ENGLAND - Stadium and Arena Development News - Page 4 - SkyscraperCity
 

forums map | 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.


View Poll Results: -
- 0 0%
- 0 0%
Voters: 0. You may not vote on this poll

Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old March 25th, 2005, 08:40 AM   #61
MoreOrLess
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,240
Likes (Received): 229

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sikario
We managed 30000 on Saturday, but then the power of the Premiership will mean sell out crowds each week, if and when we go up. We were even drawing in well over 40000 each week when we were relegated a few seasons back. When we were doing really well in the Premiership it was extremely hard to get a ticket, out lowest crowd of the season was over 43,000... and that was in the FA Cup.

Out biggest crowd this season was 43,350 which is far higher than any other Championship club.
It was certainly full for your playoff semi agenst us(Palace) last season.

If it were not for the all seating policey in the UK the prem would definately beat the budasliga for average attenandance. I'd guess that 2/3's of the clubs could fill 50,000 grounds pretty much every week, heck Man Utd and maybe Arsenal and Chelsea could fill 90,000 every week.
MoreOrLess no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old March 25th, 2005, 01:50 PM   #62
Xander
Registered User
 
Xander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Tokyo/London
Posts: 912
Likes (Received): 3

Has groundwork for New Anfield really begun? Pictures?
__________________
心で見なくちゃ、ものごとはよく見えないってことさ

ニョキニョキと広くて青い空に延ばしている摩天楼...........

My threads:
Taiwan: 1 2 3; Malaysia; Singapore; Indonesia- 1 2 3; Toronto: 1 2
Xander no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 25th, 2005, 11:35 PM   #63
andysimo123
wind-up merchant
 
andysimo123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 15,959
Likes (Received): 82

Quote:
Originally Posted by high_flyer
Not anymore, only made half the profits as they did last year
Profits are down because glazer is tring to take to over so no one is buying shirts or other items but ticket sales are still through the roof. Also the stands are being built(thats costing £40 million) and with spending silly amounts of money on players, the profits will have gone down. You won't see United profits go up untill Glazer pulls out and the ground has been expanded.
andysimo123 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old March 25th, 2005, 11:57 PM   #64
Tri-City Guy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: MVM - Melbourne - Vancouver - Manchester
Posts: 636
Likes (Received): 3

Its a shame they didn't make City of Manchester Statium a little bigger. Then again only MU could pull off a 100,000 plus statium and fill it every time. It like the design of Man City's home though.
Tri-City Guy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 26th, 2005, 02:21 PM   #65
ManchesterISwonderful
Sometimes I, fan-ta-sise
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 628
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by andysimo123
Profits are down because glazer is tring to take to over so no one is buying shirts or other items but ticket sales are still through the roof. Also the stands are being built(thats costing £40 million) and with spending silly amounts of money on players, the profits will have gone down. You won't see United profits go up untill Glazer pulls out and the ground has been expanded.

Half of Rooney's transfer's included.

The turnover's the same. It's just that we've spent big in trasnfer market; the wages have also gone up and we're about to expand the ground.

No surprise really.
ManchesterISwonderful no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 20th, 2005, 01:21 PM   #66
MoreOrLess
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,240
Likes (Received): 229

2014 World Cup Stadiums?

If the WC was to be hosted in one of the countries that I'd guess would be interested(Brazil, Spain, US, England, Austrialia etc) which stadia would you use?

Making guesses at possible extensions/new stadiums that could be built by then in England I'd guess...

New Wembley London - 90,000-100,000

Fully extended Old Trafford Manchester- 90,000-100,000

Extended Twickenham London - 82,000

Fully extended St James Park Newcastle- 70,000

Stadium of Light Sunderland with/without extension - 65,000 or 48,000

New Anfield Liverpool - 61,000

Emirates Stadium London - 60,000

Birmingham Dome - 60,000

City of Manchester Stadium Manchester - 48,000

Villa Park Birmingham - 45,000

New Bristol Rovers/City stadium - 30,000-40,000

Thats assuming that the RFU would allow Twickenham to be used(Croke park has just opened up so I'd say its not impossible) and that the Millenium Stadium will not be allowed to be used(if it was then you could strap the Bristol stadium and still have games in the south west). I'd geuss that Chelsea will have extended Stamford Bridge more by 2014 so if Twickenham wasnt used they could be instead.
MoreOrLess no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 20th, 2005, 03:18 PM   #67
eddyk
Registered Abuser
 
eddyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: G-Town Massive
Posts: 17,025
Likes (Received): 1519

Though i do think when the time comes England will have the best stadiums....cant see Brazil not getting it!

But every one of their stadiums needs alot of work...and a few new ones need to be built!

P.S
Villa Park are expanding to 52,000

P.P.S
Birmingham Dome

Its been in the media recently that a 60,000 seater sports dome is to be built in birmingham!

P.P.P.S
Chelsea have already said they are thinking of increasing to 60,000....and people have also saud they are actually thinking 80,000!

They said the Hotel will go to help expansion....im guessing quite a few surrounding buildings will have to go if they want 80,000
__________________
.
.

Visit Grantham Linconshire
eddyk no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 20th, 2005, 03:36 PM   #68
MoreOrLess
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,240
Likes (Received): 229

Quote:
Originally Posted by eddyk
Though i do think when the time comes England will have the best stadiums....cant see Brazil not getting it!

But every one of their stadiums needs alot of work...and a few new ones need to be built!
I'd guess alot of it will depend on whether Sepp Blatter gets another term as Fifa president or not. Really though I didnt intend for this to be bashing one possible bid under another just suggestions of what each bid would entail, they could esqually be for 2018 I spose.

Quote:
P.S
Villa Park are expanding to 52,000
What exactly are they planning to do, build a new stand or fill in the corners?
Quote:
P.P.S
Birmingham Dome

Its been in the media recently that a 60,000 seater sports dome is to be built in birmingham!
I'm starting to think that a world cup bid is the only way it will be built.
Quote:
P.P.P.S
Chelsea have already said they are thinking of increasing to 60,000....and people have also saud they are actually thinking 80,000!

They said the Hotel will go to help expansion....im guessing quite a few surrounding buildings will have to go if they want 80,000
If they did the entire ground in the same style as the newest stand I'd guess it would be around 60-70,000 although I can't see more than 3 london venues being used for a WC.

Last edited by MoreOrLess; April 21st, 2005 at 09:01 AM.
MoreOrLess no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 20th, 2005, 05:09 PM   #69
Loranga
Hoj!
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 360
Likes (Received): 4

How many stadiums has to be used for a World Cup tournament? South Korea/Japan used 20, too many in my opinion. Germany will use 12, sounds much more reasonable to me.
Loranga no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 20th, 2005, 05:19 PM   #70
MoreOrLess
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,240
Likes (Received): 229

Quote:
Originally Posted by Loranga
How many stadiums has to be used for a World Cup tournament? South Korea/Japan used 20, too many in my opinion. Germany will use 12, sounds much more reasonable to me.
France only used 10 if I remmber correctly so I'd guess thats the minium for a 32 team WC.
MoreOrLess no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 20th, 2005, 05:43 PM   #71
eddyk
Registered Abuser
 
eddyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: G-Town Massive
Posts: 17,025
Likes (Received): 1519

Villa Park Capacity Increase...

The Club have received planning permission to extend the North Stand. This will involve the 'filling in' of the corners to either side of the North Stand. However there are currently no firm timescales as to when this will take place. When completed the capacity of Villa Park will be increased to 51,000.
__________________
.
.

Visit Grantham Linconshire
eddyk no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 20th, 2005, 05:52 PM   #72
rantanamo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 3,523
Likes (Received): 363

what is the largest geographic distribution that has been given? Would the US need to keep things in one region of the country, or as spread out as last time? I thought last time was far too spread out.

If the whole country is used, I'd say"

Cowboys Park(retractable roof, walls and pitch) - 100,000 for final

Jets Stadium(retractable roof) - 75,000

Colts Stadium(retractable roof and walls) - 75,000

Reliant Stadium(retractable roof and field trays) - 75,000

New Arizona Cardinals stadium(retractable field and roof) - 65,000

Soldier Field(Simply awesome outdoors) - 65,000

Dolphins Stadium(being renovated with retractable roof and larger club areas) - 75,000

Qwest Field(roof for gradstand) - 70,000

New Vikings Stadium(retractable roof) - 65,000

New Giants Stadium - No details other than a deal has been struck

Whatever stadium a new Los Angeles team ends up at.

Not knowing these FIFA rules of configuration, capacity, covered seats or whatever, others I'd pick are:

Browns Stadium - 73,000
Invesco Field - 73,000
M&T Bank Stadium - 69,000
FedEx Field - 91,000
Daryl K Royal - Texas Memorial - ~114,000 in 2014
Lincoln Financial - 69,000
Bank of America - 73,000
Sanford Stadium(beautiful and continues to expand) - probably ~100,000 in 2014
Lambeau Field


There are many more in this size range or bigger that could be used. These are just my personal pics. There would be no larger collection of nice stadiums for any host unless they plan on spending tens of billions to catch up.

Last edited by rantanamo; April 20th, 2005 at 06:15 PM.
rantanamo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 20th, 2005, 06:20 PM   #73
danJonze87
skippedybeebop
 
danJonze87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Manceinion
Posts: 199
Likes (Received): 0

don't think there is a rule about where in the country games need to be played. Problem with USA 94 was the country is so damn big and they were trying to get games so everyone accross the country could go and see. Am i right in saying each city is limited to two grounds for a WC? So London could only use two stadiums (Wembley and Emirates i suspect)
danJonze87 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 20th, 2005, 06:30 PM   #74
rantanamo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 3,523
Likes (Received): 363

^That was my question. In '94 they took a regional approach. Starting teams out in a regional bracket. This cut down travel some. Each region would be perfectly capable I think if they wanted to make a smaller geographic area.
rantanamo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 20th, 2005, 06:55 PM   #75
Loranga
Hoj!
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 360
Likes (Received): 4

IMHO, for climate reasons, wouldn't it be best to arrange a U.S World Cup in the northeast part of the U.S? Remember the swedish team play in +50C against Saudi Arabia at the Cotton Bowl in Texas. Playing on the east coast makes it also easier to have decent TV times in Europe too.

I guess there will be no problem to find 14 decent stadiums in northeastern U.S
Loranga no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 20th, 2005, 08:36 PM   #76
MoreOrLess
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,240
Likes (Received): 229

Quote:
^That was my question. In '94 they took a regional approach. Starting teams out in a regional bracket. This cut down travel some. Each region would be perfectly capable I think if they wanted to make a smaller geographic area.
I'd guess that the pressure to spread things out came less from Fifa and more from the US goverment, maybe if funding came from a state level that wouldnt be the case though?

I agree the temprature in the southern states was a problem in 94 although the spread of roofed stadia since then could help with that I guess.
MoreOrLess no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 21st, 2005, 01:19 AM   #77
rantanamo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 3,523
Likes (Received): 363

All great points. The northeast or say the east coast would be great. Just hated to leave out some of the great venues in the rest of the country. One could just do the NE states.

New Giants Stadium
New Jets Stadium
possibly Giants Stadium if they don't tear it down
Gillete Stadium
Lincoln Financial
Heinz
M&T Bank
FedEx Field
New Colts Stadium
Paul Brown
Cleveland Browns
Ford Field
Ohio Stadium
Pontiac Silverdome
Rich Stadium
Soldier Field(if you wanna stretch it all the way to Illinois)

I'd still rather do the whole country. By then, the warmer cities like Miami, Dallas and Phoenix will join Houston with new retractable roof stadiums. I'd imagine that Cowboys Park's 100,000 capacity would be attractive as well for a Finals site.
rantanamo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 21st, 2005, 06:21 AM   #78
Cheese Mmmmmmmmmmmm
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: United States... Not For Long :-)
Posts: 579
Likes (Received): 4

I thought FIFA officials were quoted as saying Brazil is pretty much a "lock" for the 2014 World Cup?
Cheese Mmmmmmmmmmmm no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 21st, 2005, 11:45 AM   #79
Loranga
Hoj!
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 360
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheese Mmmmmmmmmmmm
I thought FIFA officials were quoted as saying Brazil is pretty much a "lock" for the 2014 World Cup?
Me too, but I guess Brazil has to build a couple of new stadiums then, I don't believe many of these are up to FIFA standards.
Loranga no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 22nd, 2005, 02:13 PM   #80
Gavin
SSC Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Manchester
Posts: 1,640
Likes (Received): 320

England could hold a 12stadium WC. But using Scotland and Wales's best stadiums would help.

You need zones to cut travel times.

1.S.E. - Wembley, Arsenal, Chelski
2 N.W. United, City, Liverpool
3. N.E - Newcastle, Sunderland, Hampden
4 Midlands - Birmingham Done, Villa, Millenium
Gavin no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 


Reply

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



All times are GMT +2. The time now is 03:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us