I agree with the idea. As a practical person I can't see what the problem is! They could have double the ground staff to maintain the pitch or it is even possible to have a pitch that can roll and alternate as in the Kings Dock plan. So the pitch is not a reason not to, so what is?
I believe It's more to do with pride and the rivalry, but that isn't going to stop because of a shared stadium. I have fond memories of watching games at Goodison Park but when you see how the stadium plans are holding both clubs back and could give both clubs a greater stadium than either club could afford on their own.
It would still most likely benefit Liverpool more as they have a greater need for higher weekly gates and Everton (while not successful) have struggled to sell out a 40,000 stadium. But a new super stadium could be something all scousers could be proud of and entice spectators to matches to encourage their team and immensely benefit both clubs.
I'm sure a stadium could be made big enough for both clubs to share the facilities, with advancement in technology it would be a surprise if tricks with lighting or similar could not achieve the stadium to have a red or blue appearance.
I for one would be proud of the Liverpool community if they could leave the rivalry on the pitch and pubs, as my stadiums bigger than your stadium should be left for the playgrounds and banished to the past. The numerous benefits sharing a stadium would bring should be so clear, I can't understand how the anti share group can argue yet want the best for their club at the same time!
Martin Clark, Posted 18/02/2011 at 23:25:16
Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer
1 Posted 19/02/2011 at 00:51:45
Knock down and sell off Goodison Park land, shift the ground back onto Mere Green knocking down what might need be, stick some open wooden stands up, charge 50p on the gate, sell some programmes with the teams in formation in the centre pages and offer a bovril and pie for refreshments.
I'm not being funny - we'd have 80,000 flock for that experience nowadays. It'd be the bollocks.
We'd go down. We'd go bust for sure. But at least we, and the players, would remember what its really all about.
The only modern stadium I've been to that I think has done a decent job is the Emirates - the rest are proper fucking wank. I know we cant build wooden stands in todays world but how about Amtico....? That stuff looks great!
That'd get my vote anyway.
2 Posted 19/02/2011 at 01:31:49
3 Posted 19/02/2011 at 01:34:17
Er... I guess not.
4 Posted 19/02/2011 at 01:56:00
5 Posted 19/02/2011 at 03:58:17
6 Posted 19/02/2011 at 07:38:14
7 Posted 19/02/2011 at 07:50:17
8 Posted 19/02/2011 at 08:03:52
The one that it's a ridiculous assumption that Everton could do with a much bigger capacity than the current 40,000 (or more precisely 36,000 + obstructed views) at Goodison.
Lets deal with a few facts here:
* Stats throughout England and Europe shows that football clubs with new stadiums improve their gates by 30%-50% (probably closer to the former though once the initial buzz has calmed).
* Everton sell out three to four games a season already. For these games, there is already an immidiate demand for a bigger a capacity.
* Our average attendance for the past 15 years has been cirka 35k. Note that we have 36,000 seats which are not "obstructed". I think it's fair to count a little differently with regards to the obstructed seats, which obviously doesn't sell out as easily. The fact that we have gone entire seasons selling out all un-obstructed views speaks volumes I think. I can't be arsed to dwelve into the stats, but I am guessing 60%+ of Everton league games in the past 15 years have sold 36k+. Possibly 70%.
9 Posted 19/02/2011 at 08:44:24
10 Posted 19/02/2011 at 09:04:23
We couldn't afford to nip down to B+Q to get some fuckin' lagging for the pipes before they froze...
11 Posted 19/02/2011 at 10:07:18
12 Posted 19/02/2011 at 10:39:47
Do they sell same seats twice to both sets of fans, if so how do derby matches work where 2 people would have same seat?
Otherwise fans could end up not getting their preferred seating locations. And could the club hosting a match sell the seats of a season ticket holder for the opposite team?
13 Posted 19/02/2011 at 10:48:01
Where the derby match is concerned it would work on the principal of home or away games. When the fixture list comes out the first derby match of the season would say that Everton are the home team so liverpool would only be given an allocation of say 3000- 5000 tickets. the same would apply for the second derby where everton would be the away team.
14 Posted 19/02/2011 at 11:05:27
Swathes of empty seats gleefully exposed on TV and referred to ad nauseum by opponents everywhere, what a marvellous backdrop that would provide.
Unless that can be overcome it seems an open invitation for eternal ridicule, if not we should go for the cheapest option which is improve Goodison in stages.
At least we'd retain our dignity and independence.
15 Posted 19/02/2011 at 11:49:44
16 Posted 19/02/2011 at 12:12:53
17 Posted 19/02/2011 at 12:19:50
It's a non-starter, and always has been.
18 Posted 19/02/2011 at 12:32:14
19 Posted 19/02/2011 at 14:46:41
20 Posted 19/02/2011 at 16:08:59
Also, why not try some imaginative ticketing. Offer tickets at a nominal price for children u-12 accompanied by an adult.
Last season Burton Albion hosted England vs Italy U17s. I took two of the grand kids. It cost £1 each to get each of them in - tho' I spent a chuffing fortune on programmes, burgers, chips and coca cola (and maybe Burton made strides towards picking up future adult fans!)
