If its to still be used for WAFL, clarity is needed to see whether Subiaco are interested and if not why is the Government keeping any facility purely for the WAFL GF. West Coast Eagles will build a Social Club - NFL standards apparently when it becomes a social club, but its going to still be used for football (considering the longer history it has with the code than Football Park and Waverley had)

You'll still need a ground that holds 30,000 for that one game a year. So you could demolish the three tier stand end, but you are still going to have a fairly large venue and for one game a year and no WAFL tenant. I am battling to see how the Government could sustain a 30,000 seat venue in Subiaco for effectively one game a year...

http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/perth ... 1gp4q.html

This article gives information about how Subi Oval will still hold WAFL and other sporting events. I suppose it offers the ability for the WAFC to bid for AFL games for basketcase clubs.

Also clarifies that the new venue will have retractable seats.

It doesn't necessarily say it will be retained to a standard that can see it host AFL matches. It says:



Arguably, WAFL means league matches only and not necessarily finals. Similarly, other sporting events could Under 18s footy carnivals or amateur league finals. It would not be worth the cost to preserve 30,000 seats when 27,000 of them would get used once a year.

The WA Government will want to get as much to this as possible, which is why they tie the stadium to bullshit like an NRL franchise when nib Stadium meets the demand for that. But part of that also means that ancillary events get drawn to it, like the WAFL Grand Final.

But the biggest bullshit in that article is this:

Which WAFL clubs are going to play any games there?

Subiaco would be the only option. Claremont have their venue upgraded and West Perth are committed to the northern corridor.

Subiaco may not even want to move, their crowds have increased since they left Subiaco Oval and other WAFL teams don't have any historic or emotional ties, nor will they attract more crowds by playing at Subi, which is always an argument of why many SANFL games are still held at Adelaide Oval.

I have a feeling the keeping of much of the stadium will be for the WAFL GF, which would never have a hope of filling the Burswood Stadium at 60,000.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011 ... 256416.htm

So many questions to be answered...

In the real world, nobody is going to preserve a 30,000 seat stadium for one match a year just because that event wouldn't fill the 60,000 seat stadium next door. It's worse logic than the rebuilding of the Sydney Showground for GWS.

SA kept the Adelaide Oval for 30 years.

I agree with you...

I just can't see why they would refer to keeping the ground for the WAFL when there is no side that would move into the facility (Subiaco FC have spent 1.5 million on clubrooms at Leederville) unless they were keeping it for Grand Finals and for junior football competitions.

Its a totally different set of circumstances and I am hoping that they just demolish the ground completely. Very interested to see what sort of role the WAFL plays in this facility. No obvious tenant (subiaco have older clubrooms still in existence) and no real need for any club to hold nuetral games there to attract bigger crowds - opposite to the Adelaide Oval benefits.

If Barnett keeps Subiaco, we will have two venues that are simply kept because of their 'historic' value. Absolutely no sense for the venue to be kept for the WAFL and if it is, the only game it would be kept for would be the GF which would require it to hold at least 30,000. There is no guarantee that Subi Lions will move back to the ground.

Football park and Waverley will just be used as training facilities, Subiaco Oval being kept for the WAFL requires a different set of facilities, especially if they have no tenant to play out of the ground.

Turn it up.

A WAFL ground needs a fence and a place to park the ABC van.

They don't play cricket at Subi. Plus Adelaide is a beautiful ground. Subi is a sh*t hole.

Do we create a new WAFL club just because Subiaco Oval needs to be utilised due to a state directive?

WAFL clubs have invested in electronic scoreboards East Freo, Perth, Leederville all have electronic scoreboards. Facilities are far better and improving compared to their South Australian counterparts.

Demolishing the ground makes sense, I just can't see how this ground fits into the WAFL unless Barnett is saying it will still be big enough for Grand Finals...

It's future will probably be a Weagles training centre. Similar to Waverley. Probably also where state teams and the like will be based. Unless Subiaco wants to move there, I can't see any WAFL matches being played. The Grand final will probably be played at the new stadium.

But everyone keep in mind that design, capacity, all that sh*t is still to be decided. That's why they've set up this committee. Pissfart around for a couple of years, defer as many decisions until after the next election and then in 3 or 4 years get the shovels out.

Hell, it takes a normal city 7 years to build the facilities required for the fucken Olympics. Over here we won't even get one stadium done in that time. Welcome to Perth.

I note ABC Perth already had the doubters come out...

Saying that it will be too expensive, a toxic waste dump and will add 10% onto costs.

The unicorns have not died yet...

Well, can you name 1 major public works project that has been on time, on budget, or not been hacked to pieces by the time it's finished? We could end up getting a stadium half the size of Subiaco if we're true to form.