Jump to content

New Grounds.


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Mr Plow said:

I’d hardly say any of the stands at Headingley are basic. There’s great corporate facilities in the Carnegie stand and there will also be in the North stand. I’m pretty sure a lot of lower league football clubs would love to have a ground like Headingley. As for the atmosphere the stands are closer to the pitch and the whole stadium is squeezed into a corner rather than Huddersfield which feels very open

They are very basic though. The SS doesn't even have separate access for seats and standing, the NS is a single tier of a dozen or so rows. The Carnegie's overhang is the only interesting bit. In fact, the Carnegie isn't basic, not in the same way the SS and NS are

I'm a Leeds fan, so I'm not "jealous", just honest and objective. The cost per seat for example came in very very low compared with modern builds, and that's with some decent corporate stuff

Even as a 3 sider some small town FL clubs would see it as an upgrade, but if they had a choice of all the similar sized stadiums they would probably look elsewhere. There are a lot of similar basic grounds all over the place

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


My issuebwith Headingky has always been the lack of comfort and modern facilities, they have now fixed that on three sides. It looks great.

I have no issues with an open end either, although the facilities are not up to the standard of the rest of the ground.

My one gripe is the low capacity.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

My issuebwith Headingky has always been the lack of comfort and modern facilities, they have now fixed that on three sides. It looks great.

I have no issues with an open end either, although the facilities are not up to the standard of the rest of the ground.

My one gripe is the low capacity.

Mine too that's why I haven't given up hope for a proper rebuild of the open end and not just roof it over .A proper stand and bring the capacity up to 25K 

  • Like 1

 Soon we will be dancing the fandango
FROM 2004,TO DO WHAT THIS CLUB HAS DONE,IF THATS NOT GREATNESSTHEN i DONT KNOW WHAT IS.

JAMIE PEACOCK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gorbals said:

They are very basic though. The SS doesn't even have separate access for seats and standing, the NS is a single tier of a dozen or so rows. The Carnegie's overhang is the only interesting bit. In fact, the Carnegie isn't basic, not in the same way the SS and NS are

I'm a Leeds fan, so I'm not "jealous", just honest and objective. The cost per seat for example came in very very low compared with modern builds, and that's with some decent corporate stuff

Even as a 3 sider some small town FL clubs would see it as an upgrade, but if they had a choice of all the similar sized stadiums they would probably look elsewhere. There are a lot of similar basic grounds all over the place

 

Yeah I kind of see where your coming from. I mean for a ‘new’ stadium it’s still unique it’s not flat pack like Widnes or Leigh but no new grounds have the same character that Wilderspool, Knowsley Road or Central Park had.

im happy enough with it, I’d have preferred the South Stand to be just standing but I do like it. My only real complaint is they haven’t expanded the capacity to 25k but the club seem content averaging 15K a season, which is still great but why can’t they average 20k

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, fieldofclothofgold said:

Mine too that's why I haven't given up hope for a proper rebuild of the open end and not just roof it over .A proper stand and bring the capacity up to 25K  

A new stand at the western end won't add much if any capacity though. The current terrace holds 4,000 whilst the Carnegie at the other end holds 4,243. So matching it, which would be a big planning challenge, would barely take the total over 20,000.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Mr Plow said:

Yeah I kind of see where your coming from. I mean for a ‘new’ stadium it’s still unique it’s not flat pack like Widnes or Leigh but no new grounds have the same character that Wilderspool, Knowsley Road or Central Park had.

im happy enough with it, I’d have preferred the South Stand to be just standing but I do like it. My only real complaint is they haven’t expanded the capacity to 25k but the club seem content averaging 15K a season, which is still great but why can’t they average 20k

Yeah if the roads didn't force the southeast corner to taper away it would be less visually interesting. Pretty much a Millwall, or that 3 sided ground in Oxford

As a stadium nerd I've always thought Catalans have nice little ground, even if the corners are more open than somewhere like New Headingley

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Gorbals said:

Yeah if the roads didn't force the southeast corner to taper away it would be less visually interesting. Pretty much a Millwall, or that 3 sided ground in Oxford

As a stadium nerd I've always thought Catalans have nice little ground, even if the corners are more open than somewhere like New Headingley

