Vicarage Road East Stand will be built this season after contracts signed over the weekend

Here is the Vicarage Road East Stand pictured before the roof was taken off a couple of years ago.

Here is the Vicarage Road East Stand pictured before the roof was taken off a couple of years ago.

First published in Sport
Last updated
Watford Observer: Photograph of the Author by , Deputy Group Sports Editor

After more than a decade of false dawns and broken promises, Watford FC will have a new East Stand open during this season after a crucial agreement was signed over the weekend.

The deal to build the grandstand, which will house more than 3,000 fans, was sealed over the weekend when a heads of terms agreement was signed with stadia construction specialists GL Events.

Demolition contracts are already signed and in place with local firm Gaywoods and a schedule of works – likely to commence in the next week – is already in place.

It will be 'a permanent grandstand structure' which will be made of steel within concrete foundations and there will be concrete rows within the stand.

Access to the stand will be via turnstiles from Occupation Road with the option of adding access to the stand at the front.

Hornets’ chief executive Scott Duxbury said: "We are delighted to be building a new East Stand as part of the planned stadium improvement, which includes the decision to house all extra hospitality options in the South West Corner development.

"This means that extra capacity for fans, the demand for which is clear from our first few home games this season, will be the key focus of the new East Stand.

"Working with the expertise of GL Events, I am certain it will be a construction of which we can all be very proud."

Duxbury said shortly after his arrival last year that an East Stand would be built once the average attendance was around the 15,000 mark, with the Vicarage Road capacity around 17,000 if you exclude restricted view seats.

The attendances towards the end of last season suggested there was the demand for a new stand and the average attendance during the four home Championship games so far this campaign has been 15,742.

Negotiations regarding a new stand have been ongoing for several months and minor details continue to be adjusted.

The contract being signed at the weekend was a significant moment for the club after many years of false dawns and previous plans, spanning several regimes.

Watford will demolish the main East Stand structures, including the players' tunnel and changing areas which during the initial plans were going to remain. The media centre, former supporters club building, toilet block and the terracing on the Vicarage Road side of the main building will also be demolished.

The Watford Observer will have exclusive first access to the exact plans, artist’s impressions and other visuals once they are finalised over the next few weeks.

Comments (76)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

1:09pm Mon 23 Sep 13

Denzil D says...

Great news. Yet again our owners deliver on a promise.
But hoping the plan is for some kind of modular structure that can be added to later, otherwise 3000 is a bit underwhelming.
Great news. Yet again our owners deliver on a promise. But hoping the plan is for some kind of modular structure that can be added to later, otherwise 3000 is a bit underwhelming. Denzil D
  • Score: 27

1:11pm Mon 23 Sep 13

AngelHornet says...

Excellent News! Looking forward to seeing the plans.

Black & Yellow seats preferable!
Excellent News! Looking forward to seeing the plans. Black & Yellow seats preferable! AngelHornet
  • Score: 17

1:12pm Mon 23 Sep 13

Bucks:Hornet says...

Wow, finally! Was starting to wonder if I would see it built in my lifetime but the Pozzo's look to have delivered on their promise. Excellent news!
Wow, finally! Was starting to wonder if I would see it built in my lifetime but the Pozzo's look to have delivered on their promise. Excellent news! Bucks:Hornet
  • Score: 19

1:14pm Mon 23 Sep 13

JohnnyHornet says...

Goodbye old East stand. Welcome, at last a shiny new one.
Goodbye old East stand. Welcome, at last a shiny new one. JohnnyHornet
  • Score: 10

1:24pm Mon 23 Sep 13

Bigads123 says...

Fantastic news. Wfc are lucky to have the pozzos as owners.
Fantastic news. Wfc are lucky to have the pozzos as owners. Bigads123
  • Score: 25

1:25pm Mon 23 Sep 13

Hairy Hornet says...

Unbelievable. The Pozzos have been like a dream come true. Proper football people running the club, it just gets better and better.What would the likes of Blackburn give to see their club run properly.
Unbelievable. The Pozzos have been like a dream come true. Proper football people running the club, it just gets better and better.What would the likes of Blackburn give to see their club run properly. Hairy Hornet
  • Score: 31

1:25pm Mon 23 Sep 13

Smudger Jnr says...

In order to appoint a contractor, they will need plans to quote against. Anything to be built will require planning permission, so they must be building all or part of the 2008 planning proposal (permission period extended in 2011):

http://pa.watford.go
v.uk/publicaccess/ap
plicationDetails.do?
activeTab=documents&
keyVal=JWJ8A1QW05H00


p.s. don't all look at this at once or you'll probably crash the website :-)
In order to appoint a contractor, they will need plans to quote against. Anything to be built will require planning permission, so they must be building all or part of the 2008 planning proposal (permission period extended in 2011): http://pa.watford.go v.uk/publicaccess/ap plicationDetails.do? activeTab=documents& keyVal=JWJ8A1QW05H00 p.s. don't all look at this at once or you'll probably crash the website :-) Smudger Jnr
  • Score: -1

1:31pm Mon 23 Sep 13

TaylorMadeArmy says...

The new East Stand will also be much nearer the action than the Rous, so I expect a lot of people (including me) will be considering relocating there, if we're given the chance.

3,000 may not sound a big capacity, but there isn't a great deal of space to work with on that side of the ground. Therefore, better to give 3,000 people some decent facilities than have 5,000 people crammed in like sardines.

Of course, we'll have to give it a new name...The Graham Taylor Stand!
The new East Stand will also be much nearer the action than the Rous, so I expect a lot of people (including me) will be considering relocating there, if we're given the chance. 3,000 may not sound a big capacity, but there isn't a great deal of space to work with on that side of the ground. Therefore, better to give 3,000 people some decent facilities than have 5,000 people crammed in like sardines. Of course, we'll have to give it a new name...The Graham Taylor Stand! TaylorMadeArmy
  • Score: 23

1:32pm Mon 23 Sep 13

llloydwithathirdl says...

We have the best owners in football.

Forza Pozzo!
We have the best owners in football. Forza Pozzo! llloydwithathirdl
  • Score: 19

1:36pm Mon 23 Sep 13

hornet88 says...

Wahoooooo! Thats one way to brighten up a monday! Cant wait to see the end product. I like the idea of black and yellow seats but not sure it would look good with the rest of the ground being mainly red and yellow. Still...what does it matter right now.....were finally getting a new east stand :-)
Wahoooooo! Thats one way to brighten up a monday! Cant wait to see the end product. I like the idea of black and yellow seats but not sure it would look good with the rest of the ground being mainly red and yellow. Still...what does it matter right now.....were finally getting a new east stand :-) hornet88
  • Score: 6

1:39pm Mon 23 Sep 13

Smudger Jnr says...

on the capacity, the 2008 permission allowed for 5046 seats

http://pa.watford.go
v.uk/publicaccess/fi
les/7ED816C1B8D2A519
B81A3FE5FDDBA90B/pdf
/08_00214_FULM-APPRO
VED_TERRACE_PLAN-912
85.pdf
on the capacity, the 2008 permission allowed for 5046 seats http://pa.watford.go v.uk/publicaccess/fi les/7ED816C1B8D2A519 B81A3FE5FDDBA90B/pdf /08_00214_FULM-APPRO VED_TERRACE_PLAN-912 85.pdf Smudger Jnr
  • Score: 0

1:41pm Mon 23 Sep 13

the jesterwestport says...

in pozzos we trust
in pozzos we trust the jesterwestport
  • Score: 2

1:42pm Mon 23 Sep 13

francowatford says...

THIS IS AMAZBALLS!! Do you think that supports can have their names on the brinks a bit like the new Rookery end by the turnstalls?
THIS IS AMAZBALLS!! Do you think that supports can have their names on the brinks a bit like the new Rookery end by the turnstalls? francowatford
  • Score: -1

1:43pm Mon 23 Sep 13

lockerbiehornet says...

Brilliant news, Brilliant owners, Brilliant future ahead...
Brilliant news, Brilliant owners, Brilliant future ahead... lockerbiehornet
  • Score: 11

1:44pm Mon 23 Sep 13

peter10531089 says...

Pozzo family, Mr Duxberry, Mr Nani, Mr Zola - Thank you so much - this is beyond everybodies dreams a team that plays some of the best football seen at the club and ongoing investment in the infrastructure of the club itself that will see us competely set up for sustainable Premiership football in the long run. Simply amazing.
Pozzo family, Mr Duxberry, Mr Nani, Mr Zola - Thank you so much - this is beyond everybodies dreams a team that plays some of the best football seen at the club and ongoing investment in the infrastructure of the club itself that will see us competely set up for sustainable Premiership football in the long run. Simply amazing. peter10531089
  • Score: 23

1:46pm Mon 23 Sep 13

Hornet Cornet says...

NIce one Pozzos. They really are the topmost owners anywhere and I've got nothing but respect for this lot. Most clubs would kill to have the owners and setup we have. Can't wait.

Hands up who loves the Pozzos!

HC
NIce one Pozzos. They really are the topmost owners anywhere and I've got nothing but respect for this lot. Most clubs would kill to have the owners and setup we have. Can't wait. Hands up who loves the Pozzos! HC Hornet Cornet
  • Score: 31

1:47pm Mon 23 Sep 13

No Wheels says...

I think there is an argument for making this the home of the expanded 1881.

I understand that it would have been controversial and unfair to put the singing crowd behind the goal and forcing other long term ST holders to move from behind the goal, but being stuck down there in the corner makes it harder for the singers to make themselves heard... (last week's excellent noise all round against Donny not withstanding).

But if the whole of that new East stand was an extended dedicated singers section, the length of the pitch, with everyone starting from new subscriptions and no-one's nose out of joint at having to be moved.... It might just make the difference...
I think there is an argument for making this the home of the expanded 1881. I understand that it would have been controversial and unfair to put the singing crowd behind the goal and forcing other long term ST holders to move from behind the goal, but being stuck down there in the corner makes it harder for the singers to make themselves heard... (last week's excellent noise all round against Donny not withstanding). But if the whole of that new East stand was an extended dedicated singers section, the length of the pitch, with everyone starting from new subscriptions and no-one's nose out of joint at having to be moved.... It might just make the difference... No Wheels
  • Score: 6

1:47pm Mon 23 Sep 13

Hornet Cornet says...

TaylorMadeArmy wrote:
The new East Stand will also be much nearer the action than the Rous, so I expect a lot of people (including me) will be considering relocating there, if we're given the chance. 3,000 may not sound a big capacity, but there isn't a great deal of space to work with on that side of the ground. Therefore, better to give 3,000 people some decent facilities than have 5,000 people crammed in like sardines. Of course, we'll have to give it a new name...The Graham Taylor Stand!
Little Venice
[quote][p][bold]TaylorMadeArmy[/bold] wrote: The new East Stand will also be much nearer the action than the Rous, so I expect a lot of people (including me) will be considering relocating there, if we're given the chance. 3,000 may not sound a big capacity, but there isn't a great deal of space to work with on that side of the ground. Therefore, better to give 3,000 people some decent facilities than have 5,000 people crammed in like sardines. Of course, we'll have to give it a new name...The Graham Taylor Stand![/p][/quote]Little Venice Hornet Cornet
  • Score: 0

2:00pm Mon 23 Sep 13

lockerbiehornet says...

Maybe we could save on the demolition costs by inviting Taliban Town down here for a friendly, just house them all in the East Stand!!
Maybe we could save on the demolition costs by inviting Taliban Town down here for a friendly, just house them all in the East Stand!! lockerbiehornet
  • Score: -6

2:02pm Mon 23 Sep 13

The Happy Hornet says...

This is great news. Looking at the original planning application in 2008, we applied and had approved a 5,000 seat stand, the article states that it is going to be a 3000 seat stand. I assume that now the changing rooms and the dug-outs (which in the original planning application where being moved to the SW corner) are staying put, this means that we will not have concourse space for the additional 2,000 seats? I would love to see some revised drawings of what it will look pitch side?
This is great news. Looking at the original planning application in 2008, we applied and had approved a 5,000 seat stand, the article states that it is going to be a 3000 seat stand. I assume that now the changing rooms and the dug-outs (which in the original planning application where being moved to the SW corner) are staying put, this means that we will not have concourse space for the additional 2,000 seats? I would love to see some revised drawings of what it will look pitch side? The Happy Hornet
  • Score: 4

2:03pm Mon 23 Sep 13

abbotshornet says...

TaylorMadeArmy wrote:
The new East Stand will also be much nearer the action than the Rous, so I expect a lot of people (including me) will be considering relocating there, if we're given the chance. 3,000 may not sound a big capacity, but there isn't a great deal of space to work with on that side of the ground. Therefore, better to give 3,000 people some decent facilities than have 5,000 people crammed in like sardines. Of course, we'll have to give it a new name...The Graham Taylor Stand!
The Graham Taylor stand sounds grand, not sure when it will be completed but hopefully ready for next season!
Looking forward to seeing the plans and artist's impressions.
And it cannot but help the team and the atmosphere to have fans on 4 sides again. COYH's
[quote][p][bold]TaylorMadeArmy[/bold] wrote: The new East Stand will also be much nearer the action than the Rous, so I expect a lot of people (including me) will be considering relocating there, if we're given the chance. 3,000 may not sound a big capacity, but there isn't a great deal of space to work with on that side of the ground. Therefore, better to give 3,000 people some decent facilities than have 5,000 people crammed in like sardines. Of course, we'll have to give it a new name...The Graham Taylor Stand![/p][/quote]The Graham Taylor stand sounds grand, not sure when it will be completed but hopefully ready for next season! Looking forward to seeing the plans and artist's impressions. And it cannot but help the team and the atmosphere to have fans on 4 sides again. COYH's abbotshornet
  • Score: 4

2:19pm Mon 23 Sep 13

Oldhorn says...

No Wheels wrote:
I think there is an argument for making this the home of the expanded 1881.

I understand that it would have been controversial and unfair to put the singing crowd behind the goal and forcing other long term ST holders to move from behind the goal, but being stuck down there in the corner makes it harder for the singers to make themselves heard... (last week's excellent noise all round against Donny not withstanding).

But if the whole of that new East stand was an extended dedicated singers section, the length of the pitch, with everyone starting from new subscriptions and no-one's nose out of joint at having to be moved.... It might just make the difference...
I get what you're saying NW. but my preference would be to house the away fans there. Watford always playing towards their own supporters. More clubs (though not all I grant you) are putting away fans in the most remote spot they possibly can.
[quote][p][bold]No Wheels[/bold] wrote: I think there is an argument for making this the home of the expanded 1881. I understand that it would have been controversial and unfair to put the singing crowd behind the goal and forcing other long term ST holders to move from behind the goal, but being stuck down there in the corner makes it harder for the singers to make themselves heard... (last week's excellent noise all round against Donny not withstanding). But if the whole of that new East stand was an extended dedicated singers section, the length of the pitch, with everyone starting from new subscriptions and no-one's nose out of joint at having to be moved.... It might just make the difference...[/p][/quote]I get what you're saying NW. but my preference would be to house the away fans there. Watford always playing towards their own supporters. More clubs (though not all I grant you) are putting away fans in the most remote spot they possibly can. Oldhorn
  • Score: 4

2:30pm Mon 23 Sep 13

Mickey Quinn, not so thin says...

TaylorMadeArmy wrote:
The new East Stand will also be much nearer the action than the Rous, so I expect a lot of people (including me) will be considering relocating there, if we're given the chance.

3,000 may not sound a big capacity, but there isn't a great deal of space to work with on that side of the ground. Therefore, better to give 3,000 people some decent facilities than have 5,000 people crammed in like sardines.

Of course, we'll have to give it a new name...The Graham Taylor Stand!
The "Simpson-Ashton ring-fenced stand"
[quote][p][bold]TaylorMadeArmy[/bold] wrote: The new East Stand will also be much nearer the action than the Rous, so I expect a lot of people (including me) will be considering relocating there, if we're given the chance. 3,000 may not sound a big capacity, but there isn't a great deal of space to work with on that side of the ground. Therefore, better to give 3,000 people some decent facilities than have 5,000 people crammed in like sardines. Of course, we'll have to give it a new name...The Graham Taylor Stand![/p][/quote]The "Simpson-Ashton ring-fenced stand" Mickey Quinn, not so thin
  • Score: 6

2:34pm Mon 23 Sep 13

goldanboy says...

I've never been happier as a Watford fan. From watching the dross in the Roeder years (wasn't around for the Basset times) and coming so close to going bust a couple of years ago, to watching 'sexy' football and having owners with 'real' vision. I don't get to watch as much football as I like because of my job and tend to go to away games because of the atmosphere. I'll now spend all my football money at The Vic and put money back into the club I love and who's owners passionately care for. I don't care what the stand looks like. All the previous owners have cowdunged us with promises yet have never given us a new East stand. I know that there are some terrible things going on in the world at the moment, but forgive me for feeling very lucky.
I've never been happier as a Watford fan. From watching the dross in the Roeder years (wasn't around for the Basset times) and coming so close to going bust a couple of years ago, to watching 'sexy' football and having owners with 'real' vision. I don't get to watch as much football as I like because of my job and tend to go to away games because of the atmosphere. I'll now spend all my football money at The Vic and put money back into the club I love and who's owners passionately care for. I don't care what the stand looks like. All the previous owners have cowdunged us with promises yet have never given us a new East stand. I know that there are some terrible things going on in the world at the moment, but forgive me for feeling very lucky. goldanboy
  • Score: 12

2:43pm Mon 23 Sep 13

andyrankin says...

I am over the moon about this story, because this is something "concrete" that our owners are providing for us that will be around for many years (hopefully they will be as well) where as a good team can be gone in a flash. Even owners can move and leave you stranded.
Our recent previous owners should be ashamed at what they acheived and the whole saga of "ring fenced" money that went walkies.
human nature's a bad thing though, now I want more! only 3000, hope it has the option for an add on in a couple of years etc.
OUR club is an example of how good a club can be with owners who still don't even take the oppurtunity for glory by revealing this story themselves but just steadily and quietly getting on with a fantastic job.
I bet they name it the GT stand as well, as they understand our history.
Lets keep the momentum going on the pitch
I am over the moon about this story, because this is something "concrete" that our owners are providing for us that will be around for many years (hopefully they will be as well) where as a good team can be gone in a flash. Even owners can move and leave you stranded. Our recent previous owners should be ashamed at what they acheived and the whole saga of "ring fenced" money that went walkies. human nature's a bad thing though, now I want more! only 3000, hope it has the option for an add on in a couple of years etc. OUR club is an example of how good a club can be with owners who still don't even take the oppurtunity for glory by revealing this story themselves but just steadily and quietly getting on with a fantastic job. I bet they name it the GT stand as well, as they understand our history. Lets keep the momentum going on the pitch andyrankin
  • Score: 3

2:47pm Mon 23 Sep 13

rayman01 says...

More wonderful Hornets news. Luv the Pozzos, GFZ and our golden boys. Can anyone enlighten me - does option of a 'adding a front load facility' mean adding an extra tier on top of the 3, 000 seater new East Stand. Think this necessary if we reach the promised land. We will have a stonking good atmosphere if we do that - 25k sort of stadium needed for EPL. COYHs.
More wonderful Hornets news. Luv the Pozzos, GFZ and our golden boys. Can anyone enlighten me - does option of a 'adding a front load facility' mean adding an extra tier on top of the 3, 000 seater new East Stand. Think this necessary if we reach the promised land. We will have a stonking good atmosphere if we do that - 25k sort of stadium needed for EPL. COYHs. rayman01
  • Score: 7

3:01pm Mon 23 Sep 13

Andrew1963 says...

I suspect this will be a new design and require planning permission (8 weeks) based on the princfiple of the replacement stand established with the old plans rather than a direct implementation of that approved plan. If the stand costs £3 million thats equivalent to two years of Challobah wages and would IMHO be a better investmentr at this stage of our development. I expect this new stand will be a more basic design than previously promised, without all the fancy under stand facilities such as the gym/health club. No doubt a substantial investment, but more along the lines of the Fulham kit built stands, quicker to build than the bespoke plans of the Ashton application. The need to build a stand outweighs other considerations, and in the long run expansion of the Rous is more likely for non match day facilities. Both the Vicarage Road and rookery stands need investment to nbring them up to scratch in terms of facilities, so expect this will be on the agenda for the close season. The plans will probably leave the corners as now. It think it is hard to see us getting more than 20,000 seats in the near future, so i expect promotion and a sustained period in the premiership will see prices rise toward the QPR levels. If money for extras is about - how about a replica of the old Rookery clock.
I suspect this will be a new design and require planning permission (8 weeks) based on the princfiple of the replacement stand established with the old plans rather than a direct implementation of that approved plan. If the stand costs £3 million thats equivalent to two years of Challobah wages and would IMHO be a better investmentr at this stage of our development. I expect this new stand will be a more basic design than previously promised, without all the fancy under stand facilities such as the gym/health club. No doubt a substantial investment, but more along the lines of the Fulham kit built stands, quicker to build than the bespoke plans of the Ashton application. The need to build a stand outweighs other considerations, and in the long run expansion of the Rous is more likely for non match day facilities. Both the Vicarage Road and rookery stands need investment to nbring them up to scratch in terms of facilities, so expect this will be on the agenda for the close season. The plans will probably leave the corners as now. It think it is hard to see us getting more than 20,000 seats in the near future, so i expect promotion and a sustained period in the premiership will see prices rise toward the QPR levels. If money for extras is about - how about a replica of the old Rookery clock. Andrew1963
  • Score: 7

3:07pm Mon 23 Sep 13

peter10531089 says...

goldanboy wrote:
I've never been happier as a Watford fan. From watching the dross in the Roeder years (wasn't around for the Basset times) and coming so close to going bust a couple of years ago, to watching 'sexy' football and having owners with 'real' vision. I don't get to watch as much football as I like because of my job and tend to go to away games because of the atmosphere. I'll now spend all my football money at The Vic and put money back into the club I love and who's owners passionately care for. I don't care what the stand looks like. All the previous owners have cowdunged us with promises yet have never given us a new East stand. I know that there are some terrible things going on in the world at the moment, but forgive me for feeling very lucky.
Until the very last part - I really enjoyed the Roeder era!! Craig Ramage, Paul Furlong, Tommy Mooney, Andy Hessenthaller, Colin Foster, Keith Millen, Kevin Philips, Peterboro 3 Watford 4, jumpers for goalposts etc... - I know there were big lows cos of Petchey but after watching Perryman and Colin Lee's teams at least Roeder had us trying to play some football!!!

