Sir John Hall si reported in today's Times as having attended the launch of Paul Joannou's new book on Saint James's as saying that he partly wishes we had moved as there's "an element of the carbuncle about the place". Possibly Sir John, but when you're marching up to Gallowgate with that monument to Geordie pride in your vision, aren't you glad it's not on some brownfield somewhere but remains in the very heart of the city and the community?

-- Anonymous, November 02, 2000

Answers

Also, apparently the Gallowgate End couldn't be built up any further because it has already reached the maximum weight the foundations can bear. So, it's not just Leazes Terrace that's the trouble.

-- Anonymous, November 02, 2000

Underpinning Dougal, very expensive but a solution if the need is there.

Our Construction industry is quite good you know.

-- Anonymous, November 02, 2000

Apart from when it's milking the rail companies and dragging their arses fixing damaged tracks.....

-- Anonymous, November 02, 2000

Actually, owing to where Gallowgate is, it si actually almost on the Metro line which is why there appraently can't be underpinning - they've done their homework, you know :-))

-- Anonymous, November 02, 2000

Yeh apart from that, anyway I don't count Railways in Construction.

-- Anonymous, November 02, 2000

It's easy to see why you came to that conclusion DeBuilder......because NOTHING CONSTRUCTIVE is ever done on the railways ;)

-- Anonymous, November 02, 2000

I was talking to a Surz fan after the match and he was talking how good the ground is. He then went on to say , yea it'll be great when it's finnished adding it looks a bit lop-sided.

I for one think we should have moved.

-- Anonymous, November 02, 2000

Seconded, Dave leF & SJH.

-- Anonymous, November 02, 2000

Hang on. SJP is a carbuncle?

HAS ANYBODY LOOKED AT THE BLOODY METRO CENTRE RECENTLY??

sorry for shouting but he's obviously barking. Like in the Viz cartoon....

-- Anonymous, November 02, 2000

Much as we love it as our spiritual home, and the fact that it's dominance on the skyline is now an ever-present reminder of it's place in our affections - it is an absolute monstrosity that should never have received planning approval.

-- Anonymous, November 03, 2000

Monstrosity's bit harsh, Clarky.

-- Anonymous, November 03, 2000

St James' will only look totally impressive if they complete the "wraparound". Until then in some ways it compares with Notts Forest's stand that slopes down 2/3rd's of the way along and Southampton's end stand which is angular in appearance, both examples which look as if the design was altered due to lack of funds to do a proper job, mmmmmm.

Shame about the problems surrounding the Leazes Terrace and the foundations for the Gallowgate as it may mean the rest of the ground will never be extended.

-- Anonymous, November 03, 2000

Not having seen it in the flesh yet, I suppose I`m not really qualified to comment. But, from the pictures I have seen, it does look lop-sided and kind of unfinished. Not wishing to revive all the arguements about `where` it should be, I do think a totally new stadium would have been better.(:o)

-- Anonymous, November 03, 2000

Might have escaped the Gallowgate curse....

-- Anonymous, November 03, 2000

Put me on your list as well Clarky. I don't think monstrosity is too strong.

I'm just about getting by where I am, I like much better the way I can see the play build up, but it wouldn't surprise me if loads of season tickets are allowed to lapse when the novelty of having a ticket on any terms begins to wear off. I'd hate to be way up the back all the time.

In a way, I think making the stadium so big could end up blowing up in our faces because it's only the nutters like us who will settle for anything that's thrown at us. I can see the 'not totally committed' settling for watching live footy on TV with the odd visit to the ground when the fancy takes them.

Doom and gloom or realism ? Don't ask me, it's just the way I see things going.

-- Anonymous, November 03, 2000

Hmmmmm....

a/ i would've thought most of us would've like a brand new, gorgeous-looking new stadium but the NIMBY's put paid to that.

b/ lop-sided or not, we didn't have the capacity to satisfy demand. Therefore, we extended the ground.

c/ nothing the club can do about Gallowgate & the council won't let us extended Leazes terrace.

talk about not being happy unless we've something to moan about.

Personally, i'm happy and proud to have a season ticket that i couldn't have dreamed about a few years back. The ground is still at its historical [and spiritual] home and right in the city centre, unlike most other clubs.

It's lop-sided and doesn't win any design awards. So what. More criminal is that somewhere like Killingworth was ever put up in the first place.

