Bunny, the nature of the old Den is what fuelled the successes Millwall had, since moving the team has not been as successful, in that sense the old Den (with a bigger capacity to boot) was indeed Millwalls biggest asset, would you know any Millwall fans who agree with that? As for intimidation, laughingly one of the gates greeting away fans at the old Den had 'enter at your peril' graffitied on it, but it was more the poor accomodation and sightlines that were intimidating, not anything else inside the stadium that happened to away fans. However the experience of away fans outside both stadiums are a different matter, and hardly ever a relaxed one, let alone enjoyable...so Millwall lose money because a lot of away fans will spend their money going to a different away game rather than to Millwall simply because it is more appealing. It would be hard to make the new stadium 'less intimidating' inside, because it is rather soulless at times (compared to the old Den), and when I go it is more of a 'get in, see the game (get beat in our case), and get home', no nothing of an experience really. The Millwall in the old ground had character, and history, now going to the ground is a bit like stumbling on Jeremy Kyle as you surf channels, basic freedom suggests it should be allowed, but you don't want to linger.
Millwall are a very long way behind most clubs when it comes to attracting this new type of fan.
If you look back to say 1991 and the last era of football before the Premier League brand took over. Millwall avaeraged 10,841 in the Old Second Division (Championship), our divisional rivals were the likes of Leicester City (averaged 11,546), Portsmouth (9,689), Brighton (8,386), Ipswich Town (11,772) and Charlton (6,548 - not at The Valley). se clubs have come since then in terms of attracting women, kids, new middle class fans, lasped fans from the bad old days of the 80s. And look at Millwall - we've stood still. We still get around 10-12,000, whereas the others have added another 10,000 onto their gates.
Agree largely with your point. But, the choice of 1991 is a touch selective and misrepresents Millwall's potential compared to the other clubs, as it follows on from the era of the most successful (in league terms) Millwall team ever.
By the way, the grenade was thrown on at Brentford.
Regarding moving back to the Island, when was this considered?
Fair play to them, I'm guessing that if the corners get filled in, increacing the capacity to 24000 they will need to use the corners for segregation purposes (well at least the two at the away end) that then would give them a capacity of around 22000 and they could then increase the away support to around 4000, making it a bit easier to get a ticket.
So they put in 2000 seats in the away end corners only to use the corners for segregation - sounds a bit of a waste of time and money to me?
Bet that would happen though, police would insist on it especially against those with large away followings.
Bunny, the nature of the old Den is what fuelled the successes Millwall had, since moving the team has not been as successful, in that sense the old Den (with a bigger capacity to boot) was indeed Millwalls biggest asset, would you know any Millwall fans who agree with that? As for intimidation, laughingly one of the gates greeting away fans at the old Den had 'enter at your peril' graffitied on it, but it was more the poor accomodation and sightlines that were intimidating, not anything else inside the stadium that happened to away fans. However the experience of away fans outside both stadiums are a different matter, and hardly ever a relaxed one, let alone enjoyable...so Millwall lose money because a lot of away fans will spend their money going to a different away game rather than to Millwall simply because it is more appealing. It would be hard to make the new stadium 'less intimidating' inside, because it is rather soulless at times (compared to the old Den), and when I go it is more of a 'get in, see the game (get beat in our case), and get home', no nothing of an experience really. The Millwall in the old ground had character, and history, now going to the ground is a bit like stumbling on Jeremy Kyle as you surf channels, basic freedom suggests it should be allowed, but you don't want to linger.
In the 83 years we spent at The Den we achieved very little...noticeable exceptions being a 59 game unbeaten run, some giant killings and one Championship winning season followed by a decent top flight debut.
We were a much brighter footballing outpost when based on the Island in fact...indeed, so bright we earnt the nickname the 'lions of the south'.
Like I said and highlighted - since moving we've had a lot of success (relevant to us).
