Tasmania United Fc Forum |
||
|---|---|---|
| DISCUSSIONS > Home Grounds | ||
| ntguy | Date posted | Replies |
|
I see everyone mentioning North Hobart and Aurora Stadium as home grounds for the team. In my view neither are suitable for good football watching. What is needed are dedicated rectangular stadiums purpose built for football. I suggest that lobbying of government start for a 20,000 seater stadium for Hobart as a priority. The design of this stadium should be such that expansion to the minimum 40,000 requirement for a World Cup stadium is possible. A smaller 15,000 seater stadium should be located at Launceston. This can be deferred because Aurora will cater for the medium term crowds. Add comments |
18th May 2010 | 62 |
| Comment | ||
geniaposted at 12:08AM on 2nd Dec, 2008 in an ideal world a custom built stadium would be great, however with the present struture the most number of home game would be around 12 and remembering the intention is to play some games in Launceston it would be near impossible to raise the finince to built such a stadiumChuqposted at 1:47AM on 2nd Dec, 2008 I don't think there is much chance of a new stadium in Launceston. York Park is newly redeveloped, large capacity, great playing surface, great location. It has everyone going for it apart from shape. Option for Launceston (best case first): 1. Stadium gets movable stands installed like Docklands/Homebush (pretty much zero chance) 2. Stadium gets temporary stands like this picture http://media.thedaily.com.au/img/photos/2007/11/28/170737p_t520x340.jpg (unlikely) 3. Play in stadium unmodified (almost definite) Hobart is a bit more complicated! :) 1. New stadium (eg. ~20k capacity at Showgrounds) NHO options: 2. Nth Hobart Oval modified to rectangular shape (unlikely) 3. NHO redeveloped but to oval shape (likely) 4. Play in NHO in its current format (likely) Bellerive options: Similar to York Park.ntguyposted at 1:50AM on 2nd Dec, 2008 How often is Aurora Stadium used?... 4 times a year for AFL football and then club football. Why should real football, which is the biggest sport in the state, have to use unsuitable venues? Government has spent millions at Aurora, the international Hockey Centre, Epsom and Mowbray racing venues, Hobart and Launceston Aquatic Centres, the Silverdome. Need I say more.ntguyposted at 1:57AM on 2nd Dec, 2008 Chuq I accept that Aurora has a lot going for it but it is has dimensions similar to the MCG and although the atmosphere there for a Socceroos game is great the distance from play is unacceptable for a football game. I believe that Aurora with the pitch located near the Gunns Stand is OK as an interim but sight distances from the eastern side are rediculous and therefore the venue is only suitable for a crowd od 10-12000.ndireenposted at 1:57AM on 2nd Dec, 2008 There was a debate about the hobart options in the online Mercury about this a few months ago. Another idea that came up in that debate was the redevelopment of the Athletics Centre at the Domain, putting a recangular pitch inside the running track (as happens at many European football stadia). Maybe not ideal, but perhaps better than having to deal with sitting soooo farrr awwwayyy as happens at NHO or Bellerive ovals, unless you can park yourself just near one of the corners where the pitch is closest to the boundary railing. Anyone else heard about the Domain option?Chuqposted at 3:31AM on 2nd Dec, 2008 ntguy, what would you think of this for York Park? http://stormtrooper.enumerati.org/~cgregory/tufc/yp-stands.jpg Temporary stands which could be wheeled out onto the ground. This would be like the #2 option in the list above. Some may complain that the stands would damage the pitch, but they had Crusty Demons etc. there, I don't think it is a huge concern.ntguyposted at 11:42AM on 2nd Dec, 2008 I don't think temporary stands would be practical. Their cost per seat are significantly greater than insitu seats and the damage to the Telstra Dome ground caused by the Andre Rieu concerts would be repeated numerous times a year at Aurora Stadium. It is worth looking at HOK Sport Architects site to see good examples of modern stadia of all sizes. They designed Skilled Park the home of Gold Coast United. One of their designs is Paetec Park, a low budget, 17,500 seat stadium in Rochester, USA. It cost $35M US in 2006. http://www.hoksport.com/ http://www.paetecpark.com/Chuqposted at 10:35PM on 2nd Dec, 2008 Oh I definitely think a new