As Simmo pointed out I have no issue with demolition at major sporting venues that have a point of demolition. Not destroying perfectly in tact stands that could be used to enhance the general community...Some redevelopment such as the demolition of the bowling facility for new facilities will be good.Cheesie-the-Pirate wrote:How is sporting heritage protected by grounds falling into disuse and disrepair?Egan wrote:Sorry for implying that Sports Heritage should be protected in Victoria. With discussions with a few people, I am not the only one.
If we take a very obvious example, what would be the heritage value of the SCG if no developments had been allowed after the MA Noble stand?
It'd be a great example of late 19th and early 20th century sports achitecutre, but there would be very little cricket played there, if any. Due to lack of use the stands would almost certainly be in a serious state of decline.
International cricket would be played at some other venue, as would most if not all first class and ODD games.
Where's the heritage value in that? Patently the course of heritage for NSW cricket is preserved by its most important and famous asset continuing to be in regular use for 160 years.
I won't get much use out of them, but the footballing community of Essendon will which is rather the point, isn't it? Continuing the legacy of football in the Essendon community at its historical home.Egan wrote:Enjoy your wankfests at Windy Hill and other VFL grounds...
I'm a pretty conservative guy. I do not belief in "progress" and "change" for their own sakes. Still, this is an astounding comment. Even by your standards.Egan wrote:I'm happy the majority of South Australian and West Australian grounds will be kept the same as they were 50-60 years ago.
However the general point is that the architectural heritage of grandstands are devalued by the community as a whole. Anything is allowed to be demolished to provide brand new facilities because the grandstands are held to have no value at all in the community today. ||
This is what I find sad that an old grandstand no longer provides anything. But a grandstand that is demolished for a newer one has served its purpose and is being done because its reached the end of its useful life. Not so when venues are demolished because there is no struggle or desire to protect stands that may not need to be demolished. But they are and new venues wreck venues that would otherwise continue to add character to the suburbs they reside in.
I'm a pretty conservative guy. I do not belief in "progress" and "change" for their own sakes. Still, this is an astounding comment. Even by your standards.
I am glad that WAFL and SANFL grounds are not demolishing grandstands for no purpose. Even Eftel defeated their council...
I am however happy that they are demolishing the stands at Rushton Park as that is being done to increase capacity, corporate facilities and the general standing of the clubs.
Demolition of stands and elements of sporting heritage for no sake other than to build a gymnasium or a community facility when they can easily build it on terraces our at another location is the issue.
Not for grounds such as the SCG that maintain the need to demolish to continue to compete in the professional sporting world.
WAFL, SANFL and old VFL grounds do not need to do this. Old VFL grounds need to be enhanced with museums/walking tours/shops within the grandstands/putting community facilities within the existing structures.
As a general comment there is no need to have desecrated the VFL grounds as they have done in the last 5-8 years.
