Turns out most people don't experience architecture as a drone operator.

What bugs me are stadia being named after corporate sponsors instead of actual locations (roads, streets).

Inkjet printers is the best description I've heard.

12:58 The Wikipedia article for the Ship of Theseus, somewhat ironically, has been revised so often that it doesn't have a single phrase left from the original article.

I work in stadium design and construction. Initial renderings are usually pretty interesting and unique. Then the contractor prices, it is over budget, and compromises are made. Sofi Stadium is an exception but it cost over $5 billion as the most expensive stadium in the world.

Alfie: plural of stadium is stadia
Alfie's gf: singular of couple is single

SO what I got from this video is... people love complaining, whether it was a hundred years ago, or today, people just complain about stuff.

dear hitc sevens, my favourite Youtuber, please make a video about my favourite league, the Cymru premier.  despite having one of the oldest football associations in the world, Wales have only had a domestic league for 32 years, please delve into its history and it's current situation.

Same reason why most modern buildings overall are ugly. They're built for functionality and to be cost efficient. Beautiful buildings need time and money to pay for architects, specialist equipment etc, on top of standard construction costs. Plus, beautiful buildings need even more maintenance and restoration associated time and costs.

Even the archibald leitch old football grounds of the UK were designed/built on a functional and industrial basis, albeit on a more human scale conpared to today's spaceships.

EDIT: I wrote this all before finishing the video, and now acknowledge that I've just totally parroted the points that alfie had made in the video itself. I'm too clever for my own good sometimes.

Hertha wants to leave the Olympia stadium for years now due to all the points you already mentioned (comfort, seats, commodities, service) but also the size. It's simply too big for the club and it's supporters, usually failing to create an intimate atmosphere favouring Hertha as the home team. It usually feels empty and is often taken over by the away team fans. It's like Wembley amazing for finals especially the DFB pokal one but it's not suitable as a home for a club wanting to express itself and see its identity be reflected in the stadium.

You could argue a lot of the old ones are ugly

But people like to defend them by saying they have character and history

Things have to get worse before they get better.

The #1 sport I follow is baseball, and from the 1950s through the 90s this happened a lot, be it in the US or Japan. Classic stadiums got turned in for more soulless multi-use stadiums or domes. It wasn't until the Baltimore Orioles built Camden Yards that  people woke up to the fact that "oh yeah, these classic ballparks actually did look good" and the "retro-classic" movement came about.

Be it Comerica Park in Detroit, Mazda Stadium in Hiroshima, or Lions Park in Daegu, all (looks at Seoul's Gocheok Skydome), ok, most modern baseball stadiums look pretty damn good.

"The house is a machine for living in" Le Corbusier
"A Stadium is a machine for watching football in" Potts-Harmer

If anything, I'd like more brutalist stadiums, it'd be easier to make a place intimidating with a low roof or concrete pillars than if it had a skylight or wrap around luxury suites

16:42 wow the Neo Química Arena really is the king of the inkjet printer comparison in that photo!

We had a similar issue in the United States for a long time. It was determined that the only rational, economic model for a stadium was a round bowl with in many cases moveable lower stands so that the shape of the field could be shifted between diamond shaped for baseball and rectangular for (American) football. Most had artificial turf, so you could play 100 games a year on it, plus cover it up and have people stand on it for rock concerts. Stadia like Shea Stadium in New York, the Vet in Philadelphia, Busch Stadium in St. Louis, Fulton County Stadium in Atlanta, etc. were basically the only kind built in the 1960s and 1970s. They were universally and somewhat derisively known as "cookie cutter" stadia. This changed when Camden Yards in Baltimore and Jacobs field in Cleveland were build in the 1980s as the first "retro" ballparks and it was discovered that the stadium could be an attraction in itself, and people would flock there even if the teams were lousy or the people were tourists who didn't even care about the teams. Now no city develops a single new stadium for both their MLB and NFL teams, even if that means putting two facilities right next to each other, with a common parking lot. It's amazing how thinking can change from "this is the only way to do it" to "no one does that anymore" so quickly.

As a bit of a stadiums nerd I really enjoyed this one. You are absolutely on the money when it comes to your historical perspective and the perception of time.

My local MLS team, Minnesota United, literally plays in a bed pan shaped stadium

I'm so glad that out Stadium, the Fritz Walter Stadion, is one of the last grounds which still has it's original flair. Yes it got modernized for the Worldcup 2006, but it's still unique. Also its 104 years old. The good thing is, that the DNA of our club is in good parts to our Stadium, so we luckily can not just move grounds. Ask any football fan about the "Myth Betzenberg". Chances are they will know......ask any Real Madrid fan over the age of 35.
It's such a unique ground. If you ever get the chance to watch a game there, do it, you won't regret it.

The London Stadium is a good illustration of this point, as I used to think it was really shit and the seats need to be closer to the stands, but after a few years of having a season ticket, I now think it’s only quite shit, the seats need to be closer, but I have memories of when we beat Sevilla at home