SAN SIRO CARBONI – At “1 Football Club”, a radio program hosted by Luca Cerchione broadcast on 1 Station Radio, Amedeo Carboni intervened.
San Siro, Carboni: “San Siro, Carboni:” A shame to give up the football ladder. ” But in Italy the plants are obsolete.
On the construction activity of Amedeo Carboni
“The Wanda Metropolitano ‘is ours’, like other stadiums in Spain, all of these are owned by the construction company we manage. We also have plans for the restructuring of Azteca in Mexico ”.
On Atletico Madrid-Manchester City
“City put it to the end, and in the end the quality of the players makes the difference. To keep the ball with a team like Atletico… you need good players ”.
How do you see the question of the stadium in Milan?
“If you calculate that San Siro is the only one recognized by UEFA at the international level, it is a shame to play two more stadiums. The stadiums try to make them as central as possible. If we want them to work 7 days a week, we need to get them close to the center. I am not to do two stages, but to modernize. Modernizing it would make a beautiful stadium. Even today, despite being old, he is the only one still recognized by UEFA at international level. After at San Siro, what do you do if you do other stadiums? The agreement is with the Municipality, which commands. If one of the two clubs wants to spend 7/200 million euros to renovate the San Siro, so be it! The other will make his own stadium “.
Massimo Maccarone also spoke on the microphones of 1 Station Radio, on the “1 Football Club” program, touching on the stadium theme.
Stadiums, Maccarone: “In the Netherlands, a mid-ranking club has a plant to help young people grow”
“Just look at the Italian forwards of the top six teams. There is only building that plays. This figure should make us reflect, perhaps we will have to give more importance to young Italians to play in the big teams. When I arrived in England in 2002, there were already thirteen football fields for training. In Italy there is a lack of facilities. In the Netherlands, for example, a mid-ranking society has an important plant for the growth of young people. They also look at their young people more and value them ”.
These then are the words of Massimo Maccarone, former bomber of Siena, Empoli and Samp, and of Amedeo Carboni, former Roma defender regarding the situation in the stadiums.
Stadium situation in Italy
Quite emblematic words, which reflect a fairly deficient structural situation of the Italian plants. However, as Massimo Maccarone says, the problem can be traced back to plants for the growth of young people. Consider that in Italy, the youth sectors of many Serie A teams play and train on poorly maintained fields and with structures that, compared to the English and Dutch academies, are behind by about twenty years.
Turning instead to the stadium theme itself, always in the structural field, we can say that the Italian plants, both for geographic location, which by construction, are definitely far from state-of-the-art facilities, such as the Wanda Metropolitano. Think for example of the San Paolo Stadium in Naples (today Maradona), or the Olympic Stadium in Rome: both are located in the center of the city. This determines first of all a heavy traffic during the midweek shifts in the hours before the game and above all a total absence of parcheggio of the stadium itself. In Frosinone, for example, the Benito Stirpe, or again in Udine with the Dacia Arena and the Allianz Stadium in Turin, are facilities located outside the city center and equipped with parking for fans. This is an important aspect of our stadiums, as they affect usability and flow before and after the match.
Another problem concerns the athletics track. There are too many stadiums in Italy with a track and therefore with a physical detachment from the pitch. The Bentegodi of Verona, the Olimpico of Rome, the San Paolo of Naples, the Dall’Ara of Bologna, the Franchi of Florence, are in fact all ‘ancient’ stadiums, which have never adapted to the needs of modern football. The situation is different for the San Siro, for the Allianz, the Dacia Arena or the Gewiss Stadium and the Picco which instead have the stands close to the field, and therefore you can attend an English show. Removing the track would probably be an important expedient. It would benefit the fan, who could see their idols within walking distance, but also the footballer who could receive a further boost.
In fact, the absence of the track also affects the typhus and on the team-audience relationship. Milan, with San Siro, is the only stadium in Italy with stands close to the pitch and additionally equipped with loudspeakers that entice the public to push the team. In Europe, that of the loudspeaker is an increasingly used instrument: from France with PSG, to the Bernabeu in Madrid. Furthermore, the absence of a track allows a much better and less detached view of the game. The involvement would be total.
The economic aspect
even the Merchandising it is an element practically absent in our stadiums. In fact, only the San Siro and the Juventus Stadium have stores inside the stadium where you can buy gadgets, official jerseys or other Club products. This is one of the most used tools in England to earn income: among other things, Anglo-Saxon clubs they pioneered in this respect. Even the guided tours they are almost absent in our stadiums, with the exception of the Olimpico, where you can go down into the tunnel of champions. Here you can see the jerseys of the great champions and athletes who have accomplished feats in the stadium in Rome: from Bruno Conti to Francesco Totti, up to Usain Bolt, Ciro Immobile and the jacket of Mr. Mancini. The same goes for the San Siro too.
Only Juventus, following the European model, and thanks to a large showcase, has a museum with a guided tour that ends with the entrance on the pitch and in the changing rooms. This is one of the most used gimmicks by big European clubs to generate income.
The structural problem in Italy, therefore, is an aspect that, by adding together the various aspects, is decisive above all in the commercial sphere. According to what the website: calcioefinanza.it analyzes, between 2018 and 2020 before the pandemic caused by Covid-19, Milan, Juventus and Inter together made less from the stadiums than Barcelona alone.
The Blaugrana, Real Madrid and Manchester United are in fact the top three clubs in the world for stadium proceeds: this includes merchandising, tickets and hospitality. Suffice it to say that Barça earned 160 million between 2019 and 2020, Real 145, also thanks to the restructuring of the Bernabeu, while Manchester 120 million. Juventus, on the other hand, earned 66 million, Inter 51 million and Milan only 34. A figure that must also make us reflect on the growth of the clubs, as well as on the economic and investment opportunities on the strongest players on the scene and on structures.