York Park vs Bellerive Oval

Which venue should host AFL football in Tasmania?

  • York Park

    Votes: 45 52.9%

  • Bellerive Oval

    Votes: 40 47.1%
  • Total voters
    85

Remove this Banner Ad

York Park.

Hobart is the capital, but at under 200,000 it is well under half the population. In fact Tasmania is the only state where half the population live more than 100km from the capital. Its also, like Launceston, nothing more than a regional centre in national terms - this idea that Hobart is some great metropolis and Launceston an oversized country town has one small bit of truth. launceston is a country town, Hobart is an oversized country town.

Unlike other states greater Hobart is only about 2.25 times grater launceston in population. A very different story to WA where Perth/Fremantle (nigh on 1.5m) is almost 50 times the population of Kalgoorlie (30k and the next biggest city so I'm told). Or the 17:1 ratio of Melbourne to Geelong (itself bigger than Hobart, and Victoria;s second biggest city).

Geographically Launceston is more central, and York Park actually has some car parking available unlike Bellerive.

The reason York Park was chosen had nothing to do with the election (all electorates in state elections have one marginal seat, its the nature of the Hare-Clark system; so if it was a political reason it would have made more sense to try and win Franklin and Denison with that) but Hawthorn's choice. They already had a huge supporter base in Launceston, a high percentage of members - before playing a game - in the 7250 postcode outnumbering all but a few Melbourne postcodes. St kilda also said they did not want "to be stuck at one end of the island", but as St Kilda are pulling out that's no longer relevant.

People can travel from Hobart to Launceston or vice versa, the extra hour from the north west coast would be a killer. And coastal supporters are probably, per capita, the niggest sports followers in the state.
No matter where the game is played, travelling fans are important in Tasmania; and Laucneston is more accessible to more people.


edit: Oh, and the collapse of the TFL.
It struggled all along, got good crowds in its early years but the uneven nature of the compeition worked against it.
It could, and should, have been saved in my opinion. It was a good level of footy overall (though the bottom few sides each year were woeful).
The (relative) early success of the league saw some clubs, such as North Hobart, overspend; not realising how quickly crowds would drop awaya gain once the novelty factor dropped off.
In the end, petyer Hodgman killed it. He did a great job setting up the SFL, but with the true Hodgman ego decided his baby had to be the best competition there was and that meant killing the TFL (OK, so it wasn't known as the TFL by then having undergone a name chamge seemingly every second week).
People lament how low TFL crowds were, they forget how much worse TANFL crowds were in the years before that.
The AFL didn't help matters, seemingly ready to discard Tasmania's local footy as the sport already controlled the airwaves they were quite happy to take the TV revenue and kill the game underneath.
 
Devilcat said:
Bellerive. Hobart is the capital city of Tas, and has more than half the states population living within it.
Click to expand...

Except, it doesn't.

(Sorry to bump such an old thread.)

It's not as black and white as that. State population is ~480k.

* Urban Hobart (~120k) has more people than Launceston (~60k)
* Greater Hobart (~200k) has more people than Greater Launceston (~105k) and Burnie-Devonport (~60k)

but..

* Northern Tasmania has more people than Southern Tasmania (about 48%-52%)
* Launceston has more people within a 2 hour drive than Hobart does

I was born in Launceston, lived there for 23 years, now live in Hobart and have done for 5 years - I can see both points of view. IMO, give Hobart all the first-class cricket, Launceston all the AFL Aussie rules.
 
okay a little away from whats been said.
if hobart was to get the afl gig why wouldnt the TCA ground be developed. in the heart of the city so its central for everyone tons and tons of room ie parking. aprt from money to build a stadium its perfect.
oh on the issue of population. the key word is CONCENTRATION of people. who in burnie devonport hobart will travel to launceston to see a game of footy.the facts are people will not drive for hrs so the logical solution is put a team where the most people are concentrated.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

santa claws said:
okay a little away from whats been said.
if hobart was to get the afl gig why wouldnt the TCA ground be developed. in the heart of the city so its central for everyone tons and tons of room ie parking. aprt from money to build a stadium its perfect.
oh on the issue of population. the key word is CONCENTRATION of people. who in burnie devonport hobart will travel to launceston to see a game of footy.the facts are people will not drive for hrs so the logical solution is put a team where the most people are concentrated.
Click to expand...
The released figures from the latest game are that 2,000 people travelled from interstate and another 6,000 from other areas of the state to attend. So half of the attendance of 16,000 don't mind travelling 2 hours to see a game.
 
its worth noting that this year the devils only play 3 games in launceston, one of them being a curtain raiser for an afl match.

if afl tas believe so strongly that their should be footy played at bellerive, why aren't they doing more to get a practice match or a nab cup match there?

oh, is it because its a cricket ground that still has a cricket pitch in the middle of it in feb/march?

its not about north or south i don't think- the simple reality is that bellerive is a cricket ground. its layed out like a cricket ground. even if you throw away all factors like parking, population, politics- surely there cant be any debating that york park is the best footy ground in tassie?
 
nobbyiscool said:
its worth noting that this year the devils only play 3 games in launceston, one of them being a curtain raiser for an afl match.

if afl tas believe so strongly that their should be footy played at bellerive, why aren't they doing more to get a practice match or a nab cup match there?

oh, is it because its a cricket ground that still has a cricket pitch in the middle of it in feb/march?

its not about north or south i don't think- the simple reality is that bellerive is a cricket ground. its layed out like a cricket ground. even if you throw away all factors like parking, population, politics- surely there cant be any debating that york park is the best footy ground in tassie?
Click to expand...

I think you'll find that most AFL Grounds are in Fact cricket grounds in summer. Gabba, MCG, SCG, WACCA just to name a few
 
All of which use drop in pitches, and the AFL doesn't use the WACA any more. All Perth AFL games are at Subiaco Oval.
Manuka and Marrara are the only AFL venues which actually have the same turf in the centre square for both footy and cricket.
 
Howard Littlejohn said:
All of which use drop in pitches, and the AFL doesn't use the WACA any more. All Perth AFL games are at Subiaco Oval.
Manuka and Marrara are the only AFL venues which actually have the same turf in the centre square for both footy and cricket.
Click to expand...

Yes, but my point wasn't whether the same turf was used, my point was that being a cricket oval in origin doesn't hinder the grounds suitability for AFL play. Which is obviously correct.
 
no, no... i didn't say cricket 'ground'. my point is more to do with facilities and lay out. for example, a hill covering the whole side of the ground isn't befitting of an afl ground. a stupid big building up against the fence isn't befitting of a cricket ground, let alone a footy ground. the change rooms are nowhere near big enough for a footy team.

york park was developed for footy.... so play footy there!

i am serious when i say that they should be playing a practice match down there- i just don't know where. my other point is that scott wade's behaviour is divisive, and he is doing more to flame the parochial arguments than anyone else (apart from the editors at both the newspapers).

the decision is made- yes, it was made for political reasons. but the decision is made, so scott wade should be supporting it, as he is the self appointed footy Godfather in Tassie....
 
The hill would be a problem at Bellerive.
Capacity is cut by a third if it rains for a couple of days, as it becomes simply unusable even for standing room.

Monna, your point may not have been the turf - but the turf is an important factor. AFL clubs don't like playing on grounds with cricket pitches. Its not lkike FIFA where they are now banned, but the clubs don't like it. Early in the season its injury concerns, mid-winter its gluepot issues.
 
The arguement is simple. Northern Tasmanians are BOGANS and have no money, and Bellerive *****s all over York Park. For an AFL team to survive it MUST be at Bellerive. End of arguement.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Howard Littlejohn said:
All of which use drop in pitches, and the AFL doesn't use the WACA any more. All Perth AFL games are at Subiaco Oval.
Manuka and Marrara are the only AFL venues which actually have the same turf in the centre square for both footy and cricket.
Click to expand...

I think you will find that the only ground that uses drop in pitches is the MCG, the SCG & Gabba still have the centre square in the middle.
 
Population of Hobart is 200,000
Populationof Launceston 99,000
Devonport 26,000
Burnie 21,000

Hobart is the capital as should hold all AFL and Cricket BUT the bloody Government keep pumping $$$$$$ into the North and North West. For all of you Northerners please take note of the roads up there abd then have a look down in the South. Look at Aurora Stadium and have a look at Bellerive. Have a look at Targa (all in North bar 1 day).
It is great for the folks in the Norh and North West and it is good that you are supporting it all BUT Hobart is the capital. You do not see AFL being played at Newcastle in NSW or Rockhampton in QLD or Bendigo in VIC. We are soooo far behind the mainland it is not funny.

So I am sitting on the fence but favouring Hobart for the majority of sporting events.
 
Melbourne is 16 times the size of Geelong, Sydney is 9 times the size of Newcastle. Hobart is a little over 2 times the size of Launceston.
Tasmania's demographics are very different. The only state where more than half the population live more than 100km from the capital.

It was not government that decided on Launceston, it was Hawthorn. They already had hundreds of members in launcetson, virtually no support in the south. The Mercurt likes to run that pork-barrelling line, but for state elections (with the Hare-Clark system) is doesn't make sense. In state elections, every 5 seat electorate has 1 marginal seat. To effectively pork-barrel would be to try and win the extra seat in Denison and Franklin rather than Bass.
If it had been any other club, I suspect they would have tried Hobart.
launceston is accessible to almost all the population. Its a much longer trip to Hobart from the north-west than it is from Hobart to Launceston. York Park actually has car parking, something severely lacking at Bellerive last time I was there.
As for the roads, the reason there are new roads in the north is that for 20 years no money was spent on northern roads. (Plus, yes, federal government money for Bass and Braddon; and we need the new east tamar roads for Gunns' trucks of death to effectively and efficiently help destroy the state.)
 
bakerman said:
Population of Hobart is 200,000
Populationof Launceston 99,000
Devonport 26,000
Burnie 21,000

Hobart is the capital as should hold all AFL and Cricket BUT the bloody Government keep pumping $$$$$$ into the North and North West. For all of you Northerners please take note of the roads up there abd then have a look down in the South. Look at Aurora Stadium and have a look at Bellerive. Have a look at Targa (all in North bar 1 day).
It is great for the folks in the Norh and North West and it is good that you are supporting it all BUT Hobart is the capital. You do not see AFL being played at Newcastle in NSW or Rockhampton in QLD or Bendigo in VIC. We are soooo far behind the mainland it is not funny.

So I am sitting on the fence but favouring Hobart for the majority of sporting events.
Click to expand...
I think you will find that the Council and people of Launceston were the catalyst to get the ball rolling along with a 5 million grant from the Federal Government. The only way events and facilities can get ahead is by an enthusiastic group of people with vision for the future. Aurora facilities were not handed to Launceston on a platter.
http://www.aurorastadiumlaunceston.com.au/content/view/19/34/
With the concerns from the residents around Bellerive with lights, noise and parking issues I don't know how much redevelopment the area will allow. North Hobart seems would have been the better option for redevelopment with proximity to the CBD and less residential areas to raise concerns.
 
i've said it before, i'll say it again- hobart has had the opportunity for AFL footy time and time again. they had games in the early 90s, they wouldn't make the necessary improvements. they had the plans for the elwick stadium, the people didn't support it.

yes, there was an element of pork barrelling when the federal government forked out their initial $5m, but lets not forget that at the same time bellerive got $5m for upgrades they wanted to make for their CRICKET facility.

therefore- the pork barrelling argument is null and void, because when the money was being handed out, bellerive had no interest in becomming a footy stadium.
 
You are spot on. The Hobart, Glenorchy and Clarence City Councils all had ample opportunity to push for funding and provide some funding themselves to develop an AFL standard ground at either North Hobart, KGV/Showgrounds or Bellerive. None of them showed the foresight that could have resulted in $millions in tourism for the south as a result of having AFL games played. The opportunity is now lost. Well done Launnie.
 
Wilbur35 said:
You are spot on. The Hobart, Glenorchy and Clarence City Councils all had ample opportunity to push for funding and provide some funding themselves to develop an AFL standard ground at either North Hobart, KGV/Showgrounds or Bellerive. None of them showed the foresight that could have resulted in $millions in tourism for the south as a result of having AFL games played. The opportunity is now lost. Well done Launnie.
Click to expand...
You're exactly right. No one can argue otherwise because it's the truth.
The TFL/AFL Tasmania and the council's have sat there with their thumbs up their arse for over 20 years in regard to getting a decent standard football stadium in Hobart, and still we don't have one.
The Hobart City Council didn't want cricket, Clarence City Council did, so Bellerive Oval was rebuilt virtually.
Glenorchy City Council was trying to entice the TFL to make KGV the TFL Headquarters in the mid-80's because Hobart City Council wasn't spending anything on North Hobart Oval, but the football public didn't like KGV that much so the 1982 reconfiguration of KGV was only half completed, and it still looks the same barren, windy place to this day.
Apart from a now badly delapidated electronic scoreboard, North Hobart has had one poorly designed stand built at the ground since 1966.
The facilities have not changed virtually since the 1930's.
In fact, Bellerive aside, just about every major football ground in Hobart has hardly changed since the 60's - that's why we have no AFL football.
Our council's are too busy arguing the toss over everything and nothing gets done - too many doggie-walkers, book-worms and namby-pamby's - not enough action.
 
As you can see in this pic, North Hobart has hardly changed much in 83 years.
This was taken in the days before the 1924 National Football Carnival.
nho1924wafg8.jpg
 

Remove this Banner Ad

York Park vs Bellerive Oval

Back
Top