|
Post by billyox on May 18, 2016 7:24:17 GMT
600 just isn't enough in my opinion we will have the same problem with North Stand segregation. It needs to be at least 1200 so it can house the away fans on its own leaving the north stand free for home fans
Sent from my SM-G920F using proboards
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on May 18, 2016 8:15:47 GMT
600 just isn't enough in my opinion we will have the same problem with North Stand segregation. It needs to be at least 1200 so it can house the away fans on its own leaving the north stand free for home fans Sent from my SM-G920F using proboards It will hardly be used apart from 4/5 games. Why double the cost when it's enough to fit the majority of away teams in, and frees up the best north stand seats for all but a few games
|
|
|
Post by ovaltoyou on May 18, 2016 8:23:21 GMT
600 just isn't enough in my opinion we will have the same problem with North Stand segregation. It needs to be at least 1200 so it can house the away fans on its own leaving the north stand free for home fans Sent from my SM-G920F using proboards It will hardly be used apart from 4/5 games. Why double the cost when it's enough to fit the majority of away teams in, and frees up the best north stand seats for all but a few games It would also allow home fans at both ends of the ground and possibly half of the north stand.
|
|
|
Post by The Fence End on May 18, 2016 8:37:40 GMT
It's simply not necessary, it'll be a waste of money that can be spent elsewhere.
If it does happen though it should be for home fans as it would be an advantage shooting towards Oxford fans at both ends.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on May 18, 2016 8:39:09 GMT
It will hardly be used apart from 4/5 games. Why double the cost when it's enough to fit the majority of away teams in, and frees up the best north stand seats for all but a few games It would also allow home fans at both ends of the ground and possibly half of the north stand. Think it will just be away fans what ever happens "But Eales is keen to fill in the gap, which should provide a boost to the atmosphere, and by moving away fans behind the goal it would allow extra room in the North Stand for home fans"
|
|
|
Post by sarge on May 18, 2016 9:47:12 GMT
chairmn KT " Im in favour of safe standing" .... Chairman IL " I support safe standing"
DE " Im in favour of safe standing" & now " 600 SEAT temporary 4th stand" ...why not a 900- 1000 capacity ( which with rail seating would convert to seats) safe standing 4th stand???
|
|
|
Post by Junior on May 18, 2016 10:37:11 GMT
Build the same as Barnet had. Job done.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on May 18, 2016 10:42:04 GMT
The football league hasn't approved safe standing yet has it ? So that would be a bit of a waste of money, as we probably wouldn't be able to use it
|
|
|
Post by Long John Silver on May 18, 2016 10:44:35 GMT
The football league hasn't approved safe standing yet has it ? So that would be a bit of a waste of money, as we probably wouldn't be able to use it There are League clubs that still have 'unsafe' standing!
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on May 18, 2016 10:51:16 GMT
The football league hasn't approved safe standing yet has it ? So that would be a bit of a waste of money, as we probably wouldn't be able to use it There are League clubs that still have 'unsafe' standing! But they are clubs that have never improved from that, I think there are rules in place about improving on promotion and stuff like that. We would be allowed to build a standing stand, despite club like swindon having it. And safe standing hasn't got the go ahead yet
|
|
|
Post by mcf86 on May 18, 2016 10:52:57 GMT
It's simply not necessary, it'll be a waste of money that can be spent elsewhere. If it does happen though it should be for home fans as it would be an advantage shooting towards Oxford fans at both ends. How do you know what WILL or MIGHT be 'necessary'?? Likewise, only time will tell if it's a 'Waste of money'!! I trust the judgement of Darryl Eales much much more than someone on a gossip forum! Give the bloke credit where it's due, -he's making preparations and planning for next season- and he's clearly optimistic about it enough to believe we will need a larger capacity, sound management. Plenty of people (yourself inc maybe) would be on his back if say -we are a great success on the pitch next season and carry on from where we left off- but several hundreds are turned away as he (Darryl) hadn't made provisions!! Jeez.
|
|
|
Post by Mark on May 18, 2016 10:58:06 GMT
I think the rules are that once you have been in the top two divisions for two years after after the mid 1990s that you have to go all seater, even if you get relegated again. There are exemptions around for teams like Brentford who are moving grounds.
|
|
|
Post by Junior on May 18, 2016 11:05:27 GMT
When did Barnet move to that stadium from Underhill? How come the league allowed them use a terrace?
|
|
|
Post by saddletramp on May 18, 2016 11:14:28 GMT
There are League clubs that still have 'unsafe' standing! But they are clubs that have never improved from that, I think there are rules in place about improving on promotion and stuff like that. We would be allowed to build a standing stand, despite club like swindon having it. And safe standing hasn't got the go ahead yet "Despite a club like Swindon having it "??
|
|
|
Post by saddletramp on May 18, 2016 11:16:33 GMT
When did Barnet move to that stadium from Underhill? How come the league allowed them use a terrace? Weren't Barnet non league when they moved ?
|
|
|
Post by Mark on May 18, 2016 11:32:34 GMT
When did Barnet move to that stadium from Underhill? How come the league allowed them use a terrace? Weren't Barnet non league when they moved ? Perhaps it's a combination of Barnet being non-league when they moved and also not being in the top two leagues. Presumably Burton may have to start looking at their terraces at some point. It would be a shame because a modern terrace there seems a lot safer with crash barriers than an old terrace with bolted on seats like Luton's OAK road. Burton's terrace has good wide steps and is solid concrete and quite steep, not a ratty crumbling terrace like Ketterings was. Also when Brentford move, does a completeley new ground have to be all seater? Or for instance AFC Wimbledon could have terracing in a new ground as technically they haven't played in the top two leagues.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on May 18, 2016 11:49:31 GMT
But they are clubs that have never improved from that, I think there are rules in place about improving on promotion and stuff like that. We would be allowed to build a standing stand, despite club like swindon having it. And safe standing hasn't got the go ahead yet "Despite a club like Swindon having it "?? The town end is standing isn't it ?
|
|
|
Post by scotters on May 18, 2016 11:58:45 GMT
Still trying to get my head around what benefit this has - how many games have both an away following you could guarantee would be under 600, and enough demand from Oxford fans that clearing out the North Stand would be any use?
|
|
|
Post by Best Mate on May 18, 2016 12:03:33 GMT
I welcome the move in the sense that it is a step towards us having a 4th permanent stand. Though like everyone else - I want the stadium purchased first as it just continues to complicate matters otherwise, in terms of actually making it harder to buy. Such a shame we cannot loan the money via the council, the universities, businesses or such of the rich men of the area. We don't even need the hand outs - just a bloody loan that could be paid back over 25 years @ 500K a season (if we have to pay 12.5 million). I think that would mean slightly more strain (with running costs) than we have now but like anything, it would mean the stadium is ours and we are working towards full ownership AND all profits (i.e. catering) would add a lot more into the mix.
If it ever happened I would also build the West Stand as the home end and give the East stand to the away fans.
For the temp stand, I am a little torn.
600 seats does not seem many and I actually think will struggle to cope with many away fans support (if that was its intention to free up the North stand). I would see:
Northampton, Plymouth/ Wimbledon, Bristol ROvers, MK Dons, Charlton, Bolton, Sheff United, Swindon, Coventry (and Millwall if stay down) would all require more than 600 so we would need to give them their full 10% minimum allocation in the North Stand.....then 600 extra fans in the West stand just doesn't feel like its added many?! And would we sell out the remainder of the ground anyway?
For other games - we can house away fans in it and would allow us to open up the full North stand but would the fixtures be attractive? I guess the Boxing day game would benefit....and or any other 'big' game for us (towards the back end of a season).
if the cost to add it there permanently is not huge - and it is filled a few times - I guess it is better than looking at a fence.
|
|
|
Post by Best Mate on May 18, 2016 12:04:25 GMT
Still trying to get my head around what benefit this has - how many games have both an away following you could guarantee would be under 600, and enough demand from Oxford fans that clearing out the North Stand would be any use? This. You more eloquently said what I was trying to say in about 200 words less
|
|
|
Post by scotters on May 18, 2016 12:14:57 GMT
Still trying to get my head around what benefit this has - how many games have both an away following you could guarantee would be under 600, and enough demand from Oxford fans that clearing out the North Stand would be any use? This. You more eloquently said what I was trying to say in about 200 words less I guess it depends on the segregation in the North Stand - does having a 600-person spillover for away fans behind the goal mean they they can get away with the smallest possible segregation in the NS without breaking the 10% rule?