stadium would be ideal, but costly, therefore less likely. Redeveloping the Domain Athletics Centre would be ok, but not that different to redeveloping North Hobart Oval IMO. NHO is not huge like York Park or the MCG, and it is more oval shaped than circular, so I don't think it would suffer from the usual "sqare pitch on a round field" problems.tassiemarsposted at 3:58PM on 3rd Dec, 2008 Some great suggestions and creative ideas in this thread. Can I suggest that The Tassie economy can hardly fulfill this wish list at the moment. Lets focus on getting a team together and a bid for the A-League. Park redevelopment will have to follow that initial success.Chuqposted at 10:23PM on 3rd Dec, 2008 Agree completely tassiemars - but it is nice to dream!mlinacreposted at 3:18AM on 5th Dec, 2008 I don't think a rectangular stadium will be built unless Tasmania gets a team and even then it's highly unlikely due to the costs involved. Particularly as the stadium would serve no other purpose apart from A-League due to the fact no other rectangular fielded sports games/events draw considerable crowds. North Hobart was pretty good venue in terms of being close to the pitch. I was surprised at this. Nothing like the MCG where you feel away from the pitch. Pitch also looked in good nick for the youth game I saw. North Hobart is showing it's age though.tazziedevilposted at 6:13AM on 22nd Jan, 2009 Very fair call...one step at a time, so lets get that team set in stone, then push for a field (or two). I think something that can handle a World Cup Tie would be the best target - one or two world cup games at the venue, or a couple of international qualifiers, an Olympic game (next time)...these sorts of things would more than justify the expense of one such venue in Tas. Can you imagine the revenue a couple of those games would inject into Tas? Hope this gets pointed out to the Government. Furthermore, I think its only a matter of time before we are able to host a World Cup or the AFC, ACL, or something of such magnatude.ndireenposted at 12:58PM on 23rd Jan, 2009 Following on from Tazzietell - it would be interesting if someone associated with the bid could get hold of some numbers on how Hindmarsh Stadium in Adelaide (my favorite football ground in Oz) has performed financially. From memory, it was specifically upgraded /rebuilt for the 2000 Olympic bid, and duly became an Olympic venue, well before the initial A-league season. Since then, it has had a pretty good home & away A-League record (9-17k attendance, prob averaging around 10-12k for the home games), as well as (near) sell-outs for A league finals, Olyroos, and ACL matches (including finals), and possibly Super 7s rugby, and ?rugby world cup (all those pointy ball games get confusing to me). I'd be tempted to say for the inital investment, that the rent from Adelaide United (as its home / training ground), plus gate plus the spend of fans coming to games from outside Adelaide would have repaid the ground by now, at least in terms of economic befits that government looks at. But I'd like to see some evidence. If the bid could show that a classic purpose-built 17k capacity ground can repay itself within 8-9 years, then I think we would be on course to build a proper stadium down here. tazziedevilposted at 3:59AM on 5th Feb, 2009 Well, if the Fed. Government is keen to get some economic stimulus into Tas, a new ground would be a good sized investment...for my football enjoyment, anyway. hehentguyposted at 5:52AM on 6th Feb, 2009 Hmmm... How about a 45,000 seat World Cup standard venue. It would only cost $300+M.Chuqposted at 11:28AM on 10th Feb, 2009 Perhaps for one like Melbourne is getting, but I think the Gold Coast's was way less than that? (of course both of these are smaller than 45k at the moment).ntguyposted at 8:33PM on 10th Feb, 2009 The Gold Coast stadium cost $160M for 27,000 capacity but it has no parking at all because public transport to the site is great. Foxhawkposted at 10:42PM on 18th Feb, 2009 There is a great stadium that I noticed on the net the other day. Located in Norway. Approximate seating capacity is only 10k, however the stadium is expandable to 40000 through stages by building an opposite mirror and then adding a second tier and filling in the corners. The more I read about it the more I thougth it would be a good option if enough government funding was obtained. (I am speaking down the track). Each stadium by itself would house