The New Lansdowne Road

Bluetonic

rainbowdash wrote: »

I am referring to the approx. 10 houses across the road from the old south terrace. Behind that there is a river and a road, so no houses to worry about.

I don't see how buying those houses (of which they already own all but four) would lead to a bigger capacity on the north side of the stadium.

Can you explain this?

Even closing a public road would not lead to the addition of enough space due to the layout.

rainbowdash

Bluetonic wrote: »

I don't see how buying those houses (of which they already own all but four) would lead to a bigger capacity on the north side of the stadium.

Can you explain this?

Even closing a public road would not lead to the addition of enough space due to the layout.

The whole structure would be pulled away from the existing bounds on the north side allowing them to go higher.

They could also make the east and west stands higher as they are further away from houses.

I didn't know they already owned 4 of them houses. It wouldn't have taken much to buy the rest of them and finish the job properly.

No point getting too excited about it at this stage.

Bluetonic

rainbowdash wrote: »

The whole structure would be pulled away from the existing bounds on the north side allowing them to go higher.

They could also make the east and west stands higher as they are further away from houses.

I didn't know they already owned 4 of them houses. It wouldn't have taken much to buy the rest of them and finish the job properly.

No point getting too excited about it at this stage.

It's only 4 they don't own.

What would you do about the public road?

The space gained is minimal, and then you have Wanders clubhouse to deal with again.

The winter sun (shadow cast) would still be a massive issue.

Anyhow your right, no point in getting excited about it. Should have been build down the road on the Irish Glass site!

rainbowdash

Bluetonic wrote: »

It's only 4 they don't own.

What would you do about the public road?

The space gained is minimal, and then you have Wanders clubhouse to deal with again.

The winter sun (shadow cast) would still be a massive issue.

Anyhow your right, no point in getting excited about it. Should have been build down the road on the Irish Glass site!

Not sure how important the road is but maybe they could close it completely, or route it under the stand or make it one way etc.

The point is there was surely scope to make it approx. 65K if they put their minds to it properly.

50K is just too small for all the (much of it taxpayers) investment.

big mce

Took these today.

big mce

More here:

http://pix.ie/bigmce/album/361544

sdanseo

Those houses should have been bought and knocked and if the residents wouldn't play ball then the stadium moved. No excuse for the utter shambles that has been crammed in.

I've visited the site and both the stadium and the pricing//ticketing structure surrounding it are complete and utter bull****.

REFLINE1

sdonn wrote: »

Those houses should have been bought and knocked and if the residents wouldn't play ball then the stadium moved. No excuse for the utter shambles that has been crammed in.

I've visited the site and both the stadium and the pricing//ticketing structure surrounding it are complete and utter bull****.

How..in your expert opinion is the stadium utter bull****??

Is that comment solely based on the North stand..?

Koloman

sdonn wrote: »

No excuse for the utter shambles that has been crammed in.

I've visited the site and both the stadium and the pricing//ticketing structure surrounding it are complete and utter bull****.

A shambles? You need your eyes testing if that stadium is a shambles! A little less anger and a bit more realism is called for here.

We had years of debate on the location and capacity of the stadium but that's all in the past now so we are just going to have to live with it.

I for one think it will be a fine stadium and it will be a fitting platform for our players.

Judgement Day

Koloman wrote: »

A shambles? You need your eyes testing if that stadium is a shambles! A little less anger and a bit more realism is called for here.

We had years of debate on the location and capacity of the stadium but that's all in the past now so we are just going to have to live with it.

I for one think it will be a fine stadium and it will be a fitting platform for our players.

There is absolutely no question that the new Lansdowne Road is a complete farce - too large for the FAI and way too small for the IRFU. The capacity of the new ground is a paltry 50,000 - Croke Park can hold 82,300. The attendance at the the Heineken Cup semi-final last May between Leinster and Munster was 82,208! Need anything more be said on the subject?

sdanseo

REFLINE1 wrote: »

How..in your expert opinion is the stadium utter bull****??

Is that comment solely based on the North stand..?

Koloman wrote: »

A shambles? You need your eyes testing if that stadium is a shambles! A little less anger and a bit more realism is called for here.

We had years of debate on the location and capacity of the stadium but that's all in the past now so we are just going to have to live with it.

I for one think it will be a fine stadium and it will be a fitting platform for our players.

Judgement Day wrote: »

There is absolutely no question that the new Lansdowne Road is a complete farce - too large for the FAI and way too small for the IRFU. The capacity of the new ground is a paltry 50,000 - Croke Park can hold 82,300. The attendance at the the Heineken Cup semi-final last May between Leinster and Munster was 82,208! Need anything more be said on the subject?

Addressing all three of these in one go;

The stadium was built with the usual lack of foresight (and by that I mean ANY foresight whatsoever, not just a small oversight) by people who wanted it rushed through after the Bertie Bowl fiasco.

The reality is that Ireland could fill a 100,000 seater stadium for most matches involving the international teams that are any way important. The stadium was a compromise and I'm sorry but to me, contributing €150m+ of taxpayers money to a compromise is just not ****ing good enough. It's by no means too large for the FAI - the playoff in croker was a sellout or as near as makes no difference and most of the games in the qualification series appeared to me to have 40,000-70,000 attendances - most of them certainly over the capacity of the new stadium.

The stadium is a ridiculous shape and size - you may very well say that all in all it will serve its purpose, and yes, it will. But first impressions are what count and people will, whether we like it or not, come to the stadium and think "oh, they made a right mess of this didn't they".

The excuse of Croke Park is not here in this case, there is **** all historical significance left and the railway line is not a significant obstruction. The wanderers pavilion is the only thing in the way short of the shadow that would have been cast over about 8 houses. Sorry, but the ergonomics of 8 houses should not impede the development of a national landmark with the potential to earn us billions over the years. In any event, it should have been moved out of the cramped city centre to somewhere like Abbotstown (Bertie was damn right on this at the time) and, ideally, a small stadium built at the site along the lines of the RDS for matches with a lesser capacity, or else the site sold altogether, or turned into a park, ANYTHING but what they've actually gone and done.

I stand by my assertions that the stadium is an absolute farce. I was in Giants' stadium in NJ recently and that is a fine example of how such a complex should be built; at a motorway intersection with large car parks, regular bus shuttles and since this autumn, a dedicated rail station which had trains idling at both platforms almost constantly during the night. They've actually had space to build a second, larger stadium on the site without any disruption and could probably fit two more before they ran out, all because the place was PLANNED well.

And on top of all of this, the name is changed to Aviva stadium because they sold the rights. Bull****.

Common sense and planning are things which this country just does not do, and through no fault of most of its taxpayers. This stadium is just another massive example of the policy of "ah we'll be grand" and the people responsible for it should be stripped of their jobs and pensions for gross misconduct. Delaney first.

Koloman

sdonn wrote: »

the people responsible for it should be stripped of their jobs and pensions for gross misconduct. Delaney first.

Why Delaney first? Unless you are Bernard O'Byrne then Delaney should be way down the list of people (according to you) who should loose their jobs.

Fran Rooney was in charge of the FAI when they got together with the IRFU for the Lansdowne Road redevelopment.

sdanseo

Koloman wrote: »

Why Delaney first?

Many reasons but manily just because he's a dick.

Daysha

sdonn wrote: »

The reality is that Ireland could fill a 100,000 seater stadium for most matches involving the international teams that are any way important.

I'm sorry but what cloud cookoo land are you living in? Dealing with soccer first, the Irish soccer team would never fill a 100,000 seater stadium. Ever. Regardless of what you may think about the France match two weeks ago, tickets were still easily available to purchase only up to a few hours before kick off. When Ireland leave Croker that match, along with the first match against Wales, will remain as the only games that were sold out for an Irish international.

Ireland vs Wales was historically a very important game so it's no surprise that it was sold out. Ireland/France meanwhile was the most important soccer game to be played in Ireland since the days of the Jack Charlton era, and still it's not as if tickets were like goldust or anything.

The stadium is a ridiculous shape and size - you may very well say that all in all it will serve its purpose, and yes, it will. But first impressions are what count and people will, whether we like it or not, come to the stadium and think "oh, they made a right mess of this didn't they".

Actually the majority of people I've spoken to, both home and abroad, were in agreement that it's actually a fantastic looking stadium. It's not your generic souless bowl you'd find in the Emirates or elsewhere, and how the roof swoops down on the north side doesn't make it look unfinished, it makes it look classy and unique.

I stand by my assertions that the stadium is an absolute farce. I was in Giants' stadium in NJ recently and that is a fine example of how such a complex should be built; at a motorway intersection with large car parks, regular bus shuttles and since this autumn, a dedicated rail station which had trains idling at both platforms almost constantly during the night. They've actually had space to build a second, larger stadium on the site without any disruption and could probably fit two more before they ran out, all because the place was PLANNED well.

Do you realise the kind of money that was spent on the Giants stadium? If not I'll give you some figures. When the original Giants stadium was built in the mid 70's it cost $78 million, which was an INSANE amount of money to spend at the time. The new Giants stadium currently being built is costing around $1.4 billion! How, in all honesty, can you reasonably compare that to Lansdowne Road?

Ireland does not have the right to expect to have an 80,000 seater stadium for soccer and rugby, never mind two stadiums of that size in the same city. Holland has double the population of Ireland and is one of the best soccer countries in the world yet the Amsterdam ArenA can hold 50,000.

We will have a top-class, 50,000 seater stadium that has already been awarded Elite status by UEFA, automatically making it one of the best stadiums in the world. The design of the structure would seem to suggest a fantastic atmosphere will be created there, and it goes without saying in comparison to the old Lansdowne it is lightyears ahead. And while the GAA won't admit it, the door will never be fully shut on soccer and rugby returning to Croke Park intermittently, so the option of using the bigger capacity if we need it will always be there.

We are by all means a small country. Yet this time next year we will have two brilliant stadiums with a combined capacity of 132,000! One has the sheer size and capacity, the other will have the atmosphere and smart design, and we really should be happy with that.

bk

Daysha wrote: »

And while the GAA won't admit it, the door will never be fully shut on soccer and rugby returning to Croke Park intermittently, so the option of using the bigger capacity if we need it will always be there.

Unfortunately Croker will never be used again for Rugby or Soccer, even for the biggest games. More money for the IRFU to make on corporate boxes and not paying the GAA in Lansdowne Road then filling Croker.

Which will be an awful pity for all the extra fans who have been filling Croker, who probably won't be able to get tickets for Lansdowne Road.

spank_inferno

Thanks for the pictures Big_MCE, its quite interesting.

Because when you see the pictures from inside the stadium, the north end looks tiny, however from the outside the roof structure must be nearly 4 stories tall.

so having a full sized tier if it could have fit would have been dwarfed those houses to an enormous extent.

However, would if have cost a lot to buy that street?
Is there may houses on it and behind the camera's perspective?

If it would have cost 5 million more surely it would have been worth it?

sdanseo

Daysha wrote: »

Do you realise the kind of money that was spent on the Giants stadium? If not I'll give you some figures. When the original Giants stadium was built in the mid 70's it cost $78 million, which was an INSANE amount of money to spend at the time. The new Giants stadium currently being built is costing around $1.4 billion! How, in all honesty, can you reasonably compare that to Lansdowne Road?

I wasn't comparing the stadium as much as I was comparing the space and facilities around it. To do the same with perhaps 70,000 seats in Abbotstown, or maybe out near Citywest with the LUAS and rail nearby, would have been by far the most sensible option and I don't think anyone can argue with that tbh.

Koloman

sdonn wrote: »

To do the same with perhaps 70,000 seats in Abbotstown, or maybe out near Citywest with the LUAS and rail nearby, would have been by far the most sensible option and I don't think anyone can argue with that tbh.

I think you can argue with that. As Daysha has so eloquently put it, why would you want two stadiums of 70,000 plus in a country as small as ours?

As I have said before Denmark is another country with a similar population to us and it's soccer team play in a ground that holds 40,000 and no more. A 50,000 stadium in Dublin is looking quite spacious when you compare it to Denmark!

The temporary little arrangement of Croke Park has clouded many peoples judgement as to what is realistic for us.

PS; Look at the lovely green seats!

http://www.lrsdc.ie/gallery/singlecategory.asp?PCID=126

Bluetonic

Daysha wrote: »

One has the sheer size and capacity, the other will have the atmosphere and smart design, and we really should be happy with that.

Do you really think the 30,000+ rugby fans and 10,000+ football fans who want to go to the games but can't because of short sightedness should be happy with that?

The way you put it you'd think the 'capacity' and 'atmosphere and smart design' were mutually exclusive. They are not.

Your comments about the football games never being able to sell out a 100k capacity stadium is crazy. If sometime in the next 60 years to 70 years (stadium life approx) Ireland were to win one of the two major International trophies it is more than likely demand would exceed 100k. I'm not saying a 100k capacity stadium is needed but your claims that they would never fill it are dismissive rubbish. Significantly more than 100k people turned out after world cup 1990 and 1994. If pricing was right the 100k capacity would be easily achieved if available.

Bluetonic

Koloman wrote: »

As I have said before Denmark is another country with a similar population to us and it's soccer team play in a ground that holds 40,000 and no more. A 50,000 stadium in Dublin is looking quite spacious when you compare it to Denmark!

The temporary little arrangement of Croke Park has clouded many peoples judgement as to what is realistic for us.

Demand for both rugby and football tickets (20% of capacity on waiting list which is closed two years) far exceeds supply (for the new stadium, as it did old stadium).

I think your own judgement is clouded.

Tell me what good is it building a facility that doesn't cater for the demand?

sdanseo

Koloman wrote: »

I think you can argue with that. As Daysha has so eloquently put it, why would you want two stadiums of 70,000 plus in a country as small as ours?

As I have said before Denmark is another country with a similar population to us and it's soccer team play in a ground that holds 40,000 and no more. A 50,000 stadium in Dublin is looking quite spacious when you compare it to Denmark!

The temporary little arrangement of Croke Park has clouded many peoples judgement as to what is realistic for us.

PS; Look at the lovely green seats!

http://www.lrsdc.ie/gallery/singlecategory.asp?PCID=126

Fact of the matter is there has been a bigger turnout than 50,000 at nearly all of the home soccer internationals from my guess (was at all bar Saturday week) - with notable exceptions; Montenegro and Georgia. Can't comment on rugby as I don't follow it as closely.

The new stadium does not meet demand and with the current team getting only stronger demand will be increasing. The FAI also have confirmed that there will be no such thing as general admission any more, with block booking (i.e. you get a ticket if you're in the top 39,000 on the list), 1,000 schoolboy and 10,000 premium seats in the place.

It's an absolute and utter shambles; probably breaking competition law somewhere there too. Absolute bull****.

bk

Koloman wrote: »

As I have said before Denmark is another country with a similar population to us and it's soccer team play in a ground that holds 40,000 and no more. A 50,000 stadium in Dublin is looking quite spacious when you compare it to Denmark!

The temporary little arrangement of Croke Park has clouded many peoples judgement as to what is realistic for us.

Logically I would agree with you, Dublin probably doesn't need two 70,000 seater stadiums.

If both Lansdowne Road and Croker's ownership was transfered to Dublin City Council or a similar independent body and then GAA matches could be played in Lansdowne or Rugby/Soccer played in Croker, depending on the demand for the game, then I would agree with your point.

Unfortunately due to the history involved and pig headedness, this will never happen and therefore Rugby/Soccer really do need a 70,000+ seater stadium of their own.

I'm a Rugby fan who has been really enjoying the matches in Croker, I'll be very unlikely to get tickets for Lansdowne Road, I just don't have the old boy network connections

Kristian_

With all the doom and gloom surrounding the issues with the new stadium,:( and I do agree with many of the points being made here. I for one am still looking forward to seeing the stadium when complete:D. Also I am pleased that finally our national teams will have a home to be proud of;)

ohnoigotsick

bk wrote: »

If both Lansdowne Road and Croker's ownership was transfered to Dublin City Council or a similar independent body and then GAA matches could be played in Lansdowne or Rugby/Soccer played in Croker, depending on the demand for the game, then I would agree with your point.

Why would or should the GAA want to transfer ownership of their ground to Dublin city council or anyone else for that matter?

Setanta_og

I took these shots of Lansdowne Road today it is really coming into shape including two fantastic video screens which are just about the right size to shove up Sepp’s arse
His condescending remarks at the fifa news conference today were regrettable but not surprising coming from a character with his pedigree what an absolute joker his reference to Costa Rica v Uruguay game is a total fabrication to deflect the pressure away from him, his mates and the corrupt association he represents.

The gross wrong that was witnessed by the world in Paris can not be rewritten or diminished in anyway by throwing out a red herring by inventing controversy regarding the Costa Rica v Uruguay game. Unless my eyes are deceiving me the clips on YouTube showing the Uruguay goals in both games show them to be as legit as you can get so what’s story is he spinning here.
The bottom line is his pal Michel Plattini head of uefa and well known Frenchman asked for a favour and got it actually he probably asked for three.
1.A seeded draw for the play off games assuring French prospects
2.Home advantage for the second leg to the top seeded team
3.If the above two didn’t succeed then make sure to have a referee appointed that, no matter how “well respected in the game” he was would if given the opportunity at any time during the game be momentarily struck down by blindness for the benefit of Michele team GET IT!

Check this link out all the answers are there:
http://www.transparencyinsport.org/

bk

ohnoigotsick wrote: »

Why would or should the GAA want to transfer ownership of their ground to Dublin city council or anyone else for that matter?

Well how about the fact that half the redevelopment cost of Croker was paid for by the Irish tax payer?

My believe is based on the idea of the municipal sports grounds, so common throughout Europe. Where many different sports use the same facilities as all sports are considered to be equally important and should be promoted.

Rather then having multiple redundant facilities in every city, town and village, often which lack investment and proper maintenance that we have here, you end up with far better facilities due to them being shared by different sporting bodies.

I'd like to see far more partnership between sporting bodies here in Ireland and the sharing of facilities throughout the country.

ohnoigotsick

bk wrote: »

Well how about the fact that half the redevelopment cost of Croker was paid for by the Irish tax payer?

majority of that money was from the national lottery and not the tax payer.

bk

ohnoigotsick wrote: »

majority of that money was from the national lottery and not the tax payer.

Which comes from where?

The people of Ireland.

ohnoigotsick

bk wrote: »

Which comes from where?

The people of Ireland.

who have a choice to play it or not - not like tax payers and you orginally said.

i'm pretty sure people dont play the lotto to fund croke park or the new lansdowne road - but to win a jackpot

spacetweek

I'm not socialist at all so my attitude is that Croker is privately owned so "hands off". If it's to be brought into public ownership the Gov'll pay the market rate for the facility and there's not a chance in hell of affording that right now.

It is entirely up to the public if they want to gamble on the Lotto - hardly the same as taxpayers in general paying for the stadium.

Carawaystick

bk wrote: »

My believe is based on the idea of the municipal sports grounds, so common throughout Europe. Where many different sports use the same facilities as all sports are considered to be equally important and should be promoted.

Rather then having multiple redundant facilities in every city, town and village, often which lack investment and proper maintenance that we have here, you end up with far better facilities due to them being shared by different sporting bodies.

I'd like to see far more partnership between sporting bodies here in Ireland and the sharing of facilities throughout the country.

I don't know how many association football matches you've seen in Croke Park but the pitch is lost in the middle of a hurling pitch. If you were to take Cork city's ground, I'd imagine it'd fit entirely on the pitch of Páirc Uí Caoimh Which is 90mx147m or so. This is in the third biggest city in Irleand.

Even Windsor park'd nearly fit in Casement.


How many rugby matches should be played on a golf links? especially if the links got some govt funding.

spank_inferno

New pics on the Lrsdc.ie website including a pretty good night shot

Linky

Kristian_

should be major strides in the January pics!:)

spank_inferno

The January arial shots are now available to view here..

Not a huge amount of progress during the holiday month, and the weather probably wouldnt have helped.

I dont know what has to be done but I dont think this project will meet its deadline.

Koloman

It looks like it will be a nice tight ground which will make the atmosphere more electric.

http://www.lrsdc.ie/gallery/singlecategory.asp?PCID=130

Kristian_

Koloman wrote: »

It looks like it will be a nice tight ground which will make the atmosphere more electric.

http://www.lrsdc.ie/gallery/singlecategory.asp?PCID=130

Yeah it's coming along nicely! That big screen is massive at the small end, could be a bit annoying for player's as i'd imagine it would distract.:eek:

Joey Joe-Joe Jr

On the website - won't be long now. :cool:

http://www.lrsdc.ie/gallery/photocategory.asp?PCID=34&NCID=0

Joey Joe-Joe Jr

http://www.lrsdc.ie/gallery/photocategory.asp?PCID=34&NCID=0

Son of Stupido

looking good,

roof struts look strange tho.

Hope they complete the havelock end sometime in the future.

Would be 65,000 then. Perfect size.

Dutchie

I was on a tour with project manager 2 weeks ago.
Stadium is small compared to Croke park. Hvaelock square end looks terrible with only one tier of seating. It will never be developed because of proximilty of residents. A real pity because it looks half fininshed and will leave the stadiulm obout 15000 under capicity.

donvito99

Dutchie wrote: »

I was on a tour with project manager 2 weeks ago.
Stadium is small compared to Croke park. Hvaelock square end looks terrible with only one tier of seating. It will never be developed because of proximilty of residents. A real pity because it looks half fininshed and will leave the stadiulm obout 15000 under capicity.

I think it gives it a bit of character. Obviously, we all want as many people in the ground as possible, but it leaves the stadium more open to the elements. I like it.

dowlingm

spacetweek wrote: »

I'm not socialist at all so my attitude is that Croker is privately owned so "hands off". If it's to be brought into public ownership the Gov'll pay the market rate for the facility

Which is why when the Government is giving money to large stadiums, it should be in the form of a share investment, not a grant.

If government support to CP was in the form of shares they might be paying a nice dividend now...

Koloman

Dutchie wrote: »

I was on a tour with project manager 2 weeks ago.
Stadium is small compared to Croke park. Hvaelock square end looks terrible with only one tier of seating. It will never be developed because of proximilty of residents. A real pity because it looks half fininshed and will leave the stadiulm obout 15000 under capicity.

For a country of our size to have a stadium as big as Croke Park is a bit of an anomaly in the first place. The Croke Park stadium is skewing the debate on what is appropriate for Lansdowne.

50,000 is around the right capacity for the new Lansdowne. It makes even more sense now given the economic downturn the country is facing for the foreseeable future.

A lot of the corporate boxes in Croke Park were empty at the last rugby match which speaks for itself. Croke Park also struggles to fill itself past the halfway mark for most Gaelic football/hurling matches apart from when Dublin is involved in the championship.

The worst case scenario would've been to have built a massive second Croke Park sized ground for rugby/soccer which probably would have just become a white elephant with massive running costs.

Lansdowne road and its "quirky" design will quickly grow on people and will be a fine platform for our football and rugby players.

Some people will always see a glass half empty, although on this occasion the glass is overflowing!

Interesting clip below of the progress.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jl7MQ89VjlA

citycentre

Quirky? Have you seen the Havelock Square end? Quirky is definitely the polite way of describing how it looks... From an architectural perspective I think it looks godawful as do the clumsy and overscaled roof trusses... Also the fact there are so few seats at the Havelock Square end means that the atmosphere of the whole place will be adversely affected and the TV pictures will look terrible. I hate to say it but even Murrayfield will be a better venue purely because it at least has a proper sense of enclosure.

Deedsie

Koloman wrote: »

For a country of our size to have a stadium as big as Croke Park is a bit of an anomaly in the first place. The Croke Park stadium is skewing the debate on what is appropriate for Lansdowne.

50,000 is around the right capacity for the new Lansdowne. It makes even more sense now given the economic downturn the country is facing for the foreseeable future.


A lot of the corporate boxes in Croke Park were empty at the last rugby match which speaks for itself.

Poulation of Ireland = 6,197,100
Landsdowne Road = 50,000

Poulation of Scotland = 5,168,500
Murray Field = 67,500

Against Italy in fairness. Wales and Scotland will sell out. Is something like 15000 of the Landsdowne seating not corporate?

murphym7

Havelock Square end looks like a joke - the sporting world TV viewers will think Ireland has a fetish for half finishing stadium's.

donvito99

BTH wrote: »

I hate to say it but even Murrayfield will be a better venue purely because it at least has a proper sense of enclosure.

Murrayfield is an atrocious stadium, you sit about 40 metres from the pitch and its god awful ugly. I'll take the New lansdowne any day.

Son of Stupido

donvito99 wrote: »

Murrayfield is an atrocious stadium, you sit about 40 metres from the pitch and its god awful ugly. I'll take the New lansdowne any day.

The performance of the local team doesn't help things either!!:D:D

Steviemak

Deedsie wrote: »

Poulation of Ireland = 6,197,100
Landsdowne Road = 50,000

Poulation of Scotland = 5,168,500
Murray Field = 67,500

Against Italy in fairness. Wales and Scotland will sell out. Is something like 15000 of the Landsdowne seating not corporate?

Add in Wales too

Population of Wales = 3 million
Millennium Stadium = 74,500

Deedsie

Steviemak wrote: »

Add in Wales too

Population of Wales = 3 million
Millennium Stadium = 74,500

So per capita, we have by far the smallest stadium in the six nations. We have no problem getting 80000 into Croker, but the powers that be figured a 50000 stadium was sufficient.

It is perfect for the soccer side, but this is a rugby stadium too.