|
Brick Lane
David Biddulph wrote:
"David of Broadway" wrote in message ... David Biddulph wrote: "David of Broadway" wrote in message ... Paul Terry wrote: A physical link, such as an underground passageway, would have been possible during the many occasions when Hammersmith Broadway has been rebuilt over the years. I suspect that it never happened because the number of passengers requiring such an interchange is very small indeed. If there was never an underground passageway, then what "Subway to District and Piccadilly lines" is this (former) sign referring to? http://greenberger.no-ip.com/gallery...geViewsIndex=1 It could have been referring to one of the subways under the road? What do you mean by "one of the subways under the road" if not "an underground passageway"? I meant one from outside the station, rather than a direct link between the two stations. If there is/was a passageway under the road outside the station, how much more work could it be to connect it inside the station? -- David of Broadway New York, NY, USA |
Brick Lane
Tom Anderson wrote:
On Sat, 30 Dec 2006, Tristán White wrote: Not sure about Paddington one - I think it's possible to get from one to the other without going to street level isn't it? but you have to walk past some NR platforms or something.... been a while since I went down there. There's no behind-the-barriers interchange. You have to go through the mainline station. I have been told that it's also possible to get from the H&C platforms to the concourse without going through any barriers at all, but that's another story ... I'm not sure I should be disseminating such information, but it's been discussed here beforehand, and it's not going to be much help in fare evasion given that most other LU stations are gated, so I'll continue! The ticket barriers do not need to be traversed when exiting the H&C platforms - one can go up the stairs from the H&C to the overbridge then before the LU gates there's stairs down to some of the Paddington suburban platforms (13 & 14 IIRC). From there one can walk along the side of platform 12 (see the map - I think platform 13 is a bay platform at the end of the platform face of platform 12) out onto the concourse. I have seen FGW revenue staff at this end, but if you say you're headed for the Underground they wave you through. Note that I wasn't using this route for anything nefarious - I'm pretty sure it is the quickest route from the Bakerloo to the H&C, if you use the small Tube entrance/exit next to Cafe Nero and Taste. By the by it's also possible to avoid the gates and get to the mainline Intercity platforms (p2-5, or maybe p2-7) by using the overbridge, though I think FGW do cover these routes with revenue control staff some of the time as well. Just to be clear, I am not trying to encourage ticketless travel, but merely observing the chinks in the armour. Paddington station map: http://www.networkrail.co.uk/documen...Paddington.pdf |
Brick Lane
Tristán White wrote:
Something really should be done asap about Shepherds Bush. How confusing is it to have two completely unconnected stations with exactly the same name. If you think thats confusing, go to Chicago. There are 5 separate stations called "Western", 3 of which are on the same line! And there are plenty of other examples on the same network. See http://www.chicago-l.org/maps/route/...03elevated.jpg Great system though. regards HN28 |
Brick Lane
On Sat, 30 Dec 2006 19:38:15 +0000, Paul Terry
wrote: Other confusing ones include Hammersmith - two separate stations opposite one another. But at least the two exits are close to one another, but having Hammersmith North and Hammersmith South (or wherever they're facing) would be simpler. North Hammersmith is miles away (the area around Hammersmith Hospital, well north of Shepherds Bush) so this would be potentially very confusing. "Hammersmith Grove" and "Hammersmith Central" would probably be the more obvious names, if the two really needed distinguishing. But since they are right opposite each other (well once you come out of the shopping centre), I don't think they need separate names. |
Brick Lane
James Farrar wrote in
: On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 12:31:15 +0000, Edward Cowling London UK wrote: In message 5, Tristán White writes What do you think of the petition by Brick Lane residents and shop and restaurant owners to get Aldgate East renamed "Brick Lane" to boost the area. Having lost Shoreditch station, they're getting a bit of a rum deal at the moment. Do they have much of a hope? I'd have said Aldgate East being right on top of Brick Lane should be the one renamed (if any). Well they did rename Gillespie Road to please a load of footy fans, Paid for, IIRC, by Arsenal Football Club. so I reckon renaming Aldgate East to Brick Lane is ok, Well, if the businesses petitioning want to pay the costs involved... I wonder whether the fact that Upton Park FC (1866) influenced the name decision for Upton Park tube station (1877). Upton Park FC was one of the first football sides in the country, took part in the very first FA Cup (1871) and actually represented Great Britain in the football for the 1900 Olympic games (and won Gold, beating France 4-0). (NB West Ham's ground is really called the Boleyn, is called Upton Park *because* of its proximity to the station, and only played where they play now from 1904 onwards. But Upton Park FC was a very well known team back in the days before Upton Park station was thought of.... much better known than the actual "park" itself!! So perhaps it influenced in the choice of name for the station). |
Brick Lane
On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 12:49:00 +0000, Tom Anderson
wrote: On Sat, 30 Dec 2006, Tristán White wrote: Not sure about Paddington one - I think it's possible to get from one to the other without going to street level isn't it? but you have to walk past some NR platforms or something.... been a while since I went down there. There's no behind-the-barriers interchange. You have to go through the mainline station. I have been told that it's also possible to get from the H&C platforms to the concourse without going through any barriers at all, but that's another story ... I haven't used Paddington for a while but yes I'm pretty sure it used to be possible to go across to the Ealing Broadway local platform, from which you could walk all the way along some lesser used main line platform and end up at the business end of the main station (near the entrance to the Bakerloo station). |
Brick Lane
In article , james.s
(James Farrar) wrote: On 31 Dec 2006 04:38:54 -0800, wrote: If we can't have two Shepherd's Bush stations where does that leave Edgware Road, Hammersmith and Paddington? Closer to each other. Paddington's "two stations" are at least in the same physical building (albeit a very big one!) I think Paddington has three LU stations. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
Brick Lane
John Rowland wrote:
Actually, rename Whitechapel to Whitechapel Hospital, and rename the hospital to that as well. Rename? What's wrong with "The Royal London"? Call the tube station "Royal London Hospital". |
Brick Lane
Tom Anderson wrote:
Don't people now refer to the area around Whitechapel tube as Whitechapel, though? Ah Beckification - the reconceptualisation of London's geography based on the tube map. |
Brick Lane
In article , david.of
(David of Broadway) wrote: David Biddulph wrote: "David of Broadway" wrote in message ... David Biddulph wrote: "David of Broadway" wrote in message ... Paul Terry wrote: A physical link, such as an underground passageway, would have been possible during the many occasions when Hammersmith Broadway has been rebuilt over the years. I suspect that it never happened because the number of passengers requiring such an interchange is very small indeed. If there was never an underground passageway, then what "Subway to District and Piccadilly lines" is this (former) sign referring to? http://greenberger.no-ip.com/gallery...Id=15350&g2_im ageViewsIndex=1 It could have been referring to one of the subways under the road? What do you mean by "one of the subways under the road" if not "an underground passageway"? I meant one from outside the station, rather than a direct link between the two stations. If there is/was a passageway under the road outside the station, how much more work could it be to connect it inside the station? Quite a lot as I remember the subway. Neither end was that near either station (especially the Met/H&C one) and the levels were all wrong too, I suspect. Why something wasn't included with the Hammersmith (District and Piccadilly) station redevelopment is beyond me, however. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
Brick Lane
In message , James Farrar
writes Well, if the businesses petitioning want to pay the costs involved... Didn't LT agree to the renaming of Goodge Street as "Fitzrovia" some years ago, provided local businesses paid the costs incurred? In any case, nothing ever came of it, did it? -- Ian Jelf, MITG Birmingham, UK Registered Blue Badge Tourist Guide for London and the Heart of England http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk |
Brick Lane
Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article , david.of (David of Broadway) wrote: David Biddulph wrote: "David of Broadway" wrote in message ... David Biddulph wrote: "David of Broadway" wrote in message ... Paul Terry wrote: A physical link, such as an underground passageway, would have been possible during the many occasions when Hammersmith Broadway has been rebuilt over the years. I suspect that it never happened because the number of passengers requiring such an interchange is very small indeed. If there was never an underground passageway, then what "Subway to District and Piccadilly lines" is this (former) sign referring to? http://greenberger.no-ip.com/gallery...Id=15350&g2_im ageViewsIndex=1 It could have been referring to one of the subways under the road? What do you mean by "one of the subways under the road" if not "an underground passageway"? I meant one from outside the station, rather than a direct link between the two stations. If there is/was a passageway under the road outside the station, how