Xtratime Community banner

The Groundshare Issue

  • Yes, if it was to save costs

    Votes: 1 7.1%
  • Yes, as a principle, without looking at the financial side

    Votes: 1 7.1%
  • No, because it's.. Everton!

    Votes: 12 85.7%
  • Don't care/Doesn't make any difference

    Votes: 0 0.0%
1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Winter is Coming.
Joined
·
8,131 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
L4E wanted me to run up a thread so here it is;

I guess I'll kick off the thread here, I know we've talked this issue to the death but for the loyal fans of the KOP what would you like to see?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
996 Posts
No way. Should never happen. Just wouldn't be right. Besides the fact of it just being plain wrong the quality of pitch would degrade due to playing so many more matches on the pitch.

The one thing that really does bother me about our stadium plans is that from what I've read there is no way to expand the stadium that we're building. 60,000 is really that huge to begin with but I wouldn't have had a problem with that size if it was possible to expand it in the future. I understand that we can't build too huge of a stadium right now because it would put is into debt big time but I just don't why we designed a stadium that can't be expanded. Makes no sense.

-Scott
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,663 Posts
Like Rafa said we would lose our identity. I can understand that theres financial reasons why it should go through, but theres plenty of reasons why it shouldn't I mean for starts that way Everton fans disrespect Anfield- (for non-goers) theres grafity all over and you can still see bits of blue paint stuck on the road around the Hillsborough mermoral, I wouldn't want to share a stadium with fans like that they'll wreck it.

Also
We'd lose the "this is anfield sign"?
What colour would the seats be?
What crest would be above the stands? etc. etc.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,384 Posts
Never!!! If its not economic to go ahead with the new stadium....I would rather we stay at Anfield than share with the Bitter Pills
 

·
Premier Player
Joined
·
5,940 Posts
Agree with the above..

Don't want a ground share.. no matter what!!

The points SM made are more than enough.. throw in the quality of the pitch itself.. and I think we have our decision!! :stuckup:
 

·
nomad
Joined
·
5,597 Posts
I'm against it, I always believe that each club has it's ownidentity, culture history and all that, but sharing will destroy everything, and if the groundshare was accepted (God forbid), I believe the capacity must be increased, but it'll remain 60 k, and as Skamen said, it can't be expanded in the future, therefore it will be in danger of becoming obselote and small in terms of capacity after a few years when other clubs renovate/build new grounds.

I'm fully against it, and if we can't build it by keeping it for ourselves then we should stay at the current Anfield until we can manage to secure all the funds without it affecting the club on the pitch while it's being built, Arsenal had problems coming from everywhere, even residents of the area around the new stadium! But now everything's solved (I think) and they managed to secure the money, if Arsenal who had many financial problems in the last few seasons managed to do it, I do not see why we can't :smileani:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,663 Posts
Just copied this from the Everton forum, a few good points in there I think...

Fans unite against Liverpool-Everton groundshare
Mon 29 Nov, 3:36 PM

LIVERPOOL (Reuters) - "Can you imagine walking into the new Anfield and seeing blue seats everywhere? How could we consider it our home?"

To Liverpool supporter Andy Neymen, the idea of his beloved Reds sharing their ground with city rivals Everton is football heresy.

"This is meant to be our new home in place of a ground that is a legend in football," he told Reuters. "We can't be sharing it with Blue noses."

On Wednesday Sports Minister Richard Caborn is to meet officials from both Premier League clubs to discuss the idea of a ground-share.

He is keen for Everton to take part in Liverpool's project for a 60,000-capacity stadium in Liverpool's Stanley Park.

Everton are against the proposal and supporters in the pubs of Liverpool believe both clubs would suffer if they were forced into a shared venture.

Everton have shelved a project planned for Liverpool's Kings Dock due to the cost and still play in the antiquated Goodison Park stadium situated at the opposite end of Stanley Park to Liverpool's Anfield ground, a distance of 400 metres.

"There's no way I want to piggy back what Liverpool are doing just to have a new ground," Everton supporter Neil Sleeman said.

"It will always feel like it was Liverpool's ground now and there is no way I want to be calling the new Anfield the home of Everton."

