Good interview with SD on skysports website, 1 throwaway line about Dyche wanting the club to "put another tier on the Bob Lord".

He would like the board to tart up Turf Moor and put a top tier on the Bob Lord stand.

https://www.skysports.com/football/news ... urnley-way" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A very busy stair lift !

Don't fancy a double deck bus going under my arse!!!!!!

AndyClaret wrote:Good interview with SD on skysports website, 1 throwaway line about Dyche wanting the club to "put another tier on the Bob Lord".



https://www.skysports.com/football/news ... urnley-way" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Can see a time when they decide to finally do this, but I don’t expect we are talking in the next couple of seasons before it’s looked at, assuming we continue on the way way are.

Its safe to say SD loves our club. Hes always thinking of the future and how things can improve. Absolutely love the man

Can only just about fill the ground now and another tier as opposed to a complete rebuild would increase the capacity by about 3000. I think the present BL only holds about 3000- if that
I imagine planning permission given the houses on Harry Potts way will be a problem too.

Don't see why the houses would be an issue, the Bob Lord doesn't even reach curbside as it stands, then theses 2 pavements, a road and a grassed area before the houses.

I think it would more likely be a rebuild to match the James Hargreaves first. Can the Bob Lord take the weight of another tier?

Barry_Chuckle wrote:Don't see why the houses would be an issue, the Bob Lord doesn't even reach curbside as it stands, then theses 2 pavements, a road and a grassed area before the houses.

Maybe but obstructing light could be a problem couldn't it?
Then there is the closure of the bottom tier whilst the extra tier goes on which given the rate of progress of the disabled sections could take 3 or 4 seasons.

Hroogar wrote:Don't fancy a double deck bus going under my arse!!!!!!

It would have to crash into the Club Offices and Ticket Office then

FactualFrank wrote:I think it would more likely be a rebuild to match the James Hargreaves first. Can the Bob Lord take the weight of another tier?

They could put a weight limit on the fans in there ... all fat b*****ds in the JHL and JML

I don't think it's really needed to be honest, extension wise I mean.
We barely sell out for every game as it is.. I'm all for knocking down one stand and tarting it up with a new stand though (Cricket Field or Bob Lord) although I will be sorry if/the day when they do go

Oh no, here we go again.....

Bosscat wrote:It would have to crash into the Club Offices and Ticket Office then


They could put a weight limit on the fans in there ... all fat b*****ds in the JHL and JML

I'm already in the JML

A really good article.

mdd2 wrote:Maybe but obstructing light could be a problem couldn't it?
Then there is the closure of the bottom tier whilst the extra tier goes on which given the rate of progress of the disabled sections could take 3 or 4 seasons.

BLS is our South stand, light wouldn’t be an issue.

Leave it alone. The ground is bursting with character and sentiment not seen in many other premiere league grounds.
How nice was Highbury? but an understandable sacrifice as the extra seats were needed. We don't need them .

No change. No gender neutral toilets , no prawn sandwiches and no new stands.

It's not always about selling out. Sometimes it's about the family of 4 wanting to sit together and not be sat in the corners.

Moorite wrote:It's not always about selling out. Sometimes it's about the family of 4 wanting to sit together and not be sat in the corners.

Check out previous threads on here on the subject of another tier on the Bob Lord Stand, bfcwest puts forward a strong and compelling argument why it would make good sense and he convinced many posters on here with his reasoning. Unfortunately I doubt that our BoD share his vision and therefore, sadly, I think we're more likely to see another tear on the Bob Lord Stand.

By the 2nd page the demand will be clear for a 50k stadium in the shape of slow cooker

Edit: with a statue of Vydra

Bfcboyo wrote:Leave it alone. The ground is bursting with character and sentiment not seen in many other premiere league grounds.
How nice was Highbury? but an understandable sacrifice as the extra seats were needed. We don't need them .

No change. No gender neutral toilets , no prawn sandwiches and no new stands.

Absolutely. And I read or heard a comment the other day that was on about coming to places like ours. And bigger but similar grounds like villa park.

The fans are on top of the pitch. It’s uncomfortable for the players. It’s edgy and intimidating. Even without the fans.

Players like Salah and Hazard and Aubameyang etc must love going to These identikit, soulless stadiums like Leicester, Middlesbrough and Swansea. Same stadiums different colour seats. And about as intimidating as 12 rounds with Roy cropper.

And not forgetting Brighton. A sloping roof and one off stand doesn’t disguise its Madejski on sea.

As for the interview. Phenomenal. In all honesty it’s becoming less and less likely Dyche would want to move but for a ridiculous opportunity.

Job for life. On 70k a week. With full control of the club. With a board and fans entirely behind him.

I'd sooner see all standing in the Cricketfield and Longside lower before any ground extensions.

I hate two tier stands, ruins the atmosphere!
Single tiered all the way down is much, much better!

Moorite wrote:It's not always about selling out. Sometimes it's about the family of 4 wanting to sit together and not be sat in the corners.

I think they should take out any of the single spare seat gaps between season ticket holders & have more areas of the ground that have full rows of available seats, so that families have more opportunity to purchase tickets together.

Aclaret wrote:
I'm already in the JML

Say no more .....

Only joking

CoolClaret wrote:I hate two tier stands, ruins the atmosphere!
Single tiered all the way down is much, much better!

That was the big mistake they made with the Jimmy Mac. Two tier on the Longside was one thing but that should have been a single tier stand. More so given the bit in the middle wasn't used for years.

cricketfieldclarets wrote:Absolutely. And I read or heard a comment the other day that was on about coming to places like ours. And bigger but similar grounds like villa park.

The fans are on top of the pitch. It’s uncomfortable for the players. It’s edgy and intimidating. Even without the fans.

Players like Salah and Hazard and Aubameyang etc must love going to These identikit, soulless stadiums like Leicester, Middlesbrough and Swansea. Same stadiums different colour seats. And about as intimidating as 12 rounds with Roy cropper.

And not forgetting Brighton. A sloping roof and one off stand doesn’t disguise its Madejski on sea.

You wouldn't want to get into a row with Roy Cropper on the subject of gender neutral Toilets though.

Leave my view of the hills alone!

He's probably feeling the temperature drop and is thinking ahead to winter cheeky bugger.

What inspiring words from the best thing thats ever happened to our club . When i first started following us i thought we were massive (4th division) aand we were a big fish in a small pond . I used to look at the longside in awe and think wow. 25 yrs later i realise we are a small town club punching above our weight in the best league in the world . U can choose ur job. U can choose ur friends . U can choose ur car . But when it comes to my football club .....Burnley thats all that matters. UTC

CoolClaret wrote:I hate two tier stands, ruins the atmosphere!
Single tiered all the way down is much, much better!

Whilst I agree the atmosphere in a three tier stand at Derby was the best I have ever witnessed.

Tricky Trevor wrote:BLS is our South stand, light wouldn’t be an issue.

Right to light could be an issue regardless of the orientation.

Quote 'Pep Guardiola makes me laugh when he says the opposition have tried to play the right way - usually after they've won 5-0! It's a delicate balance.

How very true which tempts the obvious question. How would each fare if they reversed roles?

Some objections to a second tier on the BL but I think its a must. Hills will still be able to be seen for those who want to look at them, but prsonally I dont go to look at the hills or worry about the light.

cricketfieldclarets wrote:Absolutely. And I read or heard a comment the other day that was on about coming to places like ours. And bigger but similar grounds like villa park.

The fans are on top of the pitch. It’s uncomfortable for the players. It’s edgy and intimidating. Even without the fans.

Players like Salah and Hazard and Aubameyang etc must love going to These identikit, soulless stadiums like Leicester, Middlesbrough and Swansea. Same stadiums different colour seats. And about as intimidating as 12 rounds with Roy cropper.

And not forgetting Brighton. A sloping roof and one off stand doesn’t disguise its Madejski on sea.

I wouldn’t say the turf is intimidating. The likes of Salah have played in huge european games all over europe and played in Italy. Whereas Aubameyang has played in germany. The turf is quite and a pretty nice place to play to be honest.

Stayingup wrote:Some objections to a second tier on the BL but I think its a must. Hills will still be able to be seen for those who want to look at them, but prsonally I dont go to look at the hills or worry about the light.

I don’t think anyone is saying that they go to the football to worry about the light. Just that putting a new tier on the Bob Lord could impinge on the neighbouring residents’ right to light. I think it’s fairly unlikely that would be the case given the height of the stand and the distance from the properties but it’s still a consideration.

Dyched wrote:I wouldn’t say the turf is intimidating. The likes of Salah have played in huge european games all over europe and played in Italy. Whereas Aubameyang has played in germany. The turf is quite and a pretty nice place to play to be honest.

Im not saying its like playing in Belgrade. Clearly not. But the changing rooms, the tunnel, the location. Everything about it is gritty. Theyre used to snd more confortable in polished surroundings where theyre pandered to.

cricketfieldclarets wrote:Im not saying its like playing in Belgrade. Clearly not. But the changing rooms, the tunnel, the location. Everything about it is gritty. Theyre used to snd more confortable in polished surroundings where theyre pandered to.

The changing rooms is the next step in us attracting better players.
Our players need to use them every week.

It will be a big plus when they get moved to the new Bob Lord stand.

Quickenthetempo wrote:The changing rooms is the next step in us attracting better players.
Our players need to use them every week.

It will be a big plus when they get moved to the new Bob Lord stand.

Ours have been done up. Just not theirs.

AndyClaret wrote:Good interview with SD on skysports website, 1 throwaway line about Dyche wanting the club to "put another tier on the Bob Lord".



https://www.skysports.com/football/news ... urnley-way" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Great interview with Sean Dyche. We are so lucky to have Sean as our manager. He's perfectly right about the "art" of management - whatever activity you are managing. I've always appreciated it when, in my career, I've been managed by someone like Sean. Equally, I try and pass on this approach to my colleagues today.

Is it a "throwaway" line? or is Sean Dyche saying that for the club to move forward we need to expand the ground capacity? In my view, our manager is right. The people who have season tickets and attend every game aren't in the best place to judge on the capacity of the ground. It's the people who might have bought a ticket, but decided not to bother because there aren't enoungh "good" seats left, where a group of 2, 3 or more can sit together and where they have a good view of the pitch. If the club can't show, say, 10 - 15% extra capacity on these terms, the club will never grow.

The Bob Lord ("Martin Dobson") stand has always been a small stand. My memory, which may be mistake after all these years, is that it's not as tall as the one it replaced - and combined with the terracing which used to run along the front, the BL has smaller capacity than used to be there.

And, surely all of the fans from the 60s and 70s remember the +30,000 gates?

UTC

Quickenthetempo wrote:The changing rooms is the next step in us attracting better players.
Our players need to use them every week.

It will be a big plus when they get moved to the new Bob Lord stand.

In May 2010 I played in a charity game at Stamford Bridge. Chelsea had just won the Premier League (and Clarets had just been relegated... ) I was really looking forward to seeing the changing rooms - and it wouldn't have mattered if it was the home or the away side. I was disappointed, they'd brought in some porta-kabins at the back of the Shed and stuck us in there. OK, that was the standard of our football, but....

Paul Waine wrote:Great interview with Sean Dyche. We are so lucky to have Sean as our manager. He's perfectly right about the "art" of management - whatever activity you are managing. I've always appreciated it when, in my career, I've been managed by someone like Sean. Equally, I try and pass on this approach to my colleagues today.

Is it a "throwaway" line? or is Sean Dyche saying that for the club to move forward we need to expand the ground capacity? In my view, our manager is right. The people who have season tickets and attend every game aren't in the best place to judge on the capacity of the ground. It's the people who might have bought a ticket, but decided not to bother because there aren't enoungh "good" seats left, where a group of 2, 3 or more can sit together and where they have a good view of the pitch. If the club can't show, say, 10 - 15% extra capacity on these terms, the club will never grow.

The Bob Lord ("Martin Dobson") stand has always been a small stand. My memory, which may be mistake after all these years, is that it's not as tall as the one it replaced - and combined with the terracing which used to run along the front, the BL has smaller capacity than used to be there.

And, surely all of the fans from the 60s and 70s remember the +30,000 gates?

UTC

The capacity of the old Brunshaw Road Stand was 9,500, it’s now around 3,000. The initial plan was for an 8,000 capacity stand there.

We don’t actually need a second tier on the stand, only to continue the current rake backwards towards the road, which should add 2,000 seats with, you’d hope, unrestricted views.

A second tier might make more sense though as the extra height above the offices could allow for an extra concourse for the extra fans.

My view has always been to actually take seats out (remove) from the Longside lower, and move the pitch over by perhaps 10-15 feet. The front row would then be higher and have a better view, and the Bob Lord could perhaps add a couple of rows to the from as well, building the dugouts into the stand.

An extra tier on the Bob Lord would not then have to be at such a steep rake to see the edge of the pitch as it will have moved over.

The other benefit would be aligning the goal with the centre of the Jimmy Mac.

If I was to expand the Bob Lord myself I wouldn’t be putting a second tier on top.
Much better to extend the existing rake out the back of the stand as now is. The steepness of the stand would mean even at the back you would be still quite close to the pitch (assuming another 15 rows or so).
The majority of the work could be carried out while the existing is in use before a new roof is popped on the top in the close season.
Tell me, is this a brilliantly simple idea or am talking complete b*ll*cks?

Claretforever wrote:The capacity of the old Brunshaw Road Stand was 9,500, it’s now around 3,000. The initial plan was for an 8,000 capacity stand there.

We don’t actually need a second tier on the stand, only to continue the current rake backwards towards the road, which should add 2,000 seats with, you’d hope, unrestricted views.

A second tier might make more sense though as the extra height above the offices could allow for an extra concourse for the extra fans.

My view has always been to actually take seats out (remove) from the Longside lower, and move the pitch over by perhaps 10-15 feet. The front row would then be higher and have a better view, and the Bob Lord could perhaps add a couple of rows to the from as well, building the dugouts into the stand.
...

An extra tier on the Bob Lord would not then have to be at such a steep rake to see the edge of the pitch as it will have moved over.

The other benefit would be aligning the goal with the centre of the Jimmy Mac.

Sh** man you’ Stolen my thunder! Great minds...

Claretforever wrote:The capacity of the old Brunshaw Road Stand was 9,500, it’s now around 3,000. The initial plan was for an 8,000 capacity stand there.

We don’t actually need a second tier on the stand, only to continue the current rake backwards towards the road, which should add 2,000 seats with, you’d hope, unrestricted views.

A second tier might make more sense though as the extra height above the offices could allow for an extra concourse for the extra fans.

My view has always been to actually take seats out (remove) from the Longside lower, and move the pitch over by perhaps 10-15 feet. The front row would then be higher and have a better view, and the Bob Lord could perhaps add a couple of rows to the from as well, building the dugouts into the stand.

An extra tier on the Bob Lord would not then have to be at such a steep rake to see the edge of the pitch as it will have moved over.

The other benefit would be aligning the goal with the centre of the Jimmy Mac.

You’d have to take out a a few rows of seats to actually make a difference to pitch view from the JHL.

All you’d do is take out 4/5 rows from one stand, move the pitch and add the seats that were lost to the bob lord at the cost of millions.

chekhov wrote:If I was to expand the Bob Lord myself I wouldn’t be putting a second tier on top.
Much better to extend the existing rake out the back of the stand as now is. The steepness of the stand would mean even at the back you would be still quite close to the pitch (assuming another 15 rows or so).
The majority of the work could be carried out while the existing is in use before a new roof is popped on the top in the close season.
Tell me, is this a brilliantly simple idea or am talking complete b*ll*cks?

Its a good idea and certainly a new roof is required as the existing one is too low and restricts crowd noise (and there is plenty contrary to some beliefs) and get rid of the stanchions.

A second tier - but a smaller than the present tier - with a 'Welcome to all Bury fans' sign.

We could sell Martin Dobson to pay for it

cricketfieldclarets wrote:Ours have been done up. Just not theirs.

Home and away changing rooms were redone last summer - both made bigger as well

Chester Perry wrote:Home and away changing rooms were redone last summer - both made bigger as well

I thought they had to be similar sizes under PL rules?