What's new

New Stadium Details And Discussions

TottenhamMattSpur

Well-Known Member
Aug 31, 2012
10,925
16,007
I'd not only be happy to stand, I would prefer it and be somewhat upset if I couldn't get a ticket in that area!

My question was only in reference to the stadium design/configuration. Interesting someone mentioned the expansions of Anfield and the Etihad. One was a ground up build and one, like the Lane, was gradually upgraded in parts of the decades.
I'd imagine the expansion of Anfield was easier then than the upgrade of the Etihad as the exterior look and footprint wouldn't have mattered.
 

coys200

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2017
8,436
17,403
Regarding expansion .its very hard to see how we could .weve pretty much squeezed out every in of space .the north / south look obvious no goes and west would prob be to complex with main facilities based there .only possible option I'd see would be another tier on east stand but it seems unlikely to me .
 

Bulletspur

The Reasonable Advocate
Match Thread Admin
Oct 17, 2006
10,690
25,246
Safe standing provides circa 3 standing spaces for every 2 seats (based on the German rail system). I've read about it maybe a year ago online somewhere.
I am sure that the previous posts were referring to safe standing in the stands.

[Edit ] Then again so were you. You were just using the rail example as a guideline, correct?
 

Phischy

The Spursy One
Feb 29, 2004
1,000
1,152
Based on everything I have seen and heard, I understand the stadium is not built with future expansion in mind, at least in terms of footprint or height.

In terms of footprint, there's simply no room to expand into, the stadium takes up the maximum available space.

In terms of building up, obviously that requires an increased footprint. But even if they found a way (Such as building over roads or Lilywhite House) the roof requires one continuous tension ring. Therefore it would be very difficult to increase the scale of one stand without doing it to all of them, or completely redesigning the roof structure.

It may not be impossible to achieve, but the reality is I think the club have decided that the future possibility of a 100k+ stadium is slim anywhere in London. That the main driver in terms of finances is corporate revenue, which isn't available in unlimited quantities, so, as opposed to just upping the number of 'plebs' you get in the door, they have decided to offer a top notch corporate experience to ensure that they always fill up that part of the stadium.

There's no commercial argument for continuing to expand capacity and the cost of doing so simply wouldn't be viable when you consider the various financial and physical barriers in London.

I suspect, that the club is already trying to max out bowl capacity (within the set constraints of visitor experience) and any future capacity increase will be via factors such as safe standing. I would also add that it's not the whole South Stand which can be converted to safe standing, it's a section (I would guess the bottom third) and on a 3 for 2 basis, that would allow a capacity increase of around 3,000 or 4,000 max.

All things considered, I don't envisage the capacity of New White Hart Lane ever exceeding around 65,000.
 

danielneeds

Kick-Ass
May 5, 2004
24,179
48,764
Don't they have these seats at Celtic?
Different regs in Scotland, UK gov has no will to do it. Police don't want it, and the PL would have to vote it in unanimously. And Liverpool are extremely unlikely to ever say yes, because of the local feeling regarding Hillsborough.
 

worcestersauce

"I'm no optimist I'm just a prisoner of hope
Jan 23, 2006
26,891
45,041
Safe standing basically means taking out the seats and allowing the people who would have been sat in those seats to stand. I would not expect much increase in capacity, just an increase in atmosphere.
It wouldn't mean taking out the seats, they would install convertable seats with backs that can be raised and locked in place as a crash barrier, they had these in Werder Bremen when we went there.
The massive difference between the old standing and what we refer to as safe standing is that each row of people standing has a barrier behind and in font of them as opposed to the periodic offset barriers of old.
 

Drink!Drink!

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2014
1,356
5,015
Looks like half the west stand had been pulled down, very hard to see exactly on the web site
wish the club would release more regular pictures on this
 

Lilbaz

Just call me Baz
Apr 1, 2005
41,363
74,893
It wouldn't mean taking out the seats, they would install convertable seats with backs that can be raised and locked in place as a crash barrier, they had these in Werder Bremen when we went there.
The massive difference between the old standing and what we refer to as safe standing is that each row of people standing has a barrier behind and in font of them as opposed to the periodic offset barriers of old.

Think this is probably why the away fans have been moved to the north stand. It means if we do have safe standing in the south they cannot charge them.
 

Gb160

Well done boys. Good process
Jun 20, 2012
23,646
93,314
The main driver for the new stadium is increased revenue. Making the West Stand bigger by 10k would have been incredibly short sighted. With a purpose built new stadium that can host events 365 days of the year and also potential a NFL franchise we can easily become the cub with the biggest stadium related revenue in the country, if not the world. Imagine the naming rights if we hosted a CL regular football club AND a NFL franchise?
Good points, although UEFA/CL rules ban stadiums being called by sponsors names during their coverage.
 

Phischy

The Spursy One
Feb 29, 2004
1,000
1,152
The record attendance was on 5th March 1938 against Sunderland and was 75,038 nowhere near 100,000.
To be fair, there were a fair few who used to sneak in back then... I suspect it wasn't 25,000 people, but it probably had a fair few more than the official number inside the stadium!
 

Dougal

Staff
Jun 4, 2004
60,345
129,920
North stand roof being dismantled bit by bit.... I'd... carefully @Dougal ;)

Wow, you're like a dog with a bit between his teeth.
A) I don't know what I'm looking at there apart from a possible sponsorship deal with YouTube
B) I didn't suggest they were going to go in with a wrecking ball and hope for the best
C) All I said was that they could tear it down from the inside so it shouldn't be too slow, which it doesn't look to be considering the lower tier is already gone and they're working on the roof
D) Yes, you're completely correct, if that means I can carry on with other things (y)
 

TottenhamMattSpur

Well-Known Member
Aug 31, 2012
10,925
16,007
Wow, you're like a dog with a bit between his teeth.
A) I don't know what I'm looking at there apart from a possible sponsorship deal with YouTube
B) I didn't suggest they were going to go in with a wrecking ball and hope for the best
C) All I said was that they could tear it down from the inside so it shouldn't be too slow, which it doesn't look to be considering the lower tier is already gone and they're working on the roof
D) Yes, you're completely correct, if that means I can carry on with other things (y)

Chill out, it was just bants.
 
Top