What are peoples opinions on the redeveloped south stand? It should be ready to sit in for the new season, maybe a game or two into the season at the latest. With the concourses etc completed late November early December. Then the TV gantry etc sorted presumably after that.
I actually think it looks quite good. All one tier, and the lower section will actually be level with the pitch with excellent sightlines. Should be a much better experience. Similar to the stand at Fulham and Palace but ours will be in a better condition with better seating.
Would be interesting to know how much it will cost to improve that stand. Maybe 2 million? That's just a guess.
Only drawback is there will be some supporting pillars in the way but with the buildings behind the stand, that's not really something that can be avoided.
Obviously the key to really increasing capacity is building a new tier on the North stand with corporate facilities.
However I'm encouraged by this improvement. The south stand will then be sorted. Unless in the future the club intend to fill in the corners with the south stand.
The redevelopment of this stand isn't massively overwhelming but it is certainly a good improvement on the current south stand.
The bit thats puzzling me is that it looks and sounds a much more major piece of work than the North stand work and yest they are planning to do it in half the time.
That's because us South Standers are more important than the rest of the ground. We house the Royal Box and the Tupperware Bog Complex for starters.
It's all cosmetic IMO.
Patch-up, make do as they used to say back in the day..
(22-03-2022, 05:35 PM)DeepBlue Wrote: [ -> ]The bit thats puzzling me is that it looks and sounds a much more major piece of work than the North stand work and yest they are planning to do it in half the time.
I agree with that.
Have you seen the YouTube video for March for the stadium update on pompeys channel?
Very interesting. Certainly seems a very tight turnaround for the south stand.
Do you like the way the designs look for it? Would you have liked to see anything different for the south stand?
I've sat in the current south stand in the lower tier a couple of tiers and it is a poor matchday experience. Below pitch level.
I'm pleased that will be rectified with with redevelopment.
Deebo.
Gerry with all due respect intended, I think the south stand redevelopment is much more than just a patch up job. It's a big change, the matchday experience will be much better.
Of course we'd all like a brand new 50 million stand but that's unrealistic.
The roof poles aren't too much of an issue. The big one is the step ladder running up to the TV gantry. Takes up loads of the viewpoint and I've spent years rocking forwards and back I'm my seat depending which half the ball is in. If they can completely remove this bit, the views should be improved.
(22-03-2022, 06:08 PM)Pedalo_menders Wrote: [ -> ]The roof poles aren't too much of an issue. The big one is the step ladder running up to the TV gantry. Takes up loads of the viewpoint and I've spent years rocking forwards and back I'm my seat depending which half the ball is in. If they can completely remove this bit, the views should be improved.
Yeah good point. I'm not sure if the big step ladder will even be there at the start of the redevelopment or what the plan is with that.
I really can't understand the clamour by the Portsmouth History Society to keep this shabby antique.
It isn't fit for purpose anymore, seats are too narrow for "fatties", not enough leg room for the "longshanks" of today. The concourses and facilities are not fit for the 21st Century.
It should be razed to the ground and whole ground moved north a few metres.
A huge opportunity missed, with this patch up and mend malarky.
(22-03-2022, 06:51 PM)exterminator Wrote: [ -> ]I really can't understand the clamour by the Portsmouth History Society to keep this shabby antique.
It isn't fit for purpose anymore, seats are too narrow for "fatties", not enough leg room for the "longshanks" of today. The concourses and facilities are not fit for the 21st Century.
It should be razed to the ground and whole ground moved north a few metres.
A huge opportunity missed, with this patch up and mend malarky.
Isn't a lot of that going to be rectified with the redevelopment?
I.e leg room, concourse and facilities.
Seems that way watching the redevelopment video.
(22-03-2022, 05:35 PM)DeepBlue Wrote: [ -> ]The bit thats puzzling me is that it looks and sounds a much more major piece of work than the North stand work and yest they are planning to do it in half the time.
Surely the NS was much slower due to having to have people in it? If the SS is being done in the off season they don’t have that worry.
(22-03-2022, 07:12 PM)Pompeyg100 Wrote: [ -> ] (22-03-2022, 05:35 PM)DeepBlue Wrote: [ -> ]The bit thats puzzling me is that it looks and sounds a much more major piece of work than the North stand work and yest they are planning to do it in half the time.
Surely the NS was much slower due to having to have people in it? If the SS is being done in the off season they don’t have that worry.
The North stand is taking 3 or 4 months for each empty half. The whole south stand is being done in less than that.
