Croke Park Capacity

Bluetonic

DWCommuter wrote: »

I don't see why the level of the line would have to be lowered. Build over it. The seating and tier arrangements in an upgraded Hill end dont need to match the rest of the stadium. Once the roof matches, bobs your uncle and away we go.

It would be a pretty pointless thing to do as the rail line would limit what you can put in if you left it as is. Also given it's orientation it would surely be subject to the same planning constraints as the north stand in Lansdowne.

Interestingly the GAA own none of the houses on the other side of the rail line despite many being available over the years. I would imagine this shows their intent.

dowlingm

I think this discussion is more moot because the GAA does not need more than the current capacity on a year round basis. IIRC the Hill is used as the end for concerts so extra seating there wouldn't be usable, and outside of the All Irelands it's hard to predict how many times a year the full capacity of the ground is required. Given the decline of hurling outside of Kilkenny - fewer and fewer as time goes on...

Bluetonic

Just because something isn't needed it really shouldn't restrict us from creative thinking and a bit of discussion!

DWCommuter

Bluetonic wrote: »

It would be a pretty pointless thing to do as the rail line would limit what you can put in if you left it as is. Also given it's orientation it would surely be subject to the same planning constraints as the north stand in Lansdowne.

Interestingly the GAA own none of the houses on the other side of the rail line despite many being available over the years. I would imagine this shows their intent.

I speak from a purely "completion of the stadium" viewpoint. It could actually be finished off properly above the rail line, but as I alluded to earlier in the thread, the impact on the residences would cause other problems. In Croke park terms we are dealing with one row of houses. Landsdowne road was a whole different kettle of fish. Planning constraints only come into play if there are objections. As an internet discussion Croke Park could be "completed" without any engineering work on the GSWR line behind the hill.

The GAAs intent is obviously to leave things as they are, but it could have been done. Thats the only point I'm making.

Its fair to say that both so called modern stadiums in this country are compromised and half arsed. Thats a point that has been made before and isn't lost on the international sporting community. The much publicised FAI attempt to get a European championship final to Dublin was met with concern from the visiting delegation when they saw the gaping hole at one end of croke park. The "glasshouse effect" at one end of the Aviva is nothing more than placation and no matter what, it looks very poor. I just wish we had a proper stadium, but we don't, when compared to run of the mill premiership grounds in the UK.

Bluetonic

DWCommuter wrote: »

I speak from a purely "completion of the stadium" viewpoint. It could actually be finished off properly above the rail line

I don't think it could be finished off properly without alterations to the rail line but they it depends on what your definition of properly is.

DWCommuter wrote: »

The much publicised FAI attempt to get a European championship final to Dublin was met with concern from the visiting delegation when they saw the gaping hole at one end of croke park.

Yet they were more than happy to give Lansdowne the 2011 Europa League final and aside from a small roof there's little difference in the two, in fact depending on personal opinion Croker could be preferable. In fact with a seated Hill is would be up to UEFAs top category rated stadium criteria.

Also...

UEFA's top brass were impressed when they visited the GAA's headquarters in 2003 after the FAI applied, jointly with Scotland, to stage the Euro 2008 finals.

Source

markpb

DWCommuter wrote: »

I don't see why the level of the line would have to be lowered. Build over it. The seating and tier arrangements in an upgraded Hill end dont need to match the rest of the stadium. Once the roof matches, bobs your uncle and away we go.

It looks like it could be done without lowering the line but it's certainly a tight space to build in, especially in the lower-right corner of that image.

fullstop

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

If the Hill 16 was to be rebuilt to match the rest of the ground it would probably have the same capacity of the Davin Stand which is 21,000. Of course you would lose the 8,800 the Hill currently holds. So the new capacity of the stadium would be;

(82,300 - 8,800) + 21,000 = 94,500

The main difficulty with doing this would be the rail line currently running behind the Hill, not the houses. They dont fill Croker often enough to justify the cost of doing this. Plus I think as an amateur association they should retain the cheaper high density terrace.

The capacity of the Cusack is 25,000, so I'd imagine the Hogan is the same...so 50,000 for those two stands. There are just over 69,000 seats in the stadium with the hill + Nally holding 12,000 when terraced and 5 or 6,000 when seated for soccer internationals (capacity for these is/was around 74,000). So the Davin holds about 19,000, which would leave 69,000 + 19,000 = 88,000 capacity if the stadium was finished all the way around, certainly wouldn't be over 90,000.

dowlingm

The Bing view really brings it home. I think the only way you could have fit a full size stand at that end would have been either a) Build the Canal End over the Canal :eek: or b) rotate the pitch 90 deg. Neither of these was really on the table.

Croke Park's redevelopment was done around the same time as (Glasgow) Celtic Park. I have always thought the GAA should have moved big games to Semple for at least one year, as in 1984, so the development would not be beholden to the All Ireland's schedule. I vividly recall being on a stadium tour during 1994-5 seeing the Jungle and all the rest of the terracing flattened to bare ground. By moving to Hampden for a year, Celtic were able to proceed at a fast pace and their redevelopment (albeit only 3 sides) came in at at least 1/2 the price per seat that Croke Park's did. There were probably reasons for some of that - less competition for the tender maybe, the Canal, the railway line but still...

munchkin_utd

fullstop wrote: »

The capacity of the Cusack is 25,000, so I'd imagine the Hogan is the same...so 50,000 for those two stands. There are just over 69,000 seats in the stadium with the hill + Nally holding 12,000 when terraced and 5 or 6,000 when seated for soccer internationals (capacity for these is/was around 74,000). So the Davin holds about 19,000, which would leave 69,000 + 19,000 = 88,000 capacity if the stadium was finished all the way around, certainly wouldn't be over 90,000.

From an interview with the GAA top brass that i heard a few years back your numbers arent far wrong.

The question was put as to why the hill wasnt developed as seating.
There was a number of factors but the long and the short was that it wouldnt increase capacity overall, or only increase it marginally, to remove a high density standing terrace and replace it with multi tiered seating, and for a high cost (including buying all the houses behind the hill at the peak of the housing boom) there was very little benefit.

cson

Just looking at the Bing Map there; you'd really have to be owning all the houses in a 500 yard or so radius just to even build it and have the room to do so. Even then you'd have serious objections.

It'll happen eventually imo; but at the moment there's just no justification for it. How often would we manage to fill a 90k+ Stadium anyway? Having said that; the GAA would do well to start buying up the houses behind it/surrounding it on the quiet over the next few years to give them the option in a decade or so if they wished to redevelop it.

I'd be all for leaving the bottom tier of a finished Hill as a terrace though, a lá the German football stadiums.

Son of Stupido

fullstop wrote: »

The capacity of the Cusack is 25,000, so I'd imagine the Hogan is the same...so 50,000 for those two stands. There are just over 69,000 seats in the stadium with the hill + Nally holding 12,000 when terraced and 5 or 6,000 when seated for soccer internationals (capacity for these is/was around 74,000). So the Davin holds about 19,000, which would leave 69,000 + 19,000 = 88,000 capacity if the stadium was finished all the way around, certainly wouldn't be over 90,000.

Cusack = 25,500 (including 2 corner segments)
Hogan = 25,500 (including 2 corner segments)
Davin = 21,500 (including 3 corner segments each corner
Hill 16 = c23,500 (including 5 corner segments each corner)
Total = 96,000 give or take a thousand

Bluetonic

Considering you need corporate facilities to make a stand viable you can see how the rail line would cut right through any ones built in a stand where the rail line remained unmoved. Corporate higher or lower whilst an option would be most likely undesirable due to the view.



Attached is what they own.

DWCommuter

Bluetonic wrote: »

I don't think it could be finished off properly without alterations to the rail line but they it depends on what your definition of properly is.


Yet they were more than happy to give Lansdowne the 2011 Europa League final and aside from a small roof there's little difference in the two, in fact depending on personal opinion Croker could be preferable. In fact with a seated Hill is would be up to UEFAs top category rated stadium criteria.

Also...


Source

I disagree with that newspaper articl re. the UEFA committee's feelings on Croke Park. Unfortunately my source can't be referenced.

The 2011 Europa Cup final issue was a done deal between FAI brass and Mr. Platini. Perhaps UEFA can understand an "enclosed" stadium" that the FAI control, despite its enclosure being purely cosmetic.

As for the rail line behind Hill 16, we'll have to agree to differ on whether it would be affected by a stadium upgrade. Im not an engineer, but I respect what engineers can do, so remain convinced that they could solve the problem with a minimal of fuss.

BrianD

DWCommuter wrote: »

I hate to disagree Pete, but the railway behind the Hill wouldn't be much of a problem and could've been factored into converting the Hill end. The real problem is actually the houses on Clonliffe road. To complete the stadium these houses would have to give up a section of their back gardens and then accept a view of a towering concrete structure. It may also be the case that some houses on Jones road would have to very accomodating as well.

I believe that engineering is far more advanced than human nature.;)

Correct - the real reason that these houses would never see sunlight again. Perhaps when the GAA buy them all up and resist the opportunity to build a hotel then Hill 16 will b e multi tiered. To be honest, it doesn't make a whole lot of difference to the stadium whether it is or not.

Croke PArk needs a minimum of 40k audience to be viable. Given the match attendance for the number of days it's open each year, I can't see the demand for extra capacity on the Raillway End (other than final days).

DVCommuter wrote:

The much publicised FAI attempt to get a European championship final to Dublin was met with concern from the visiting delegation when they saw the gaping hole at one end of croke park.

What gaping hole? Why would anybody be bothered if it has a roof or not. The only thing that goes against Croker in this respect is the lack of seating in this area.

jack presley

Croke Park is already capable of more than the 82,000 that it currently has as its capacity but the fire cert is only for the 82k.

A few years back when the last few sections of the top tier of the Hogan Stand weren't finished, the attendance at games was still 82k. They just stuck more into the Hill.

Bluetonic

jack presley wrote: »

A few years back when the last few sections of the top tier of the Hogan Stand weren't finished, the attendance at games was still 82k. They just stuck more into the Hill.

When the Hogan was being finished the Hill was a completely different structure and capacity than it is now. I disagree with your view.

DWCommuter

BrianD wrote: »

What gaping hole? Why would anybody be bothered if it has a roof or not. The only thing that goes against Croker in this respect is the lack of seating in this area.

In all fairness Brian, look at any modern European stadium that hosts finals and you do not see a gaping hole at one end. Hill 16 is an ugly gaping hole at one end of the ground. Cradiff Arms Park had a similar set up and the WRFU couldn't wait to get rid of it and at that stage the ground was better than anything we had in Ireland. The Aviva are getting a European final because the gaping hole is covered by the overall roof. Believe me, this is how our European neighbours think. At the end of the day Aviva is enclosed. Croke Park isn't. The Hill end is ugly no matter what seats you put in it.

Mr Simpson

markpb wrote: »

I don't see how they could prosecute anyone - entering the pitch isn't against the law.

Entering the pitch without permission is trespass, and is prosecutable by law as such.

Bluetonic

DWCommuter wrote: »

Look at any modern European stadium that hosts finals and you do not see a gaping hole at one end. Hill 16 is an ugly gaping hole at one end of the ground.

Host of the 2005 Champion League Final, the Ataturk Olumpuyit Stadium.

Not one but two 'gaping' holes at the end.

Whilst entitled to your opinion I don't think your entitled to present it as fact.

DWCommuter wrote: »

. The Aviva are getting a European final because the gaping hole is covered by the overall roof.

See above.

markpb

mmcn90 wrote: »

Entering the pitch without permission is trespass, and is prosecutable by law as such.

What a load of cobbles. Entering private property without permission is a civil offence and is not an arrestable offence. Croke Park have already given you admission when you presented your ticket so trespass cannot be a factor at all. And lastly, if you want proof, contact Croke Park management - they helped write a very long article in the Sunday Times two weeks ago specifically stating that they cannot prosecute someone for entering the pitch and that it would require a change in civil law to allow them to do so.

munchkin_utd

DWCommuter wrote: »

In all fairness Brian, look at any modern European stadium that hosts finals and you do not see a gaping hole at one end. Hill 16 is an ugly gaping hole at one end of the ground.

Host of world cup final (and it doesnt get bigger that that to be honest), Berlin olympiastadion, has a gap at one end too.



I do agree that croke park would be asthetically more pleasing if they had no hill 16, but there really really is no need for it.
Yesterdays semi "only" had 62,000 at it.
Even if the current hill was seated you'd still have 10,000 empty places yesterday. Spending tens or hundreds of millions just to make a stadium look nice really is a waste of money.

If there is one fault in the design of the stadium relating to capacity, its all the pitchside seats that were designed not to be covered by the roof.
The GAA knew that only on major finals (or when the dubs play) would they be at full capacity, so it was thought that it was overkill to cover all seats with the roof and that there was plenty of covered seat capacity if they covered the upper tier and most of the lower. So 40,000 (or whatever the exact figure is) covered seats was thought to be adequate. (and if someone wanted to stand on the hill then also grand)

But, then they copped on that it looks really bad on telly if you have 40,000 in a stadium in the upper levels but the pitchside has 10s of thousands of empty seats in the rain.

So now they sell pitchside tickets where you get the full force of the irish damp climate first, before selling tickets for the sheltered upper tier only when theres enough suckers to fill the rainy seats below.
This is the complete opposite of what was originally planned.

It probably should also be noted that a lot complain about the view from above being too far from the pitch so in balance most prefer to be below despite the rain. In hindsight they really should have had a slightly bigger roof that attempts to cover all seating, even the pitchside seats.

P.S.
My biggest complaint though would be that a seat in the rain, close to the pitch and corner flag with a crap view, is the same price as a prime covered seat on the centre line right below the coporate boxes with a prefect view. But thats a separate issue to be fair!!

BrianD

markpb wrote: »

What a load of cobbles. Entering private property without permission is a civil offence and is not an arrestable offence. Croke Park have already given you admission when you presented your ticket so trespass cannot be a factor at all. And lastly, if you want proof, contact Croke Park management - they helped write a very long article in the Sunday Times two weeks ago specifically stating that they cannot prosecute someone for entering the pitch and that it would require a change in civil law to allow them to do so.

It may well be on the way and might be the simplist way out of it. I believe that Australia do have a law that prevents pitch trespass.

Croke Park can stipulate that you do not enter areas of the venue and evict you if they wish. But in reality it would be impractical in a pitch invasion.

Mr Simpson

markpb wrote: »

What a load of cobbles. Entering private property without permission is a civil offence and is not an arrestable offence. Croke Park have already given you admission when you presented your ticket so trespass cannot be a factor at all. And lastly, if you want proof, contact Croke Park management - they helped write a very long article in the Sunday Times two weeks ago specifically stating that they cannot prosecute someone for entering the pitch and that it would require a change in civil law to allow them to do so.

Apologies, I misread the rules and regulations. However with your ticket croke park admit you to certain areas of the stadium, not the pitch. Entering the pitch is trespass, but as you pointed out is not an arrestable offence. Maybe it should be though.

DWCommuter

Bluetonic wrote: »

Host of the 2005 Champion League Final, the Ataturk Olumpuyit Stadium.

Not one but two 'gaping' holes at the end.

Whilst entitled to your opinion I don't think your entitled to present it as fact.





See above.

I think you are misunderstanding the point Im making. There is absolutely no comparison between the Ataturk Stadium and Croke Park or Aviva. It is essentially a very deliberate design and Olympic standard. The "uncovered" areas are irrelevant as the symmetry is maintained. But...
Ataturk had to be modified for the 2005 final and is being further modified to host Euro 2016 making it the largest stadium in the world with seats under cover. It is so far ahead of Aviva or Croke Park that it makes our efforts almost docile in comparison.

Hill 16 in Croke park is a gaping hole because it is at odds with the rest of the stadium design. At least in Aviva, some attempt was made to disguise its inadequacies by integrating the Havelock sq end, despite it being ugly and half arsed.

Ive seen a lot of football finals in a lot of grounds around Europe and on the basis of completed stadiums, Croke Park doesn't fit the bill at all. Aviva just scrapes by. Its my opinion but is it fact? Hmmmm.... I didn't think that I presented it as so, but you are entitled to your opinion too. My UEFA point re Croke Park is valid, but at this moment I can't reveal the source. Apologies.

DWCommuter

munchkin_utd wrote: »

Host of world cup final (and it doesnt get bigger that that to be honest), Berlin olympiastadion, has a gap at one end too.



I do agree that croke park would be asthetically more pleasing if they had no hill 16, but there really really is no need for it.
Yesterdays semi "only" had 62,000 at it.
Even if the current hill was seated you'd still have 10,000 empty places yesterday. Spending tens or hundreds of millions just to make a stadium look nice really is a waste of money.

If there is one fault in the design of the stadium relating to capacity, its all the pitchside seats that were designed not to be covered by the roof.
The GAA knew that only on major finals (or when the dubs play) would they be at full capacity, so it was thought that it was overkill to cover all seats with the roof and that there was plenty of covered seat capacity if they covered the upper tier and most of the lower. So 40,000 (or whatever the exact figure is) covered seats was thought to be adequate. (and if someone wanted to stand on the hill then also grand)

But, then they copped on that it looks really bad on telly if you have 40,000 in a stadium in the upper levels but the pitchside has 10s of thousands of empty seats in the rain.

So now they sell pitchside tickets where you get the full force of the irish damp climate first, before selling tickets for the sheltered upper tier only when theres enough suckers to fill the rainy seats below.
This is the complete opposite of what was originally planned.

It probably should also be noted that a lot complain about the view from above being too far from the pitch so in balance most prefer to be below despite the rain. In hindsight they really should have had a slightly bigger roof that attempts to cover all seating, even the pitchside seats.

P.S.
My biggest complaint though would be that a seat in the rain, close to the pitch and corner flag with a crap view, is the same price as a prime covered seat on the centre line right below the coporate boxes with a prefect view. But thats a separate issue to be fair!!

Once again (see my post above re Ataturk) the gap in the Berlin stadium was deliberate and part of the design.

Carawaystick

DWCommuter wrote: »

I think you are misunderstanding the point Im making. There is absolutely no comparison between the Ataturk Stadium and Croke Park or Aviva. It is essentially a very deliberate design and Olympic standard. The "uncovered" areas are irrelevant as the symmetry is maintained. But...
Ataturk had to be modified for the 2005 final and is being further modified to host Euro 2016 making it the largest stadium in the world with seats under cover. It is so far ahead of Aviva or Croke Park that it makes our efforts almost docile in comparison.

Hill 16 in Croke park is a gaping hole because it is at odds with the rest of the stadium design. At least in Aviva, some attempt was made to disguise its inadequacies by integrating the Havelock sq end, despite it being ugly and half arsed.

Ive seen a lot of football finals in a lot of grounds around Europe and on the basis of completed stadiums, Croke Park doesn't fit the bill at all. Aviva just scrapes by. Its my opinion but is it fact? Hmmmm.... I didn't think that I presented it as so, but you are entitled to your opinion too. My UEFA point re Croke Park is valid, but at this moment I can't reveal the source. Apologies.

Derek, Where is the nearest bar or train station to the attaturk? from the pics shown it looks like it's even more in the sticks than abbotstown ever would be.

Proper fans would be on the Hill, so Croker's issue vanish.

DWCommuter

Carawaystick wrote: »

Derek, Where is the nearest bar or train station to the attaturk? from the pics shown it looks like it's even more in the sticks than abbotstown ever would be.

Proper fans would be on the Hill, so Croker's issue vanish.

Whats a bar or train station got to do with it? Seriously? The stadium is in no mans land in all respects, but the road network into it is great and the ground is surrounded by a massive car park. Looked okay to me.

Bluetonic

Just as a side and nothing to do with the roof design but the Ataturk failed massively as a stadium for the 2005 final.

Security was a major issue with ticket stile not functioning and many fans getting into the ground without tickets. I doubt this would happen in Croke Park.

dowlingm

According to wiki the Ataturk is being reconstructed for Euro 2016 including lowering pitch level 7 feet, becoming the world's largest stadium with every seat under cover.

Jayuu

dowlingm wrote: »

According to wiki the Ataturk is being reconstructed for Euro 2016 including lowering pitch level 7 feet, becoming the world's largest stadium with every seat under cover.

Turkey weren't awarded Euro 2016. France are the hosts so there's no indication if this will be done.

Anyway back to Croke Park. Has anybody any information on the new barriers. Are they are to be in place by Sunday for the All-Ireland Hurling Final? I'm surprise we haven't heard more about it if so.