I agree to a certain extent about the Old Den being intimidating by its very nature alone - there is a great picture of it empty, with no game on, on a winters night...and it looks forbidding. However, I think the likes of Leeds, West Ham, Chelsea, Cardiff City, Bristol City et al would argue against 'nothing inside that happened to away fans' being intimidating during it's 70s and 80s heyday.
My cousin is a Charlton fan and admits that you got two very different Millwalls - depending on if it was Norwich, Reading or Charlton visiting..compared if it was West Ham, Leeds or Cardiff.
As for the new place- I quite like it, and don't think it's souless at all. Obviously it will never touch Cold Blow Lane for character, but we've had some great games down there now and I can tell you that games against Leeds and nights against Wolves and Huddersfield have lived up to anything the Old Den produced. In fact the night time FA Cup match v Arsenal was louder and more partisan than any game v West Ham at the old place.
I sometimes write articles for The Lion Roars and do a bit on away fans and other club's fanzines...and can tell you that I've read and met plenty of away fans that have seen coming to Zampa Road as a proper football experience still - again, these are more likely to be Forest, Leeds, Cardiff, Bristol City fans...as opposed to Yeovil fans for example...when the new place can, just like the old place, be a bit flat.
It's all about perspective though - in modern football terms the Den is a lot less souless an experience than the likes of Reading, Southampton, Leicester etc etc even it isn't as charismatic as Cold Blow Lane, the 60s Valley, the old Anfield or Roker Park etc.
Millwall are a very long way behind most clubs when it comes to attracting this new type of fan.
If you look back to say 1991 and the last era of football before the Premier League brand took over. Millwall avaeraged 10,841 in the Old Second Division (Championship), our divisional rivals were the likes of Leicester City (averaged 11,546), Portsmouth (9,689), Brighton (8,386), Ipswich Town (11,772) and Charlton (6,548 - not at The Valley). se clubs have come since then in terms of attracting women, kids, new middle class fans, lasped fans from the bad old days of the 80s. And look at Millwall - we've stood still. We still get around 10-12,000, whereas the others have added another 10,000 onto their gates.
Agree largely with your point. But, the choice of 1991 is a touch selective and misrepresents Millwall's potential compared to the other clubs, as it follows on from the era of the most successful (in league terms) Millwall team ever.
By the way, the grenade was thrown on at Brentford.
Regarding moving back to the Island, when was this considered?
Ah, yes...Brentford...that was it.
When the club were looking to move we looked at potential in Greenwich and the Island, so around 1990.
Take your point about 1991 re gates...however, Millwall's average gate since 1920 is 12,500. So, 10,841 isn't that selective in the grand scheme of things...I think the 80s are a skewed time for judging gates- given the problems in football and society at the time. .
The club has average circa 11,000 since the formation of the Premier League. In that time the likes of Leicester, Derby and Charlton have added thousands on to their average gates- through stadium moves/success/and tapping into the new football fan market. We've stood pretty much totally still.
Millwalls USP attracts a regular hardcore of cocks.
For big games they can attract a far greater amount of floating cocks.
As the proportion of cocks in the South East appears to be expanding at an alarming rate, Millwall have the potential to fill their boots.
Millwall won't change, ever. They know their market and know where their bread is best buttered.
Welcome to the forum Bunny, me ol cock spanna
This is a very warped view.
By this logic our best period for crowds should have been the late 70s and 80s.
However, that was our worst ever period for crowds.
Our best was the 1930s to the early 1960s.
And that is the real reason we survive - in the 1930s, 50s and early 60s we attracted 30-50,000 to games. The trouble actually drove a lot of people away. Yet thankfully with such a formally big fan base to draw the club have managed to hang on to a floating support of around 20,000 people - the descendants of some of those fans.
We survive on a very loyal local hardcore and those descendants out in south London suburbia and Kent turning ip for big games.
