What's new

New stadium or expand WHL ?

Should we have a new ground or expand WHL

  • New Ground

    Votes: 53 42.1%
  • Expand WHL

    Votes: 73 57.9%

  • Total voters
    126
  • Poll closed .

bas

Member
Jan 1, 2004
187
24
I have read that expansion at WHL would increase capacity to 52,000. The existing poor transport to and from the ground and the poor parking would seem to remain. If other clubs are ambitious enough grasp the nettle and build new stadiums (Arsenal, WHam amongst others) surely we can. I remember when we were without question the leading club in London both on the field and off (team & stadium). I feel that Arsenal have left us behind with their team & stadium. I feel that 52,000 capacity could prove to be insufficient (hopefully !) and we need to move to a new ground if we are to stay level at the very least but also to have the opportunity to regain the lead.
This subject may have been raised before, if so apologies from me. If not let us know what your views are.

Please vote:

1) New Ground

2) Expand WHL
 

jambo

Member
Apr 29, 2007
182
0
I hope we move stadium but its the ground sharing that bothers me ( especially with the claret & blue shite ). Ive heard that if a new stadium was to be built it would be enfield. If we could use wembley that would be ideal but wont happen imo.
 

justfookinhitit

Jedi Master
Aug 4, 2006
1,206
0
If we can build a 60,000 seater stadium on the current site then great. If not then find a new site as close as possible and build it on that.

Ground sharing only comes into play if we redevelop the existing site. And if we do then suffering a journey to the spammers or elsewhere for a year or two is fine by me if it results in us having the infrastructure to fund continued success.
 

MattyP

Advises to have a beer & sleep with prostitutes
May 14, 2007
14,041
2,980
Expanding WHL would strongly be my preferred option, though 52,000 seems small to me, ideally 60,000.

On the transport issues, it has been reported that to extend the Victoria Line to Northumberland Park would cost between £40-£60m. Transport for London have ruled this out as it does not meet their economic criteria.

To put this into context the total cost of of extending the Victoria Line would cost less than one year's interest on the £14bn loan needed to construct the Crossrail project (not to mention the millions already spent on that scheme), which HAS been approved.

You figure that one out.
 

fozzi44

Well-Known Member
Feb 5, 2006
1,435
37
for me the 3 big issues are the cost and the capacity and the location.

For me 300 mill for a 52 k stadium (thats what sunderland and newcastle currently have) is too small. Especially when the emirates, liverpool and man u are all going too be much bigger and mostly brand new. Given the shite transport it wouldnt really bother me if we could move somewhere close - enfield too far. But my preference would be a new stadium unless we redevelop to about 65 k, the ground share would be shite too - god knows how the team would adapt to having to play at someone elses stadium.
 

SpurSince57

Well-Known Member
Jan 20, 2006
45,213
8,229
The reason they won't extend the Victoria to Northumberland Park is that it would barely be used other than when we're playing at home. Even in the morning and evening rush-hours the overground station is very quiet compared to Bruce Grove and WHL. It always has been.

What would help would be a better overground service to NP. Or any service at all on a Sunday.
 

PT

North Stand behind Pat's goal.
Admin
May 21, 2004
25,468
2,408
It's the 21st century and our peers are grasping the implications accordingly.

Spurs are beholden to our history and look like we don't want to let go any time soon.

THFC must look long term - £300mill is a lot of money and a significant percentage will be borrowed. So why not borrow the extra it takes to become an iconic force in World football again and build new?

We can take the name with us.
 

ollywomble

New Member
Aug 28, 2007
10
0
I'd rather increase capacity to 52,000 and ground share for a year or two than move to a new stadium that would probably be quite a way north of Tottenham.

After a couple of years away, it would be a great homecoming to a bigger and better Lane.
 

worcestersauce

"I'm no optimist I'm just a prisoner of hope
Jan 23, 2006
26,894
45,042
I can't think of a single place in Enfield that would have better access than White Hart Lane.
If there is one better for vehicle access it isn't any better for rail or tube access, certainly nowhere up the Lea valley.
The only place I can think of is perhaps next to Cockfosters Station on the Piccadilly line and five minutes off the M25 but can anyone see that happening?
 

chrissivad

Staff
May 20, 2005
51,646
58,072
52k is not small when you think we only have a 36k one just now.

It would realy depend on the plans, if we can then develop parts of the stands to increase the capasaty again. Im sure they would have thought about this already though.

Redevelop.
 

MattyP

Advises to have a beer & sleep with prostitutes
May 14, 2007
14,041
2,980
It's the 21st century and our peers are grasping the implications accordingly.

Spurs are beholden to our history and look like we don't want to let go any time soon.

THFC must look long term - £300mill is a lot of money and a significant percentage will be borrowed. So why not borrow the extra it takes to become an iconic force in World football again and build new?

We can take the name with us.

We can indeed take the name with us, like that lot did down the road, and Milton Keynes Dons did.

As much as I genuinely love the old WHL, I have no problem building a new stadium on the old site. Increased capacity, increased income, retaining our traditional home.
 

Netty

40 Ounce Bounce
Aug 14, 2007
12,465
153
New stadium in Merseyside would do me!

I've voted to expand WHL.
 

Krafty

Well-Known Member
May 26, 2004
4,768
2,099
I'd like us to stay where we are, one because of the history, two because I fear change, and three because most grounds built from scratch these days are lacking so much soul its almost sickening to watch football there. Take the new wembley. Very, very nice stadium, but the place has no character. It could have been built anywhere in the world for anyone. Emirates is the same. The New Anfield looks different for sure, but that is almost going the other way.

They just dont feel natural. If we redeveloped the Lane it would still have some of that character, some of the history, and in ten years time when the shine of it being new has worn off it wont just be a big cold concrete monster. It would have been our home for over a century.

As for the transport links its impossible to get 50-60k out of one place easily and quickly. Even Wembley is a pain, its just an organised pain.

But at the end of the day I just want the club to progress, if we have to move somewhere then it has to be done. If we have to ground share, no matter how bitter pill it is to swallow, we have to do it. We need a bigger stadium, end of.
 

PLTuck

Eternal Optimist
Aug 22, 2006
15,855
32,965
I'd like us to stay where we are, one because of the history, two because I fear change, and three because most grounds built from scratch these days are lacking so much soul its almost sickening to watch football there. Take the new wembley. Very, very nice stadium, but the place has no character. It could have been built anywhere in the world for anyone. Emirates is the same. The New Anfield looks different for sure, but that is almost going the other way.

They just dont feel natural. If we redeveloped the Lane it would still have some of that character, some of the history, and in ten years time when the shine of it being new has worn off it wont just be a big cold concrete monster. It would have been our home for over a century.

As for the transport links its impossible to get 50-60k out of one place easily and quickly. Even Wembley is a pain, its just an organised pain.

But at the end of the day I just want the club to progress, if we have to move somewhere then it has to be done. If we have to ground share, no matter how bitter pill it is to swallow, we have to do it. We need a bigger stadium, end of.


100% agree with all of this. Not been to new Wembley yet, the old one was bad enough (with transport / access).
 

Spursking

Well-Known Member
May 16, 2004
5,431
2,457
Do we get all the best facilities if we expand WHL? That is the main issue. If we are going to expand, I want us to do it really good, and it should look like a brand new stadium. We also have to consider the transport possibilities, and everything should be built with an eye for the best for THFC.
 
Top