Tasmania United

Clint

posted at 11:19PM on 16th Aug, 2009

Oops, that should read "failure to draw more than 10,000", not "failure to draw sub-10,000 crowds"!

» Reply to this comment

ntguy

posted at 4:46AM on 17th Aug, 2009

I don't think crowds so far this year are at all disappointing.  The season has started earlier this year so there is more overlap of seasons.  Far North Queensland is an extremely parochial League area so it will take a while for crowds to build to the 12,000 they need to break even.  Gold Coast crowds should build quite quickly to 12-15,000 which is more than acceptable.  No one should ever use Melbourne as a yardstick of "normal" crowd support, it just isn't a representative market.  As for Tassie I would expect the crowd at the recent game in L'ton to be the norm to start with up here but Hobart should push 8-10,000 to start with.  If crowds at Melbourne II and Western Sydney are comparable to current crowds in those cities then I think the FFA would be quite happy with Tassie's crowds in the short term.

» Reply to this comment

galactica

posted at 9:48AM on 17th Aug, 2009

I think we might have to be happy for around the 6-8,000 mark for most of the season for possibly the first year, with maybe one or two sporadic jumps to 10-12,000 depending on success and promotions.

If the community embraces the team which is possible if the various govt , NGO and media entities unite behind the concept, well we could leap forward to 12,000 mark in the second year especially if the side has been competitive year one and begins well in year two .

I am not sure about people attending in big numbers at Bellerive because of the pitch layout and the same thing may well wear thin at York Park. I do think there is potential at North Hobart because of the view around the whole ground, but to date the HCC responses are as antiquated as some of the buildings in the city. Sometimes I wonder whether they think operations will simply fall into their lap and they only have to decide whether it fits the bill for carbon emissions! I mean doggies on leads and pedaling around is nice and all that but this is a chance to link into the (rest of the)world game and at this stage the unlimited potential benefits. So I say come on capital city aldermen get with it.

» Reply to this comment

Foxhawk

posted at 7:30AM on 18th Aug, 2009

I guess this is why the FFT will need to push for a major say in any rectangular stadium development in Hobart a la World Cup.

Would love to see such a stadium built that after the cup one end could be relocated to the side of a Launceston ground (much like Members Equity), and the other end being built on legs with the intention to relocate portions to both Burnie and Devonport fields.

Afterwards the ends could have smaller more permanent replacements and the new launceston ground could have small single tier stands built around the ends and the side opposite the relocated stand.

Stands to reason that if the Hobart stand will be downsized then the state should have as much to gain from such downsizing as can be possible.

» Reply to this comment

galactica

posted at 8:32AM on 18th Aug, 2009

Yep I like your thinking mechanism Foxhawk. Seems the most economic way to go. Mostly now depends upon a change in heirachy at local and state govt levels to bring impetus to this notion. Because interference from certain quarters will muddy the waters and we will end up with something possibly simply a continuation of the unsuitable situations as is now for infrastructure. I would hope that FFT, State Govt,  Fed Govt, HCC, LCC, CCC and TUFC initially  can reach a consensus rather than parochial conflict, with later input from Devon and Emu Bay localities.

» Reply to this comment