Etihad Campus, Stadium and Collar Site Development Thread

[maccieblue]

how do they get that?

Think United claim there is no other part of the ground that can accommodate disabled home fans
Very convenient

 

[HelloCity]

 

[Kent_Col]

View attachment 52278

The view from the top tier is dire. Much like the old Wembley there's no rake so you're too far away to know what is going on. Sunday was my fourth visit, although in the lower tier this time but no better. I was in row D but still felt like miles to the pitch & you get a perspective of how far the bench is from the touchline, about 25 metres.
Speaking to a few hammers on the way up they loved their seats on the half way line lower but neither had ST at Upton park, another had his ST behind the goal upper & admitted was too far back.

 

[Tim of the Oak]

The London Stadium has helped the Hammers to become a biggest Club with, now, the second bigger attendances in the Prem.

The ground is nothing special but the away end isn’t as bad as Barca.

 

[Bluearmy]

The void between upper and lower tiers at the 'away' end is ridiculous. Presumably for a stage for gigs etc? It's bad enough how far the fans are from the pitch on the halfway line, but look how separated the City fans (or any away fans) are...View attachment 52259

Are the y changing this?? Heard new seats are planned somewhere... Needs something doing!!

 

[Jacko1956]

This is true. They had a template with the Manchester Commonwealth Stadium of how to make it work, but unfortunately arseholes like David Conn whinged dismally about private interests benefitting excessively from the public money spent on the stadium.

As a result, Culture Secretary Tessa Jowell and London Mayor Ken Livingstone took a decision that the stadium would be scaled back and retain the track. This was entirely a political consideration aimed at ensuring that a wealthy Premier League club wouldn't move in. They complacently assumed that they'd be able to rent the venue in winter to Leyton Orient or maybe one of the London rugby clubs only to discover that, just like the bigger football clubs, these outfits had no desire to play at a stadium with a track, either.

I confess to loathing Boris Johnson, but when he became London Mayor he quite correctly identified the proposed legacy of the main Olympic venue as a joke. He alighted on the wrong solution, however. Spending north of GBP 300 million to convert a venue so West Ham could take it on a 99-year lease at an annual rent of GBP 2 million was a really poor deal for London's council taxpayers. It should have been knocked down after the Games and rebuilt, as Spurs proposed.

The Etihad design for the commonwealth games was actually a scaled down version of a stadium that was designed for a failed bid by Manchester for the Olympic games with a 85k attendance ! I worked for Manchester City Council at the time and went to model unvailing at the Town Hall, think.is was about 1996 or there abouts ! Identical to he current stadium with bigger second and third tiers !

 

[Bluearmy]

That affects home fans in that end too, and a giant screen bang in the centre of the opposite end, it's just shocking as a stadium.

Wembley has them too??

 

[Jesus H Gabz]

City can’t.

The PL want a % of away fans pitch side to improve the atmosphere. United and Newcastle have special dispensation, and don’t have away fans pitchside.

It’s about time they where both instructed to sort that out, they’ve had long enough to do it since the original decision, in the same way clubs being promoted to the championship have a limited time to make their stadiums all seater. Clubs/supporters should lobby the PL

 

[Brewster's millions]

This is true. They had a template with the Manchester Commonwealth Stadium of how to make it work, but unfortunately arseholes like David Conn whinged dismally about private interests benefitting excessively from the public money spent on the stadium.

As a result, Culture Secretary Tessa Jowell and London Mayor Ken Livingstone took a decision that the stadium would be scaled back and retain the track. This was entirely a political consideration aimed at ensuring that a wealthy Premier League club wouldn't move in. They complacently assumed that they'd be able to rent the venue in winter to Leyton Orient or maybe one of the London rugby clubs only to discover that, just like the bigger football clubs, these outfits had no desire to play at a stadium with a track, either.

I confess to loathing Boris Johnson, but when he became London Mayor he quite correctly identified the proposed legacy of the main Olympic venue as a joke. He alighted on the wrong solution, however. Spending north of GBP 300 million to convert a venue so West Ham could take it on a 99-year lease at an annual rent of GBP 2 million was a really poor deal for London's council taxpayers. It should have been knocked down after the Games and rebuilt, as Spurs proposed.

Thanks for filling in the detail - I recall reading at the time that West Ham’s rental agreement essentially absolves them from any maintenance expenditure for the stadium as well, so that annual rent fee is even worse than it appears.

 

[grim up north]

City can’t.

The PL want a % of away fans pitch side to improve the atmosphere. United and Newcastle have special dispensation, and don’t have away fans pitchside.

Which is an absolute joke Newcastle away section is the worst in the PL I live in Newcastle and will not set foot in that stadium it’s an absolute piss take