Search results for query: *

@Jayblue9 you both posted similar but I can't get that multi quote to work. If they put the standing in the back half they wouldn't have needed a super riser.

You've made the very last 10 or so rows of your South Stand safe standing. Did they say much about why they done that? I reckon it's a good idea, would like that here.

Is that relevant to the choice of having a super riser rather than not having one? Or Is that to do with us losing 8 rows? If so, that is another moan of mine. It was said before the super riser is at least 1800 mm, so that's worth the height of 5 or 6 risers I reckon? Length of footprint...

Another thing. How can they even consider option 2 and 3, when option 1 was so good? When the initial plans were released absolutely no one said it would be better if they split that stand in two and only gave half a Blue Wall. Yet Everton, being Everton, manage to do what Everton does best...

Good detective work Andy! If you come across the height of that annoying super riser put that up to.

It'll be interesting to find out. I'd be surprised if they go against the green guide because you have all the safety advisory groups who issue the licenses. So I'm still going to for 25 on the lower and 34 on the upper but I'm not as certain as was earlier! I remember someone on here showing...

Not seen them pics before, thanks for posting thrm. I don't get why no 2 is saying standing lower at 32 degrees when hes even wrote 25 degrees max steepness? I have just assumed that the lower is shallower than the upper, so I might be wrong. I know 25 degrees is max for safe standing but there...

Large Stands usually have 2 or 3 different gradients, shallower to steeper. I'd expect this would be no different? It's to do with sightlines.

Good points. Re the upper South Stand, they can have rail seats same as the lower, but they can't then progress to safe standing due to its steeper gradient. Tottenham added about 10 rows of rail seats to the very back of theirs, Everton should definitely do so too.

With standing at the front of the stand instead of at the back, the design lends itself to an Ultra group to lead the way rather than the traditional way of a group of fans congregating and just starting off songs at the back if a stand out of sight. I'd prefer an Ultra group to a band...

That really highlights the huge gap between the last row of seats and the start of the roof. You could have added an extra 10 rows of seats without increasing the height. Obviously the length of the footprint would have been longer

Anyone can latch into a successful team and then say look at me I'm better than you because my team is better than yours, but it takes someone with an IQ of over 10 to realise that it is absolutely pathetic to do so.

One thing I noticed was that it was McNeil who was pressing Onana and Tielemens in the first half, but second half it seemed to be just Tim and Gana who were pressing them.

Yeah but we had the last laugh when we took Hottiger from them...

Sorry I meant why did they knock off 8 rows of seats from the South Stand? I was thinking it was to reduce the height of the stand but I could be wrong.

8 rows have been knocked off it. So kop is 76 rows, ours s 60 rows rather than 68. Wasnt it to do with the height of the stand they reduced it? Although no idea why they couldn't just reduce the distance of the roof to the stand, or reduce the steepness to fit more rows in.

It's because we went and Evertoned it up. It really annoys me that we've split it in two. Put the standing at the back not the front.

Is that wall and height difference the same in the other corner of the South Stand too?

I like the corners but not sure if I'd choose to sit in those seats that are angled towards each other in the middle of that second block in from the left. Maybe they took the wrong meaning of the word initimate!

Does anyone know the capacity of the corner quadrants either side of the South Stand?