Hill 16 /Nally stand

Da Boss

Let's start a debate: should Hill 16/Nally Stand be kept as be given the history tradition ect or should Croke park stadium be "finished" as such?

PTH2009

50/50 on this, it is tradition but it would be nice to see Croker the one shape. They could call it the 'The hill 16 stand'

I think the train tracks behind hill 16 are the problem

But is it needed, CP is not open fully for Rugby/Soccer and for concerts the stage is set up in front of hill 16. Obv it would be good for the 2023 Rugby world cup final but besides that ???

roy rodgers

Could they not incorporate the train tracks into a new station?? Be handy for people traveling up to just hop off at the stadium

Also would like too see it fully finished as one shape.

Da Boss

PTH2009 wrote: »

50/50 on this, it is tradition but it would be nice to see Croker the one shape. They could call it the 'The hill 16 stand'

I think the train tracks behind hill 16 are the problem

The train tracks are indeed a problem alright but u don't have to look any further than the Davin stand/canal end to see that ways on working around this obstacle are possible
I

Da Boss

PTH2009 wrote: »

But is it needed, CP is not open fully for Rugby/Soccer and for concerts the stage is set up in front of hill 16. Obv it would be good for the 2023 Rugby world cup final but besides that ???

I've no doubt the extra seats would be filled at least once in a year 4 all ireland football final and concerts too

PTH2009

Da Boss wrote: »

I've no doubt the extra seats would be filled at least once in a year 4 all ireland football final and concerts too

Where would the stage go for concerts??? At least one stand would be looking at the band's arses for the whole concert ???

The Bertie bowl was not such a bad idea thinking about it now ???. We're a small country a huge national stadium would of been handy ???

LeinsterDub

Da Boss wrote: »

Let's start a debate: should Hill 16/Nally Stand be kept as be given the history tradition ect or should Croke park stadium be "finished" as such?

No demand for the extra capacity

tomwaterford

Kept as it is....gives a cheaper option to people wanting to attend matches

ProudDUB

LeinsterDub wrote: »

No demand for the extra capacity

Exactly. There are only two sell out games all year. It wouldn't warrant the trouble and expense. Besides, its irrelevant. It'll never happen. The GAA don't own the houses or the train tracks they would need to "finish" the Hill. Plus, the Croke Park train tracks are elevated. The ones at Lansdowne Rd are not. Its like comparing apples to oranges, from an engineering point of view.

bruschi

ProudDUB wrote: »

Exactly. There are only two sell out games all year. It wouldn't warrant the trouble and expense. Besides, its irrelevant. It'll never happen. The GAA don't own the houses or the train tracks they would need to "finish" the Hill. Plus, the Croke Park train tracks are elevated. The ones at Lansdowne Rd are not. Its like comparing apples to oranges, from an engineering point of view.

there is also the issue of the right to light for houses on Clonliffe Road. Considering the large scale that a huge Hill 16 end would be, the shadow that would go across Clonliffe Road would be considerable I would think as it would be south facing.



Just did a very crude drawing of the potential fully enclosed ground. The green line is the railway track. The red line is the lane behind the Nally/Hill. the blue line is the neighbouring properties boundaries. There are by my count 24 houses who would have construction on their site. Potentially the other 4 too on Jones' Road. The purple line is estimated shadow, which goes right over Clonliffe road so very close to the other houses. In any event, every house on the Croke Park side of Clonliffe road would be in the complete shade and have no natural sunlight on their property.

I dont see in any way how it could be fully enclosed without massive work with both the ground and also in sorting out the inevitable mess with local residents.

PARlance

We've something truly unique and historic. Why change that.

Seems crazier than ever to suggest it when the trend is that other stadia are looking to put in standing sections again.

ProudDUB

Yeah, it really isn't worth it, not when there are only two sell out games a year, three maybe, if the Dubs are in the football semis. It would wreak havoc on the inter city rail infrastructure too. It's gas the attitude some people take to all this....as if the GAA are just being lazy, or cheap, in not having Croke Park be a fully enclosed stadium & that turning it into one, would be as easy as changing a pair of socks. Far from it !

Fr Tod Umptious

Leave it as it is.
It's got character.

Just like the small stand in the Aviva has character.

College football stadiums in the US often remind me of Croke Park, built and revamped over the years with some quirks like the Hill.

Conchir

No. Terraces are the life of any stadium. Look at the Aviva versus the old Lansdowne Road. It went all seater and now it feels dead pretty much every match played there. Standing fans are the ones that create noise and atmosphere in a stadium. Take out the Hill and Croker will be as lifeless as any other bland arena, and soon people would be calling for 'safe standing' like you see all across European football clubs.

It would be madness to get rid of probably the best part of the place.

Father Hernandez

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Leave it as it is.
It's got character.

Just like the small stand in the Aviva has character.

College football stadiums in the US often remind me of Croke Park, built and revamped over the years with some quirks like the Hill.

Conchir wrote: »

No. Terraces are the life of any stadium. Look at the Aviva versus the old Lansdowne Road. It went all seater and now it feels dead pretty much every match played there. Standing fans are the ones that create noise and atmosphere in a stadium. Take out the Hill and Croker will be as lifeless as any other bland arena, and soon people would be calling for 'safe standing' like you see all across European football clubs.

It would be madness to get rid of probably the best part of the place.

Agreed & agreed.

The Hill is unique, it's more often than not the life & soul of the place, getting rid of it would be a massive mistake.

Having been in stadiums around the world, terraces are needed for the party atmosphere, the excitement and this is where the likes of the Aviva fall down massively.

With the ever growing availability of being able to watch live games anywhere and everywhere, we need fans attending games not only to be entertained by what's on the field, but also what's off it. It's about the experience of being there, taking part in singing, being there for the atmosphere rather than simply spectating.

I've been in the Hill on many occasion and the friendly rivalry between Dubs fans and fans from other counties is next to one, taking this away would do more harm than good.

Dr. Kenneth Noisewater

The Hill adds a bit of character to the stadium. If they filled it out with another stand, the ground would look generic and lose a certain amount of atmosphere in my opinion. As others have said, there isn't a huge need for the extra capacity either, you have 2 or 3 sell outs every year, that's it.

It'd just be a second Davin Stand, nobody wants that....

Dirty Dingus McGee

Croke Park looks different than most modern stadia and it should be kept that way.

They should have left the canal end as a terrace aswell,it was always great on all ireland final days with 2 terraces filled with fans from each county, really helped generate a great atmosphere.


Problem with the hill of course is they won't open for every match the it should always be open to give all fans a chance to buy a cheaper ticket if they want.

seligehgit

I'll be the awkward bedfellow but I think the stadium would be much aesthetically improved with a stand where Hill 16 is.

The sole terrace looks totally out of synch with the majority of modern stadia and an all seater stadium would be the coup de grace.

BonnieSituation

I even think finishing the corners and having a terrace in the middle would close it off a bit whilst keeping the iconic nature of a terrace.

MayoAreMagic

I would make it all seated, and simply reduce the price of tickets behind both goals on that level.

gobo99

The capacity of the hill/nally is roughly the same as the Davin so very little to be gained by seating it Money would be better spent elsewhere. Provincial grounds, grassroots etc...

Da Boss

Ok well not much of a debate so it seems got my answer here it's safe to say the majority are in favour of the retention of the Hill, to be fair some very good arguments put forward.

donkey balls

Brought an Aussie lad that I worked with back in the noughties to Croker and he was taken aback from the size of the stadium and the fact the players didn't get paid and the GAA is a non professional org etc. He liked the way their was a terrace/Hill at the other end of the stadium and not like the stadiums in OZ that go right around with seating.

Other lads that I worked with from the UK could not believe that fans mix on the terrace with hardly ever any trouble, I brought a mate on to the hill in 2013 and he thought the atmosphere was unreal compared to other stadiums he had been in.
Myself personally I don't think I could sit down in the lashing rain watching the match I would rather stand, I've also noticed the regulars I see on the Hill and travelling to league away matches always head straight for the terraces must be something in the DNA.

Noveight

Dr. Kenneth Noisewater wrote: »

It'd just be a second Davin Stand, nobody wants that....

Lock it up lads, there's no better answer than that

ProudDUB

seligehgit wrote: »

I'll be the awkward bedfellow but I think the stadium would be much aesthetically improved with a stand where Hill 16 is.

The sole terrace looks totally out of synch with the majority of modern stadia and and an all seater stadium would be the coup de grace.

Of course it would be aesthetically improved if it were a fully finished stadium. I don't think anyone would debate that. The debate is - to my mind anyway - whether or not the trouble and expense would warrant finishing it, when there are only 2 guaranteed sell out games a year. Then there are the intangible factors, such as history, tradition, atmosphere etc etc. They are important too, quite possibly more important than the aesthetic factor.

When I lived in the States, there was a definite move away from the perfectly symmetrical, cookie cooker, custom built baseball stadiums that were built in the 1970's, as the older inner city grounds began to crumble and/or out grow their original locations. The newer stadia looked great and modern when they were built, at least they were were in theory. But they were totally lacking in character and the quirks that made the older stadia so unique and individual. One by one, they were bulldozed and newer stadia were built, that didn't down play the history or tradition of the cities that spawned them. The planners and architects realised that some things are just as important as appearance.

I don't want some generic Premier League style bowl. I couldn't care less about being in sync with modern stadia. I want something that is a right fit for the GAA....and Croke Park, such as it is, ticks the boxes imo.

Dirty Dingus McGee

ProudDUB wrote: »

Of course it would be aesthetically improved if it were a fully finished stadium. I don't think anyone would debate that. The debate is - to my mind anyway - whether or not the trouble and expense would warrant finishing it, when there are only 2 guaranteed sell out games a year. Then there are the intangible factors, such as history, tradition, atmosphere etc etc. They are important too, quite possibly more important than the aesthetic factor.

When I lived in the States, there was a definite move away from the perfectly symmetrical, cookie cooker, custom built baseball stadiums that were built in the 1970's, as the older inner city grounds began to crumble and/or out grow their original locations. The newer stadia looked great and modern when they were built, at least they were were in theory. But they were totally lacking in character and the quirks that made the older stadia so unique and individual. One by one, they were bulldozed and newer stadia were built, that didn't down play the history or tradition of the cities that spawned them. The planners and architects realised that some things are just as important as appearance.

I don't want some generic Premier League style bowl. I couldn't care less about being in sync with modern stadia. I want something that is a right fit for the GAA....and Croke Park, such as it is, ticks the boxes imo.

I don't think it would look better to be honest.

It would just be another emirates, allianz arena style characterless bowl which to be honest are fairly dull looking.

feichin

Is it possible that there could be a compromise solution that would keep nearly everyone happy?
If you look at the hill it rises to almost the top of the "middle" level of the Hogan and Cusack stands.
If the hill was left as it is - a standing terrace - and a top, seated tier was built to join the Hogan & Cusack stands to complete the bowl effect, which should also increase the capacity by a few thousand.
This may or may not be possible with the railway, but as was stated earlier, solutions were found to similar problems at the other end of the stadium.
I'm sure the local residents would still have understandable issues but does the existing shadow of the stadium not already interfere with the sunlight to the properties surrounding Croke Park?

threeball

bruschi wrote: »

there is also the issue of the right to light for houses on Clonliffe Road. Considering the large scale that a huge Hill 16 end would be, the shadow that would go across Clonliffe Road would be considerable I would think as it would be south facing.



Just did a very crude drawing of the potential fully enclosed ground. The green line is the railway track. The red line is the lane behind the Nally/Hill. the blue line is the neighbouring properties boundaries. There are by my count 24 houses who would have construction on their site. Potentially the other 4 too on Jones' Road. The purple line is estimated shadow, which goes right over Clonliffe road so very close to the other houses. In any event, every house on the Croke Park side of Clonliffe road would be in the complete shade and have no natural sunlight on their property.

I dont see in any way how it could be fully enclosed without massive work with both the ground and also in sorting out the inevitable mess with local residents.

The gaa own most of those houses along the back of hill 16 now so I'd imagine we will eventually see the bowl being completed. I dont see why they couldnt leave the lower deck as the Hill while still being able to install an upper deck giving the best of both worlds. With the added bonus that the hill would be mostly covered.

freedominacup

ProudDUB wrote: »

Then there are the intangible factors, such as history, tradition...

Virtually every terrible decision taken by the gaa over the years was for these reasons.

Just saying.

Bluetonic

Lengthening the the roof on the Cusack, Canal and lesser degree on the Hogan would be a higher priority than any (unrealistic and unneeded) work on the Hill.

Given the amount of summer rain we get, to think that the first 30 rows of the stadium are totally open to the elements is pretty unacceptable in this day and age. More roof, while also protecting fans from the elements, to a lesser degree would add to the atmosphere as the sound would stay in the stadium.

Think the cost was £1m IEP at the time the Cusack started per meter of roof built, hence the Hogan, built when the GAA had more money, has a longer roof.

Lets hope it can be easily extended without having to rebuild the support for it.

threeball

Bluetonic wrote: »

Lengthening the the roof on the Cusack, Canal and lesser degree on the Hogan would be a higher priority than any (unrealistic and unneeded) work on the Hill.

Given the amount of summer rain we get, to think that the first 30 rows of the stadium are totally open to the elements is pretty unacceptable in this day and age. More roof, while also protecting fans from the elements, to a lesser degree would add to the atmosphere as the sound would stay in the stadium.

Think the cost was £1m IEP at the time the Cusack started per meter of roof built, hence the Hogan, built when the GAA had more money, has a longer roof.

Lets hope it can be easily extended without having to rebuild the support for it.

It would be easier do this with a completed hill section as all sections would support one another as they were extended. I agree the design is ridiculous as it stands.

howiya

feichin wrote: »

Is it possible that there could be a compromise solution that would keep nearly everyone happy?
If you look at the hill it rises to almost the top of the "middle" level of the Hogan and Cusack stands.
If the hill was left as it is - a standing terrace - and a top, seated tier was built to join the Hogan & Cusack stands to complete the bowl effect, which should also increase the capacity by a few thousand.
This may or may not be possible with the railway, but as was stated earlier, solutions were found to similar problems at the other end of the stadium.
I'm sure the local residents would still have understandable issues but does the existing shadow of the stadium not already interfere with the sunlight to the properties surrounding Croke Park?

Would imagine it would be far more difficult and costly to build over the elevated railway line at the hill end than it would be to build over the line at ground level at the canal end