Yeah I like the Gilbert Brutus. I’d like Leeds to do what they’ve done there with the corner. Could done the same between the Carnegie and SS

B0C7CBBC-617B-4DBC-8F71-85F3767D5A96.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the attractions of Headingley is it's size.15,000 there looks very good,whilst I think both Hulls and Wigans grounds at nearer 25,000 are too large.In my opion both would be better at around 20,000.It's only on rare occassions when capacity is reached and then usually with the help of ticket offers.There seems to be an obsession amongst rl fans to have a large ground,if only used to capacity once a season,whilst I would much prefer a slightly smaller ground,reachin capacity more regularly.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is brilliant that headingley is finally being brought up to 21 st century standard , however all this nonsense about having ' character ' compared to so called ' flat pack stadiums is rubbish

it is still a bit of a ' mash up ' of different stands , it will provide everything Leeds need , but still look a bit weird when compared to to any ' single design stadium , be that a football/ rugby share or primarily RL stadiums like Warrington,Saints,Widnes,leigh , even Salford

In fact it resembles a club RU stadium in many respects as that is what most of those look like

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, cookey said:

One of the attractions of Headingley is it's size.15,000 there looks very good,whilst I think both Hulls and Wigans grounds at nearer 25,000 are too large.In my opion both would be better at around 20,000.It's only on rare occassions when capacity is reached and then usually with the help of ticket offers.There seems to be an obsession amongst rl fans to have a large ground,if only used to capacity once a season,whilst I would much prefer a slightly smaller ground,reachin capacity more regularly.

 

I do take that on board, but I'd just like our biggest club to be pushing the limit a bit more, and it is pretty unusual to invest tens of millions in facility and get a reduction in capacity. 

Leeds can get 75% of their capacity regularly anyway, with greatly improved facilities surely there is a hope that this will grow. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I do take that on board, but I'd just like our biggest club to be pushing the limit a bit more, and it is pretty unusual to invest tens of millions in facility and get a reduction in capacity.

Leeds can get 75% of their capacity regularly anyway, with greatly improved facilities surely there is a hope that this will grow.

That is the actual point here , 75 % full Huddersfield is better than 75% full headingley , similiarily at Hull and the DW , headingley was a dump , but more full than anywhere else , therefore provided a better atmosphere , now its less of a dump , but still a collection of 3 modern stands , it will provide leeds with what they want , ie more corporate revenue

But I'd still prefer a 75% full LSV over it , as would any fan of any other club

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I do take that on board, but I'd just like our biggest club to be pushing the limit a bit more, and it is pretty unusual to invest tens of millions in facility and get a reduction in capacity. 

 Leeds can get 75% of their capacity regularly anyway, with greatly improved facilities surely there is a hope that this will grow. 

There's only so much that the club can reasonably expand whilst at Headingley and I think that the idea that Headingley could go to a 25-30k stadium is probably wishful thinking (to put it kindly) given the nature of the area today. 

Headingley is one of the most congested and densly populated parts of the city and it is part of the city that is subject to specific priorities / council policies around issues like alcohol licencing, housing and HMOs (the council is desperately trying to change Headingley's and Hyde Park's "student" image and make it a more family-friendly area). Planning applications in and around LS6 get much greater levels of scrutiny as a result.

For Leeds this development is very much about maximising revenue from the footprint that they have to work with - increasing the number of premium seats and corporate facilities, rather than going through a painful and expensive planning process in order to sell more £20 tickets.

I think the current capacity is broadly right - it's enough to meet general demand, enough to generate an element of 'FOMO' for bigger games and enough for the club to keep it's price-point high enough without damaging the matchday experience. I think Huddersfield shows that having a ground that's too big for demand is damaging to the matchday experience, and the club then relies on discounts and under-selling itself in order to compensate for that. 

Edited by whatmichaelsays
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, whatmichaelsays said:

There's only so much that the club can reasonably expand whilst at Headingley and I think that the idea that Headingley could go to a 25-30k stadium is probably wishful thinking given the nature of the area today. 