much more work could it be to connect it inside the station? Quite a lot as I remember the subway. Neither end was that near either station (especially the Met/H&C one) and the levels were all wrong too, I suspect. Why something wasn't included with the Hammersmith (District and Piccadilly) station redevelopment is beyond me, however. Since the D & P platforms are islands, you would need any interchange subway to go up or down from them first. Unless you put four escalators in the subway, which I doubt could have been justified, such a subway would not be more convenient than the present street-level crossing which has the advantage that it's at platform level for the H&C station. -- Richard J. (to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address) |
Brick Lane
In message , David of Broadway
writes If there is/was a passageway under the road outside the station, how much more work could it be to connect it inside the station? An awful lot. The north end emerged in the street not particularly close to the H&C station. But the real problem would have been on the south side - projecting the subway any further south would have meant crossing the District and Piccadilly lines on the level (!) especially to reach the westbound platforms. Since the H&C is a surface level station, and the ticket barriers of the D&P station are also at surface level, a surface-level crossing makes sense - and I suspect that the solution of a pedestrian crossing also appealed as a "traffic calming" measure (the subway was never LU property, so I doubt they had much say in the matter). -- Paul Terry |
Brick Lane
wrote:
They've already had one half-hearted attempt at this about 15 years ago when Shepherd's Bush(C) was going to become Shepherd's Bush Green. As part of this plan new enamel line diagrams at Mile End WB carried the new name, and indeed still do! I'm not sure if it ever appeared/appears anywhere else and it certainly never got as far as Shepherd's Bush(C) station itself. Chancery Lane (at least WB) has Shepherd's Bush Green marked on it. If we can't have two Shepherd's Bush stations where does that leave Edgware Road, Hammersmith and Paddington? Well - there will be two S Bush stations - Shepherd's Bush, and Shepherd's Bush Market. The West London Line and Central Line stations are so close to each other that it would be counter-productive to give them separate names. In fact, the platforms on each line are probably closer together than those in many Zone 1 in-station interchanges. Hammersmith is slightly less obvious but the stations are still so close together, and there are directions from each to the other. It would be good to add some (more prominent) publicity advising customers that Oyster PAYG will not charge extra for the interchange. The Paddingtons are really both part of the same complex - just at opposite ends of it. The new service pattern on the Circle and H&C lines will make using Paddington much easier, with passengers to/from the northern Circle almost exclusively using the Bishop's Road (H&C) platforms, and passengers to/from the western Circle and beyond using the Praed Street (C/D) platforms. I'm not sure there's much of a problem at Edgware Road. They're just on opposite sides of the flyover, and nobody will be interchanging between them as Paddington and Baker Street are more suitable (and marked as such on the Tube map). As for confusion for people arranging to meet outside a station, this can occur even at a single site where there are multiple exits (e.g. Victoria). That implies that renaming nearby stations with the same name, to stations with different names, won't reap many benefits. Arranging to meet people at large locations in London is inherently tricky and is just a fact of big-city life, I think! -- Dave Arquati www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London |
Brick Lane
On Sat, 30 Dec 2006 12:52:21 GMT, "Richard J."
wrote: Christian Hansen wrote: On Sat, 30 Dec 2006 03:10:58 -0000, "Tim Roll-Pickering" wrote: Tristán White wrote: What do you think of the petition by Brick Lane residents and shop and restaurant owners to get Aldgate East renamed "Brick Lane" to boost the area. Having lost Shoreditch station, they're getting a bit of a rum deal at the moment. I've always been rather sceptical of the idea that Shoreditch is/was the best station for Brick Lane. Personally I've always found Aldgate East to be the most useful. I guess if you were travelling from south of Whitechapel and Shoreditch was open then it might be useful, but Aldgate East comes out at a better place for walking Brick Lane properly. Depends on where you're going on Brick Lane. I often go to the "Beigel" bakeries at the other end of Brick Lane, and it's a 10 minute walk from Aldgate East to the bakeries. So the new Shoreditch High Street station when it opens would be equally if not more convenient than Aldgate East for the north end of Brick Lane. I don't see how the closure of a station that was generally open only in peak hours would have a major impact on the restaurants. Perhaps they should concentrate on the quality of the food rather than aggressively harrassing pedestrians on Brick Lane or organising ill-founded petitions. Most of the restaurants are in the middle of Brick Lane, before the brewery. After that there are a few coffee shops, the two "beigel" shops, and a couple of boutiques. Shoreditch High Street will probably be OK for the restaurants, but I'm not averse to a renaming of Aldgate East either. The closing of Shoreditch has really screwed up my rye bread consumption. That's what I go to the "beigel" shops to buy, and it used to be fairly easy when Shoreditch was around; I just took the train shortly after they opened Shoreditch and then took the #35 bus home. Now I have to plan my visits and usually (stupidly) take the #8 bus from Victoria because it normally turns up in front of my place of work as I'm leaving. That takes about an hour, whereas if I could resist its blandishments and take the Circle Line from Victoria to Liverpool Street I could either walk or take the #8 from there. -- Chris Hansen | chrishansenhome at btinternet dot com www.christianphansen.com or chrishansenhome.livejournal.com |
Brick Lane
On Sat, 30 Dec 2006 14:07:45 +0000, asdf wrote:
On Sat, 30 Dec 2006 06:18:00 -0000, John Rowland wrote: What do you think of the petition by Brick Lane residents and shop and restaurant owners to get Aldgate East renamed "Brick Lane" to boost the area. I hope they don't get their way. The station isn't in Brick lane, or very near it. It would also invite a flurry of other requests to rename stations for commercial purposes, and would leave LU with no excuse to deny those requests. Look forward to Waterloo being renamed London Eye, etc. Does the name of South Kensington get changed to Museum Central or Royal Albert Hall? Perhaps they could hold auctions - highest bidder gets to name their station. This already happens in the US, I believe. I think it's unlikely that there would be any neighbourhood pressure to rename Waterloo Station to London Eye Station. There might be some pressure from the museums to rename South Kensington to something more museum-like, I suppose. However, station name changes are not unknown here so the debate around this is healthy. After all, the name of the station should be descriptive of the area. If the area changes the name of the station should be up-for-grabs. I think that we're talking "Brick Lane" as a neighbourhood rather than strictly as a street. -- Chris Hansen | chrishansenhome at btinternet dot com www.christianphansen.com or chrishansenhome.livejournal.co |
Brick Lane
Christian Hansen wrote:
On Sat, 30 Dec 2006 14:07:45 +0000, asdf wrote: On Sat, 30 Dec 2006 06:18:00 -0000, John Rowland wrote: What do you think of the petition by Brick Lane residents and shop and restaurant owners to get Aldgate East renamed "Brick Lane" to boost the area. I hope they don't get their way. The station isn't in Brick lane, or very near it. It would also invite a flurry of other requests to rename stations for commercial purposes, and would leave LU with no excuse to deny those requests. Look forward to Waterloo being renamed London Eye, etc. Does the name of South Kensington get changed to Museum Central or Royal Albert Hall? Perhaps they could hold auctions - highest bidder gets to name their station. This already happens in the US, I believe. I think it's unlikely that there would be any neighbourhood pressure to rename Waterloo Station to London Eye Station. There might be some pressure from the museums to rename South Kensington to something more museum-like, I suppose. However, station name changes are not unknown here so the debate around this is healthy. After all, the name of the station should be descriptive of the area. If the area changes the name of the station should be up-for-grabs. I think that we're talking "Brick Lane" as a neighbourhood rather than strictly as a street. OK, but what would be achieved by changing the name of Aldgate East? The profits of second-rate restaurants don't come high on my priorities. -- Richard J. (to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address) |
Brick Lane
On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 22:58:01 GMT, "Richard J."
wrote: Christian Hansen wrote: I think that we're talking "Brick Lane" as a neighbourhood rather than strictly as a street. OK, but what would be achieved by changing the name of Aldgate East? The profits of second-rate restaurants don't come high on my priorities. That's what the debate will be about. "Brick Lane" has become the name synonymous with the area surrounding and extending north from the current station. It's true that the station itself does not belong to the neighbourhood; it belongs to LUL and, through them, us the users. But the name of the station is nondescript: it's just saying that it's east of Aldgate (which is true) but nothing more. As Underground maps are reprinted regularly (presumably all the maps have just been reprinted to indicate the zone changes around Hainault) some coordination could make a name change a bit less onerous financially. Has anyone quantified the expense associated with changing the name of Aldgate East? -- Chris Hansen | chrishansenhome at btinternet dot com www.christianphansen.com or chrishansenhome.livejournal.co |
Brick Lane
On Sun, 31 Dec 2006, Mizter T wrote:
Tom Anderson wrote: On Sat, 30 Dec 2006, Tristán White wrote: Not sure about Paddington one - I think it's possible to get from one to the other without going to street level isn't it? but you have to walk past some NR platforms or something.... been a while since I went down there. There's no behind-the-barriers interchange. You have to go through the mainline station. I have been told that it's also possible to get from the H&C platforms to the concourse without going through any barriers at all, but that's another story ... I'm not sure I should be disseminating such information, but it's been discussed here beforehand, and it's not going to be much help in fare evasion given that most other LU stations are gated, so I'll continue! I live in Finsbury Park. Luckily, i am an honest man! The ticket barriers do not need to be traversed when exiting the H&C platforms - one can go up the stairs from the H&C to the overbridge then before the LU gates there's stairs down to some of the Paddington suburban platforms (13 & 14 IIRC). From there one can walk along the side of platform 12 (see the map - I think platform 13 is a bay platform at the end of the platform face of platform 12) out onto the concourse. That's what i thought, although i've never actually tried it myself. tom -- Like Kurosawa i make mad films; okay, i don't make films, but if i did they'd have a samurai. |
Brick Lane
On Sun, 31 Dec 2006, Dave Arquati wrote:
wrote: As for confusion for people arranging to meet outside a station, this can occur even at a single site where there are multiple exits (e.g. Victoria). That implies that renaming nearby stations with the same name, to stations with different names, won't reap many benefits. Arranging to meet people at large locations in London is inherently tricky and is just a fact of big-city life, I think! Ooh, one of my pet peeves: some stations have numbered exits, and some don't. If they were all numbered, you could always just arrange to meet at exit 1, and it would be unambiguous. tom -- Like Kurosawa i make mad films; okay, i don't make films, but if i did they'd have a samurai. |
Brick Lane
On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 09:39:10 -0600, "Tristán White"
wrote: (NB West Ham's ground is really called the Boleyn, Yeah, and Arsenal's old ground was really called "Arsenal Stadium". |
Brick Lane
On Sun, 31 Dec 2006, John Rowland wrote:
James Farrar wrote: On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 12:40:38 +0000, Tom Anderson wrote: On Sat, 30 Dec 2006, John Rowland wrote: Mizter T wrote: John Rowland wrote: Aldgate East station is in Whitechapel High Street. It should probably be called Whitechapel, and Whitechapel should be called something else! Aldgate East is in the vicinity of Aldgate, so I don't really buy that argument. No, it's in the vicinity of Whitechapel, as evidenced by the fact that it's on Whitechapel High Street. Don't people now refer to the area around Whitechapel tube as Whitechapel, though? Yup, IME. "Directions and site maps are available for The Royal London Hospital in Whitechapel". I don't think anyone is disputing that Whitechapel Station and the RL Hospital are in Whitechapel. But Aldgate East is (as I may have already mentioned) in Whitechapel High Street, and if you're going to have a station called Whitechapel, Aldgate East should be the one. Only if Whitechapel High Street is the centre of Whitechapel. Clearly, it once was - is it now? Actually, rename Whitechapel to Whitechapel Hospital, and rename the hospital to that as well. I submit that renaming the station to Whitechapel Road might be simpler. Then after 10 years or so you could rename Aldgate East to Whitechapel, or Whitechapel High Street. I'd suggest Whitechapel High Street, to reduce the change that people will confuse it with the old Whitechapel. Better yet - how about Commercial Street? tom -- Like Kurosawa i make mad films; okay, i don't make films, but if i did they'd have a samurai. |
Brick Lane
On Sun, 31 Dec 2006, Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article , james.s (James Farrar) wrote: On 31 Dec 2006 04:38:54 -0800, wrote: If we can't have two Shepherd's Bush stations where does that leave Edgware Road, Hammersmith and Paddington? Paddington's "two stations" are at least in the same physical building (albeit a very big one!) I think Paddington has three LU stations. Okay, i don't get this one. The H&C is a separate station from the rest, i'd agree, but surely the Bakerloo and Circle platforms are part of one station? Or do you mean something else? tom -- Like Kurosawa i make mad films; okay, i don't make films, but if i did they'd have a samurai. |
Brick Lane
Tom Anderson wrote:
On Sun, 31 Dec 2006, Dave Arquati wrote: Ooh, one of my pet peeves: some stations have numbered exits, and some don't. If they were all numbered, you could always just arrange to meet at exit 1, and it would be unambiguous. Interesting. I think you should send that to LU complaints department. |
Brick Lane
On Mon, 1 Jan 2007, John Rowland wrote:
Tom Anderson wrote: On Sun, 31 Dec 2006, Dave Arquati wrote: Ooh, one of my pet peeves: some stations have numbered exits, and some don't. If they were all numbered, you could always just arrange to meet at exit 1, and it would be unambiguous. Interesting. I think you should send that to LU complaints department. Might do. More of a suggestion than a complaint, though! tom -- Civis Britannicus sum. |
Brick Lane
In article , twic@urchin
earth.li (Tom Anderson) wrote: On Sun, 31 Dec 2006, Colin Rosenstiel wrote: I think Paddington has three LU stations. Okay, i don't get this one. The H&C is a separate station from the rest, i'd agree, but surely the Bakerloo and Circle platforms are part of one station? Or do you mean something else? I thought they had separate station buildings. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
Brick Lane
Tom Anderson wrote:
On Mon, 1 Jan 2007, John Rowland wrote: Tom Anderson wrote: On Sun, 31 Dec 2006, Dave Arquati wrote: Ooh, one of my pet peeves: some stations have numbered exits, and some don't. If they were all numbered, you could always just arrange to meet at exit 1, and it would be unambiguous. Interesting. I think you should send that to LU complaints department. Might do. More of a suggestion than a complaint, though! I would say do it anyway! -- Dave Arquati www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London |
Brick Lane
|
Brick Lane
Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article , james.s (James Farrar) wrote: On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 09:39:10 -0600, "Tristán White" wrote: (NB West Ham's ground is really called the Boleyn, Yeah, and Arsenal's old ground was really called "Arsenal Stadium". And the new one is really called Ashburton Grove. And some of us Gooners call it just that. |
Brick Lane
In article 5, Tristán
White writes What do you think of the petition by Brick Lane residents and shop and restaurant owners to get Aldgate East renamed "Brick Lane" to boost the area. Having lost Shoreditch station, they're getting a bit of a rum deal at the moment. Do they have much of a hope? Didn't residents of West Hampstead once petition to have Kilburn station renamed 'Mapesbury'? I don't see why Brick Lane residents would have better luck. -- congokid Eating out in London? Read my tips... http://congokid.com |
Brick Lane
On Tue, 2 Jan 2007 11:28 +0000 (GMT Standard Time),
(Colin Rosenstiel) wrote: In article , james.s (James Farrar) wrote: On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 09:39:10 -0600, "Tristán White" wrote: (NB West Ham's ground is really called the Boleyn, Yeah, and Arsenal's old ground was really called "Arsenal Stadium". And the new one is really called Ashburton Grove. Absolutely. |
Brick Lane
In article .com,
(Mizter T) wrote: Colin Rosenstiel wrote: In article , james.s (James Farrar) wrote: On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 09:39:10 -0600, "Tristán White" wrote: Yeah, and Arsenal's old ground was really called "Arsenal Stadium". And the new one is really called Ashburton Grove. And some of us Gooners call it just that. Indeed. My daughter told me. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
Brick Lane
Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article .com, (Mizter T) wrote: Colin Rosenstiel wrote: In article , james.s (James Farrar) wrote: On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 09:39:10 -0600, "Tristán White" wrote: Yeah, and Arsenal's old ground was really called "Arsenal Stadium". And the new one is really called Ashburton Grove. And some of us Gooners call it just that. Indeed. My daughter told me. One of the club fanzines, the "Gooner", of course calls the stadium Ashburton Grove, and also amusingly refers to the stadium's sponsored moniker by way of "the E word", as if it were a vulgar oath. Which in a way it is. (One could argue it's possibly a little less offensively in-your-face than Bolton's 'Reebok stadium'. Though as I'm not an apologist for all this mallarkey it won't be me taking that argument any further!). The actual Ashburton Grove was a road that has now more or less vanished under the development. I say was as whilst one can still walk the course of the road, it's not a road anymore but a wide pedestrian thoroughfare next to the western side of the stadium, at a higher level than the former road. I'm almost certain there's no longer any signage of the road's name and I guess it's no longer classified as a highway anymore either. The old street layout can still be seen on the streetmap.co.uk mapping: http://tinyurl.com/yg2u7s |
Brick Lane
On 2 Jan 2007 06:38:31 -0800, "Mizter T" wrote:
Colin Rosenstiel wrote: In article .com, (Mizter T) wrote: Colin Rosenstiel wrote: In article , james.s (James Farrar) wrote: On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 09:39:10 -0600, "Tristán White" wrote: Yeah, and Arsenal's old ground was really called "Arsenal Stadium". And the new one is really called Ashburton Grove. And some of us Gooners call it just that. Indeed. My daughter told me. One of the club fanzines, the "Gooner", of course calls the stadium Ashburton Grove, and also amusingly refers to the stadium's sponsored moniker by way of "the E word", as if it were a vulgar oath. Which in a way it is. (One could argue it's possibly a little less offensively in-your-face than Bolton's 'Reebok stadium'. Though as I'm not an apologist for all this mallarkey it won't be me taking that argument any further!). The difference is, IIRC, the Reebok was always going to be called that. Ashburton Grove was developed under that name until the Sheikh came along waving a chequebook. |
Brick Lane
James Farrar wrote:
On 2 Jan 2007 06:38:31 -0800, "Mizter T" wrote: Colin Rosenstiel wrote: In article .com, (Mizter T) wrote: Colin Rosenstiel wrote: In article , james.s (James Farrar) wrote: On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 09:39:10 -0600, "Tristán White" wrote: Yeah, and Arsenal's old ground was really called "Arsenal Stadium". And the new one is really called Ashburton Grove. And some of us Gooners call it just that. Indeed. My daughter told me. One of the club fanzines, the "Gooner", of course calls the stadium Ashburton Grove, and also amusingly refers to the stadium's sponsored moniker by way of "the E word", as if it were a vulgar oath. Which in a way it is. (One could argue it's possibly a little less offensively in-your-face than Bolton's 'Reebok stadium'. Though as I'm not an apologist for all this mallarkey it won't be me taking that argument any further!). The difference is, IIRC, the Reebok was always going to be called that. Ashburton Grove was developed under that name until the Sheikh came along waving a chequebook. As I said, I don't want to be an apologist for it, but I do have some understanding of why the Arsenal board went for it. The whole new stadium was a very expensive endeavour, in part because of a great number of tricky planning issues that were far more complex than at first envisaged. Obviously there's lots of money floating around at Arsenal, but nonetheless I've read much that says the club had quite a tricky balancing act to perform in financing the new stadium whilst still running a Premiership club. The stadium naming rights thus provided some financial relief. I am glad the new stadium is still in still in the same neighbourhood. It's become increasingly clear that in the 90's the club gave very serious consideration to building a new ground off the M25 near St. Albans during the 90's - thankfully that didn't happen. I'm also glad that the club managed to avoid a Leeds United style financial catastrophe when it came to paying for the new stadium. Nonetheless I still don't welcome Arsenal's part in helping to create a precedent that new stadiums will receive sponsored names, but I suspect that's now the way things are going. I'm not quite sure why everyone doesn't just call it Ashburton Grove though? Perhaps the broadcasters, during their match coverage at least, are compelled to call each ground by their official names, but I don't see why the papers do so, nor why anyone else should. |
Brick Lane
Mizter T wrote:
I am glad the new stadium is still in still in the same neighbourhood. It's become increasingly clear that in the 90's the club gave very serious consideration to building a new ground off the M25 near St. Albans during the 90's - thankfully that didn't happen. I'm also glad that the club managed to avoid a Leeds United style financial catastrophe when it came to paying for the new stadium. Nonetheless I still don't welcome Arsenal's part in helping to create a precedent that new stadiums will receive sponsored names, but I suspect that's now the way things are going. I'm not quite sure why everyone doesn't just call it Ashburton Grove though? Perhaps the broadcasters, during their match coverage at least, are compelled to call each ground by their official names, but I don't see why the papers do so, nor why anyone else should. Why do you have such a grudge against the people who part paid for the new stadium? |
Brick Lane
|
Brick Lane
On Mon, 1 Jan 2007, Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article , twic@urchin earth.li (Tom Anderson) wrote: On Sun, 31 Dec 2006, Colin Rosenstiel wrote: I think Paddington has three LU stations. Okay, i don't get this one. The H&C is a separate station from the rest, i'd agree, but surely the Bakerloo and Circle platforms are part of one station? Or do you mean something else? I thought they had separate station buildings. Perhaps, but there's certainly a tunnel between them! tom -- Hit to death in the future head |
Brick Lane
On Tue, 2 Jan 2007, Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article , james.s (James Farrar) wrote: On Sun, 31 Dec 2006 09:39:10 -0600, "Tristán White" wrote: (NB West Ham's ground is really called the Boleyn, Yeah, and Arsenal's old ground was really called "Arsenal Stadium". And the new one is really called Ashburton Grove. Quite fitting, given what was there before. ;) tom -- Hit to death in the future head |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 01:26 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk