Why is Bramall Lane not a listed building?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?


Bramall lane is one of the best grounds for atmosphere in the country and the sum of its parts are magnificent. But each individual stand in my opinion is an architectural "cock up." The ground over the years has been developed on the cheap, with maybe the exception of the South stand, that nearly ruined us.
But with not really any future vision the ground has evolved in a haphazard manner and is quite difficult develop into a ground that could stage World cup matches in the future.
 
CarlMcBlade said:
Bramall lane is one of the best grounds for atmosphere in the country and the sum of its parts are magnificent. But each individual stand in my opinion is an architectural "cock up." The ground over the years has been developed on the cheap, with maybe the exception of the South stand, that nearly ruined us.
But with not really any future vision the ground has evolved in a haphazard manner and is quite difficult develop into a ground that could stage World cup matches in the future.
Click to expand...
I remember seeing Brierley's vision for the lane at an open day in the late 80's. it was a model of an old wembley style stadium in the style of the South stand. Twas quite exciting to see as a young lad. the reality is fabulous, but not for its architecture
 
To add to what Carl states above, the enlargement of the South Stand so it could be used for World Cup matches graphically showed this lack of forward planning.

There was to be a new tier of seats but it couldn't run the whole length of the stand (which runs the whole length of the pitch) because the Hotel gets in the way. Obviously, the hotel should have been designed to allow for expansion of the stadium but it seems it was not.

Better architects than those who designed the latest scheme would probably be able to sort out how to 'work round' the hotel but fundamentally, the obvious flaw in the design is that the hotel is built too near to the stadium, it should have been located a few yards closer to the corner of Bramall Lane and Cherry Street. If it were forming the corner of the street, it would have enhanced the structure of the street plan as well.

But there has been a refusal to implement a masterplan and workaday design firms have been employed. Workaday design firms are easier to work with because their way of doing business is to flatter their clients and do what they say whereas if you want to create something of value, you inevitably challenge the client but in doing so of course, you risk losing the job.


p.s. one of the obvious architectural downfalls of piecemeal development is that where the stands meet, in the corners, is a mess. The corners could be designed to unite the stands (geometrically) but it would require demolition of small areas of some of the existing stands near to those corners - it really has to happen, but there has been a reluctance to do this. I'm sure the hotel could be similarly adapted to accomodate a bigger south stand. The worst corner is obviously the one between the Kop and the John Street Stand, this is such a cockup because the club wouldn't contemplate a demolition of a short length of the John Street stand to rework it round the corner.. but its quite likely it didn't dawn on the architects either OR it did dawn on them but being 'yes men' they were too afraid to suggest it.
 
Last edited:
vorpal blade said:
To add to what Carl states above, the enlargement of the South Stand so it could be used for World Cup matches graphically showed this lack of forward planning.

There was to be a new tier of seats but it couldn't run the whole length of the stand (which runs the whole length of the pitch) because the Hotel gets in the way. Obviously, the hotel should have been designed to allow for expansion of the stadium but it seems it was not.

Better architects than those who designed the latest scheme would probably be able to sort out how to 'work round' the hotel but fundamentally, the obvious flaw in the design is that the hotel is built too near to the stadium, it should have been located a few yards closer to the corner of Bramall Lane and Cherry Street. If it were forming the corner of the street, it would have enhanced the structure of the street plan as well.

But there has been a refusal to implement a masterplan and workaday design firms have been employed. Workaday design firms are easier to work with because their way of doing business is to flatter their clients and do what they say whereas if you want to create something of value, you inevitably challenge the client but in doing so of course, you risk losing the job.


p.s. one of the obvious architectural downfalls of piecemeal development is that where the stands meet, in the corners, is a mess. The corners could be designed to unite the stands (geometrically) but it would require demolition of small areas of some of the existing stands near to those corners - it really has to happen, but there has been a reluctance to do this. I'm sure the hotel could be similarly adapted to accomodate a bigger south stand. The worst corner is obviously the one between the Kop and the John Street Stand, this is such a cockup because the club wouldn't contemplate a demolition of a short length of the John Street stand to rework it round the corner.. but its quite likely it didn't dawn on the architects either OR it did dawn on them but being 'yes men' they were too afraid to suggest it.
Click to expand...
Bear in mind KM has a QS background so may well have carried out his own 'value engineering'.
 
BushBlade said:
Bear in mind KM has a QS background so may well have carried out his own 'value engineering'.
Click to expand...

He's also created over a billion pounds worth of value in a variety of incarnations of his Scarborough Group.

Maybe, just maybe, the bloke knows what he is doing when it comes to property....
 
I should coco said:
He's also created over a billion pounds worth of value in a variety of incarnations of his Scarborough Group.

Maybe, just maybe, the bloke knows what he is doing when it comes to property....
Click to expand...
He builds sheds. He's very good at making money out of it. Delivering a quality product is different to maximising profits. That's why many modern buildings are fugly.
 
What the fuck is the matter with some people. When I first went to the Lane it had 3 sides, 2,000 seats, you stood ankle deep in piss in the bogs and .......... well, I could go on. In short it was a fucking dump, an embarrassment and you actually looked forward to derby matches so you could visit a proper ground. Now we have a cracking ground with great atmosphere (that is, when you lot stop fucking moaning) and beats the shit out of that shed across the city. I can only conclude that the pedantics making such stupid comments on geometrical alignment and the hotel being a few meters too close to the south stand are still in fuckin' nappies.
 
I'm 63 and don't lecture anyone.

If you read my post you will see that I was making comparisons with then and now. 50 years ago we had a fucking dump. Now we have a great ground with a few flaws. I compares well with most grounds in the country and betters most of the newer, architecturally designed meccano sets. And it's evolved to a state where it is better than that of our neighbours formerly world-class stadium.

Don't take things so personally.
 
vorpal blade said:
I'm 53 and lecture in Architecture - how about you?
Click to expand...

A bit below the belt, but hey ho....

He who can, does; he who cannot, teaches

(George Bernard Shaw wrote this in his playMan and Superman, 1903. It is included as Maxim 36 in theMaxims for Revolutionists that is included in the work).
 
snootyfenooty said:
I'm 63 and don't lecture anyone.

If you read my post you will see that I was making comparisons with then and now. 50 years ago we had a fucking dump. Now we have a great ground with a few flaws. I compares well with most grounds in the country and betters most of the newer, architecturally designed meccano sets. And it's evolved to a state where it is better than that of our neighbours formerly world-class stadium.

Don't take things so personally.
Click to expand...

Bert agrees with you, Hillsborough was formerly billed as the "Wembley of the North". Our stadium is far better now. Having said that a full Hillsborough especially on Derby Day is still something special.
 
Snooty, I'm not taking it at all personally. The person who started this thread asked the question, "Why is Bramall Lane not a listed building?"

Therefore, quite reasonably the conversation has been about the quality of the architecture - because if it were deemed significant enough to preserve it, then it would be listed. The geometry of stadia is all important in terms of seeing the pitch (not possible from some of the seats between the John Street stand and the Kop) and therefore whether its a significant design or not.

Your contribution with a 'fuck' in the first sentence and a 'fuckin' in the last makes no comment on the quality of the architecture of the place. Its just pointlessly insulting.
 
Bert said:
Having said that a full Hillsborough especially on Derby Day is still something special.
Click to expand...

When did that last happen?

"They're here.
They're there,
They're every fucking where,
Empty seats......"
 

Bert said:
Having said that a full Hillsborough especially on Derby Day is still rarer than rocking horse shit.
Click to expand...

Corrections are gratis. Thanks are not necessary.
 
vorpal blade said:
To add to what Carl states above, the enlargement of the South Stand so it could be used for World Cup matches graphically showed this lack of forward planning.

There was to be a new tier of seats but it couldn't run the whole length of the stand (which runs the whole length of the pitch) because the Hotel gets in the way. Obviously, the hotel should have been designed to allow for expansion of the stadium but it seems it was not.

Better architects than those who designed the latest scheme would probably be able to sort out how to 'work round' the hotel but fundamentally, the obvious flaw in the design is that the hotel is built too near to the stadium, it should have been located a few yards closer to the corner of Bramall Lane and Cherry Street. If it were forming the corner of the street, it would have enhanced the structure of the street plan as well.

But there has been a refusal to implement a masterplan and workaday design firms have been employed. Workaday design firms are easier to work with because their way of doing business is to flatter their clients and do what they say whereas if you want to create something of value, you inevitably challenge the client but in doing so of course, you risk losing the job.


p.s. one of the obvious architectural downfalls of piecemeal development is that where the stands meet, in the corners, is a mess. The corners could be designed to unite the stands (geometrically) but it would require demolition of small areas of some of the existing stands near to those corners - it really has to happen, but there has been a reluctance to do this. I'm sure the hotel could be similarly adapted to accomodate a bigger south stand. The worst corner is obviously the one between the Kop and the John Street Stand, this is such a cockup because the club wouldn't contemplate a demolition of a short length of the John Street stand to rework it round the corner.. but its quite likely it didn't dawn on the architects either OR it did dawn on them but being 'yes men' they were too afraid to suggest it.
Click to expand...

Knowing next to nowt about these things, if and when the Kop is developed could that not incorporate the offending corner?
 
Bert said:
Bert agrees with you, Hillsborough was formerly billed as the "Wembley of the North". Our stadium is far better now. Having said that a full Hillsborough especially on Derby Day is still something special.
Click to expand...

Have to agree, I used to look forward to visiting once upon a time. You go now though, especially on matchdays, and it looks like a scene from a Lowry painting except there is more life in the matchstick men than in the real life versions.
 
vorpal blade said:
absolutely on the nail Coco. I ran out of design work and had to lecture, I've now got much more design work to do & I don't lecture anymore.
Click to expand...

I agreed with most of your earlier post about the limited options to expand BDTBL but as ever, it is a question of money.

The business centre was built to generate revenue when we struggled in the Championship. Obviously if we'd have gone on to establish ourselves in the Premier (in some parallel Tevez-free universe), then I guess we would have a better ground with the South Stand / Kop gap filled in with something decent.

KM knows what he is doing but most of his and the family wealth is in property holdings. There is now way he is going to chuck in tens of millions of pounds of cash, just to create more empty seats, albeit they are more aesthetically pleasing.
 
I should coco said:
When did that last happen?

"They're here.
They're there,
They're every fucking where,
Empty seats......"
Click to expand...

A long time ago, us being in a division below them isn't helping either.
 
Bert said:
A long time ago, us being in a division below them isn't helping either.
Click to expand...

No it wouldn't would it?

Strange that. I notice the Sunderland v Hartlepool and Man Citeh v Bury haven't sold out either recently.....
 
SouthEssexBlade said:
if and when the Kop is developed could that not incorporate the offending corner?
Click to expand...

yes.....BUT

To just extend a stand around a corner,

- if the stands have the same rake, then they can meet simply and everything is neat and tidy.

- if the two stands have different rakes, then I think I'm right in saying that the steeper one of the two must be extended to form the corner. Otherwise there will be areas of the new terracing that haven't got a direct view of the pitch (sorry snooty, but this is geometry).

- so if the Kop were extended around on a curve, as it has a very shallow rake, it couldn't have seats right round it because there would be blind spots as it would end up lower than the terraces of the John Street Stand where the two meet. You could curve it round before it was inline with the John Street stand but you would lose a lot of the current seats. Then there is the additional problem that boxes at the back of the John Street form a vertical wall (too close to the pitch) and soon get in the way of any new terracing in that corner...this is what the problem is at the moment. Are there still seats there from which you just cannot see the pitch or have they taken them out yet?

- I believe that the proposed scheme is just a new second tier because of this problem but building that does nothing to improve the Kop seating, which is uncomfortably cramped because of its shallow rake.

It should be noted that the architects of the South Stand built it a long way back from the pitch so that when a new John Street stand was built, it could match height of the South Stand because you would move the pitch southwards to give it enough room. In building a John Street Stand to match the South Stand, you would obscure the view for thousands of seats in the Bramall Lane Stand and the Kop so would have to undertake more extensive building work.

In other words, there was a masterplan, but like most masterplans, it wasn't followed through, the design of the John Street stand has compromised development ever since it was built - I believe the club lost control of its design for contractual reasons.

If you want to expand the stadium, then the most organised way is probably to still move the John Street Stand closer to the South Stand but there would have to be serious demolition and restructuring of the Kop (& possible relocation nearer Shoreham Street)....you may think that that would be no bad thing? but it certainly wouldn't come cheap.

and of course you'd have to demolish the John Street stand itself which is still quite new - it takes a lot of boldness and cash to do that.

If you did that, you could have a stadium united under a roof the same height all the way round, but by putting a second tier on the Kop and South Stands you start making it lobsided - not as badly lobsided as St. James Park or Elland Road, but it is inherently, sub-optimal IMO.
 
Last edited:
vorpal blade said:
Otherwise there will be areas of the new terracing that haven't got a direct view of the pitch (sorry snooty, but this is geometry).
Click to expand...

When you talk out of your arse when your head is already up your arse, isn't this ass-symetry?
 
snootyfenooty said:
What the fuck is the matter with some people. When I first went to the Lane it had 3 sides, 2,000 seats, you stood ankle deep in piss in the bogs and .......... well, I could go on. In short it was a fucking dump, an embarrassment and you actually looked forward to derby matches so you could visit a proper ground. Now we have a cracking ground with great atmosphere (that is, when you lot stop fucking moaning) and beats the shit out of that shed across the city. I can only conclude that the pedantics making such stupid comments on geometrical alignment and the hotel being a few meters too close to the south stand are still in fuckin' nappies.
Click to expand...
What the fuck is the matter with you? We're just discussing the architecture. It could have been done better. That doesn't mean the 'new' ground isn't an improvement on the old.

And it's 'pedants'.
 
BushBlade said:
What the fuck is the matter with you? We're just discussing the architecture. It could have been done better. That doesn't mean the 'new' ground isn't an improvement on the old.

