Bramall Lane roof

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

Without knowing the exact problems and what's required to fix them, it does seem short-sighted at face value.

Not only does the roof effectively cover the lower tier to a large extent too, it could have an impact on FA Cup games and late season games if anything is on the line (relegation rather than promotion you'd have to say at this point).
 



bxb said:
I hadnt thought about RAAC - what bits of it are concrete..? I think RAAC was more like 60s 70s era.. my guess it relates to the steelwork. Corrosion protection (paint) requires regular maintenace - 15 years service life would be optimistic before it needed renewing.
Click to expand...
RAAC was still being used in the late 90s for floors and ceilings and has a life of around 30 years, which is why it came to mind.

You can bet your house on McCabe using RAAC for the floors if it was cheaper, it would also explain why it’s the upper tier and not the lower that’s closed.

They won’t want to mention RAAC (if it is that) as they’ll need a full risk assessment of the rest of the ground and god knows what that will bring up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bxb
bxb said:
I hadnt though about RAAC - what bits of it are concrete..? I think RAAC was more like 60s 70s era.. my guess it relates to the steelwork. Corrosion protection (paint) requires regular maintenace - 15 years service life would be optimistic before it needed renewing.
Click to expand...
Raac was used for concrete ceilings and what not not structural columns ,not sure whether the bl is steel framed or reinforced concrete like the south ,there must be a problem in the fixings from the newish cantilever on there ,bettis could have explained it much better or even have the ground maintainace manger on to explain.
 
KMC-1889 said:
RAAC was still being used in the late 90s for floors and ceilings and has a life of around 30 years, which is why it came to mind.

You can bet your house on McCabe using RAAC for the floors if it was cheaper, it would also explain why it’s the upper tier and not the lower that’s closed.

They won’t want to mention RAAC (if it is that) as they’ll need a full risk assessment of the rest of the ground and god knows what that will bring up.
Click to expand...
McCabe didn't build the bl upper ,he had the roof altered when the Westfield corner went up cantilevered it and took the vertical steel supports out .
 
I was wondering if allocating upper tier to away fans only in future is part of club thinking. Keeping it closed unless there's a large away following will save money
 
bxb said:
Absolute nonsense - I have more than a little knowledge of structural engineering - nothing much has changed in 20 odd years. We might have adopted Eurocodes instead of British Standards (well, I havent!) but that would make f*ck all difference to how you would design it in principle. Im guessing it need mainenance (corrosion protection). Or maybe theyve reviewed the original design or had an interim inspection for some reason and have found some defect or suchlike and they are concerned about it. There are a lot of connections on the main roof truss that sits above the roof covering
Click to expand...
I'm only repeating what the CEO said live on RS.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bxb
Its CW's fault. Gerrim out of our club!! he had all summer to fix the roof. What was he doing? Watching the world cup to scout for players who know about the British culture and this football club 👀
 
Tickhill said:
I was wondering if allocating upper tier to away fans only in future is part of club thinking. Keeping it closed unless there's a large away following will save money
Click to expand...
Don’t think they can, there’s a rule about away fans having to be next to the pitch.

Although Newcastle have been breaking that rule for as long as I can remember.
 
Isn't that just a prem rule? The porkers sometimes have the lower tier of the lepers lane end. Disgusting favouritism regarding Newcastle and how nothing has been done to enforce the rule. Same with Everton, got away with having wooden flooring in the away section for years as the excuse was that they were on the verge of moving to a new stadium.
 



Growing up me and my Dad used to sit in the family stand on John Street. When that got knocked down we briefly transferred to the South Stand then back to JSS.

I went on the Kop a few times for Cup games but wasn’t a huge fan though that might have been before seating. Maybe once I’ve been in there seated but wasn’t a fan of it though on later life I realise it’s probably because I should have got glasses for far off viewing!

Last few times I’ve visited I’ve aimed for the Westfield Corner or whatever it’s called this season. When my daughter came with me we watched all four matches last November from BLUT.

I probably left thinking those latter two gave the best views as it feels more panoramic.

I’m trying to engineer a similar visit in November this year. Not obvious where we’ll sit unless we can get in the corner stand.

What is that Capacity now then?
 