If Millwall know how their bread is buttered why do they spend a disportionately large amount of money on things like grass line (a text service for fans to report anti-social behaviour) and on prosecuting fans for sometimes minor things, as well as an expensive (£1m to install) and inhibitive membership card scheme (gates slashed from an average of 14,000 to 8,500 overnight)? As well as happily having 1,000 people on a banning list.
I know many, many more Millwall fans that moan about these 'cocks' holding us back than people saying it's one of the reasons they go. Our crowds having always halved after major incidences, never increased.
Unless you're equating people liking singing no-one likes us and dishing out stick to oppo players as all cocks? Then yes, we are all cocks...and hopefully will never change!
This is why, after years of lurking I finally joined up...the heading to this thread is totally misleading, and you have the misconception that this is a scheme dreamt up by Millwall football club.
It just so happens that this is happening on our doorstep. It's got the go ahead and the only involvement the club has had is to negoiate on things like using the sports facilities and seeing a revamp of the ground's (no doubt to encourage buyers) exterior.
It has been at the planning stage for the best part of a decade. However, the footprint for the new station is now complete (you can take pictures for your collection on your visit) and the rest looks like starting in the next 18 months.
thats all well and good (and a bit boring)... but did you like my nickname for ya new look bling bling stadium?
It was quite amusing, yes.
And I can be boring - my cousin says I'd fit in with him down the Valley quite well..as I too know a lot about average attendances...just need to brush up my train knowledge though.
thats all well and good (and a bit boring)... but did you like my nickname for ya new look bling bling stadium?
It was quite amusing, yes.
And I can be boring - my cousin says I'd fit in with him down the Valley quite well..as I too know a lot about average attendances...just need to brush up my train knowledge though.
that's not all we're into. (though average attendances are bloody interesting and train knowledge is always useful in day to day life)
we also like music trivia, cricket statistics, blankets and flasks, potholes, financial advice, researching, bar charts, graphs, anything with a neat index, weather pattens, puns and general whining, bitching and moaning. and that's just to list a few.
The problem for Millwall, to use modern business BS is that it has a very strong brand, but a tarnished one. It's reputation as being a place full of violent numbskulls, who riot every week may be wrong and unfair, but what a lot of people think, the sort of people who instead might be attracted to Charlton with its friendly reputation. And bring their thermos flasks with them etc This reputation can't be a help in getting corporate sponsorship in either. Unless I was based in the area, would I want to entertain clients at The New Den? I don't know if this reputation will ever go away, as all it takes is a single incident, like the riot outside Upton Park, and your reputation is ruined for another 10 years. The fact that the rioting fans were in the main not even regular Millwall supporters must make it more painful for the club...
I think that is why the club and us fans are quite realistic.
No premier league dreams for us. The chairman and us regulars simply want to see the club establish itself as a steady Championship club and get more of the actual fans we already have (ie the 25,000 individuals that signed up to the membership scheme between 2002 and 2004) going regularly.
We know that with our reputation we will always struggle to attract any floating fans in south London. After all - Charlton is a day out...Millwall is an experience, and one most would rather avoid.
However, I do think the image of the club is softening to a degree - we receive some positive PR now, mainly thanks to the book 'Family'...which has had positive feed back from the media. Talksport talk about us in glowing terms compared to before - and they're the most reactionary bunch of numbskulls going. And away fan numbers has been increasing as word spreads that Millwall, as a very central London club, is actually a good all round day out..now you can have a pint around Borough and get a walkway to the away end no hassle.
There haven't been any major incidences at home since the walkway was built - games v West Ham, Leeds and Cardiff have all gone off peacefully, on Saturdays and bar West Ham at 3pm kick offs.
The trouble seems to have been exported to certain away games, but other than the membership scheme already in place there's not a lot the club can do about that. But, yes incidents like West Ham in the cup will continue to tarnish us to a degree, however, we received a much fairer hearing by the media (and eventually the FA) than we previously did.
Trouble is with Millwall, whilst Stoke, Manchester United and Spurs have just as active hooligans as us, we are completely unsuccessful on the pitch - so we are only associated with trouble. United fans may well have smashed up Barcelona city centre...but didn't Ryan Giggs play well...
thats all well and good (and a bit boring)... but did you like my nickname for ya new look bling bling stadium?
It was quite amusing, yes.
And I can be boring - my cousin says I'd fit in with him down the Valley quite well..as I too know a lot about average attendances...just need to brush up my train knowledge though.
well im glad you didnt really like the nickname, that would never do, your apathetic response is pleasing to me.
funny you should say that about your cousin and fitting in... my spanner cousin is always trying to get me to go to the new den with him but the fact i cant master the bermondsey bowl would be a real give away (well that and id look and feel like a proper wolly) stops me from going!
Although I don't think we should ever throw the baby out with bath water...
Meaning we should retain elements of that 'brand'. I liked the posters that said..'don't be a sheep, follow the lions'. And 'no-one likes us' was included in the top ten British slogans of the last 30 years.
It's about striking the balance of having the Den as a partisan, but enjoyable, place to watch full blooded football.
thats all well and good (and a bit boring)... but did you like my nickname for ya new look bling bling stadium?
It was quite amusing, yes.
And I can be boring - my cousin says I'd fit in with him down the Valley quite well..as I too know a lot about average attendances...just need to brush up my train knowledge though.
well im glad you didnt really like the nickname, that would never do, your apathetic response is pleasing to me.
funny you should say that about your cousin and fitting in... my spanner cousin is always trying to get me to go to the new den with him but the fact i cant master the bermondsey bowl would be a real give away (well that and id look and feel like a proper wolly) stops me from going!
I'm from Walworth...so wouldn't bother with that Bermondsey nonsense either.
Fair play to them, I'm guessing that if the corners get filled in, increacing the capacity to 24000 they will need to use the corners for segregation purposes (well at least the two at the away end) that then would give them a capacity of around 22000 and they could then increase the away support to around 4000, making it a bit easier to get a ticket.
If the corners are needed for segregation, wouldn't it be cheaper and easier to leave them as they are?
Fair play to them, I'm guessing that if the corners get filled in, increacing the capacity to 24000 they will need to use the corners for segregation purposes (well at least the two at the away end) that then would give them a capacity of around 22000 and they could then increase the away support to around 4000, making it a bit easier to get a ticket.
If the corners are needed for segregation, wouldn't it be cheaper and easier to leave them as they are?
The corners will be joined, through the re-cladding, between the away stand and the Barry Kitchener and Docker's Stands, but no seats will be put in. This is visible on the Renewal video. It's more about creating an atheistic look for the centre piece of the regen. The capacity increase would be from re-configuring the Cold Blow Lane end and filling the corners in between the home areas - hence the modest increase in capacity.
thats all well and good (and a bit boring)... but did you like my nickname for ya new look bling bling stadium?
It was quite amusing, yes.
And I can be boring - my cousin says I'd fit in with him down the Valley quite well..as I too know a lot about average attendances...just need to brush up my train knowledge though.
well im glad you didnt really like the nickname, that would never do, your apathetic response is pleasing to me.
funny you should say that about your cousin and fitting in... my spanner cousin is always trying to get me to go to the new den with him but the fact i cant master the bermondsey bowl would be a real give away (well that and id look and feel like a proper wolly) stops me from going!
I'm from Walworth...so wouldn't bother with that Bermondsey nonsense either.
Comments
As for intimidation, laughingly one of the gates greeting away fans at the old Den had 'enter at your peril' graffitied on it, but it was more the poor accomodation and sightlines that were intimidating, not anything else inside the stadium that happened to away fans.
However the experience of away fans outside both stadiums are a different matter, and hardly ever a relaxed one, let alone enjoyable...so Millwall lose money because a lot of away fans will spend their money going to a different away game rather than to Millwall simply because it is more appealing.
It would be hard to make the new stadium 'less intimidating' inside, because it is rather soulless at times (compared to the old Den), and when I go it is more of a 'get in, see the game (get beat in our case), and get home', no nothing of an experience really. The Millwall in the old ground had character, and history, now going to the ground is a bit like stumbling on Jeremy Kyle as you surf channels, basic freedom suggests it should be allowed, but you don't want to linger.
Millwalls USP attracts a regular hardcore of cocks.
For big games they can attract a far greater amount of floating cocks.
As the proportion of cocks in the South East appears to be expanding at an alarming rate, Millwall have the potential to fill their boots.
Millwall won't change, ever. They know their market and know where their bread is best buttered.
Welcome to the forum Bunny, me ol cock spanna
Agree largely with your point. But, the choice of 1991 is a touch selective and misrepresents Millwall's potential compared to the other clubs, as it follows on from the era of the most successful (in league terms) Millwall team ever.
By the way, the grenade was thrown on at Brentford.
Regarding moving back to the Island, when was this considered?
We were a much brighter footballing outpost when based on the Island in fact...indeed, so bright we earnt the nickname the 'lions of the south'.
Like I said and highlighted - since moving we've had a lot of success (relevant to us).
I agree to a certain extent about the Old Den being intimidating by its very nature alone - there is a great picture of it empty, with no game on, on a winters night...and it looks forbidding. However, I think the likes of Leeds, West Ham, Chelsea, Cardiff City, Bristol City et al would argue against 'nothing inside that happened to away fans' being intimidating during it's 70s and 80s heyday.
My cousin is a Charlton fan and admits that you got two very different Millwalls - depending on if it was Norwich, Reading or Charlton visiting..compared if it was West Ham, Leeds or Cardiff.
As for the new place- I quite like it, and don't think it's souless at all. Obviously it will never touch Cold Blow Lane for character, but we've had some great games down there now and I can tell you that games against Leeds and nights against Wolves and Huddersfield have lived up to anything the Old Den produced. In fact the night time FA Cup match v Arsenal was louder and more partisan than any game v West Ham at the old place.
I sometimes write articles for The Lion Roars and do a bit on away fans and other club's fanzines...and can tell you that I've read and met plenty of away fans that have seen coming to Zampa Road as a proper football experience still - again, these are more likely to be Forest, Leeds, Cardiff, Bristol City fans...as opposed to Yeovil fans for example...when the new place can, just like the old place, be a bit flat.
It's all about perspective though - in modern football terms the Den is a lot less souless an experience than the likes of Reading, Southampton, Leicester etc etc even it isn't as charismatic as Cold Blow Lane, the 60s Valley, the old Anfield or Roker Park etc.
and rodders my comment was aimed at bunny
When the club were looking to move we looked at potential in Greenwich and the Island, so around 1990.
Take your point about 1991 re gates...however, Millwall's average gate since 1920 is 12,500. So, 10,841 isn't that selective in the grand scheme of things...I think the 80s are a skewed time for judging gates- given the problems in football and society at the time. .
The club has average circa 11,000 since the formation of the Premier League. In that time the likes of Leicester, Derby and Charlton have added thousands on to their average gates- through stadium moves/success/and tapping into the new football fan market. We've stood pretty much totally still.
By this logic our best period for crowds should have been the late 70s and 80s.
However, that was our worst ever period for crowds.
Our best was the 1930s to the early 1960s.
And that is the real reason we survive - in the 1930s, 50s and early 60s we attracted 30-50,000 to games. The trouble actually drove a lot of people away. Yet thankfully with such a formally big fan base to draw the club have managed to hang on to a floating support of around 20,000 people - the descendants of some of those fans.
We survive on a very loyal local hardcore and those descendants out in south London suburbia and Kent turning ip for big games.
If Millwall know how their bread is buttered why do they spend a disportionately large amount of money on things like grass line (a text service for fans to report anti-social behaviour) and on prosecuting fans for sometimes minor things, as well as an expensive (£1m to install) and inhibitive membership card scheme (gates slashed from an average of 14,000 to 8,500 overnight)? As well as happily having 1,000 people on a banning list.
I know many, many more Millwall fans that moan about these 'cocks' holding us back than people saying it's one of the reasons they go. Our crowds having always halved after major incidences, never increased.
Unless you're equating people liking singing no-one likes us and dishing out stick to oppo players as all cocks? Then yes, we are all cocks...and hopefully will never change!
It just so happens that this is happening on our doorstep. It's got the go ahead and the only involvement the club has had is to negoiate on things like using the sports facilities and seeing a revamp of the ground's (no doubt to encourage buyers) exterior.
It has been at the planning stage for the best part of a decade. However, the footprint for the new station is now complete (you can take pictures for your collection on your visit) and the rest looks like starting in the next 18 months.
And I can be boring - my cousin says I'd fit in with him down the Valley quite well..as I too know a lot about average attendances...just need to brush up my train knowledge though.
we also like music trivia, cricket statistics, blankets and flasks, potholes, financial advice, researching, bar charts, graphs, anything with a neat index, weather pattens, puns and general whining, bitching and moaning.
and that's just to list a few.
It's reputation as being a place full of violent numbskulls, who riot every week may be wrong and unfair, but what a lot of people think, the sort of people who instead might be attracted to Charlton with its friendly reputation. And bring their thermos flasks with them etc
This reputation can't be a help in getting corporate sponsorship in either. Unless I was based in the area, would I want to entertain clients at The New Den?
I don't know if this reputation will ever go away, as all it takes is a single incident, like the riot outside Upton Park, and your reputation is ruined for another 10 years. The fact that the rioting fans were in the main not even regular Millwall supporters must make it more painful for the club...
No premier league dreams for us. The chairman and us regulars simply want to see the club establish itself as a steady Championship club and get more of the actual fans we already have (ie the 25,000 individuals that signed up to the membership scheme between 2002 and 2004) going regularly.
We know that with our reputation we will always struggle to attract any floating fans in south London. After all - Charlton is a day out...Millwall is an experience, and one most would rather avoid.
However, I do think the image of the club is softening to a degree - we receive some positive PR now, mainly thanks to the book 'Family'...which has had positive feed back from the media. Talksport talk about us in glowing terms compared to before - and they're the most reactionary bunch of numbskulls going. And away fan numbers has been increasing as word spreads that Millwall, as a very central London club, is actually a good all round day out..now you can have a pint around Borough and get a walkway to the away end no hassle.
There haven't been any major incidences at home since the walkway was built - games v West Ham, Leeds and Cardiff have all gone off peacefully, on Saturdays and bar West Ham at 3pm kick offs.
The trouble seems to have been exported to certain away games, but other than the membership scheme already in place there's not a lot the club can do about that. But, yes incidents like West Ham in the cup will continue to tarnish us to a degree, however, we received a much fairer hearing by the media (and eventually the FA) than we previously did.
Trouble is with Millwall, whilst Stoke, Manchester United and Spurs have just as active hooligans as us, we are completely unsuccessful on the pitch - so we are only associated with trouble. United fans may well have smashed up Barcelona city centre...but didn't Ryan Giggs play well...
funny you should say that about your cousin and fitting in... my spanner cousin is always trying to get me to go to the new den with him but the fact i cant master the bermondsey bowl would be a real give away (well that and id look and feel like a proper wolly) stops me from going!
Meaning we should retain elements of that 'brand'. I liked the posters that said..'don't be a sheep, follow the lions'. And 'no-one likes us' was included in the top ten British slogans of the last 30 years.
It's about striking the balance of having the Den as a partisan, but enjoyable, place to watch full blooded football.
Walworth, Pwoper Geeza !!!
Yet you're posting from Haywards Heath.
"Another cream tea vicar ? Splendid !"