[Football] Does visiting the new-build WHL really count as a new ground ticked off?

[Nottseagull]

If it was built on a different site then undoubtedly so, but they do overlap and even the pitches overlap slightly in which case, can it really be counted as a new ground visited?
You wouldn't count the Molineux of the 1970s as a different ground simply because it's since had four new stands and the pitch moved a stand's width to one side.

 

[Biscuit Barrel]

Yes.

 

[Poojah]

It’s a bit of a contentious one this. I’d say that it counts on the basis that that more than 50% of both old and new structures existed at the same time - that’s not possible if you’re simply redeveloping a ground.

 

[Barham's tash]

Not for me Clive.

 

[beorhthelm]

yes, only thing the same is the address.

 

[Tokyohands]

Yes of course. If you knocked down your house and built a new one on the same site you'd be inviting people round to your new house and I doubt your friends would be questioning if it really is a new house or not.

 

[studio150]

Yes

 

[Guy Fawkes]

Yes of course. If you knocked down your house and built a new one on the same site you'd be inviting people round to your new house and I doubt your friends would be questioning if it really is a new house or not.

Not quite in this case, more like knocking down your house, and also 3 other neighbouring properties and building a new house on the combined footprint of those 4 sites. There is no way that the end result could be mistaken for the old house so of course it counts as a new ground.