@ReturnToSenda said:
Atmosphere > view for a final imo, but as long as you're not right at the front then the view from the bottom tier is totally fine
We're going to need to create all the atmosphere we can. Where do you think our most vocal fans are likely to congregate?
'Singing section' must be right behind the goal? But I'll certainly be very vocal in 109 just to the side!
It feels right that we should have the opportunity to sell our half of the neutral stadium but if we don't and it can be done safely, of course those tickets should be sod to Sunderland supporters. The more people who want to see the game that can be accommodated the better.
Are there spare tickets beyond those allocated to the two clubs and those needed for sponsors etc.
The allocation of tickets should of course be even and fair, but if we can't sell all our tickets, then I'm perfectly happy for Sunderland to be given extra tickets. I don't like the idea of needless empty seats at Wembley anymore than I liked them at MK.
@Last_Quarter said:
I'm guessing you were happy for Winkleman then to leave thousands of empty seats at Stadium MK last week that could've been sold to our fans?
Given we get a share of the gate it's in our interest for Sunderland to sell all the tickets they possibly can. Plus, as Ainsworth said eloquently last week, after the two years we've all had we should be finding a way for everyone who wants a ticket to get one for occasions like this.
Finally, the bigger the Sunderland crowd the more pressure on their team, and arguably the more our lads feel like underdogs. This could be a huge factor to our advantage.
More of this in my opinion, I hate it similarly when away fans are treated like crap, it all comes around, let as many of both clubs regular fans in if we can, having less fans has never been a stain on our club or an issue for atmosphere, our tiny contingent at MK were all I could here on TV and I've been in tiny away crowds at places like Morecambe outsinging the home fans.
Also why should fans have to hide their colours and come in to other ends or risk any scraps when there are empty seats.
I suspect the silence on further tickets may be about the EFL trying to save money on security/stewarding in opening up further tiers/areas. We're possibly talking about a 55K+ crowd in a 90K stadium at present. Probably right on the cusp and just passing 60K may result in fully staffed areas with few fans in there. I'm purely surmising here as I clearly don't actually know how the EFL go about running Wembley. I guess there's a tipping point somewhere.
@ValleyWanderer said:
I suspect the silence on further tickets may be about the EFL trying to save money on security/stewarding in opening up further tiers/areas. We're possibly talking about a 55K+ crowd in a 90K stadium at present. Probably right on the cusp and just passing 60K may result in fully staffed areas with few fans in there. I'm purely surmising here as I clearly don't actually know how the EFL go about running Wembley. I guess there's a tipping point somewhere.
Based on the fact all levels of the Stadium will be open for Sunderland fans, it would be silly not to open more blocks up in level 5 for them should we fail to sell out our initial allocation. I personally hope we are allowed to fill level 1 and utilise as much of level 2. But we will never get close to filling the top tier so it makes sense to offer some of these seats to Sunderland fans. I would like to think they wouldn't be allowed to stretch into "the east end" that we shall have and would say anything further east of block 520 would be too much
If Wycombe sold 20k tickets and Sunderland could sell 70k tickets and it was safe to do so I would be absolutely delighted to watch Wycombe in front of a Wembley full house.
I obviously know Sunderland wouldn’t bring that many, but if there are seats available after Wycombe have sold all that they require and there are fans that still want to watch the game live (and it can be done safely), they should be allowed to do so. The venue is neutral (I.e, the pitch and facilities for the players and staff). To suggest that each club should get half of the stadium to maintain ‘neutrality’ regardless of ticket demand is, quite frankly, ridiculous. To pursue that line of thought, if we only take 20k surely Sunderland should be capped at 20k to maintain ‘neutrality’. What a load of tosh!
It’s a game of football and as long as it is safe to do so (with required segregation, stewarding etc) if you can attend you should be able to watch it, whoever you support.
No problem with Sunderland getting 50k, us however much of a 30k section we can fill and then the 10k club Wembley seats. Depends on how segregation can be done.
So long as Wycombe followers aren't denied entry to allow Sunderland more its all good. That means if we sell only a couple tickets in a new block that reduces the overall attendance then so be it.
Bigger crowd adds to the atmosphere and occasion, and will make it even sweeter when we win
@Quarterman said:
If Wycombe sold 20k tickets and Sunderland could sell 70k tickets and it was safe to do so I would be absolutely delighted to watch Wycombe in front of a Wembley full house.
