Bristol Boy Posted February 18, 2007 Posted February 18, 2007 I'm glad we won because it's easy to be accused of sour grapes after a defeat.Blackpools stadium is, well, half a very nice stadium and half a bombsite.If you haven't been, imagine a brand new enclosure & stand inc Ex Boxes, in an L shape where the Dolman & The EE is and then a concrete hard standing going back about 15 metres with rows of uncovered temporary seating where the Williams is and behind the goal, in place of The Atyeo.......er, well, naff all really unless you count some steel sheeting and some waste ground.I really think that the League should look at the quality of grounds for existing teams as well as applicants and that's not a dig at Blackpool.The pitch, whilst not looking as sandy as normal, wasn't great and was pretty bumpy in places.I don't think it looked as bad as Scunnys and that's another point.Surely with all the money in the game, a pitch inspector should assesss pitches as being fit for play in the four top divisions in England and clubs should be required to have a decent pitch at least??If clubs can afford players on a thousand pounds a week and to pay transfer/signing on fees, surely facilities for the paying customer must come first?Over to you.
bringbacktherobin Posted February 18, 2007 Posted February 18, 2007 I don't see whats wrong with it, They only need that L Shaped stand, why build when they don't need to?Shove a roof on the away end and it will be fine.
EmersonsKev Posted February 18, 2007 Posted February 18, 2007 I'm glad we won because it's easy to be accused of sour grapes after a defeat.Blackpools stadium is, well, half a very nice stadium and half a bombsite.If you haven't been, imagine a brand new enclosure & stand inc Ex Boxes, in an L shape where the Dolman & The EE is and then a concrete hard standing going back about 15 metres with rows of uncovered temporary seating where the Williams is and behind the goal, in place of The Atyeo.......er, well, naff all really unless you count some steel sheeting and some waste ground.I really think that the League should look at the quality of grounds for existing teams as well as applicants and that's not a dig at Blackpool.The pitch, whilst not looking as sandy as normal, wasn't great and was pretty bumpy in places.I don't think it looked as bad as Scunnys and that's another point.Surely with all the money in the game, a pitch inspector should assesss pitches as being fit for play in the four top divisions in England and clubs should be required to have a decent pitch at least??If clubs can afford players on a thousand pounds a week and to pay transfer/signing on fees, surely facilities for the paying customer must come first?Over to you.In all fairness Ian, you must have been to Bloomfield Rd before the redevelopment/destruction. Its a marked improvement! However i am in agreement with you that clubs should put the paying public high on its list of priorities and offer decent facilities.
Admin Maesknoll Posted February 18, 2007 Admin Posted February 18, 2007 I'm glad we won because it's easy to be accused of sour grapes after a defeat.Blackpools stadium is, well, half a very nice stadium and half a bombsite.If you haven't been, imagine a brand new enclosure & stand inc Ex Boxes, in an L shape where the Dolman & The EE is and then a concrete hard standing going back about 15 metres with rows of uncovered temporary seating where the Williams is and behind the goal, in place of The Atyeo.......er, well, naff all really unless you count some steel sheeting and some waste ground.I really think that the League should look at the quality of grounds for existing teams as well as applicants and that's not a dig at Blackpool.The pitch, whilst not looking as sandy as normal, wasn't great and was pretty bumpy in places.I don't think it looked as bad as Scunnys and that's another point.Surely with all the money in the game, a pitch inspector should assesss pitches as being fit for play in the four top divisions in England and clubs should be required to have a decent pitch at least??If clubs can afford players on a thousand pounds a week and to pay transfer/signing on fees, surely facilities for the paying customer must come first?Over to you.Have to hope we're not the kettle calling the pot black here, our pitch was at its usual high standard up to and including the boxing day game, then the egg chasers stomped all over it and since then it has been a long way from what we've been used to.
Bristol Boy Posted February 18, 2007 Author Posted February 18, 2007 I don't see whats wrong with it, They only need that L Shaped stand, why build when they don't need to?Shove a roof on the away end and it will be fine.Shove a roof on what?That would be like trying to put a roof over a playing field. What do you do about foundations and suchlike
Bristol Boy Posted February 18, 2007 Author Posted February 18, 2007 Have to hope we're not the kettle calling the pot black here, our pitch was at its usual high standard up to and including the boxing day game, then the egg chasers stomped all over it and since then it has been a long way from what we've been used to.It's like Wembley compared to Scuuny & Blackpool and still plays true when it's just a bit wet.I agree that if the egg chasers are to become regular userrs that they should pay to upgrade to a Wycombe style £250k proper job!!
leadman Posted February 18, 2007 Posted February 18, 2007 is there a possibility that bpool are waiting to see if there russian invester comes up trumps???i looked at the stadium yesterday, there was aprox 6k bpool fans and what looked like about 500 empty seats, if there long term plan his to add two more sides the same, there stadium will hold about 12k after segregation.defo not prem bound with that are they.despite the temp away stand, its still better than the old open end, it was the coldest place on earth.shame the tangerine club and car parks gone aswell.
foghornred Posted February 18, 2007 Posted February 18, 2007 Ground like Blackpool,Swindon,Portsmouth & Brighton should not be able to charge supporters more than £10 to sit in a stand without a roof, IT'S JUST A RIP OFF !
Bristol Boy Posted February 18, 2007 Author Posted February 18, 2007 is there a possibility that bpool are waiting to see if there russian invester comes up trumps???He's Latvian and only owns around 25% so I can't see it anytime soon.
Guest North Street Posted February 19, 2007 Posted February 19, 2007 If clubs can afford players on a thousand pounds a week and to pay transfer/signing on fees, surely facilities for the paying customer must come first?Tell that to Colchester fans or would they really want to be Darlo instead!Next you will be wanting toilets in the Dolman open.
Dan Of The Dolman Posted February 19, 2007 Posted February 19, 2007 The toilets in Dolman being open would be well appreciated.
WTFiGO!?! Posted February 19, 2007 Posted February 19, 2007 Over to you.Sweet.With all respect, and I do see your point, we're experiancing third teir Football. Them charging twenty odd quid for it is another issue, but seriously, people moaning about standard of Football and in this case the standard of stadia I do not empathise with. We're here cos we're Bristol City right? You want better quality....? I do to too. That's why we need to start making proper inrode's into the National Football ladder. Quick fix; Chelsea have prostituted themselves, go have a piece. Life's a bitch and then you die, if you're really stupid you tolerate a nagging woman for much of that time too is my understanding.Genuine Football pilgrims (No Plymouth related comments please) are being unscrupolously exploited in the current age, that is true.
Admin Phantom Posted February 19, 2007 Admin Posted February 19, 2007 Shove a roof on what?That would be like trying to put a roof over a playing field. What do you do about foundations and suchlike Rovers have managed it, with the stand behind their goal, when we went there pre-season last year there was not roof on the stand behind the goal but now they have one !He's Latvian and only owns around 25% so I can't see it anytime soon.No there is ALSO a russian guy who is on the verge of taking over at the club, the locals were raving about it Saturday night.
Port Said Red Posted February 19, 2007 Posted February 19, 2007 Shove a roof on what?That would be like trying to put a roof over a playing field. What do you do about foundations and suchlike I didn't go to Blackpool, but your description and the picture that Collis has provided remind me of what Molineux looked like when we played Wolves in the 4th division, they were halfway through a redevelopment then as well. Unless you move to a new site there is always going to be a period where the ground looks like a building site, hopefully the gate will soon when work finally starts on the "New East End". I agree that the prices charged should reflect the lower quality of seating during that time though.As far as the pitch inspector thing goes, what would you see as the outcome of there inspection?Would there be more games postponed? Fines imposed? points deducted? Teams forced to play home games elsewhere?In any of those cases, some clubs (e.g. Shrewsbury) would always be in trouble because of where they are in the country.
Bristol Boy Posted February 19, 2007 Author Posted February 19, 2007 Tell that to Colchester fans or would they really want to be Darlo instead!In fairness Colchester are building a new stadium........a whole one, too Next you will be wanting toilets in the Dolman open.Wanted one against Huddfld only just made it to the potaloo outside the gate-Suppose it would have been a dumb idea to do that in the close season With all respect, and I do see your point, we're experiancing third teir Football. Them charging twenty odd quid for it is another issue,£15 at Blackpool which was fair enough but seriously, people moaning about standard of Football and in this case the standard of stadia I do not empathise with. We're here cos we're Bristol City right? You want better quality....? I do to too. That's why we need to start making proper inrode's into the National Football ladder. Quick fix; Chelsea have prostituted themselves, go have a piece.It would appear Blackpools only just of completing what has been in this state for about five years now, is foreign money.On exploitation, fans of one club, Wigan, had the answer-Say No-Don't Go-Prices halved and so were some at Blackburn Rovers have managed it, with the stand behind their goal, when we went there pre-season last year there was not roof on the stand behind the goal but now they have one !That's called a Marquee No there is ALSO a russian guy who is on the verge of taking over at the club, the locals were raving about it Saturday night.ChristI didn't go to Blackpool, but your description and the picture that Collis has provided remind me of what Molineux looked like when we played Wolves in the 4th division, they were halfway through a redevelopment then as well. The difference was a bloke called Jack Hayward, attendances and the rest is historyUnless you move to a new site there is always going to be a period where the ground looks like a building site,Yes but not 5/6 years hopefully the gate will soon when work finally starts on the "New East End". I agree that the prices charged should reflect the lower quality of seating during that time though.And we need an 8-10,000 Seater New EE.As far as the pitch inspector thing goes, what would you see as the outcome of there inspection?Would there be more games postponed? Fines imposed? points deducted? Teams forced to play home games elsewhere?In any of those cases, some clubs (e.g. Shrewsbury) would always be in trouble because of where they are in the country.All of the above and clubs should have decent pitches and facilities for a professional sport or ply their trade in non league until they can.Sorry but we spent millions redeveloping AG when others, like Fulham, spent it on players etc and got promoted.Perhaps they were smarter than us, but fairs fair.
RedTop Posted February 19, 2007 Posted February 19, 2007 Personally I have felt for some time that clubs (including ours) should reduce prices for all away fans below that of equivalent seats for home supporters as a gesture to the sacrifice, financial and otherwise, they make in travelling to see their team play and their importance to the game (in preventing an American football or baseball-style atmosphere where there's only one set of fans and no-one to chant or sing at). I'm sure if we started it, most clubs would reciprocate for our fans.Can't see it ever happening, though, which is a shame.
Bristol Boy Posted February 19, 2007 Author Posted February 19, 2007 Personally I have felt for some time that clubs (including ours) should reduce prices for all away fans below that of equivalent seats for home supporters as a gesture to the sacrifice, financial and otherwise, they make in travelling to see their team play and their importance to the game (in preventing an American football or baseball-style atmosphere where there's only one set of fans and no-one to chant or sing at). I'm sure if we started it, most clubs would reciprocate for our fans.Can't see it ever happening, though, which is a shame.A friend who went to Tottm v West Ham recently had to pay £42 for a seat and that's just pricing the game away from it's traditional fanbase.An Arsenal ST is £3,500 and I suppose if you want to pay Henry £125,000pw, that's the way it's going to go.You never know if people don't just stop going they may go and watch their local club more.
Fodbarmyarmy Posted February 19, 2007 Posted February 19, 2007 The toilets in Dolman being open would be well appreciated.And by Wed night please..What a pain in the ar5e its going to be on Wed if they're not!
Flaxbourton Red Posted February 19, 2007 Posted February 19, 2007 A friend who went to Tottm v West Ham recently had to pay £42 for a seat and that's just pricing the game away from it's traditional fanbase.An Arsenal ST is £3,500 and I suppose if you want to pay Henry £125,000pw, that's the way it's going to go.You never know if people don't just stop going they may go and watch their local club more. the amount of greed within the self-styled "premier" league is shocking. The FA should have never allowed the big clubs to keep all the cash to themselves. The way clubs and the FA treat football fans is appalling.
Chivs Posted February 19, 2007 Posted February 19, 2007 Personally I have felt for some time that clubs (including ours) should reduce prices for all away fans below that of equivalent seats for home supporters as a gesture to the sacrifice, financial and otherwise, they make in travelling to see their team play and their importance to the game (in preventing an American football or baseball-style atmosphere where there's only one set of fans and no-one to chant or sing at). I'm sure if we started it, most clubs would reciprocate for our fans.Can't see it ever happening, though, which is a shame.But that's illegal isn't it? I thought the club must charge the same for all fans irrespective of their allegiance. It's European Union Law or English Law or FA (Sod the fans) Law. Summat like that...
RedTop Posted February 19, 2007 Posted February 19, 2007 But that's illegal isn't it? I thought the club must charge the same for all fans irrespective of their allegiance. It's European Union Law or English Law or FA (Sod the fans) Law. Summat like that...I'm sure you are right, Chivs. As I said, I don't expect it will ever happen but I think it would be a decent gesture by clubs. I always thought the 'same price' policy was brought in to prevent clubs exploiting away fans, whose week-in, week-out loyalty they do not have to worry about, by charging them comparatively higher ticket prices than home fans. I can't see any club would actually follow my wishes as there's no incentive beyond decency and an appreciation of the away fan's commitment and importance to the whole football 'experience'.
cider11 Posted February 19, 2007 Posted February 19, 2007 I thought that it was that the away fans could be charged no more than the home fans in equivilant seating with same facilities. At oldham i know they did charge away fans more because they were in the newest stand and had better facilities than those being offered to the home fans.
Chivs Posted February 19, 2007 Posted February 19, 2007 I'm sure you are right, Chivs. As I said, I don't expect it will ever happen but I think it would be a decent gesture by clubs. I always thought the 'same price' policy was brought in to prevent clubs exploiting away fans, whose week-in, week-out loyalty they do not have to worry about, by charging them comparatively higher ticket prices than home fans. I can't see any club would actually follow my wishes as there's no incentive beyond decency and an appreciation of the away fan's commitment and importance to the whole football 'experience'.Is there any better motivation than decency? I say, ask not what away fans can do for you, but what you can do for away fans. Let's do the decent thing and start the "Make it cheaper for the opposition" campaign.PS Did you start an "Only one Lee Johnson" chant?
Godzilla Posted February 20, 2007 Posted February 20, 2007 is there a possibility that bpool are waiting to see if there russian invester comes up trumps???i looked at the stadium yesterday, there was aprox 6k bpool fans and what looked like about 500 empty seats, if there long term plan his to add two more sides the same, there stadium will hold about 12k after segregation.defo not prem bound with that are they.despite the temp away stand, its still better than the old open end, it was the coldest place on earth.shame the tangerine club and car parks gone aswell.What I don't understand is how is there the room to build another stand along the side of the pitch the same size?There's a road and a load houses there?!Maybe I've missed the boat somewhere along the line, but it clearly isn't at all possible without knocking houses etc. down. It's kind of bizarre.
cheshire_red Posted February 20, 2007 Posted February 20, 2007 If an Arsenal season ticket is £3,500 that works out to £185 per game. I dunno think so BB.The Latvian owns part of the football club.The football club does not own the ground, the Oyston Family do. Oyston Jnr is the Chairman as Oyston Snr is allegedly banned from owning or running or being a director of a business. The newish stand is rusting away already. The Oyston's rent out the office space within the stands and until they can rent out the space within the other half they will not be completed. It's not exactly as if it's a Town that needs masses of office space is it. It is believed that the Oyston's were banking on the town winning the Super Casino bid which in fact went to Manchester, the Casino bid was is also rumoured to be why the Latvian was interested in such a struggling football club.
cider11 Posted February 20, 2007 Posted February 20, 2007 The £3,500 season tickets at arsenal are in there 2nd tier, in the drinking seats, where when you see them on tv there empty at half time. They range from £2,500 to £4,750 to go in one of the 4 bars they have for them seats. Thats why so expensive as sort of the hospitality season tickets.
cheshire_red Posted February 20, 2007 Posted February 20, 2007 I presumed BB meant the average costof an ST at Arsenal and re reading his post it does read asif it was for an average ST.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.