@FrijidPink wrote
2:07PM @ReadingMarginalista - I know a lot of people who would have been quite happy at Booker. You are only speaking from your non league point of view with those that didn't want the club to move forward. Look at Chesterfield, Shrewsbury, Brighton, Reading etc I'm sure those clubs all wished that they were still playing in their old toilets of grounds.
Firstly the opposition to the ground at Booker wasn't whether people would be 'happy' at the ground, rather that the deal proposed by Hayes would have been catastrophic to the club. You may remember the questions posed by the Black and White Appeal that were useful yardsticks to measure whether Hayes's plan would benefit WWFC, and his plan failed pretty much every single one.
Secondly, Adams Park is far superior to Saltergate, Gay Meadow, Elm Park and, in Brighton's case, no ground at all. Do you honestly think that Adams Park is a 'toilet'? In what way is Adams Park not suited to the club's current needs? In which situation would a capacity of c. 10,000 hinder the club?
The only problem with Adams Park is that it's on the outskirts of town far away from any decent pubs - a problem that would have been made even worse had we moved to Booker!
As to me having a 'non league' point of view, what the hell is that even meant to mean? It is the antithesis of being not being able to see the wood for the trees?!
Agree with the comments above. There was no valid reason for us to leave Adams Park, whereas the other clubs mentioned were playing in old, outdated stadiums and needed to move to progress, something we'd already done in 1990.
One other point, I don't think promotion would increase our away crowds, in fact for travelling support at AP, we're better off in League 2 I believe. Also quoting £22 for a ticket is misleading. I pay £13 for an adult terrace ticket, which is very good value compared to other clubs.
I have to say : regarding away fans , some of the away attendances at AP have been appalling , Crawley being the most recent reminder . I would hazard a guess that out away support must be some of the best outside the 4-5 bigger clubs in this division ?
You'd certainly gain in away fans moving up a division. You might lose one or some of the Luton/Oxford/Portsmouth/Plymouth types but you'd also lose the 50men and his dog northern lot.
Adams Park is only 2miles outside the main town isn't it? How far are some other out of town stadiums? Oxford's has to be far more than that surely?
@Frijidpink - a cornucopia of grounds you mention there covering many different circumstances. The only thing that unites them is that the status quo was untenable e.g. Brighton having been nomadic after they were asset stripped out of their old ground and anyone who ever went to Saltergate would know why Chesterfield wanted to move. We however had a new ground - always well liked in terms of the facilities - and few people I spoke to saw the move to Booker as being to our advantage, particularly as it was every bit as inconvenient as Adams Park.
One thing that does strike me as odd, and I am really not sure whether this is of any relevance here, is that when compared with the home gate, we have a very large percentage of supporters prepared to undertake quite long journeys to watch the team play away. Perhaps the average Wycombe supporter is considered too fanatical by the casual visitor, who knows? On the other hand, it might just be that like the proverbial oil tanker, it takes a really long time to turn round the average football club.
@bourne70 said:
I have to say : regarding away fans , some of the away attendances at AP have been appalling , Crawley being the most recent reminder . I would hazard a guess that out away support must be some of the best outside the 4-5 bigger clubs in this division ?
I too would be amazed if our away following does not rank well above our home crowds. If memory serves we took around 7/800 away to Crawley. They probably brought less than 200.
Anyone who's wondering where the neutrals have gone would fully understand if they were watching this match v Morcambe. A truly terrible game where it's hard to believe it's being played out by people who do this for a living!
70 mins and I don't think we've managed to trouble the keeper yet.
@Bluebottle not sure how you can call 1992 new? Maybe newer than some - but certainly not "new". So if it had been at Flackwell Heath or Wycombe Marsh it would have been ok? It would be nice to have 4 stands that actually match (and not the old piddly little terraces we used to have in the "new" ground mark 1).
@Uncle_T said:
Perhaps recent history has proven Lawrie Sanchez to have been correct with his observation on High Wycombe that "This is not a football town".
To an extent. But the glories of 2001 showed that we can attract a certain type of supporter and in fairly decent numbers.
Some of our crowds in 01/02 were relatively impressive, even against the 'lesser' teams such as Cambridge etc.
Shame Sanchez decided to hit the reverse button in 02/03 and try 'Plan B' (turgid hoofball, his 'other way' to gain promotion).
There IS floating support in and around Wycombe, will just take a lot more glory to attract it back.
There is an enormous number of sporting and other activities to take part in (and to watch) which includes shopping. That is competition for football which has to offer more than seems to be available at present, judging by comments here.
A trip to Wembley is more than a football occasion it is a communal day out which many will wish to join even if football is not high up in their list of interests.
@frijidPink. In footballing terms 1990 is new. I don't recall any club at any level moving to a new ground then moving again within 25 years. Doubtless there is one but it would be just that, the odd one. And I'm not sure most people would have aesthetics high on their list of why we should build a new stadium...
Comments
@FrijidPink Ah my favoured wind up merchant. So Adams park is now a Toilet by your reckoning. But it was never just about that was it.
Firstly the opposition to the ground at Booker wasn't whether people would be 'happy' at the ground, rather that the deal proposed by Hayes would have been catastrophic to the club. You may remember the questions posed by the Black and White Appeal that were useful yardsticks to measure whether Hayes's plan would benefit WWFC, and his plan failed pretty much every single one.
Secondly, Adams Park is far superior to Saltergate, Gay Meadow, Elm Park and, in Brighton's case, no ground at all. Do you honestly think that Adams Park is a 'toilet'? In what way is Adams Park not suited to the club's current needs? In which situation would a capacity of c. 10,000 hinder the club?
The only problem with Adams Park is that it's on the outskirts of town far away from any decent pubs - a problem that would have been made even worse had we moved to Booker!
As to me having a 'non league' point of view, what the hell is that even meant to mean? It is the antithesis of being not being able to see the wood for the trees?!
Agree with the comments above. There was no valid reason for us to leave Adams Park, whereas the other clubs mentioned were playing in old, outdated stadiums and needed to move to progress, something we'd already done in 1990.
One other point, I don't think promotion would increase our away crowds, in fact for travelling support at AP, we're better off in League 2 I believe. Also quoting £22 for a ticket is misleading. I pay £13 for an adult terrace ticket, which is very good value compared to other clubs.
I have to say : regarding away fans , some of the away attendances at AP have been appalling , Crawley being the most recent reminder . I would hazard a guess that out away support must be some of the best outside the 4-5 bigger clubs in this division ?
You'd certainly gain in away fans moving up a division. You might lose one or some of the Luton/Oxford/Portsmouth/Plymouth types but you'd also lose the 50men and his dog northern lot.
Adams Park is only 2miles outside the main town isn't it? How far are some other out of town stadiums? Oxford's has to be far more than that surely?
@Frijidpink - a cornucopia of grounds you mention there covering many different circumstances. The only thing that unites them is that the status quo was untenable e.g. Brighton having been nomadic after they were asset stripped out of their old ground and anyone who ever went to Saltergate would know why Chesterfield wanted to move. We however had a new ground - always well liked in terms of the facilities - and few people I spoke to saw the move to Booker as being to our advantage, particularly as it was every bit as inconvenient as Adams Park.
One thing that does strike me as odd, and I am really not sure whether this is of any relevance here, is that when compared with the home gate, we have a very large percentage of supporters prepared to undertake quite long journeys to watch the team play away. Perhaps the average Wycombe supporter is considered too fanatical by the casual visitor, who knows? On the other hand, it might just be that like the proverbial oil tanker, it takes a really long time to turn round the average football club.
I too would be amazed if our away following does not rank well above our home crowds. If memory serves we took around 7/800 away to Crawley. They probably brought less than 200.
Perhaps recent history has proven Lawrie Sanchez to have been correct with his observation on High Wycombe that "This is not a football town".
This thread title always makes me think of
Anyone who's wondering where the neutrals have gone would fully understand if they were watching this match v Morcambe. A truly terrible game where it's hard to believe it's being played out by people who do this for a living!
70 mins and I don't think we've managed to trouble the keeper yet.
Awful, just awful.
@Bluebottle not sure how you can call 1992 new? Maybe newer than some - but certainly not "new". So if it had been at Flackwell Heath or Wycombe Marsh it would have been ok? It would be nice to have 4 stands that actually match (and not the old piddly little terraces we used to have in the "new" ground mark 1).
Thing is it was not just yesterday the match before was almost as rubbish save for the 2 goals .
@FrijidPink we moved to Adams Park in 1990 you tedious arse
POTD
To an extent. But the glories of 2001 showed that we can attract a certain type of supporter and in fairly decent numbers.
Some of our crowds in 01/02 were relatively impressive, even against the 'lesser' teams such as Cambridge etc.
Shame Sanchez decided to hit the reverse button in 02/03 and try 'Plan B' (turgid hoofball, his 'other way' to gain promotion).
There IS floating support in and around Wycombe, will just take a lot more glory to attract it back.
There is an enormous number of sporting and other activities to take part in (and to watch) which includes shopping. That is competition for football which has to offer more than seems to be available at present, judging by comments here.
A trip to Wembley is more than a football occasion it is a communal day out which many will wish to join even if football is not high up in their list of interests.
@frijidPink. In footballing terms 1990 is new. I don't recall any club at any level moving to a new ground then moving again within 25 years. Doubtless there is one but it would be just that, the odd one. And I'm not sure most people would have aesthetics high on their list of why we should build a new stadium...