Liverpool 2022 claim no fears over track at new Everton stadium

After an earthquake, they built an entire bridge/roadway in less than a week! Same with a sinkhole, within 36hrs they rebuilt an entire bridge!

Engineers at the top of their game, plus they gave us the saying, "got an arse like a Japanese flag", what could go wrong?

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/soul-and-spirit-of-everton-will-be-present-in-new-stadium-promises-architect-35855326.html

The fact that we still commemorate past colonialism with these irrelevant games is beyond me.

We should not have any caveat attached to the new stadium.

Is that kind of language really fucking necessary?

"It is claimed the accommodation of the temporary 400 metre athletics track will be achieved without any disruption to the "intimacy, fan proximity and atmosphere" of the stadium"

Methinks just about everybody involved dost protest too much about not affecting proximity.

Why is everyone harping on about the process of installing and removing a temporary track? Who's worried about that and who cares? The disruption of fitting and removing the track has nothing to do with what matters; it's the option to do this that impacts substantially on the end result in terms of proximity.

We have Meis himself highlighting "History" and culture, and saying that fans create atmosphere. Then he says:

"We don't want to put out imagery until we know what we can accomplish," he said.

I don't buy for one minute that a guy like Dan Meis doesn't know in seconds what having the track option implies to the basic starting parameters for his design, within his budget. So that statement is honest in that regard.

I believe that the club and Meis are very mindful of the passion that many fans feel for the very football-focused layout of Goodison and will do everything they can to soft pedal this aspect.

How what can be done?

Link

To repeat yourself "Why is everyone harping on about the process of installing and removing a temporary track? Who's worried about that and who cares?".

From the article linked at the top of this thread:

"Concerns over how the stadium could be adapted for athletics without significantly affecting the design has been one of the main concerns of Everton fans."

Affecting the stadium design. Not how the track will be built.

To clear any misunderstanding - the concern has been about the proximity of the fans for football, the final result when and if a track has been and gone, leaving a football-only stadium. So it's not the end of worries. Have you heard any Everton fans worried about the technicalities of building and removing the track itself?

The reason I linked to the photo of Hampden is because it shows what can result after the accommodation of a track.

The whole paragraph I originally wrote made my own point very clear:

"Why is everyone harping on about the process of installing and removing a temporary track? Who's worried about that and who cares? The disruption of fitting and removing the track has nothing to do with what matters; it's the option to do this that impacts substantially on the end result in terms of proximity."

i.e. compare Hampden with Goodison.

As this article questions the timescale – that is another matter and all good if the conversion is done so quickly.

End of my comments on this – I'm not sure what you're stuck on. I'm happy – maybe not with the debate of the design of the stadium yet, etc, but okay.

In defence of the games, I'm watching the Gold Coast gearing up for it next year and the whole place is benefiting already. There's a light railway being extended, stadiums, heaps of infrastructure investment, businesses thriving, tech companies popping up.

We've seen what the games have done for Manchester and Glasgow and I imagine Liverpool would be transformed by it. I think Everton being central to that is an incredible opportunity unlike Man City who adopted the Eastlands after the Games.

The question of atmosphere and passion being affected will be answered by money – let's see if we're putting ours where our mouth is.

I'm not stuck on anything. I'll have one last go, then I'll give up too.

Looking at the photo of Hampden, that is the kind of "Proximity" of fans to the pitch that has always resulted in stadiums that have been designed/built/proportioned to accommodate a track, even when it's removed later. The fans are set back away from the pitch.

Comparing with a picture of Goodison, built as a football-only stadium, it is seen that the stands and hence fans, are sited much closer to the pitch.

This and the extra atmosphere it creates are much loved by Blues, some of whom are concerned that it will be lost in a stadium designed to temporarily house a running track – because a stadium designed to contain a standard running track will have to have a larger flat area in the middle.

Unless of course you think Hampden looks like Goodison, in which case...

I am also guessing that he won't be trying to solve it with the Hampden "stick built" solution – too time consuming and labour intensive.

I have a feeling that we may well end up with a pitch sunk into the drained-off dock with steep stands on all sides. Now that would be threatening.

On the other hand, now that I have retired perhaps I have too much time on my hands.

It's all good fun – much better than our Kirby episode.