Whilst I disagree with your comments on the Roeder era I congratulate you on your use of the word "cowdunged"!! Most excellent
[quote][p][bold]goldanboy[/bold] wrote: I've never been happier as a Watford fan. From watching the dross in the Roeder years (wasn't around for the Basset times) and coming so close to going bust a couple of years ago, to watching 'sexy' football and having owners with 'real' vision. I don't get to watch as much football as I like because of my job and tend to go to away games because of the atmosphere. I'll now spend all my football money at The Vic and put money back into the club I love and who's owners passionately care for. I don't care what the stand looks like. All the previous owners have cowdunged us with promises yet have never given us a new East stand. I know that there are some terrible things going on in the world at the moment, but forgive me for feeling very lucky.[/p][/quote]Until the very last part - I really enjoyed the Roeder era!! Craig Ramage, Paul Furlong, Tommy Mooney, Andy Hessenthaller, Colin Foster, Keith Millen, Kevin Philips, Peterboro 3 Watford 4, jumpers for goalposts etc... - I know there were big lows cos of Petchey but after watching Perryman and Colin Lee's teams at least Roeder had us trying to play some football!!! Whilst I disagree with your comments on the Roeder era I congratulate you on your use of the word "cowdunged"!! Most excellent peter10531089
  • Score: 12

3:13pm Mon 23 Sep 13

1971Hornet says...

http://www.glevents.
co.uk/Matmut-Stadium
-build.html
http://www.glevents. co.uk/Matmut-Stadium -build.html 1971Hornet
  • Score: 6

3:14pm Mon 23 Sep 13

1971Hornet says...

Above is from their site....probably similar as to be built so quick
Above is from their site....probably similar as to be built so quick 1971Hornet
  • Score: 0

3:30pm Mon 23 Sep 13

demerit says...

Let's hold tight for a moment. This could be yet another ****-up by the WO (go on WO, let me use "****-up"). The firm they refer to is a contractor that specialises in temporary stands, not permanent ones. In fact, they haven't ever built a permanent stand as far as I can make out. The club were going to insert dome temporary seating in any case so could this just be that? No agreement could be reached with a contractor before the design is finished and, until planning permission is obtained, which it hasn't yet, the design couldn't be finalised.

So, needless to say, I doubt the accuracy of this report. I am still in the "I'll believe it when I see it" camp.
Let's hold tight for a moment. This could be yet another ****-up by the WO (go on WO, let me use "****-up"). The firm they refer to is a contractor that specialises in temporary stands, not permanent ones. In fact, they haven't ever built a permanent stand as far as I can make out. The club were going to insert dome temporary seating in any case so could this just be that? No agreement could be reached with a contractor before the design is finished and, until planning permission is obtained, which it hasn't yet, the design couldn't be finalised. So, needless to say, I doubt the accuracy of this report. I am still in the "I'll believe it when I see it" camp. demerit
  • Score: -10

3:30pm Mon 23 Sep 13

Bush Hornet says...

peter10531089 wrote:
goldanboy wrote:
I've never been happier as a Watford fan. From watching the dross in the Roeder years (wasn't around for the Basset times) and coming so close to going bust a couple of years ago, to watching 'sexy' football and having owners with 'real' vision. I don't get to watch as much football as I like because of my job and tend to go to away games because of the atmosphere. I'll now spend all my football money at The Vic and put money back into the club I love and who's owners passionately care for. I don't care what the stand looks like. All the previous owners have cowdunged us with promises yet have never given us a new East stand. I know that there are some terrible things going on in the world at the moment, but forgive me for feeling very lucky.
Until the very last part - I really enjoyed the Roeder era!! Craig Ramage, Paul Furlong, Tommy Mooney, Andy Hessenthaller, Colin Foster, Keith Millen, Kevin Philips, Peterboro 3 Watford 4, jumpers for goalposts etc... - I know there were big lows cos of Petchey but after watching Perryman and Colin Lee's teams at least Roeder had us trying to play some football!!!

Whilst I disagree with your comments on the Roeder era I congratulate you on your use of the word "cowdunged"!! Most excellent
I agree with Peter. There was some nice football under Roeder and he had no money to work with. He unearthed gems like Phillips and Mooney and took a punt on Ramage. Brought the best out of a young Bruce Dyer and under Roeder we sold Furlong and developed the stadium. Yes Petchey was a ****** but the word 'dross' is more easily applied to some of the football witnessed since Roeder.
[quote][p][bold]peter10531089[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]goldanboy[/bold] wrote: I've never been happier as a Watford fan. From watching the dross in the Roeder years (wasn't around for the Basset times) and coming so close to going bust a couple of years ago, to watching 'sexy' football and having owners with 'real' vision. I don't get to watch as much football as I like because of my job and tend to go to away games because of the atmosphere. I'll now spend all my football money at The Vic and put money back into the club I love and who's owners passionately care for. I don't care what the stand looks like. All the previous owners have cowdunged us with promises yet have never given us a new East stand. I know that there are some terrible things going on in the world at the moment, but forgive me for feeling very lucky.[/p][/quote]Until the very last part - I really enjoyed the Roeder era!! Craig Ramage, Paul Furlong, Tommy Mooney, Andy Hessenthaller, Colin Foster, Keith Millen, Kevin Philips, Peterboro 3 Watford 4, jumpers for goalposts etc... - I know there were big lows cos of Petchey but after watching Perryman and Colin Lee's teams at least Roeder had us trying to play some football!!! Whilst I disagree with your comments on the Roeder era I congratulate you on your use of the word "cowdunged"!! Most excellent[/p][/quote]I agree with Peter. There was some nice football under Roeder and he had no money to work with. He unearthed gems like Phillips and Mooney and took a punt on Ramage. Brought the best out of a young Bruce Dyer and under Roeder we sold Furlong and developed the stadium. Yes Petchey was a ****** but the word 'dross' is more easily applied to some of the football witnessed since Roeder. Bush Hornet
  • Score: 8

3:33pm Mon 23 Sep 13

demerit says...

Andrew1963 wrote:
I suspect this will be a new design and require planning permission (8 weeks) based on the princfiple of the replacement stand established with the old plans rather than a direct implementation of that approved plan. If the stand costs £3 million thats equivalent to two years of Challobah wages and would IMHO be a better investmentr at this stage of our development. I expect this new stand will be a more basic design than previously promised, without all the fancy under stand facilities such as the gym/health club. No doubt a substantial investment, but more along the lines of the Fulham kit built stands, quicker to build than the bespoke plans of the Ashton application. The need to build a stand outweighs other considerations, and in the long run expansion of the Rous is more likely for non match day facilities. Both the Vicarage Road and rookery stands need investment to nbring them up to scratch in terms of facilities, so expect this will be on the agenda for the close season. The plans will probably leave the corners as now. It think it is hard to see us getting more than 20,000 seats in the near future, so i expect promotion and a sustained period in the premiership will see prices rise toward the QPR levels. If money for extras is about - how about a replica of the old Rookery clock.
£3million!!!! Times it by 3 at least!
[quote][p][bold]Andrew1963[/bold] wrote: I suspect this will be a new design and require planning permission (8 weeks) based on the princfiple of the replacement stand established with the old plans rather than a direct implementation of that approved plan. If the stand costs £3 million thats equivalent to two years of Challobah wages and would IMHO be a better investmentr at this stage of our development. I expect this new stand will be a more basic design than previously promised, without all the fancy under stand facilities such as the gym/health club. No doubt a substantial investment, but more along the lines of the Fulham kit built stands, quicker to build than the bespoke plans of the Ashton application. The need to build a stand outweighs other considerations, and in the long run expansion of the Rous is more likely for non match day facilities. Both the Vicarage Road and rookery stands need investment to nbring them up to scratch in terms of facilities, so expect this will be on the agenda for the close season. The plans will probably leave the corners as now. It think it is hard to see us getting more than 20,000 seats in the near future, so i expect promotion and a sustained period in the premiership will see prices rise toward the QPR levels. If money for extras is about - how about a replica of the old Rookery clock.[/p][/quote]£3million!!!! Times it by 3 at least! demerit
  • Score: -4

3:54pm Mon 23 Sep 13

Andrew1963 says...

£9 million - r u sure - I have no idea of the costs - but sounds a lot for a meccano stand! Mind you the council are spending £4 million on new pavements in the Parade and £2 million on a set of shipping containers for the market so you might be a lot nearer the mark. Based on an average of an extra £900,000 a year in seat sales it will take a long time to repay the capital costs let alone the extra running costs - No wonder previous regimes ran away from a rebuild!
£9 million - r u sure - I have no idea of the costs - but sounds a lot for a meccano stand! Mind you the council are spending £4 million on new pavements in the Parade and £2 million on a set of shipping containers for the market so you might be a lot nearer the mark. Based on an average of an extra £900,000 a year in seat sales it will take a long time to repay the capital costs let alone the extra running costs - No wonder previous regimes ran away from a rebuild! Andrew1963
  • Score: 3

4:08pm Mon 23 Sep 13

andyhooked says...

This is magic. And to build so quickly is unbelieveable. Great news that the demolition work is going to a local company and I hope to local people and not people living outside of the area. ex-Chairman Bonsor got a lot of stick but at l;eats he did get the newer bit of the East Stand built. Onwards and upwards with our incredible backers and new management. Shame that we lost a few weeks cos Watford Council became so prissy about the demolition.
This is magic. And to build so quickly is unbelieveable. Great news that the demolition work is going to a local company and I hope to local people and not people living outside of the area. ex-Chairman Bonsor got a lot of stick but at l;eats he did get the newer bit of the East Stand built. Onwards and upwards with our incredible backers and new management. Shame that we lost a few weeks cos Watford Council became so prissy about the demolition. andyhooked
  • Score: 2

4:13pm Mon 23 Sep 13

ForzaWatford says...

Maybe Bassini will chip in just so he can put that helmet back on!
Maybe Bassini will chip in just so he can put that helmet back on! ForzaWatford
  • Score: 10

4:20pm Mon 23 Sep 13

benson11 says...

Eat your heart out Bassini !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Eat your heart out Bassini !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! benson11
  • Score: 7

4:29pm Mon 23 Sep 13

JohnnyHornet says...

ForzaWatford wrote:
Maybe Bassini will chip in just so he can put that helmet back on!
Didn't realise his helmet was detachable, Oh yeah I get it, take the helmut away and you're left with a c
[quote][p][bold]ForzaWatford[/bold] wrote: Maybe Bassini will chip in just so he can put that helmet back on![/p][/quote]Didn't realise his helmet was detachable, Oh yeah I get it, take the helmut away and you're left with a c JohnnyHornet
  • Score: 0

4:31pm Mon 23 Sep 13

The_Gaffer says...

Looks like a semi-permanent job with the option to replace or add to in the future. I just hope this lot don't put massive great pillars up like they did at Blackpool, which looks cheap & nasty
Looks like a semi-permanent job with the option to replace or add to in the future. I just hope this lot don't put massive great pillars up like they did at Blackpool, which looks cheap & nasty The_Gaffer
  • Score: 6

4:40pm Mon 23 Sep 13

JohnnyHornet says...

The_Gaffer wrote:
Looks like a semi-permanent job with the option to replace or add to in the future. I just hope this lot don't put massive great pillars up like they did at Blackpool, which looks cheap & nasty
This is posted earlier in this thread. http://www.glevents.
co.uk/Matmut-Stadium
-build.html
[quote][p][bold]The_Gaffer[/bold] wrote: Looks like a semi-permanent job with the option to replace or add to in the future. I just hope this lot don't put massive great pillars up like they did at Blackpool, which looks cheap & nasty[/p][/quote]This is posted earlier in this thread. http://www.glevents. co.uk/Matmut-Stadium -build.html JohnnyHornet
  • Score: 1

4:44pm Mon 23 Sep 13

PeteBogHorrorHornet says...

demerit wrote:
Let's hold tight for a moment. This could be yet another ****-up by the WO (go on WO, let me use "****-up"). The firm they refer to is a contractor that specialises in temporary stands, not permanent ones. In fact, they haven't ever built a permanent stand as far as I can make out. The club were going to insert dome temporary seating in any case so could this just be that? No agreement could be reached with a contractor before the design is finished and, until planning permission is obtained, which it hasn't yet, the design couldn't be finalised.

So, needless to say, I doubt the accuracy of this report. I am still in the "I'll believe it when I see it" camp.
It's on the official site now so it's gonna happen...
[quote][p][bold]demerit[/bold] wrote: Let's hold tight for a moment. This could be yet another ****-up by the WO (go on WO, let me use "****-up"). The firm they refer to is a contractor that specialises in temporary stands, not permanent ones. In fact, they haven't ever built a permanent stand as far as I can make out. The club were going to insert dome temporary seating in any case so could this just be that? No agreement could be reached with a contractor before the design is finished and, until planning permission is obtained, which it hasn't yet, the design couldn't be finalised. So, needless to say, I doubt the accuracy of this report. I am still in the "I'll believe it when I see it" camp.[/p][/quote]It's on the official site now so it's gonna happen... PeteBogHorrorHornet
  • Score: 1

4:48pm Mon 23 Sep 13

demerit says...

The_Gaffer wrote:
Looks like a semi-permanent job with the option to replace or add to in the future. I just hope this lot don't put massive great pillars up like they did at Blackpool, which looks cheap & nasty
I still doubt the accuracy of this report but if I am wrong, I fear that this really will be a bargain basement effort. No design yet, no planning permission, a contract with a meccano builder (no doubt to a figure as well) who will do the design himself and skimp on everything he can to get as much profit out of it as possible. Doesn't seem worth the effort for 3 000 extra seats. Not exactly looking very far in the future then - but that's football.

On the plus side, it is better from a business perspective to have a small ground and have it packed to the rafters every week than have it half full (have they ever had more than half the capacity at the Riverside, for instance?). Just don't expect it to win any design awards....
[quote][p][bold]The_Gaffer[/bold] wrote: Looks like a semi-permanent job with the option to replace or add to in the future. I just hope this lot don't put massive great pillars up like they did at Blackpool, which looks cheap & nasty[/p][/quote]I still doubt the accuracy of this report but if I am wrong, I fear that this really will be a bargain basement effort. No design yet, no planning permission, a contract with a meccano builder (no doubt to a figure as well) who will do the design himself and skimp on everything he can to get as much profit out of it as possible. Doesn't seem worth the effort for 3 000 extra seats. Not exactly looking very far in the future then - but that's football. On the plus side, it is better from a business perspective to have a small ground and have it packed to the rafters every week than have it half full (have they ever had more than half the capacity at the Riverside, for instance?). Just don't expect it to win any design awards.... demerit
  • Score: -17

4:59pm Mon 23 Sep 13

demerit says...

Andrew1963 wrote:
£9 million - r u sure - I have no idea of the costs - but sounds a lot for a meccano stand! Mind you the council are spending £4 million on new pavements in the Parade and £2 million on a set of shipping containers for the market so you might be a lot nearer the mark. Based on an average of an extra £900,000 a year in seat sales it will take a long time to repay the capital costs let alone the extra running costs - No wonder previous regimes ran away from a rebuild!
The benchmark for a new 40 000 seat stadium in the UK is about £ 3 500 / seat. For just one stand, the cost per seat would go up to about £ 5 000 / seat. However, we're talking low spec here and on a scale of 1-10 with Amex at 10 and Crap at 1, I reckon we're about 2-3, so the figure would probably come down to about £ 3 000 / seat. So, for 3 000 seats, about £ 9 million. But they are saying that there will be corporate entertainment in it as well? !!! Who knows?
[quote][p][bold]Andrew1963[/bold] wrote: £9 million - r u sure - I have no idea of the costs - but sounds a lot for a meccano stand! Mind you the council are spending £4 million on new pavements in the Parade and £2 million on a set of shipping containers for the market so you might be a lot nearer the mark. Based on an average of an extra £900,000 a year in seat sales it will take a long time to repay the capital costs let alone the extra running costs - No wonder previous regimes ran away from a rebuild![/p][/quote]The benchmark for a new 40 000 seat stadium in the UK is about £ 3 500 / seat. For just one stand, the cost per seat would go up to about £ 5 000 / seat. However, we're talking low spec here and on a scale of 1-10 with Amex at 10 and Crap at 1, I reckon we're about 2-3, so the figure would probably come down to about £ 3 000 / seat. So, for 3 000 seats, about £ 9 million. But they are saying that there will be corporate entertainment in it as well? !!! Who knows? demerit
  • Score: 0

5:05pm Mon 23 Sep 13

demerit says...

PeteBogHorrorHornet wrote:
demerit wrote:
Let's hold tight for a moment. This could be yet another ****-up by the WO (go on WO, let me use "****-up"). The firm they refer to is a contractor that specialises in temporary stands, not permanent ones. In fact, they haven't ever built a permanent stand as far as I can make out. The club were going to insert dome temporary seating in any case so could this just be that? No agreement could be reached with a contractor before the design is finished and, until planning permission is obtained, which it hasn't yet, the design couldn't be finalised.

So, needless to say, I doubt the accuracy of this report. I am still in the "I'll believe it when I see it" camp.
It's on the official site now so it's gonna happen...
Yep. I was wrong and it seems to be going ahead. As I say, a bargain basement stand. I suspect the cost will be between £ 5 -10 million. I would also be interested to know whether there will be a roof on it.
[quote][p][bold]PeteBogHorrorHornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]demerit[/bold] wrote: Let's hold tight for a moment. This could be yet another ****-up by the WO (go on WO, let me use "****-up"). The firm they refer to is a contractor that specialises in temporary stands, not permanent ones. In fact, they haven't ever built a permanent stand as far as I can make out. The club were going to insert dome temporary seating in any case so could this just be that? No agreement could be reached with a contractor before the design is finished and, until planning permission is obtained, which it hasn't yet, the design couldn't be finalised. So, needless to say, I doubt the accuracy of this report. I am still in the "I'll believe it when I see it" camp.[/p][/quote]It's on the official site now so it's gonna happen...[/p][/quote]Yep. I was wrong and it seems to be going ahead. As I say, a bargain basement stand. I suspect the cost will be between £ 5 -10 million. I would also be interested to know whether there will be a roof on it. demerit
  • Score: -13

5:18pm Mon 23 Sep 13

rogeruk says...

lockerbiehornet wrote:
Maybe we could save on the demolition costs by inviting Taliban Town down here for a friendly, just house them all in the East Stand!!
If you had left the letter d of your last word this post would have been hilarious. Opportunity lost!
[quote][p][bold]lockerbiehornet[/bold] wrote: Maybe we could save on the demolition costs by inviting Taliban Town down here for a friendly, just house them all in the East Stand!![/p][/quote]If you had left the letter d of your last word this post would have been hilarious. Opportunity lost! rogeruk
  • Score: -4

5:33pm Mon 23 Sep 13

andyhooked says...

Do we really want pollution , that you call Taliban Town FC, anywhere near us? Nice joke mate. Perhaps that brave lady copper that ran on to the pitch to stop the scum when we last played that lot should be invited to open the new stand. More announcements to come from Watford FC but perhaps look at the Watford Council website, that I find appaling to find my way around. Any person out there that is a firend of a local Councillor that can give us an inside view? That said, why the friggin' hell knock what we do not have the full facts about! ONWARDS AND UPWARDS YET AGAIN.
Do we really want pollution , that you call Taliban Town FC, anywhere near us? Nice joke mate. Perhaps that brave lady copper that ran on to the pitch to stop the scum when we last played that lot should be invited to open the new stand. More announcements to come from Watford FC but perhaps look at the Watford Council website, that I find appaling to find my way around. Any person out there that is a firend of a local Councillor that can give us an inside view? That said, why the friggin' hell knock what we do not have the full facts about! ONWARDS AND UPWARDS YET AGAIN. andyhooked
  • Score: 1

5:51pm Mon 23 Sep 13

soulfulhornet says...

Great news as the Vic near to capacity currently. When or if we get to the Prem 20,000 - 22,000 will be needed. And anyway the East stand is an embarrassment, and not compatible with a top championship team.

We have a great team/ manager/ owners and soon a decent ground at last. I have not experienced the sense of vision and purpose since the early days (1977/84) of Sir Elton/ GT.

I keep thinking I am going to wake up and with the Pozzos a figment of my imagination and we will be back with Iwulemo, Dickinson, Scott Loach, Baz or the Russos.
Great news as the Vic near to capacity currently. When or if we get to the Prem 20,000 - 22,000 will be needed. And anyway the East stand is an embarrassment, and not compatible with a top championship team. We have a great team/ manager/ owners and soon a decent ground at last. I have not experienced the sense of vision and purpose since the early days (1977/84) of Sir Elton/ GT. I keep thinking I am going to wake up and with the Pozzos a figment of my imagination and we will be back with Iwulemo, Dickinson, Scott Loach, Baz or the Russos. soulfulhornet
  • Score: 5

6:03pm Mon 23 Sep 13

1234566789 says...

Oldhorn wrote:
No Wheels wrote:
I think there is an argument for making this the home of the expanded 1881.

I understand that it would have been controversial and unfair to put the singing crowd behind the goal and forcing other long term ST holders to move from behind the goal, but being stuck down there in the corner makes it harder for the singers to make themselves heard... (last week's excellent noise all round against Donny not withstanding).

