St James' Park

[TheBrownBottle]

Just now, Dokko said:

 

One has uses and the other is an actual tourist attraction. These buildings just exist. 

 

But glad they mean more to people than SJP. 

 

 

The historic Georgian sandstone buildings of Newcastle?  Yes, they mean more to me than the concrete and steel stands hoyed up by Hall and Shepherd.  I’m emotionally attached to my city and club - not to a recently built football stadium.  The city lost huge parts of the old Grainger town in the 1960s in an act of cultural vandalism - we should be very careful about allowing it again, and it needs to be for a better reason than ‘I can’t bear the notion of watching football a couple of hundred yards further down the road’

 

Sentiment, if anything, is attached to the building, not the land on which it sits.  England itself has proof of this - plenty of football fans get misty eyed about the old Wembley, but I doubt many do about the new one.  It’s on the same site, but there’s no emotional attachment to it.  

[TheBrownBottle]

2 minutes ago, Yorkie said:

 

I mean, it is a bit. Which of the tangible aspects make a meaningful contribution to the intangible notion of 'the club,' in your view, if not SJP? Would you be arsed if we got rid of the badge? The stripes?

We had a different badge when I was a kid - again, it’s younger than the average ST holder.  I wouldn’t get emotive over that either.  I wouldn’t want to see the kit changed, though.  

 

The ground isn’t the club - the club represents the city, not the ground. 

[El Prontonise]

The last thing the city centre needs is more glass and steel, it's already gone quite tatty imo in places.

[ponsaelius]

The straw man of moving to somewhere like Benton is not even worth mentioning imo. Neither the owners nor fans would ever want it. Any move would be within the vicinity of the city centre.

[Dokko]

3 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

The historic Georgian sandstone buildings of Newcastle?  Yes, they mean more to me than the concrete and steel stands hoyed up by Hall and Shepherd.  I’m emotionally attached to my city and club - not to a recently built football stadium.  The city lost huge parts of the old Grainger town in the 1960s in an act of cultural vandalism - we should be very careful about allowing it again, and it needs to be for a better reason than ‘I can’t bear the notion of watching football a couple of hundred yards further down the road’

 

Sentiment, if anything, is attached to the building, not the land on which it sits.  England itself has proof of this - plenty of football fans get misty eyed about the old Wembley, but I doubt many do about the new one.  It’s on the same site, but there’s no emotional attachment to it.  

 

The past shouldn't stand in the way of the future, but it can be part of it. Make them part of the new design and give them a new purpose, as at the minute they do nothing but stop a city from growing. Shame if that's what they were known as for future generations. 

[Yorkie]

8 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

We had a different badge when I was a kid - again, it’s younger than the average ST holder.  I wouldn’t get emotive over that either.  I wouldn’t want to see the kit changed, though.  

 

The ground isn’t the club - the club represents the city, not the ground. 

 

I'd agree that the badge has less significance than the ground or the kit. But obviously you agree that some of the tangible things actually are 'the club' at least to some extent; the ground just isn't one of those things as far as you're concerned. But to some people, it is. Hopefully that helps to reduce some of your bafflement. ?

[TheBrownBottle]

4 minutes ago, Dokko said:

 

The past shouldn't stand in the way of the future, but it can be part of it. Make them part of the new design and give them a new purpose, as at the minute they do nothing but stop a city from growing. Shame if that's what they were known as for future generations. 

T Dan Smith was imprisoned for his crimes before I was born, but his name lives on in complete infamy.  It inspired one of the best knows dramas set in Newcastle.
 

No-one is stopping progress by doing it; no-one is stopping a city growing; you’re simply advocating cultural vandalism because you’re not keen on your football club playing in a slightly different spot. 

[TheBrownBottle]

4 minutes ago, Yorkie said:

 

I'd agree that the badge has less significance than the ground or the kit. But obviously you agree that some of the tangible things actually are 'the club' at least to some extent; the ground just isn't one of those things as far as you're concerned. But to some people, it is. Hopefully that helps to reduce some of your bafflement. ?

Yeah, that’s fair enough.  And I can only speak for me, of course  - though I do think that should we leave, people would likely get over the emotional hump quickly. 
 

Some people also do react like this re the badge, mind you - despite the fact that since the PL breakaway Arsenal, Aston Villa, Chelsea, Everton, Liverpool, Man City, Leeds, Spurs, Sheff Wed, Sunderland, and other big (or historically big) clubs have also changed their badges - sometimes more than once - with little or no fuss.  

