[Archived] Fans Forum meeting, plus new website

[tomphil]

The JW looks emptier than the Riverside most matchdays so it isn't going to make the crowd look any better. Also it'll cost money and we don't want Rhodes sale to pay for stadium refurbishments surely ?

[Tom]

I think if it was viable it would have been done years ago.

For some reason the angle these days is terrible though when you watch a game back on TV it seems really high up compared to previous years.

[AndyNeil]

maybe the grand plan to keep the DE mob happy is to close the Riverside in the hope that the people from there will transfer into the JW. We could certainly do with some life in there on a matchday, and that comes from somebody who sits in there.

In all seriousness though I could never see it happening if a cost/benefit analysis was to be conducted given our current position - which probably means it'll happen.

[Al]

Trouble with closing areas of the ground is that you risk peeing off the fans who like where they sit. We have few enough fans without alienating any more.

Thanks, are you aware if the club is still doing this, or whom people should contact if they wanted to use that facility?

I found Christine Peacock very helpful when I needed to find a seat without so many steps. She is brilliant. 07717724646.

[AndyNeil]

Trouble with closing areas of the ground is that you risk peeing off the fans who like where they sit. We have few enough fans without alienating any more.

I'm certainly not advocating closing areas of the ground, however as the number of home fans through the door seems to continue to dwindle (does anybody actually take the official attendance / number of tickets issued for the match seriously anymore) coupled with the financial situation the club finds itself in, from a £££ perspective I can see why the idea would be floated within the club at least.

Presently we have circa 12,000 home supporters spread over circa 24,000 seats. Visually how much 'better' would it look if those 12,000 were spread over 22,000 rather than 24,000? IMO the impact would be minimal. From a £££ perspective, it would save on police, stewards and kiosk staffing I would of thought although how much that would actually save over the course of a season and how much as a % of the total match cost of running the stadium is open to debate.

Either way I can't see it making that much of an effect, plus do the club really want to aggravate the supporters in there? Coupled with the fact that some of the most vocal of those defending the right to keep the Darwen End open are members of the FF and BRAG, may well just swing it as I doubt the club has the minerals to go against these two fan groups.

All in, I'd imagine the status quo will remain, unless the manager has a very good run-in and really pushes for it to be closed in order to condense the home support.

[VinjayV4]

Not sure if anything been on here,but heard TV gantry is going on riverside stand,anyone heard anything?

Well where did you hear it? Said before there's enough angles but really what can the TV crews do about it? If the club want to move main cameras to the Riverside they will do so. Its hardly something they will boycott the ground over. Not like there's been a ton of televised home league games this season anyway.

[barry_]

as was once said by a wise old man... haters gonna hate

[JHRover]

I've heard the same thing. The two obvious benefits to relocating the tv gantry will be that the ground will look more modern and it will be lower down than in the JW stand. It seems daft to make the Riverside the focal point of the ground when it is looking dated. The gantry in the JW Upper is high up and when viewing games via tv looks a long way away from the pitch. Presumably there are ways of dealing with the sunlight issue, unless the club are oblivious to it. Maybe modern day tv cameras can function even with sunlight difficulties. There must be other grounds in the country with pitches on a North-South alignment with tv gantrys that face the sun at various times of the day.

One of the things that occurred to me was the risk of the new gantry obstructing views from the back of the Riverside. Its a shallow stand, if the gantry hangs from under the roof then those right at the back might have issues seeing, though again you would expect the club to have factored that in before deciding to do it.

[VinjayV4]

I've heard the same thing. The two obvious benefits to relocating the tv gantry will be that the ground will look more modern and it will be lower down than in the JW stand. It seems daft to make the Riverside the focal point of the ground when it is looking dated. The gantry in the JW Upper is high up and when viewing games via tv looks a long way away from the pitch. Presumably there are ways of dealing with the sunlight issue, unless the club are oblivious to it. Maybe modern day tv cameras can function even with sunlight difficulties. There must be other grounds in the country with pitches on a North-South alignment with tv gantrys that face the sun at various times of the day.

One of the things that occurred to me was the risk of the new gantry obstructing views from the back of the Riverside. Its a shallow stand, if the gantry hangs from under the roof then those right at the back might have issues seeing, though again you would expect the club to have factored that in before deciding to do it.

Suppose the worst that can happen is a few fans might be annoyed if they have to move seats. Yes the Riverside looks dated but some people treat it like its falling down. The "old Ewood" didn't start crumbling for many years its not even 30 years old yet.

[JHRover]

Suppose the worst that can happen is a few fans might be annoyed if they have to move seats. Yes the Riverside looks dated but some people treat it like its falling down. The "old Ewood" didn't start crumbling for many years its not even 30 years old yet.

The Riverside looks older than it is. One reason is the standard of the Jack Walker, Blackburn and Darwen Ends, which are far superior in size, facilities and overall appearance, which makes the Riverside look old and dilapidated in comparison even when it isn't.

The improvements in football stadia over the last 20 years and the fact that most clubs in the top 2 divisions have either moved to completely new purpose built grounds or completely renovated their grounds, makes an 80's stand like the Riverside look out of date and in need of replacement. Supporting pillars are part of the problem, and the system with turnstiles to each end and a walkway to the front with no real concourse facilities to shelter supporters other than a small bar area at the back mean it lags behind almost all stands in the top divisions for comfort and facilities, although in terms of leg-room I think it is the best at Ewood.

Ideally were we to get promoted it would be good to rebuild the Riverside. It doesn't need to match the grand plans of Jack Walker or even increase capacity of Ewood, but a more modern stand with a proper concourse, better exit facilities, no supporting pillars built closer to the pitch, with floodlights housed in the roof and every seat covered from the elements, would improve the ground dramatically.

[J*B]

I've heard the same thing. The two obvious benefits to relocating the tv gantry will be that the ground will look more modern and it will be lower down than in the JW stand. It seems daft to make the Riverside the focal point of the ground when it is looking dated. The gantry in the JW Upper is high up and when viewing games via tv looks a long way away from the pitch. Presumably there are ways of dealing with the sunlight issue, unless the club are oblivious to it. Maybe modern day tv cameras can function even with sunlight difficulties. There must be other grounds in the country with pitches on a North-South alignment with tv gantrys that face the sun at various times of the day.

One of the things that occurred to me was the risk of the new gantry obstructing views from the back of the Riverside. Its a shallow stand, if the gantry hangs from under the roof then those right at the back might have issues seeing, though again you would expect the club to have factored that in before deciding to do it.

The sunlight issue completely isnt an issue at all, its incredibly easily solved and can all be done in-camera.

[unsall]

Well where did you hear it? Said before there's enough angles but really what can the TV crews do about it? If the club want to move main cameras to the Riverside they will do so. Its hardly something they will boycott the ground over. Not like there's been a ton of televised home league games this season anyway.

. Someone who is usually very reliable,hope it's true,look much better on tele.

[tomphil]

I just don't see why they'd even consider it when they already have an up to date, state of the art modern facility already there. Never mind the access issue for the sky trucks etc at the back.

If it was part of a wider plan of maybe closing part of the riverside with a view to it eventually being replaced then fair enough. Where does the money come from though ? There have been rumours in the recent past about the riverside needing a lot of work to it so if that was true and it had to be closed then I suppose it would look better with a temporary camera gantry in front of it in the middle than a big empty stand.

[Ben-2000]

This nearly happened very recently.

The plan was put into place but was pulled at the last minute due to costs.

So the gantry will remain in the JW Stand for the foreseeable future.

[Biddy]

Can't see sun being an issue if the cameras did move to the Riverside. Cameras don't need to see much for 2 minutes highlights at the end of channel 5's "The Championship"

[tomphil]

This nearly happened very recently.

The plan was put into place but was pulled at the last minute due to costs.

So the gantry will remain in the JW Stand for the foreseeable future.

Are you aware of the thinking behind why it nearly happed Ben ?

[VinjayV4]

The Riverside was shown in 94-95 so can't really see much of a problem having the same main angle now. We know the owners have brought nothing to the club except chaos and embarrassment so really which stand is featured most prominently on Tv is one of the lesser concerns.

I imagine the reasoning was the one general argument for moving the cameras. I can't think of anything else and I certainly don't think Venkys will rebuild the stand. Or shut it down for that matter. Really my only issue with the Riverside is the lack of a sponsor. I generally referred to it as the Walkersteel initially anyway (not sure if I even knew it was called the Riverside originally though I did have an "A-Z" book quite early on) and doubtful that people would care about a new stand sponsor. Just as long as they don't try to rename the Jack Walker stand. Renaming Ewood certainly wouldn't be popular either.

Though of course St James' Park (the Newcastle one) was briefly renamed and we all know that is one of the legendary cathedrals of World football.

[Al]

I've heard the same thing. The two obvious benefits to relocating the tv gantry will be that the ground will look more modern and it will be lower down than in the JW stand. It seems daft to make the Riverside the focal point of the ground when it is looking dated. The gantry in the JW Upper is high up and when viewing games via tv looks a long way away from the pitch. Presumably there are ways of dealing with the sunlight issue, unless the club are oblivious to it. Maybe modern day tv cameras can function even with sunlight difficulties. There must be other grounds in the country with pitches on a North-South alignment with tv gantrys that face the sun at various times of the day.

One of the things that occurred to me was the risk of the new gantry obstructing views from the back of the Riverside. Its a shallow stand, if the gantry hangs from under the roof then those right at the back might have issues seeing, though again you would expect the club to have factored that in before deciding to do it.

Sunlight? This is Blackburn, Lancashire. How often would it be a problem?

[Ben-2000]

Are you aware of the thinking behind why it nearly happed Ben ?

Basically, to show off the 3 main stands.

I got the feeling the person involved is very keen & proud to portray the club in the best light possible. This was just one thing that would aid that.

[Stuart]

This nearly happened very recently.

The plan was put into place but was pulled at the last minute due to costs.

So the gantry will remain in the JW Stand for the foreseeable future.

Shame really. Any chance they might replace the Riverside roof at any point?

[Mattyblue]

As Biddy points out, 2 minutes on Channel 5 every other week means the profile of Ewood Park is very low indeed! So it isn't a priority,

But if we do somehow end up back in the top flight, get the camera moved immediately.

[BlueMonday]

Basically, to show off the 3 main stands.

I got the feeling the person involved is very keen & proud to portray the club in the best light possible. This was just one thing that would aid that.

I'm inclined to think Venkys wanted the good side of Ewood showing on TV, so they could tell everyone in India that they built a new stand at Ewood!

We all know owning a football club is only a PR exercise to make them look good in India.

Just saying...

Shame really. Any chance they might replace the Riverside roof at any point?

Yes, when the Rhodes money comes in...

[Stuart]

We all know owning a football club is only a PR exercise to make them look good in India.

Bit of an oxymoron that. To have any possibility of looking good they must be keeping very quite about all things Rovers. It a text book example of utter failure. Unless the story is riches to rags and back to riches again - in which case they've still a long way to go.

Yes, when the Rhodes money comes in...

I'd love it if this were true. If they get rid of those posts then I've got one of the best seats in the ground!

[BlueMonday]

Bit of an oxymoron that. To have any possibility of looking good they must be keeping very quite about all things Rovers. It a text book example of utter failure. Unless the story is riches to rags and back to riches again - in which case they've still a long way to go.

I'd love it if this were true. If they get rid of those posts then I've got one of the best seats in the ground!

I didn't say they'd made a success of it. But their early statements when they took over were all about promoting the Venkys brand in global markets, buying Ronaldinho and blah, blah, blah.

without a doubt they've made a cluster @#/? of it, but its nothing more than a vanity project.

[Stuart]

I didn't say they'd made a success of it. But their early statements when they took over were all about promoting the Venkys brand in global markets, buying Ronaldinho and blah, blah, blah.

without a doubt they've made a cluster @#/? of it, but its nothing more than a vanity project.

It may have started out that way but I've genuinely no clue what's in it for them now. There is either a financial incentive or they are just biding their time.