|
Post by ThrobsBlackHat on Oct 30, 2014 0:20:32 GMT 1
Greenhous Meadow is definitely what guaranteed our future but for me last night just showed how hopelessly insufficient the facilities are.
Get a capacity crowd and it takes almost the entire half time to go to the bog and 20 mins plus to get a drink during a 15 minute half time, then another 10=15 minutes to get out of a gate into a narrow path to get to the car.
Some decent stuff was got right but the concourses were so poorly designed you wonder whether there might be legal recourse. You wonder why during the week you can't stand indoors to buy a ticket. You wonder why the shop is so small.
The euphoria of last night does not hide that, it highlights it for me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2014 1:15:57 GMT 1
We weren't exactly setting L2 alight at the turn of the Century and were lucky to stay in it on many occasions. Didn't the floods put us on the brink a few times? And would RW have kept supporting us if there had not been a new ground on the horizon? Could he have paid the wages to cover a month or more every couple of years due to Floods? Even at the basement division Football professionalism has improved so much that good playing surfaces are now expected in L2 and If you look at York, Grimsby,Luton and others who have been trying for years to get a new ground and compare them with ourselves, Rotherham and Doncaster or even Swansea then I think that the ''new ground affect'' is THE catalyst for progression. A few points in response to this: 1) In our last season at Gay Meadow we finished in the play-offs and I remember fellow managers commenting on our playing budget (getting the likes of Drummond, Asamoah & Ben Davies to sign for us over other clubs). Hardly a sign of a club that was struggling to survive 2) I stand to be corrected but pretty sure that the floods debate is something that gets exaggerated. There was one season where we didnt have a home game for 2 months or so but generally there wasnt many games called off. 3) Regarding the pitch, the pitch at the new ground arguably was actually our downfall under GP as we struggled to adapt. But yes I accept the pitch wasnt the greatest, however 'clever' managers used it to their advantage like GP did. 4) New grounds dont necessarily mean progress, there's plenty of clubs in shiny new stadiums who havent progressed or gone backwards (Oxford, Darlington, Coventry). Equally there's plenty of clubs who have remained stable or progressed (on the field) with lack of funds and/or not the greatest of grounds and gates (Yeovil, Scunny, Walsall, Rochdale, Vale, Crewe etc) 5) What do you class as progression? At Gay Meadow in the final season we were in L2, at the new ground we are currently in L2 and clearly struggled to compete in L1, is that progression? I dont doubt for a moment that the new ground has attracted new fans, brought us in extra revenue, made us a more professional club, attracted players we previously couldnt afford and generally taken the club to a different level in stature. However Im just not convinced we would be on the verge of bankruptcy at the old ground, of course we will never know. 1. Could the New Ground on the horizon and the future extra income attracted a higher a standard of player. Did a Chairman put his money in due to seeing a return on his investment with a L2/L1 Club in a suitable Stadium and didn't want to risk seeing a Non-league side playing in it, we hadn't long left the Conference before moving? Crowds were around half what we've been getting at New Meadow so even without the Corporate side could we have sustained the place we have in the league? 2. You wouldn't lose all the money from the game but you can never match the income from a postponed Saturday fixture moved to a Weeknight you could knock off a few grand for every postponed match. And how would we have payed the players without a fixture for a few Months? It wasn't just the big Floods even a heavy down pour could see a postponement. Would the ground have coped with last Winter's Floods I'm sure there have been other Winters that would have seen plenty of games called off at the Gay Meadow that the Greenhous has coped with ? If we hadn't sold it prior to the financial crisis would we have done so since? 3. Football in L2/1 has changed so much that you can regularly see good passing Football in it now. We would have had to change our strategy for home games could we have regularly played a good passing game at Gay Meadow?. The Pitch along with the facilities has allowed us to get International matches that the Gay meadow would never have had got. I also believe that having good Football will see us attract young hungry players looking to either progress with us or impress Managers higher up the New Meadow allows them to do this. Also what ever you think of the Loan market the parent Club do look at far more than just being a mate of the Manger before sending them out. A good Manager would never send a Player out on loan unless they play a certain way, trust the loaning Club's Coaching Staff and have a Pitch that wont turn your ankle if you run on it. 4. Darlington, Coventry and Oxford are examples of Chairman/owners not having a clue Darlington apart both Oxford and Coventry(if they ever sort out their issues) have assets that are beneficial to the Club I doubt Oxford would be better off in the long term in the old ground. If Coventry had good owners since their move I'm sure the Stadium would have aided them in sustaining a Championship Club with an odd promotion challenge. From the Premier League down you see Clubs who cannot progress due to being hindered by their Stadium. Everton - Man City, City have had Two take overs since the Etihad was built and have progressed ever since it's likely that not having to fund a new Stadium was the catalyst for the take-over. Liverpool - United Old Trafford may not be new but it's development has meant that they now dwarf anything that Anfield could ever take. Spurs are unlikely to ever Bridge the gap that the Emirates has given Arsenal. You could say that paying for the Emirates has held Arsenal back for 10 years but it will allow them to compete for the next 100 especially since the introduction of FFP You mention S****horpe and Yeovill they have ''struck gold'' with Managers. They and Walsall have relatively new ground's that have been able to take advantage of their success. Walsall has been redeveloped and could the income by being one of the first Club's move into a new stadium have given them an advantage over the rest? S****horpe see a new ground as so important there having another one built 30 years later. We would have found life far tougher in L2 without the New Meadow and would have gradually fallen behind the competition. 5. Progression for Shrewsbury is moving from an average to lower L2 Club into a top L2 club with frequent promotion challenges. With the right Manager we are in a position to become a Walsall/Crewe and sustain a L1 Club and with our own income financing it. Doncaster and Rotherham have been in far worse situations than us but look where they are now? I don't think we are too far off them in terms of potential. We will soon start to see the benefit of having ''Kids for a quid'' and a Family friendly Stadium that (Gay Meadow struggled to be) as those Kids will now start becoming full price spectators. Even at a quid I wouldn't have taken my Daughter to Gay Meadow at three years old.
