WACA ground close to sell out

argee · Post by **argee** » Tue Dec 31, 2002 4:45 pm

I think that for a cricket stadium in a city the size of Perth there should be a capacity of at least 30,000.
As for the new configuration of seating, I don't think I've ever seen a more confused layout.

marcus · Post by **marcus** » Tue Dec 31, 2002 7:48 pm

Jeffles · Post by **Jeffles** » Wed Jan 01, 2003 7:17 pm

I think that for a cricket stadium in a city the size of Perth there should be a capacity of at least 30,000.

Maybe not that big. 30,000 max. I don't want the new image of the WACA as a boutique cricket field to be ruined. I thinkk the WACA is sensational now.

yob · Post by **yob** » Wed Jan 01, 2003 11:22 pm

argee wrote:I think that for a cricket stadium in a city the size of Perth there should be a capacity of at least 30,000.

Sounds great. Would you like to pay for it? I'm sure you'll get a huge return on an investment into a venu which sells out it's capacity what.... twice a year?

Egan · Post by **Egan** » Thu Jan 02, 2003 2:14 am

Well you'll probably get your wish argee not that it will be happening soon, but the arrogance of the WACA will mean you'll probably get this superdooper stadium, of about 40,000 which is a total waste its like a home its your money and you do what you please on it. The government have no say on redevelopment much like they have no say on the destruction of Burswood Dome. The government is in an akward position with many companies and trusts holding and owning land, for stadiums for sport. But on the good side the government hasnt built a brand new stadium in decades besides Arena Joondalup. The WACA have not even finished stage 1 yet and there will be a multiple of changes in the next 20 years and you will see two stadium of about 40,000 in perth my prediction. Which is a total waste but whats the solution, the WACA wont move so maybe the destruction of Subi could happen in 20 years. Although this is unlikely aswell. The people of Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne are lucky in the fact that there cricket clubs that own the stadiums dont have as much power as the WACA does. They are also utilised far better, but thats something the WACA will never get in there current state of mind.

argee · Post by **argee** » Thu Jan 02, 2003 3:43 pm

Look people, I am all for tradition but the WACA just doesn't cut it. What's the point of having a stadium of that size when most sports events (AFL, NSL, Rugby Union, etc) are held at Subiaco (a far superior venue IMO, even though the WACA is slightly better located). Cricket & concerts appear to be the only suitable tenants at the WACA which is a real problem for such a historical stadium. I suggest it all moves to Subiaco and the WACA is torn down as it will be rendered useless. Brisbane will have this problem when the Broncos (NRL) move to the new Lang Park (aka Suncorp Stadium) in 2004. ANZ will remain a large (50,000+) underused white elephant with an expensive athletics track & I'm sure that concerts held there (previously Madonna, U2, Michael Jackson, etc) will be preferred at the more centralised Lang Park with approximately the same capacity.
Its a pity & Perth should spare itself that by letting go of the WACA before it descends any further.

Egan · Post by **Egan** » Thu Jan 02, 2003 11:53 pm

I totally agree argee and thats been my argument for a while, the WACA should be demolished before more money is spent on it. But its not a matter of logic, its what the WACA want not what the people want. Its like trying to get ducks out of water ( a lost cause) so the only alternative is to get Subi to move before we get 2 stadiums of 40,000 competing for events and I can tell you now that would be the WACAS aim. Get your act together. The WACA is a white elephant and has remained so for years, but the cricket association will continue to upgrade it for 2,3 sellouts a year. A TOTAL WASTE.