(22-03-2022, 07:59 PM)DeepBlue Wrote: [ -> ] (22-03-2022, 07:12 PM)Pompeyg100 Wrote: [ -> ] (22-03-2022, 05:35 PM)DeepBlue Wrote: [ -> ]The bit thats puzzling me is that it looks and sounds a much more major piece of work than the North stand work and yest they are planning to do it in half the time.
Surely the NS was much slower due to having to have people in it? If the SS is being done in the off season they don’t have that worry.
The North stand is taking 3 or 4 months for each empty half. The whole south stand is being done in less than that.
Correct.
(22-03-2022, 06:08 PM)Pedalo_menders Wrote: [ -> ]The roof poles aren't too much of an issue. The big one is the step ladder running up to the TV gantry. Takes up loads of the viewpoint and I've spent years rocking forwards and back I'm my seat depending which half the ball is in. If they can completely remove this bit, the views should be improved.
IIRC won´t access be from the back wall .
re the north stand
a lot of the work is restructuring/modelling to allow for a future rebuild of the top half I'm guessing that is what has taken the time, plus it is a much larger previous terrace that needed completely restepping for seats. As compared to the little south lower
I can't help keep thinking that we should have moved to a new purpose built stadium fit for the 21st Century. All we appear to be doing is trying to rebuild a decaying old stadium. The land is worth a lot for residential property redevelopment. Maybe we could have got a grant from the football league & also a sponsor for the new stadium. What does everyone else think?
(23-03-2022, 07:52 PM)mikey393 Wrote: [ -> ]I can't help keep thinking that we should have moved to a new purpose built stadium fit for the 21st Century. All we appear to be doing is trying to rebuild a decaying old stadium. The land is worth a lot for residential property redevelopment. Maybe we could have got a grant from the football league & also a sponsor for the new stadium. What does everyone else think?
I think the majority of fans made their feelings quite clear that they wanted to stay at Fratton if it was at all possible and that is what we should do. There is absolutely no reason that a rebuilt stadium in the same footprint cannot be equally fit for purpose in the 21st century, and it's cheaper to achieve.
The best example in the country for doing this is probably the Hawthorns, and there are numerous soulless flatpack stadiums that come nowhere near the trditional grounds they replced.
And since when have the FL handed out grants for new grounds ???
(23-03-2022, 08:00 PM)DeepBlue Wrote: [ -> ] (23-03-2022, 07:52 PM)mikey393 Wrote: [ -> ]I can't help keep thinking that we should have moved to a new purpose built stadium fit for the 21st Century. All we appear to be doing is trying to rebuild a decaying old stadium. The land is worth a lot for residential property redevelopment. Maybe we could have got a grant from the football league & also a sponsor for the new stadium. What does everyone else think?
I think the majority of fans made their feelings quite clear that they wanted to stay at Fratton if it was at all possible and that is what we should do. There is absolutely no reason that a rebuilt stadium in the same footprint cannot be equally fit for purpose in the 21st century, and it's cheaper to achieve.
The best example in the country for doing this is probably the Hawthorns, and there are numerous soulless flatpack stadiums that come nowhere near the trditional grounds they replced.
And since when have the FL handed out grants for new grounds ???
a new stadium would most likely be out of town. At least where it is, a lot of fans can walk/bus/cycle/train. Looking forward we should be moving away from commuting completely. And we missed the boat on football ground improvement cash, there was a lot of it about when all seater were forced upon clubs. Ttaaly agree about souless flat packs. Loved the first two or three we visited in the prem, then realised they were all just the same but with different colour seats. Man U, MK stand out as a bit different. One designed from the early 60s and gradually built to a grand plan, the other built with effectively govt money for a minority interest sport.
(23-03-2022, 08:00 PM)DeepBlue Wrote: [ -> ]The best example in the country for doing this is probably the Hawthorns
Not a bad example but I'd wager Villa did a much better job as did Wolves.
(24-03-2022, 10:27 AM)Rick Pumpkin Wrote: [ -> ] (23-03-2022, 08:00 PM)DeepBlue Wrote: [ -> ]The best example in the country for doing this is probably the Hawthorns
Not a bad example but I'd wager Villa did a much better job as did Wolves.
Yes, both of them are good examples. As are Old Trafford & St. James Park.
(24-03-2022, 10:59 AM)DeepBlue Wrote: [ -> ] (24-03-2022, 10:27 AM)Rick Pumpkin Wrote: [ -> ] (23-03-2022, 08:00 PM)DeepBlue Wrote: [ -> ]The best example in the country for doing this is probably the Hawthorns
Not a bad example but I'd wager Villa did a much better job as did Wolves.
