The Arthur is a f***ing s***hole. Sorry, but that's the long and short of it. Not fit for purpose. It takes the whole of half time just to reach the concourse, never mind actually getting to a urinal. 12,000 (or whatever) people divided into a concourse fifty yards long and three yards wide divided by 15 minutes supplied by two urinals and two or three small catering outlets doesn't work. I ended up there on Saturday too and we shouldn't be apologising to Villa fans; our club should be apologising to us. I'm all for the Old Stand rebuild but something really needs to be done about the Arthur first. What, I don't know. I'm not an architect. But it shouldn't be beyond the wit of an architect to do something to make it better at a reasonable cost. And while they're at it, either get rid of that frigging pitch length TV gantry or start pricing every seat above the twentieth row at a reduced cost. If you can't see 15% of the pitch then knock 15% off the ticket price.

Edited by sydtheeagle (30 Nov 2021 1.18am)

Edited by sydtheeagle (30 Nov 2021 1.19am)

Sydenham by birth. Selhurst by the Grace of God.

This

TaxiMark
Sheffield Wednesday Fan
Posted 23 February 2013 - 07:49 PM
I don't mind palace to be fair. Much better club than tinpot Charlton and Brighton

Just a heads up - my brother was thinking of coming to the AV game, eventually he cried off, but I went looking for a ticket in the main stand (near to my season ticket so we could at least share a pint in the bar) I was late looking for this ticket, (about a week before the game) the only ones left in the main stand were restricted view at £43.00, but for sure the facilities in the main stand are much better that the AW - if your paying £42.00 for a restricted view in the AW (Because of the gantry) perhaps you would be better off paying almost the same amount for a seat in the main stand with the better facilities.

I get where you're coming from but I'm not sure I entirely agree with you. As I said, I'm not an architect and I'm guessing neither are you but there are some pretty simple things that could be done to improve the Arthur at no enormous cost in terms of capital investment, although they might reduce matchday revenues somewhat. Among them:

1. Do something about the TV gantry. If nothing else, with a bit of imagination it ought to be possible to put it on the roof of the stand so it doesn't block sightlines rather than immediately below the roof where it does. There might need to be a small investment in new access and reinforcing a section of the roof, but doing this shouldn't be a major financial issue. Instant result is that you'd improve the sightlines for about 40% of the seats in the Arthur. I can't imagine the TV camera pictures would be any different if they were placed 20 feet or so higher.

2. Reduce the capacity of the Arthur. If you can't properly accommodate the number of people it presently seats (and accommodating people means giving them a decent matchday experience; not simply finding out how many sardines can you shove into a can) then admit fewer. Knock 10 or 15% off the capacity and the concourse mess will be reduced by 10 or 15%. That would make a difference. I realise revenues will go down accordingly but right now, the club are making out like bandits and they shouldn't be. The situation in the Arthur boils down to exploiting the goodwill of the fan base; providing us with a s*** experience because the club knows we'll put up with it.

3. This may be more expensive and where you'd need an architect to confirm viability, but build a second concourse behind the present seats at pitch level (effectively, a tunnel) beneath the higher mid-stand level concourse that exists now. As I said, it would require investment but building a 100-yard long tunnel where you already own the land would surely not be prohibitively expensive. And there must be room to do it? Anyway, do that and you instantly halve the sardine problem by removing 50% of the crowd who presently use the only available concourse.

4. Get rid of the top 15 or so rows of seats and create an upper concourse at the top of the stand. Yes, you lose income from those seats (all of which have s*** sightlines anyway) but it would be cheaper to do than the tunnel idea (above) and, again, provide a second concourse to accommodate the supporters in the Arthur.

5. Dramatically expand the existing concourse into what is now the stand itself. Double it in size. Essentially, remove 10-15 rows of seats in the middle of the Arthur and expand the present concourse into the area where there are now seats, essentially turning the Arthur into a "two-tier" stand where you have what you used to be enclosure at the bottom, then a "walled section" behind which the expanded concourse sits, and then an "upper" section above the concourse. You'd be losing some crowd numbers and doubling the concourse space. That should work and no major structural building investment should be required.

As I said, I'm neither an architect nor a builder and it may be that someone better informed than me can tell me why any or all the above ideas aren't viable. But they strike me as simple, logical, not prohibitively expensive, and they would me a difference. In any event, I don't buy the "it is what it is; nothing can be done" argument at all.

Sydenham by birth. Selhurst by the Grace of God.

Pretty sure you can make the Arthur shallower but higher without messing up residents sight lines too much.

Then again, you have to assume the old stand is considered the easiest fix...and it's taking forever.

Edited by Ginger Pubic Wig (30 Nov 2021 4.24pm)

If you want to live in a world full of kindness, respect and love, try to show these qualities.