Yup.
And Abramovich can sleep safe in his Chabad bed that Bibi won't extradite him to either Switzerland or Mueller's FBI probe into Trump's mobster links....
Let's All Laugh At... Let's all laugh at Chelsea thread
- Thread starter ibbz
- Start date
Yup.
And Abramovich can sleep safe in his Chabad bed that Bibi won't extradite him to either Switzerland or Mueller's FBI probe into Trump's mobster links....
Bus-Conductor
SC Supporter
- Oct 19, 2004
- 39,837
- 50,713
Does being the newest thing automatically give it some kind of architectural Kudos? As a grown up, I'm just exorcising my right not be overly enamoured with the design of our new stadium. This isn't a new thing, Ive said this at every stage, when the design was first published etc.
I'm happy we are getting a new stadium, I'm happy with some of the improved functionality of it. And It's certainly an improvement of what was left standing there after all the various remodelling over the last few decades. But as a piece of architecture it doesn't really inspire me. I think such a building could/should make a statement, should excite you as you first glimpse it and leave you awe struck, or at least interested, as you get closer.
I love big buildings, and stadiums in particular. You just look at somewhere like the San Siro, it's breathtaking, austere, fascinating, it's captivating from the moment you first glimpse it. It's not just a generic, nicely glazed bowl.
But the San Siro, like the Bernabeu or the Camp Nou or even Old Trafford were developed over decades. White Hart Lane had no such option. I prefer our "uninspiring bowl" (with Europe's largest single tier stand by the way), to the Michelin Stadium that Bayern has, for example. I think it oozes elegance and class. Just like Tottenham Hotspur. I think you're missing that particular detail - even though it was the insiring factor behind the build.
steve
Well-Known Member
- Oct 21, 2003
- 3,503
- 1,767
But is it great inside? I understand your comments having been the San Siro and with a billionaire backing the budget Chelsea could afford to go for an amazing design, but we had to be pragmatic and concentrate our efforts on the key elements within which I think we've done very well. It looks a bit tacky in some respects but it's future proofed with the cladding and I don't think with the technical and financial constraints we should complain too much.
whitesocks
The past means nothing. This is a message for life
- Jan 16, 2014
- 4,652
- 5,738
The trees holding up the Park Lane are quite distinctive, and the retractable pitch is interesting - that's where the statement money went. The rest looks like a big glass office block and that is to make all the big glass office workers feel at home.
The back of the old east stand looked like a factory wall, and when they built it, I dare say the majority of fans worked in a factory, so this is nothing new.
Far more important to me what the new place is like inside. The support makes the stadium, although the way it's laid out can do a lot to help. I always had a pet theory that because the shelf was side on to the pitch our noisiest supporters had a completely different view of the game to their equivalents at most other grounds and were maybe open to a different style of play. I doubt it was planned that way but when the place was jumping the noise from that stand was immense.
I just hope the attention the designers claim to have paid to atmosphere translates into reality. That even if it's nothing special from the outside it's loud and intimidating inside.
I just hope the attention the designers claim to have paid to atmosphere translates into reality. That even if it's nothing special from the outside it's loud and intimidating inside.
TheChosenOne
A dislike or neg rep = fat fingers
- Dec 13, 2005
- 48,086
- 50,085
If Fulham get Wembley for themselves then Chelsea will drop further down the pecking order with the likes of little Palace and the West Ham Stadium renters.
Bus-Conductor
SC Supporter
- Oct 19, 2004
- 39,837
- 50,713
Like I said, I'm happy with some of the improved functionality and features of the new stadium. I just don't find the exterior interesting at all. For the record, I felt the same about the exterior of the Camp Not, it looks like a multi story car park as you approach it.
It's not so much tacky as just a bit boring IMO. I really think it would have been possible to create something a bit more interesting, externally. Cladding you say....
Saoirse
Well-Known Member
- Aug 20, 2013
- 6,163
- 15,641
I just can't see Fulham moving to Wembley being a good idea. They regularly seemed to struggle even filling the Cottage in the Premier League with the "neutral end" etc. What's the best they'd get even if they made the tickets dirt cheap- £15 a game, £1 kids etc - 45-50k? Barely any better revenue wise and you're stuck rattling around a half empty stadium with no atmosphere every week. Why would you ever want to do that?!
spud
Well-Known Member
- Sep 2, 2003
- 5,850
- 8,794
Because then you can sell the prime Thameside development land that is Craven Cottage and get back a sizeable chunk of what you've paid for Wembley. Plus you get a stadium that - while it's a souless pile of crap that's impossible to get to - has a certain cache in the football world and would enable you to attract higher crowds and better players if and when you improve.
