-
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Hobart Stadium: $750 million cost
- Thread starter Mr Taswegian
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Bjo187
Premiership Player
- Apr 30, 2020
- 3,892
- 5,510
- AFL Club
- Essendon
Yes nrl and soccer are suburban games, but what about Sydney football stadium, Parramatta stadium, accor stadium, Suncorp stadium, the north Queensland stadium. 3 of those relatively new builds, the nrl making big profits these days, did they, or soccer put in a cent? I highly doubt it.
And they’ve just contributed $4.5 million to Henson park, which is used more for rugby league than afl.
I agree with it though, payment should also come from the league itself who benefit from the upgrades.
- Sep 22, 2011
- 41,971
- 91,650
- AFL Club
- Essendon
I mean, it’s a bit rough to compare a stadium that will only ever be used by the absolute elite and allows their sports to make untold millions, with tennis courts and swimming pools that can generally be accessed and used by anybody 99% of the time.
Bjo187
Premiership Player
- Apr 30, 2020
- 3,892
- 5,510
- AFL Club
- Essendon
So cricket, nrl, soccer? Their stadiums aren't used by anyone other than the professionals, yet they put nothing in, where as for some reason the afl are pressured to, or feel the need to offer. Also I don't think amateurs use the tennis courts at Melbourne park, they were all government funded too.
- Sep 22, 2011
- 41,971
- 91,650
- AFL Club
- Essendon
Yeah that’s fine, they probably should, but facilities that are open to the public such as pools and tennis courts are a bit different. Melbourne Park courts are definitely available for hire (if not the main stadiums, of course).
The other factor to remember is that sometimes it can appear governments are being bullied by pro sports. We shouldn’t discount the angle that most often, politicians do love building stadiums - they’re big visible things that will get them in the hardhat and hi-vis vest for the cameras, and millions of people use them every year.
Things are a little different at the moment as the economy is almost uniquely rooted… but assuming that’s somewhat temporary, building stuff will be in vogue again. Notwithstanding the Tassie discussion, where the electorate does seem to be a little regressive on this front - other electorates would be ripping a government’s arm off for a new stadium and pro club.
Cunnington Cartel
All Australian
- Nov 18, 2022
- 817
- 1,297
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
Was this you who emailed a question to the Sounding Board about the NRL getting preferential treatment from the federal government, because it’s Albo’s favourite sport? It certainly opened Damo and Hutchy’s eyes to the concept and they said they’ll look into it more next week.
Furious that the federal government is fully funding the Leichhardt Oval redevelopment, when they made Tassie jump through so many hoops to get funding for Mac Point and Albo wanted the AFL to contribute more. It’s a joke how many free kicks he’s giving rugby league!
Listen from 4:30:
Bjo187
Premiership Player
- Apr 30, 2020
- 3,892
- 5,510
- AFL Club
- Essendon
Good pick up. It might have been under an alias account though, coz one time I sent a question last year they read my full name out and people at work were asking me about it.
Damo didn't read the questions out properly he dropped words and added in his own on some. The leichardt oval isn't fully funded by the feds, but they're pitching in with zero requirement for the NRL to put their hand in their pocket, as usual. Yet on albo's other one, the home of his newtown jets (Henson park) he made the afl chip in despite it also being used for rugby league purposes. Plus as you said shaking down the afl for 20 mill of their own money towards the tassie stadium.
Hutchie also made the mistake by saying that v'landy's went to albo with the 600 million funding idea, it was the other way around. I swear he sat around thinking how can he give near 1 billion Aussie taxpayer dollars to his favourite sport and close the gap on the afl.
Have a look into the digital streaming rights loophole too, it just so happens to be open up conveniently for the NRL and then will likely be closed in 2026 when their new media rights deal is done. They know they cant match the AFL's money fairly, because they don't get as many viewers, so albo has left a nice little loophole open to them despite protests from all the fta tv networks, so that they can make up the difference via an Amazon, Netflix type company paying for digital streaming (for those without an antenna, which is nearly 50 percent of the population now).
I don't particularly care about his politics on all other issues, but the conflict of interest and intentional draining of the afl coffers, whilst filling the NRL's with free tax payer money is disgraceful.
You know him and v'landy's go out to lunch regularly just the two of them in Sydney. The afl/ southern media should be all over this, if it were the other way around the Sydney media would be having a cat fit.
