Tasmania United

Chuq

posted at 12:18AM on 27th Nov, 2008

I think full state support is vital. Many mainlanders on other forums don't seem to realise the odd demographic split we have here in Tas. Yes, dedicated fans will travel, but there are a large number of "walk up" (or "bandwagoner") fans in each city who may not have a huge interest in football, but are interested in coming along to a game - and that is how dedicated fans start out. Even dedicated fans like myself would struggle with travelling the Midland Highway every two weeks. If games alternate, than I could catch all the games in Hobart, and travel every 2 months to Launceston, and still get to 75% of the games.

» Reply to this comment

stoogest

posted at 6:46AM on 28th Nov, 2008

This North/South issue is what could make or break the success of the club. I can understand that alternating between Lonnie and Hobart would give everyone a chance of viewing at least 50% of the matches, but there are some serious downsides to this: a)What about training? does the squad share it's time between north/south as well? A single base of operations would give the players a sense of 'home' and permanency. b) Home ground advantage. The whole idea of having home games is that the home team turns their pitch into a fortress. This will be significantly harder with two grounds (with early success essential in the long term recruitment of fans). c) The southern league is extremely strong, and it would make sense for investment in facilities (which would have to happen as part of our bid for an A-League team) to occur where the need is strongest. Personally, I would advocate that Hobart should be the base for the team. Although I do live in Hobart, that isn't the main reason. I don't have facts to back this up, but I strongly suspect that most of the supporter base is in Hobart, as are many of the better players. In most mainland states, the thought of travelling 2 hours from the country to go and see your state AFL team play is a no-brainer...you just do it because you love your club. I believe we need to foster that same sense of spirit and unity in Tasmania. Hate the hotwheels by the way....need a shield/badge like Chuq (i think?) suggested. Just my 2c worth...

» Reply to this comment

mlinacre

posted at 7:00AM on 28th Nov, 2008

I am sure the team will be based in one particular location, for training and administration purposes as a minimum. Although publically the task force has said it aims to share the games between both areas. I hope for everyone that people in both areas of the state realise that some professional football in Tas, regardless if its up the other end of the state is better than none. I prefer 2hrs drive than a minimum 1hr flight plus cabs both ends.

» Reply to this comment

mlinacre

posted at 7:00AM on 28th Nov, 2008

I am sure the team will be based in one particular location, for training and administration purposes as a minimum. Although publically the task force has said it aims to share the games between both areas. I hope for everyone that people in both areas of the state realise that some professional football in Tas, regardless if its up the other end of the state is better than none. I prefer 2hrs drive than a minimum 1hr flight plus cabs both ends.

» Reply to this comment

Taswegian

posted at 10:21PM on 28th Nov, 2008

I think two home grounds is a good idea for our circumstances. I reckon it would work well. The clubs operations would have to based in one spot and obviously this is going to be Hobart and that's fine. I imagine you would find that the club would do a lot of work though to make sure that the team got out and about, you know what mean. I could see them going to Launceston and Devonport etc and kicking a ball about with school kids and having some photo's taken for the papers etc. If they do this kind of thing often they will have no problems.

» Reply to this comment

Chuq

posted at 11:44PM on 28th Nov, 2008

One important thing to consider is that TUFC plans to have both a Youth League team and a W-League team. I'm sure these games will be spread around the state (the same as Melbourne youth/women's games are spread throughout the suburbs). You could reasonably expect both the north and the south to each have at least one A-League/W-League/NYL match most weeks!

» Reply to this comment

ntguy

posted at 8:01AM on 30th Nov, 2008

I agree with Grubb. It is essential that we get games in Launceston as well as Hobart. It is interesting to note that the A-League pre season games played in Launceston have had crowds of 7,500. I think you would get more than that for a competition match. It is as much as Perth and Wellington are averaging this year as well. I also remember York Park being sold out for the Romania/Namibia World Cup Rugby Union fixture so large crowds in Launceston are a distinct possibility. If Hobart draws bigger crowds then an A-League franchise would be well supported.

» Reply to this comment

Grubb

posted at 3:33AM on 1st Dec, 2008

By the way, North or South, I think United is an average name. I know we need to unite, but we're not dumb and don't need to be reminded by the name. If we are truly passionate then we will unite. I think the name is cliched and weak - we don't have the history to make it stand up. And I'm against those crappy nicknames - Roar, Fury, Glory and the like. Let's keep it simple and classy - Tasmania FC.

» Reply to this comment

tassiemars

posted at 3:53AM on 2nd Dec, 2008

Astute comment by Grubb, Tasmanian's know that Nth/Sth aren't United. 'Tasmania FC' rises above our Hatfields vs McCoys rivalry. Realise that 65% of the population live in the Nth of the state along the Bass Strait (Burnie, Devonport, Launceston). Locating exclusively in Hobart will alienate this entire segment of the population, no exageration. I am for dual game scheduling.

» Reply to this comment

benoncehobbled

posted at 4:58AM on 2nd Dec, 2008

I agree with you stoogest. The ultimate aim should be a purpose-built rectangular stadium. NH & Aurora are less than ideal venues. The rectangular stadium would need to be constructed in Hobart - no other option is feasible or sensible. With such a large capital outlay, the ground should be used as much as possible, which means almost all Tassie A-League fixtures played at that venue. Sorry North of the state, but having lived at both ends of the island, Hobart is the home of football in Tassie and deserves most matches.

» Reply to this comment

unko

posted at 9:43AM on 2nd Dec, 2008

We dont even have a team and people are already winging over where we should play. It should be North...no it should be South..until we can agree to support the game no matter where it is played we are in trouble. I live in the South and I would travel to Launie to watch games I already do once a year.I do want to be able to see them down here as well. The question is will others Nth and sth do the same??????

» Reply to this comment

stoogest

posted at 10:40AM on 2nd Dec, 2008

Ahhhh, come on unko! We've got nothing else to argue over at the moment, so it might as well be that old chestnut!

» Reply to this comment

dechardonay

posted at 11:17PM on 2nd Dec, 2008

(to steal a concept from the victory fans, please don't dob on me ;P ) ...hein busses between either town, anyone???

» Reply to this comment

Chuq

posted at 11:23PM on 2nd Dec, 2008

Speaking of hiring busses: Take a look at the "accessibility" section at http://www.tasmaniaunited.com.au/news/post/club-charter/ * The Club will make every effort to provide suitable transport arrangements to facilitate supporters throughout the State in attending home matches. * The Club will make every effort to assist supporters wishing to travel to interstate matches in making their arrangements.

» Reply to this comment

tufc

posted at 12:00AM on 3rd Dec, 2008

I would've thought somewhere like Brighton would be a good choice for a new stadium. There's plenty of space for parking (which is a nightmare at Bellerive and North Hobart), it has good access from both the Western and Eastern shores of Hobart, and would cut 20 to 30 minutes off the drive from the north of the state compared to somewhere in Hobart proper...

» Reply to this comment

tassiemars

posted at 3:07PM on 3rd Dec, 2008

North or South is an important debate in Tasmania. To dismiss it is to undermine the whole concept of a Tasmania FC. Two and a half hours travel is a big disincentive to the average Tasmanian without even considering the host of other prejudices that exist between Launceston & Hobart in the State Administration. We have to get real to make a success of Tasmania FC

» Reply to this comment

Chuq

posted at 10:36PM on 3rd Dec, 2008

I don't know if Brighton would be a good place for a stadium - it is 1/2 an hour drive for most of Hobart, which is fine for the dedicated fans, but ideally you'd want to draw the casual observers in as well.

» Reply to this comment

ntguy

posted at 12:03AM on 4th Dec, 2008

I agree Chuq. Walk up patrons make up a significant proportion of most sports crowds so any new venue needs to be fairly central to the city. An extra 15 minutes travel is not much on top of a 2 hr trip. A greenfields site is always cheaper to develop than remodelling of a basically unsuitable ground.

» Reply to this comment

Tazztell

posted at 3:51AM on 5th Dec, 2008

Whilst I agree that a stadium at Brighton has some merits, it would probably cost too much with the added security that would be required in that particular part of the state.Arson, vandalism and theft are rife in that area, so unless the Tasmania United task force are willing to include an electric fence and a crocodile filled moat to encircle the propsed stadium in their final analysis,I can't see it happening.

» Reply to this comment

Timinane

posted at 4:36AM on 5th Dec, 2008

If we have to share venues then we have to find the most profitable way of doing it. One thing we have to worry about if we equally share games between Launceston and Hobart is the cost of travel for the squad compared to the revenue from the match. This cost factor is making me favour a solution that means we have a majority of games at one venue while say once every 6-8 rounds have a game scheduled at the other venue. I'd also favour having the main venue in the city that has the better chance of being able to build and support a rectangular stadium. This main venue should also be where we host final matches. Since I'm currently in Hobart I'd love the main venue to be here but that profitability factor means if Launceston is the best venue I'd have to agree. The question I'd ask is. Is there enough support among that supposed 65% of our population up north that would come along to the match to make having that as a main venue profitable?

» Reply to this comment