Shamrock Rovers Ultras

[magpie seanie]

If internationals are to be played then the soccer pitch MUST be between 100m and 110m in length. FIFA have different dimension allowed for soccer internationals.

It seems to me that a minimum size adult GAA pitch could be facilitated with a bit of compromise. A grass area of 140m by 90m would cover this (5m run off on each side is loads). Soccer fans at the end of the pitch would still be closer to the goals than in the Brandywell and there's no problem there with atmosphere.

[tayto]

Evil genuis, Look i realise that maybe an issue, and it's a a far stronger arguement then the lads are putting forward.

Hoop is the one trying to argue the principle that fitting any GAA pitch into any stadium automatically makes that venue unsuitable for soccer. He came up with this argument to try and justify the offensive banner Rovers fans held up at a recent match, he went on to say Thomas Davis are trying to "destroy" this project, and even said Rovers were the "victims". He is claiming that the crowd would have to be 30m from either end in order to fit a GAA pitch. This simply isn't the case according to the regulation pitch dimensions above.

Now, Thomas Davis have a architects report saying the pitch could be expanded without changing the capacity of the stadium on the tallaght site. The Rovers lads, of course, doubt this report exists but I can't imagine TD have a case if the capacity would be badly reduced. I would imagine this will be looked at when the review comes around.

I actually wouldnt argue Thomas Davis's case if the capacity would have to be reduced, as Rovers will need the higher capacity for cup matches-Dublin derbys and the like.

[hoop]

Now, Thomas Davis have a architects report saying the pitch could be expanded without changing the capacity of the stadium on this site. The Rovers lads, of course, doubt this report exists but I can't imagine TD have a case if the capacity would be badly reduced. I would imagine this will be looked at when the review comes around.

I actually wouldnt argue Thomas Davis's case if the capacity would have to be reduced, as Rovers will need the higher capacity for cup matches-Dublin derbys and the like.

Well it would be a great help to all of us if Thomas Davis were to release their secret plans - NOW - and not maybe in a couple of years (depending on the timeframe for the Judicial Review).

They have continually stated that capacity wouldn't be reduced, but how can this be the case if the second stand is reduced to a couple of yards (in depth) of terrace???

What they MIGHT mean, is that the capacity after the planned FIRST PHASE of construction would not be reduced. But the second phase would never be possible - so the planned final capacity of around 10 thousand (or possibly more) is out the window.

[Evil Genius]

That maximum possible soccer pitch size is somewat bizarre in that just about NOBODY actually uses it. It's way too big.

I just did a quick google search and found that the pitch in Old Trafford measures 105m x 68m.

Indeed. What people are overlooking is that the pitch dimensions were originally laid down before soccer went professional. Also, unlike Gaelic Games, soccer clubs sometimes shared with other sports (usually cricket), which required a much larger playing area. Consequently, you had unusual shared grounds such as at Northampton Town, where there were stands built on only three sides of the ground.

However, when soccer started attracting large crowds, the cricket clubs moved out, thereby allowing grandstands/terraces to be built on the redundant playing area.

Further, with the all-seater requirements for international matches, plus the top tier of English football, ever larger stands have had to be shoehorned around ever smaller pitches. For example, when Stamford Bridge was re-built in the 90's, the old dog track was completely removed. And when Wembley re-opens, you'lll see that the dogs have been evicted from there, as well.

Plus, with many grounds formerly built in suburban areas (i.e. with lots of space) now facinf encroachment by urban sprawl, space is ever more at a premium.

Of course, none of the above particularly applies in the Tallaght case, but it serves to show why standard soccer pitches are invariably at the minimum end of the permitted maximum/minimum dimensions.

One further consideration re sharing facitlities generally is that due to the nature of the games, plus tradition (I guess), soccer places much great emphasis on spectator accommodation (seats or terracing) behind the goals. By contrast, rugby fans much prefer to watch from alongside the pitch. Consequently, soccer grounds are invariably developed on all four sides, whereas rugby grounds often have minimal (even no) development at either end. (See Ravenhill, even the old Landsdowne, as examples)

I don't know about GAA sports. Do they have the same "Kop"-style tradition as soccer, or is it more like rugby?  

[hoop]

He is claiming that the crowd would have to be 30m from either end in order to fit a GAA pitch. This simply isn't the case according to the regulation pitch dimensions above.

The planned soccer pitch is 100 metres in length.

Thomas Davis want the playing surface extended to 160 metres.

Fact.

[tayto]

Well its a far more logical arguement then the one you've been trying to go down till now hoop.

Was their report shown to the judge who granted the review?

Why hasnt the minister been using this line of arguement to make his case instead of saying he made a "promise" to Rovers that it'd be soccer only.

A lot more people would understand the decision if there was a clear logical argument behind it like a reduction in capacity.

[tayto]

He is claiming that the crowd would have to be 30m from either end in order to fit a GAA pitch. This simply isn't the case according to the regulation pitch dimensions above.

The planned soccer pitch is 100 metres in length.

Thomas Davis want the playing surface extended to 160 metres.

Fact.

Well unplan the soccer pitch and negociate with Thomas Davis about the size of the GAA pitch.
OH no you're right, far better to let this get dragged through the courts. Well done mnister.

[dublinfella]

tayto,

If TD actually had this report (bear in mind they or the 'architects' have never had access to the site) that says capacity wouldnt be reduced and a gaa pitch included and it was viable, they would be in. No arguments from anyone.

They have been asked for this report and refused to share. They didnt introduce it as 'evidence' in their Judicial Review application.

What does that say

I smell rodent.

[tayto]

So, the capacity is THE only arguement. 
Well finally we get there.
We went through a lot of faffology to get this far. 
A couple of pages ago Hoop said something else was the main arguement. 
Do we all agree then that if it can be expanded without a reduction in capacity then it's fair enough? 
I would agree that a reduction in capacity should rule Thomad Davis out of the planed stadium. 

[dublinfella]

So, the capacity is THE only arguement. 
Well finally we get there.
We went through a lot of faffology to get this far. 
A couple of pages ago Hoop said something else was the main arguement. 
Do we all agree then that if it can be expanded without a reduction in capacity then it's fair enough? 
I would agree that a reduction in capacity should rule Thomad Davis out of the planed stadium. 

Shamrock Rovers said this 2 years ago ffs.

[hoop]

If TD actually had this report (bear in mind they or the 'architects' have never had access to the site) that says capacity wouldnt be reduced and a gaa pitch included and it was viable, they would be in. No arguments from anyone.

They have been asked for this report and refused to share. They didnt introduce it as 'evidence' in their Judicial Review application.

Access to the site isn't an issue really. The council have plenty of detailed plans which Thomas Davis can also access. In fact, it was at the request of Thomas Davis that the council drew up a new plan to illustrate the impact of putting in a playing surface 160 metres in length. I'm not sure that they've shown that to anyone either - but I've seen it.

[tayto]

So, the capacity is THE only arguement. 
Well finally we get there.
We went through a lot of faffology to get this far. 
A couple of pages ago Hoop said something else was the main arguement. 
Do we all agree then that if it can be expanded without a reduction in capacity then it's fair enough? 
I would agree that a reduction in capacity should rule Thomad Davis out of the planed stadium. 

Shamrock Rovers said this 2 years ago ffs.

Well no one has said it on here till now.

There has been bitching and moaning about who got funding before, i was even called a bigot because i said i dont care about the atmoshpere at rovers matches.

Why in the meantime didnt the minister get an independent architectual review or demand to see Thomas Davis's review? Why isnt he saying this is the issue every time he's asked about Tallaght? Everyone can understand something like capacity being reduced making a project unviable. Instead he has just dug his heels in and said something about promises, this that and the other

[hoop]

Why in the meantime didnt the minister get an independent architectual review or demand to see Thomas Davis's review? Why isnt he saying this is the issue every time he's asked about Tallaght? Everyone can understand something like capacity being reduced making a project unviable. Instead he has just dug his heels in and said something about promises, this that and the other

He knows that it's an issue.

Go here:
http://www.shamrockrovers.ie/newsarchive.php

and then scroll down to:
Minister ODonoghue on RTE "This Week" radio programme 08-04-07

[SammyG]

Well no one has said it on here till now.

It doesn't take much working out. If you have a fixed piece of land and you're building a stadium, if you then increase the pitch size by 60 metres but can't increase the piece of land, you have to reduce and/or remove some of the stands, which in turn will reduce capacity. It's hardly rocket science.

On a slightly different tack, apparently the Maze stadium is going to have moveable stands that allow for the bigger pitch without affecting capacity but none of the Maze supporters have been able to explain how this will actually work. 

[hoop]

It doesn't take much working out. If you have a fixed piece of land and you're building a stadium, if you then increase the pitch size by 60 metres but can't increase the piece of land, you have to reduce and/or remove some of the stands, which in turn will reduce capacity. It's hardly rocket science.

Yes - I would have thought that it was obvious that the one matter leads to the next.

Maybe not.

When I said the "main issue", I meant that Rovers objections have - for example - nothing to do with pitch over-use, or fixtures clash or dislike of the GAA.

They have EVERYTHING to do with a botched stadium, reduced capacity and a facility totally unsuited to soccer (that's the 30 yards away from the pitch bit).