|
|
|
Post by Mark on May 18, 2016 12:17:19 GMT
34.2 Facilities for visiting supporters 34.2.1 Each Club must make provision for at least 2,000 visiting supporters at every home match or such number as represents 10% of the Club’s certified capacity, if less than 2,000. The League may, on the prior written application of a Club, suspend this Regulation or reduce the figure either for a particular League Match or for a period of time. Each Club shall, subject to any dispensations granted by the Board, make provision for at least 200 of the visiting supporters to be accommodated under cover. Any Club which fails to meet the requirement of 200 visiting supporters being accommodated under cover and which does not have a dispensation granted by the Board shall have such amounts as the Board shall determine (in its absolute discretion) withheld from that Club’s central distributions from the Pool Account until such time as the Club can meet the requirement. Read more at www.football-league.co.uk/global/section5.aspx#zmrV5KdBeEgDILdP.99
|
|
|
Post by MJB on May 18, 2016 12:18:02 GMT
"Despite a club like Swindon having it "?? The town end is standing isn't it ? Wash your mouth out.
|
|
|
Post by Toeby on May 18, 2016 13:05:57 GMT
Does anyone know how many the Oxford Mail holds?
I'm just wondering what it would look like. Would it be 600 seats that stretch the width of the pitch and peep over the top of the fence? Or could it be the 600 seats that aren't the width of the pitch....which would look a bit tinpot in my opinion.
Credit to club though, and I hope we have a fourth stand for next season. If the away fans bring less than 600 put them in the temp stand. If they have more then give Oxford the West Stand instead and away fans can have 10% of the total ground in the North Stand, at the end closest to the Oxford Mail.
|
|
|
Post by saddletramp on May 18, 2016 13:14:12 GMT
"Despite a club like Swindon having it "?? The town end is standing isn't it ? The Town end hasn't been standing for over 20 years,they bolted seats to the old terracing. Terrible view apparently and it's £385 for a S/T.
|
|
|
Post by saddletramp on May 18, 2016 13:15:57 GMT
Does anyone know how many the Oxford Mail holds? I'm just wondering what it would look like. Would it be 600 seats that stretch the width of the pitch and peep over the top of the fence? Or could it be the 600 seats that aren't the width of the pitch....which would look a bit tinpot in my opinion. Credit to club though, and I hope we have a fourth stand for next season. If the away fans bring less than 600 put them in the temp stand. If they have more then give Oxford the West Stand instead and away fans can have 10% of the total ground in the North Stand, at the end closest to the Oxford Mail. 2,850
|
|
|
Post by McVicar on May 18, 2016 13:34:07 GMT
To be honest I don't really care what it looks like, whether it is seats or terracing, whether it houses home or away supporters or even whether it makes any money. The fact that there will be SOMETHING there, with supporters in it, will be bloody fantastic IMO.
|
|
|
Post by carefreeoufc on May 18, 2016 13:42:39 GMT
Could someone confirm the layout beneath the North Stand?
Am I right in thinking that at present a team that sold out an allocation of 600 behind the goal and say had 75 still to be seated would be back in the North Stand where they currently are?
As a result we as the home team would again be confined to a certain part of the North Stand due to the security arrangements beneath the ground.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on May 18, 2016 13:54:53 GMT
The town end is standing isn't it ? The Town end hasn't been standing for over 20 years,they bolted seats to the old terracing. Terrible view apparently and it's £385 for a S/T. Is wycombes end standing then ? Getting mixed up Any way despite my confusion , u can have standing unless u have gone high enough for the Taylor report to make u change it
|
|
|
Post by whingit on May 18, 2016 14:07:38 GMT
The segregation under the stand means that 1204 seats is the minimum away fans are given in the North Stand, so 1800 away fans in total if the stand is put up. However, I don't see why this wouldn't be reduced because the segregation over the seats, in theory, could be fipped so that away seats are covered instead, freeing up more of the North Stand for Oxford fans.
|
|