initially 10k of supporters in single wing and end with a filled in corner. It would provide facilities for home and away supporters. Mirroring this could be placed temporary stands of lower capacity. (These can actually be hired from businesses who would set them up and collect them as they are replaced). Foxhawkposted at 10:43PM on 18th Feb, 2009 Building two to the above specifications in the north and south of the state would be cheaper than building two different facilities as all parts would be sourced at the same time and would essentially be duplicated on the order. As time progressed the stadiums could be 'built up' as demand required as each wing upper tier (thats upper, not second) comes in three sections. I will find the stadium again and post a link to it. Chuqposted at 6:04AM on 19th Feb, 2009 Sounds like a good idea Foxhawk, but I think after all the money put into York Park they are going to be pushing for it as the northern venue. As much as playing in an oval stadium wouldn't make all the football purists happy, there is only so much money to go around. In Hobart I would be happy to demolish North Hobart Oval and build one there, but it would be the AFL purists who would be unhappy this time! Rutposted at 10:15PM on 19th Feb, 2009 How about the TCA ground site? This venue has been used for a number of uses over the years ie AFL, Cricket and greyhounds. There is ample parking at the ground, cross roads, cenotaph and surrounding streets. Shuttle buses from the regatta grounds could ferry supporters (though it is only a gentle stroll). In addition to being virtually a greenfield site the views of hobart, the river and the Mountain are bloody marvellous and would promote the State 6-13 times a year on the mainland and beyond. It would certainly lend itself to be the prettiest ground in the comp if not the largest. TC_CValeposted at 6:36AM on 20th Feb, 2009 Would it be worth looking at what Wigan has done with the Football and Rugby codes and use the stadium 12 months of the year. TUFC could approach the Rugby codes to put in a joint submission into the Hobart City Council and State Govt. The A League games are played from October - Febuary, Rugby is played April - Sept. This would see the venue used 12 months of the year. A joint bid would have many advantages, the most obvious is that private funding may be available if the stadium was being used all year round. Built at the cross roads on the domain, this would also free up Rugby Park for development. ntguyposted at 11:22AM on 20th Feb, 2009 How would that site go with something like Estadio Algarve on it? This 30,300 seater stadium was built for Euro 2004 in Portugal
Foxhawkposted at 6:31AM on 23rd Feb, 2009 I can see Tasmania United one day playing on a ground like this in Hobart and perhaps on a smaller ground in Launceston similar to like Praetec stadium. The idea of a ground share with a Rugby club may even occur one day. It is certainly plausable. We can't wait for this though. Using existing facilities will do for a start as any ground share agreement with a League club would have to wait in line as the NRL are more interested in getting a second team into Melbourne as well as expanding further in Queensland, New Zealand and then later, Port Moresby. If we ever did ground share with a Tasmanian based NRL club then eventually the A-League will expand to the point where A-Leage and NRL fixtures crossover. This would not be a problem in the case of Tasmania as the venue could be split. Foxhawkposted at 6:44AM on 23rd Feb, 2009 If we had a groundshare agreement down the track (a long way down the track) with a Rugby side based in a large Hobart stadium and slightly small Launceston stadium then it could be possible for the two sides to alternate grounds each home game. For Example; Saturday March 3rd 20?? Tasmania United FC play Sydney FC at Hobart. Tasmanian Devils (League) play South Sydney at Launceston. Saturday March 17th 20?? Tasmanian Devils (League) play West Tigers at Hobart. Tasmania United FC play Melbourne Victory at Launceston. As said before. Wigan manage it with far more fixtures for both competitions and only ONE stadium. Chuqposted at 8:25AM on 23rd Feb, 2009 Whoah slow down! When I read the "share with rugby" comments I meant share with Rugby Tasmania for their local amateur rugby competitions, and state representative teams, such as what is currently played at Cornelian Bay. Tasmania getting a team in the NRL is unlikely