Headingley is one of the most congested and densly populated parts of the city and it is part of the city that is subject to specific priorities / council policies around issues like alcohol licencing, housing and HMOs (the council is desperately trying to change Headingley's and Hyde Park's "student" image and make it a more family-friendly area). Planning applications in and around LS6 get much greater levels of scrutiny as a result.

For Leeds this development is very much about maximising revenue from the footprint that they have to work with - increasing the number of premium seats and corporate facilities, rather than going through a painful and expensive planning process in order to sell more £20 tickets.

I think the current capacity is broadly right - it's enough to meet general demand, enough to generate an element of 'FOMO' for bigger games and enough for the club to keep it's price-point high enough without damaging the matchday experience. I think Huddersfield shows that having a ground that's too big for demand is damaging to the matchday experience, and the club then relies on discounts and under-selling itself in order to compensate for that. 

Yes I think increasing the coporate ££'s is the way to go. NBA teams are very rich despite only having 15-20k arenas to play in. But thier VIP/Corporate offerings are fantastic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Mattrhino said:

Yes I think increasing the coporate ££'s is the way to go. NBA teams are very rich despite only having 15-20k arenas to play in. But thier VIP/Corporate offerings are fantastic.

Without doubt leeds do have that clientele , other clubs who wont ever have that level of corporate will focus more on your £ 20 seat , i do believe that if Cas ever do get theirs built they will be surprised how difficult selling higher priced corporate ' experiences will be

Edited by GUBRATS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GUBRATS said:

It is brilliant that headingley is finally being brought up to 21 st century standard , however all this nonsense about having ' character ' compared to so called ' flat pack stadiums is rubbish

it is still a bit of a ' mash up ' of different stands , it will provide everything Leeds need , but still look a bit weird when compared to to any ' single design stadium , be that a football/ rugby share or primarily RL stadiums like Warrington,Saints,Widnes,leigh , even Salford

In fact it resembles a club RU stadium in many respects as that is what most of those look like

 

What I find fascinating (as an Aussie) is how cheap all the new RL stadiums are in the UK. 

Saints cost £25m, Headingley £40m, Salford £26m, Leigh £17.5m, Cas £15m

Contrast that to the new Townsville stadium £170m, Parramatta £170m, Melbourne £152m, Gold Coast £91m and new Sydney Football Stadium a whopping £415m!

how is it so much cheaper to build stadiums in the UK?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, whatmichaelsays said:

There's only so much that the club can reasonably expand whilst at Headingley and I think that the idea that Headingley could go to a 25-30k stadium is probably wishful thinking (to put it kindly) given the nature of the area today. 

Headingley is one of the most congested and densly populated parts of the city and it is part of the city that is subject to specific priorities / council policies around issues like alcohol licencing, housing and HMOs (the council is desperately trying to change Headingley's and Hyde Park's "student" image and make it a more family-friendly area). Planning applications in and around LS6 get much greater levels of scrutiny as a result.

For Leeds this development is very much about maximising revenue from the footprint that they have to work with - increasing the number of premium seats and corporate facilities, rather than going through a painful and expensive planning process in order to sell more £20 tickets.

I think the current capacity is broadly right - it's enough to meet general demand, enough to generate an element of 'FOMO' for bigger games and enough for the club to keep it's price-point high enough without damaging the matchday experience. I think Huddersfield shows that having a ground that's too big for demand is damaging to the matchday experience, and the club then relies on discounts and under-selling itself in order to compensate for that. 

I did mean to acknowledge the challenges that Leeds have had to face, and I am genuinely not being negative about the work they have done, it looks superb to me. 

Had they been able to get 25k, I think it should have been a key stadium for England RL too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Or they charge more?

 

Yes, but I know you are staunchly against making more from existing customer bases - I recall the lengthy debates we had.

To be fair to Leeds they do have some scope for growth here, they can go from c15k averages to 20k averages and increase price, so it isn't a bad thing, but in reality there is probably no scope for the ground to ever increase over 20k now, and I find that a shame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, goldcoaster said:

What I find fascinating (as an Aussie) is how cheap all the new RL stadiums are in the UK. 

Saints cost £25m, Headingley £40m, Salford £26m, Leigh £17.5m, Cas £15m

Contrast that to the new Townsville stadium £170m, Parramatta £170m, Melbourne £152m, Gold Coast £91m and new Sydney Football Stadium a whopping £415m!

how is it so much cheaper to build stadiums in the UK?