And it's 'pedants'.
Click to expand...

That's pedantic
 
vorpal blade said:
yes.....BUT

To just extend a stand around a corner,

- if the stands have the same rake, then they can meet simply and everything is neat and tidy.

- if the two stands have different rakes, then I think I'm right in saying that the steeper one of the two must be extended to form the corner. Otherwise there will be areas of the new terracing that haven't got a direct view of the pitch (sorry snooty, but this is geometry).

- so if the Kop were extended around on a curve, as it has a very shallow rake, it couldn't have seats right round it because there would be blind spots as it would end up lower than the terraces of the John Street Stand where the two meet. You could curve it round before it was inline with the John Street stand but you would lose a lot of the current seats. Then there is the additional problem that boxes at the back of the John Street form a vertical wall (too close to the pitch) and soon get in the way of any new terracing in that corner...this is what the problem is at the moment. Are there still seats there from which you just cannot see the pitch or have they taken them out yet?

- I believe that the proposed scheme is just a new second tier because of this problem but building that does nothing to improve the Kop seating, which is uncomfortably cramped because of its shallow rake.

It should be noted that the architects of the South Stand built it a long way back from the pitch so that when a new John Street stand was built, it could match height of the South Stand because you would move the pitch southwards to give it enough room. In building a John Street Stand to match the South Stand, you would obscure the view for thousands of seats in the Bramall Lane Stand and the Kop so would have to undertake more extensive building work.

In other words, there was a masterplan, but like most masterplans, it wasn't followed through, the design of the John Street stand has compromised development ever since it was built - I believe the club lost control of its design for contractual reasons.

If you want to expand the stadium, then the most organised way is probably to still move the John Street Stand closer to the South Stand but there would have to be serious demolition and restructuring of the Kop (& possible relocation nearer Shoreham Street)....you may think that that would be no bad thing? but it certainly wouldn't come cheap.

and of course you'd have to demolish the John Street stand itself which is still quite new - it takes a lot of boldness and cash to do that.

If you did that, you could have a stadium united under a roof the same height all the way round, but by putting a second tier on the Kop and South Stands you start making it lobsided - not as badly lobsided as St. James Park or Elland Road, but it is inherently, sub-optimal IMO.
Click to expand...

Such things annoy me. Like you say, the huge gap left in front on the South Stand should have vanished when we built the John Street. And then Wilder narrowed the pitch making my OCD issues even worse.... :(
 

vorpal blade said:
To add to what Carl states above, the enlargement of the South Stand so it could be used for World Cup matches graphically showed this lack of forward planning.

There was to be a new tier of seats but it couldn't run the whole length of the stand (which runs the whole length of the pitch) because the Hotel gets in the way. Obviously, the hotel should have been designed to allow for expansion of the stadium but it seems it was not.

Better architects than those who designed the latest scheme would probably be able to sort out how to 'work round' the hotel but fundamentally, the obvious flaw in the design is that the hotel is built too near to the stadium, it should have been located a few yards closer to the corner of Bramall Lane and Cherry Street. If it were forming the corner of the street, it would have enhanced the structure of the street plan as well.

But there has been a refusal to implement a masterplan and workaday design firms have been employed. Workaday design firms are easier to work with because their way of doing business is to flatter their clients and do what they say whereas if you want to create something of value, you inevitably challenge the client but in doing so of course, you risk losing the job.


p.s. one of the obvious architectural downfalls of piecemeal development is that where the stands meet, in the corners, is a mess. The corners could be designed to unite the stands (geometrically) but it would require demolition of small areas of some of the existing stands near to those corners - it really has to happen, but there has been a reluctance to do this. I'm sure the hotel could be similarly adapted to accomodate a bigger south stand. The worst corner is obviously the one between the Kop and the John Street Stand, this is such a cockup because the club wouldn't contemplate a demolition of a short length of the John Street stand to rework it round the corner.. but its quite likely it didn't dawn on the architects either OR it did dawn on them but being 'yes men' they were too afraid to suggest it.
Click to expand...

Huge respect to your experience and knowledge, VP. I can almost hear your teeth grating when you contemplate poor design at football stadia but in all honesty some of us prefer piecemeal development rather than instant new stands. Bramall Lane is more "organic" than any Forest Green stadium will ever be, because its various non-matching bits all came along in different eras, and I like it that way. It might not be aesthetically pleasing to the expert eye but it's a "proper" football ground which has developed in its own way and will, no doubt, continue to do so.

In all honesty, I prefer what Fulham have got now to what they might have had, and while I have no sympathy for millionaires I do also think it only fair that folk who live right next to grounds should be given a veto over buildings they don't like. I love the Blades dearly but I wouldn't want them building an Olympic stadium on my doorstep, thanks very much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom