Crappest \"NEW\" Ground you have been to ...

[Donnywolf]

... Glanford Park .... end of thread (or is it)

[Nudga]

Keepmoat!

[German Rover]

Falkirks new one, soulless with (when i went) only one stand, and none of the character of the old ground, brockville I think.

[inSODwetrust]

Keepmoat! (Unfortunately)

[The Red Baron]

Depends if you call Chester's Deva Stadium a \"new\" ground. The Breeze Block Stadium would be a better name.

I've not been to Morecambe's Globe Arena yet but that's had some pretty bad press.

[Rovers Return]

Coventry....ugh!!

[bedale rover]

twickenham

soulless breezeblock heaven!

[Jim Dobbin]

Keepmoat for me too.

[River Don]

I can see why you might nominate the Keepmoat... I don't think it's the worst though.

I don't like that place at Huddersfield. The stadium may look nice, in a modernist style from a distance but the design doesn't work. Those wide open corners let all the atmosphere out and all the weather in.

The Deva stadium is little more than a group of bus shelters.

But I think the worst one may well be that white elephant up in Darlo, which s completely inappropriate for the club.

EDIT: The Don Valley is completely useless for football too but I think Rotherham have to be out of there soon.

[NickDRFC]

Ricoh. Horrible car park of a ground.

One saving grace is the casino underneath, my traditional ten on red hasn't failed me yet and paid for the pre-match booze in 2 appearances!

[Thinwhiteduke]

DONNYWOLF wrote:

... Glanford Park .... end of thread (or is it)

Agreed.

A thousand times worse than anything else mentioned in this list so far.

[River Don]

Thinwhiteduke wrote:

DONNYWOLF wrote:

... Glanford Park .... end of thread (or is it)

Agreed.

A thousand times worse than anything else mentioned in this list so far.

Completely disagree. For one thing Glanford Park is pretty unique amongst new stadiums because it has a standing terrace. It generates a decent atmosphere too because the stands are tight to the pitch and it has no open corners. New stadiums have to have a wide area between the stands and pitch which again kills the atmosphere. Yes it's let down by restricted views and cramped seating but it's far from the worst.

You might want to join the campaign to keep Scunny standing.

http://www.fsf.org.uk/keepScunthorpestanding/

[Filo]

River Don wrote:

Thinwhiteduke wrote:

DONNYWOLF wrote:

... Glanford Park .... end of thread (or is it)

Agreed.

A thousand times worse than anything else mentioned in this list so far.

Completely disagree. For one thing Glanford Park is pretty unique amongst new stadiums because it has a standing terrace. It generates a decent atmosphere too because the stands are tight to the pitch and it has no open corners. New stadiums have to have a wide area between the stands and pitch which again kills the atmosphere. Yes it's let down by restricted views and cramped seating but it's far from the worst.

You might want to join the campaign to keep Scunny standing.

http://www.fsf.org.uk/keepScunthorpestanding/

Every one else in the championship has to abide by the rules that they have to have all seater stands after 3 years in the championship, why should Scunny be the exeption?

[Jim Dobbin]

River Don wrote:

I can see why you might nominate the Keepmoat... I don't think it's the worst though.

I don't like that place at Huddersfield. The stadium may look nice, in a modernist style from a distance but the design doesn't work. Those wide open corners let all the atmosphere out and all the weather in.

The Deva stadium is little more than a group of bus shelters.

But I think the worst one may well be that white elephant up in Darlo, which s completely inappropriate for the club.

EDIT: The Don Valley is completely useless for football too but I think Rotherham have to be out of there soon.

You serious? The Galpharm is one of the best stadiums outside of the Prem. The design is unlike all the horrible one tier bowl ones and it has a brilliant atmosphere and character.

Coventry, Sunderland and Derby are the best \"New\" bowl type stadiums l've visited. I don't class the likes of Newcastle has a new bowl type stadium, thats been built bit by bit over the years.

[River Don]

Filo wrote:

River Don wrote:

Thinwhiteduke wrote:

DONNYWOLF wrote:

... Glanford Park .... end of thread (or is it)

Agreed.

A thousand times worse than anything else mentioned in this list so far.

Completely disagree. For one thing Glanford Park is pretty unique amongst new stadiums because it has a standing terrace. It generates a decent atmosphere too because the stands are tight to the pitch and it has no open corners. New stadiums have to have a wide area between the stands and pitch which again kills the atmosphere. Yes it's let down by restricted views and cramped seating but it's far from the worst.

You might want to join the campaign to keep Scunny standing.

http://www.fsf.org.uk/keepScunthorpestanding/

Every one else in the championship has to abide by the rules that they have to have all seater stands after 3 years in the championship, why should Scunny be the exeption?

Because it's one example that puts paid to the lie that standing terraces are inherently dangerous.

[German Rover]

bedale rover wrote:

twickenham

soulless breezeblock heaven!

Wash your mouth out with soap and water, by far the best stadium in england, with a real atmosphere as well!

[River Don]

I'll probably upset a few people here but I think the new Wembley is pretty crap.

Why? Well for one thing it cost way too much. English football could have used the money in much better ways and because it cost so much there are numerous other consequences.

All England fixtures HAVE to be played there. Why should the England team belong to London?

All FA Cup semi finals HAVE to be played there, which only devalues the competition and forces many fans to travel long distances.

The best seats have ALL been sold to corporate entertainment, meaning in very important fixtures such as the play-off finals large expanses of the best seats are unused. It kills the atmosphere and denies fans the opportunity to see these games.

On top of that the stadium it's self isn't great. Lord Rogers may do a great job of creating serene calm spaces for airports but you don't want a stadium to be serene and calm. Unfortunately it is.

The Roof slides but doesn't fully shut or open, giving you the worst of all worlds. On a good day because of the sheer size of the roof you get vast horrible shadows that divide the pitch in two and make the game difficult to watch. In bad weather all the front seats get wet and the pitch can become waterlogged and tears up very badly. And the giant roof means the pitch never gets enough sunlight or air movement so the turf is always crap.

And there's the fact that it's on the same site as the Old Wembley which means all the same transport issues remain.

For the money, they ought to have done MUCH better.

[dijit8]

Kassam Stadium with its 3 sides and a nightmare to get out of the car park.

[silent majority]

Filo wrote:

River Don wrote:

Thinwhiteduke wrote:

DONNYWOLF wrote:

... Glanford Park .... end of thread (or is it)

Agreed.

A thousand times worse than anything else mentioned in this list so far.

Completely disagree. For one thing Glanford Park is pretty unique amongst new stadiums because it has a standing terrace. It generates a decent atmosphere too because the stands are tight to the pitch and it has no open corners. New stadiums have to have a wide area between the stands and pitch which again kills the atmosphere. Yes it's let down by restricted views and cramped seating but it's far from the worst.

You might want to join the campaign to keep Scunny standing.

http://www.fsf.org.uk/keepScunthorpestanding/

Every one else in the championship has to abide by the rules that they have to have all seater stands after 3 years in the championship, why should Scunny be the exeption?

They wouldn't be the exception either, the precedent was set by Cardiff City who got away with a standing section for about 9 years! If we are to see more standing sections installed in football grounds we have to start somewhere, so why not here?

Furthermore if they get relegated then the requirement is cancelled for the season after, so why is it safe to stand in Lg1 but not the Championship?

[River Don]

Rigoglioso wrote:

I can see why the Galpharm is nominated, though personally I don't think it is the worst at all.

The major flaw in the design of it is the fact that the \"away\" concourse is actually uncovered and because the ground is basically located at the bottom of a hill, when the weather is bad in winter, it feels more cold inside the stadium than what it does in other parts of the town. The fact that the stadium consists of four seperate stands doesn't help this problem either.

It's one of those god awful out of town locations as well, right in the middle of a modern, clonetown, soulless retail estate. Last time I went finding a decent pub close to the ground proved difficult.

As I say I do like the look of the structures, it isn't your bog standard bowl. I don't think the place generates any atmosphere though, if there is an atmosphere it isn't helped by the stadium. The wide open corners let all the sound out and they also ensure a constant bitterly cold wind blasting through, sometimes accompanied by driving rain. I don't want to sound namby pamby complaining about the cold and wet at football but at least in the old grounds you were standing and could turn your back to it or find a bit of shelter. It's horrible having to sit in it and you shouldn't have to in a modern stadium!

[Boomstick]

Definately the keepmoat, its a horrible souless warehouse. Hate the place

[Rios]

German Rover wrote:

Falkirks new one, soulless with (when i went) only one stand, and none of the character of the old ground, brockville I think.

It has three proper sides now and a temporary fourth, which will probably still be there in 20 years!

It's reassuring to see that I'm not the only one who hasn't taken to the Keepmoat.  Having said that it certainly isn't the worst.  Neither is Scunthorpes... despite all the technical limitations and short sightedness they did build it without any grants and without any of lessons that have been learnt since they built it.  Walsall on the other hand saw how limited Scunnys was and thought \"We'll have some of that and stick some extra sight blocking pillars in while you're at it!\"

My vote goes for Darlo.  Derby's similar design is a success as they fill it most games.  Feethams was in the process of being developed and was far better than the empty, souless monstrosity they've ended up with.  If I was a Darlo fan I'd have packed it in by now having to sit in that.

[RedRover45]

Rigoglioso wrote:

I can see why the Galpharm is nominated, though personally I don't think it is the worst at all.

The major flaw in the design of it is the fact that the \"away\" concourse is actually uncovered and because the ground is basically located at the bottom of a hill, when the weather is bad in winter, it feels more cold inside the stadium than what it does in other parts of the town. The fact that the stadium consists of four seperate stands doesn't help this problem either.

I don't know what's defined as \"new\" these days, due to all the re-development work that has took place in the years since the Hillsborough disaster, but surely the worst has to be East Fife? They moved from a perfectly normal ground in the centre of town, to a one-sided ground that overlooks a disused power station. Horrible place.

  Agreed about East Fife, and after only 9 years there, they have plans to move to another new ground already. A lot of the 'new' Scottish grounds are poor though. Agree about Falkirk, but Livingston and Stirling are also poor although Dumbarton gets my vote as the worse.

[roversam]

Boomstick wrote:

Definately the keepmoat, its a horrible souless warehouse. Hate the place

Where do you sit in the warehouse Boomstick, let me guess, West stand library by any chance.

[BobG]

I'm with Don. I loathe Wembley. Rubbish location, rubbish pricing, rubbish facilities anywhere within a mile, rubbish seating for ordinary blokes and an architectural fantasy entitled 'The Delusions of Grandeur Arena'. It's a horrible place.

Twickers is alright though.

BobG

[Filo]

Is n`t the Galpharm a stone throw from the site of the old Leeds Road ground?

[timdrfc]

inSODwetrust wrote:

Keepmoat! (Unfortunately)

You're joking , surley it's what YOU   make it

I loved my time at Belle  View but the Keepmoats so much better.

[Nudga]

timdrfc wrote:

inSODwetrust wrote:

Keepmoat! (Unfortunately)

You're joking , surley it's what YOU   make it

I loved my time at Belle  View but the Keepmoats so much better.

I would have loved to have seen Belle Vue redeveloped, in a modern version of what it used to be like.And then, most folk would have stuck to their original favourite standing/seating position and everyone would have been happy.

[German Rover]

Nudga wrote:

timdrfc wrote:

inSODwetrust wrote:

Keepmoat! (Unfortunately)

You're joking , surley it's what YOU   make it

I loved my time at Belle  View but the Keepmoats so much better.

I would have loved to have seen Belle Vue redeveloped, in a modern version of what it used to be like.And then, most folk would have stuck to their original favourite standing/seating position and everyone would have been happy.

100% agree think there were plans once in the evening paper for an all seater stand at town end, could have been a start of a beautiful thing like Preston's frankly beautiful stadium, Even though the new stand isn't finished it shines amongst new grounds as it has some identity and generally is a great piece of work.

Oh and I could still be on the pop side!!!

[Old Popsider]

Keepmoat, unfortunately. Souless bowl.

 Pity OBV wasn't redeveloped as a new stadium. We could've ground shared somewhere (Apart from bellend road and Don valley) until a shiny new place could've been put into place. Even then we would probably ended up with a souless bowl a la KMS!!