Inter are not worried about the comments that emerged from AC Milan’s shareholders’ meeting yesterday, specifically those from Paolo Scaroni.
La Gazzetta dello Sport report that the latest chapter in the now long and drawn-out stadium issue came from the Rossoneri shareholders’ meeting when the president Paolo Scaroni admitted that the idea of building a new home alone remains an option for Milan.
“The public debate is proceeding quite well. If the stadium will be in San Siro will obviously do it with Inter. However we are also working on other hypotheses, beyond San Siro: in that case, we could decide to do it together with Inter or even alone,” he said.
This is an opening to a second solution which is nothing new. The leaders of Milan are occasionally invited to comment on the issue and do not hold back and it is perhaps a tactic to put pressure on the Council, but of course it could also be a real alternative that for now can only be considered as secondary.
There is no concern from Inter at present about the idea of Milan ditching the project and building alone because both clubs know the continuation of the public debate must be respected and there is still the hope that the project will be voted in favour of.
After a static few months, from mid-summer onwards the stadium chapter underwent a sharp acceleration and of course there must still be patience to battle the bureaucracy. Inter have not received communications regarding a change in Milan’s direction, nor do they perceive even the slightest detachment from the current plan.
Noone should be surprised if the project gets shot down in the public debate. San Siro is a piece of cultural history and architectural art, while the suggested replacement is an abomination. I recommend watching the 6min video “San Siro” by Yuri Ancarani.
I recommend going to the San Siro, it is a dump. It should have been replaced long ago.
Great it has history, so what, its time has long past and nostalgia doesn’t pay the bills.
If the project get shot down, them good. We will build our own stadia at sesto. The debate is about San Siro, if we build our own stadium at Sesto we don’t need any debate.
I don’t dispute that a replacement is needed. What I’m saying is that the chosen design neither seem to honor the aesthetics of San Siro or present any awe-inspiring details of it’s own. I understand if the people of Milano do not want ‘The Cathedral’.