|
|
|
Post by champagneprince on Oct 30, 2014 1:17:38 GMT 1
Yep, still lots of changes needed especially on the back of this game where new fans will have enjoyed the team performance and may well give us a second go.
The little things are important to the matchday experience and perhaps this is something that can be worked on by the SP ? One big list, which gets prioritised and then worked through one-by-one.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2014 1:48:11 GMT 1
I think we would have.
It's 7 years on and the lower leagues are very different places. They are more professionally run and The Conference is especially difficult to get out of. Surviving on 3k crowds (probably more likely 2k) and with people reluctant to pay more than £15 because of the cesspit conditions, I suspect we would now be mid-table Conference and with a dwindling fanbase, heading towards Hereford-like status if we hadn't got there already.
Crowds were above 4k the last few seasons there if memory serves me correctly. Why would we now be getting 2k? Just because Hereford are?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2014 1:52:48 GMT 1
Catering seems to be an issue. I didn't go round the front of the Stadium so don't know if any extra was available but a few Catering Vans around the Car Park would see pressure eased off the Stadiums. I think we maybe one of the only Grounds without any. The path needs sorting out with proper lighting the way the Stadium is Floodlighted means it's actually harder to see your way due to the Fence you have a type of strobe affect meaning your eyes cannot adjust to the dark or the light and Torches a pretty useless . What would happen if a Club brought a ''Firm'' that had no intention of attending the match and lay in wait around there? I mean it's pretty secluded and you could easily hide a a decent number in the Fields if they were determined enough.
|
|
blue1963
Shropshire County League
Posts: 15
|
Post by blue1963 on Oct 30, 2014 1:57:25 GMT 1
Interesting, a little bit of success and the chairman seems to drop out of the frame. Some of the abuse he at the end of the season from so called long term loyal fans was disgraceful. It hurt him badly believe me, and several of the so called loyal town fans (block 14) were lucky they didn't get a right hander from my daughter who knows the chairman a little bit better than they do.
|
|
|
Post by jamo on Oct 30, 2014 10:23:08 GMT 1
Interesting, a little bit of success and the chairman seems to drop out of the frame. Some of the abuse he at the end of the season from so called long term loyal fans was disgraceful. It hurt him badly believe me, and several of the so called loyal town fans (block 14) were lucky they didn't get a right hander from my daughter who knows the chairman a little bit better than they do. Oh Dear !! someone's touchy.
|
|
|
Post by AlisonS on Oct 30, 2014 12:43:33 GMT 1
The Gay Meadow would have hamstrung us so much that we'd be no more than a Club fighting off relegation each season until the inevitable. We'd be getting gates of 2,500-3,000 and struggling to gain new fans due to being so Female/Child unfriendly. A Winter like the last(and even last night's weather would have put 's on the match that's before the standard of Football we could have played on Gay Meadows pitch) could have killed us off. It's quite possible that our only highlight would be a couple of games against Wrexham and Telford or worse Hereford. Female unfriendly? - speak for yourself! My idea of friendly is a nice sociable terrace - and being able to get out of the ground quickly and safely....
|
|
|
Post by ThrobsBlackHat on Oct 30, 2014 12:52:13 GMT 1
I think they are alluding to the lack of toilets etc on two sides of the ground, which was a common complaint amongst female supporters.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2014 13:34:21 GMT 1
Greenhous Meadow is definitely what guaranteed our future but for me last night just showed how hopelessly insufficient the facilities are. Get a capacity crowd and it takes almost the entire half time to go to the bog and 20 mins plus to get a drink during a 15 minute half time, then another 10=15 minutes to get out of a gate into a narrow path to get to the car. Some decent stuff was got right but the concourses were so poorly designed you wonder whether there might be legal recourse. You wonder why during the week you can't stand indoors to buy a ticket. You wonder why the shop is so small. The euphoria of last night does not hide that, it highlights it for me. Couldnt agree more. Il make it clear that I recognise that Gay Meadow was coming towards the end of its life and something had to happen but I strongly dislike the shiny, sterile new grounds which is why I am partly anti 'New Meadow' but Im also against it due to the terrible design and the lack of thought for fans. For me we have had a once in a lifetime opportunity with the ground move but failed due to the design, Ive said before that the club delivered a basic shell of a ground but lets not forget that: 1) Its now a lot more incovenient to get to than the old ground 2) Parking is a nightmare 3) There's not many pubs and other facilities nearby 4) The design of the concourses is poor 5) Access/Exit points are poor 6) The club shop is small 7) The bizzare decision not to have executive boxes all across the East Stand 8) The lack of thought in the overall design in terms of segreation (not being able to give extra tickets to away fans for example) And then also lets not forget that if it hadnt been for the supporters groups, the matchday experience would be even worse as without them..... 1) We wouldnt have any tv's in the concourses 2) The concourses would be grey 3) We wouldnt have a place to drink at the ground (Power League) 4) We wouldnt have the short cut open at the back of the West Stand meaning only one access/exit point 5) We wouldnt have a scoreboard at the ground Plus probably many more things Ive forgotten
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 30, 2014 13:48:57 GMT 1
Interesting, a little bit of success and the chairman seems to drop out of the frame. Some of the abuse he at the end of the season from so called long term loyal fans was disgraceful. It hurt him badly believe me, and several of the so called loyal town fans (block 14) were lucky they didn't get a right hander from my daughter who knows the chairman a little bit better than they do. Is your Daughter Jayne?? and i still think its time for him to retire!
|
|
|
Post by mattmw on Oct 30, 2014 17:23:03 GMT 1
Interesting, a little bit of success and the chairman seems to drop out of the frame. Some of the abuse he at the end of the season from so called long term loyal fans was disgraceful. It hurt him badly believe me, and several of the so called loyal town fans (block 14) were lucky they didn't get a right hander from my daughter who knows the chairman a little bit better than they do. Don't recall the Chairman getting abuse, just criticism of some of the decisions he and style of leadership. Most of these seemed justified and reasonable, and have since been acted on by the club, suggesting they were needed. Success on the pitch this season has helped but hopefully the chairman still realises there is a massive revamp of the club needed to establish us in league one
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Oct 30, 2014 17:29:06 GMT 1
Interesting, a little bit of success and the chairman seems to drop out of the frame. Some of the abuse he at the end of the season from so called long term loyal fans was disgraceful. It hurt him badly believe me, and several of the so called loyal town fans (block 14) were lucky they didn't get a right hander from my daughter who knows the chairman a little bit better than they do. Don't recall the Chairman getting abuse, just criticism of some of the decisions he and style of leadership. Most of these seemed justified and reasonable, and have since been acted on by the club, suggesting they were needed. Success on the pitch this season has helped but hopefully the chairman still realises there is a massive revamp of the club needed to establish us in league one I think that's important that. I can't say I've ever been abusive towards the chairman but I have certainly been critical. And I suspect that's how the vast majority of supporters have gone about things too...
|
|
|
Post by staffordshrew on Oct 30, 2014 23:48:35 GMT 1
Gay Meadow was very flaky at the end - rotting wood, etc. Thanks to the chairman's passion we have a ground that doesn't attract all those "tiny little old ground" type comments when we stage ties against top of the Premier leugue sides, at least i didn't hear any.
I wish Muller would realise that they could help finance the permanent filling in of the draughty areas and call them the "Muller corners".
|
|
|
Post by wiganshrew2 on Oct 31, 2014 21:51:56 GMT 1
Greenhous Meadow looked VERY good on T.V. on Tuesday Night. Very different from Gay Meadow in 2003!!!! I think Dave does have a point about the facilities though.
|
|
|
Post by quinnster on Nov 1, 2014 19:56:57 GMT 1
There would no doubt have been a wish list when the ground was designed, and like a lot of big projects, red tape and finances, would have meant compromises, for the club, i.e RW, the board/club.
I thought the local authorities were difficult, and I witnessed a few meetings at the old SABC HQ at Oakley Manor. RW must always be given credit, for pushing it through, and the club has come a long way since Jake's time, when he had to deal with a low budget, and the problems and limitations the old ground imposed. Lets not forget, it was the Taylor Report, which nearly killed the club, because when there was a big game, the limit was still limited to just 8,000, including away fans, meaning maybe just 6500'ish Salopians. ....or gloryhunters.....anyway, looking at how Hereford have done, it just illustrates, how lucky we are.
Often threads crop up about "Atmosphere", and preferring, the old Meadow, I loved the place, it was Home, but the reality is, GM, is home, and whilst we can critiscise the atmosphere, and it being a little sterile, it's us the fans who have it in our attendance, to change this, more than just a building, it's about the people, and dare I say, the singers, would be more effective, if they moved to the South Stand. However, 19 is where they are, and at least they Do SING. Oooh, and before I finish, a Club Terrace "SONG", but again, it's down to the people.
A massive week for the club, and well done to all. FLOREAT SALOPIA.
|
|