North Stand Construction Discussion

smevchenko said:
So if stadiums need 70,000 seats to be considered for CL finals, The Etihad will need further development to reach that capacity. Based on the gap between South Stand and North Stand construction, any further work is unlikely to start before 2030.

By that time, United will probably be part way through constructing a stadium with at least 90,000 capacity and upon completion, you would expect it to be considered the best arena in its class much like Spurs stadium when that was finished.

So at that point, you would have Wembley and United's new stadium with much bigger capacity's, so the possibility of repeat finals at a 70,000 Etihad would be pretty slim. They might get one every 12 years, but I think that would be generous.
Click to expand...
Just as well that that isn't true then...
 
Gordyola said:
Stadium must be rated 4 to host a final UEFA also take into account the facilities and infrastructure of a host city such as airport, transport infrastructure and hotel availability Im sure Etihad stadium and Manchester will comply once the NS is finished
en.wikipedia.org

UEFA stadium categories - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
Click to expand...
Fecked if I know how Istanbul qualified then!!
 
Dr Marvin said:
The original application described the expansion as an addition of of 7,900 seats, increasing the stadium capacity to 61,958 and yet the site-hoardings and club communications confusingly describe the expansion in terms of 7,000 new seats.

Maine Road's capacity prior to the move was c.34 k, we are now operating at capacity (53.5 k). There is no potential constraint on the match-day potential of City's fanbase other than the stadium capacity subject to success on the pitch which for the first time since the Mancini regime is now in doubt.

There are some fantastic modern stadiums in England such as Tottenham's stadium, the Emirates and Wembley but they stand alone. City's ground is integrated into a cluster of sports venues (regional tennis centre, regional athletic arena, velodrome, national squash centre and BMX arena). Added to the sports venues is the Co-op LIVE indoor arena (23,500). The North Stand expansion will further add a 391 bed hotel, museum, restaurant, fan and retail complex. This venue is abridged to the men, women, and academy training grounds with their own stadia and facilities. This means that when football journalists consider the Etihad sponsorship with rival clubs sponsorship agreements their comparisons are not like with like.

I live in Manchester, and walk to the game. If I am at my Dad's in the High Peak, I catch a match-day bus that takes me to almost to the ground. It's incredibly well designed. 25 years ago, this area was derelict ex-industrial land criss-crossed by redundant canals that included the sites of a former colliery and steelworks. Now it has been redeveloped. Manchester is a wonderful modern city with skyscrapers that have no English comparison. Manchester City are very much part of that. Manchester has a unique industrial past and it is the only vibrant English city outside of London. Unfortunately, social commentators experience of football is through TV or the internet. They have no idea of what the area once was, or now is.

MCFC is seen as a political soft-power enterprise by some who think that Britain and the Western powers have the sole right to be the architects of globalisation and the likes of the Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, Arabs etc have no right to operate on the world stage. The world is global now and no one has an inherent right to it.
Click to expand...
You missed off the toxic apocalyptic wasteland that was Clayton Aniline, the Sheikh should be thanked for cleaning up just that with no cost to the taxpayer.

Oh, I forgot, he bought the land for pennies due to "mates rates" didn't he. I've also forgotten which moron wrote that in the media.
 
Centurions said:
Are you still claiming that 70,000+ is a requirement?

And yes, without doubt we'd be considered (not that it would mean much to myself).
Click to expand...

I wasn't claiming as such, but according to wikipedia, it appears in the last 15 years, only 1 stadium with a capacity less than 70,000 has been used (Estadio De Luz ~65k), so I would say with a capacity of 62k, meaning a matchday capacity of around 58k after usual final capacity restrictions, The Etihad would not be considered at all.

And like I said before, given Wembley is 90k, and a new United stadium of around similar, even increasing The Etihad to 70k means it would be unlikely we would even get one final, let alone repeat ones.

So increasing capacity in the hope of getting a CL final would seem pretty pointless to me.
 
Centurions said:
Are you still claiming that 70,000+ is a requirement?

And yes, without doubt we'd be considered (not that it would mean much to myself).
Click to expand...

Apparently Finals from 2026 onward will only be able to be staged in the Category 4 stadiums with a capacity of over: 70,000 for the UEFA Champions League. 60,000 for the UEFA Euro. 40,000 for the UEFA Europa League.
 
Bluearmy said:
Apparently Finals from 2026 onward will only be able to be staged in the Category 4 stadiums with a capacity of over: 70,000 for the UEFA Champions League. 60,000 for the UEFA Euro. 40,000 for the UEFA Europa League.
Click to expand...
It seems really unlikely that the Etihad would get a UCL final while Wembley exists, anything below that would probably be fair game though
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.