Answering my own question:

The figures don’t fully reconcile so perhaps some get lost due to segregation or restricted view.

Stand / section Approx. capacity

Shoreham Street Kop 10,221

Tony Currie South Stand 7,500

John Street Stand 7,000

HE Barnes Bramall Lane Stand — upper and lower tiers combined 5,680

John Street Corner (between Kop and John Street) 900

Bramall Lane Corner (between South and HE Barnes stands) 2,000

Sum of these individual estimates 33,301

Published stadium capacity 31,884

If we work on published capacity then 31,884, losing the entire HE Barnes stand gives you 26,204 home seats. Then the lower tier holds 2,990, so total capacity now is 29,194 and obviously the 2,990 can fluctuate a fair bit at this level.
 
Is it possible that the work required on this stand and possibly other work which is required is the reason why the owners are holding up payment?
Admittedly not £35m but they could be claiming that it not fit for purpose. Etc etc
 
bertieblade said:
Is it possible that the work required on this stand and possibly other work which is required is the reason why the owners are holding up payment?
Admittedly not £35m but they could be claiming that it not fit for purpose. Etc etc
Click to expand...
I think it's been mentioned "historic debt" etc.

I suspect the argument they are going for is we paid £110m. But the club had x-amount due out in debt/payments over the next 18 months.
Should we have gone up then perhaps this could have been covered by PL payments.

How they weren't aware I'm not sure... unless some figures were more or less "hidden" or not disclosed I don't know how they have a leg to stand on.

The mystery of it all continues.
 
bertieblade said:
Is it possible that the work required on this stand and possibly other work which is required is the reason why the owners are holding up payment?
Admittedly not £35m but they could be claiming that it not fit for purpose. Etc etc
Click to expand...
I think there could be something in this, Bettis mentioned warranties for non payment meaning the purchase price should be reduced.

New owners suddenly find structural defects to claim warranties against and reduce the price, have to keep BLUT closed to support their claim.
 
CPB said:
I think it's been mentioned "historic debt" etc.

I suspect the argument they are going for is we paid £110m. But the club had x-amount due out in debt/payments over the next 18 months.
Should we have gone up then perhaps this could have been covered by PL payments.

How they weren't aware I'm not sure... unless some figures were more or less "hidden" or not disclosed I don't know how they have a leg to stand on.

The mystery of it all continues.
Click to expand...
That would be in the accounts.

What wouldn’t would be the exact state of the ground, for instance. If this hasn’t been maintained as well as it should have been (ironically also under Bettis).

Suppose they are looking and saying we didn’t expect to walk into an x million restoration on the ground. I’d imagine they got accountants to pore over the accounts. I suppose it’s less obvious if they got builders or surveyors in to inspect each stand. I still don’t understand the timing or comment of Bettis on this I.e. we check at the start of each season. They then find they need a summer to rectify. This is pretty amateurish. Radio Sheffield should have picked this up; Wht wasn’t it done straight after the last home game? You then had a good few months to fix it. All seems anofher happy convenience to kick down the road the spending of any cash.
 
The Fox said:
Probably a bit if a dull answer but there are a few rows of sheeting missing ( or were ). I doubt very much its the sheeting that the work was to rectify and probsbly removed to give access to the structure and the strengthening or replacement of parts.

If these require any fabrication that in itself can take weeks , along with the installation final sign off and replacement or refitting of the panels .

Unlike or counterparts at S6 its probably been done properly rather than with ties, denso tape and a lick of paint .
Click to expand...

Could we not just put a bit of tarp over it and slip the SCC a few quid?
 



You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

1973Blade
Traffic disruption near Bramall Lane
Replies
4
Views
696
diode_blade
diode_blade
Akrotiri_Blades
Blades training at Bramall Lane
2
Replies
42
Views
6K
dexter101
dexter101
Ricardo Mantelban
King Keith
2 3
Replies
78
Views
5K
Cheets
C
Blade3
Bramall Lane End Clock
2 3
Replies
80
Views
5K
Blade In Flame
Blade In Flame
borg elite
5 Live this morning - 'There's No Place Like Home': Bramall Lane
Replies
0
Views
654
borg elite
borg elite

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