• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

Bring back the North Bank

Javea Shrimper

Guest
[b said:
Quote[/b] (CS J @ Feb. 12 2005,21:15)]haven't clubs with terracing like swansea, been given an ultimatem to get seating put it?? i head this somewhere...
With regards to Swansea (and other clubs due to move to new stadia or construct new stands), I think I remember being told that they don't have to make the necessary changes. Fulham, for instance, had terracing until just a couple of years ago but only on the proviso that there was the intention to upgrade Craven Cottage (which has been achieved now).

WS
 

Javea Shrimper

Guest
[b said:
Quote[/b] (BoyWonder2 @ Feb. 12 2005,21:17)]Where did you head this?

rock.gif
In the net?

WS

wink.gif
 

J

The Chameleon
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Messages
7,576
thanks matey, i knew there was something in place to sort out the clubs with terracing
 

Guest

Guest
[b said:
Quote[/b] (CS J @ Feb. 12 2005,21:42)]thanks matey, i knew there was something in place to sort out the clubs with terracing
I believe the FL rule regarding terracing in grounds states that any ground in the second tier of the league or above (ie the 'championship' and Premier$hite) MUST have an all-seater stadium. Teams like Fulham (who were promoted very quickly from the second division to the premier) are given three years to rid themselves of terracing and make their stadia all seater.
Hence clubs in the lower tiers of the league structure are allowed to have terraced areas (as many still do).
 

Javea Shrimper

Guest
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Whatever @ Feb. 12 2005,23:19)]I believe the FL rule regarding terracing in grounds states that any ground in the second tier of the league or above (ie the 'championship' and Premier$hite) MUST have an all-seater stadium. Teams like Fulham (who were promoted very quickly from the second division to the premier) are given three years to rid themselves of terracing and make their stadia all seater.
I was led to believe (by an FLA representative) that clubs who have ACCEPTED plans for new stadia and / or new stands have an exemption beyond the three years ...

WS
 

Technician

Guest
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Javea Shrimper @ Feb. 12 2005,19:44)]Don't waste your time because it won't happen. ShrimperZone led a campaign back in October 2002 which was picked up by the Evening Echo and attracted such names as Paul Clark and Barry Fry to lobby for a return. The club met with all the relevant authorities (FLA, police, local council) and the decision for a return was left with the club providing required segregation issues were addressed. The cost to upgrade the stand was to be around £17,000 (which Ron Martin claimed SUFC could absorb; in other words it wasn't prohibitive) and the fans were given a chance to show their feelings both via a voting slip in the matchday programme for the home game against Hartlepool United and via a similar slip in the October issue of the Shrimpers' Trust newsletter.

At the end of the day, just 77 people responded to the club and, of those who bothered, just 26 expressed a desire for a return to the North Bank, just over 33%. Unsurprisingly, the club "closed the book" with Ron Martin stating that "we realised that a lot of our fans would like to go back in the North Bank and we gave them the chance to show us that this was the general consensus of the Roots Hall crowd. But the feedback we received is nowhere near enough to get the wheels in motion."

End of story ... it won't happen ...

WS
JS.

I have made my feelings heard on this debate many times, but SUFC is now in a very good position to capitalise on what is a relatively small investment to maximise its income. We witnessed a good game on Friday played in front of a crowd of over 8200 fans of which 4-500 were Scunny supporters.

With the exception of Orient & Yeovil (the latter will most certainly be one of the top three), we will not see many more away supporters than this. With our continued good form... is the club really prepared to say to its supporters, "sorry, but if more than 8000 Southend supporters want to attend a match, we can't accomodate you?!" What message does this send out to those supporters, bearing in mind the proposals for a 16000 seater stadium in the offing?

I hope that the club has a contingency plan to look at the amount of seating allocated for away supporters for next season, because to have 3000 seats unused is "criminal!"
 

Javea Shrimper

Guest
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Technician @ Feb. 13 2005,00:48)]I hope that the club has a contingency plan to look at the amount of seating allocated for away supporters for next season, because to have 3000 seats unused is "criminal!"
I agree. I really do.

But it won't happen. Far too few people are actually interested in moving back to the North Bank, certainly not enough for the club to react. Imagine the scene : less than 300 Scunthorpe fans looks pathetic; the club hands over the North Stand to home fans; less than 200 actually enter. Sounds ridiculous? Well, that's what happened when the stand was handed to home fans for the Steve Tilson Testimonial ...

WS

glare.gif
 

Taunton_Shrimp

First XI
Joined
Oct 25, 2003
Messages
276
Location
Yeovil
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Javea Shrimper @ Feb. 13 2005,07:46)]
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Technician @ Feb. 13 2005,00:48)]I hope that the club has a contingency plan to look at the amount of seating allocated for away supporters for next season, because to have 3000 seats unused is "criminal!"
I agree. I really do.

But it won't happen. Far too few people are actually interested in moving back to the North Bank, certainly not enough for the club to react. Imagine the scene : less than 300 Scunthorpe fans looks pathetic; the club hands over the North Stand to home fans; less than 200 actually enter. Sounds ridiculous? Well, that's what happened when the stand was handed to home fans for the Steve Tilson Testimonial ...

WS

glare.gif
I dont think you can cast your assumptions on how many would go back to the north bank on one testimonial game! That dosent compare to a top of the table clash against scunthorpe on a friday night does it?
 

Javea Shrimper

Guest
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Yeovil_Shrimper @ Feb. 13 2005,08:42)]I  dont think you can cast your assumptions on how many would go back to the north bank on one testimonial game!  That dosent compare to a top of the table clash against scunthorpe on a friday night does it?
No. Fair comment. However the Testimonial game was indeed a test case, a show of strength of feeling if you will, about the real desire to return. Those who really wanted to go back made the effort to use that stand; many didn't.

Granted the club may open the North Stand to home fans (or at least the NW corner) for extreme cases - and they have done so before in the past - but open the whole stand? I don't think so. I can't see why the club should spend £17,000 to replace 300 away fans with 300 home fans ...

WS
 

Technician

Guest
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Yeovil_Shrimper @ Feb. 13 2005,08:42)]
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Jávea Shrimper @ Feb. 13 2005,07:46)]
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Technician @ Feb. 13 2005,00:48)]I hope that the club has a contingency plan to look at the amount of seating allocated for away supporters for next season, because to have 3000 seats unused is "criminal!"
I agree. I really do.

But it won't happen. Far too few people are actually interested in moving back to the North Bank, certainly not enough for the club to react. Imagine the scene : less than 300 Scunthorpe fans looks pathetic; the club hands over the North Stand to home fans; less than 200 actually enter. Sounds ridiculous? Well, that's what happened when the stand was handed to home fans for the Steve Tilson Testimonial ...

WS

glare.gif
I dont think you can cast your assumptions on how many would go back to the north bank on one testimonial game! That dosent compare to a top of the table clash against scunthorpe on a friday night does it?
On Friday, the club opened up Block X, which is technically part of the sterile area adjacent to the north-west corner. When that quickly filled up, there were still people queuing at the West-Stand ticket office to get in.

As a result of this, there were numerous fans standing at the back of the West Stand who could not find seating, especially as many of them were in groups of 4, 5, 6 etc and they would want to sit together.

One of the key points of this debate (I don't claim to having all the answers), is how to segregate home supporters from away!!! now presently, the away supporters enter and leave the ground from the ticket office end of the north bank... which means the North-West corner turnstyles never get used.

If home supporters were to be given this section, they would enter via the West turnstyles. There is an access gate into the North-West section of the ground, which is closed off by a further access gate outside the North-West turnstyles on the Fairfax road entrance to the ground. This just leaves the question of how to segregate the home and away fans once inside the ground.

Surely, the club could come up with a steel fence structure that would segregate the North from North-West and serve a purpose for a couple of seasons. This would allow the club to tap an unused resource that will increase the club's likelihood of making a profit and thus giving Tilson & Brush more money to spend on quality players.

In short 90% of the opportunity is there... why not use it?
 

Javea Shrimper

Guest
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Technician @ Feb. 13 2005,09:41)]Surely, the club could come up with a steel fence structure that would segregate the North from North-West and serve a purpose for a couple of seasons. This would allow the club to tap an unused resource that will increase the club's likelihood of making a profit and thus giving Tilson & Brush more money to spend on quality players.

In short 90% of the opportunity is there... why not use it?
It's far more than a simple fence. To have the changes licensed by the council and FLA, they have to meet a list of requirements including seperate ticketing, seperate catering and toilet facilities, and so on. Simply running a fence down the middle of the North Stand doesn't meet these requirements and therefore the stand won't meet the regulations required.

Sure, once or twice a season the club could use that extra space when the demand requires it (and I find it very unlikely that 8,200 will return for the home game against Shrewsbury Town) but for much of the season there's no demand.

Why not use it? WHO would use it? Not many, I'd wager. On October 28 2002, Ron Martin said : "If fans want to return to the North Bank then they need to come out in strong numbers and tell us through our poll. I would be disappointed if only 30% of the Roots Hall crowd get back to us – we want everybody." As I have said earlier in this thread, just 77 people bothered to respond, just over 1%, and just 26 wanted to return. Those are certainly not the "strong numbers" that the club wanted.

Sure, the poll could have been conducted better but the campaign was about a high profile as we could get it. Scriv and I started the ball rolling on ShrimperZone, the Evening Echo ran a campaign with full-page articles, whilst several national websites also got in on the story. But, as it turned out, no-one was really that bothered ...

Believe me, it will take a lot more that a couple of games a season where demand is exceptionally high for the club to change its mind.

WS
 

Technician

Guest
What do you reckon will be the drop in attendance for our home games with Shrewsbury & Bury then?

...of course, your answer would depend on how well we did at Sixfields next Saturday, but if we are still 4th or 5th, I can see similar home numbers arriving for both of these games, irrespective of our opponents... and why not?

The problem is that the club never has a contingency plan to cater for unexpected numbers like those we had on Friday! it's all very well saying oh, we'll open Block X, but the club needs to answer the problem of fans being able to find seating without being separated from one another.

Also, the club loses real segregation from away fans by utilising Block X as an emergency measure anyway, as only a low wall separates that from the North-West.

If the North-West was used for home supporters, there are toilet facilities behind that section and a couple of mobile burger vans can be parked behind that section to provide refreshments.

This is all feasible JS and whilst I accept you are knowledgeable on this issue, I don't see it is a closed topic altogether and Ron Martin needs to make a decision (whether now or at the end of the season) about the ground layout.

If 8000 is our maximum attendance for a typical home match in league 2, it is outrageous and shows lack of ambition when nearly 10000 could be at the disposal of home fans.

I've said my piece... at worst, we'll have to agree to disagree... but the bottom line is we appear to be moving into UNCHARTED territory here. If I am proved wrong in the next few weeks, then so be it... but, I hope the increasing numbers of Southend fans attending the hall will be safely accomodated in the remaining games of the season..

wink.gif
 

Javea Shrimper

Guest
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Technician @ Feb. 13 2005,10:36)]This is all feasible JS and whilst I accept you are knowledgeable on this issue, I don't see it is a closed topic altogether and Ron Martin needs to make a decision (whether now or at the end of the season) about the ground layout.
By all means, approach the owners with this and see what they say. I think I know what their answer would be but I am gracious enough to hold up my hands and admit that I'm wrong IF they turn around and agree to the changes.

Or I can "have a word" on behalf of the SZ community, at least to get the club's thoughts ... ?

WS
 

Javea Shrimper

Guest
[b said:
Quote[/b] (TrueBlue @ Feb. 13 2005,10:48)]Ok what if the money was raised for the change? would the club still say no?
Who's going to raise the £17,000? You, Scott? The Trust? Have you ever tried getting just a fiver out of people to contribute to the ShrimperZone Player Sponsorship?!

WS
 

Javea Shrimper

Guest
The stand already is sponsored, Scott. I don't think Universal Cycles would be too impressed ... unles you approached them with first option, of course ...

WS

wink.gif
 

Beaver

Resident Rodent
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Messages
1,621
Location
Beaver Land
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Javea Shrimper @ Feb. 13 2005,10:52)]
[b said:
Quote[/b] (TrueBlue @ Feb. 13 2005,10:48)]Ok what if the money was raised for the change? would the club still say no?
Who's going to raise the £17,000? You, Scott? The Trust? Have you ever tried getting just a fiver out of people to contribute to the ShrimperZone Player Sponsorship?!

WS
Or £7 for a membership renewal
rock.gif
 
Top