|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2019 20:51:36 GMT
The chief exec at the time made momo''s bromance best buddy look positively benign. he did have a fit daughter though GD
|
|
|
Post by lordherefordsknob on Sept 6, 2019 20:53:46 GMT
From what I heard it was cheaper to build the Britt rather than build two new stands at the vic.
Also Jez Moxey would of made a lot more through back handers.
|
|
|
Post by eyeonebob on Sept 6, 2019 20:54:36 GMT
i remember there was some kind of voting slips handed out, new ground or do up the vic, new ground won comfortably. Never in this wild world did that hapoen
|
|
|
Post by eyeonebob on Sept 6, 2019 20:59:19 GMT
i remember there was some kind of voting slips handed out, new ground or do up the vic, new ground won comfortably. Never in this wild world did that happen the only people who love the Brit 365 are the people who never had the chance to experience the vic.. What a place it was...
|
|
|
Post by JoeinOz on Sept 6, 2019 21:11:51 GMT
There's a lot of history rewritten about the Vic.
The move was absolutely the right thing to do.
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Sept 6, 2019 21:12:54 GMT
My issue is not so much the new stadium rather that there is still, 22 years after it opened, absolutely stuff all infrastructure around it.
Pubs, bars, eateries etc. just some life I mean.
It's a remote hell hole on a hillside.
|
|
|
Post by wrighter on Sept 6, 2019 21:27:35 GMT
Never the same at the Brit Should never have moved, the old Boothen rocked Good pubs close by, close to the railway station and fingertips massage !!!!
RIP Vic
|
|
|
Post by Dutchpeter on Sept 6, 2019 21:38:44 GMT
My impression at the time, was that council leader Ted Smith was one of the prime movers behind the new stadium being built. I rather thought that Jez Moxey took credit for Ted’s work, and Ted Smith is now a forgotten figure.
|
|
|
Post by marylandstoke on Sept 6, 2019 21:40:16 GMT
That’s what I never understood. Terrence Trent Darby....the Trent doesn’t go through Derby?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2019 21:41:09 GMT
There's a lot of history rewritten about the Vic. The move was absolutely the right thing to do. I don't think that we are rewriting history Joe. Ok, it may have been the only thing to do, but you will struggle to find an old supporter that prefers the Bet365 to the Vic.
|
|
|
Post by JoeinOz on Sept 6, 2019 21:45:21 GMT
There's a lot of history rewritten about the Vic. The move was absolutely the right thing to do. I don't think that we are rewriting history Joe. Ok, it may have been the only thing to do, but you will struggle to find an old supporter that prefers the Bet365 to the Vic. I do. Ot might just be me but I do. 😀
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2019 21:53:57 GMT
I don't think that we are rewriting history Joe. Ok, it may have been the only thing to do, but you will struggle to find an old supporter that prefers the Bet365 to the Vic. I do. Ot might just be me but I do. 😀 I bet you miss getting in the ground for afe a crown.
For our younger viewers, half a crown is 12.5p
TBH I don't remember getting in for half a crown - ten bob more likely.
|
|
|
Post by lordherefordsknob on Sept 6, 2019 21:57:03 GMT
It was definitely the cheaper option to move.
A third each payed by Stoke, the council and Stan Clarke for a new stadium.
Or half a rebuilt vic, that Stoke would have had to pay for themselves.
|
|
|
Post by mickstupp on Sept 6, 2019 22:03:03 GMT
It would have been a half arsed, cheapo, botch job with seating lumped onto existing terracing and a decent ish new stand on the Butler Street.
Capacity 22,000 tops.
|
|
|
Post by silsdenstokie on Sept 6, 2019 22:09:06 GMT
From a financial perspective they probably had to do it....Coates then didn't have the wealth he has now
That said, I've never had the same buzz going to the Brit as I did the Vic. Would go back tomorrow if we could
|
|
|
Post by owdestokie2 on Sept 6, 2019 22:11:24 GMT
The Vic was deliberately run into the ground to provide an argument for a new stadium. It became uneconomical to re-develop
West Brom are an example of a club that developed their existing stadium to what it is today.
Don’t forget those in the “know” knew exactly what land was becoming available, at what price and what potential subsidies would be available well before “Joe Public”. A Community Stadium?
The “Brit” was built on the cheap and there are examples to this day that would substantiate that comment.
|
|
|
Post by owdestokie2 on Sept 6, 2019 22:15:14 GMT
There's a lot of history rewritten about the Vic. The move was absolutely the right thing to do. Sorry. No it wasn’t
|
|
|
Post by maninasuitcase on Sept 6, 2019 23:02:18 GMT
It would have been a half arsed, cheapo, botch job with seating lumped onto existing terracing and a decent ish new stand on the Butler Street. Capacity 22,000 tops. But 22000 passionate fans creating a fortress.
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Sept 6, 2019 23:07:50 GMT
Honestly a part of me died when we left the Victoria Ground.
It was as much Stoke City as the red and white stripes.
It's quite bizarre, 22 years on I still have no sense as I trudge miserably over the 'D' road flyover and past the council incinerator that I'm heading for our home, it's like I'm stuck in a bad dream.