Yes, both of them are good examples. As are Old Trafford & St. James Park.
St James Park doesn’t look finished, it’s all lob sided.
Best traditional ground I've been to in recent years was Bramall Lane.
Good stadium right in the city centre walking distance from the Sheffield train station.
The concourses are a good quality as is the
whole stadium. A couple of supporting pillars in the kop but that doesn't appear to be a problem. Good atmosphere.
Also been to Hillsborough in the main stand where it takes about an hour to walk the stairs to the top level lol. Huge stadium but needs a big makeover.
(24-03-2022, 10:59 AM)DeepBlue Wrote: [ -> ] (24-03-2022, 10:27 AM)Rick Pumpkin Wrote: [ -> ] (23-03-2022, 08:00 PM)DeepBlue Wrote: [ -> ]The best example in the country for doing this is probably the Hawthorns
Not a bad example but I'd wager Villa did a much better job as did Wolves.
Yes, both of them are good examples. As are Old Trafford & St. James Park.
Those are two other good examples. I was surprised at the improvements at Anfield in the three years between my last two visits (unfortunately we've got a red side to the in laws...).
But all in all those you've mentioned are perfect examples of what can be done in situ - Wolves, Villa and the Baggies all had to extend thier footprint outwards, but not by that much and all three stadiums have improved facilities immeasurably, but in most cases have kept their old atmosphere.
And BlueArmy, a good call on Bramall Lane. Hillsborough, unfortunately, is probably now where FP was ten years ago in decay, just much bigger!
The proposed South stand development is certainly an improvement, but to watch 21st century football with an obscured view behind ladders and stanchions is very short sighted indeed. All in the name of preserving the Leitch architecture??? I really don’t think that’s a valid reason, does anyone else agree?
If we are staying at Fratton Park long term, the most sensible decision is to turn the ground 90 degrees as has been discussed before. This overcomes four primary issues, namely:
1.) The pitch orientation of North to South satisfies FIFA guidelines I.e. goalkeepers are looking directly into the Sun. Who remembers Knightsie wearing his baseball cap?
2.) The pitch can be enlarged to meet FA standards. The current pitch size is too small and if we were to ever get back to the Prem, we would have to ask for special dispensation to play home games at Fratton.
3.) Increase in stadium capacity to 35-40k. This might appear a little audacious, but if we can sell 51k tickets for a tin pot trophy final, I’m confident we could fill a large stadium playing prem football week in week out. That’s if the Eisners harbour any ambition to reach the upper echelons of English football? I suspect not looking at the frugal investment in the team building over the last 5 years.
4.) Avoid clashing with the existing sub-station behind the North stand. I would like to see the current proposals of how a new North stand avoids this “White elephant”?
(24-03-2022, 01:44 PM)BigSmokeBlue Wrote: [ -> ]The proposed South stand development is certainly an improvement, but to watch 21st century football with an obscured view behind ladders and stanchions is very short sighted indeed. All in the name of preserving the Leitch architecture??? I really don’t think that’s a valid reason, does anyone else agree?
If we are staying at Fratton Park long term, the most sensible decision is to turn the ground 90 degrees as has been discussed before. This overcomes four primary issues, namely:
1.) The pitch orientation of North to South satisfies FIFA guidelines I.e. goalkeepers are looking directly into the Sun. Who remembers Knightsie wearing his baseball cap?
2.) The pitch can be enlarged to meet FA standards. The current pitch size is too small and if we were to ever get back to the Prem, we would have to ask for special dispensation to play home games at Fratton.
3.) Increase in stadium capacity to 35-40k. This might appear a little audacious, but if we can sell 51k tickets for a tin pot trophy final, I’m confident we could fill a large stadium playing prem football week in week out. That’s if the Eisners harbour any ambition to reach the upper echelons of English football? I suspect not looking at the frugal investment in the team building over the last 5 years.
4.) Avoid clashing with the existing sub-station behind the North stand. I would like to see the current proposals of how a new North stand avoids this “White elephant”?
Football is football, football played in the 21st century is just that, there’s nothing special about it and all this ‘it’s the 21st century’ is just stating the bleeding obvious and means nothing.
If you don’t want an obscured view, don’t buy a restricted view ticket, simple.
There is no way we would fill a 40k stadium week in week out, even in the Prem. We didn’t sell out last time we were there for every game and the capacity was much lower than 40,000.
Having said that, I wouldn’t be against turning round the pitch for the reasons you give. The cost of moving or avoiding the sub station wouldn’t be that high in the context of a stadium rebuild would it?