enough that it is not worth considering! TC_CValeposted at 12:36PM on 23rd Feb, 2009 The idea of sharing a stadium was that if grass roots sport can use it as well as top level athletes, then the better the chance of receiving funding from Local, State and Federal Govt's. The stadium does not have to be as grand as the one's shown by previous post, a stadium of that size would just be a white elephant, the cost of maintaining something like that would be prohibitive. We need a stadium similar in size to a Premier League ground, one that can cater for 30,000 spectators, anymore and the place would always be half empty. This is something that can be looked at well after we get TUFC up and playing and when Nth Hobart Oval is turning people away because the capacity of 17000 has been reached, before then it is just pie in the sky stuff. ntguyposted at 8:29PM on 23rd Feb, 2009 I picked Estadio Algarve because it has a capacity of 30,000 and has a relatively cheap roof. With the removal of the upper tier the capacity would be about 23,000 which in my view would be at the upper end of the requirement of a permanent stadium for Hobart. The eastern stand would have a capacity of 7,500, the western stand 6,500 and the northern and southern stands 4,500 each. This stadium could be built in stages... Stage 1 would include the eastern and western stands with the northern and southern stands built as future stages. The type of construction is quite similar to Hindmarsh stadium. The roof of Estadio Algarve was designed to facilitate its use as an outdoor performance venue for bands etc. making the stadium a multi use venue. While I accept that we won't have a permanent stadium before we ARE successful in getting a team I believe we ought to be trying to get a commitment from the major parties for a stadium at the 2010 election. Foxhawkposted at 1:47AM on 25th Feb, 2009 Actually I thought you were referring to the NRL. That is why I focused on that competition in my reply. I agree that it would be ages before that occurs if it occurred but don't forget that in regard to building a large southern and smaller northern stadium I was referring to the long term future, not the short term. Estadio Algarve style stadium sounds very much like the style of stadium that I saw in Norway. Can be built as a single side and end with the opposite side and end being temporary seating. (Which can be leased for years at a time from overseas). Then you simply fill it in as needed. Foxhawkposted at 9:28PM on 25th Feb, 2009 Just out of curiosity, is that the finished product or are tehy planning to put second tiers on the ends with similar style coverings over the top? Any idea? ntguyposted at 11:14PM on 25th Feb, 2009 That is the finished product for Estadio Algarve. The two sides that share the ground dont fill it now and as a regional venue they dont need it to have larger capacity. The roof covers 60% of the seats. kiallrposted at 5:04AM on 26th Feb, 2009 Simple solution, clear a large area in Bronte Park and build an 80,000 seat oval (AFL/Cricket), a 60,000 seat rectangular field (Soccer/Rugby), a tennis centre (bid for the Aus Open), a cycle track, an acquatic centre, an international airport and a whole tonne of hotels and casinos. Turn the dead centre of the state into a blend of Las Vegas and Dubai. This would simulateously solve the north/south dramas and give Tassie a trememndous tourism base and a massive economic boost! All we need a a few dozen shieks and some Russian billionaires, maybe some rich Texans etc. Problem solved. Rutposted at 10:01PM on 1st Mar, 2009 I read with interest Ken Morton's views on the idea of multiple Home Grounds. I must admit I concur 100% with his views that only 1 venue be used. As previously discussed the success or otherwise of this club will be a direct result of the "walk up" crowd on the day and with its far greater population Hobart is the obvious choice. I also cannot see the supposedly thousands of people travelling from one end of the state to support the team given that to do so means spending a minimum of 5-6 hrs driving in Summer temps, let alone the fact that current kick off times will mean such supporters getting home at an un familiy friendly time of between 8-11pm on Sunday nights! In addition, support for the team will be extremely compromised if the average supporter only gets to see their team play once every 4 weeks. I just wonder how many people spruiking multiple home venues have young families. Foxhawkposted at 12:17AM on 2nd Mar, 2009 Well all the best if we end up with Tasmania United FC (a.k.a Hobart FC). I certainly won't watch them. Plus the FFA probably won't select them either, especially since a lot of people in the north will be voicing a desire for a northern based club. If it's Hobart FC then expect Melb2, Syd2, Canb, Wollong, and lots other to beat us. I can see it now. Hobart and Launceston consortiums both fail to get into the B-League once more in 2016 meanwhile Toowoomba takes the last B-League spot effectively ending our chances. ntguyposted at 2:16AM on 2nd Mar, 2009 Rut, you can't help yourself can you. Alienate half of the state if you wish. The team wouldn't last any longer than the New Zealand Knights because of lack of support. 250,000 population from which to draw would mean small crowds and small crowds means little power to attract sponsors. The Hobart only concept wouldn't work without a very benevolent owner who has many millions to throw away each year for the life of the franchise There is no argument with the need to base a team in one location. That this location must be the single home ground is, however, subject to debate. The advantage of a home ground comes from familiarity with the venue and a passionate home crowd. There is no reason to believe that these advantages will not be available both in Hobart and Launceston. A good example to consider is Hawthorn. Their results at York Park clearly show that having a second home ground does not disadvantage them at all. Foxhawkposted at 3:06AM on 2nd Mar, 2009 The A-League itself may not see us as the 'odd one out' in terms of home ground. Queensland Fury intend to eventually be a 'club for the north'. They will probably down the track play at more than one venue with one or two matches even played at another. (They are already in negotiations to play some in Darwin). The second Sydney side will be 'Western Sydney' which is very clever on the part of the FA. They will want to play all their matches down the track at Homebush, but realistically they will probably start with multiple venues in Parramatta, Campbelltown and possibly others. Foxhawkposted at 3:07AM on 2nd Mar, 2009 Other consortiums down the track may do the same. This last week I read an article discussing a consortium based in Ballarat. They want to play in multiple locations as a rural Victorian team with a central 10k stadium. Probably miss out on the A-League but maybe a future 'B-League' side. For all we know Towoomba may follow suit. All we can say for sure is lets go for it and see how it turns out. Rutposted at 4:36AM on 2nd Mar, 2009 I apologise if I have offended anyone but I note with the responses to date that none of you have actually addressed my concerns. Sure ther are the usual insults but the fact of the matter is that if a tassie bid is successful then you can bet your bottom $ the team will be based in Hobart. I repeat You cannot get sustained momentum when your team only plays at home once every 4 weeks. In addition as I've said before I cannot see many people hopping into their cars to travel to the other end of the state when the mercury rises above 25C let alone the High 30C's that we experienced this year. If people in the North are so passionate about the game then they will travel as do the die heart AFL fans from Hobart. Even then I have servere reservations as to how many AFL fans would travel if a team was playing every 2 weeks in Launceston. ntguyposted at 6:24AM on 2nd Mar, 2009 I apologize Rut if you see my comments as being abusive, they certainly weren't meant to be. It is just that you raised the Hobart-centric views as you have previously expressed and these views raise the ire of people who live in the north. Frankly we are tired of the disproportionate influence on government and decisions that the 50% of Tasmanians who live in the south have. Tasmania United in its charter clearly indicates that it wants to represent the whole state. Games therefore have to be divided between the north and the south (but not necessarily equally). This should not be a point of argument. The point you raise about kids is valid, but equally valid for kids in the north and kids in the south. Your solution is to advantage kids in the south at the expense of kids in the north. The point about the walk up gate making or breaking the success of a team is arguable. I believe membership is a more important factor.
kiallrposted at 6:44AM on 2nd Mar, 2009 The way I see it, an awful lot of people cannot commit to going to games every 2 weeks for the entire season. You give 'walk up' crowds a game a month and they are more likely to go every time the side plays in their half of the city. With the drive between Hobart and Launceston less than 3 hours, the 'diehard' fans can easily get to whatever game they choose. Basing the side in only one population centre halves your support base and 250,000 people are simply not enough to support a professional football team, especially when the side will already be competing with the AFL for the imagination of the sporting public (and junior players). Foxhawkposted at 9:20PM on 2nd Mar, 2009 Just to ad to this comment. I have just been the the UK, where it is no problem for fans to go three hours to watch a match. The clubs tend to arrange supporter buses, although a lot of supporters car pool or go alone. If we play both venues then I will go to all Launceston and probably two of three Hobart matches, but even if I only go to 1 of three it still increases the supporter base. stoogestposted at 9:32AM on 2nd Mar, 2009 I'm with you Rut (you can see my previous posts for my reasoning), but I can appreciate the views that tha majority have and also acknowledge that it's a lost cause because the Tasmania United bid team have already made up their mind (as per previous media releases etc..). My point of view is probably a result of not having grown up in Tasmania and hence I think I have a more holistic view of the issue and perhaps don't appreciate the deep rooted north/south rivalry that seems to reside in every Tasmanan since birth ;) Regardless of the final outcome I'll definitely be out there supporting Tasmania United! Chuqposted at 11:08AM on 2nd Mar, 2009 A few points: "the success or otherwise of this club will be a direct result of the "walk up" crowd on the day" - correct - and with games in both Hobart and Launceston you massively increase the people who have exposure to the game. Your concern about driving in summer temperatures - ignoring the fact that half the league rounds are played before the end of November, TUFC has in its charter - "The Club will make every effort to provide suitable transport arrangements to facilitate supporters throughout the State in attending home matches." In Tasmania this can only mean coach transport, and I'm pretty sure they are all air-conditioned these days? And getting home at 11pm - A-League pre-season games in Tas have been timed to be early afternoon, I presume for the exact reasons of making intrastate travel easier. (by the way, this one contradicts your "summer temps" issue). Chuqposted at 11:08AM on 2nd Mar, 2009
(pt 2) Yes, I have a young family. I support half the games being in Launceston even though this means I may not be able to get to all of them. I understand that there are people with young families at the other end in the state in the same situation.
Playing in each city once every four weeks could be a good thing - it would make the games more of an "event" and therefore in more demand when they are on. I don't think people have ignored your comments - it is just that they have been asked, and answered, many times before. TC_CValeposted at 12:40PM on 2nd Mar, 2009 North vs South will always be the one major sticking point for any sporting venture in Tassie. Why should the world game be any different. " I wont go if it's played their or stuffed if I will go their to watch". Let's just hope the FFA don't take our ball away, then we won't be playing anywhere. Foxhawkposted at 10:21PM on 2nd Mar, 2009 Too true. I really think a lot of people in both ends of the state didn't listen when their parents told them to 'share' with their brothers and sisters. Tasmania United FC based in Hobart will only have people from Launceston upwards thinking "one day we will have an A-League side as well and we will beat their team". rac_flemingposted at 1:10PM on 30th Mar, 2009 I am still strongly in favour of the Domain Athletic Centre. It has one of the most amazing settings, perched upon the Domain, with commanding views over the river, and the mountain as a backdrop, which would look great on tv for future World Cup and Asian Champions League matches. The tourism benefit alone should justify government expenditure.
rac_flemingposted at 1:10PM on 30th Mar, 2009 continued Hobart is the only capital in Australia that does not have an excellent multiuse rectangular stadium. Building a 20,000 seat multi-sport stadium would be the best possible use of the funding. I already suggested this on the Mercury forum. It could be used, as suggested above, by A-league over the summer, local Rugby and/or football in the winter, and retained the running track allowing it to be used for Athletics events (national championships etc), plus being an ideal concert venue. Athletics Tasmania and the Football Federation of Tasmania could relocate to centralised offices within the stadium, which could also house Institute of Sport facilities, a local Sports Museum, and permanent hospitality venues to help fund itself. I know plenty of fans don't like the track keeping them slightly further from the action, but I have visited many of the Serie A stadiums in Italy where this is the case, and it doesn't detract from your view of the ground at all. Besides for Tasmania's smallish population, multiuse is the most cost-efficient use of such a venue. It would also help in the applcation for Federal funding that would be needed to part finance such a stadium's construction.
ntguyposted at 11:09PM on 30th Mar, 2009 I agree that multi purpose is the best use of resources. While a football/athletics mix works well in Europe it will not work in Australia because the A-League and athletics are both summer sports. Field events and football are an absolute no-no together. |
||
| Who's online |
|---|
| Our users have posted a total of 2032 posts We have 1009 registered users The newest registered user is rossaj |
stoogest
posted at 10:16AM on 1st Dec, 2008
I agree wholeheartedly. I know there had been talk of redeveloping the showgrounds. Could be an option. Being realistic it'll be years before we get a licence, which should be plenty of time to get something built. Build it and they will come...!!» Reply to this comment