Mowen Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 Huge numbers of fans (a minority, but still loads) go to London for the weekend for England games. I know you like a whinge about London saying how horrible it is but face it, you're in a minority there. It's also pretty easy to get to with train links to nigh on everywhere and despite what Stifler said above is very, very easy to travel around once you're there. The vast majority of games when it was moving around the country (and certainly pretty much every game of any significance) were at Old Trafford, was that any better? I quite like the concept of a national stadium, particularly under the Wembley name, arguably the most famous sporting venue in the world. Similar to Lords in cricket, every footballer wants to play at Wembley. Having said that I don't think it's been executed particularly well, not every single game needs to be played there and it's not my favourite stadium. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mowen Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 Personally I'm quite pleased with the fact that we have a national stadium and although with semis being played taking some of the gloss of it is still something special to go to Wembley and I can't wait til we get the chance to go there. If people want to see England play so desperately they can get themselves to London, its hardly a difficult place to get to in these days. Getting to London in most cases is fairly easy, most (if not all cities) have a direct train route, a major road route, and a lot have direct flights. However for all of the public transport London offers it can be rather difficult to actually travel in London once you arrive. Also the question has to be asked is, why should London beneift from all of these games, after England games are national games, so surely every corner of the nation should have a chance of benefitting from hosting national games, and why should London gain from games that could be played between two clubs (for example the FA Cup games, and the play off's) that arn't from London all the time? Not really. I left the CCF 5 mins after the final whistle (as, staggeringly, did lots and lots of Man U fans who couldnt be arsed to wait around for the final whistle, let alone the trophy presentation. I guess that's how it is when you're so successful), walked down Wembley Way, got on the tube and was back in Harrow to get in the car with the absolute minimum of fuss. And that was with 90,000 people there. It all depends where about you come from, I mean not all trains go to Kings cross, and not all roads and such lead you directly to Wemberly, infact public transport is surposed to be rather poor around there. And also, since the Man Utd fans stayed behind after the final whistle for the trophy you were only up against half of the crowd, so thats about 45k, thats less then the crowd at most games at SJP. Imagine how much harder it would of been for the fans of Man Utd who did stay behind? As Madras said, why not think of what games like these could bring to other areas? It isn't. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElDiablo Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 What a crock of shite. It's a piece of piss to navigate your way round London if you've an ounce of common sense and initiative. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 It's a big city with lots of people and stuff. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 At least the money for Wembley could've been spent on grassroots,coaching and the likes & they're not building another massive fucking white elephant just down the road in Stratford. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest kingdawson Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 I preferred old Wembley to the new Wembley anyway tbh. Really? Christ, I didn't. It was a dump which should have been rebuilt at the very least 30 years before it was. Yeh i loved it. Been to new Wembley twice and although it undoubtedly looks better, there was something about Old Wembley that the new one doesn't have (probably the history as Madras said). The location of the stadium is a shithole in general but used to go to every England game for £4 (one of the many benefits of captaining Queens park's year 7 team to Brent cup glory). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 Huge numbers of fans (a minority, but still loads) go to London for the weekend for England games. I know you like a whinge about London saying how horrible it is but face it, you're in a minority there. It's also pretty easy to get to with train links to nigh on everywhere and despite what Stifler said above is very, very easy to travel around once you're there. The vast majority of games when it was moving around the country (and certainly pretty much every game of any significance) were at Old Trafford, was that any better? I quite like the concept of a national stadium, particularly under the Wembley name, arguably the most famous sporting venue in the world. Similar to Lords in cricket, every footballer wants to play at Wembley. Having said that I don't think it's been executed particularly well, not every single game needs to be played there and it's not my favourite stadium. i like the idea of a national stadium. for the major england games and cup finals but was it worth the money for it to be built there ? would somewhere else have benfited had it been elsewhere ? would fewer people had gone ? isnt it time we stopped feeding the big fish ? it's pointless saying we should put this new thing there in london because of what london has to offer as it turns into a black hole effect. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mowen Posted April 9, 2010 Share Posted April 9, 2010 It wasn't worth the money but I don't think the ludicrous overspend was because it was in London...just because they fucked up on near enough everything as far as I could tell. I agree with you in the second point, but I think to relocate the national stadium would have been mental with the Wembley name alone being arguably the most famous in sport. I'd be all for new stadia being around the country but I don't think removing Wembley outright was ever a feasible option and don't think it should be, it wasn't a new thing as such, rather giving a dying stadium a facelift. Tradition has a place in sport. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted April 10, 2010 Share Posted April 10, 2010 So travelling in London is easy, so too it is for travelling in other cities in the UK, most of our stadia isn't hard to get to, so maybe the transport problem isn't a problem or even a debate I should of brought up. Though my original point is the one that Madras came up with, why give the big fish all the food, when it is only going to get bigger and leave less room in the tank for the smaller fish who will end up suffering? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted April 10, 2010 Share Posted April 10, 2010 It wasn't worth the money but I don't think the ludicrous overspend was because it was in London...just because they f***ed up on near enough everything as far as I could tell. I agree with you in the second point, but I think to relocate the national stadium would have been mental with the Wembley name alone being arguably the most famous in sport. I'd be all for new stadia being around the country but I don't think removing Wembley outright was ever a feasible option and don't think it should be, it wasn't a new thing as such, rather giving a dying stadium a facelift. Tradition has a place in sport. of course it would and after a year or so everyone would treat it as normal. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Village Idiot Posted April 10, 2010 Share Posted April 10, 2010 They should have kept some architectonic elements of Old Wembley, though. Granted I have only seen aerial shots of the thing, but nothing in it makes you think of Old Wembley. I mean, the white towers... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mowen Posted April 10, 2010 Share Posted April 10, 2010 So travelling in London is easy, so too it is for travelling in other cities in the UK, most of our stadia isn't hard to get to, so maybe the transport problem isn't a problem or even a debate I should of brought up. Though my original point is the one that Madras came up with, why give the big fish all the food, when it is only going to get bigger and leave less room in the tank for the smaller fish who will end up suffering? It's not like we didn't have a national stadium and decided to build it in London. We already had (maybe) the most famous one in the world there, only it was dying and needed updating. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted April 10, 2010 Share Posted April 10, 2010 They should have kept some architectonic elements of Old Wembley, though. Granted I have only seen aerial shots of the thing, but nothing in it makes you think of Old Wembley. I mean, the white towers... those white towers and wembley way were 'wembley' and were actually a bit of a let down when there. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted April 10, 2010 Share Posted April 10, 2010 So travelling in London is easy, so too it is for travelling in other cities in the UK, most of our stadia isn't hard to get to, so maybe the transport problem isn't a problem or even a debate I should of brought up. Though my original point is the one that Madras came up with, why give the big fish all the food, when it is only going to get bigger and leave less room in the tank for the smaller fish who will end up suffering? It's not like we didn't have a national stadium and decided to build it in London. We already had (maybe) the most famous one in the world there, only it was dying and needed updating. and it's not like if it needed redoing it couldn't have been done elsewhere ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Village Idiot Posted April 10, 2010 Share Posted April 10, 2010 They should have kept some architectonic elements of Old Wembley, though. Granted I have only seen aerial shots of the thing, but nothing in it makes you think of Old Wembley. I mean, the white towers... those white towers and wembley way were 'wembley' and were actually a bit of a let down when there. Dunno, I have been to Old Wembley and I was pretty impressed by the whole way and the the towers as you approached the entrance. Then the stadium on itself was admittedly a bit of a letdown. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mowen Posted April 10, 2010 Share Posted April 10, 2010 So travelling in London is easy, so too it is for travelling in other cities in the UK, most of our stadia isn't hard to get to, so maybe the transport problem isn't a problem or even a debate I should of brought up. Though my original point is the one that Madras came up with, why give the big fish all the food, when it is only going to get bigger and leave less room in the tank for the smaller fish who will end up suffering? It's not like we didn't have a national stadium and decided to build it in London. We already had (maybe) the most famous one in the world there, only it was dying and needed updating. and it's not like if it needed redoing it couldn't have been done elsewhere ? It could have. Just noticed your reply to my other post, will have to agree to disagree, I don't agree with you at all. If a new SJP was built in Blyth or something people would eventually get used to it. Still be shit though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted April 10, 2010 Share Posted April 10, 2010 So travelling in London is easy, so too it is for travelling in other cities in the UK, most of our stadia isn't hard to get to, so maybe the transport problem isn't a problem or even a debate I should of brought up. Though my original point is the one that Madras came up with, why give the big fish all the food, when it is only going to get bigger and leave less room in the tank for the smaller fish who will end up suffering? It's not like we didn't have a national stadium and decided to build it in London. We already had (maybe) the most famous one in the world there, only it was dying and needed updating. and it's not like if it needed redoing it couldn't have been done elsewhere ? It could have. Just noticed your reply to my other post, will have to agree to disagree, I don't agree with you at all. If a new SJP was built in Blyth or something people would eventually get used to it. Still be s*** though. the SJP argument doesnt wash. its a newcastle stadium...the england stadium would still be in england. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mowen Posted April 10, 2010 Share Posted April 10, 2010 So travelling in London is easy, so too it is for travelling in other cities in the UK, most of our stadia isn't hard to get to, so maybe the transport problem isn't a problem or even a debate I should of brought up. Though my original point is the one that Madras came up with, why give the big fish all the food, when it is only going to get bigger and leave less room in the tank for the smaller fish who will end up suffering? It's not like we didn't have a national stadium and decided to build it in London. We already had (maybe) the most famous one in the world there, only it was dying and needed updating. and it's not like if it needed redoing it couldn't have been done elsewhere ? It could have. Just noticed your reply to my other post, will have to agree to disagree, I don't agree with you at all. If a new SJP was built in Blyth or something people would eventually get used to it. Still be s*** though. the SJP argument doesnt wash. its a newcastle stadium...the england stadium would still be in england. Blyth's pretty much in Newcastle though... I was only fishing with that line I reckon it probably is arguable but I'm too tired to work it out properly. We won't agree on the England stadium so there's not that much point really, plus I think it's my bedtime. I'm happy to have another go another day if you fancy an itching post though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted April 10, 2010 Share Posted April 10, 2010 So travelling in London is easy, so too it is for travelling in other cities in the UK, most of our stadia isn't hard to get to, so maybe the transport problem isn't a problem or even a debate I should of brought up. Though my original point is the one that Madras came up with, why give the big fish all the food, when it is only going to get bigger and leave less room in the tank for the smaller fish who will end up suffering? It's not like we didn't have a national stadium and decided to build it in London. We already had (maybe) the most famous one in the world there, only it was dying and needed updating. and it's not like if it needed redoing it couldn't have been done elsewhere ? It could have. Just noticed your reply to my other post, will have to agree to disagree, I don't agree with you at all. If a new SJP was built in Blyth or something people would eventually get used to it. Still be s*** though. the SJP argument doesnt wash. its a newcastle stadium...the england stadium would still be in england. Blyth's pretty much in Newcastle though... I was only fishing with that line I reckon it probably is arguable but I'm too tired to work it out properly. We won't agree on the England stadium so there's not that much point really, plus I think it's my bedtime. I'm happy to have another go another day if you fancy an itching post though. no probs. what a nice way to disagree though, no personal digs, no snide comments. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Posted April 10, 2010 Share Posted April 10, 2010 So travelling in London is easy, so too it is for travelling in other cities in the UK, most of our stadia isn't hard to get to, so maybe the transport problem isn't a problem or even a debate I should of brought up. Though my original point is the one that Madras came up with, why give the big fish all the food, when it is only going to get bigger and leave less room in the tank for the smaller fish who will end up suffering? It's not like we didn't have a national stadium and decided to build it in London. We already had (maybe) the most famous one in the world there, only it was dying and needed updating. and it's not like if it needed redoing it couldn't have been done elsewhere ? It could have. Just noticed your reply to my other post, will have to agree to disagree, I don't agree with you at all. If a new SJP was built in Blyth or something people would eventually get used to it. Still be s*** though. the SJP argument doesnt wash. its a newcastle stadium...the england stadium would still be in england. Blyth's pretty much in Newcastle though... I was only fishing with that line I reckon it probably is arguable but I'm too tired to work it out properly. We won't agree on the England stadium so there's not that much point really, plus I think it's my bedtime. I'm happy to have another go another day if you fancy an itching post though. no probs. what a nice way to disagree though, no personal digs, no snide comments. Thoroughly disappointing for the audience, though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mowen Posted April 10, 2010 Share Posted April 10, 2010 So travelling in London is easy, so too it is for travelling in other cities in the UK, most of our stadia isn't hard to get to, so maybe the transport problem isn't a problem or even a debate I should of brought up. Though my original point is the one that Madras came up with, why give the big fish all the food, when it is only going to get bigger and leave less room in the tank for the smaller fish who will end up suffering? It's not like we didn't have a national stadium and decided to build it in London. We already had (maybe) the most famous one in the world there, only it was dying and needed updating. and it's not like if it needed redoing it couldn't have been done elsewhere ? It could have. Just noticed your reply to my other post, will have to agree to disagree, I don't agree with you at all. If a new SJP was built in Blyth or something people would eventually get used to it. Still be s*** though. the SJP argument doesnt wash. its a newcastle stadium...the england stadium would still be in england. Blyth's pretty much in Newcastle though... I was only fishing with that line I reckon it probably is arguable but I'm too tired to work it out properly. We won't agree on the England stadium so there's not that much point really, plus I think it's my bedtime. I'm happy to have another go another day if you fancy an itching post though. no probs. what a nice way to disagree though, no personal digs, no snide comments. Thoroughly disappointing for the audience, though. Scouse cunt Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted April 10, 2010 Share Posted April 10, 2010 So travelling in London is easy, so too it is for travelling in other cities in the UK, most of our stadia isn't hard to get to, so maybe the transport problem isn't a problem or even a debate I should of brought up. Though my original point is the one that Madras came up with, why give the big fish all the food, when it is only going to get bigger and leave less room in the tank for the smaller fish who will end up suffering? It's not like we didn't have a national stadium and decided to build it in London. We already had (maybe) the most famous one in the world there, only it was dying and needed updating. and it's not like if it needed redoing it couldn't have been done elsewhere ? It could have. Just noticed your reply to my other post, will have to agree to disagree, I don't agree with you at all. If a new SJP was built in Blyth or something people would eventually get used to it. Still be s*** though. the SJP argument doesnt wash. its a newcastle stadium...the england stadium would still be in england. Blyth's pretty much in Newcastle though... I was only fishing with that line I reckon it probably is arguable but I'm too tired to work it out properly. We won't agree on the England stadium so there's not that much point really, plus I think it's my bedtime. I'm happy to have another go another day if you fancy an itching post though. no probs. what a nice way to disagree though, no personal digs, no snide comments. Thoroughly disappointing for the audience, though. and i was thinking of my piss taking. theres bound to be people out there in cyberland who see my piss taking as personal digs and snide comments. they're not you know, honest, i limit them to those i think i know well enough to accept them in the manner they are meant. honest. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mowen Posted April 10, 2010 Share Posted April 10, 2010 So travelling in London is easy, so too it is for travelling in other cities in the UK, most of our stadia isn't hard to get to, so maybe the transport problem isn't a problem or even a debate I should of brought up. Though my original point is the one that Madras came up with, why give the big fish all the food, when it is only going to get bigger and leave less room in the tank for the smaller fish who will end up suffering? It's not like we didn't have a national stadium and decided to build it in London. We already had (maybe) the most famous one in the world there, only it was dying and needed updating. and it's not like if it needed redoing it couldn't have been done elsewhere ? It could have. Just noticed your reply to my other post, will have to agree to disagree, I don't agree with you at all. If a new SJP was built in Blyth or something people would eventually get used to it. Still be s*** though. the SJP argument doesnt wash. its a newcastle stadium...the england stadium would still be in england. Blyth's pretty much in Newcastle though... I was only fishing with that line I reckon it probably is arguable but I'm too tired to work it out properly. We won't agree on the England stadium so there's not that much point really, plus I think it's my bedtime. I'm happy to have another go another day if you fancy an itching post though. no probs. what a nice way to disagree though, no personal digs, no snide comments. Thoroughly disappointing for the audience, though. and i was thinking of my piss taking. theres bound to be people out there in cyberland who see my piss taking as personal digs and snide comments. they're not you know, honest, i limit them to those i think i know well enough to accept them in the manner they are meant. honest. And GM Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted April 10, 2010 Share Posted April 10, 2010 So travelling in London is easy, so too it is for travelling in other cities in the UK, most of our stadia isn't hard to get to, so maybe the transport problem isn't a problem or even a debate I should of brought up. Though my original point is the one that Madras came up with, why give the big fish all the food, when it is only going to get bigger and leave less room in the tank for the smaller fish who will end up suffering? It's not like we didn't have a national stadium and decided to build it in London. We already had (maybe) the most famous one in the world there, only it was dying and needed updating. and it's not like if it needed redoing it couldn't have been done elsewhere ? It could have. Just noticed your reply to my other post, will have to agree to disagree, I don't agree with you at all. If a new SJP was built in Blyth or something people would eventually get used to it. Still be s*** though. the SJP argument doesnt wash. its a newcastle stadium...the england stadium would still be in england. Blyth's pretty much in Newcastle though... I was only fishing with that line I reckon it probably is arguable but I'm too tired to work it out properly. We won't agree on the England stadium so there's not that much point really, plus I think it's my bedtime. I'm happy to have another go another day if you fancy an itching post though. no probs. what a nice way to disagree though, no personal digs, no snide comments. Thoroughly disappointing for the audience, though. and i was thinking of my piss taking. theres bound to be people out there in cyberland who see my piss taking as personal digs and snide comments. they're not you know, honest, i limit them to those i think i know well enough to accept them in the manner they are meant. honest. And GM heknows where i'm coming from. he just doesn't know when. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted April 10, 2010 Share Posted April 10, 2010 The good thing about not having a national stadium, though, is that Spain plays their games throughout the whole country. So fans everywhere have a chance of eventually seeing them live They very rarely play in Barcelona, though, and haven't played in the Basque Country in decades. Is that to do with the whole Spain/Catalan thing? Is it still a big deal? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts