St James' Park

[Magpie]

1 hour ago, Yorkie said:

 

Don't think there's any need to get into the nitty gritty of the debate again. But in a nutshell I'd sooner stay at SJP than see us occupy a bog seat design like Spurs.

 

We all know where you stand on the issue, there's no need to be an arse about it. There are good reasons to move and there are good reasons to stay; it depends on what you value and not everyone is the same.

I know where you're coming from but if you take the SoFi stadium as an example, that is a bowl style stadium before they put the elaborate swish on top of it. And when you see that stadium from the inside it looks spectacular to say the least. The Spurs stadium is also a bowl but with their one tier kop stand a slightly different bowl shape but also just as spectacular.

 

I think we can be rest assured that whatever 'bowl' design they do come up with it will be out of this world.

 

 

 

Edited yesterday at 13:08 by Magpie

[AyeDubbleYoo]

23 minutes ago, Superior Acuña said:

 

What's the tl;dr of why you loved the Spurs stadium? Not being an arse, just asking.

 

Went for the away game and my take aways were - big ring of corporate around 3/4 of the ground was grim, lacked character, view from 10th row was substantially worse than would be from equivalent of SJP. Caveat that didn't go to bar. Atmosphere was also proper shit - but don't think can pin that on stadium much.

 

I just found it very impressive, high-sided, seats quite close together, I like the continuous ring shape as well. Class gold cock on the top of course. Even the massive club megastore was impressive since we didn't even had a club shop then. 

 

I went during the time I didn't care about Newcastle so maybe anything progressive was unbelievable to me

 

Spurs were also good at that time.

[Danh1]

1 minute ago, Whitley mag said:

Just hope PIF have the balls unlike John Hall to ride out the planning process, the majority of Tyneside will want this stadium, but their will be a very vocal minority of Swampys, mackems and anti Saudi brigade who will kick up a stink.

The other proposal which includes leaving the East Stand largely untouched, just doesn’t cut it if where looking to be best in class.

 

The East Stand will need demolished like the flyover before long.

 

The East Stand is what makes me 100% certain we’ll be leaving SJP. You simply cannot increase it to a size that is sufficient.

 

I do not want to see a “lipstick on a pig” Aviva Stadium style refurbishment done to it either. It looks utter shite.

 

Real shame as staying is the number one choice for me but if this location is true then I’m warming to it. 

[TRon]

5 minutes ago, Whitley mag said:

Just hope PIF have the balls unlike John Hall to ride out the planning process, the majority of Tyneside will want this stadium, but there will be a very vocal minority of Swampys, mackems and anti Saudi brigade who will kick up a stink.

The other proposal which includes leaving the East Stand largely untouched, just doesn’t cut it if where looking to be best in class.

 

The East Stand will need demolished like the flyover before long.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fair to say just about club that has built a new stadium has had a vocal percentage of fans who have opposed it, usually for heritage reasons, which is fair enough.

 

But given the choice, how many of them would want their old stadium back?

 

 

[NSG]

Could mean there’s only 100 or so games left at SJP.

[LFEE]

55 minutes ago, Yorkie said:

 

Don't think there's any need to get into the nitty gritty of the debate again. But in a nutshell I'd sooner stay at SJP than see us occupy a bog seat design like Spurs.

 

We all know where you stand on the issue, there's no need to be an arse about it. There are good reasons to move and there are good reasons to stay; it depends on what you value and not everyone is the same.

I’m not being an arse. Just shake my head at people moaning about the shape of it of all the things to consider! 
 

Big change in location, worse views and acoustics or locking out future generations and effect on the City in general etc I’m all for a debate. All the things that matter to the match going fan and those who spend their time in the city that would be effected, particularly a regular one should totally be on the table.

 

If I was being an arse I’d say why do you care what shape it is when you don’t go to the games even when offered tickets. That would be being an arse. But I didn’t  

 

So… Whats the problem with the stadium being a bowl shape? That was my question.

 

 

[Groundhog63]

11 minutes ago, NSG said:

Could mean there’s only 100 or so games left at SJP.

Great. 5 more years of Mags+ Membership means I may get to.......let's see......about 5 of those games 

[bobbydazzla]

I'd prefer they built on a virgin site in Leazers Park / Castle Leazers, kept the current stadium fully operational during construction and then got Thompsons of Prudhoe in with bulldozers and a wrecking ball the day after the new stadium opens

 

Fuck playing at a construction site with reduced capacity and only 3 stands open etc etc etc

 

And fuck playing at Murrayfield, which would be a steaming pile of dogshit in terms of logistics

 

Anyhow, the article is by Mr. L Edwards. We ridicule his transfer bantz, but seem to take his stadium news as gospel. So it could all just be utter bollocks for clicks, as usual

 

 

 

 

Edited yesterday at 13:26 by bobbydazzla

[jack j]

5 minutes ago, bobbydazzla said:

Anyhow, the article is by Mr. L Edwards. We ridicule his transfer bantz, but seem to take his stadium news as gospel. So it could all just be utter bollocks for clicks, as usual

 

 

 

 

 

It's no different to what was shared on here in July last year but that got laughed off as shite. Edwards obvs the oracle thesedays

[Ikon]

Any mention of how many quid the budget is?

