WACA, Subiaco Oval to be sold

Discuss stadium news, redevelopment, construction & future stadiums.
User avatar
Egan
Platinum
Posts: 14959
Joined: Sat Nov 23, 2002 1:14 am
Location: Perth
Contact:

Post by Egan »

StadiumKing you dont realise how much this is needed.

By the end of this century Perth will have a larger population then Brisbane. The current largest Capacity is 43000 with nobody that isnt a West Coast Eagles Member can watch an eagles game, the Dockers are getting very close with near record non derby crowds every week and a membership over 30000 now. The WACA is a shambles massive debts and prospect of not having a test this year. Add this to the fact that the 22000 capacity ground without temporary stands has allocated more then a third of the ground to its WACA members. The One Day match this year between India and Australia they only had 14,000 tickets on sale to the general public this is less then the capacity of Hobarts ground. Even though the members area has more seats then members. 6200 members for 8000 seats.

The Burswood site would be utilised like Tom stated for Test Cricket and One Day Internationals with a drop in pitch so theirs no need to worry about the size of the ground as it wouldnt cost that much more to hold it in a larger stadium. Get better countries coming out and maybe you would get larger crowds. I could see 30,000 a day coming for test matches.

Perth has gone past that perception that it is a small city and in all reality the perception that we should have smaller stadiums may be good for atmosphere but is not good for the people of this state. It would hold back the prospects of more people being allowed to go to the football. The perth public pay more money then any where else in Australia for AFL matches, for the day it costs a family of four including food, tickets, transport minimum of 150-$300 to watch an AFL match. they charge ridiculous prices because the demand is so high. Lower the ticket prices to what you get in Melbourne and 55-60,000 for all Eagles games could be feasible. And sell outs for all derbies and finals.

Their was a record crowd in soccer which I witnessed of 43,242 and the largest crowd for an AFL Match at the redeveloped stadium was the last derby of the year at 43,027. The capacity of the ground is 42,922. Like I said the reason it isnt packed completley constantly is because their is no walk up tickets they are all members only and some dont go every game. Perthmike even disputes the figure of 42,922 being the capacity as a regular watcher of the eagles.

Character, historical reference I stand for , but I also see that in order for what is right for Western Australia we deserve to have the quality facilities that other states have. You may have to sacrifice the past in order to find the benefit for the future. before Swede says this is not right even Arsenal are doing the same, knowing that it is best for their fans to move to a new stadium. Even though it doesnt come close to the historical and cultural aspects of Highbury.

It IS DESPERATLEY NEEDED IN THIS STATE

User avatar
stadiumking
Gold
Posts: 1769
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2003 5:31 pm
Location: Melbourne

Post by stadiumking »

Well Egan, I must say that you have swayed my view a little with your admirable reply, though i still disagree with the plan to get rid of these two venues.
On the subject of Subiaco attendances, I didnt realise that walk-up tickets arent available at the ground. Although i am an eagles supporter and member, i am somewhat spoilt with the venues here in Melbourne - MCG, Telstra Dome etc (dont even get me started on Optus Oval though - one time i arrived there for a match ten minutes before the openeing bounce and didnt get in until half time).
It is important to adress the subject of crowds and capacities. MCG etc are fine for cricket and footy. maybe the answer is to increase the capacity at Subiaco. the ANZ stand doesnt efficiently use the space wisely. if the three-tiered stand was continued around the ground, then the capacity would be a more reasonable figure.

As you can probably tell - I dont mind about creating a new venue, though i am opposed at what this will mean for subi and WACA. If perth's population is growing at such a fast rate and going to be 2.1million, then you would expect that there would be increased demand for cricket as well, which would mean that the WACA is still an option. I think that it is sad seeing all the suburban grounds in melbourne and even waverly - ghosts of the past. If freo is becoming as successful as it is, then why dont they consider a ground for them seperate to the Eagles at Subi. If Sydney - one team that struggles with members and supporters etc, can use two major venues (even in a rugby-based state), then surely two teams in an afl state could use two main stadiums. Even though it ironically redeveloped to be a cricket venue and hosted its last afl match, maybe the WACA is an option for one of the WA teams. if the WACA is short of money and in danger of losing big events, then why not a rapidly developing powerhouse team like the dockers - growing financially and support - inherit it as their own home ground.

And another thing, although totally off this topic - i think that every season in the heritage round, that the clubs (especially important for the victorian clubs) should play at their original home ground. EG Essendon at Windy hill, Doggies at Whitten, Hawthorn at Glenferrie, ST Kilda at Moorabbin, Roos at Arden street, magpies at vic park, etc...

User avatar
Egan
Platinum
Posts: 14959
Joined: Sat Nov 23, 2002 1:14 am
Location: Perth
Contact:

Post by Egan »

The WACA dont have any money to spend they spent 12 million dollars on CREDIT without government help and reduced the capacity by about 6000.

WA Government stands for rationalisation, while it would be good hypothetically, it is not realistic and Id rather one 70000 stadium then two 40000. Because their is no way they would spend money on a 70,000 seat stadium and leave Subiaco as it is.

WACA is in danger, hopefully they are destroyed, we want them gone. Theirs no coming back for them. They are the devils :twisted:

:wink: :D

In all seriousness the present redevelopment has made it IMPOSSIBLE for AFL to be played their, its got rectangular square boundaries and is no longer circular shaped. It did that as it sought to attract the NSL and Super 12, the Government didnt want the Glory playing at the WACA. Because they want it destroyed aswell :D. Plus the WACA couldnt support the amount of supporters the Dockers have. I can see in the next few years it will be a total lock out every game of the AFL season. Especially if the Dockers finish in the top four (extremely likely in my view, playing like a bunch of amateurs yet still only lost 1 game)

You need to pre-purchase tickets at Subiaco a limited amount of tickets are left over from Membership sales for games and basically every game is a sell out. That is why you see next to no Dockers support at the Eagles Home Derbies.

Congratulations on being an Eagles supporter, Am I right but since they have been going fairly well lately, their is alot more Melbourne Eagles supporters coming out of the woodwork and attending games. the official cheer squad looks bigger all the time, increasing every year. They look like out of Adelaide Crows, Port Adelaide Power, West Coast Eagles and Freo Dockers they have the largest amount of interstate supporters.

User avatar
stadiumking
Gold
Posts: 1769
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2003 5:31 pm
Location: Melbourne

Post by stadiumking »

Right on the mark there...
Eagles victorian membership is flourishing, and we are getting more and more fans coming to the grounds and games. it is a good sign. i think that we DO have the most fans out of the interstates. Especially due to our early success, and also the Geelong connection.
I would urge more people to get behind the cheer squad though, because it is looking quite small at the moment (well it was on saturday night - heartbraking loss).
I guess i dont fully know the extent of the problem....you gave the grounds a pretty decent revue in the stadium rating section though. what do you think of the idea about the clubs playing at their original home grounds?

User avatar
Egan
Platinum
Posts: 14959
Joined: Sat Nov 23, 2002 1:14 am
Location: Perth
Contact:

Post by Egan »

I like the look and attractiveness its just too small for a city the size of Perth.

I havent given a review of the WACA as I haven't been their for about a year. Plus like you would probably realise Im the biggest hater of the WACA on this planet, organisation and all. Last time was Australia vs Sri Lanka last VB series. I like to review only a few days after I have actually been to the ground. Egs Ive been to North Sydney Oval, but I would rather have fresh in my mind my experience rather then what I remembered from the ground. Which unfortunately was not that good, due to a loss and Navens sending off.

Eagles original home ground? I thought its always been Subiaco
Dockers, wont ever play at Fremantle Oval. It is smack bang in the Fremantle CBD boarded by Fremantle Hospital and Fremantle Prison (No longer occupied, just a tourist attraction). Plus Dockers headquaters, car parks and then you have the city centre abounding the ground. So their is no chance for expansion, if their was theyd have to get rid of some historic buildings and that would cost a ton if they where allowed, highly unlikely due to their historical value.

70,000 venue and demolition of the others is the only option

User avatar
Hiraldo
Silver
Posts: 1480
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2003 1:21 am

Post by Hiraldo »

If a 60,000 capacity stadium is built in Perth by 2020ish, and the Australian Premier League is successful, then the WACA could be kept by having a second Western Australian APL team playing at a remodeled, rectangular WACA.

Perhaps the state's soccer association can take it over, and call it the WASA. :wink:

User avatar
yob
Platinum
Posts: 8406
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2002 1:26 am
Location: Czech Republic

Post by yob »

stadiumking wrote:Right on the mark there...
Eagles victorian membership is flourishing, and we are getting more and more fans coming to the grounds and games. it is a good sign. i think that we DO have the most fans out of the interstates. Especially due to our early success, and also the Geelong connection.
I would urge more people to get behind the cheer squad though, because it is looking quite small at the moment (well it was on saturday night - heartbraking loss).
I guess i dont fully know the extent of the problem....you gave the grounds a pretty decent revue in the stadium rating section though. what do you think of the idea about the clubs playing at their original home grounds?
Do you have stats on the Eagles Victorian members? I contacted the crows last year, they said we have 950 Victorian members. I'd expect the Eagles to be much the same.

Having been to crows games in Melbourne, I can definitely say that our presence is getting larger, a lot larger than the good old days at Moorabbin and Windy Hill. Even Princes park... god, never again.

User avatar
stadiumking
Gold
Posts: 1769
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2003 5:31 pm
Location: Melbourne

Post by stadiumking »

Actually I wouldnt know exactly....that is something interesting to find out though. I'll se hoy I go.
It is expected that teams like Adelaide and West Coast have more substantial supporter bases everywhere as opposed to dockers and port, because they were the original afl team and more dominant. that could be contradicted, though, because of port in the sanfl as well. hard call...

User avatar
perthsmike
Bronze
Posts: 335
Joined: Thu Nov 28, 2002 9:18 pm
Location: Perth

Post by perthsmike »

once again Subiaco crowd numbers have me puzzled. West Coast's recent "sell out" saturday night blockbuster against Port Adelaide had an official attendance of 39,760. thats 3,232 short of capacity. dont ask me where they expect another 3000 odd people to sit unless they plan to hang people off the roof. i could see barerly any spare seats, 1000 at the most. but the simple fact that it was a "sell out" (ie every seat sold) proves how high the demand is. this weekend's block buster Eagles vs Brisbane sold out last Friday (8 days before the game). now dont tell me that isn;t high demand. it should be interesting to see the crowd figures they give us.

West Coast membership for 2004: [source "Eagle Eye" members magazine]
94% Membership renewal from 2003 (37,304)
3000 Extra members

so the current figure is roughly 38,066. Allowing for the required 3,000 odd seats which must be left for 'general public' (ie randoms and opposition supporters) leaves 1926 membership seats remaining (once again id like to know where). most of these are distribusted around the ground in single locations (and yes i would know because ive just brought a 4th membership for WC and trying to get it next to the others was next to impossible)

So from an eagles point of view WE NEED MORE SEATS! i'd like to hear anyones reasoning why eagles couldn;t attract crowds of up to 45-50,000 each week, especially as ticket prices plummet from the ridiculously high amount they stand at currently (any one wanna pay $50 for a general adult ticket?) Then take into account the blockbuster schedule eagles generally get (eg. rnd 2 eagles/port. rnd 4 eagles/brisbane. rnd 6 eagles/freo. rnd 8 eagles/ swans for a start) and finals and the expected figure could easily raise to 60,000. Perth people are desperate for international sports (International Rules game last October sold out in 6 days, 3 weeks before the event. International Rugby always attracts crowds 35,000+) and it makes sense: if we want bigger and better sports build a decent venue!

mike

ps. im not commenting on freo because i dont have facts on their attendances etc but if they continue to develop so too will their bandwagon. soon the freo faithful will be outnumbered 1:3 with randoms (meaning they will have bigger crowds and also need more seats) :P

User avatar
yob
Platinum
Posts: 8406
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2002 1:26 am
Location: Czech Republic

Post by yob »

Eagles are in the same position as the Crows really. Crows have 47,000 members, although there's a larger allocation for GA every match, nearly every single game in the last 2 years has sold out.

On Fremantle, they had 25,386 members last year, and last week broke the 30,000 mark for this year.

WA definitely needs a 50,000 seat football stadium as a minimum - it's a traditional AFL state with 300,000 more people than Adelaide, yet has a stadium that holds 8,000 less people :?: :!: For a long time I suspected that rather than pour the millions required into a new venue, the AFL would start another WA side in the AFL, to further dillute the AFL followers.

User avatar
redback_original
Silver
Posts: 546
Joined: Sat May 10, 2003 10:03 am

Post by redback_original »

I agree with stadiumking - the name of the game these days is purpose stadiums and not multi-use. Groundsharing is a bit 'oldschool'.

A city the size of Perth should be looking at maintaining their current boutique cricket ground - and keeping Subi.

In the states, there's only two stadiums that are now shared between baseball and football - Oakland Colesium and Proplayer Stadium. In recent years plenty of local councils have approved the building of two stadiums - one for each sport - with the realisation that 'one size doesn't fit all'. In Houston - no more astrodome, instead reliant for football and minute maid for baseball. Cleveland now has two separate stadiums, same with Baltimore, Pittsburgh, Seattle and San francisco to name a few.

While I realise that the shape of AFL and cricket playing areas is the same - it's the other details - pitches, crowd sizes and facilities that are different- it's for this reason that a 'superstadium' wouldn't be appropriate.

BTW - despite the recent successes of the Lions - I'd still say there's more Swans fans in Melbourne than any other interstate side 4400 members in 2003 - but maybe your not counting relocated or merged teams...
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/ ... 21508.html
Last edited by redback_original on Wed Apr 14, 2004 10:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
perthsmike
Bronze
Posts: 335
Joined: Thu Nov 28, 2002 9:18 pm
Location: Perth

Post by perthsmike »

redback_original wrote: Groundsharing is a bit 'oldschool'.

While I realise that the shape of AFL and cricket playing areas is the same - it's the other details - pitches, crowd sizes and facilities that are different- it's for this reason that a 'superstadium' wouldn't be appropriate.
MCG? SCG? ring any bells? they seem to do it fine. baseball and gridiron are completely different. i cant even imagine how ever even mangaed to fit them on a pitch the same size?? (im picturing this giant square with rounded corners :S) what would you consider different facilities? corportate (no difference), media (no different) seating structure (no difference). i just dont see how it wouldn't be appropriate :S
redback_original wrote: A city the size of Perth should be looking at maintaining their current boutique cricket ground - and keeping Subi.
but wouldn;t this just lead to an escalating problem? i kno that i would love to see a new stadium cos i have a keen interest in them but this is also for the good of the people of WA who deserve more. a city the size of perth should be looking at a stadium with a capacity 55,000 to 60,000 in the near future.

mike

User avatar
redback_original
Silver
Posts: 546
Joined: Sat May 10, 2003 10:03 am

Post by redback_original »

I know what you're saying Perthsmike... but in regards to the MCG and SCG... If I may... I'll borrow some well written words from some fellow forum contributers...
Dale wrote:
Jeffles wrote:Dale

The SCG also has a proud RL history, being the major RL ground in the country from 1907-1987. Two stands at the ground are named after RL players (Clive Churchill and Dally Messenger).

I like the ground because of its dimensions, history, atmosphere and appearance (lots of unique grandstands).
Yeah, I know. Big RL fan myself and looking forward to going to the SCG to see the Dragons destroy the Bunnies in Round 16.

Its just to me it is still a Cricket Ground in my eyes.

I love the MCG. I think it is a great stadium. Certainly one of the great stadiums of the world (not the greatest though... I honestly can't look past New Wembley for that gong). It just kind of leaves me cold as a cricket venue. This is especially true with the new Northern Stand.

The SCG, for all its great RL history (Dragons 11 in a row for instance!!!) is still a cricket ground. And I love all that makes it a true cricket ground.
The SCG is being used less and less for football these days (and with the recent dodgy crowds - who knows, the Swans may even pull out totally in the near future)... but it will always remain a test cricket venue - for this is what it is first & foremost... a cricket ground.

Big concrete stadiums are not ideal for cricket... they take away from the charm and character of the game. The WACA with it's newly planted grassy nolls recaptures a bit of this county green atmosphere (whilst other grounds are reducing their hills - Adel Oval - or eliminating them alltogether - SCG, Gabba).

But point taken... us east coasters shouldn't be telling you what's best for you... it's just that I'd love to have a WACA and a Subi in my backyard.

james_
Silver
Posts: 1232
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2003 4:48 pm

Post by james_ »

redback_original wrote:... it's just that I'd love to have a WACA and a Subi in my backyard.
The grass is always greener it would seem... the Gabba does nothing for you? What about Suncorp? (yes, I know its not oval.)

If its old fashioned charm you're after head over to the Exhibition Ground or Allan Border Field.

User avatar
Hiraldo
Silver
Posts: 1480
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2003 1:21 am

Post by Hiraldo »

The Gabba USED to be a cricket ground...now it's horrible for cricket. You're expected to sit in a bucket seat for eight or so hours, unable to walk from your seat to food outlets/toilets without having to walk over people's knees due to the lack of space inbetween seats.

Post Reply