thabucks
-
Posts
5,489 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Recent Profile Visitors
5,139 profile views
thabucks's Achievements
-
Mandela Keita & Oscar Gloukh …
-
New sleeve sponsor next up ….
-
They kinda did do that …
- 4,671 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- aston villa
- branding
- (and 1 more)
-
Interesting no sleeve sponsor so that’s gunna be different and presume a lot bigger deal than the current one…
-
It’s not Heck’s badge it’s NSWE … If they were suitably blown away by the round badge do you think they’d let it be changed a year afterwards ? Why is it the Lerner badge and not Paul Faulkner’s. Yes Heck would’ve been behind it but ultimately it is Nas & Wes’s badge as it will define their ownership in terms of badges. Or is it cause a lot don’t seem to like Heck they get away from being associated with it ?
-
WHO says it’s not been approved by the FA ? Not seen that anywhere … I trust the club have done the required due diligence with the badge in terms of liaising with the FA.
-
I wonder if we will be going forwards using a darker shade of claret for the shirts, etc. The announcement of Betano appears to be a deeper shade than used currently and the badge does stand out well against it.
-
We would need to prove it was in the communities beneficial interests in order to obtain the CPO required. Losing X amount of houses but gaining Y benefits thus adding value to the whole area. If it’s for the wider greater good of the overall majority of residents, then harsh as it is yes it is ok and a few shouldn’t get in the way of regeneration.
-
Rudimentary sketch of the amount of parkland required … you’d need to cpo a bunch of houses to negate right to light issues also.
-
You wouldn’t be encroaching into the park by more than 20sq metres … Relocate any trees which would be in the way, contribute to improvements to the park and I’m sure the council would oblige.
-
If you look at the plans for redevelopment of the north stand, the corner which was adjoin it didn’t have the walkway and had an additional 6 rows of seats in comparison to the rest of the lower tier. Certain sections would need to be retained for disabled fans but not the whole length.
-
It would’nt need to carry any more weight as with the new main stand at Anfield the additional tier and new roof would be constructed behind then joined to the stand once the old roof was removed. No need to reduce capacity whilst the work was going on. I think it’s a more realistic solution long term than moving grounds to get Villa park to over 60k
-
Only way to do it is to purchase houses to enlarge the site and remove the right to light obstacle … A 19/20k trinity Road Stand, with a new North Stand of 14k+ takes us to 57/58k before the Witton is looked at which you’d expect to take us to 62-64k seater stadium - 4 separate stand identities. It’s gunna mean moving people from their homes .
-
Both the SAF stand at OT and the Main Stand at Anfield would tower over the current Trinity stand. An extension to it wouldn’t encroach massively on the parkland but houses would need to be demolished. You would make the current 2nd tier a bit smaller then add a 3rd tier above. It would easier to build and extend behind it than the Witton.
-
It could be easier is many respects to enlarge the main Trinity Road stand which’s current capacity is just under 13’000 compared to the main stand at Anfield is just over 20’000. it would involve the need to purchase a small section of the park and again buy houses, for circulation and negate right to light issues.
