Willard
Youth Player
Never get out of the boat. Absolutely goddamn right. Unless you were goin' all the way.
Posts: 257
|
Post by Willard on Feb 20, 2009 7:49:55 GMT
Lakeland...with a little tinkering im pretty sure we could put the away fans in the corner  All it takes is a little bit of structural work, then with say the cup games where larger allocations are needed then give them some of the south stand...bit of barbed wire across the seats and some sort of propper divide in the concourse would work a treat! Im thinking something a bit better than an MDF door that got beaten down last season by the way  |
|
|
|
Post by Menorca Stokie on Feb 20, 2009 12:52:36 GMT
One thing that could possible look quite magnificent would be to build onto of the derssing room/ club shop. You could have a tall structure with more corporrate hospitality boxes with balconies outside.
I'm sure they have something similar at one of the Itallian stadiums.
The longer we are in the Prem the more Corporate hospitality we'll need.
Just a thought like.
|
|
|
|
Post by vestanpance on Feb 20, 2009 12:58:00 GMT
I'd personally support anything that stopped out ground looking an atypical homogenised MFI football ground from the late 90's
The fucking weirder the better
|
|
|
|
Post by powchirper on Feb 20, 2009 13:05:23 GMT
What a font of wisdom you are chirper, 10000 posts and the freedom of the city, we dont all spend our lives on here like you. you penis And after all them posts i still find time to go to the game, Next time you're over pop up the Seddon and give us a shout. ps; Chirper has a capital you thick illiterate halfwit wannabee septic tank. |
|
|
|
Post by vestanpance on Feb 20, 2009 13:13:10 GMT
Actually, because chirper is a verb (past participle of the verb "to chirp") it doesn't require a capital letter. In point of fact Chirper it is you Sir who is in the wrong, and also i for the inclusion of the capital letter.
No need for thanks, glad to help.
|
|
|
|
Post by scfc75 on Feb 20, 2009 13:15:44 GMT
Actually, because chirper is a verb (past participle of the verb "to chirp") it doesn't require a capital letter. In point of fact Chirper it is you Sir who is in the wrong, and also i for the inclusion of the capital letter. No need for thanks, glad to help. Surely sir, if used as a name then any word (verb or otherwise) would need to be capitalised, i.e. if I were to call myself "testicle" then when writing my name, it would be "Testicle"? |
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Feb 20, 2009 13:17:06 GMT
I may have mentioned this before....
stuff the extra seats what we really need is a giant Balti House (with 'stadium' garlic Naans mmmmm) in one corner.
|
|
|
|
Post by powchirper on Feb 20, 2009 13:18:32 GMT
Actually, because chirper is a verb (past participle of the verb "to chirp") it doesn't require a capital letter. In point of fact Chirper it is you Sir who is in the wrong, and also i for the inclusion of the capital letter. No need for thanks, glad to help. Piss off. www.thefreedictionary.com/ChirperIt's my name and if i say it's got a cap it's got a cap,ok. |
|
|
|
Post by vestanpance on Feb 20, 2009 13:20:24 GMT
Actually, because chirper is a verb (past participle of the verb "to chirp") it doesn't require a capital letter. In point of fact Chirper it is you Sir who is in the wrong, and also i for the inclusion of the capital letter. No need for thanks, glad to help. Surely sir, if used as a name then any word (verb or otherwise) would need to be capitalised, i.e. if I were to call myself "testicle" then when writing my name, it would be "Testicle"? Without question, there is strong logic in your argument and i applaud you for bringing me to task on this issue. However my original post was in deference to Chirper's insistance that there was an absolute need for Chriper to be festooned with a capital letter, whereas in literal terms no such adornment is required. I have however enjoyed this intellectual tussle Sir, and i look forward to locking horns with you again on matters syntax, grammar & punctuation. You are without question a worth adversary. |
|
|
|
Post by vestanpance on Feb 20, 2009 13:20:53 GMT
Actually, because chirper is a verb (past participle of the verb "to chirp") it doesn't require a capital letter. In point of fact Chirper it is you Sir who is in the wrong, and also i for the inclusion of the capital letter. No need for thanks, glad to help. Piss off. It's my name and if i say it's got a cap it's got a cap,ok. Seems fair ;D |
|
|
|
Post by scfc75 on Feb 20, 2009 13:22:55 GMT
Without question, there is strong logic in your argument and i applaud you for bringing me to task on this issue. However my original post was in deference to Chirper's insistance that there was an absolute need for Chriper to be festooned with a capital letter, whereas in literal terms no such adornment is required. I have however enjoyed this intellectual tussle Sir, and i look forward to locking horns with you again on matters syntax, grammar & punctuation. You are without question a worth adversary. Yeah, well..... fuck off ;D My real name isn't Testicle by the way. |
|
|
|
Post by stonestokie! on Feb 20, 2009 13:27:46 GMT
or even somehow coming out of the corner of Seddon/Boothen how the f*ck would that happen , nice thinkin though 1) if we go down , no they wont be filled , if we stay up , then yes possible 2) id like to see them coming from JS/Boothen or more traditionally down the centre somehow. i was thinking that lmao ;D |
|
|
|
Post by stokie716 on Feb 20, 2009 13:36:05 GMT
maybe if we fill the corners in we could put all the freeloaders in one of em,you know the kind who only turn up cause they won a pair of tickets etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by knowles on Feb 20, 2009 13:42:53 GMT
I never understood why the visiting supporters were put on the tunnel side of the South Stand. Surely it would be even more intimidating for away teams to come out to Stoke fans either side of them?!
