Three clubs all in the same stadium dilemma

Tottenham

Tottenham’s plans to obtain and redevelop the Olympic stadium have obviously ended in failure. And many of the fans are not disappointed. That is not to say that all of them are, but a majority appeared to be in opposition to the idea of moving the home of their club: something they constantly like to remind Arsenal fans that they did when they upped sticks and left Woolwich for more northern pastures. Tottenham’s is an interesting situation. Their progress in recent years seems to merit a larger ground. They are one of the most improved teams in recent years but they run the risk of sliding back down if they cannot financially guarantee their place at the top.

They have arguably the best squad they have ever had but it will not last forever and when players do start to move on they need to ensure they are in a position to compete financially both in terms of transfer fees and wages. The obvious answer to this is to move stadiums; but where to? The ideal situation would be to redevelop White Hart Lane but for numerous reasons this has not taken off. What’s more: where would they play whilst this was being redeveloped? At the Emirates? Unlikely.

People have accused Spurs fans of being sentimental in their aversion to moving further east and whilst it does make sense financially it would truly be a shame for the club and its supporters. Football clubs are about more than just football. They are the pillars of local communities, they have come to define certain areas and supporters, with the exception of most Man Utd fans, have strong ties to the area in which the club exists. To abandon north London would be to abandon a large section of the fan base. Arsenal was fortunate enough to build Ashburton Grove next to Highbury. Not all clubs will be so lucky.

Liverpool

Liverpool chairmen Ian Ayre stated in July that due to numerous environmental, property acquisition and statutory issues the redevelopment of Anfield into a 60,000 seat stadium is extremely unlikely to happen. The redevelopment of their current ground would have cost the new owner s a considerably lower amount than the proposed move to Stanley Park. Liverpool fans will be reluctant to leave a ground that is one of the most famous throughout the world, both for its atmosphere and its history.

It is totally understandable that fans would have reserves about moving. However I think that Liverpool are in a relatively fortunate situation in that their ground is not as small as someone like Tottenham’s. the immediate future is not such a pressing issue and despite not winning a league title for over twenty years they have managed to maintain their competitive level. Moreover, they have an extremely large fan base abroad, which provides revenues that other teams definitely lack.

The decision to move grounds is never an easy one. Particularly for supporters who have been going to their beloved ground their entire lives. The prospect of moving to a new stadium after fifty years of going to your favourite ground is not enviable. However fans have to realise the sentimentality and history do not guarantee you a future at football’s top table. Every club must find its own solution, and every fan must be willing to compromise.

The article was written by Hamish Mackay for FootballFancast.com. Make sure to check out the latest news, blogs and podcasts at FFC – ed.

Get Football, Rewards and More with a brand new free app Qustodian Sports. Click the banner below to download for free! 

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

How does Qustodian Sports work?

[youtube bu14CjolAgE]

Follow us on twitter @live4Liverpool or like us on Facebook

Live4Liverpool is recruiting columnists. For further info contact the site editor at live4liverpool@snack-media.com