Is Manchester United FC Halt closed?

[Scotty]

Ok, i've tried to resist but I cannot anymore......

Well you should've resisted.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Last time I used the station (several years ago now) the match was a Saturday 5.30 kick off. I had an advance from Piccadilly back to London at 8.35. Game ended, I came straight out and was in the queue by 7.30. first train was due at 7.35 but didn't get on as the police were holding the queue. Second train was due at 7.55. It arrived at 8.30! Got back to Piccadilly and Northern refused to do anything to help me get home. Ended up forking out for the overnight National Express coach. (Full details posted in previous threads).

All the more reason to use the tram instead. A single on Metrolink would've been less than you paid for the coach, I assume.

 

[MadMac]

I would of thought that the costs of expanding the Charlton stand would be considerable to gain 5000 seats which would not be corporate. Regarding planning permission, Chelsea had to make transport improvements as part of there plans to build a new stadium which coincidently also involved building over 2 railway lines. The lines are the District and West London.

Didn’t they build over a line in Dublin in the fairly recent past?

 

[Kneedown]

Well you should've resisted.

Sorry, too good an opportunity to miss.

 

[Puffing Devil]

When Brighton & Hove Albion had to switch to the athletics stadium at Withdean, the council insisted that the club subsidise local public transport in order to reduce match-day congestion in a residential area. The same still applies now that they have moved to the edge-of-town Amex Stadium at Falmer. You get free pre- and post-match bus and train travel over a wide area.

Given the revenue coming in to every premier league club, I can see few reasons why something similar should not be universally applied. I can see that London might present some problems, but I can't think of any reason why the proposal cannot be at least considered.

The Metrolink at the Etihad can't cope with the users it has now, and they pay!

 

[Chester1]

Will there be a change to the layout of Anfield Road itself, when the stand is expanded?

Off topic! It will be closed near the stadium at some point in the near future regardless of whether the stand is extended or rebuilt. The councils master plan for Anfield downgrades it to an ordinary residential road, with traffic diverted down a renovated new high street (Walton Breck Road). By closing the small section of Anfield Road next to the stadium it merges the new plaza next to the main stand into Stanley Park. Combined with huge demolition and construction of residential parts of Anfield the area will soon be very different!

Although demand has probably dropped off somewhat with the decline in the team, I think it’s still pretty strong. I believe there around 55,000 season ticket holders, which only leaves around 20,000 for ad hoc purchases. League games require joining the supporters club, I can’t recall a league game going to general sale.
There was the expansion in 2006 which added 8,000 seats which was fairly quickly gobbled up. There is also the factor that capacity is about to reduce as seats are converted to add more disabled area.
Expanding Bobby Charlton would supposedly take capacity to 80,000. https://www.statista.com/statistics/268646/manchester-united-average-per-game-attendance/ says average attendance has been around 75,000 for the last decade, adding another 5,000 doesn’t seem much of a stretch.
Though coming back to the original topic, I wonder if the council would insist on transport improvements as part of any planning permission. It’s already horrible to get away from after a match, more people would only make it worse.

I would of thought that the costs of expanding the Charlton stand would be considerable to gain 5000 seats which would not be corporate. Regarding planning permission, Chelsea had to make transport improvements as part of there plans to build a new stadium which coincidently also involved building over 2 railway lines. The lines are the District and West London.

I agree with Greyman42, the sums do not add up for building over the railway line. It was left until last and then not done because of the cost. Average attendance is certainly not 75,000 because the recent work to increase the number of disabled seats has reduced capacity below that many seats (Anfield lost 600 seats but expanded the Kop by 500 to nearly compensate). I don't watch matches for obvious reason but I bet there are some empty seats visable at less popular matches. There has been recent headlines that United fudge attendence figures!

My two cents on the station is that its only viable to build one station in the area for day to day use and that Cornbrook would be a much better location. After the opening of the Trafford Park Line and delivery of an extra 27 units Metrolink will be in a much better position to serve stadium traffic. Northern may or may not be able to run match day services on any particular day (or season) so the station should only be treated as a useful extra facility that should not be relied on.

 

[sprunt]

There has been recent headlines that United fudge attendence figures!

Or not.

 

[158752]

On Metrolink adult single is £3 or £3.20 return for Piccadilly to Old Trafford with no railcard discounts. I can't find the NR fare on brfares.com

£4.40 Single
£6.00 Return

The fare is created by
From MAN
To MUF

 

[Chester1]

Or not.

Exactly matching police figures means they are simply copying and pasting police estimates and not using their own resources to record attendences, assuming Old Trafford has membership card or ticket magnetic strip activation of turnstiles like at Anfield it should be very easy to record attendences. I doubt the police estimates are miles out but I struggle to see how they can be spot on either. The FOI sample was of Premier League matches and consistant attendences within the 70-75,000 bracket are plausible. I watched the latter stages of the recent United v Derby League Cup match and it didn't look like there was a full house. I doubt United will get full attendance against the likes of Young Boys and other less important European matches. Either way, after more than a decade since the last stadium expansion and no meaningful progress its obvious the Glazers have done their sums and its not worth expanding Old Trafford.

In addition to the costs of building over the railway line it is very likely that the council will demand a very large contribution to transport infrastructure in return for planning permission. Liverpool and Everton are both capped at around 60,000 because of insufficient transport infrastructure to handle more people. Liverpool made no effort to get the huge demolition of property in Anfield to include the shops near the Kop and moving the main road backwards to allow future expansion because Anfield Road stand redevelopment will push right upto the transport limit. Can Manchesters transport infrastructure actually take an extra 5-15,000 extra fans? The station would barely put any dent in that even with a guaranteed high capacity rail service.

 

[philthetube]

Exactly matching police figures means they are simply copying and pasting police estimates and not using their own resources to record attendences, assuming Old Trafford has membership card or ticket magnetic strip activation of turnstiles like at Anfield it should be very easy to record attendences. I doubt the police estimates are miles out but I struggle to see how they can be spot on either. The FOI sample was of Premier League matches and consistant attendences within the 70-75,000 bracket are plausible. I watched the latter stages of the recent United v Derby League Cup match and it didn't look like there was a full house. I doubt United will get full attendance against the likes of Young Boys and other less important European matches. Either way, after more than a decade since the last stadium expansion and no meaningful progress its obvious the Glazers have done their sums and its not worth expanding Old Trafford.

Nor would they expect to, season ticket holders have to pay for these matches and people are not going to be rushing to watch Derby probably get hammered, especially if it was on TV, and I have no idea if it was.

 

[londonbridge]

All the more reason to use the tram instead. A single on Metrolink would've been less than you paid for the coach, I assume.

Normally I would have done except on that occasion Metrolink was closed. I did eventually recover the cost of the advance from Piccadilly to London though. Anyway, my team is currently in league one so assuming a) we don't draw Utd away in one of the cups) and/or b)they (Utd) don't mysteriously collapse and get relegated, it'll be however long it takes us to get back to the Premier League before i have cause to visit Old Trafford again.

 

[Scotty]

I watched the latter stages of the recent United v Derby League Cup match and it didn't look like there was a full house

Well the attendance figure was just over 55,000... capacity is just over 74,000.

You scan your ticket on the way in, so they do know how many people have entered the ground. They match up with the figures because they must declare attendees rather than tickets sold. United fully sell out most games, but attendance figures can vary by a few hundred.

 

[CHAPS2034]

Didn’t they build over a line in Dublin in the fairly recent past?

Yes at Lansdowne Road - the Aviva Stadium which opened in 2010.
Here it is

https://alchetron.com/Lansdowne-Road-railway-station

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/...e_Road_station,_Dublin_(geograph_3582376).jpg

https://laurapix.wordpress.com/2012/10/29/dart-lansdowne-road-station/

 

[greyman42]

Yes at Lansdowne Road - the Aviva Stadium which opened in 2010.
Here it is

https://alchetron.com/Lansdowne-Road-railway-station

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/...e_Road_station,_Dublin_(geograph_3582376).jpg

https://laurapix.wordpress.com/2012/10/29/dart-lansdowne-road-station/

The old stadium was built over the railway line. The new stadium was built at the side of the line as building a new modern stadium over the line was not viable. This is why one stand behind the goal posts is tiny compared to the other three.

 

[kilonewton]

The old stadium was built over the railway line. The new stadium was built at the side of the line as building a new modern stadium over the line was not viable. This is why one stand behind the goal posts is tiny compared to the other three.

The small end is small so as not to overshadow the houses at the north end. The railway runs under the west side of the stadium & a concourse. Very quick glance at Google Maps (other mapping sites are available) makes it clear to see.

 

[greyman42]

The small end is small so as not to overshadow the houses at the north end. The railway runs under the west side of the stadium & a concourse. Very quick glance at Google Maps (other mapping sites are available) makes it clear to see.

Thanks. My error.

 

[Rail Ranger]

Wikipedia says: Since 2018, matchday services to and from Old Trafford [MUFC Halt] do not operate due to insufficient capacity on the line since the introduction of more services in the May 2018 timetable.

 

[Kite159]

Wikipedia says: Since 2018, matchday services to and from Old Trafford [MUFC Halt] do not operate due to insufficient capacity on the line since the introduction of more services in the May 2018 timetable.

Unreferenced statement on the Wikipedia page it looked like.

 

[PR1Berske]

Unreferenced statement on the Wikipedia page it looked like.

An unreferenced statement though perhaps nonetheless accurate?

 

[js1000]

Nonetheless accurate, yes - otherwise they'd still be running the shuttles.