New Stadium

  • The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

ZmjMbhs.jpg

From SSC...Looks lovely with the badge all lit up and all, but it's fake...here's the original...
image.php
My understanding is that it will be back-lit eventually, so that is a rough approximation.
 
I'm no expert on the subject, but in general terms fire and other regulations become more exacting from time to time - but only for buildings built after that time, they are rarely retrospective unless the regulation can easily be implemented in an older building.

Moving onto something I know about (bear with me its relevant) fire regulations in blocks of flats became far more exacting about 7 or 8 years ago for the 'common parts (broadly communal halls and stairs) by including these in the same fire regulation category as shops, hotels and other public buildings category - .before that the 'common parts' of blocks of flats were treated pretty much in the same way as individual homes.

So when The Sports Grounds Safety Authority (SGSA) https://sgsa.org.uk/insight/history-of-the-sgsa/ was established in 2011, taking over from the Football Licensing Authority (FLA) (itself only established in mid 1980's - after many stadia were built) a similar change in standard of regulation may well have occurred as the FLA regulations mainly were about an oversight on what the local councils did, which of course was variable by council.
What I'm still struggling to get my head around is a ground like Sellhurst Park which doesn't(??) have these systems in place is deem safe for thousands of fans to go every other week, while NWHL built to new higher building regs, better materials etc would be deemed unsafe without them??? I know I'm oversimplifying and almost certainly talking out of my backside here.
 
What I'm still struggling to get my head around is a ground like Sellhurst Park which doesn't(??) have these systems in place is deem safe for thousands of fans to go every other week, while NWHL built to new higher building regs, better materials etc would be deemed unsafe without them??? I know I'm oversimplifying and almost certainly talking out of my backside here.
I think it comes down to the old rule of new builds need to be built to current safety spec, old builds don't have to be retrospectively updated to the same spec.
 
What I'm still struggling to get my head around is a ground like Sellhurst Park which doesn't(??) have these systems in place is deem safe for thousands of fans to go every other week, while NWHL built to new higher building regs, better materials etc would be deemed unsafe without them??? I know I'm oversimplifying and almost certainly talking out of my backside here.

Same conundrum with say housing - I live in a 'low rise' block of flats which is now over 100 years old and certainly not built to modern standards required by building regulations (eg depth of foundations) and certainly in some areas we struggle to meet best practice for modern fire regulations where the original design of the building does not allow it, but we try to compensate in other ways.

And even flats/housing stock built in say the 1960's or 1980's will have similar (but different) issues.

So the question is whether the buildings are so unsafe that they should be knocked down or are they safe enough to continue to be used ? And if 75% of housing is more than 30 years old, are we really going to knock it down and spend £bns rebuilding or are we going to make it as safe as sensibly possible ?

Going back to your example of say Selhurst Park, or perhaps better still Hillsborough as being a bigger ground, the safety in those grounds will certainly be less than at NWHL. Maybe the The Sports Grounds Safety Authority (SGSA) will start to insist on more exacting standards (eg more fire marshals where appropriate fire detection systems cannot be easily retro-fitted or the original design of the ground doesn't allow it ).

BTW, it may be relevant to comment that the SGA are just bringing into force the 6th edition of 'The Green Guide' which is the regulations governing ground safety (replacing the 5th edition brought out 10 years ago), so from time to time some of the older grounds will have more regulation. But its not a 'vote winner' for the SGA to demand too many changes for older stadia.....unless and until a big problem arises at an older ground, and thank god that's not happened.
 
My understanding is that it will be back-lit eventually, so that is a rough approximation.
Yeah I heard about some fancy backlighting, I wonder why they haven't tested it yet, every other fucking light in the place has got the full works...maybe they're waiting to get the cladding finished to get the back lighting on it and then get the full effect going.
 
What I'm still struggling to get my head around is a ground like Sellhurst Park which doesn't(??) have these systems in place is deem safe for thousands of fans to go every other week, while NWHL built to new higher building regs, better materials etc would be deemed unsafe without them??? I know I'm oversimplifying and almost certainly talking out of my backside here.
I suppose it's like vintage cars don't have to have seat belts.
 
What I'm still struggling to get my head around is a ground like Sellhurst Park which doesn't(??) have these systems in place is deem safe for thousands of fans to go every other week, while NWHL built to new higher building regs, better materials etc would be deemed unsafe without them??? I know I'm oversimplifying and almost certainly talking out of my backside here.
Isn't Selhurt Park getting renovated in sections? I know they got greenlit to build a new stand. So I assume all these features will be added during that process.
 
Isn't Selhurt Park getting renovated in sections? I know they got greenlit to build a new stand. So I assume all these features will be added during that process.
Only aware that they have done something to the portacabin changing rooms (exactly what I don't know, they still look like Butlin caravans stacked on top of each other). They have or were going to do something to the Homesdale End but think that's now been put on ice and the kids in black costumes are back in the stand. They have plans in place to redevelop a new stadium, either with Sainsbury's or they are going to by the Sainsbury's on the site it shares with them.
 
Only aware that they have done something to the portacabin changing rooms (exactly what I don't know, they still look like Butlin caravans stacked on top of each other). They have or were going to do something to the Homesdale End but think that's now been put on ice and the kids in black costumes are back in the stand. They have plans in place to redevelop a new stadium, either with Sainsbury's or they are going to by the Sainsbury's on the site it shares with them.
Maybe it is Fulham then that got approved to build a entirely new stand. I remember it being one of them at least
 
With the West stand cladding almost finished there are a couple of new cameras for the East Stand about to come online, someone on SSC got a sneak preview...
IbwQIHk.png


Lw8CSNQ.png
 
Maybe it is Fulham then that got approved to build a entirely new stand. I remember it being one of them at least
I've lost track with what is going on there I know that they have publicised pictures of a new stadium development too, however, because their old stand (at the front) is listed they can't knock it down, thank God as it's a fantastic piece of football history, so any new development has to include it.
 
I still haven't been able to wrap my head around the screen shape on the outside of the west stand. Then I remembered them testing out the screen a few days back and it is possible to reason that they are in fact 2 screens by the two test patterns.



I looked at the old concept pictures of the stadium and didn't see this design in any of them.



The original design being a standard rectangle tv shape. So in my very dubious deductive reasoning I think I may have an answer. (forgive the bad drawing. Not great with a mouse)



Maybe??

Yes, I have had some time on my hands today.
 
Last edited:
Honestly I think people are looking too deep into the screen shape.

It's not there to watch movies on or anything, it's not meant to be showing the football, it's there for general branding and "visuals".

The shape of the screen is to make it blend into the curve of the stadium, nothing else. When it's actually up and running you'll see what I mean. You don't need to see the whole rectangle of a screen when it's only pretty pictures and stuff.
 
I still haven't been able to wrap my head around the screen shape on the outside of the west stand. Then I remembered them testing out the screen a few days back and it is possible to reason that they are in fact 2 screens by the two test patterns.



I looked at the old concept pictures of the stadium and didn't see this design in any of them.



The original design being a standard rectangle tv shape. So in my very dubious deductive reasoning I think I may have an answer. (forgive the bad drawing. Not great with a mouse)



Maybe??

Yes, I have had some time on my hands today.
If some company is going to pay £20m per year for naming rights, trust me they are going to be using every square inch of that screen. That screen will be no different than those on the inside (maybe not show game footage due to licencing reasons) but the screen will be dynamic, with adds and content from the club to keep eyeballs onto it and therefore exposure to those who have stumped up the money.
 
I still haven't been able to wrap my head around the screen shape on the outside of the west stand. Then I remembered them testing out the screen a few days back and it is possible to reason that they are in fact 2 screens by the two test patterns.



I looked at the old concept pictures of the stadium and didn't see this design in any of them.



The original design being a standard rectangle tv shape. So in my very dubious deductive reasoning I think I may have an answer. (forgive the bad drawing. Not great with a mouse)



Maybe??

Yes, I have had some time on my hands today.

too much time... you're looking into this too deeply. The naming rights might go to Nike but the sahpe of the screen will have nothing to do with it. It's for aesthetics and no other reason
 
If some company is going to pay £20m per year for naming rights, trust me they are going to be using every square inch of that screen. That screen will be no different than those on the inside (maybe not show game footage due to licencing reasons) but the screen will be dynamic, with adds and content from the club to keep eyeballs onto it and therefore exposure to those who have stumped up the money.
That sounds very reasonable and of course it doesn't really matter, as it's inside the stadium is what matters most.

I do still wonder about the design choice though. Why not keep it as shown in the concept image giving said sponsor more square inch's for their buck?

I'm not OCD on this, just interested.
 
Back
Top Bottom