I obviously know Sunderland wouldn’t bring that many, but if there are seats available after Wycombe have sold all that they require and there are fans that still want to watch the game live (and it can be done safely), they should be allowed to do so. The venue is neutral (I.e, the pitch and facilities for the players and staff). To suggest that each club should get half of the stadium to maintain ‘neutrality’ regardless of ticket demand is, quite frankly, ridiculous. To pursue that line of thought, if we only take 20k surely Sunderland should be capped at 20k to maintain ‘neutrality’. What a load of tosh!
Is anyone suggesting that? We would have been limited to 4,000 at the Runcorn final!
I think we can all agree that keeping seats empty and depriving football fans of the opportunity to support their team on a big occasion is the sort of petty shite that only a plastic franchise club would indulge in.
@drcongo said:
I think we can all agree that keeping seats empty and depriving football fans of the opportunity to support their team on a big occasion is the sort of petty shite that only a plastic franchise club would indulge in.
I think anyone who disagrees might want to wonder how we got into a situation where MKDongs were even allowed to suggest what they did let alone implement it, why there's 1000 steps up at Sunderland and why we sit on scaffolding at Gillingham.
Why all the fuss about segregation when outside the stadium and on public transport everybody is in it together? Is duffing up the other team's supporters now a normal part of football culture? It used not to be.
@drcongo said:
I think we can all agree that keeping seats empty and depriving football fans of the opportunity to support their team on a big occasion is the sort of petty shite that only a plastic franchise club would indulge in.
I think anyone who disagrees might want to wonder how we got into a situation where MKDongs were even allowed to suggest what they did let alone implement it, why there's 1000 steps up at Sunderland and why we sit on scaffolding at Gillingham.
Exactly this and why is it possible for Bristol Rovers fans to be in a position to throw things on away fans. Although I think that the franchise behaved the worst.
@wingnut said:
Why all the fuss about segregation when outside the stadium and on public transport everybody is in it together? Is duffing up the other team's supporters now a normal part of football culture? It used not to be.
Hmm, it obviously has happened.
Practicality aside PR is your short answer though, the Prem and EFL would much rather any trouble wasn't on the screen.
As I understood it, @ReturnToSenda was arguing that no team should be allowed to have more than 50% of the "capacity", not 50% of the attendance... So a team can fill their half but can't encroach on the other half of the stadium (for a final, on neutral ground). I see the principle, but not convinced.
An extreme example would be Man Utd fans having 85,000 for a league Cup final vs Forest Green Rovers who have the remaining 5,000 that they managed to sell - thus making it feel like a home game for Man Utd, with Wembley full of Londoners.
It is an extreme example, of course, because Man Utd are nowhere near good enough to get to a League Cup final.
Yeah, that's exactly what I was saying. I certainly don't think it should be allowed to be, say, 20,000 Wycombe and 60,000 Sunderland (which they would easily sell).
@ReturnToSenda said:
Yeah, that's exactly what I was saying. I certainly don't think it should be allowed to be, say, 20,000 Wycombe and 60,000 Sunderland (which they would easily sell).
@ReturnToSenda said:
Yeah, that's exactly what I was saying. I certainly don't think it should be allowed to be, say, 20,000 Wycombe and 60,000 Sunderland (which they would easily sell).
Would they? Last time didn't sell out
Really? Surprised by that! They've got a massive fan base.
Comments
The other half of the lower tier is now on sale at the ticket site. Blocks 113 to 123.
'Singing section' must be right behind the goal? But I'll certainly be very vocal in 109 just to the side!
It feels right that we should have the opportunity to sell our half of the neutral stadium but if we don't and it can be done safely, of course those tickets should be sod to Sunderland supporters. The more people who want to see the game that can be accommodated the better.
Are there spare tickets beyond those allocated to the two clubs and those needed for sponsors etc.
Now now, be nice.
The allocation of tickets should of course be even and fair, but if we can't sell all our tickets, then I'm perfectly happy for Sunderland to be given extra tickets. I don't like the idea of needless empty seats at Wembley anymore than I liked them at MK.
More of this in my opinion, I hate it similarly when away fans are treated like crap, it all comes around, let as many of both clubs regular fans in if we can, having less fans has never been a stain on our club or an issue for atmosphere, our tiny contingent at MK were all I could here on TV and I've been in tiny away crowds at places like Morecambe outsinging the home fans.
Also why should fans have to hide their colours and come in to other ends or risk any scraps when there are empty seats.
