Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

One of the things which makes St Mary's different is the large concrete blocking painted red in the middle of the Chapel as well, it's very distinctive.

Posted

St Mary's would only be better for me if it was nearer my house (but not near enough to affect the traffic) :). Love the location, love the clear views in the bowl compared to older grounds, and its uniqueness - it looks a BIT like some other grounds, but you don't hear complaints about the dozens of photofit Archibald Leitch stands that used to be at older grounds, do you ? It's a popular design because it's a good design. Having said that, would be nice if we could customise it a bit more with banners, etc. It doesn't hurt distinctive grounds, nothing wrong with bannering up some that might benefit from more character.

Posted
The article isnt that far off -at least in terms of SMS. It is not the worst stadium in the PL (Reading is in IMO) but its one of the worst.

 

I think it is a good stadium in terms of it functions well, and obviously has a high quality (for the 4 star rating). However, in terms of 'character', it is very much a flatpack stadium not too dissimilar to a lot of stadiums built around that time. If we could go again, I'd want a bit more individuality, but I suppose that costs.

Posted
The article isnt that far off -at least in terms of SMS. It is not the worst stadium in the PL (Reading is in IMO) but its one of the worst.

 

It has one of the best locations with plenty of transport links, has good views from any seat, nothing miles away from the pitch or obstructed, no really cramped concourses or excessive queues for the loo (could do with better staff and queueing arrangements for food in some areas though), has corporate facilities to support modern revenue generation, away fans are close but not invasive, and whilst we're in the Prem it isn't too small or too big... yet. There are plenty of others that don't offer that.

Posted
I think it is a good stadium in terms of it functions well, and obviously has a high quality (for the 4 star rating). However, in terms of 'character', it is very much a flatpack stadium not too dissimilar to a lot of stadiums built around that time. If we could go again, I'd want a bit more individuality, but I suppose that costs.

 

Agree its functional and does nothing wrong. For a new stadium, its relatively central - probably the most central out of all the flatpacks. And compared to many grounds in the prem, it generates a half decent atmosphere. But given the choice between a Goodison (warts and all) and SMS, I'd go for the former everytime.

Posted
Agree its functional and does nothing wrong. For a new stadium, its relatively central - probably the most central out of all the flatpacks. And compared to many grounds in the prem, it generates a half decent atmosphere. But given the choice between a Goodison (warts and all) and SMS, I'd go for the former everytime.

 

Goodison and WHL are by far the best grounds in this league.

Posted
Goodison and WHL are by far the best grounds in this league.

 

Which both teams desperately want to replace?

 

Many have said the reason Everton have not been able to attract investment is Goodison.

Posted
Stoke have a modern ground and generate atmosphere, Goodison is a class old stadium, crap for the middle class clapper but great for the football fan.

 

I'm assuming you didnt go there this season then? It was silent in the home ends.

Posted
Which both teams desperately want to replace?

 

Many have said the reason Everton have not been able to attract investment is Goodison.

Doesn't stop it being a great ground. English football will be a poorer place when such grounds are no more.
Posted
Which both teams desperately want to replace?

 

Many have said the reason Everton have not been able to attract investment is Goodison.

 

True but moot point in it being a real football ground.

Posted (edited)
I'm assuming you didnt go there this season then? It was silent in the home ends.

 

I was but was in the Gwadlys Street End and the atmosphere was not great but better than at ours.

Edited by Barry Sanchez
Posted
Stoke have a modern ground and generate atmosphere, Goodison is a class old stadium, crap for the middle class clapper but great for the football fan.

 

Stoke's ground is horrible, as are any grounds with open corners. And I've been there in the Stoke end, supporting Stoke (it was against Brighton when we were both in L1).

Posted
Stoke's ground is horrible, as are any grounds with open corners. And I've been there in the Stoke end, supporting Stoke (it was against Brighton when we were both in L1).

 

Was that the day the Rochdale game was called off?

Posted (edited)
Nothing Unique about St. Mary's imo.

 

Already had this discussion. Derby is not similar, is split all the way around the stands and has one stand much bigger than the others and a sloping roof. Leicester is similar, but it's completely blue... Darlington is quite similar, but isn't a football ground any more anyway and is half the size. Middlesbrough looks like Derby but not St Mary's, and Doncaster looks like Darlington.

Edited by The9
Posted
Stoke's ground is horrible, as are any grounds with open corners. And I've been there in the Stoke end, supporting Stoke (it was against Brighton when we were both in L1).

 

Wind get up your blouse? I agree in the main they are not as good but I love the feel of 4 seperate stands as they have their own identity.

Posted
Doesn't stop it being a great ground. English football will be a poorer place when such grounds are no more.

 

True but we had to move with the times and they will too. Are we nostalgic for the dell? Of Course! But unfortunately economics will always play a fundamental role in football and, despite it's lack of history, the SMS has decent(ish) facilities and is well located(ish!).

 

Perhaps when we crack on with the super stadium rebuild we could add some personality to it so it doesnt look like so many of the others?

Posted
Was that the day the Rochdale game was called off?

 

Yeah, 19 Feb 2011, I just looked it up. We already were in Warwickshire on the M40 when it was called off, and a quick look at the fixtures nearby(ish) showed we had the choice of going to St Andrews' to see Birmingham v Sheff Wed or pushing on to Stoke to see them play Brighton.

 

I hadn't been to the Britannia so angled for that, whilst the wife and the other passenger wanted to go to St Andrews. I won because I was the driver and it was a new ground for all 3 of us rather than just 2, plus we didn't have any sat nav and I didn't fancy parking in Birmingham. That's also probably the last time I got my own way as well. ;).

Posted
Wind get up your blouse? I agree in the main they are not as good but I love the feel of 4 seperate stands as they have their own identity.

 

No different from St Mary's then ? Even the Northam-Kingsland Barrier was popular enough to have a poster on Saints Forever named after it... It was quite windy at Stoke too, though we were in the non-open home corner.

Posted
Doesn't stop it being a great ground. English football will be a poorer place when such grounds are no more.

 

True but we had to move with the times and they will too. Are we nostalgic for the dell? Of Course! But unfortunately economics will always play a fundamental role in football and, despite it's lack of history, the SMS has decent(ish) facilities and is well located(ish!).

 

Perhaps when we crack on with the super stadium rebuild we could add some personality to it so it doesnt look like so many of the others?

Posted

Notable Strengths:

 

1) Great pitch.

2) ??? Anything else?

 

 

Weaknesses:

 

1) Standard bowl

2) Two small screens

3) Lack of information

4) Lack of charm

5) Lack of any sort of notable attribute.

 

 

I'm not complaining about the place - I'm glad we have a relatively new and modern facility. But what about it makes it great?

Posted

I think we could easily install some character at St May's:

 

- put in some period fireplaces, + Chesterfield debenture seating areas

- replace industrial spec windows with proper sash wooden ones

- free season tickets to several hundred curmudgeonly, cantankerous pensioners

- real ale and malt whisky served on concourse bars

Posted
Notable Strengths:

 

1) Great pitch.

2) ??? Anything else?

 

 

Weaknesses:

 

1) Standard bowl

2) Two small screens

3) Lack of information

4) Lack of charm

5) Lack of any sort of notable attribute.

 

I'm not complaining about the place - I'm glad we have a relatively new and modern facility. But what about it makes it great?

 

Excellent views, all seats within decent distance of the pitch, decent facilities (PA aside), city centre location, good transport links.

Not sure how lack of information is a stadium fault, or how the screens can be described as "small".

Posted
Goodison and WHL are by far the best grounds in this league.

 

I'd add upton park to that list too, grounds tight to the pitch that create real atmosphere. To be honest i'm one that's still disappointed that we didn't have a steeper ground. For all it's out in the middle of nowhere feel the Madjeski does have a steep bank to it that feels more like a proper ground.

Posted
I'd add upton park to that list too, grounds tight to the pitch that create real atmosphere. To be honest i'm one that's still disappointed that we didn't have a steeper ground. For all it's out in the middle of nowhere feel the Madjeski does have a steep bank to it that feels more like a proper ground.

 

The best one of the new type stadiums I've been to is Coventry, for that reason, decent steep banks.

Posted
I'd add upton park to that list too, grounds tight to the pitch that create real atmosphere. To be honest i'm one that's still disappointed that we didn't have a steeper ground. For all it's out in the middle of nowhere feel the Madjeski does have a steep bank to it that feels more like a proper ground.

 

The best one of the new type stadiums I've been to is Coventry, for that reason, decent steep banks.

 

It is hard to believe the whacky 'MadStad' holds 7,000 less than SMS, looks very similar in size due to the steep rake of the stands but the downside of that is the cramped concourses squeezed underneath. The Ricoh has been designed better and despite the steeper design the concourse is more roomy.

 

The Ricoh also has amazing acoustics.

 

Another thing they got right, I remember when it was opened they said the acoustics was something they'd worked hard at to achieve as previous newbuilds had suffered (think the Barr ones were being referred to) I'm beginning to sound like MLG!

 

That small bunch of Cov in the corner make a fair bit of noise tbf.

Posted
I'd add upton park to that list too, grounds tight to the pitch that create real atmosphere. To be honest i'm one that's still disappointed that we didn't have a steeper ground. For all it's out in the middle of nowhere feel the Madjeski does have a steep bank to it that feels more like a proper ground.
Upton Park certainly doesn't have "steep" banks, none of the old traditional grounds do.
Posted

I'm not sure how this thread has generated so many replies.

 

This is all that matters from the article:

 

"DW Stadium holds a smaller number of about 25,000 spectators and a grass pitch with four separate stands."

 

The DW Stadium has a GRASS pitch everyone!

 

Yes it's a ridiculous article but clearly written by a staffer with no knowledge of English football. I wish Saints fans would stop being so precious, though, especially when caught out by articles as juvenile and naive as this.

Posted
True but we had to move with the times and they will too. Are we nostalgic for the dell? Of Course! But unfortunately economics will always play a fundamental role in football and, despite it's lack of history, the SMS has decent(ish) facilities and is well located(ish!).

 

Perhaps when we crack on with the super stadium rebuild we could add some personality to it so it doesnt look like so many of the others?

Who knows if Everton really have too move. Plenty of clubs have moved to knew grounds and it really hasn't improved their fortunes on and off the pitch. Also, who knows how many points Goodison Park and all that goes with it have won for Everton.
Posted
I'm not sure how this thread has generated so many replies.

 

This is all that matters from the article:

 

"DW Stadium holds a smaller number of about 25,000 spectators and a grass pitch with four separate stands."

 

The DW Stadium has a GRASS pitch everyone!

 

Yes it's a ridiculous article but clearly written by a staffer with no knowledge of English football. I wish Saints fans would stop being so precious, though, especially when caught out by articles as juvenile and naive as this.

 

Hear, hear.

Posted
Who knows if Everton really have too move. Plenty of clubs have moved to knew grounds and it really hasn't improved their fortunes on and off the pitch. Also, who knows how many points Goodison Park and all that goes with it have won for Everton.

 

The board feel they have to move. Financially they will be forced to move to survive as a club.

Posted
Who knows if Everton really have too move. Plenty of clubs have moved to knew grounds and it really hasn't improved their fortunes on and off the pitch. Also, who knows how many points Goodison Park and all that goes with it have won for Everton.

 

Wasn't saying they do to be fair, more a comment on the fact that the better "new build" grounds are the ones with steeper stands.

 

Of all the new builds though my favourite has to be the Millennium. Cracking ground that, especially when compared to the soulless - and sh.it for acoustics - wembley

Posted
I'd add upton park to that list too, grounds tight to the pitch that create real atmosphere. To be honest i'm one that's still disappointed that we didn't have a steeper ground. For all it's out in the middle of nowhere feel the Madjeski does have a steep bank to it that feels more like a proper ground.

 

The only problem with Upton Park is the stand to the left of the away end is a bit tinpot, but other than that it's also a top ground.

Posted
Out of interest but why does anyone like Loftus Road?!? QPR made exactly no noise when we went there, the facilities were on a par with Gillingham (apart from the luxury of a roof) and its in a stupid place... Plus the view was only good for about 5/6's of the fans.

 

Similar problem to craven cottage but at at least had very efficient beer guys at the bottom

 

Most fans like Loftus road because so many of them get 3 points there and then go out on the **** in London!

Posted
No, they won't be 'forced to move to survive as a club'.

 

Ok poor word choice. To maintain their current position and continue to be competitive without a damned miracle.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...