But if the whole of that new East stand was an extended dedicated singers section, the length of the pitch, with everyone starting from new subscriptions and no-one's nose out of joint at having to be moved.... It might just make the difference...
I get what you're saying NW. but my preference would be to house the away fans there. Watford always playing towards their own supporters. More clubs (though not all I grant you) are putting away fans in the most remote spot they possibly can.
I think it would be a bad idea to put away fans anywhere that involves them walking down Occupation Road. Would mean a police escort in and out of the ground each week
[quote][p][bold]Oldhorn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]No Wheels[/bold] wrote: I think there is an argument for making this the home of the expanded 1881. I understand that it would have been controversial and unfair to put the singing crowd behind the goal and forcing other long term ST holders to move from behind the goal, but being stuck down there in the corner makes it harder for the singers to make themselves heard... (last week's excellent noise all round against Donny not withstanding). But if the whole of that new East stand was an extended dedicated singers section, the length of the pitch, with everyone starting from new subscriptions and no-one's nose out of joint at having to be moved.... It might just make the difference...[/p][/quote]I get what you're saying NW. but my preference would be to house the away fans there. Watford always playing towards their own supporters. More clubs (though not all I grant you) are putting away fans in the most remote spot they possibly can.[/p][/quote]I think it would be a bad idea to put away fans anywhere that involves them walking down Occupation Road. Would mean a police escort in and out of the ground each week 1234566789
  • Score: 9

6:14pm Mon 23 Sep 13

lutondown says...

Nice call Boosey!! See the rusty old tools slow to acknowledge
Your superior insight
Tools really ;))
Nice call Boosey!! See the rusty old tools slow to acknowledge Your superior insight Tools really ;)) lutondown
  • Score: 0

6:16pm Mon 23 Sep 13

Fun Bobby says...

I have full respect for Graham Taylor and what he achieved at Watford (twice over) but I don't understand why a new stand should be called anything other than the Giampaolo Pozzo Stand - or is GT going 50/50 on the cost of it?
I have full respect for Graham Taylor and what he achieved at Watford (twice over) but I don't understand why a new stand should be called anything other than the Giampaolo Pozzo Stand - or is GT going 50/50 on the cost of it? Fun Bobby
  • Score: -11

6:16pm Mon 23 Sep 13

Goldenboy1960 says...

Andrew1963 wrote:
I suspect this will be a new design and require planning permission (8 weeks) based on the princfiple of the replacement stand established with the old plans rather than a direct implementation of that approved plan. If the stand costs £3 million thats equivalent to two years of Challobah wages and would IMHO be a better investmentr at this stage of our development. I expect this new stand will be a more basic design than previously promised, without all the fancy under stand facilities such as the gym/health club. No doubt a substantial investment, but more along the lines of the Fulham kit built stands, quicker to build than the bespoke plans of the Ashton application. The need to build a stand outweighs other considerations, and in the long run expansion of the Rous is more likely for non match day facilities. Both the Vicarage Road and rookery stands need investment to nbring them up to scratch in terms of facilities, so expect this will be on the agenda for the close season. The plans will probably leave the corners as now. It think it is hard to see us getting more than 20,000 seats in the near future, so i expect promotion and a sustained period in the premiership will see prices rise toward the QPR levels. If money for extras is about - how about a replica of the old Rookery clock.
The original clock is the Red Lion...
[quote][p][bold]Andrew1963[/bold] wrote: I suspect this will be a new design and require planning permission (8 weeks) based on the princfiple of the replacement stand established with the old plans rather than a direct implementation of that approved plan. If the stand costs £3 million thats equivalent to two years of Challobah wages and would IMHO be a better investmentr at this stage of our development. I expect this new stand will be a more basic design than previously promised, without all the fancy under stand facilities such as the gym/health club. No doubt a substantial investment, but more along the lines of the Fulham kit built stands, quicker to build than the bespoke plans of the Ashton application. The need to build a stand outweighs other considerations, and in the long run expansion of the Rous is more likely for non match day facilities. Both the Vicarage Road and rookery stands need investment to nbring them up to scratch in terms of facilities, so expect this will be on the agenda for the close season. The plans will probably leave the corners as now. It think it is hard to see us getting more than 20,000 seats in the near future, so i expect promotion and a sustained period in the premiership will see prices rise toward the QPR levels. If money for extras is about - how about a replica of the old Rookery clock.[/p][/quote]The original clock is the Red Lion... Goldenboy1960
  • Score: 0

6:19pm Mon 23 Sep 13

Goldenboy1960 says...

Goldenboy1960 wrote:
Andrew1963 wrote:
I suspect this will be a new design and require planning permission (8 weeks) based on the princfiple of the replacement stand established with the old plans rather than a direct implementation of that approved plan. If the stand costs £3 million thats equivalent to two years of Challobah wages and would IMHO be a better investmentr at this stage of our development. I expect this new stand will be a more basic design than previously promised, without all the fancy under stand facilities such as the gym/health club. No doubt a substantial investment, but more along the lines of the Fulham kit built stands, quicker to build than the bespoke plans of the Ashton application. The need to build a stand outweighs other considerations, and in the long run expansion of the Rous is more likely for non match day facilities. Both the Vicarage Road and rookery stands need investment to nbring them up to scratch in terms of facilities, so expect this will be on the agenda for the close season. The plans will probably leave the corners as now. It think it is hard to see us getting more than 20,000 seats in the near future, so i expect promotion and a sustained period in the premiership will see prices rise toward the QPR levels. If money for extras is about - how about a replica of the old Rookery clock.
The original clock is the Red Lion...
Sorry is IN the Red Lion....
[quote][p][bold]Goldenboy1960[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Andrew1963[/bold] wrote: I suspect this will be a new design and require planning permission (8 weeks) based on the princfiple of the replacement stand established with the old plans rather than a direct implementation of that approved plan. If the stand costs £3 million thats equivalent to two years of Challobah wages and would IMHO be a better investmentr at this stage of our development. I expect this new stand will be a more basic design than previously promised, without all the fancy under stand facilities such as the gym/health club. No doubt a substantial investment, but more along the lines of the Fulham kit built stands, quicker to build than the bespoke plans of the Ashton application. The need to build a stand outweighs other considerations, and in the long run expansion of the Rous is more likely for non match day facilities. Both the Vicarage Road and rookery stands need investment to nbring them up to scratch in terms of facilities, so expect this will be on the agenda for the close season. The plans will probably leave the corners as now. It think it is hard to see us getting more than 20,000 seats in the near future, so i expect promotion and a sustained period in the premiership will see prices rise toward the QPR levels. If money for extras is about - how about a replica of the old Rookery clock.[/p][/quote]The original clock is the Red Lion...[/p][/quote]Sorry is IN the Red Lion.... Goldenboy1960
  • Score: 1

8:05pm Mon 23 Sep 13

Dunderdale Pinner says...

very good news. There will always be some doomsters on this sight but let us all look on the bright side. Thank you Pozzo family and the admin staff who have put this together. Look forward to the end result. I believe that providing the foundations are strong enough, then additions can be made as and when required. I see the players tunnel is being demolished. Assume that means that all the facilities for the players and officials will move to under the Rous stand? I oppposed the Jim Bonser extension to the old East stand as I, and many others, would have preferred the money spent on players. Now the situation is reversed. We have probably the best set of players in the history of WFC. so now let us go forward with improvements to the stadium. Now it is onwards and upwards. COYH
very good news. There will always be some doomsters on this sight but let us all look on the bright side. Thank you Pozzo family and the admin staff who have put this together. Look forward to the end result. I believe that providing the foundations are strong enough, then additions can be made as and when required. I see the players tunnel is being demolished. Assume that means that all the facilities for the players and officials will move to under the Rous stand? I oppposed the Jim Bonser extension to the old East stand as I, and many others, would have preferred the money spent on players. Now the situation is reversed. We have probably the best set of players in the history of WFC. so now let us go forward with improvements to the stadium. Now it is onwards and upwards. COYH Dunderdale Pinner
  • Score: 2

8:27pm Mon 23 Sep 13

StewartScullion says...

It's just a thought but maybe the club views this as a temporary
Structure to deal with the immediate requirement.The Pozzo family
Would have thought very carefully about choosing Watford a club with
An excellent reputation as a family club located within the M25
and the potential to draw crowds of 25-30k once established in the premiership.Don't be surprised if 5 years down the road the club will
Be moving to a site compatible to Reading or Wigan with retail and
Leisure facilities.It's wonderful what we have for now but bigger and better
Plans maybe a foot
It's just a thought but maybe the club views this as a temporary Structure to deal with the immediate requirement.The Pozzo family Would have thought very carefully about choosing Watford a club with An excellent reputation as a family club located within the M25 and the potential to draw crowds of 25-30k once established in the premiership.Don't be surprised if 5 years down the road the club will Be moving to a site compatible to Reading or Wigan with retail and Leisure facilities.It's wonderful what we have for now but bigger and better Plans maybe a foot StewartScullion
  • Score: 5

9:06pm Mon 23 Sep 13

Stoney77 says...

StewartScullion wrote:
It's just a thought but maybe the club views this as a temporary
Structure to deal with the immediate requirement.The Pozzo family
Would have thought very carefully about choosing Watford a club with
An excellent reputation as a family club located within the M25
and the potential to draw crowds of 25-30k once established in the premiership.Don't be surprised if 5 years down the road the club will
Be moving to a site compatible to Reading or Wigan with retail and
Leisure facilities.It's wonderful what we have for now but bigger and better
Plans maybe a foot
I share this opinion; a 3,000 seater stand would see the capacity rise to approx 20,500. To be honest I can't see us needing a bigger stadium until (unless!) we are established in the top half of the prem with cup finals and European qualification beckoning; maybe in 6-10 years we could be filling a 25,000 plus stadium every week. As posted above GL Events don't seem to specialise in permanent structures although their website does suggest they deal with 'semi permanent' structures. I see this as a medium term fix, with additional plans afoot for the future. Anyhow, fantastic news and his great (weird/strange) will it be to watch the mighty golden boys in a 'proper' stadium!!
[quote][p][bold]StewartScullion[/bold] wrote: It's just a thought but maybe the club views this as a temporary Structure to deal with the immediate requirement.The Pozzo family Would have thought very carefully about choosing Watford a club with An excellent reputation as a family club located within the M25 and the potential to draw crowds of 25-30k once established in the premiership.Don't be surprised if 5 years down the road the club will Be moving to a site compatible to Reading or Wigan with retail and Leisure facilities.It's wonderful what we have for now but bigger and better Plans maybe a foot[/p][/quote]I share this opinion; a 3,000 seater stand would see the capacity rise to approx 20,500. To be honest I can't see us needing a bigger stadium until (unless!) we are established in the top half of the prem with cup finals and European qualification beckoning; maybe in 6-10 years we could be filling a 25,000 plus stadium every week. As posted above GL Events don't seem to specialise in permanent structures although their website does suggest they deal with 'semi permanent' structures. I see this as a medium term fix, with additional plans afoot for the future. Anyhow, fantastic news and his great (weird/strange) will it be to watch the mighty golden boys in a 'proper' stadium!! Stoney77
  • Score: 5

9:57pm Mon 23 Sep 13

Stoney77 says...

Oldhorn wrote:
No Wheels wrote:
I think there is an argument for making this the home of the expanded 1881.

I understand that it would have been controversial and unfair to put the singing crowd behind the goal and forcing other long term ST holders to move from behind the goal, but being stuck down there in the corner makes it harder for the singers to make themselves heard... (last week's excellent noise all round against Donny not withstanding).