21 Posted 19/02/2011 at 16:54:51
My preferred new stadium would have been the Kings Dock but since that went the only common sense solution for me was and is to merge grounds.
Both teams would benefit. If one benefitted more than the other so what? No lost revenue during redevelopment, shared capital and income costs, shared stadium sponsorship (which would be greater for obvious reasons), both teams benefitting from extra revenue etc etc.
It will be interesting to see how and if Liverpool develop there ground. I actually think both teams will eventually get round the table and do the sensible thing.
22 Posted 19/02/2011 at 17:29:25
23 Posted 19/02/2011 at 18:04:19
There's no quick fix. The long term plan has to be to redevelop Goodison Park one side at a time as & when we can afford to & feel there's the demand for it. The first step would probably have to be the addition of corporate boxes & an additional tier of seats on the Park End. But don't hold your breath as it's unlikely to happen until we get some dramatic changes in the Boardroom.
24 Posted 19/02/2011 at 18:25:54
25 Posted 19/02/2011 at 21:10:57
My mother used to stand on the Gwaldys Street in the 60s and 70s and my Dad has a season ticket in the Upper Bullens, so I am not someone who doesn't have a feel for the club. I also have a few koppite mates, and I love the banter around Derby day and it can even get a little bitter at times. It doesn't stop us being mates though. Ground share for me ? and end up with a better stadium than the Mancs! :-)
26 Posted 19/02/2011 at 22:38:02
27 Posted 20/02/2011 at 00:59:34
28 Posted 20/02/2011 at 01:14:26
I fancy within the next 10-20 years there will be a European league system (with maybe 2 or 3 tiers). You may find the idea horrendous, but what prospects will we have if we miss that boat? A Derby with Tranmere perhaps?
We were founder members of the league, and the Prem. Lest we get left behind come the next revolution, we need a new stadium. Ground share seems like our best bet if we want anything decent.
29 Posted 20/02/2011 at 01:29:07
My main concern is, with the current ineptitude of our board, we will find ourselves crying poverty every year; they, being more business/devious minded, would offer for us to rent off them, our board would take it, 5 years later they would turf us out. This is my main fear, we would get shunted out of it, once all the building costs are cared for.
For them it is nothing new, they have been using our ground for over 100 years. Plus I would rather not share anything with their fans, it is bad enough sharing the same city.
30 Posted 20/02/2011 at 01:41:08
We and the shite gig at the same venues throughout the season, that still doesn't make us joined at the hip, we are two seperate bands if you like? But we are seperate nonetheless. Don't get me wrong, ground share obviously makes sense from a business point of view but, like I intimated in my original post, Asda and Tesco wouldn't dream of doing it, and for us it should be the last option imo
31 Posted 20/02/2011 at 07:39:01
32 Posted 20/02/2011 at 07:49:43
33 Posted 20/02/2011 at 09:44:43
All the arguements against are valid when sitting round havin a pint (well, most of them - the "where would we sit at the derby match?" got me), but are completely irrelevant to accountants, big American business and those seeking to avoid bankruptcy.
At the end of the day the cash situation at each club will dictate whether this ever moves past the hot-air stage.
34 Posted 20/02/2011 at 12:10:58
35 Posted 20/02/2011 at 13:15:27
36 Posted 20/02/2011 at 13:49:06
As for the ?we haven?t got a pot to piss in? and ?the economy?s fucked? arguments; true... but it?s not the way it will always be ? hopefully ? and either you stand there wailing we?re all doooomed, or you try to get the ball rolling and make things happen.
A shared stadium is not one of the options it is the ONLY option, if both clubs wish to keep up with the super clubs (and remember it wasn?t so long ago that we were part of the big 5 ? nothing stays the same). KEIOC had a great plan to have a football village but the cost was seen as prohibitive, but it just needs someone with a bit of vision and balls to try to push it through. What we don?t need is the ?I?m not sitting on a RS seat? mentality dragging it back.
37 Posted 21/02/2011 at 02:31:43
David Hallwood ? sorry, mate, I don't agree at all. The Shite's owner has already categorically stated he is going to rebuild Anfield... so why in the hell would they need us? They wouldn't and they don't.
The last time you could talk about us in the same light as the former top 4 was never. By the time the Premier League got past it's infancy,we where skint and where perennially struggling to stay up. Its infancy was nearly 20 years ago, in footballing circles that's a long time ago.
Sorry David... we don't need the RS ever.
38 Posted 21/02/2011 at 02:58:40
39 Posted 21/02/2011 at 11:51:23
Is it? Has anyone done a study to show what can be done, how it could be phased and the approximate cost of each phase? The plans that have been on here, originally Goodison for Everton (I think) and latterly the plans that I think Tom Hughes put forward.
Should a buyer, or buyers come in for us, they would look at the option of developing the ground, surely.
40 Posted 21/02/2011 at 12:44:47
"give a good reason against ground share, funny no-one did."
I've posted this before when groundshare has popped up....