I suspect the silence on further tickets may be about the EFL trying to save money on security/stewarding in opening up further tiers/areas. We're possibly talking about a 55K+ crowd in a 90K stadium at present. Probably right on the cusp and just passing 60K may result in fully staffed areas with few fans in there. I'm purely surmising here as I clearly don't actually know how the EFL go about running Wembley. I guess there's a tipping point somewhere.
We're already at a disadvantage by having a smaller fan base - why would we want to amplify that?
Based on the fact all levels of the Stadium will be open for Sunderland fans, it would be silly not to open more blocks up in level 5 for them should we fail to sell out our initial allocation. I personally hope we are allowed to fill level 1 and utilise as much of level 2. But we will never get close to filling the top tier so it makes sense to offer some of these seats to Sunderland fans. I would like to think they wouldn't be allowed to stretch into "the east end" that we shall have and would say anything further east of block 520 would be too much
If Wycombe sold 20k tickets and Sunderland could sell 70k tickets and it was safe to do so I would be absolutely delighted to watch Wycombe in front of a Wembley full house.
I obviously know Sunderland wouldn’t bring that many, but if there are seats available after Wycombe have sold all that they require and there are fans that still want to watch the game live (and it can be done safely), they should be allowed to do so. The venue is neutral (I.e, the pitch and facilities for the players and staff). To suggest that each club should get half of the stadium to maintain ‘neutrality’ regardless of ticket demand is, quite frankly, ridiculous. To pursue that line of thought, if we only take 20k surely Sunderland should be capped at 20k to maintain ‘neutrality’. What a load of tosh!
Why would you want to turn it into an away game?
It’s a game of football and as long as it is safe to do so (with required segregation, stewarding etc) if you can attend you should be able to watch it, whoever you support.
But it's a final - it should be as neutral as possible
Surely with more people in the ground , we make more money and also there will be a lot more disappointed fans when we win. Bring it on.
No problem with Sunderland getting 50k, us however much of a 30k section we can fill and then the 10k club Wembley seats. Depends on how segregation can be done.
So long as Wycombe followers aren't denied entry to allow Sunderland more its all good. That means if we sell only a couple tickets in a new block that reduces the overall attendance then so be it.
Bigger crowd adds to the atmosphere and occasion, and will make it even sweeter when we win
Is there an actual rule on this as you talk as if the club have a say in the ticket allocations?
My daughter has entered some draw on Sky for free tickets!
Getting the feeling you think it should be neutral @ReturnToSenda
Not a single Wycombe fan complained that we out numbered Runcorn fans by around 5:1 in the 1993 FA Trophy final.
More like 10-1, Runcorn only seem to have about 2500, there that day.
Is anyone suggesting that? We would have been limited to 4,000 at the Runcorn final!
I think we can all agree that keeping seats empty and depriving football fans of the opportunity to support their team on a big occasion is the sort of petty shite that only a plastic franchise club would indulge in.
I think anyone who disagrees might want to wonder how we got into a situation where MKDongs were even allowed to suggest what they did let alone implement it, why there's 1000 steps up at Sunderland and why we sit on scaffolding at Gillingham.
Why all the fuss about segregation when outside the stadium and on public transport everybody is in it together? Is duffing up the other team's supporters now a normal part of football culture? It used not to be.
Exactly this and why is it possible for Bristol Rovers fans to be in a position to throw things on away fans. Although I think that the franchise behaved the worst.
Hmm, it obviously has happened.
Practicality aside PR is your short answer though, the Prem and EFL would much rather any trouble wasn't on the screen.
As I understood it, @ReturnToSenda was arguing that no team should be allowed to have more than 50% of the "capacity", not 50% of the attendance... So a team can fill their half but can't encroach on the other half of the stadium (for a final, on neutral ground). I see the principle, but not convinced.
An extreme example would be Man Utd fans having 85,000 for a league Cup final vs Forest Green Rovers who have the remaining 5,000 that they managed to sell - thus making it feel like a home game for Man Utd, with Wembley full of Londoners.
It is an extreme example, of course, because Man Utd are nowhere near good enough to get to a League Cup final.
Yeah, that's exactly what I was saying. I certainly don't think it should be allowed to be, say, 20,000 Wycombe and 60,000 Sunderland (which they would easily sell).
Would they? Last time didn't sell out
Really? Surprised by that! They've got a massive fan base.