TorquayFans.com | Torquay United Fans Forum

Trojan 67 wrote:Eh ? It's an open sided concrete box with fitted plastic seats fer cry sakes, why then the 35 to 40 weeks for completion ?

It best not be "an open sided concrete box" otherwise it will be a wind tunnel like the Family Stand....Fine in August to October, April and May but bloody freezing otherwise. I would seriously consider not renewing my season ticket if that was the case (although I would no doubt still get one in the end).

And put some bloody sides on the Family Stand....Its not like it would cut down the view of the pitch in the slightest....

Fletch wrote: It best not be "an open sided concrete box" otherwise it will be a wind tunnel like the Family Stand....Fine in August to October, April and May but bloody freezing otherwise. I would seriously consider not renewing my season ticket if that was the case (although I would no doubt still get one in the end).

And put some bloody sides on the Family Stand....Its not like it would cut down the view of the pitch in the slightest....

...................and change the bloody roof on the Pop so we can get some damned atmosphere inside the ground

Think this is good news that the club are planning to press ahead with the new grandstand,it is something that is badly needed if the club are to progress and move forward.

As for fans having to relocate,this may not be needed,went a few years ago with amate to watch Leeds,there new cantilever stand was not complete ,however the top half was and was safety signed off,and that part was opened and used before the bottom half was finished,if a section of the new granstand was finished and signed off for use before the start of the new season ,could it not be opened and used with our gates it would cause minimal fuss.

Southampton Gull wrote:

...................and change the bloody roof on the Pop so we can get some damned atmosphere inside the ground

Nooooo,gives us the away end please

The open side I was referring to is the one that is a potential health hazard and in need of an immediate risk assessment.

Aye, the side that faces the pitch.

I think we have to build the new grandstand to stay in the football league don't we?

I know a wimbledon supporter who is adament that if they get promoted, they have to have 2000 seats in the ground within 3 years according to FL regulations. Given our grandstand capacity is now just 745ish, I doubt we meet this and the end of next season would be our deadline.

basil75 wrote:I think we have to build the new grandstand to stay in the football league don't we?

I know a wimbledon supporter who is adament that if they get promoted, they have to have 2000 seats in the ground within 3 years according to FL regulations. Given our grandstand capacity is now just 745ish, I doubt we meet this and the end of next season would be our deadline.

I thought that was the rule too, but there have never been 2000 seats at Accrington's ground. I think there are 1200 seats maximum in there, and its pretty much been like that since they got into the FL in 2006. Barnet I think are in a similar boat, although I'm not sure how their new(ish) stand at one end has boosted their numbers.

basil75 wrote:I think we have to build the new grandstand to stay in the football league don't we?

I know a wimbledon supporter who is adament that if they get promoted, they have to have 2000 seats in the ground within 3 years according to FL regulations. Given our grandstand capacity is now just 745ish, I doubt we meet this and the end of next season would be our deadline.

These are the reasons for the rebuild and as stated in the Herald Express article, to bring the current structure up to the required regulations would be in itself expensive.

Naming the new stand after Mr A J Boyce or Mr P Bristow is fine by me. I just hope the club don't go down the road of renaming the ground for commercial reasons, an example would be THE FYFFES BANANAS STADIUM. :no:

COME ON YOU BANANAS just won't sit right with the Popside faithful.

Southampton Gull wrote:...................and change the bloody roof on the Pop so we can get some damned atmosphere inside the ground

Dave, next time you're down here have a look at the construction of each stand. To my (untrained) eye they look to be built the same. I suspect it's the length of the popside (compared to the away end) that means it sounds quieter. The same number of singers concentrated into a lesser area will always sound louder...Only way round it in my opinion is to have the away end and split the popside 70/30 ish and have the closest to the away end for away fans with entry through the (currently closed?) turnstiles in Marnham road by the police control box...

Couldn't agree more with most of that mate although I think it's the width of the roof, not the length that's the problem.

The half time regulars who use Boots & Laces do realise that moving to the Babbacombe End means the end of said half time pleasures ? Or does it ? I'm taking no chances so will be staying on the Pop.

To improve the atmosphere on the Pop, 2000 regulars prepared to unite* and sing in unison* on said side would be ideal.

* this is not a subtle recruiting drive for two similar sounding Trade Unions. :no:

(Unite the better Union, join for as little as £11 per month)

Tis all contained in the link below,think depends on when these regulations were brought in,as i should imagine they would only apply to teams promoted after they were brought in.

http://www.football-league.co.uk/regula ... 33_2128158

Not to sure the football league would go down the road of expelling any team who failed to comply with this,as the football league would have start promoting teams from the conference who have no chance of meeting this criteria.

Having just been to Accrington's shithole excuse for a ground, I think the Football League will have better places to start than Plainmoor if they're gonna start a witchhunt for technically unsuitable grounds. Maybe once Plymouth go under and the asset strippers move in, they might sell us one of their stands as a ready made replacement?

Matt.

Southampton Gull wrote:Couldn't agree more with most of that mate although I think it's the width of the roof, not the length that's the problem.

Whilst Google Earth may not be the most accurate way of comparing the depth of the roof, they look pretty much the same in that respect as well. Must take a tape measure Tuesday

I think the 'fit and proper' rules are different for those clubs already in the League, compared to those trying to get into it. A club wouldn't be kicked out of the League if it didn't already 'meet the bar', but failing to 'meet the bar' might be enough to prevent promotion into it. Not that that is fair in any way.