I'm aware that you can pay by direct debit. Last year I had the luxury of being able to put down £200 as a deposit, making the monthly payments of £20 quite manageable. This year I'll only have the minimum of £100, making the monthly payments £51.75 which is just not affordable for me, I was lucky enough to win tickets to the semi final, I wouldn't have been able to afford to go to both the semi and final otherwise, the final only cost me £76 If I didn't go to the final, I could've had a larger deposit and a lower direct debit but I didn't wanna miss the chance to be at the final
Totally agree with you on consultation and priority of e4 or similar seat to what has been taken, I do not want to be behind goal, been there donât like it, also been up in the gods donât like that either , The increase in cost was expected and although isnât nice it was not part of my decision to walk away, I just canât be bothered with the hassle anymore so the cost of 3 adult passes will go towards an alternative way of watching Hull City AFC
Unfortunately can't see this working out. It's such a poor area to put our vocal supporters. What should have happened is the away fans moved further towards the West Stand in blocks N1 - N4, leaving the East Stand as it is and extending home support round into blocks N5 - N7. This way we would be behind the goal and it would give us a 'singing area' twice as big without disturbing anyone. But we can't be upsetting the suits by having away supporters nearby, can we?
I think most would agree with this. There are bits of the lower west that could have been brought in if needed. Unfortunately, we're stuck with making best. Fans will make it work to some degree, but hopefully the club learn the lessons and get better advice in the future.
I didn't mean directly behind the goal, I meant a presence in the North Stand in general. It would be far better, having the already vocal East Stand merge into the North Stand and create a corner section twice the size. Would give scope for people in other areas who like to sing and shout to move into there.
What happens to passholders next season in N1 to N4 when we have a cup game with a team that wants its full quota, like SAFC did this season? Evicted again? You can be 100% sure this has not been thought about yet by the buffoons making this decision.
I was being facetious, but then again, I never thought anyone would be daft enough to break up the existing singing area.
When did AP say this dutch? Provide a link you keep conveniently ignoring this. From 2011 HULL City are considering changing seating arrangements at the KC Stadium in a bid to improve the atmosphere at home games. The Tigers are looking at the possibility of moving away fans out of the North Stand, allowing City fans to fill behind both goals. Head of football Adam Pearson believes this will give Tigers fans use of the best facilities, and help generate a better atmosphere. "In all new stadiums away fans are in a corner, with home fans at both ends, and there is always a better atmosphere," Pearson told the Mail. "If we were in an ideal world the stadium wouldn't be laid out as it is now. "It can't be right to have our supporters stuck in corners of the ground with the worst facilities." Pearson hopes it will be possible to move away fans into the north east corner of the stadium, freeing up the main area of the North Stand for Tigers fans. But he admits a number of security issues and systems will have to be looked at before a change can be made. "I have been told repeatedly that it is down to security reasons but hopefully we can look at it now from afresh and start taking all the obstacles out of the way," Pearson added. The move would not be an unprecedented as both Aston Villa and Blackburn Rovers have recently moved away fans from behind the goals to accommodate their own fans. It is also the way seating is arranged at the Arsenal, Manchester United and Chelsea. http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/HULL...arrangements/story-11977231-detail/story.html
Why post that ^^^^ in a question about the west stand? Oh, and it's been asked once and answered as far as I can see. (ok twice now) So I've no idea what the "keep ignoring" thing's about. Do you think they just looked at one option? How and why do you think they came up with a favoured one? ALL stands were suggested. Previously, ALL stands were rejected. More recently, the reasons why one of those stands was rejected have been resolved. The reasons the other stands were rejected could possibly also be resolved, particularly the engineering issues.
**** me it's Jeremy Paxman. As I asked, and you ignored, do you seriously believe they never considered it? If you do, did the reasons it was't done just mataerialise? I know you're desperate for an argument with me, but pick something else ffs. This one answers itself.
