Future NRL Stadiums part II

Discussion in 'NRL' started by insert.pause, May 8, 2015.

  1. herbert henry1908

    herbert henry1908 Coach

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Messages:
    11,293
    Likes Received:
    579
    55,000 is too small for our main stadium and too big for a club stadium. Bad number.

    Even if you did make Allianz 60k you'd need to do something with ANZ. If you left ANZ as is why would the big events move to Allianz? An extra 22k seats could be sold at ANZ, administrators are interested in more money over good viewing angles.
     
  2. Raiderdave

    Raiderdave First Grade

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2009
    Messages:
    5,966
    Likes Received:
    649
    Giants have the biggest crowds & memberships ??

    hahahahaha
    what is it with you brain washed halfwits ?

    the fudgeits get crowds of barely 10K ( fudged) in Sydney which would place them dead last in averages behind all Sydney NRL clubs & every other one too outside Sydney
    they have 20K members .. of which only 6K reside in Sydney , about half of the lowest Sydney Club in Manly with 12K members
    Even their total number including ACT , & interstate members is behind Souths , Parramatta & Penrith

    biggest eh ?
    don't post crap buddy less you get made look like a fool
    they
     
    taipan, colly and El Diablo like this.
  3. ReddFelon

    ReddFelon Juniors

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2017
    Messages:
    20
    Likes Received:
    25

    In general around the world and even within Australia, they're finding that medium sized stadiums of 50-60k are better money makers than the over-sized mega stadiums. Outside of Origin and the GF does ANZ ever get close to half capacity? Not just in RL terms, I mean for the city of Sydney does ANZ actually bring in all that much money? Tickets to events at ANZ are shockingly overpriced in my experience wouldn't that suggest they don't get enough people in when they need to? Not to mention it's not even a proper football stadium, it's a recycled Olympics stadium, it's not circular or rectangular the entire joint is a bad design. SFS is the better choice in my view, certainly it needs to be the South Sydney homeground and if Easts continue their push in getting more supporters from outside the Eastern Districts/Suburbs they too will have a better shot at filling a refurbished SFS than they will ANZ.
     
    OldPanther likes this.
  4. herbert henry1908

    herbert henry1908 Coach

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Messages:
    11,293
    Likes Received:
    579
    Whilst I don't doubt that claim, I also think a city our size needs a venue that can attract major international events, such as concerts. 50k seems too small to me, 65k would be a better compromise number.

    Yes. ANZ stadium has gone past 40k people, 10 times this year. Will likely be more by the end of the year.


    For smaller events, perhaps.

    But for bigger events, reducing the capacity will increase ticket costs. Reducing it too far will price many people out of going to the grand final or SOO.

    That's what's being fixed.

    SFS is being redone anyway. the question is, should it be our main stadium or a club stadium?

    If it's our main stadium something still needs to be done with ANZ.

    Also Souths are highly unlikely to move back.
     
  5. Captain Apollo

    Captain Apollo Bench

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2013
    Messages:
    4,305
    Likes Received:
    501
    The issue is that the land on the southern side of Driver Avenue, is not part of the SCG Trust lands. It is part of the Centennial and Moore Park Trust, which is a separate organisation governed by a different Act of the NSW Parliament than that which governs the Sydney Cricket and Sports Ground Trust. Both Acts stipulate quite explicitly what land is vested in each trust, and what those lands may be used for by the respective trusts.

    To change that, you would require legislation to amend the respective Acts, and as the NSW Government does not have the numbers in the NSW Legislative Council (the state's upper house for those unaware) they would be unlikely to get the numbers to agree to any proposed legislative change. You could not make the changes administratively as each trust has different objectives and statutory obligations as to how its respective lands may be used.
     
    OldPanther likes this.
  6. herbert henry1908

    herbert henry1908 Coach

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Messages:
    11,293
    Likes Received:
    579
    I'm aware of the legislative problems.

    However if you made the swap it should be paletable to all concerned, including other politicians. The govt don't have a majority but they are very close to it in the upper house, they'd only need a few cross benches to support.

    Not sure why they'd be unlikely to get the numbers for *any legislative change*. They pass legislation all the time through compromise in the legislative council. A swap of land isn't a land grab and shouldn't raise any serious questions. They'd get it passed I think.

    Of course totally taking the kippax lake site from the centennial parks trust and not replacing it with the current Allianz site would be a much harder battle.
     
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2017
  7. M2D2

    M2D2 Bench

    Joined:
    May 12, 2011
    Messages:
    3,480
    Likes Received:
    269
    The proposed that when they were wanting ro rebuild the SFS there.
    It didnt get very far.
     
  8. Captain Apollo

    Captain Apollo Bench

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2013
    Messages:
    4,305
    Likes Received:
    501
    Exactly. The SCG Trust were not proposing a land swap, just assuming more land.

    As to the Government being close to having the numbers, they effectively have 18 out of 42 members voting (as 1 Liberal is President of the Legislative Council). The kerfuffle that erupted after it was discovered how the Government got through the legislative change to the Sydney Cricket and Sports Ground Trust Act to enable the building of the RU's "Centre of Excellence" will ensure any change would not be favourably looked upon by the Opposition nor the cross benchers.

    Further HH, do you seriously believe if such a land swap happened like you suggest, that at some future date the SCG Trust would not try and subsume the "old SFS" site into its lands considering you would have one parcel of Centennial Park Trust land isolated inside a ring of land controlled by the SCG Trust? I could hear it now "as it is closer to our facilities, it would be cheaper for us to maintain in" etc etc.
     
  9. herbert henry1908

    herbert henry1908 Coach

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Messages:
    11,293
    Likes Received:
    579
    Unless I'm mistaken they wanted to keep the current site for other uses & take the kippax lake site as well.

    This proposal would be to simply swap one for the other. With a 3 year period that Allianz would remain whilst the other stadium is built & then demolished and turned into centennial park land.
     
  10. herbert henry1908

    herbert henry1908 Coach

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Messages:
    11,293
    Likes Received:
    579
    Yes I know.

    What I'm saying is do it differently as a land swap.

    They actually have 20 members, 19 minus the president.

    There are 4 right leaning cross benches who they use to pass legislation all the time.

    That can be dealt with in the legislation.

    Any future attempt to subsume the land would have to go through parliament. Just like any attempt now to take the kippax lake site would too.
     
  11. Captain Apollo

    Captain Apollo Bench

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2013
    Messages:
    4,305
    Likes Received:
    501
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2017
  12. adamkungl

    adamkungl Immortal

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2005
    Messages:
    38,582
    Likes Received:
    2,288
    What's so special about Kippax lake anyway.. it's an ugly fetid pond and the only activity that takes place on its lands seems to be Roosters or Tahs training, and parking cars.

    I am 100% supportive of green space and public parklands but this is of pretty low importance to the community.. unless you're talking about a few ducks.
     
  13. herbert henry1908

    herbert henry1908 Coach

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Messages:
    11,293
    Likes Received:
    579
  14. herbert henry1908

    herbert henry1908 Coach

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Messages:
    11,293
    Likes Received:
    579
    I agree. Plus there's heaps of green space in that area anyway.

    A land swap would at least be worth exploring. Would mean 3 teams wouldn't lose their home ground for 2-3 years, plus Sydney could still host the SOO if ANZ was done at the same time.
     
  15. siv

    siv Juniors

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2009
    Messages:
    2,275
    Likes Received:
    118
    Turned into a Car Park not open space

    And I suspect we would see more offices set up on the existing gold members car park
     
  16. Captain Apollo

    Captain Apollo Bench

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2013
    Messages:
    4,305
    Likes Received:
    501
    I know. :oops: That is why I'd gone back and edited my previous post (which must have happened as you were typing the above).
     
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2017
    herbert henry1908 likes this.
  17. M2D2

    M2D2 Bench

    Joined:
    May 12, 2011
    Messages:
    3,480
    Likes Received:
    269
    It wont pass legislation and they wont trade.
    It still has the same problem that all of Moore Park has. Which is why they wont even bother doing it, youll find the majority of the NSW goverment that dont have their fingers in the SCG trust want these kind of events held away from the CBD.
     
  18. Captain Apollo

    Captain Apollo Bench

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2013
    Messages:
    4,305
    Likes Received:
    501
    That is pretty much what looks like happening.

    The last change to the SCG Trust lands, the Government snuck it into one of the budget bills in 2016 so the Australian Rugby Union Development Centre could be built on the current Gold Members Car Park.

    Herbert Henry,why did the Government sneak the change into one of the budget bills? Simple, because unlike at Federal level, budget bills cannot be amended or blocked by the Legislative Council. That is how sure the Government were of the numbers only just over 12 months ago. That is why I reckon legislative change like you are suggesting would be so problematic.
     
  19. herbert henry1908

    herbert henry1908 Coach

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Messages:
    11,293
    Likes Received:
    579
    Absolutely.

    So it was no surprise the locals kicked up such a fuss.

    If you guaranteed a swap of land in the legislation it would be better received.

    Even better received if you only did a 35k seats stadium.
     
  20. herbert henry1908

    herbert henry1908 Coach

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Messages:
    11,293
    Likes Received:
    579

    They haven't even tried a swap, and they only need 3 votes. We don't know how members of the govt would react to a swap deal.

    Plus the swap doesn't need to occur for a major stadium like previously proposed.
    You could do it just for a 35k seat stadium & still have the major stadium at ANZ.

    There's clear & common sense benefits to this.
     

Share This Page