[LFEE]

5 minutes ago, bobbydazzla said:

I'd prefer they built on a virgin site in Leazers Park / Castle Leazers, kept the current stadium fully operational during construction and then got Thompsons of Prudhoe in with bulldozers and a wrecking ball the day after the new stadium opens

 

Fuck playing at a construction site with reduced capacity and only 3 stands open etc etc etc

 

And fuck playing at Murrayfield, which would be a steaming pile of dogshit in terms of logistics

 

Anyhow, the article is by Mr. L Edwards. We ridicule his transfer bantz, but seem to take his stadium news as gospel. So it could all just be utter bollocks for clicks, as usual

 

 

 

 

 

I’m surprised they are thinking of overlapping the stadiums. If however they think it’s the only option that will tick the locality box and face minimum opposition then fare enough but can’t help feel they are having to make the project less ambitious.

 

Anyway like you say it might not even happen as shown.

[bobbydazzla]

5 minutes ago, jack j said:

It's no different to what was shared on here in July last year but that got laughed off as shite. Edwards obvs the oracle thesedays

 

I was so utterly convinced by Tyneside Life on Youtube saying he'd spoken to the council and they were moving Leazers Terrace onto the tennis courts that I simply ignored any other stadium speculation from any other sources as it was clearly fake news

 

 

Edited yesterday at 13:36 by bobbydazzla

[bobbydazzla]

3 minutes ago, Ikon said:

Any mention of how many quid the budget is?

 

Millions of billions

[MagCA]

9 minutes ago, Ikon said:

Any mention of how many quid the budget is?

Olly Gill will be along any second to let us know. 

[LFEE]

1 hour ago, Interpolic said:

 

Still find this view/tone quite obnoxious.  Fans are allowed to have the opposing view without being told they're not seeing sense.

I’ve not said you can’t have opposing views?

 

This option isn’t even the one I want 

 

But having listened to a broad range of feedback on here and elsewhere I honestly think the club have made the most sensible decision if indeed this is the one.

 

Its as close to the current site you could ask for so much so it overlaps so no change to anyone’s match day routines.

 

Its 20% approximately bigger so hopefully that will allow future generations into the ground more regularly at a lower price point than an expansion would and on the flip side put to rest fears from some we couldn’t fill 75/80/85k regularly.

 

It allows the club flexibility for their corporate adventures which will all help to keep the ticket prices lower than they would with less corporate opportunities.

 

It also gives the chance to reconfigure the fans who want to be together and offer better acoustics hopefully leading to a better atmosphere.

 

Hopefully it will attract people to visit our lovely city with other sporting and music events which is great for the City.

 

Finally it would hopefully give us a couple of scoreboards for the VAR decisions for everyone to be able to view.

 

I’m not sure there’s a box they haven’t ticked with those plans in that report. That encompasses everyone’s views.

 

So I’ll repeat I’m glad the club has seen sense and I hope the fans do to.

 

I’ll also repeat it’s not the option I would’ve went for but overall I’m happy to accept it.

 

Not sure how it came across obnoxious? I certainly didn’t mean to 👍🏻

 

 

 

 

Edited yesterday at 14:17 by LFEE

[Wandy]

39 minutes ago, bobbydazzla said:

 

I was so utterly convinced by Tyneside Life on Youtube saying he'd spoken to the council and they were moving Leazers Terrace onto the tennis courts that I simply ignored any other stadium speculation from any other sources as it was clearly fake news

 

Only 3 months ago he was saying that anyone who believes there would be any kind of development on Leazes Park is "batshit crazy". He's pretty insufferable when it comes the the subject of stadium redevelopment/relocation.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited yesterday at 14:13 by Wandy

[NWMag]

Also, and this is probably extremely ignorant of me considering I know F all about construction, but it does shock me at how long these things take.

 

Ive seen videos from China of them throwing up buildings in 2 weeks etc. surely (if they wanted to) PIF could employ 4x the normal workload and get it done a lot quicker? 

[Interpolic]

5 minutes ago, LFEE said:

So I’ll repeat I’m glad the club has seen sense and I hope the fans do to.

 

I am of the opposing view and I'm not lacking any sense, cheers.

[MagCA]

I like the idea of doing a two year feasibility study and then Brad Miller saw this and just thought, “you know what… option C”

[LFEE]

Just now, Interpolic said:

 

I am of the opposing view and I'm not lacking any sense, cheers.

Tell me what you would like which you think is more sensible?

[J7]

2 minutes ago, Interpolic said:

 

I am of the opposing view and I'm not lacking any sense, cheers.

What are your reasons, then we can judge. 

[Interpolic]

4 minutes ago, J7 said:

What are your reasons, then we can judge. 

 

wtf?

[Sima]

Why would we imprint on the current ground if we don’t have to?

 

Seems like it would cause unnecessary disruption.

[TwoForJoy]

2 hours ago, The Butcher said:

 

A new stadium is going to take up far more of Leazes Park than they've intimated there. 20,000 more seats, yet it's the same size as the current SJP. I'd say the new build will be double the size of the one shown there. The concourses and bogs, not to mention bars and food outlets need to be able to cope with 70,000 people. It'll be huge.

 

 

Edited yesterday at 14:22 by TwoForJoy
spelling

[Interpolic]

I've said many times on here - I don't want to leave SJP, it's a proper football ground and I've yet to see a new build in this country that isn't completely naff in comparison.  I don't aspire to be Spurs. 

 

I accept progress may be a bit slower taking this route.  I do not accept that we actually need to do this to compete.  I do not accept we should make a forever decision based on PSR rules which may end up being relatively short-lived.