TBF, it is probably better to compare to new Premier League grounds, Spurs new ground may reach £1bn costs. 

These grounds in RL are pretty basic compared to some of the Premier League grounds, or the grounds they build in Oz (and then knock down and rebuild after a few years!).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

TBF, it is probably better to compare to new Premier League grounds, Spurs new ground may reach £1bn costs. 

These grounds in RL are pretty basic compared to some of the Premier League grounds, or the grounds they build in Oz (and then knock down and rebuild after a few years!).

If a basic flat-pack stadium cost the same in Aus to build as in the UK, then clubs would all buy one. Instead no NRL club owns their own grounds and all pay rent to play at these overpriced, oversized Government stadiums

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, scotchy1 said:

Headingley wasn't a dump and isn't a dump now. It's a great place to watch RL as it always has been. It didn't lack for facilities, it offered a choice of options

There is nothing I can get in the LSV that I couldn't get at headingley.

Yes it did offer options  , and there were things you could get at Headingley that you couldnt at the LSV

Wooden seats and restricted views

For the Uks premier club , it was a dump , it no longer is , and thats great , is it ' iconic ' ? , no , does it have ' Character ' ? , no , not really , it is a collection of 3 different stands that provide good views and will make the club more revenue

If Leeds could have afforded to knock it all down and get the planning for a ' mini Emirates ' they would have done , as it happens they couldnt , but all this " I much prefer it to a stadium with 4 even regular stands all round " nonsense is boring , people can lie to others , but they cant lie to themselves

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, goldcoaster said:

What I find fascinating (as an Aussie) is how cheap all the new RL stadiums are in the UK. 

Saints cost £25m, Headingley £40m, Salford £26m, Leigh £17.5m, Cas £15m

Contrast that to the new Townsville stadium £170m, Parramatta £170m, Melbourne £152m, Gold Coast £91m and new Sydney Football Stadium a whopping £415m!

how is it so much cheaper to build stadiums in the UK?

actually it cost £43m for the two new stands and £7m for the Carnegie ,but aren't those Aussie stadiums much larger ? and no grassy knolls I hope 

 

 Soon we will be dancing the fandango
FROM 2004,TO DO WHAT THIS CLUB HAS DONE,IF THATS NOT GREATNESSTHEN i DONT KNOW WHAT IS.

JAMIE PEACOCK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

Yes it did offer options  , and there were things you could get at Headingley that you couldnt at the LSV

Wooden seats and restricted views

For the Uks premier club , it was a dump , it no longer is , and thats great , is it ' iconic ' ? , no , does it have ' Character ' ? , no , not really , it is a collection of 3 different stands that provide good views and will make the club more revenue

If Leeds could have afforded to knock it all down and get the planning for a ' mini Emirates ' they would have done , as it happens they couldnt , but all this " I much prefer it to a stadium with 4 even regular stands all round " nonsense is boring , people can lie to others , but they cant lie to themselves

 

Dump implies it was poorly maintained. Like, say, Hilton Park where the club let it fall apart. Leeds spent millions keeping Headingley in good and usable condition, probably £3m plus just on the South Stand in the time Hetherington's been in charge. Both stands had new roofs and new toilets and new bars in that period. It was an old ground but it was never run down.

And yes I don't think I'm going out on a limb to say that for most people, on a visual and emotional level, Headingley is a more interesting place to look at and to experience than LSV. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

Yes, but I know you are staunchly against making more from existing customer bases - I recall the lengthy debates we had.

To be fair to Leeds they do have some scope for growth here, they can go from c15k averages to 20k averages and increase price, so it isn't a bad thing, but in reality there is probably no scope for the ground to ever increase over 20k now, and I find that a shame.

I understand your position but at the moment it is probably about right, as with the current ownership there doesn't seem to be much motivation to create bigger crowd figures. We have very little footprint in the city, no marketing other than a bit of social media.

For example you would have never known we won the championship in 2017 or that a Rugby club exists in the city. No posters, billboards, no city centre shop, no campaigns on the plethera of LED screens around the city.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...