Ghost Hardware
Well-Known Member
- Aug 31, 2012
- 18,311
- 62,960
I do actually agree, I’m not that fussed as a stadium is primarily about functionality, but purely from an asthetic level our new stadium doesn’t seem very iconic. Obviously, saying that, one has to wait until one sees it. Agree also about the Giuseppe Meazza, every time I go there or even pass by it you can’t help but be in awe of the place despite the fact it needs a serious refurbishment within. From a purely functional point of view it does seem our new digs will be state of the art (assuming everyone works at it should) but I don’t feel the outside doesn’t do us justice. But, as said, one rally needs to wait and see it finished in person before making a judgment. Asthetically speaking the designers for the new Chelsea stadium did look pretty impressive I must say. Shame it won’t get made any time soon
mpickard2087
Patient Zero
- Jun 13, 2008
- 21,889
- 32,561
I think the main problem with our new gaff is that TPTB have just kept tinkering and been determined to add more and more and use every nook and cranny. Obviously it's what's inside the stadium bowl that counts mainly, and wait till the finished product etc etc, but there are a few features that don't impress me at all - combination of overdoing it, contradicting itself, and the mish-mash of different materials.
ohtottenham!
Well-Known Member
- Aug 15, 2013
- 7,501
- 13,042
Agree. But still, the internal is way more important than the external, 'cause that's where the game's played, and that's where we get our results.
Think the roar from the South Stand will get us more points than an iconic, interesting external design. Would have liked to have had both, but think we put our resources in the right place.
'O Zio
Well-Known Member
- Dec 27, 2014
- 7,405
- 13,785
To be fair I've been to Bayern's stadium a few times and it's class inside. Like a massive version of the old WHL to be honest. Square to the pitch, filled in corners, steep. The outside is a bit odd but what's really important is what's inside and as far as "modern" stadiums go, the Allianz Arena is pretty good IMO.
'O Zio
Well-Known Member
- Dec 27, 2014
- 7,405
- 13,785
I agree with you about the exterior, I think it looks pretty shit from the outside, and it's already been pointed out by every fan of another club that the areal shots make it look like a toilet (it really does, it's hard to argue tbh
)Also agree on the Camp Nou, looks absolutely awful from the outside. Car park was my first thought when I walked up to it as well. Not sure about now but when I went about 10 years ago the place was absolutely falling apart as well. Don't get me wrong, I'm not necessarily slagging it off, just saying that even these "classic" stadiums aren't necessarily appealing to the eye from the outside, it's what's inside that counts.
hellava_tough
Well-Known Member
- Apr 21, 2005
- 9,429
- 12,383
I agree with you about the exterior, I think it looks pretty shit from the outside, and it's already been pointed out by every fan of another club that the areal shots make it look like a toilet (it really does, it's hard to argue tbh
Also agree on the Camp Nou, looks absolutely awful from the outside. Car park was my first thought when I walked up to it as well. Not sure about now but when I went about 10 years ago the place was absolutely falling apart as well. Don't get me wrong, I'm not necessarily slagging it off, just saying that even these "classic" stadiums aren't necessarily appealing to the eye from the outside, it's what's inside that counts.
Camp Nou definitely needs a roof (not a fully enclosed one) to go around it
It looks a bit 'Mad Max' as it is
worcestersauce
"I'm no optimist I'm just a prisoner of hope
- Jan 23, 2006
- 26,954
- 45,217
I don't think we can give a proper opinion on the outside until they've painted it.
As for the Chelsea stadium, we can't call it architecture unless it gets built, I'm pretty sure in fifty years time it'll crop up in one of those "things that never got built" articles like the London as it might have been we see from time to time.
As for the Chelsea stadium, we can't call it architecture unless it gets built, I'm pretty sure in fifty years time it'll crop up in one of those "things that never got built" articles like the London as it might have been we see from time to time.
Pellshek
Well-Known Member
- Dec 30, 2015
- 2,535
- 7,336
beats1
Well-Known Member
- Feb 22, 2010
- 30,024
- 29,597
TBH if you compare our stadium with some of the big projects around the world, ours is a bit meh, the only thing is, is that is actually being built and finished. Stadiums design is coming from a limited amount of architects who are coming up with extortionate designs.I do actually agree, I’m not that fussed as a stadium is primarily about functionality, but purely from an asthetic level our new stadium doesn’t seem very iconic. Obviously, saying that, one has to wait until one sees it. Agree also about the Giuseppe Meazza, every time I go there or even pass by it you can’t help but be in awe of the place despite the fact it needs a serious refurbishment within. From a purely functional point of view it does seem our new digs will be state of the art (assuming everyone works at it should) but I don’t feel the outside doesn’t do us justice. But, as said, one rally needs to wait and see it finished in person before making a judgment. Asthetically speaking the designers for the new Chelsea stadium did look pretty impressive I must say. Shame it won’t get made any time soon
The exterior is uninspiring(though it dont look like the emirates which is shit, I hate the fact that any bowl made now is like the emirates) especially the roof, our facilities is revolutionary in terms of football stadiums but thats because our new stadium is more like an american football stadium which are light years ahead of football stadiums but that is partly down to a stadium having a life of around 20-30 years