We thought we could live forever in fun, our chances really were a million to one.
|
|
|
Post by loosestools on Sept 6, 2019 23:11:15 GMT
Honestly a part of me died when we left the Victoria Ground. It was as much Stoke City as the red and white stripes. It's quite bizarre, 22 years on I still have no sense as I trudge miserably over the 'D' road flyover and past the council incinerator that I'm heading for our home, it's like I'm stuck in a bad dream. We thought we could live forever in fun, our chances really were a million to one. Sounds like the intro to a new Jack Reacher book.
|
|
|
Post by sunshine on Sept 6, 2019 23:48:16 GMT
In this age of super stadiums like the new Spurs one, it’s sobering to think our ground that was so state of the art not so long back is actually quite dated. When you also think that it’s architecture is based on Manchester United’s new main stand for the 1966 World Cup, then it’s even older. Spurs new stadium is stunning, in my opinion of course. I'm sure it's not to everyone's taste. I may be wrong but I think spurs new place is some thing in the region of a billion? It's bonkers money. We got a complete new stadium for I think it was around 15 million back in 1998. I'm not saying we were being cheap but I think we got a decent stadium for what was a very small outlay and I doubt it would be possible these days. Don't get me wrong, it's not the best of stadiums and the location is well, debatable. However you can't deny for the money it's a half decent facility and during our premier run put the fear into the best of 'em, that's my lasting memory anyway.
|
|
|
Post by mickstupp on Sept 7, 2019 0:09:50 GMT
It would have been a half arsed, cheapo, botch job with seating lumped onto existing terracing and a decent ish new stand on the Butler Street. Capacity 22,000 tops. But 22000 passionate fans creating a fortress. I’ve stood and sat at the old ground with 6,000 in there. It was every bit a morgue as the new ground is at the moment. Worse at times.
|
|
|
Post by mickstupp on Sept 7, 2019 0:16:31 GMT
i remember there was some kind of voting slips handed out, new ground or do up the vic, new ground won comfortably. Never in this wild world did that hapoen It did, I can remember filling it out. 1994 ish
|
|
|
Post by kustokie on Sept 7, 2019 1:40:40 GMT
I think that was the problem. The river went under the corner of the stand so they either had to divert the river or move the stadium. Diverting the river was too expensive and there was not room to move the footprint of the stadium. Couldn't you have moved to the Boothen End? Did that too. Also, worked the turnstiles - what a nightmare that was if they sent you to the Stoke End or the Boothen End because the fans used to throw their money in, jump the gate, or squeeze in two or three at a time. So we always knew there were far more people in the ground than the official attendance. But it paid well and I got in for free. good old days.
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Sept 7, 2019 1:51:27 GMT
In this age of super stadiums like the new Spurs one, it’s sobering to think our ground that was so state of the art not so long back is actually quite dated. When you also think that it’s architecture is based on Manchester United’s new main stand for the 1966 World Cup, then it’s even older. Spurs new stadium is stunning, in my opinion of course. I'm sure it's not to everyone's taste. I may be wrong but I think spurs new place is some thing in the region of a billion? It's bonkers money. We got a complete new stadium for I think it was around 15 million back in 1998. I'm not saying we were being cheap but I think we got a decent stadium for what was a very small outlay and I doubt it would be possible these days. Don't get me wrong, it's not the best of stadiums and the location is well, debatable. However you can't deny for the money it's a half decent facility and during our premier run put the fear into the best of 'em, that's my lasting memory anyway. I have 18m in my head. And the actual cost to the club at the time was a fraction of that I believe? Details are sketchy now but we had the opportunity of a brand new ground for basically peanuts outlay, or stay in a charming but decrepit shed with no realistic options for modernisation. No-brainer really.
|
|
|
Post by overthehills on Sept 7, 2019 6:27:18 GMT
This is a battle of heart vs head.
Head tells you the move was best option financially.
Heart is still broken to this day. They had to drag me out on last game at the Vic, crying my heart out
|
|
|
Post by jamfan on Sept 7, 2019 7:04:17 GMT
Against Rochdale was the first time I had sat down at a stoke game always the boothen then boothen paddock by the tunnel for last five years at the Vic . Still miss the old ground like mad but in hindsight we had to move
|
|
|
Post by dealstokie08 on Sept 7, 2019 7:04:48 GMT
My issue is not so much the new stadium rather that there is still, 22 years after it opened, absolutely stuff all infrastructure around it. Pubs, bars, eateries etc. just some life I mean. It's a remote hell hole on a hillside. And we still can't get the road systems right!
|
|
|
Post by hogansgoals on Sept 7, 2019 7:42:52 GMT
In this age of super stadiums like the new Spurs one, it’s sobering to think our ground that was so state of the art not so long back is actually quite dated. When you also think that it’s architecture is based on Manchester United’s new main stand for the 1966 World Cup, then it’s even older. why was it state of the art?
|
|
|
Post by xchpotter on Sept 7, 2019 7:44:40 GMT
It would have been a half arsed, cheapo, botch job with seating lumped onto existing terracing and a decent ish new stand on the Butler Street. Capacity 22,000 tops. But 22000 passionate fans creating a fortress. That, it could have been. However, do you think it would make a blind bit of difference to the useless, spineless feckers we currently have on the pitch wearing the red and white stripes.... I'm not sure what sort of atmosphere or crowd dynamic would motivate this lot.
|
|