New Everton Stadium Discussion

[muckers]

Theirs was designed for safestanding too. The whole lower section is already set up for it. They also have a super riser half way up to ensure that those seated behind will still have clear sightlines. I think they also have bigger tread depths there than those proposed at BMD, meaning that if the safe standing ratio is increased beyond 1:1, then they will be able to have a higher ratio than us.

They do have a provision for safe standing but they cannot increase past 1:1.

All their concourses etc are maxed out at their current capacity.

 

[Tom Hughes]

They do have a provision for safe standing but they cannot increase past 1:1.

All their concourses etc are maxed out at their current capacity.

Where have you read that? Could be right, but looking at the drawings, the concourse areas look significantly larger at Spurs south stand and they have actually gone with the larger tread depths too.

 

[muckers]

Where have you read that? Could be right, but looking at the drawings, the concourse areas look significantly larger at Spurs south stand and they have actually gone with the larger tread depths too.

I read it several times when following the new stadium thread in a Spurs forum and @safestandingRS on Twitter.

Also…

 

[Davideeyore]

Overlapping stands would mean the lower tier would have to be further away from the pitch and a lot shallower.

The opposite of what is needed to create a Bear pit atmosphere.

Also, with a change in safe standing regulations the capacity can jump up to the late 50 - early 60k.

All on the same tight, intimate footprint. Which means - intimidating atmosphere.

The club have got it right.

Forgive me if i'm wrong, why would a lower tier be further away from the pitch?

Goodison was the first stadium to have 4 double decker stands, It's what we know. It's just my opinion I think
they missed a trick. I mean look at the north stand, make it double decker, you've got another 5 or 6000.

 

[Davideeyore]

Don’t think it was ever 60k. 52k was the figure reported well before Dan Meis’ first presentation in April 2018. The club know how many customer numbers there are and will have done their research on capacity. They will have factored in that every PL game will probably be on TV within a few years as well. You don’t want it looking like Wembley on League 2 play-off final day.

The footprint, as shown a few pages back, was 60,000. It was also bang on same size as NWHL, but with design differences, IE theirs was longer but ours had different shaped corners.

 

[Gardocki]

The point about moving the bottom tier back so you can bring it upper tier closer makes no sense.

The thing that dictates how close the top tier can be to the pitch is the sight lines. The sight lines are the views of the near touch line over the heads of the people sitting in front of you on the top tier. Pushing the bottom tier further from the pitch has no benefit in this regard.

If you move it back and make it shallower, you can tuck seats underneath the top tier, but you cannot move the top tier forward without lowering it.

 

[bcblue1878]

Remember the sniggers when the attendance was announced some games.

Then “There’s more of us than that!” would start!

 

[Davideeyore]

Remember the sniggers when the attendance was announced some games.

This was prevelant when I went a lot in the 80's. Even the 4-4 game in 91, I think is about 37 or 38,000. WTF?

 

[rochdaleblue]

I take issue with the percentage increase arguement. Because Goodison capacity has shrunk in real terms over the years we're on a smaller baseline than we should have. There is demand for tickets even when we are at this low eb in terms of status. I'd say the true reflection of demand is around 50000 right now.

That's the base line. When you add in the new stadium factor, better facilities, no obstructed views, waterfront I think there would be a further demand for going to watch Everton. That's before we even think about becoming successful again. Look at Arsenal, about 38000 at Highbury, up to 60000. Tottenham about 36000, up to 62000, West Ham same about 36000, up to 61000. I'm sure people will pour scorn on that saying they're London clubs bla bla. But even Sunderland and Bolton had big increases in attendance when they moved (and we're in top flight).

As for the stadium, It could be better. I don't know what it will look like when built but some of the graphics are so generic. But the earlier designs we're almost (almost, no overlapping stands, or a retractable roof!) spot on.
Shame they were scaled down.

I’m not aware that any original plans had a retractable roof. I seem to remember Meis saying it was going to be a football stadium and a retractable roof wasn’t an option.

 

[Davideeyore]

I’m not aware that any original plans had a retractable roof. I seem to remember Meis saying it was going to be a football stadium and a retractable roof wasn’t an option.

I didn't say it did

 

[Tom Hughes]

The point about moving the bottom tier back so you can bring it upper tier closer makes no sense.

The thing that dictates how close the top tier can be to the pitch is the sight lines. The sight lines are the views of the near touch line over the heads of the people sitting in front of you on the top tier. Pushing the bottom tier further from the pitch has no benefit in this regard.

If you move it back and make it shallower, you can tuck seats underneath the top tier, but you cannot move the top tier forward without lowering it.

That's the point..... the closer the front row is to the touchline, the steeper the resultant tier has to be for a given c-value to be achieved. So by moving back you can lower the rake angle and the back row of that tier can drop dramatically.... The upper tier can then extend forwards with the overlap formed being an increased capacity or a reduction in footprint if there are spacial constraints. I think there is sightline modelling software on line, or if you know excel the formula is quite simple to make your own. I had to model several stands for sightline quality over 25yrs ago for work I was involved in.... including GP.

 

[degsy]

Quality, Cost and Speed*
(*In this case more or less 'on time' aka, Aug. 2024)
Its almost always a case of perm any 2...and sometimes 1...from 3.
As in -
*Top Quality? *raises eyebrow - gonna cost you mate...and you'll have to wait for it to be delivered - supply chain innit." Etc.**

**we call this...sorry about using overly technical terms...'The Real World as it is today'

Just sayin like

 

[Tom Hughes]

I read it several times when following the new stadium thread in a Spurs forum and @safestandingRS on Twitter.

Also…

Yes, i think I read that article at the time. I think the quote was regarding concerns about migration of fans in safestanding areas to overfill rows during the trial.... not about increased ratio or insufficient concourse area in the future. There have been a few articles from the club saying they will have future proofed this in their design allowing increased capacity with safestanding, if future legislation allows.

 

[4737carlin]

Hahaha, I took my father in law to a GP game against Leeds I think, at least 55K inside, absolutely rammed, then they announced about 39,000….

Thing is a lot of the stewards when paying cash were doing a one for me one for you deal, it wasn't just the club on the fiddle

 

[PhilM]

Thing is a lot of the stewards when paying cash were doing a one for me one for you deal, it wasn't just the club on the fiddle

Similar to the Mersey Tunnel for so many years. When they found a tunnel worker with buckets of coins (no word of a lie there!), they realised the size of it.

However alongside the steward element, the club did famously play with the attendance figures as some of the players had attendance clauses.