But if the whole of that new East stand was an extended dedicated singers section, the length of the pitch, with everyone starting from new subscriptions and no-one's nose out of joint at having to be moved.... It might just make the difference...
I get what you're saying NW. but my preference would be to house the away fans there. Watford always playing towards their own supporters. More clubs (though not all I grant you) are putting away fans in the most remote spot they possibly can.
I agree, this would also increase the capacity of the stadium as there would be no need for the segregation seats at The Vic Rd end. Also, the club could allocate the 1881 singing section to the half of the Vic Rd which currently houses the away fans. They would then be next to the away fans and this can only increase the atmosphere. Only problem with this plan is that the dug outs would be right in front of the away fans.
[quote][p][bold]Oldhorn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]No Wheels[/bold] wrote: I think there is an argument for making this the home of the expanded 1881. I understand that it would have been controversial and unfair to put the singing crowd behind the goal and forcing other long term ST holders to move from behind the goal, but being stuck down there in the corner makes it harder for the singers to make themselves heard... (last week's excellent noise all round against Donny not withstanding). But if the whole of that new East stand was an extended dedicated singers section, the length of the pitch, with everyone starting from new subscriptions and no-one's nose out of joint at having to be moved.... It might just make the difference...[/p][/quote]I get what you're saying NW. but my preference would be to house the away fans there. Watford always playing towards their own supporters. More clubs (though not all I grant you) are putting away fans in the most remote spot they possibly can.[/p][/quote]I agree, this would also increase the capacity of the stadium as there would be no need for the segregation seats at The Vic Rd end. Also, the club could allocate the 1881 singing section to the half of the Vic Rd which currently houses the away fans. They would then be next to the away fans and this can only increase the atmosphere. Only problem with this plan is that the dug outs would be right in front of the away fans. Stoney77
  • Score: -1

10:59pm Mon 23 Sep 13

Skully84 says...

My initial thought is joy but can Vicarage Road get bigger? Residents on Liverpool and Clifton Roads who want to see the evening sunshine might oppose this. As a Watford fan I want a third tier on the Rous and a new tier on the Vicarage Road end. For a perm east stand it has to be built ON Occupation Rd. An example of building like this..don't look no further than Forest's City Ground, back in 92 there were a few houses behind the Bridgeford End and they built it so the street has sun..
My initial thought is joy but can Vicarage Road get bigger? Residents on Liverpool and Clifton Roads who want to see the evening sunshine might oppose this. As a Watford fan I want a third tier on the Rous and a new tier on the Vicarage Road end. For a perm east stand it has to be built ON Occupation Rd. An example of building like this..don't look no further than Forest's City Ground, back in 92 there were a few houses behind the Bridgeford End and they built it so the street has sun.. Skully84
  • Score: 1

12:07am Tue 24 Sep 13

Watfordwes says...

lockerbiehornet wrote:
Maybe we could save on the demolition costs by inviting Taliban Town down here for a friendly, just house them all in the East Stand!!
Shut up you daft racist!
[quote][p][bold]lockerbiehornet[/bold] wrote: Maybe we could save on the demolition costs by inviting Taliban Town down here for a friendly, just house them all in the East Stand!![/p][/quote]Shut up you daft racist! Watfordwes
  • Score: -7

5:50am Tue 24 Sep 13

lutondown says...

I think the new stand should be named the Boosey
Stand in honour of that great Holywell sage!
Why the GT stand? It must be the Pozzo stand
It is after all they who saved our lives and are
Delivering on all their promises
I think the new stand should be named the Boosey Stand in honour of that great Holywell sage! Why the GT stand? It must be the Pozzo stand It is after all they who saved our lives and are Delivering on all their promises lutondown
  • Score: 1

6:14am Tue 24 Sep 13

3Lions4Ever says...

I think it's bleachers, not a permanent stand (still a lot better than nothing!)
I think it's bleachers, not a permanent stand (still a lot better than nothing!) 3Lions4Ever
  • Score: 0

6:29am Tue 24 Sep 13

Tonytheaceman says...

I can't help but think this is a mistake, as the rest of the VIC is a S**t hole.
I recently bought tickets on line for the Forest game, 3rd row seats in the Rous Stand, but the 3rd row is level with the pitch so all you can see (unless you are 8 foot tall) is the players legs ( rows 1 and 2 are below pitch level - what a joke ! I should contact consumer affairs. WFC need to move!! (If they want to be a top club they need to have top facilities) even the Forest fans were chanting “What a F**king S**t hole” !!!!!!!
PS. I’m not a whinger, but this is the 21st century and a football club on the up – COYH.
I can't help but think this is a mistake, as the rest of the VIC is a S**t hole. I recently bought tickets on line for the Forest game, 3rd row seats in the Rous Stand, but the 3rd row is level with the pitch so all you can see (unless you are 8 foot tall) is the players legs ( rows 1 and 2 are below pitch level - what a joke ! I should contact consumer affairs. WFC need to move!! (If they want to be a top club they need to have top facilities) even the Forest fans were chanting “What a F**king S**t hole” !!!!!!! PS. I’m not a whinger, but this is the 21st century and a football club on the up – COYH. Tonytheaceman
  • Score: -24

6:59am Tue 24 Sep 13

northofwatfordpete says...

lockerbiehornet wrote:
Maybe we could save on the demolition costs by inviting Taliban Town down here for a friendly, just house them all in the East Stand!!
Still the Taliban then - I thought Rangers might have lost that tag by now.
[quote][p][bold]lockerbiehornet[/bold] wrote: Maybe we could save on the demolition costs by inviting Taliban Town down here for a friendly, just house them all in the East Stand!![/p][/quote]Still the Taliban then - I thought Rangers might have lost that tag by now. northofwatfordpete
  • Score: -2

8:54am Tue 24 Sep 13

Denzil D says...

Tonytheaceman wrote:
I can't help but think this is a mistake, as the rest of the VIC is a S**t hole. I recently bought tickets on line for the Forest game, 3rd row seats in the Rous Stand, but the 3rd row is level with the pitch so all you can see (unless you are 8 foot tall) is the players legs ( rows 1 and 2 are below pitch level - what a joke ! I should contact consumer affairs. WFC need to move!! (If they want to be a top club they need to have top facilities) even the Forest fans were chanting “What a F**king S**t hole” !!!!!!! PS. I’m not a whinger, but this is the 21st century and a football club on the up – COYH.
Those seats should at least come with a periscope!

The Vic's not a hole but is in dire need of investment throughout the ground. The Pozzos are demonstrating that this is a part of their strategy for the club.
In a few years; with a 21st century standard stadium, 15000+ core fanbase and prem TV money, they can make the next business decision - develop Vic capacity or relocate.
This smallish-scale stand seems to be a good cost-effective stepping stone on the way to the finding the best long-term solution.
[quote][p][bold]Tonytheaceman[/bold] wrote: I can't help but think this is a mistake, as the rest of the VIC is a S**t hole. I recently bought tickets on line for the Forest game, 3rd row seats in the Rous Stand, but the 3rd row is level with the pitch so all you can see (unless you are 8 foot tall) is the players legs ( rows 1 and 2 are below pitch level - what a joke ! I should contact consumer affairs. WFC need to move!! (If they want to be a top club they need to have top facilities) even the Forest fans were chanting “What a F**king S**t hole” !!!!!!! PS. I’m not a whinger, but this is the 21st century and a football club on the up – COYH.[/p][/quote]Those seats should at least come with a periscope! The Vic's not a hole but is in dire need of investment throughout the ground. The Pozzos are demonstrating that this is a part of their strategy for the club. In a few years; with a 21st century standard stadium, 15000+ core fanbase and prem TV money, they can make the next business decision - develop Vic capacity or relocate. This smallish-scale stand seems to be a good cost-effective stepping stone on the way to the finding the best long-term solution. Denzil D
  • Score: 10

9:35am Tue 24 Sep 13

neilhorn says...

Tonytheaceman wrote:
I can't help but think this is a mistake, as the rest of the VIC is a S**t hole.
I recently bought tickets on line for the Forest game, 3rd row seats in the Rous Stand, but the 3rd row is level with the pitch so all you can see (unless you are 8 foot tall) is the players legs ( rows 1 and 2 are below pitch level - what a joke ! I should contact consumer affairs. WFC need to move!! (If they want to be a top club they need to have top facilities) even the Forest fans were chanting “What a F**king S**t hole” !!!!!!!
PS. I’m not a whinger, but this is the 21st century and a football club on the up – COYH.
don't understand - if this where true surely all you would have been able to see if the top half of the players, not the bottom half
[quote][p][bold]Tonytheaceman[/bold] wrote: I can't help but think this is a mistake, as the rest of the VIC is a S**t hole. I recently bought tickets on line for the Forest game, 3rd row seats in the Rous Stand, but the 3rd row is level with the pitch so all you can see (unless you are 8 foot tall) is the players legs ( rows 1 and 2 are below pitch level - what a joke ! I should contact consumer affairs. WFC need to move!! (If they want to be a top club they need to have top facilities) even the Forest fans were chanting “What a F**king S**t hole” !!!!!!! PS. I’m not a whinger, but this is the 21st century and a football club on the up – COYH.[/p][/quote]don't understand - if this where true surely all you would have been able to see if the top half of the players, not the bottom half neilhorn
  • Score: 8

10:19am Tue 24 Sep 13

Stoney77 says...

Tonytheaceman wrote:
I can't help but think this is a mistake, as the rest of the VIC is a S**t hole.
I recently bought tickets on line for the Forest game, 3rd row seats in the Rous Stand, but the 3rd row is level with the pitch so all you can see (unless you are 8 foot tall) is the players legs ( rows 1 and 2 are below pitch level - what a joke ! I should contact consumer affairs. WFC need to move!! (If they want to be a top club they need to have top facilities) even the Forest fans were chanting “What a F**king S**t hole” !!!!!!!
PS. I’m not a whinger, but this is the 21st century and a football club on the up – COYH.
1.Where else do you think the first 3 rows will be? 50 foot up in the air so you get a great vantage point?
2. If you tilt your head very slightly upwards (probably less than 1 degree) you can see the players head, body and arms rather than just looking straight ahead at their legs. It's also helpful to look left and right and you can see all of the other players. I find a similar theory assists me in Row F (2/3 of the way back) in the Rookery although I tilt my head slightly downwards so can view the game. For the first few games I spent my time watching the pigeons sat on the top of the Vic Rd Stand but then some intelligent chap told me I didn't just have to stare straight ahead
3. If you want a better seat, buy a ticket earlier
4. If you had supported the Ornz for more than 2 months you'd realise that we probably, just probably don't have the funds for a brand new stadium and hence now is not the right time for such an investment.
5. If you disagree with point 4, then good luck to you if you run your own business, or have aspirations to.
6. And Finally, nothing like putting a positive spin on great news huh?
[quote][p][bold]Tonytheaceman[/bold] wrote: I can't help but think this is a mistake, as the rest of the VIC is a S**t hole. I recently bought tickets on line for the Forest game, 3rd row seats in the Rous Stand, but the 3rd row is level with the pitch so all you can see (unless you are 8 foot tall) is the players legs ( rows 1 and 2 are below pitch level - what a joke ! I should contact consumer affairs. WFC need to move!! (If they want to be a top club they need to have top facilities) even the Forest fans were chanting “What a F**king S**t hole” !!!!!!! PS. I’m not a whinger, but this is the 21st century and a football club on the up – COYH.[/p][/quote]1.Where else do you think the first 3 rows will be? 50 foot up in the air so you get a great vantage point? 2. If you tilt your head very slightly upwards (probably less than 1 degree) you can see the players head, body and arms rather than just looking straight ahead at their legs. It's also helpful to look left and right and you can see all of the other players. I find a similar theory assists me in Row F (2/3 of the way back) in the Rookery although I tilt my head slightly downwards so can view the game. For the first few games I spent my time watching the pigeons sat on the top of the Vic Rd Stand but then some intelligent chap told me I didn't just have to stare straight ahead 3. If you want a better seat, buy a ticket earlier 4. If you had supported the Ornz for more than 2 months you'd realise that we probably, just probably don't have the funds for a brand new stadium and hence now is not the right time for such an investment. 5. If you disagree with point 4, then good luck to you if you run your own business, or have aspirations to. 6. And Finally, nothing like putting a positive spin on great news huh? Stoney77
  • Score: 18

10:31am Tue 24 Sep 13

Andrew1963 says...