Another minor point. I thought the running track was to be coloured red. Does anyone know why this hasn't happened yet? The initial excuse was the weather I think!
|
|
|
|
Post by vestanpance on Feb 20, 2009 13:45:11 GMT
Without question, there is strong logic in your argument and i applaud you for bringing me to task on this issue. However my original post was in deference to Chirper's insistance that there was an absolute need for Chriper to be festooned with a capital letter, whereas in literal terms no such adornment is required. I have however enjoyed this intellectual tussle Sir, and i look forward to locking horns with you again on matters syntax, grammar & punctuation. You are without question a worth adversary. Yeah, well..... fuck off ;D My real name isn't Testicle by the way. Course not Tess. |
|
|
|
Post by youareallwrong on Feb 20, 2009 14:32:44 GMT
Vestan pance; best not try too much grammatical correction work, unless you have a vague clue what you're talking about. 'chirper' is not the past participle of the verb 'to chirp', that would be 'chirped'. Chirper is, in fact, a noun indicating one that chirps, e.g. a little birdie.
Lesson over, call again next week.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cupid Stunt on Feb 20, 2009 15:12:13 GMT
I think if we did get round to filling the corners in then the best bet would be fill in the corner where the score board stands & put the away fans there. Reasons being... 1.) It gets Stoke fans behind both goals (looks better on the tv) 2.)Access to & from the ground would be easier & safer for away fans, they could perhaps cordon off an area where it would mean no hanging around for the away fans, literally park up & go, not a holding pen...a sort of corridor or slip road taking them straight into the ground & straight out after the match, have there own entrance & exit etc...not like the current shambles  3.) It would get more banter inside the ground, away fans with home fans on either side would create a cracking atmosphere!!! thoughts...??? You can't move the away fans from where they are because they'd be trappe din the corner with both Stoke fans directly to their left and right when they come out of the ground, asking for trouble, there is no current shambles because they can get out easily and have their own parking section etc where the coaches go. Also, if they were on the seddon side, they'd still be behind the goal, because you have to give a percentage (I think it's 10%) so it would still go over past the goal because they'd have 2,800 seats at least which is over half of the south stand. Some people don't really think do they? As for the tunnel coming out of the corner at the Boothen/Seddon, you'd have to rip seats out, not have a concourse and have no room for the dressing rooms etc, not really appropriate for them to be there as well because it would be miles away from the visiting players' coaches, it would also look shite with 3 empty corners and 1 corner with everything crammed in it, and they'd have to walk across the pitch to the dug outs, which would also look shite. Also, we should only fill in the corners with seating if we're selling out for 2 seasons every game with out fail and there is a further demand for tickets, otherwise it'll be a waste of money.  |
|
|
|
Post by lordeffinghamhunt on Feb 20, 2009 15:25:55 GMT
I'd personally support anything that stopped out ground looking an atypical homogenised MFI football ground from the late 90's The fucking weirder the better Out ground! Pance you are slipping my friend. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2009 15:31:20 GMT
Changing rooms moved, well a couple of portakabins between JS and the boothen, surely that would do :-)
|
|
|
|
Post by scfc75 on Feb 20, 2009 15:37:41 GMT
Changing rooms moved, well a couple of portakabins between JS and the boothen, surely that would do :-) No need, we've got the shed. |
|
All it takes is a little bit of structural work, then with say the cup games where larger allocations are needed then give them some of the south stand...bit of barbed wire across the seats and some sort of propper divide in the concourse would work a treat! Im thinking something a bit better than an MDF door that got beaten down last season by the way 