Perhaps you might start with.... The same cohesive arguments that see so many of the world?s remaining sharing clubs so passionately striving for stadium independence, despite its obvious and massive expense.....? I?m a bit wary of those spouting the purple-seated nirvanna as the only way forward (I remember a whole thread on the seat colour alone, indicating some people?s ignorance of the main issues with the sharing strategy).
There is almost nothing I would like more than for us to play at a truly state of the art stadium, but I'm not sure I?d want it at any cost, and ultimately with the inevitable loss of big proportion of our identity. The 2 clubs are completely separate entities, and make no mistake, they have thrived on their separate and strong identities too, it?s not something in the small print nor a mere minor detail of the relationship we have with our club.
However imponderable, it?s as real as the blue shirt on the player?s backs..... this IMO cannot by definition be rationalised into one stadium, although it?s open to debate. I?m also sure people on here have been going the match over a wide range of periods, and therefore their feelings for GP may also vary from quite indifferent, to complete reverence.
But please remember "Sharing" has NEVER worked anywhere in this country. For it even to be theoretically viable on a basic business level alone, it requires complete parity. Neither club should be seen as the other?s superior, otherwise the other will eventually be seen as the poor lodger who never fills the place (as we surely would be in a superstadia designed to meet LFC?s greater capacity needs), but how can long term parity be guaranteed? How do you maintain that, and why would anyone want to?
By the nature of competition, we aspire to be better than the other, meaning the equilibrium that supports the whole relationship is false and cannot and should not be sustained! Can anyone really argue that we?d enter this alliance on anything like an equal basis? In practical and strategic terms, even if funding brings down our contribution to a manageable level (which is highly debateable alone), who will have benefitted most....?
LFC getting a stadium they couldn?t afford otherwise, that allows them to average 30-40k more than us and leave us forever in their wake, or Everton who get a stadium they can rarely fill, but who may be left with equal running costs, when in actual fact they probably only needed a few thousand more seats and boxes in the first place?
I started going the match regularly in the mid-70?s, LFC were winning everything in sight, the only thing that reaffirmed my dad?s assertions that we were a great club was the single biggest and permanent representation of our identity, and that was our home. For me it has always been a major part of the whole match-going experience. During those years of low achievement, set against their unprecedented and overwhelming success, god knows how many of the "floating vote" of my generation defected to the other side. How many more might have found it so much easier to attend on the alternate weekend when the red shirted successful ones ran out on our "common ground" if we had shared then.
The separate grounds helped define the clubs.... Would we still be getting 30 odd thousand every week now? Diluting our identity in this way could be irreversible, and the ensuing loss of identity (that real and valuable asset) can only ever be detrimental. There have been times in our history when that has been all we could hang on to, so we should n?t be so dismissive, nor keen to surrender it.
Alternately, you could argue that this could be the only way to one day grow into a superstadium, but my feelings are that LFC would probably be out of sight by then, aided by our compliance.
People often refer to Milan as the bench-mark. Personally I find it hard to discern between the Milan clubs, they blend together in my eyes. The backdrop, magnificent as it is, fading not strengthening their distinct identities. They have also had 50 years to get used to the arrangement, and yet still both clubs and fans yearn for their own stadia (with plans drawn for an new Inter stadium), and you don?t have to look too far to see abject failure, and even complete collapse with similar Italian co-existence.
Juventus/Torino have jumped at the opportunity to separate, regardless of cost. Even to the extent that Juve are now building a new smaller stadium inside the demolished and comparatively young stadio del alpi, regarded as one of the best stadiums in the world at Italia 90. While Torino have gratefully occupied the aging communale. Similarly with the Rome pair, who both have plans to leave the Olympico in the future.
Probably the most comparable shared-stadium might be the Munich situation where 1860's move to the Alianz arena has been pretty much disastrous, with Bayern having to eventually buy 1860 out of the shared ownership, only reinforcing their difference in status not aleviating it. Maybe our city can redefine the shared stadium strategy, but I think that's akin to chasing perpetual motion?
Therefore, IMO you can ready yourselves for choruses of "bring back my Goodison to me" a la Charlton as soon as the novelty has worn off, or even worse the fate that befell Wimbledon who saw the obvious economic benefits of renting as too attractive to resist. Similarly for us, there may be no going back!!!
Emotional? Subjective? Maybe!
But please consider your stance on this carefully, and if you?re ever lucky enough to have an anfield derby ticket, take a good look around their place next time pre KO, and tell me your stomach isn?t churning at the dark and slightly unfamiliar surroundings, try explaining to yourself that it?s only valueless emotions causing your unease, then for a moment close your eyes and try to imagine you?re in GP. I am sure then you?ll instantly live that old adage....... there?s no place like home (warts and all). Emotions might not come with pound signs on them, but sometimes their value is almost priceless!
41 Posted 21/02/2011 at 14:09:18
42 Posted 22/02/2011 at 00:19:46
43 Posted 22/02/2011 at 20:19:00
Add Your Comments
In order to post a comment to the MailBag, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.
Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and MailBag submissions across the site.