No way will Watford relocate until it is a well established premiership club with a site that makes business sense to relocate to. Within the M25, it cost Saracens £24 million to a semi permanent stadium with plastic pitch. Apart from Arsenal and Millwall, who within M25 has relocated a football club to a new site? Doubt millwall could afford to do it now, with land prices substantially higher in real terms than the 1990s. With a new Metropolitan line station in the offing, plus new M1 link road with 650 car park spaces at the end of it on the table, and without a waiting list of 5,000 for season tickets, i think the focus will be on the current stadium and how it can be enhanced to make it more proifitable and more enjoyable for club and supporters.
No way will Watford relocate until it is a well established premiership club with a site that makes business sense to relocate to. Within the M25, it cost Saracens £24 million to a semi permanent stadium with plastic pitch. Apart from Arsenal and Millwall, who within M25 has relocated a football club to a new site? Doubt millwall could afford to do it now, with land prices substantially higher in real terms than the 1990s. With a new Metropolitan line station in the offing, plus new M1 link road with 650 car park spaces at the end of it on the table, and without a waiting list of 5,000 for season tickets, i think the focus will be on the current stadium and how it can be enhanced to make it more proifitable and more enjoyable for club and supporters. Andrew1963
  • Score: 12

11:53am Tue 24 Sep 13

soulfulhornet says...

Andrew1963 wrote:
No way will Watford relocate until it is a well established premiership club with a site that makes business sense to relocate to. Within the M25, it cost Saracens £24 million to a semi permanent stadium with plastic pitch. Apart from Arsenal and Millwall, who within M25 has relocated a football club to a new site? Doubt millwall could afford to do it now, with land prices substantially higher in real terms than the 1990s. With a new Metropolitan line station in the offing, plus new M1 link road with 650 car park spaces at the end of it on the table, and without a waiting list of 5,000 for season tickets, i think the focus will be on the current stadium and how it can be enhanced to make it more proifitable and more enjoyable for club and supporters.
Agreed, think we will be at the Vic for some time. Good. We need to make the place a fortress and a hard place for teams to visit. I don't mean in a nasty way a la Millwall, but I remember the last few games before the playoffs under Boothroyd. The atmosphere was incredible and intimidating albeit in a good way. When/if we get to the Premier League, we must eke out any advantage we can. Come to think of it, we need to do that now to help the team. I get the impression there is a buzz about the town re the club... home element of the crowd up 40% in numbers, optimism re the season and every one pulling together for a common objective. Like the good old days of GT/ Elton.

Vicarage Road is a part of all that, would be sad to give the history up and get one of those purpose built stadia like Bolton, Sunderland etc. So hopefully this stage 1 of the ground investment the club now needs to develop.
[quote][p][bold]Andrew1963[/bold] wrote: No way will Watford relocate until it is a well established premiership club with a site that makes business sense to relocate to. Within the M25, it cost Saracens £24 million to a semi permanent stadium with plastic pitch. Apart from Arsenal and Millwall, who within M25 has relocated a football club to a new site? Doubt millwall could afford to do it now, with land prices substantially higher in real terms than the 1990s. With a new Metropolitan line station in the offing, plus new M1 link road with 650 car park spaces at the end of it on the table, and without a waiting list of 5,000 for season tickets, i think the focus will be on the current stadium and how it can be enhanced to make it more proifitable and more enjoyable for club and supporters.[/p][/quote]Agreed, think we will be at the Vic for some time. Good. We need to make the place a fortress and a hard place for teams to visit. I don't mean in a nasty way a la Millwall, but I remember the last few games before the playoffs under Boothroyd. The atmosphere was incredible and intimidating albeit in a good way. When/if we get to the Premier League, we must eke out any advantage we can. Come to think of it, we need to do that now to help the team. I get the impression there is a buzz about the town re the club... home element of the crowd up 40% in numbers, optimism re the season and every one pulling together for a common objective. Like the good old days of GT/ Elton. Vicarage Road is a part of all that, would be sad to give the history up and get one of those purpose built stadia like Bolton, Sunderland etc. So hopefully this stage 1 of the ground investment the club now needs to develop. soulfulhornet
  • Score: 0

12:01pm Tue 24 Sep 13

soulfulhornet says...

Sorry, last sentence should read
So hopefully this is stage 1 of the ground investment. The club now needs to to continue to develop the ground to maximise revenues.

I like the way the Pozzos are doing this too. Only when the extra capacity is needed as now - will they spend the money. As far as the ultimate capacity is concerned would we ever need more than 25,000? If not then the Vic should be able to accomodate.
Sorry, last sentence should read So hopefully this is stage 1 of the ground investment. The club now needs to to continue to develop the ground to maximise revenues. I like the way the Pozzos are doing this too. Only when the extra capacity is needed as now - will they spend the money. As far as the ultimate capacity is concerned would we ever need more than 25,000? If not then the Vic should be able to accomodate. soulfulhornet
  • Score: 0

12:16pm Tue 24 Sep 13

hornetsforever says...

soulfulhornet wrote:
Sorry, last sentence should read
So hopefully this is stage 1 of the ground investment. The club now needs to to continue to develop the ground to maximise revenues.

I like the way the Pozzos are doing this too. Only when the extra capacity is needed as now - will they spend the money. As far as the ultimate capacity is concerned would we ever need more than 25,000? If not then the Vic should be able to accomodate.
I think the Pozzos have in mind bigger crowds than 25 000 in the long run, otherwise it wouldn't make much sense for them to choose Watford in the first place. Having said that, I'm sure they will persue a carefully optimistic time schedule for stadium growth.
[quote][p][bold]soulfulhornet[/bold] wrote: Sorry, last sentence should read So hopefully this is stage 1 of the ground investment. The club now needs to to continue to develop the ground to maximise revenues. I like the way the Pozzos are doing this too. Only when the extra capacity is needed as now - will they spend the money. As far as the ultimate capacity is concerned would we ever need more than 25,000? If not then the Vic should be able to accomodate.[/p][/quote]I think the Pozzos have in mind bigger crowds than 25 000 in the long run, otherwise it wouldn't make much sense for them to choose Watford in the first place. Having said that, I'm sure they will persue a carefully optimistic time schedule for stadium growth. hornetsforever
  • Score: 1

12:32pm Tue 24 Sep 13

soulfulhornet says...

hornetsforever wrote:
soulfulhornet wrote: Sorry, last sentence should read So hopefully this is stage 1 of the ground investment. The club now needs to to continue to develop the ground to maximise revenues. I like the way the Pozzos are doing this too. Only when the extra capacity is needed as now - will they spend the money. As far as the ultimate capacity is concerned would we ever need more than 25,000? If not then the Vic should be able to accomodate.
I think the Pozzos have in mind bigger crowds than 25 000 in the long run, otherwise it wouldn't make much sense for them to choose Watford in the first place. Having said that, I'm sure they will persue a carefully optimistic time schedule for stadium growth.
Ideally yes, and may be that is part of the Pozzo vision. But if you look at our proud history, we have never averaged over 20,000 per game in a season. I think that was the first season in the old first division, when we averaged around 19,000 - 19,500. So I was being cautious when a picked a figure of 25,000 out of admittedly thin air.

Agreed our success (if and when), might attract a non Watford area based audience. Remember the stage managed forums that Aidy and Simpson did as far a field as Stevenage!! Crowds did not go up substantially as a result.

Probably the most successful expansion was by Charlton when in the Prem. They ventured into parts of Surrey and Kent, so it is possible.
[quote][p][bold]hornetsforever[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]soulfulhornet[/bold] wrote: Sorry, last sentence should read So hopefully this is stage 1 of the ground investment. The club now needs to to continue to develop the ground to maximise revenues. I like the way the Pozzos are doing this too. Only when the extra capacity is needed as now - will they spend the money. As far as the ultimate capacity is concerned would we ever need more than 25,000? If not then the Vic should be able to accomodate.[/p][/quote]I think the Pozzos have in mind bigger crowds than 25 000 in the long run, otherwise it wouldn't make much sense for them to choose Watford in the first place. Having said that, I'm sure they will persue a carefully optimistic time schedule for stadium growth.[/p][/quote]Ideally yes, and may be that is part of the Pozzo vision. But if you look at our proud history, we have never averaged over 20,000 per game in a season. I think that was the first season in the old first division, when we averaged around 19,000 - 19,500. So I was being cautious when a picked a figure of 25,000 out of admittedly thin air. Agreed our success (if and when), might attract a non Watford area based audience. Remember the stage managed forums that Aidy and Simpson did as far a field as Stevenage!! Crowds did not go up substantially as a result. Probably the most successful expansion was by Charlton when in the Prem. They ventured into parts of Surrey and Kent, so it is possible. soulfulhornet
  • Score: 0

1:18pm Tue 24 Sep 13

hornetsforever says...

soulfulhornet wrote:
hornetsforever wrote:
soulfulhornet wrote: Sorry, last sentence should read So hopefully this is stage 1 of the ground investment. The club now needs to to continue to develop the ground to maximise revenues. I like the way the Pozzos are doing this too. Only when the extra capacity is needed as now - will they spend the money. As far as the ultimate capacity is concerned would we ever need more than 25,000? If not then the Vic should be able to accomodate.
I think the Pozzos have in mind bigger crowds than 25 000 in the long run, otherwise it wouldn't make much sense for them to choose Watford in the first place. Having said that, I'm sure they will persue a carefully optimistic time schedule for stadium growth.
Ideally yes, and may be that is part of the Pozzo vision. But if you look at our proud history, we have never averaged over 20,000 per game in a season. I think that was the first season in the old first division, when we averaged around 19,000 - 19,500. So I was being cautious when a picked a figure of 25,000 out of admittedly thin air.

Agreed our success (if and when), might attract a non Watford area based audience. Remember the stage managed forums that Aidy and Simpson did as far a field as Stevenage!! Crowds did not go up substantially as a result.

Probably the most successful expansion was by Charlton when in the Prem. They ventured into parts of Surrey and Kent, so it is possible.
it is true that Watford's highest average attendance was just under 20 000 for the first season in the old first division. But it also has to be remembered that in those days the average first division attendances for all clubs were also below 20 000. There is a better market now than then. The new station and tube line could well help in getting in more bodies. I think Harrow represents a better catchment area than Stevenage.
I'm not just looking at the future with rose tinted spectacles and do not see 25000+ attendances as a matter of course, but I'm sure the Pozzos are aware of the possibility of this potential and would have plans to accomodate them if they do happen.
[quote][p][bold]soulfulhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]hornetsforever[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]soulfulhornet[/bold] wrote: Sorry, last sentence should read So hopefully this is stage 1 of the ground investment. The club now needs to to continue to develop the ground to maximise revenues. I like the way the Pozzos are doing this too. Only when the extra capacity is needed as now - will they spend the money. As far as the ultimate capacity is concerned would we ever need more than 25,000? If not then the Vic should be able to accomodate.[/p][/quote]I think the Pozzos have in mind bigger crowds than 25 000 in the long run, otherwise it wouldn't make much sense for them to choose Watford in the first place. Having said that, I'm sure they will persue a carefully optimistic time schedule for stadium growth.[/p][/quote]Ideally yes, and may be that is part of the Pozzo vision. But if you look at our proud history, we have never averaged over 20,000 per game in a season. I think that was the first season in the old first division, when we averaged around 19,000 - 19,500. So I was being cautious when a picked a figure of 25,000 out of admittedly thin air. Agreed our success (if and when), might attract a non Watford area based audience. Remember the stage managed forums that Aidy and Simpson did as far a field as Stevenage!! Crowds did not go up substantially as a result. Probably the most successful expansion was by Charlton when in the Prem. They ventured into parts of Surrey and Kent, so it is possible.[/p][/quote]it is true that Watford's highest average attendance was just under 20 000 for the first season in the old first division. But it also has to be remembered that in those days the average first division attendances for all clubs were also below 20 000. There is a better market now than then. The new station and tube line could well help in getting in more bodies. I think Harrow represents a better catchment area than Stevenage. I'm not just looking at the future with rose tinted spectacles and do not see 25000+ attendances as a matter of course, but I'm sure the Pozzos are aware of the possibility of this potential and would have plans to accomodate them if they do happen. hornetsforever
  • Score: 0

1:40pm Tue 24 Sep 13

soulfulhornet says...

hornetsforever wrote:
soulfulhornet wrote:
hornetsforever wrote:
soulfulhornet wrote: Sorry, last sentence should read So hopefully this is stage 1 of the ground investment. The club now needs to to continue to develop the ground to maximise revenues. I like the way the Pozzos are doing this too. Only when the extra capacity is needed as now - will they spend the money. As far as the ultimate capacity is concerned would we ever need more than 25,000? If not then the Vic should be able to accomodate.
I think the Pozzos have in mind bigger crowds than 25 000 in the long run, otherwise it wouldn't make much sense for them to choose Watford in the first place. Having said that, I'm sure they will persue a carefully optimistic time schedule for stadium growth.
Ideally yes, and may be that is part of the Pozzo vision. But if you look at our proud history, we have never averaged over 20,000 per game in a season. I think that was the first season in the old first division, when we averaged around 19,000 - 19,500. So I was being cautious when a picked a figure of 25,000 out of admittedly thin air. Agreed our success (if and when), might attract a non Watford area based audience. Remember the stage managed forums that Aidy and Simpson did as far a field as Stevenage!! Crowds did not go up substantially as a result. Probably the most successful expansion was by Charlton when in the Prem. They ventured into parts of Surrey and Kent, so it is possible.
it is true that Watford's highest average attendance was just under 20 000 for the first season in the old first division. But it also has to be remembered that in those days the average first division attendances for all clubs were also below 20 000. There is a better market now than then. The new station and tube line could well help in getting in more bodies. I think Harrow represents a better catchment area than Stevenage. I'm not just looking at the future with rose tinted spectacles and do not see 25000+ attendances as a matter of course, but I'm sure the Pozzos are aware of the possibility of this potential and would have plans to accomodate them if they do happen.
Point taken, football has come along way since those dark days of the eighties (not dark for us horns) with crowd trouble, appalling facilities and food that you wouldn't give to a dog. so may be that comparison is a bit unfair.

I am sure there is potential, just difficult to quantify. I listen to talksport alot and always amazed how many fans of other clubs e.g Spurs, West Ham, Arsenal etc live in Watford and call in . If we could attract these fans or more likely their offspring then there is certainly an opportunity.

In the 80's Watford were always in the vanguard of attracting new fans with the family stand and terrace for example. A similar initiative perhaps with schools etc might boost the fan base.

When I attend Vicarage Road - not as often as my health/wealth would allow - I am struck by the demographic of the crowd. Largely over 50! This is a problem for other teams too, partly down to cost I suppose. The extra capacity might give more leeway to attract a new audience/ crowd especially as the likes of Arsenal and Spurs are full to capacity.

I believe the Pozzos have contingency plans and that they are pragmatic and purposeful in just about everything they do. Hence the absence of silly promises like we will win the Premier League or other such nonsense that some owners say to hoodwink the fans.
[quote][p][bold]hornetsforever[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]soulfulhornet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]hornetsforever[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]soulfulhornet[/bold] wrote: Sorry, last sentence should read So hopefully this is stage 1 of the ground investment. The club now needs to to continue to develop the ground to maximise revenues. I like the way the Pozzos are doing this too. Only when the extra capacity is needed as now - will they spend the money. As far as the ultimate capacity is concerned would we ever need more than 25,000? If not then the Vic should be able to accomodate.[/p][/quote]I think the Pozzos have in mind bigger crowds than 25 000 in the long run, otherwise it wouldn't make much sense for them to choose Watford in the first place. Having said that, I'm sure they will persue a carefully optimistic time schedule for stadium growth.[/p][/quote]Ideally yes, and may be that is part of the Pozzo vision. But if you look at our proud history, we have never averaged over 20,000 per game in a season. I think that was the first season in the old first division, when we averaged around 19,000 - 19,500. So I was being cautious when a picked a figure of 25,000 out of admittedly thin air. Agreed our success (if and when), might attract a non Watford area based audience. Remember the stage managed forums that Aidy and Simpson did as far a field as Stevenage!! Crowds did not go up substantially as a result. Probably the most successful expansion was by Charlton when in the Prem. They ventured into parts of Surrey and Kent, so it is possible.[/p][/quote]it is true that Watford's highest average attendance was just under 20 000 for the first season in the old first division. But it also has to be remembered that in those days the average first division attendances for all clubs were also below 20 000. There is a better market now than then. The new station and tube line could well help in getting in more bodies. I think Harrow represents a better catchment area than Stevenage. I'm not just looking at the future with rose tinted spectacles and do not see 25000+ attendances as a matter of course, but I'm sure the Pozzos are aware of the possibility of this potential and would have plans to accomodate them if they do happen.[/p][/quote]Point taken, football has come along way since those dark days of the eighties (not dark for us horns) with crowd trouble, appalling facilities and food that you wouldn't give to a dog. so may be that comparison is a bit unfair. I am sure there is potential, just difficult to quantify. I listen to talksport alot and always amazed how many fans of other clubs e.g Spurs, West Ham, Arsenal etc live in Watford and call in . If we could attract these fans or more likely their offspring then there is certainly an opportunity. In the 80's Watford were always in the vanguard of attracting new fans with the family stand and terrace for example. A similar initiative perhaps with schools etc might boost the fan base. When I attend Vicarage Road - not as often as my health/wealth would allow - I am struck by the demographic of the crowd. Largely over 50! This is a problem for other teams too, partly down to cost I suppose. The extra capacity might give more leeway to attract a new audience/ crowd especially as the likes of Arsenal and Spurs are full to capacity. I believe the Pozzos have contingency plans and that they are pragmatic and purposeful in just about everything they do. Hence the absence of silly promises like we will win the Premier League or other such nonsense that some owners say to hoodwink the fans. soulfulhornet
  • Score: 4

3:48pm Tue 24 Sep 13

1982WFC says...

A smallish single tier stand-WITH a roof. Built close to the pitch with plenty of space behind to add second tier as and when it is needed.
A smallish single tier stand-WITH a roof. Built close to the pitch with plenty of space behind to add second tier as and when it is needed. 1982WFC
  • Score: 1

10:45am Sat 28 Sep 13

Nick El Greco says...

Fun Bobby wrote:
I have full respect for Graham Taylor and what he achieved at Watford (twice over) but I don't understand why a new stand should be called anything other than the Giampaolo Pozzo Stand - or is GT going 50/50 on the cost of it?
Because one of them took us from the bottom of Division 4 to 2nd in the whole country; moved on managed our country, came back and took us to the top tier again.Since then he has been a constant at the club, bringing calm when we otherwise quite possibly have ceased to exist. The other has been here for a season and a bit and although I respect everything he and his family have done, they haven't achieved anything yet. If you can't see the difference there is something you're not understanding
[quote][p][bold]Fun Bobby[/bold] wrote: I have full respect for Graham Taylor and what he achieved at Watford (twice over) but I don't understand why a new stand should be called anything other than the Giampaolo Pozzo Stand - or is GT going 50/50 on the cost of it?[/p][/quote]Because one of them took us from the bottom of Division 4 to 2nd in the whole country; moved on managed our country, came back and took us to the top tier again.Since then he has been a constant at the club, bringing calm when we otherwise quite possibly have ceased to exist. The other has been here for a season and a bit and although I respect everything he and his family have done, they haven't achieved anything yet. If you can't see the difference there is something you're not understanding Nick El Greco
  • Score: 4

11:03am Sat 28 Sep 13

Nick El Greco says...

If we attract 3,000 new fans i'll give it a week before people start describing them as 'plastics' and moaning about them not singing. Ironically, the people who generally do this have often only been going a few seasons themselves. I was as upset as anyone about the poor vocal support at Wembley but you aren't going to change anything by alienating people

Interesting that some of the comments in this thread seem to imply that going for economy in the new stand is somehow reprehensible. It may be basic but compared to what? The existing East stand is a disgrace and looks like someone's shed from the air. Personally I couldn't give 2 hoots whether it's basic or not, it's happening and that's ALL that's important
If we attract 3,000 new fans i'll give it a week before people start describing them as 'plastics' and moaning about them not singing. Ironically, the people who generally do this have often only been going a few seasons themselves. I was as upset as anyone about the poor vocal support at Wembley but you aren't going to change anything by alienating people Interesting that some of the comments in this thread seem to imply that going for economy in the new stand is somehow reprehensible. It may be basic but compared to what? The existing East stand is a disgrace and looks like someone's shed from the air. Personally I couldn't give 2 hoots whether it's basic or not, it's happening and that's ALL that's important Nick El Greco
  • Score: 3

1:57pm Mon 30 Sep 13

84AGAIN says...

Regarding concerns about the nature of the replacement of the East stand with a temporary structure suggest checking out the GL events web site to see what they did at the Olympics or maybe more relevant, Worcester Warriors rugby club. Think you will agree that a "temporary" structure can be pretty decent these days!
Regarding concerns about the nature of the replacement of the East stand with a temporary structure suggest checking out the GL events web site to see what they did at the Olympics or maybe more relevant, Worcester Warriors rugby club. Think you will agree that a "temporary" structure can be pretty decent these days! 84AGAIN
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree