.

9. The Oval is a cricket stadium. Small in global terms. Yes. Well done. So what? It's still a stadium (that is far more important within the context of cricket than all but two or three of BA's football stadiums are within the context of football) and there are plans to redevelop and increase its capacity.

Last edited by JimB; December 9th, 2010 at 03:10 AM.
JimB no está en línea  
Old December 9th, 2010, 12:47 PM   #433
desertpunk
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot
 
desertpunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ELP ~ ABQ
Posts: 55,648
Likes (Received): 53449

I'd give it to London. Especially by 2012.
__________________
We are floating in space...
desertpunk no está en línea  
Old December 9th, 2010, 12:56 PM   #434
sathya_226
DIPLOMAT
 
sathya_226's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Maximum City!
Posts: 2,788
Likes (Received): 44

I would say New Delhi..... Beutiful olympic size stadiums, Indoor stadiums, existing cricket stadium, massive and stunning under construction cricket venues and more over an F! truck under construction which is poised to host 2011 oct. race... What more can u ask for.... So definitely its DELHI!!!!!
sathya_226 no está en línea  
Old December 9th, 2010, 12:58 PM   #435
SpicyMcHaggis
Registered User
 
SpicyMcHaggis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 4,953
Likes (Received): 1789

Quote:
Originally Posted by sathya_226 View Post
I would say New Delhi..... Beutiful olympic size stadiums, Indoor stadiums, existing cricket stadium, massive and stunning under construction cricket venues and more over an F! truck under construction which is poised to host 2011 oct. race... What more can u ask for.... So definitely its DELHI!!!!!
Get real..
SpicyMcHaggis no está en línea  
Old December 9th, 2010, 01:49 PM   #436
Tom Hughes
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,491
Likes (Received): 989

Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimB View Post
1. You originally wrote, "without the national stadium, (which a lot of other cities will never have), it's not so remarkable IMO."

It's a rather pointless statement, isn't it? Because London does have the national stadium.
I thought my inference was pretty staight forward tbh. People's view of London's stadium offer is grossly distorted by one big stadium..... Wembley, (which is a luxury most other cities cannot have). Put it this way, what BA offers is the equivalent of EVERY football club in London (including your Brentfords, Millwalls etc) playing in a stadium bigger than Stamford Bridge..... then there are many smaller footy stadia again.... and much more than that!

Quote:
2. Wembley isn't that poor for atmosphere. I've been there four times with Spurs. The atmosphere is so so. Not great, maybe. But then, neither is the Millenium stadium, IMO - even with the roof closed. Like all really big stadia, Wembley suffers from imperfect conditions for atmosphere.
Well we'll have to disagree. Every occasion at Wembley is a "big one", so with this and the capacity there will always be an "atmosphere", however in terms of the acoustics and the general arrangement it is very poor in this respect. The Millenium stadium has a far better atmosphere, since there is a far greater proportion of fans directly beneath the roof than at Wembley. While I agree that many large multi-tier venues can struggle in this respect, Wembley's config is exceptionally poor..... fill it with banshees and yes it will be noisy, put half as many into say Anfield, and it will be noisier!

Quote:
4. Again, I repeat, £1 billion or £100 billion wouldn't buy the capacity to change the behaviour of rainfall in windy conditions. Rain doesn't just fall vertically, you know.
Disagree again, far less pennies provided a water-tight solution at the Millenium. BTW, I have also designed roofs, I am fully aware of rain's perculiar habits.

Quote:
5. What on earth is "typical Londoner" about not being au fait with the number and size of BA's stadiums? I bet that people in Liverpool know no more about BA's stadiums than Londoners. Would such ignorance therefore make it "typical scouser" behaviour too??????? I repeat, you have a chip on your shoulder about London. Time you grew up a bit, I think.
If anything is "Typical", it is the taking-for-granted assertion by many Londoners that London will have or be the best...... the anywhere else wont "begin" to match London attitude, with a total disregard for even the most basic of research. I responded directly to such! In actual fact, in years gone by I think you would've found that scousers generally had a broader outlook than most, probably due to disproportionate numbers who went to sea (like myself). Many were more familiar with say New York's and BA's streets and landmarks than they would be with say Manchester's...... but I digress!


Quote:
6. Few of London's stadiums are famous outside of....London???? Really? You believe that? Bless! The simple truth is - whether you choose to accept it or not - there are no really famous or iconic stadiums in BA other than La Bombonera or, to a lesser extent, River's Monumental stadium. London is far ahead in that respect.
Again, I think that's being quite insular of you actually.... As I said there's a whole world out there, and just because the premiership is so well packaged and televised it does not then equate to some sort of reflected London stadium Glory. Very few around the globe would probably recognise WHL, Upton Park, The Valley, The new Den etc. Regardless however, the thread is asking which is the stadium capital of the world and BA's list is longer and with many more bigger stadia. Your problem, as someone with an interest in stadia is that you were blissfully unaware of it.... bless, indeed!

Quote:
7. You can choose to believe that there's nothing exceptional about Wembley, Lords, Twickenham and Wimbledon if you like. But they are iconic nevertheless - because of what they represent as much as because of what they are. Perhaps it's not a concept that you understand. But players and fans of football, cricket, rugby union and tennis from all over the world do.
Well to me it is Wembley in name only, no twin towers etc, so I'm not so sure about derived or inherited status. It really is standard fayre tbh.... big, but nothing special IMO... if you doubt me, check out some of the similarly sized newer American stadia with moving pitches, roofs, tiers, suspended TV screens etc. Similarly, tho even more so.... Twickers tbh, good scale but generally very basic, wide open and poor acoustically (Swing low or not). Lords and Wimbledon at least have their historic character and features preserved.... but Lords is dwarfed by most Aussie/Indian cricket grounds, so it's slightly underwhelming in that respect.

Quote:
8. The Argentina national team is marginally better than England's currently. Both are poor. I will concede, however, that Argentina has far better individual talent - just badly managed. But, in terms of domestic leagues, England are streets ahead. The Premier League is watched by billions and passionately followed in every corner of the globe. To the extent that Argentine domestic football is broadcast beyond Latin America, it is relegated to obscure channels or insomniac scheduling.
Argentina's League is practically based in and around BA... hence the large number of medium to large stadia.... which again is the "theme of the thread". That said, generally Argentina does far better than England internationally, despite their disorganisation.... and London is not the premier league, indeed twice as many prem clubs are from the north-west..... but again, what is the relevance to the thread?

Quote:
9. The Oval is a cricket stadium. Small in global terms. Yes. Well done. So what? It's still a stadium (that is far more important within the context of cricket than all but two or three of BA's football stadiums are within the context of football) and there are plans to redevelop and increase its capacity.
Yes, it is a stadium.... a small one. So what? BA has lots of them too, and horse race tracks, motor race tracks, large Basket ball and indoor sports arenas, Hockey, Polo, Tennis, and even rugby stadia!

It also has to be remembered that over the past 20 yrs Britain has enjoyed its biggest stadium building/redevelopment boom since the turn of the last century.... These things are often cyclic.... Argentina/BA hasn't had that yet, but they will, and yet despite this, their starting point with so many large stadia is far more substantial than London's. It is known as Ciudad De Los Estadios in Latin America for that reason.
Tom Hughes no está en línea  
Old December 9th, 2010, 03:56 PM   #437
the spliff fairy
ONE WORLD
 
the spliff fairy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: london
Posts: 7,984
Likes (Received): 6213

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Hughes View Post
****-er-neys.... dont ya love em? If you listen to them London's the biggest city in the world........ except it isn't even close! No wonder England got trashed for the world cup! Stick to the spliffs my friend, because you live in fantasy world.

City of stadiums? Ask Simon Inglis...... cos it aint Londres, by a long chalk!
Tell me Tom, what part of my post shows that I'm living in a fantasy world - when all Im putting are the official capacities? Argued down by numbers?

Oh, and btw, quit with the personal insult or Ill be asking an apology of you.
the spliff fairy no está en línea  
Old December 9th, 2010, 04:24 PM   #438
Tom Hughes
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,491
Likes (Received): 989

Quote:
Originally Posted by the spliff fairy View Post
Tell me Tom, what part of my post shows that I'm living in a fantasy world - when all Im putting are the official capacities? Argued down by numbers?

Oh, and btw, quit with the personal insult or Ill be asking an apology of you.
I suggest you add your numbers up again then.... and show me where you get over 900,000, because no-one else has managed to get even close to that figure for London. I've a feeling you're adding record Attendances together and throwing in Ascot probably too, which isn't in London. Not to mention new WHL and old WHL and the Olympic stadium, when in the end these may become just one 60k stadium, and even then I can't see anything remotely like 900k+.....! I admit, I haven't read through the whole thread, so enlighten me if you can.

I'm not sure what the personal insult was tbh....
Tom Hughes no está en línea  
Old December 9th, 2010, 04:46 PM   #439
SpicyMcHaggis
Registered User
 
SpicyMcHaggis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 4,953
Likes (Received): 1789

This guy is just ridiculous..
SpicyMcHaggis no está en línea  
Old December 9th, 2010, 07:07 PM   #440
the spliff fairy
ONE WORLD
 
the spliff fairy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: london
Posts: 7,984
Likes (Received): 6213

Tom, feel free to do the math.
These figures are capacity, not record attendances (eg counting standing people in a rock concert etc). Like I said before, if you take out Ascot it's 870,000 still.

Also bear in mind the due-to-be-increased capacities related to in this old post has already come about:


Quote:
Originally Posted by the spliff fairy View Post
To recap for LONDON

Stadiums over 20,000:


Wembley Football 90,000

image hosted on flickr






Twickenham Rugby 82,000

image hosted on flickr




Ascot Horseracing, 80,000





Olympic Stadium 80,000

image hosted on flickr




Emirates Football Stadium 60,000








New Stamford Bridge Football 42,000 (formerly 100,000)





White Hart Lane Football, 36,000 (formerly 75,000)





Boleyn Ground Football 35,000 (maximum 42,000)





Lords Cricket Ground 32,000 due to increase to 42,000










The Valley Football, 27,000





Selhurst Park Football, 26,500





O2 Centre Mixed Use, 26,000



image hosted on flickr




Craven Cottage 25,500, due to be increased to 30,000





Brit Oval Cricket Ground 23,000

[img]http://************************/london/jpgs/brit_oval_miller_83b.jpg[/img]


The New Den , 20,146





Earls Court Arena Mixed Use 20,000





Stadiums under 20,000

Loftus Road 19,148
Crystal Palace Athletics Stadium 15,500
Matchroom Stadium 13,842
Wimbledon Tennis Centre Court 15,000
Griffin Park 12,763
Stoop Memorial Ground 12,500
Croydon Gateway Arena 12,500
Wimbledon Tennis Number 1 Court 11,500
Kingsmeadow 6,299
Glyn Hopkin Stadium 6,000
Old Deer Park 5,850
Underhill 5,500
C.P. National Sports Centre 3,500
Wimbledon Tennis No. 2 Court 3000
New River Stadium 2 000
Alexandra Palace 1 250



Under construction:


White Hart Lane Stadium 60,000




Olympic Aquatic Centre 20,000



Olympic Basketball Arena 12,000





Olympic Handball Arena 6,000






Velodrome 6,000

[img]http://************************/london/jpgs/london_olympic_velopark_oda080908_2.jpg[/img]



There are also plans for new grounds for West Ham FC in a 50-60,000 stadium, and a Chelsea one to replace Stamford Bridge that will be 60,000.


Consider the list doubled if you were to count those in the London metro.
the spliff fairy no está en línea  


Closed Thread

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 01:09 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu