But just because the stadia look the same that does not nessasarily mean that the materials are of the same standard and weight bearing.

My only experience is when we had our loft done. They had options of different RSJ's, they could look identical but bear differing tollerances.

So we may have lower tollerances on our beams as they where planned to carry less weight.

The south stand is built differently, It has two rows of vertical beams whereas the other stands have one.

It isn't the weight of cladding in itself that is the problem, it is the air pressure in a gale under the roof once the back is filled in. The roof and back design was open to allow wind to blow through thus making equal pressure above and below the roof. Closing the back completely changes that.

In a gale the roof could possibly blow up and out (rather than what you would intuitively imagine, a collapse down) if the back is enclosed.

Having the back open allows much less steel to be used to keep the roof on, thus saving money.

The 'beams' holding the roof on is a cantilever design. This allows unhindered viewing from all seats. The down side of this design is it is a careful balancing act to get the roof to stay up. Unless you put in another row of vertical 'beams' to anchor the cantilever more securely at the back like was done in the South stand. But that is massively more expensive.

Yeah and don't we know it!

Yes I do accept that, but an established stadia building company would advise and I'm sure would have said if you take this option, cladding can't be used! and it will mean weather elements on supporters and the stadium always looking unfinished.

I think that's the basis of the legal stuff going on to see who is liable?

I doubt there is any legal stuff going on. The club tried to cut corners, got burned by a harsh winter last year and are finding it hard finding the motivation to invest in completing the stadium.

Sad but true

We might not have cladding, but the door to the boardroom looks very nice indeed instagram.com/p/WKqrBplxju/

We might not have cladding, but the door to the boardroom looks very nice indeed instagram.com/p/WKqrBplxju/

im not having that the stadium cant take the stresses of cladding, nearly all stadia are clad and they dont collapse. Nothing the club have said indicates the stadium cant take it, just it needs paying for

Bottom line is that they are cheesed off it wasn't included in the original design and they thought it was. The problem is that they want someone else to pay for it because they thought they already had paid for it. Whoever approved the plans on behalf of the club is responsible for this whole damn mess!!!!!!!

apart from the legal stuff re stabilty/planning & cost could it be clad up to a certain height then have a gap like they have at the K.C. stadium so the winds can blow thro without stressing the fabric of the stadium.B/hell there was a gap at the top of the scaff/pop side at KR & that was built of brick. it would still cost an arm & a leg so i suppose we will wait for the time being till the money becomes available.COYS.

Interesting to compare Hull Kr's issues re their new stand compared to Saints fans moans about lack of cladding www.thisishullandeastriding.co.u ... z2Lu263XtT Puts in perspective how things have turned out at Langtree park

Interesting to compare Hull Kr's issues re their new stand compared to Saints fans moans about lack of cladding www.thisishullandeastriding.co.u ... z2Lu263XtT Puts in perspective how things have turned out at Langtree park

We have the 'stadium can't hold the weight' argument to the cladding problem, would it be an idea to do a building wrap. This could be sponsored too, or even have a photo of the team or the fans or whatever they would want.