Clash wrote:foxinthebox2001 wrote:One of my abiding match day memories was turning into Avenall Rd (top end), and taking in the sea of supporters all the way down the hill towards Gillespie Rd, and the magnificent facade of Highbury on the left.
West Ham fans should remember, once its gone, its gone forever.
Nice post mate. Very true about once its gone its gone forever.
Only once has a club moved back to a their spiritual home stadium and that was Charlton who never permanently moved elsewhere.
Anyway I have no love for West Ham but its sad that yet another old ground is about to get bulldozed in the name of progress. Admittedly Upton Park looks nothing like it did when I first went there in the 80s but its still the same place. Still got the memories. As is the case with Old Trafford and Anfield. Different stands but they're still home for many.
One of the biggest load of bollocks that does the rounds in football circles these days is the 'progress' thing.
'Have to move with the times''. ''Mustn't stand in the way of progress''. ''Can't keep living in the past''
This is how business men (and women like that poisonous bitch Karen Brady) brainwash people into accepting their self-serving, money making schemes. They make it sound like they are there for our benefit when really the opposite is true. They make you sound unreasonable if you dont want change.
And yes tell me how football has ''progressed'' as a sport or a spectacle since Arsenal did the double in 1971?
As far as I can see it hasnt because football doesnt need billions from TV. It doesnt need sponsorship or advertising or non-stop coverage or any of that crap we're told it needs to survive.
It survived perfectly well without those things because men will always play football and want to watch those who are the best play it. Football could survive and continue as an amateur sport for this reason. And yet perversely we are approaching a time when football might not even need crowds.
Too many people have had the wool pulled over their eyes and been tricked into accepting that these foreign owners and Sky TV are good for the game. On the contrary they are slowly destroying it.
Highbury in 1971 held over 60,000. More than what we can get in the ground now. Is that progress?
Also it was affordable, it was more raw and more real, the players were a better pedigree and cared more who they were playing for. It was probably more exciting for children back then too. Everyone played on Saturday 3pm
Not one thing that actually matters has progressed.
All seater stadiums and family atmospheres are a nonsense and a big marketing con.
Its all contrived shite that has been dressed up in the name of safety and comfort ... but really its just there to take more and more money from the working man and divert it into the pockets of the rich.
Corporate entertainment is vile but this has grown and grown to a point that it has taken over and now take precedence. The people who care least about the game in a stadium get the best seats. TV justifies moving kick off times because of the money they pump into the game ... and yet still the ticket prices for everyone else go up. So how are we benefiting exactly?
Sponsorship and talk of the expanding the brand is grotesque. ''The Emirates Stadium'' Say no more. Sounds like a greyhound track.
Too late now but West Ham fans, the genuine ones, will grow to hate their new stadium once the novelty of it has worn off. It wont make them a bigger club and that ambitious bitch Brady will fuck off and ruin some other part the game some other when it suits her.
( sorry for the lengthy rant for anyone who bothered ... was originally only intended posting one sentence)
