Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2016 13:16:49 GMT
Give me an example of what it's like being dead and I'll be able to answer your question Mike Jay stalking you on forums. That's just brain dead.
|
|
|
Post by tanksfull on Oct 25, 2016 14:33:34 GMT
But is it a debate worth having? Old traditional grounds (which I prefer), are dead and gone (or going, in the case of ones that cling on), and new all-seater grounds are here to stay. Whether some individuals enjoy the new experience, compared to their old experiences,is neither here or there. Whatever form it eventually takes, the UWE will more closely resemble the Amex than it will Eastville, or the Goldstone, or any other historic stadium. This is unavoidable. We have to move forward but at the same time understand what is good about what went before and incorporate as much of the good points as possible. Personally I much prefer to sit and watch football from a reasonable height, so new stadiums suit me (except when people stand in front of me) just fine. However I fully appreciate/understand the other arguments and there is no doubt that most new stadiums lack atmosphere. The problems seem to fall into two main categories:- - Standing
- Allocation of a specific "seat"
Without "safe standing" the first is not easy to deal with but does have a great effect on the second.
For home supporters the "seat" allocation can be sorted with a little bit of thought to ensure that those who want to vocally support are allowed to sit together and maybe even unallocated "seating" utilised? And those, like me, who want a different experience are seated elsewhere - not below but in a different area. I have no idea how that fits with rules and regulations. Understanding the problems and issues will help to resolve those issues and maximise people's enjoyment. As Steve Hamer said the longer we can stay in the design stage (or words to that effect) the better.
It is obviously more difficult to deal with this for away supporters and some would argue that the more dispersed they are the better. However it must also be a positive to create the best atmosphere possible. Why not also allocate to them based upon their preference with the flexibility to move things around on the day? That would mean getting most people in the right sort of area for their needs.
It could well come down to something as easy as selling the right seats to the right people? Yes it will take a little longer but it could be so much more enjoyable for all concerned.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2016 15:24:07 GMT
Why is it relevant? The Goldstone Ground is long gone, you might as well ask which is better, being 25 or being dead. Give me an example of what it's like being dead and I'll be able to answer your question I can, last Sunday, after starting in the Welly straight after the game and attempting as much as Glos Rd as possible, made it to the arches at 3am, and was dead all day on Sunday, woke up and reborn on Monday morning. The plan is for the same this Saturday so being dead again on Sunday is highly likely.
|
|
Bridgeman
Alfie Biggs
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 3,549
|
Post by Bridgeman on Oct 26, 2016 1:15:14 GMT
But is it a debate worth having? Old traditional grounds (which I prefer), are dead and gone (or going, in the case of ones that cling on), and new all-seater grounds are here to stay. Whether some individuals enjoy the new experience, compared to their old experiences,is neither here or there. Whatever form it eventually takes, the UWE will more closely resemble the Amex than it will Eastville, or the Goldstone, or any other historic stadium. This is unavoidable. We have to move forward but at the same time understand what is good about what went before and incorporate as much of the good points as possible. Personally I much prefer to sit and watch football from a reasonable height, so new stadiums suit me (except when people stand in front of me) just fine. However I fully appreciate/understand the other arguments and there is no doubt that most new stadiums lack atmosphere. The problems seem to fall into two main categories:- - Standing
- Allocation of a specific "seat"
Without "safe standing" the first is not easy to deal with but does have a great effect on the second.
For home supporters the "seat" allocation can be sorted with a little bit of thought to ensure that those who want to vocally support are allowed to sit together and maybe even unallocated "seating" utilised? And those, like me, who want a different experience are seated elsewhere - not below but in a different area. I have no idea how that fits with rules and regulations. Understanding the problems and issues will help to resolve those issues and maximise people's enjoyment. As Steve Hamer said the longer we can stay in the design stage (or words to that effect) the better.
It is obviously more difficult to deal with this for away supporters and some would argue that the more dispersed they are the better. However it must also be a positive to create the best atmosphere possible. Why not also allocate to them based upon their preference with the flexibility to move things around on the day? That would mean getting most people in the right sort of area for their needs.
It could well come down to something as easy as selling the right seats to the right people? Yes it will take a little longer but it could be so much more enjoyable for all concerned.
One of the better considerations I've read concerning new grounds and how they could be managed before they are built
|
|
eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,135
|
Post by eppinggas on Oct 26, 2016 10:03:07 GMT
Thanks Tanksful - this is exactly the sort of response I was hoping for. UTG.
|
|
|
Post by tanksfull on Oct 26, 2016 12:57:52 GMT
Thanks Tanksful - this is exactly the sort of response I was hoping for. UTG. I actually see this subject as being the most important issue to get right. Yes there are lots of issues regarding making the stadium pay for itself but giving the supporter the experience that they want is vital to get right.
|
|
Igitur
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 2,294
|
Post by Igitur on Oct 26, 2016 13:48:34 GMT
Thanks Tanksful - this is exactly the sort of response I was hoping for. UTG. I actually see this subject as being the most important issue to get right. Yes there are lots of issues regarding making the stadium pay for itself but giving the supporter the experience that they want is vital to get right. ... and therein lies the rub, we have all been to these new bowls and come away rarely enthused with the surroundings. Notwithstanding the supporter being way at the back where football is concerned, even with our new owners who appear to have more interest in fans, it must be hard to design a stadium to give the experience the average person is looking for, as hardly any have managed to. Getting the viewing experience right such as the distance from the pitch, the angle of the stands, noise levels etc is absolutely vital, then come the important aspects such as bars, toilets, getting in and out etc. I am sure though, fans have been lost by travelling problems or not having proper pubs nearby the new ground. You suspect that money raising factors are given the most attention. There's a further issue, unless we are up in the Championship at least, the stadium will not be full, which is a real atmosphere killer.
|
|