Before I cut to the chase I wish to make it very clear that I am not making a case here for or against a move to a new stadium. There are and have been some excellent points raised on this and other forums with regards to that, so I'll leave that debate to those more in the know.
My concern here is regarding what happens IF a stadium move gets the go-ahead, whether it be at Speke, on the car park across the road from Anfield, or anywhere else. Any new ground would have an expected life span of AT LEAST 80 years, and would of course be the home of our team, the place where we watch them play, somewhere that would form a major part of the spirit and future identity of our club. It goes without saying, therefore, that not only is the decision of whether to move of critical importance, but also the style and formula of any new stadium project. This is an issue that is clearly so much more important than the relatively minor arguments on who had a good game in the last match, or who should make way for our next signing, and yet, so far, I am worried that our relatively well-run club may fall into certain obvious pitfalls. Not that they have done yet, but if and when they do, it may be too late - they probably have some initial designs sorted out already.
The first fundamental point, which trancends all others, regards SUPPORTER CONSULTATION. All football clubs, including our own, need to do more to wise up to how their fans feel about all issues, but especially a decision such as this, from potential sites all the way through to the final naming (Sunderland Stadium of Light / The Walkers Bowl, anyone?). The club should do all they can to guage how the supporters feel about EVERY stage of the development process.
My second point regards CHARACTER and IDENTITY. Most away regulars will agree that trips to purpose-built stadiums such as at Derby, Southampton, Middlesbrough and the like are all very well from one point of view (they tend to be comfortable, have pretty good facilities and offer a decent view of thet action), but they're all so very...boring. They're all the same. There's very little unique about them that the fans can identify with and claim for their own. This does contrast with those stadiums developed over time - ironic really, given that a new stadium offers a chance to create that character from scratch. Would you want to have a bigger version of the Riverside as our home? I know I wouldn't.
I believe that, where possible, they should try to take as much of the LFC identity with them. By this, I don't just mean the obvious things like the Shankly Gates and the Hillsborough Memorial. Take the Kop, for example. The Kop nowadays does not mean the same bricks and mortar it used to be. To me it means a large, single-tier uninterupted cavern behind one goal where the most vociferous support chooe to watch the game from. This can be transferred to a new stadium quite easily. You could have something like the Millenium stadium, retain that horseshoe shape around three sides, and replace the end stand (the one which we were housed in for our three trophy wins) with a stand befitting the above description. You then have your clearly-defined home end (can anyone tell me the 'home end' at the Riverside? At Southampton I could have sworn the home end was right next to the away end - the Soton fans themselves didn't even seem to know!).
Third point - a little obvious really - but obviously NO ATHLETICS TRACK or equivealent. I'm surprised Man City fans seem to be OK with this - it ruins atmosphere and viewing (this is actually one thing that bothers me about new Wembley - it's a FOOTBALL STADIUM - why change the design for a one-off occasion that probably won't happen anyway?). If it can hold the odd rock concert for a bit of extra revenue then fine, but no other potential event should detract in any way from the football stadium concept.
Not only should we not have a running track, but any concave shape whatsoever should be avoided. Aaesthetically-pleasing the Stade de France may be, but the middle of each stand is about 10 metres from the pitch. The edge of every stand should run exactly in parrallel with the edge of the pitch, right next to the action.
My final point (for now!) - TRAFFIC and PARKING. Hard enough already with 45,000, so this needs looking at. Personally I'm all for lots of park-and-rides (so long as they don't have the mutilated buses they had at Southampton!). As a concept, it works well, is usually efficient and convenient, and the atmosphere and banter in the bus on the way the stadium is great fun. And no pesky scallies to pay to avoid a slashed tyre or two!
So that's my take on it. I've stuck to the bigger issues (rather than go into details like season ticket allocations, how much the beer should be, whether ther's a McNasty's etc). I've also left out the other hot issue of WHERE any new stadium should be. I'd be happy to see if other fans agree/disagree with me, whether there are matters they think I've left out and so-on.
I only hope that whatever happens, the club listens to the fans above all else.