 

 

Edited December 5, 2023 by TheBrownBottle

[Kid Icarus]

And nigh on every fanbase that has moved stadium prefers their old ground...

[Hovagod]

14 minutes ago, ponsaelius said:

The straw man of moving to somewhere like Benton is not even worth mentioning imo. Neither the owners nor fans would ever want it. Any move would be within the vicinity of the city centre.

Why are people so confident the owners are with the fans on this one? They have spoken about SJP, true, but they have never referenced its location specifically have they? Seems like if they’re going back on their initial comments on the ground itself then any location would be potentially worth considering from their point of view

[TheBrownBottle]

Just now, Kid Icarus said:

And nigh on every fanbase that has moved stadium prefers their old ground...

Haven’t seen polls to confirm this, but perhaps.  But my dad’s generation gets sentimental about piss-in-your pockets, crumbling stands and the infested with casual violence of SJP of the 60s and 70s.  I’m pretty sure a lot of it is nostalgia for their own past. 

[Dokko]

3 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

T Dan Smith was imprisoned for his crimes before I was born, but his name lives on in complete infamy.  It inspired one of the best knows dramas set in Newcastle.
 

No-one is stopping progress by doing it; no-one is stopping a city growing; you’re simply advocating cultural vandalism because you’re not keen on your football club playing in a slightly different spot. 

 

Cultural vandalism  ???

 

SJP is more important to me than a building I've never set foot in, and probably never will. It doesn't matter what it looks like, it's about what it means and what it can mean to generations to come. They build on its culture and it becomes something greater. Leazes terrace will never mean as much as that to as many for as long as it stands. It could be part of it though.  

[J7]

4 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

And nigh on every fanbase that has moved stadium prefers their old ground...

I’m sure the Mackems preferred Roker Park, but it would be ludicrous to still be playing in that dump.
 

I prefer standing on a terrace, but it’s 2023.

[TheBrownBottle]

3 minutes ago, Hovagod said:

Why are people so confident the owners are with the fans on this one? They have spoken about SJP, true, but they have never referenced its location specifically have they? Seems like if they’re going back on their initial comments on the ground itself then any location would be potentially worth considering from their point of view

You can’t be confident at all - there is nothing re the KSA govt or PIF that suggests that sentiment plays any role in their thinking.  Again, I make reference to the area surrounding the Kaaba, which makes Las Vegas look classy

[Kid Icarus]

1 minute ago, TheBrownBottle said:

Haven’t seen polls to confirm this, but perhaps.  But my dad’s generation gets sentimental about piss-in-your pockets, crumbling stands and the infested with casual violence of SJP of the 60s and 70s.  I’m pretty sure a lot of it is nostalgia for their own past. 

That might be true but you don't need to go that far back or ask just that generation. 

 

SJP is Trigger's broom to me basically, I don't mind too much about how many parts are changed so long as it stays there.

[TheBrownBottle]

Just now, Kid Icarus said:

That might be true but you don't need to go that far back or ask just that generation. 

 

SJP is Trigger's broom to me basically, I don't mind too much about how many parts are changed so long as it stays there.

Haha yep was just thinking about the ‘Ship of Theseus’ (Trigger’s Broom) a few moments ago - I think we can see where NO members sit on whether it’s the same ship / broom or not.  You can probably tell from me that it’s a different ship / broom.   

[Dokko]

I'd rather nowt changes than move it. Thats what might have to happen. Seems more likely, maybe a modest 5k increase with some creative thinking. Just means we won't compete with the very best or, you'll be charged £100 a game. Can't have it all ways I suppose.

[TheBrownBottle]

3 minutes ago, Dokko said:

 

Cultural vandalism  ???

 

SJP is more important to me than a building I've never set foot in, and probably never will. It doesn't matter what it looks like, it's about what it means and what it can mean to generations to come. They build on its culture and it becomes something greater. Leazes terrace will never mean as much as that to as many for as long as it stands. It could be part of it though.  

Leazes Terrace had been there for decades when the first match kicked off at SJP.  And it is cultural vandalism to tear down listed buildings.

 

You’re also assuming that every Geordie feels the same re SJP, and of those every NUFC supporter feels the same sentiment re SJP.  They don’t. 

[Dokko]

1 minute ago, TheBrownBottle said:

Leazes Terrace had been there for decades when the first match kicked off at SJP.  And it is cultural vandalism to tear down listed buildings.

 

You’re also assuming that every Geordie feels the same re SJP, and of those every NUFC supporter feels the same sentiment re SJP.  They don’t. 

 

Aye, the majority of nufc fans care more for LT than SJP. 

[TheBrownBottle]

Just now, Dokko said:

 

Aye, the majority of nufc fans care more for LT than SJP. 

Honestly, you might be shocked if people were given the choice.

 

Newcastle’s character and beauty is based around the sandstone architecture.   It’s why it looks so much better than, say, Sunderland.  Get rid of that and replace it with red facing brick, glass, steel and concrete and you’re Anywheresville, UK. 

[et tu brute]

12 minutes ago, Dokko said:

I'd rather nowt changes than move it. Thats what might have to happen. Seems more likely, maybe a modest 5k increase with some creative thinking. Just means we won't compete with the very best or, you'll be charged £100 a game. Can't have it all ways I suppose.

I can tell you now that with Saudi owners there is no chance that they will accept that. Our Chairman's very words only a few months ago was that we want to be the number one team in the world.
 

They will explore all the options, but the limitations of expansion at St James and the costs involved for a relatively smallish expansion of the stadium, will result imo, in the owners going for a new stadium. Any expansion will also result in thousands of fans losing their season tickets for a minimum of a season. You can't knock the ground down and rebuild, as again costs involved and catering for 52,000 support is just not good business sense. 
 

I'm with TheBrownBottle on this and been a season ticket from the early 70s until Rafas last year. To me the most important things about the club are number 1 the team and secondly the support. When 000s of fans past and present can't get into the ground, then something has to change. A new ground will also result in the team being given the best opportunity to be challenging on all levels. You and some others may disagree and that's fine also. At the end of the day though it's not what you, me or others want, it's the owners who will decide. 

[Dokko]

4 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

Honestly, you might be shocked if people were given the choice.

 

Newcastle’s character and beauty is based around the sandstone architecture.   It’s why it looks so much better than, say, Sunderland.  Get rid of that and replace it with red facing brick, glass, steel and concrete and you’re Anywheresville, UK. 

 

This is why I'm keen to explore it being part of its future. I personally don't overaly care what the ground looks like. Football stadiums aren't the prettiest and if you're against glass and steel, then you pretty much hate them. I'd like to see something like villa park with the buildings being part of the foundations of a stand, and allow a whole new world of people know of them and their influence. You can't get away from a grounds roof, but say one side of it is represented by LT, listed aside, wouldn't that be something to live in keeping with the city. 

 

It'll not happen, I know, too many hurdles, but maybe someone with a better grasp on what can be done could propose something which protected the future of both sites.

 

[Woolly]

36 minutes ago, TheBrownBottle said:

Haven’t seen polls to confirm this, but perhaps.  But my dad’s generation gets sentimental about piss-in-your pockets, crumbling stands and the infested with casual violence of SJP of the 60s and 70s.  I’m pretty sure a lot of it is nostalgia for their own past. 

 

Some truth in this. I'm in my 60's and, though I acknowledge the improvements made for fans over the decades, I do miss the rawness of what I experienced in my youth.

 

Mind you, I remember my dad saying much the same many years ago !

 

I don't get to as many games at SJP as I used to though, which is probably par for the course as you get older.

[Dokko]

2 minutes ago, et tu brute said:

I can tell you now that with Saudi owners there is no chance that they will accept that. Our Chairman's very words only a few months ago was that we want to be the number one team in the world.
 

They will explore all the options, but the limitations of expansion at St James and the costs involved for a relatively smallish expansion of the stadium, will result imo, in the owners going for a new stadium. Any expansion will also result in thousands of fans losing their season tickets for a minimum of a season. You can't knock the ground down and rebuild, as again costs involved and catering for 52,000 support is just not good business sense. 
 

I'm with TheBrownBottle on this and been a season ticket from the early 70s until Rafas last year. To me the most important things about the club are number 1 the team and secondly the support. When 000s of fans past and present can't get into the ground, then something has to change. A new ground will also result in the team being given the best opportunity to be challenging on all levels. You and some others may disagree and that's fine also. At the end of the day though it's not what you, me or others want, it's the owners who will decide. 

 

Agree with what you're saying, but if they weren't arsed what we think then why ask?

[et tu brute]

11 minutes ago, Dokko said:

 

Agree with what you're saying, but if they weren't arsed what we think then why ask?

Personally think it's a tick box exercise as if they just went ahead without any consultation, then they would not only be hammered by the support, but the media also. I do also believe that they would have been looking at the St James expansion possibilities also. 

 

 

Edited December 5, 2023 by et tu brute