Liverpool manager Rafael Benitez has already spoken out against the idea of sharing, saying the pitch would suffer through over-use and supporters would not like the idea.

The groundshare idea has resurfaced because the costs of building the new stadium have soared from an estimated 80 million pounds to 110 million pounds.

FINANCIAL SENSE

Everton appear to have most to gain from the deal as they are currently in debt and may not be able to raise the capital needed to build a new home.

"We have been talking about leaving Goodison Park for ages and to be honest the ground is starting to show its age," Richard Parker said.

"But I think our fans would only be happy moving to a new purpose-built stadium for Everton.

"Whatever they say about sharing, that would never be the case. We would always be told we were just tenants by that lot.

"That's something Everton fans are just not going to put up with."

Generally fans of both clubs enjoy a friendly rivalry. Unlike in other cities that boast two clubs, supporters of either team are not situated in different areas of Liverpool.

Many live next door to each other and it is common for a family to be split between the two teams.

Ironically Everton started out playing at Anfield before moving to Goodison Park in 1892 when the landlord John Houlding doubled the rent.

Liverpool were founded by Houlding to ensure he still had a team to play on his land.

"I know people are saying it makes financial sense to share with Everton as they would pay towards the building and upkeep," Liverpool fan Phil Symes said.

"But this isn't about money. It's about our football club and I want to keep the traditions we have here, not sell them out.

"Can you imagine Manchester United letting Manchester City share with them? It would never happen and it won't happen here."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
996 Posts
Is there still any chance of us redesigning our stadium plans such as making it possible for it to be expanded in the future? That's what really worries me. This 60,000 seater isn't really a ton bigger than Anfield. If we're going to make a new Stadium it should definitely be worth the expenses and the leaving of Anfield.

-Scott
 

·
nomad
Joined
·
5,597 Posts
Exactly my thoughts Skamen, but I do not know why ever since news about the new Anfield came out the only capacity I heard was 60,000, never heard any other numbers, I do not know why, I was hoping for something grand, not to SHARE it with our bitter local rivals :wth:, I wanted something special, something to make up for leaving the historic original Anfield, and to make the fans of the club in Merseyside and all over the world proud of it, a landmark venue, like the Mellinium Stadium in Cardiff or Wembley (but with less costs) but not this! I mean the stadium is reasonable to some extent, but not what every Liverpool fan hoped for.

Even Man Utd are thinking of expanding OT, and their current capacity is more that the capacity of the new Anfield :moan:, Arsenal's new ground will host 60,000 while St. James park I believe has a capacity of almost 60 thousand spectators, we shoukd work on more seats for the stadium imo :sigh:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,006 Posts
liverpool4ever said:
Exactly my thoughts Skamen, but I do not know why ever since news about the new Anfield came out the only capacity I heard was 60,000, never heard any other numbers, I do not know why, I was hoping for something grand, not to SHARE it with our bitter local rivals :wth:, I wanted something special, something to make up for leaving the historic original Anfield, and to make the fans of the club in Merseyside and all over the world proud of it, a landmark venue, like the Mellinium Stadium in Cardiff or Wembley (but with less costs) but not this! I mean the stadium is reasonable to some extent, but not what every Liverpool fan hoped for.

Even Man Utd are thinking of expanding OT, and their current capacity is more that the capacity of the new Anfield :moan:, Arsenal's new ground will host 60,000 while St. James park I believe has a capacity of almost 60 thousand spectators, we shoukd work on more seats for the stadium imo :sigh:

People do realise that increasing capacity means increasing the cost don't they?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
996 Posts
CardiffRed said:
People do realise that increasing capacity means increasing the cost don't they?
That's true but that's the very reason why the stadium should at least be designed w/ the option to be able to expand it in the future.

-Scott
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
170 Posts
chances are, we can't fill an 80k seater. regardless of that, stadiums larger than 60k cost much more because they have to be of a different design. the increase in price is not commensurate with the increase in revenue generated from an extra 10-20k seats.

i believe the groundshare talk is not for real. parry gave the blueshite till christmas to come up with 50 million. that's sarcastic, dark humour and a great way to make fun of them. no way they'll be able toconjure that cash out of thin air.

-p
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top