-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Tottenham Hotspur Stadium - Licence To Stand
- Thread starter Jordinho
- Start date
More bums on seats does not mean future proof. Another 2k or 5k above row Z means fudge all in added competitiveness. The money comes from VIP boxes.
Somewhere in here I read about the listed buildings and Secretary of State why does this make me think we won't move in, in 2018....
Or will revised planning permission on the actual stadium be passed separate to the listed building permission allowing the actual stadium to be built.
I suppose if we didn't get permission to knock down the buildings then capacity may be capped due to safety concerns.
Or will revised planning permission on the actual stadium be passed separate to the listed building permission allowing the actual stadium to be built.
I suppose if we didn't get permission to knock down the buildings then capacity may be capped due to safety concerns.
Notmegov
Roman Pavlyuchenko
There are 3 listed buildings, 1 is Nationally listed (grade 2 irc) and the other 2 are locally listed (building of local interest/significance). We are only looking to knock down the 2 localy listed buildings and this is covered by the local authority rather than the Secretary of State.
They probably are so 44K gone each match, 3K away allocation and 14K for general sale/members.
Craig_J
Eidur Gudjohnsen
You forgot to mention that we'd slash Arsenals away allocation in half due to safety concerns.
richardanthonyc
Stuart Nethercott
We bloody better do!
paxtonwolf
John White
Won't the away allocation increase too. I thought we had to allocate a percentage of the capacity to the opposition. Is it something like 7.5% for League matches 15% for Cup matches???
Jurgen the German
Tommy Harmer
I don't think any club offers more than 3,000. We get something paltry like 2,000 at Old Trafford IIRC.
mjc23
Terry Fenwick
Those bars definitely look head height when in seat mode.
parklane1
Vic Buckingham
mjc23
Terry Fenwick
Thanks, but I was hoping for something else.
mjc23
Terry Fenwick
OK, I'll bite. Name one good reason why it's a bad idea.
I
indianspur
Guest
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...with-arsenal--not-go-to-wembley-10398070.html
Spurs told to move in with Arsenal – not go to Wembley
The Premier League will block any attempt by Tottenham to use Wembley and Milton Keynes while White Hart Lane is being redeveloped. They would also prevent Chelsea using Wembley during the three years it will take Stamford Bridge to be turned into what the Premier League champions are calling “a cathedral of football” if any fixtures are shifted from the stadium.
The Premier League’s executive chairman, Richard Scudamore, said the most logical place for Spurs to play the 2017-18 season was Arsenal’s Emirates Stadium – though he acknowledged the level of opposition this might bring.
In a meeting between the Spurs board and the Tottenham Supporters Trust in April the club stated that their preferred option was to move to Stadium MK, which is due to have a capacity of 32,000 when White Hart Lane begins its redevelopment in May 2017, and play the bigger fixtures at Wembley. Scudamore last night insisted this would be immediately vetoed by the Premier League.
“They would have to play in a single stadium for an entire year for the integrity of the competition,” he said. “You cannot have 19 home games with 10 at Milton Keynes and nine at Wembley. That is completely, completely unfair. That will not be allowed in our competition.”
He added: “They know the rules and what we require. They have to provide a stadium. We can’t have a fettered fixture list.
“Clubs have to be able to deliver 19 home games in the slots that are required. So, if they share with a rugby league club, we cannot be fettered as to when they can play.
“They have to work it out with Wembley or wherever they want to play, and decide if they could deliver that level of commitment to us.”
It would be difficult for either club to rent Wembley for a season because of the stadium’s commitment to staging NFL matches, cup finals and semi-finals. Brent Council currently limits the stadium to staging 37 live events a year.
Chelsea are reported to have offered the Football Association £11m to stage games there – substantially more than Spurs.
From the Premier League’s point of view, the most straightforward solution would be for the Tottenham board to ask Arsenal to play at the Emirates. The West Ham board has already rejected any suggestion of Spurs sharing the Olympic Stadium.
“Premier League fixtures are paired so Liverpool and Everton, Tottenham and Arsenal and Manchester United and Emirates Marketing Project do not play at home on the same weekend,” said Scudamore. “So it is perfectly possible to have two teams playing in one stadium.
“You might very well argue that in some circumstances that would be desirable but I do know the reasons why it would be difficult.”
In a poll conducted by the Tottenham Supporters Trust, shifting all Spurs’ home games to Wembley while White Hart Lane is rebuilt was the overwhelming choice of the fans. Only eight per cent said they were “highly likely” to make the 48-mile trip to Milton Keynes, while 40 per cent said they would only renew their season tickets if Wembley were the sole venue.
Spurs told to move in with Arsenal – not go to Wembley
The Premier League will block any attempt by Tottenham to use Wembley and Milton Keynes while White Hart Lane is being redeveloped. They would also prevent Chelsea using Wembley during the three years it will take Stamford Bridge to be turned into what the Premier League champions are calling “a cathedral of football” if any fixtures are shifted from the stadium.
The Premier League’s executive chairman, Richard Scudamore, said the most logical place for Spurs to play the 2017-18 season was Arsenal’s Emirates Stadium – though he acknowledged the level of opposition this might bring.
In a meeting between the Spurs board and the Tottenham Supporters Trust in April the club stated that their preferred option was to move to Stadium MK, which is due to have a capacity of 32,000 when White Hart Lane begins its redevelopment in May 2017, and play the bigger fixtures at Wembley. Scudamore last night insisted this would be immediately vetoed by the Premier League.
“They would have to play in a single stadium for an entire year for the integrity of the competition,” he said. “You cannot have 19 home games with 10 at Milton Keynes and nine at Wembley. That is completely, completely unfair. That will not be allowed in our competition.”
He added: “They know the rules and what we require. They have to provide a stadium. We can’t have a fettered fixture list.
“Clubs have to be able to deliver 19 home games in the slots that are required. So, if they share with a rugby league club, we cannot be fettered as to when they can play.
“They have to work it out with Wembley or wherever they want to play, and decide if they could deliver that level of commitment to us.”
It would be difficult for either club to rent Wembley for a season because of the stadium’s commitment to staging NFL matches, cup finals and semi-finals. Brent Council currently limits the stadium to staging 37 live events a year.
Chelsea are reported to have offered the Football Association £11m to stage games there – substantially more than Spurs.
From the Premier League’s point of view, the most straightforward solution would be for the Tottenham board to ask Arsenal to play at the Emirates. The West Ham board has already rejected any suggestion of Spurs sharing the Olympic Stadium.
“Premier League fixtures are paired so Liverpool and Everton, Tottenham and Arsenal and Manchester United and Emirates Marketing Project do not play at home on the same weekend,” said Scudamore. “So it is perfectly possible to have two teams playing in one stadium.
“You might very well argue that in some circumstances that would be desirable but I do know the reasons why it would be difficult.”
In a poll conducted by the Tottenham Supporters Trust, shifting all Spurs’ home games to Wembley while White Hart Lane is rebuilt was the overwhelming choice of the fans. Only eight per cent said they were “highly likely” to make the 48-mile trip to Milton Keynes, while 40 per cent said they would only renew their season tickets if Wembley were the sole venue.