Man Utd Looking To Expand Old Trafford To 88000

[The Artful Dodger]

21 hours ago, LFCMadLad said:

They are increasing by about 12000 seats. We increased by about 12000 seats 

Liverpool should be increasing by 20k, they've increased by a pitiful amount really.

A step behind as always, I've got no care for Liverpool FC as a club but it's a shame for the city as we should have the ability to host big football events in the city. Liverpool could and should be aiming to fill a 70k stadium.

[Guest]

7 hours ago, HoneyNUFC said:

The Victorians created football clubs as representative of the local community. Not a single club has a catchment area of 70,000 weekly fans in this country.

It is different in many European countries where they simply don't have the number of strong local clubs like in England and Scotland.

Anyone who can top 70k weekly here is built on gloryhunting fraud and the destruction of the Victorian values of the game.

Like how Man Utd have coach travel to their home games from every town and city in Yorkshire, Lancashire and the East Midlands. Even from places like Hull where it is obvious that it isn't mancunians who moved to Hull for jobs and are coming back.

Arsenal are another club walking the line of being a completely fraudulent fan base. They are definitely over their limit. However they are partly inflated by middle class European migrants in London who move to Clapham and think the local club is Arsenal.

Who cares what the Victorians made football clubs for. A lot of support for big clubs comes from areas that don't have league football teams. Most so called glory hunters support clubs from a young age. Nothing wrong with that.

[Redcanuck]

7 hours ago, HoneyNUFC said:

It's not over if we introduce a 100% tax on all revenue over £200m 

Why would we punish people for being successful,  and bring everyone down to a level of mediocracy? 

[LFCMadLad]

5 hours ago, The Artful Dodger said:

Liverpool should be increasing by 20k, they've increased by a pitiful amount really.

A step behind as always, I've got no care for Liverpool FC as a club but it's a shame for the city as we should have the ability to host big football events in the city. Liverpool could and should be aiming to fill a 70k stadium.

Anfield is being expanded in phases, it’s how it’s got to be due to the residential area it’s situated in (slap bang in the middle of housing estates), new rail links, transporting and parking issues etc etc. It was literally impossible to expand to near 70k in one go.

We have planning permission already for the other phases but it will be a slow process. It took years just to get the Main Stand expanded. I can’t be arsed to go into the ins and outs as it’s been done to death, but if you are so interested then a quick google should give you all the info you need. 

United never had such problems when expanding, they never have, due to Old Trafford having acres of spare land surrounding it. 

[HK85]

6 minutes ago, LFCMadLad said:

Anfield is being expanded in phases, it’s how it’s got to be due to the residential area it’s situated in etc etc. We have planning permission already for the other phases but it will be a slow process. I can’t be arsed to go into the ins and outs as it’s been done to death, but if you are so interested then a quick google should give you all the info you need. 

United never had such problems when expanding, they never have, due to Old Trafford having acres of spare land surrounding it. 

Are they going to threaten any more residents to kick them out of their homes and low balling them, only to leave houses empty and derelict thus causing a decline in the Anfield area, again?

[LFCMadLad]

3 minutes ago, HK85 said:

Are they going to threaten any more residents to kick them out of their homes and low balling them, only to leave houses empty and derelict thus causing a decline in the Anfield area, again?

Not sure mate? 

I’m just trying to rebut Dodgers crazy claim that we should have done this and should have done that when he clearly knows nothing about it. 

[RandoEFC+]

You guys can have Goodison after we move to the docks. Stack some of the safer bits on the Anfield roof, probably do you another few hundred seats and it keeps with the tradition of Liverpool taking hand me downs from Everton .

[LFCMadLad]

3 minutes ago, RandoEFC said:

You guys can have Goodison after we move to the docks. Stack some of the safer bits on the Anfield roof, probably do you another few hundred seats and it keeps with the tradition of Liverpool taking hand me downs from Everton .

You lot belong in the docks 

[LFCMike]

8 hours ago, LFCMadLad said:

Anfield is being expanded in phases, it’s how it’s got to be due to the residential area it’s situated in (slap bang in the middle of housing estates), new rail links, transporting and parking issues etc etc. It was literally impossible to expand to near 70k in one go.

We have planning permission already for the other phases but it will be a slow process. It took years just to get the Main Stand expanded. I can’t be arsed to go into the ins and outs as it’s been done to death, but if you are so interested then a quick google should give you all the info you need. 

United never had such problems when expanding, they never have, due to Old Trafford having acres of spare land surrounding it. 

It's not just about the current owners though. This goes back a lot longer. The previous two ownerships fucked the stadium situation up too. Liverpool should have been in a 60,000 capacity stadium with room for expansion about 15 years ago (just not the Parry bowl that looked like Bolton's stadium)

[LFCMadLad]

30 minutes ago, LFCMike said:

It's not just about the current owners though. This goes back a lot longer. The previous two ownerships fucked the stadium situation up too. Liverpool should have been in a 60,000 capacity stadium with room for expansion about 15 years ago (just not the Parry bowl that looked like Bolton's stadium)

To be fair Hicks & Gillette fucked up more than just the Stadium plans, they almost ruined us. Their only intention was to take as much money out of the club as they possibly could and nothing more. Under them, expanding Anfield/building a new stadium was the least of our worries. It was literally about surviving as a club. 

 

[LFCMike]

1 minute ago, LFCMadLad said:

To be fair Hicks & Gillette fucked up more than just the Stadium plans, they almost ruined us. Their only intention was to take as much money out of the club as they possibly could and nothing more. Under them, expanding Anfield/building a new stadium was the least of our worries. It was literally about surviving as a club. 

 

Of course, but if we're talking about just the stadium, it's one of the main reasons Moores sold the club (as well as give us more financial muscle in the transfer market). They took over at a time when a record TV deal had just been agreed and barely spent anything after that first summer. Going back to the stadium, they revealed these ambitious plans, which looked decent but were completely unrealistic and promised a spade in the ground within 80 days or something. At the end of their ownership of course it was the least of our worries but go back to February 2007 and it was pretty much the main reason they were brought it.

[LFCMadLad]

23 minutes ago, LFCMike said:

Of course, but if we're talking about just the stadium, it's one of the main reasons Moores sold the club (as well as give us more financial muscle in the transfer market). They took over at a time when a record TV deal had just been agreed and barely spent anything after that first summer. Going back to the stadium, they revealed these ambitious plans, which looked decent but were completely unrealistic and promised a spade in the ground within 80 days or something. At the end of their ownership of course it was the least of our worries but go back to February 2007 and it was pretty much the main reason they were brought it.

This very point was thrashed out in court when FSG took over. It was all a front by H&G to help their purchase go through. They never intended to build a new stadium, their only intention was to milk the club dry and it set us back years. 

[LFCMike]

11 minutes ago, LFCMadLad said:

This very point was thrashed out in court when FSG took over. It was all a front by H&G to help their purchase go through. They never intended to build a new stadium, their only intention was to milk the club dry and it set us back years. 

Well of course we know that now. But back in 2007, we all bought into it until Benitez started to out them.

[LFCMadLad]

28 minutes ago, LFCMike said:

Well of course we know that now. But back in 2007, we all bought into it until Benitez started to out them.

The blokes a legend. If not for him ‘outing them’ it could have been even worse! Basically sacrificed his job to expose them bastards.... I’d have him back tomorrow....,

 

RAFA BENITEZ....RAAAAFA BENITEZ.....RAAAAFA BENITEZ..... RAAAAAAFA BENITEZ......

[Honey Honey]

17 hours ago, Gunnersauraus said:

Who cares what the Victorians made football clubs for. A lot of support for big clubs comes from areas that don't have league football teams. Most so called glory hunters support clubs from a young age. Nothing wrong with that.

Very few people live further than 20 miles from a professional club.

Arsenal are surely the epitome of what is wrong with it. A once working class club now doesnt have a single working class person left in the stadium. A history of destroying and appropriating the local communities culture, but that is just London in general.

If you live 50, 100, 150, 200 miles away from a club you support with no local connection, you just saw them on the tele when you were 5 years old and liked the colour of their kit, then you decide you will go to games, you can only do so if you earn a middle class salary first of all due to expensive travel. As more and more people with good salaries get drawn in to the stadium the clubs put the prices up and up and up. Chasing more money to get better players, better league positions, more prime tv time, more indoctrination of children 150 miles away, feeding the cycle perptually until eventually the club is unrecognisable in the community itself and is no longer representitive of it, it becomes representative of some fashionista badge wearer strutting around Chesterfield or wherever, chin held high, look at me I support Arsenal because I can watch them on Sky. Thats all about me me me.

Football, in the Victorian sense, isn't about individualism. It's not showing off your choice to support Man Utd whilst living in a Welsh mining village. Football, in the Victorian sense, is about shared experiences, it's about bringing the community together, it's about the generations handing down their collective memory to the next generation.

Some people still find that valuable and not something to just be palmed off because Sky made it easy to indoctrinate a child in Rochdale into the individualist fashion world.

 

17 hours ago, Redcanuck said:

Why would we punish people for being successful,  and bring everyone down to a level of mediocracy? 

Because it's a community sport, the level of football on offer really doesn't matter to the emotional experience, never has, never will. When the money chasers fuck off the real fans will still be there.

[SirBalon]

18 minutes ago, HoneyNUFC said:

Very few people live further than 20 miles from a professional club.

Arsenal are surely the epitome of what is wrong with it. A once working class club now doesnt have a single working class person left in the stadium. A history of destroying and appropriating the local communities culture, but that is just London in general.

If you live 50, 100, 150, 200 miles away from a club you support with no local connection, you just saw them on the tele when you were 5 years old and liked the colour of their kit, then you decide you will go to games, you can only do so if you earn a middle class salary first of all due to expensive travel. As more and more people with good salaries get drawn in to the stadium the clubs put the prices up and up and up. Chasing more money to get better players, better league positions, more prime tv time, more indoctrination of children 150 miles away, feeding the cycle perptually until eventually the club is unrecognisable in the community itself and is no longer representitive of it, it becomes representative of some fashionista badge wearer strutting around Chesterfield or wherever, chin held high, look at me I support Arsenal because I can watch them on Sky. Thats all about me me me.

Football, in the Victorian sense, isn't about individualism. It's not showing off your choice to support Man Utd whilst living in a Welsh mining village. Football, in the Victorian sense, is about shared experiences, it's about bringing the community together, it's about the generations handing down their collective memory to the next generation.

Some people still find that valuable and not something to just be palmed off because Sky made it easy to indoctrinate a child in Rochdale into the individualist fashion world.

BRILLIANT!

Excellently put and how many posts have I written of spoken about this in a pub with friends that love football.  Sometimes I read myself back or even find that I'm listening to myself these days on how repetitive I am and how boring it must be with me every now and then when I come out with this sort of thing.

How many times have I put the words ASSOCIATION CLUB FOOTBALL at the forefront of my arguments and what it actually all means.  I am not asking for a rule, a law or a forced issue onto who should follow or support who.  No!  I know we all live in a global community these days and that internet has made that even more so.  I can accept the fact that football is universal and that the whole planet can watch any given game in any given country at any given time via their screens be they tv, computer or smartphone.  But it's about the loss of identity and fundamentally the loss of a belief in local ideals.

It's sad, but it ain't coming back!

[Honey Honey]

50 minutes ago, SirBalon said:

BRILLIANT!

Excellently put and how many posts have I written of spoken about this in a pub with friends that love football.  Sometimes I read myself back or even find that I'm listening to myself these days on how repetitive I am and how boring it must be with me every now and then when I come out with this sort of thing.

How many times have I put the words ASSOCIATION CLUB FOOTBALL at the forefront of my arguments and what it actually all means.  I am not asking for a rule, a law or a forced issue onto who should follow or support who.  No!  I know we all live in a global community these days and that internet has made that even more so.  I can accept the fact that football is universal and that the whole planet can watch any given game in any given country at any given time via their screens be they tv, computer or smartphone.  But it's about the loss of identity and fundamentally the loss of a belief in local ideals.

It's sad, but it ain't coming back!

It's not coming back no, it's not even possible anymore, what is done is done.

I would say the number one priority to address now is how emotionless the fans winning trophies are becoming. They are not making any history in the community, there are no memories to pass down in local folklore. They are primarily just collecting bragging rights, which is a symptom of the me me me badge wearing cultural infestation. It may be the result of ticket prices replacing a large number of fans who know how to have a good time with fans who would prefer to have a flat white coffee.

I cannot think of any solution except to weaken the hegemony of these clubs so that their teams go up and down the ladder more severely, which will not only restore the excitement of victory but would give other teams the chance to not be stuck in tedium beneath them.

Hence a rule that would break the financial monopoly and return competition to the league. But if Newcastle get bought out by immoral rich Arabs I am dropping everything I have ever said about them and this and will be sticking my fingers up at everyone as we pass them in the league table 

[LFCMike]

3 hours ago, LFCMadLad said:

The blokes a legend. If not for him ‘outing them’ it could have been even worse! Basically sacrificed his job to expose them bastards.... I’d have him back tomorrow....,

 

RAFA BENITEZ....RAAAAFA BENITEZ.....RAAAAFA BENITEZ..... RAAAAAAFA BENITEZ......

Just a shame that 90% of our fanbase weren't arsed until it was nearly too late. That whole period was grim looking back. 

[LFCMadLad]

19 minutes ago, LFCMike said:

Just a shame that 90% of our fanbase weren't arsed until it was nearly too late. That whole period was grim looking back. 

Agreed 👍🏻

[Redcanuck]

5 hours ago, HoneyNUFC said:

Very few people live further than 20 miles from a professional club.

Arsenal are surely the epitome of what is wrong with it. A once working class club now doesnt have a single working class person left in the stadium. A history of destroying and appropriating the local communities culture, but that is just London in general.

If you live 50, 100, 150, 200 miles away from a club you support with no local connection, you just saw them on the tele when you were 5 years old and liked the colour of their kit, then you decide you will go to games, you can only do so if you earn a middle class salary first of all due to expensive travel. As more and more people with good salaries get drawn in to the stadium the clubs put the prices up and up and up. Chasing more money to get better players, better league positions, more prime tv time, more indoctrination of children 150 miles away, feeding the cycle perptually until eventually the club is unrecognisable in the community itself and is no longer representitive of it, it becomes representative of some fashionista badge wearer strutting around Chesterfield or wherever, chin held high, look at me I support Arsenal because I can watch them on Sky. Thats all about me me me.

Football, in the Victorian sense, isn't about individualism. It's not showing off your choice to support Man Utd whilst living in a Welsh mining village. Football, in the Victorian sense, is about shared experiences, it's about bringing the community together, it's about the generations handing down their collective memory to the next generation.

Some people still find that valuable and not something to just be palmed off because Sky made it easy to indoctrinate a child in Rochdale into the individualist fashion world.

 

Because it's a community sport, the level of football on offer really doesn't matter to the emotional experience, never has, never will. When the money chasers fuck off the real fans will still be there.

I sympathize with your thinking but you are living in the past.  The money in football is going nowhere, at least in my life time.  The level of football may not matter to the emotional experience  especially if you have enough pints in you,  but it effects the entertainment level and overall enjoyment.

I understand the community spirit you are talking about, I was born in the 50's and grew up in England in the 60's and attended matches on a regular basis.  However, that community spirit is dead and burried in the UK, just as it is in North America and it is not comming back.  The rise of the wealthy super clubs in England may have helped to destroy the community spirit you thrive for, but the quality of the football played by the top teams in England is a lot better than it was when I was a kid. 

[Spike]

It's a shame for the purity of the sport that Honey's 'Victorian' model was also corrupted by many as another forum to express religious and political agendas. I can understand certain circumstances, such as Barcelona being a beacon of 'Catalaness' and resistance in the face of an oppressive regime but I always struggled to sympathise with the Old Firm's Catholic v Anglican rivalry, which was simply put was just an extrapolation of ancient Elizabethan religious dogmatism. 

[Dave]

13 hours ago, HoneyNUFC said:

Very few people live further than 20 miles from a professional club.

Arsenal are surely the epitome of what is wrong with it. A once working class club now doesnt have a single working class person left in the stadium. A history of destroying and appropriating the local communities culture, but that is just London in general.

If you live 50, 100, 150, 200 miles away from a club you support with no local connection, you just saw them on the tele when you were 5 years old and liked the colour of their kit, then you decide you will go to games, you can only do so if you earn a middle class salary first of all due to expensive travel. As more and more people with good salaries get drawn in to the stadium the clubs put the prices up and up and up. Chasing more money to get better players, better league positions, more prime tv time, more indoctrination of children 150 miles away, feeding the cycle perptually until eventually the club is unrecognisable in the community itself and is no longer representitive of it, it becomes representative of some fashionista badge wearer strutting around Chesterfield or wherever, chin held high, look at me I support Arsenal because I can watch them on Sky. Thats all about me me me.

Football, in the Victorian sense, isn't about individualism. It's not showing off your choice to support Man Utd whilst living in a Welsh mining village. Football, in the Victorian sense, is about shared experiences, it's about bringing the community together, it's about the generations handing down their collective memory to the next generation.

Some people still find that valuable and not something to just be palmed off because Sky made it easy to indoctrinate a child in Rochdale into the individualist fashion world.

That perfectly sums up life for all young people. However, and im aware times have changed, growing up in the late nineties we weren't indoctrinated by Sky as heavy as we are now but we were indoctrinated by live tv, sticker books, football focus etc. Growing up in Chessington, on the outskirts of London my year group was roughly 50% United as they won everything, 20% Chelsea as they were the local big team with Vialli and Zola, 10% Liverpool because of there history, 10% Arsenal because Wenger arrived and a couple of Dads supported them and then there was 10% that went with there dads to watch Wimbledon, QPR, Fulham and Palace. Now of that year group 15 years later that last 10% is now 80% with the last 20% being  Chelsea fans that do go to games when they can. People as they get older see through this progressive shove down your throat sky bullshit. 

I understand not everyone is fortunate enough to live in London. I have the luxury of being a 15 minute bus ride away from AFC Wimbledon or Sutton United, and Crawley Town is hardly a ballache to get to by Uber (for now). But once youngsters get that taste for a match day atmosphere they'll crave more. We've seen a pretty significant spike in non league attendances on the last five years and I imagine that trend will continue. This country may be geared towards global domination but I don't necessarily think the lower league teams are 'missing out'.

[Dan+]

I was always in a minority at Primary School, nearly all Man Utd 'fans' but they soon grew out of it. I think my loyalty comes from a mix of two things - my parents ingraining it from an age where I couldn't stop it and my instinctive attitude to fuck 'the flow'.

People who choose to support a top club based on what they see on the TV have no idea what they're missing.

[Honey Honey]

23 hours ago, Redcanuck said:

I sympathize with your thinking but you are living in the past.  The money in football is going nowhere, at least in my life time.  The level of football may not matter to the emotional experience  especially if you have enough pints in you,  but it effects the entertainment level and overall enjoyment.

I understand the community spirit you are talking about, I was born in the 50's and grew up in England in the 60's and attended matches on a regular basis.  However, that community spirit is dead and burried in the UK, just as it is in North America and it is not comming back.  The rise of the wealthy super clubs in England may have helped to destroy the community spirit you thrive for, but the quality of the football played by the top teams in England is a lot better than it was when I was a kid. 

I'm not expecting the game to go back in time, but at the minute the modern game is driven by national and international viewership ahead of the local community, I would flip that. There are a lot of things that can be done, but it can only start by making TV viewings secondary to the Victorian purpose of football and not the other way around. What has happened across the Premier League has been a race to accumulate fans who aren't local at the expense and mutation of the one's who are. I say mutation because the reality is those who go to games now are middle income earners, particularly people over the age of 50 who are wealthy enough to pay, creating social exclusion in the community of those who are not. Any local area is made up of a variety of income levels and classes, football should be open to all as it once was, not turned into an aspiration.

Newcastle fans off the scale love affair with Rafa Benitez is the equivalent of a mid-life crisis and it is in no small part caused by the monopoly on winning a small group of excessively wealthy clubs have. It has eroded hope for the rest of us, hence why our managers reputation from success at other clubs has become our identity and celebration, something to cling to, something to believe that we can be better. Like a bloke having a mid life crisis who gets a convertible, you can drive around all you like, you'll never get back the opportunities that have gone.

Little things like this are a symptom of a problem in the game but are never seen as such. Shit atmosphere's and eating sandwiches at games is about as far as we've collectively gone at symptom spotting.

Smashing the hegemony of the top clubs would sharp have the biggest impact.

[Guest]

On 06/10/2017 at 11:42 AM, HoneyNUFC said:

Very few people live further than 20 miles from a professional club.

Arsenal are surely the epitome of what is wrong with it. A once working class club now doesnt have a single working class person left in the stadium. A history of destroying and appropriating the local communities culture, but that is just London in general.

If you live 50, 100, 150, 200 miles away from a club you support with no local connection, you just saw them on the tele when you were 5 years old and liked the colour of their kit, then you decide you will go to games, you can only do so if you earn a middle class salary first of all due to expensive travel. As more and more people with good salaries get drawn in to the stadium the clubs put the prices up and up and up. Chasing more money to get better players, better league positions, more prime tv time, more indoctrination of children 150 miles away, feeding the cycle perptually until eventually the club is unrecognisable in the community itself and is no longer representitive of it, it becomes representative of some fashionista badge wearer strutting around Chesterfield or wherever, chin held high, look at me I support Arsenal because I can watch them on Sky. Thats all about me me me.

Football, in the Victorian sense, isn't about individualism. It's not showing off your choice to support Man Utd whilst living in a Welsh mining village. Football, in the Victorian sense, is about shared experiences, it's about bringing the community together, it's about the generations handing down their collective memory to the next generation.

Some people still find that valuable and not something to just be palmed off because Sky made it easy to indoctrinate a child in Rochdale into the individualist fashion world.

 

Because it's a community sport, the level of football on offer really doesn't matter to the emotional experience, never has, never will. When the money chasers fuck off the real fans will still be there.

What if you come from a city like Bath? You're not gonna supoort Bristol city are you? Like I said a lot of people who support big clubs support them from a young age. A lot of them still support local clubs as well.  No one have ever made a law saying you have to support a local club it is up to an individual and not really anyone elses business