-- Anonymous, November 03, 2000

Min,

If you check back you'll find that I have consistently criticised the development ever since it was conceived - and am not just 'moaning' after the fact.
In addition, I'm not simply criticising NUFC - in fact, given the deck of cards they were finally dealt, they have delivered a very good quality product. The view of the ground from the west (ie. Barrack Rd.) is excellent, and perfectly acceptable architecturally.
My problem is that the entire project was ill-conceived and should never have gone ahead in the first place.
I am on record as vehemently criticising the City Council, who lacked both the guts and the vision to see the value in the Club's original proposal, help them win over the doubters, and work with the Club to create a truly beautiful world-class, landscaped area to the north of the City embracing Gallowgate, Leazes Park, and the Castle Leazes area - much like the Olympic Stadium area in Munich. Naturally, this would have included a fantastic new purpose-designed stadium, within ear-shot of the spiritual home, that we could all have been truly proud of - and importantly, where everyone would have had a decent view.
In the event, through a lack of civic fortitude and vision, we've finished up with what we've got - a montrous, perpetually lopsided, carbuncle on the skyline, and a stadium for a spectator sport where many of the additional seats, provided at such massive cost, afford a very remote view of the proceedings down below - a problem that as Pit Bill warns may lead to these seats becoming difficult to sell out in the future.

In addition to all this, Leazes Park is still an under-invested, uncared for civic disgrace - and the Castle Leazes area is still a derelict haven for muggers, prostitutes and drug-dealers. Does this scenario suggest an overall success? You draw your own conclusions.

What else could the Club have done? Well, in my view they should have said quite clearly to the City Council - either you work with us to produce an acceptable stadium proposal for NUFC in the City, or we will move out and build elsewhere.
They should have progressed plans to make that a real and viable alternative, and forced the hands of the Council. At the end of all the posturing, I don't believe the Council would have dared to allow this to happen, and faced with a very stark choice would have relented.
At the end of the day I can tell you that if it had been my decision I would built elsewhere, rather than spend what has been spent on SJP - but I will always believe it would not have come to that if NUFC had been stronger and made moving an entirely realistic alternative.

-- Anonymous, November 04, 2000

Clarky,

I don't doubt for a minute anything you've stated previously and i wholeheartedly agree that the club should've put their foot down - you're obviously in the know about this far more than i am - enlighten me....

Monstrosity, Carbuncle, whatever. Aesthetically it could be better, it could be worse. It's functional. Financially, as a plc, could the club really have just said: well, let's wait for a few more years and see if the council relaxes it's stance a little? It's a like a confectionary giant not making enough chocolate bars to satisfy demand. It just wouldn't happen.

My mate's cousin actually worked on the designs for the first phase [enclosing the ground] and then, as far as i'm aware, refused to work on the upper tiers for precisely the reasons you state.

I think the club probably [unwisely] thought that by adding capacity in the short term they might force the council's hand in allowing a redevelopment of Leazes Terrace and/or Gallowgate at some point in the future. I'm no engineer, i'm a designer - how 'impossible' is the Gallowgate redevelopment? Of course it could look better but we're dealing with a 'what if' situation now, or can the Castle Leazes project be revived? Not for 10-15 years in my opinion, and that's dependent on the success on the field.

Short term/Long term. It's obviously a short-term solution. Always has been surely? Damned if they do, damned if they don't....

-- Anonymous, November 04, 2000

Min,

I'm afraid what we've got is "it" - there is no 'long term' solution.
This discussion is tempting me to get into some of my pet peeves right now. I'm afraid the decision to create 'the carbuncle' is symptomatic of much that goes on in this country now - be it the Dome, our transport systems, taxation philosophy, the NHS, etc., etc., etc.
It seems everything is the product of muddled thinking, half-@rsed compromise, and lack of vision.
We have become the masters of "make do and mend", rather than identifying "the right thing" and then figuring out how to get there. I'm afraid I'm in full-blown Victor Meldrew mode right now, so you'll just have to excuse me.

-- Anonymous, November 04, 2000

then i think we're pretty much in agreement.

Lack of vision, forward planning, half arsed answers, make do and mend. Some of the many problems with British management for years and years. And it runs deeper than we could imagine. I'd like to be able to tell you that from over here things look better but they don't. You just realise the crap you're fobbed off with as 'quality' and the ridiculous price you pay for the privilege. ; o (

-- Anonymous, November 04, 2000