Last edited:
Cunnington Cartel
All Australian
- Nov 18, 2022
- 817
- 1,297
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
It certainly sounded like you. If not, then ‘Craig’ did a great job. I hope they actually follow this up next week and it generates some interest amongst the Melbourne media.
Sydney has dominated the Prime Ministership for decades. I think that Gillard (Vic) and Rudd (Qld) have been the only PM’s that aren’t from Sydney in the last 30+ years. I don’t think any of the other Sydney PMs have been as overt with the preferential treatment and financial kickbacks towards NRL as Albo though. Very poor, although it’s hardly surprising when that slimy V’Landys is involved too.
If the country had voted for Shorten when they had the chance, maybe the shoe would be on the other foot right now.
The boss of Ticketek has praised the MacPoint stadium. He says it will attract performers & Hobart/Tassie & that Tassie is a desirable destination. He thinks it'll rival MONA for tourism attraction.
Well thats the final nail in the Naysayers coffin (If they weren't already consigned to one, metaphorically speaking of course.
)
Well thats the final nail in the Naysayers coffin (If they weren't already consigned to one, metaphorically speaking of course.
)
errant bounce
All Australian
- May 2, 2024
- 694
- 1,055
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- South Fremantle
What's he gonna say, it's a dud idea? they're going to add another major facility to their worldwide stable of venues.The boss of Ticketek has praised the MacPoint stadium. He says it will attract performers & Hobart/Tassie & that Tassie is a desirable destination. He thinks it'll rival MONA for tourism attraction.
Well thats the final nail in the Naysayers coffin (If they weren't already consigned to one, metaphorically speaking of course.
The idea Hobart starts getting acts big enough to play stadiums is nuts. it was unlikely 10 years ago but it's impossible now.
Major acts prefer multiple shows in larger markets than going from one to the next. transport costs are insane, especially when you'd be going over a sea. acts of all size are continuously looking for three or four stops and Brisbane and Perth alternate between them. Tasmania doesn't have the population, general and culturally, to get 35,000 people to stand for a concert. people go to MONA because because it's a cheap flight from Melbourne and offers something that's not in Melbourne. people aren't going to decide on inflated flight and hotels to see an act they could see at AAMI or Marvel or the MCG.
It'll be a footy stadium, the ICC will allow cricket there, and that's it. Taylor Swift isn't playing ****in Hobart.
So MONA works because of cheap flights from Melbourne, but the stadium won't because of inflated flights & hotels? Ok, that might make sense to someone else I guess.
- Mar 20, 2017
- 10,833
- 36,510
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Interesting to see that the Killers have just announced a tour with a one off gig at the newish 25,000 seat Townsville stadium. Townsville by the way has a smaller population that Hobart.
The idea that no bands would play at a new Tassie stadium is ridiculous. If people are prepared to fill it, bands will come.
MONA isn't open only on a specific date. The spread of visitors means there isn't nearly as much surge pricing.So MONA works because of cheap flights from Melbourne, but the stadium won't because of inflated flights & hotels? Ok, that might make sense to someone else I guess.
Fair point, do supporters going to say Perth for a game get screwed with price gouging? Or the reverse with WCE supporters going to Melbourne or Sydney?
I couldn't tell you since I don't live in Perth, but perhaps someone with knowledge can chime in.
I wrote this into the Stadium thread on the Tassie Board. Seem relevant to copy it in the Stadium Board.
Here is my run down on the documents released for the proposed stadium.
All of the documents available as part of the development approval are here:
This is a great design. The spectator facilities will be very good. The transport planning is similar to Perth Stadium and will hopefully provide people with a relaxed trip to and from the stadium without the car.
This is clearly the best location for the stadium.
The roof has been designed for a capacity expansion. Earlier images suggested the top tier of seating would not all initially be built, allowing them to be gradually built and expanding capacity. It now seems like it is all built to begin with. There is no details in the documents as to how the capacity can be expanded.
Some of the studies such as for utilities and transport, contemplated the venue having a 40,000 capacity in concert mode to ensure the site can handle future expansion. This reflects a future capacity in AFL mode of about 32,000.
For some reason they’ve decided to build the stadium with the AFL field in a north-south orientation. This is the same as Adelaide Oval and the SCG. The MCG and Perth Stadium have the AFL field in an east-west orientation.
Whilst AFL does not have a prescribed orientation for the field, cricket requires the wicket pitch to run north-south. Rugby prefers to orientate north-south for goals, but is a lot more flexible than cricket.
The orientation at Perth Stadium and the MCG allows the same media facilities to be used for both cricket and AFL. AFL media (including TV cameras like to be on the wing, whilst cricket media is behind the stumps. This was a deliberate decision in the case for Perth Stadium and detailed in their design reports.
For Hobart Stadium they are proposing separate media facilities for the two sports, meaning a large chunk of seating capacity is lost where the separate cricket media facilities are put. Not rotating the oval 90 degrees to be the same as Perth Stadium and MCG is unfortunate, as spectator capacity is reduced by about 1,000 seats for a duplication of media facilities that results in one sitting empty whilst the other is used.
Here is my run down on the documents released for the proposed stadium.
All of the documents available as part of the development approval are here:
This is a great design. The spectator facilities will be very good. The transport planning is similar to Perth Stadium and will hopefully provide people with a relaxed trip to and from the stadium without the car.
This is clearly the best location for the stadium.
The roof has been designed for a capacity expansion. Earlier images suggested the top tier of seating would not all initially be built, allowing them to be gradually built and expanding capacity. It now seems like it is all built to begin with. There is no details in the documents as to how the capacity can be expanded.
Some of the studies such as for utilities and transport, contemplated the venue having a 40,000 capacity in concert mode to ensure the site can handle future expansion. This reflects a future capacity in AFL mode of about 32,000.
For some reason they’ve decided to build the stadium with the AFL field in a north-south orientation. This is the same as Adelaide Oval and the SCG. The MCG and Perth Stadium have the AFL field in an east-west orientation.
Whilst AFL does not have a prescribed orientation for the field, cricket requires the wicket pitch to run north-south. Rugby prefers to orientate north-south for goals, but is a lot more flexible than cricket.
The orientation at Perth Stadium and the MCG allows the same media facilities to be used for both cricket and AFL. AFL media (including TV cameras like to be on the wing, whilst cricket media is behind the stumps. This was a deliberate decision in the case for Perth Stadium and detailed in their design reports.
For Hobart Stadium they are proposing separate media facilities for the two sports, meaning a large chunk of seating capacity is lost where the separate cricket media facilities are put. Not rotating the oval 90 degrees to be the same as Perth Stadium and MCG is unfortunate, as spectator capacity is reduced by about 1,000 seats for a duplication of media facilities that results in one sitting empty whilst the other is used.
If you want to make the oval size smaller to reduce the cost of the roof you have to go with the north south orientation. Mcg and optus only work because of their very wide wings. Not worth it in Hobart when the roof was a non negotiable.
That’s a fair point about trying to minimise the roof area.
But Perth Stadium doesn’t actually have wide wings. Compared to the Gabba and the MCG (both run east-west) it is a bit narrower. Similar in width to Docklands and the proposed Hobart Stadium (both run north-south).
From the SCG to Kardinia Park — do ground sizes contribute to the end result in AFL games?
From big to small and everything in between, the size of an AFL ground impacts the way the game is played and how teams win — right? Well, it's not that simple, writes Cody Atkinson and Sean Lawson.
www.abc.net.au
It’s interesting that the Hobart Stadium has nearly the same length and width dimensions (50cm less) as the only other roofed Australian stadium, which is Docklands.
The ICC has a minimum boundary length of 59.43m in all directions from the centre of a pitch. But as shown in the cricket field image depicted in the Hobart Stadium documents, there are normally three pitches side by side, which makes the required area needing to be longer in the east-west dimension than it is in the north-south dimension.
The Hobart Stadium documents use the dimensions of:
59.43m+71.6m= 131.03m east-west
64.0m+64.0m= 128m north-south
The wider eastern boundary of 71.6m is to ensure the minimum boundary distance is achieved from all three pitches. They’ve also gone with 64m to the boundary on the north south direction (probably because of the excess space to the AFL goals).
There is also a further 2.74m separation between the boundary and the fence in all directions.
So to minimise the roof area, which means minimising the playing surface area, cricket needs a longer dimension on the east-west axis, and the longest dimension on an AFL field is from the goals rather than the wings. Meaning it would be better to run the goals east-west.
If using the bare minimum dimension from the fence line and providing a 5.5m separation between the fence and boundary for an AFL field, this would give a dimension of 122.48m for the wings. The smallest dimension that currently exists between the goals is 155m at the SCG.
As per the image shown before of the Hobart Stadium with an AFL field, they’ve gone with dimensions of 128.5mx159.5m with a north-south orientation. This is larger than the minimum they could have gone if they orientated the field east-west of 122.48mx155m.
Last edited:
