Docklands Stadium (Marvel Stadium) - Discussion

[Rouel_14]

Victory would not get the support to do that. Its not a soccer stadium.

Melbournes biggest problem is building a tiny rectangular stadium. It needs to be twice as big.

Etihad is fine, just make sure the small clubs make money

I can not see teams such as saints dogs and north getting close to capacity at Etihad within the next 20 years

Yes the deal may be better and they will make money, but full stadiums look and sound a lot better

 

[cats2rise]

Fantastic that robert Doyle the mayor has recognised what a terrible position Etihad is in. He's saying it will be gone in 20 years. We can only hope. It is the major blunder in that part of the city and a lot of planning and rail problems flow from it. Western park would be an ideal alternative site.

Stadium should not have been built there - correct - but it will not be moved/demolished. It just wont.

 

[Fire]

Fantastic that robert Doyle the mayor has recognised what a terrible position Etihad is in. He's saying it will be gone in 20 years. We can only hope. It is the major blunder in that part of the city and a lot of planning and rail problems flow from it. Western park would be an ideal alternative site.

I read about this, its just waffle.

The stadium doesn't cut the docklands off from the city; Spencer Street station does that. What would bulldozing the stadium do? Allow you to build a bunch of roads that run into the back of the station? Is he also going to bulldoze the city loop? Because if not, I'm missing the critical step here.

Step 1: bulldoze stadium
Step 2: ?
Step 3: connected!

 

[KissKiss]

I read about this, its just waffle.

The stadium doesn't cut the docklands off from the city; Spencer Street station does that. What would bulldozing the stadium do? Allow you to build a bunch of roads that run into the back of the station? Is he also going to bulldoze the city loop? Because if not, I'm missing the critical step here.

Step 1: bulldoze station.
Step 2: ?
Step 3: connected!

You're right. If you build over the train lines and fix the connections going over to the docklands it would help a lot. It still wouldn't help the fact that the docklands were and still are planned terribly

 

[Allan Shorty]

What is actually so bad about the stadium?
What is actually so bad about the location?
What rail or planning does the stadium effect ?

Destroying a stadium that is less that 20 years old, still up to a world class standard (hence the 70000 that will be there on Sunday) is actually the most stupidest things I have ever heard.

Instead of ripping down the stadium, embrace it!

There is not to many stadiums around the world that are right in the heart of the city, have a world class stadium at their doorstep and if your only problem is he ease of getting in and out of the place well I'm sorry but any stadium with over 30000 people is going to be annoying to get out of, even the MCG in the middle of a god dam park can be a prick.

There is even parking under the ground with lifts that come right out in the stadium!!

So please stop bagging the stadium, bag the cost of going there all you like, but the stadium itself has been maintained to a high standard and they continue to upgrade the signage and screen size.
Not to mention there isn't to many bad seats in the house


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm not bagging the stadium. So relax there. I just want a well planned city.

 

[Rouel_14]

I'm not bagging the stadium. So relax there. I just want a well planned city.

But Melbourne is one of the best planned cities in Australia and most liveable city in the world, if you think our city is poorly planned you obviously haven't ever been to Sydney before


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[brucetiki]

But Melbourne is one of the best planned cities in Australia and most liveable city in the world, if you think our city is poorly planned you obviously haven't ever been to Sydney before


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Melbourne is one of the best planned cities in the world.

Sydney is one of the worst planned cities in the world.

 

[Rob]

I read about this, its just waffle.

The stadium doesn't cut the docklands off from the city; Spencer Street station does that. What would bulldozing the stadium do? Allow you to build a bunch of roads that run into the back of the station? Is he also going to bulldoze the city loop? Because if not, I'm missing the critical step here.

Step 1: bulldoze station.
Step 2: ?
Step 3: connected!

This. It's the f**king rail line that cuts Docklands off. If you want to connect it, sink the rail line.

Probably cost about a billion dollars though.

 

[The_Wookie]

This. It's the f**king rail line that cuts Docklands off. If you want to connect it, sink the rail line.

Probably cost about a billion dollars though.

To sink Spencer Street Station? Its a huge station, second busiest in Melbourne, and host to the diesel VLine terminus. Billions is probably right. They really did utensil up the redevelopment for the Games.

 

[HBFlanker]

I can not see teams such as saints dogs and north getting close to capacity at Etihad within the next 20 years

Yes the deal may be better and they will make money, but full stadiums look and sound a lot better

Who gives a s**t what it looks and sounds like?

THE AFL play finals in a less than half full stadium in Sydney. They dont care what it looks and sounds like.

If it is financially viable, they will roll with it.

Building another stadium is not financially viable

 

[cats2rise]

But Melbourne is one of the best planned cities in Australia and most liveable city in the world, if you think our city is poorly planned you obviously haven't ever been to Sydney before


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Melbourne has many, many planning issues. Do not kid yourself.

 

[Resistor]

thanks for taking the time to explain a few

 

[KissKiss]

Melbourne is one of the best planned cities in the world.

Sydney is one of the worst planned cities in the world.

Melbourne is one of the better planned cities in the world because it had some planning in the beginning. That puts it ahead of many of the organically grown cities (like many in Europe) that just sort of grew before cars, or others like a lot of African cities. It still has a huge amount of planning issues though. Way way too much leeway has been given to developers and people chasing quick $.

 

[KissKiss]

To sink Spencer Street Station? Its a huge station, second busiest in Melbourne, and host to the diesel VLine terminus. Billions is probably right. They really did utensil up the redevelopment for the Games.

Yeah it was pretty dumb when they did the re-design. Lot of people were annoyed with the roof (as it locked them out of going up over the station) and not sinking the lines or building over them (ala Fed Square).

There still is not enough political will or sense in things like the MPA to go and try and fix the whole docklands area. Removing the whole stadium would be no where near the top of the list of things you would start with to improve the area

 

[1892]

I can see how it would be a physical barrier, but with all the towers going up around the ground the thought's about 10 years too late. Also as others have said there's no point knocking down the stadium unless the rail lines are decked and shopping centre also knocked down.

 

[bombersfan4000]

Who gives a s**t what it looks and sounds like?

THE AFL play finals in a less than half full stadium in Sydney. They dont care what it looks and sounds like.

If it is financially viable, they will roll with it.

Building another stadium is not financially viable

Another 25 years of bad stadium deals

 

[PerfectFooty]

I don't mind Etihad and would rather keep it at this point.

Before anyone points it out. Yes, i am a Melbourne supporter

 

[Silent Alarm]

Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb and unlikely.

Etihad is not outdated. It's still a modern stadium that is at worst adequate and at best a really good, top tier arena. They make a constant effort to update the amenities and add the small things like wifi. I don't ever go there and cringe at anything. In all honesty, if you go to AAMI Park and Etihad in the same day, despite the 10-year difference in building, you'd call them at an even par. If Perth's new stadium looks like Etihad inside, you'll have chuffed punters – and not just because Subi sucks.

This'll continue on and be the case for another 20 years.

And that's without mentioning Southern Cross station won't get further away, and that station is decades ahead of Richmond and Jolimont in terms of size, amenities, accessibility, and general access for all sorts of people. No one has to change to get an eastern bound or northern bound train for Etihad, unlike the 'G.

AAAAAAAND we still haven't noted how expensive the actual act of demolishing Etihad would be. Plus building a new ground. It would override the benefits. The AFL is better off spending $100 million on making Etihad even better, and still blowing it out of the water of another new ground, than buying new land and a new arena. You could probably make a very, very good 25,000 seater at Princes Park for the remaining $900 mil a new stadium would cost. And that's without the cost of demolition.

Long story short... shut up and no.

 

[FreoRicci]

Fantastic that robert Doyle the mayor has recognised what a terrible position Etihad is in. He's saying it will be gone in 20 years. We can only hope. It is the major blunder in that part of the city and a lot of planning and rail problems flow from it. Western park would be an ideal alternative site.

Go to Brisbane for their stadiums, have Gabba and Suncorp within walking distance of the CBD. Very much the same as Melbourne. Now go to Perth and try Subiaco Oval. About 5-10 kilometres from CBD, public transport is a joke. Yet people still go. I know the new Perth Stadium is coming, but people in WA have had to put up with the joke of a stadium for 25+ years in the AFL. I would love to have Etihad where the WACA is.
Compared to MCG, Etihad have better seating views as well as accessibility. Only because MCG is one of the best stadiums in the world it gets away with it's transport to and from the games. The infrastructure and space Docklands has is nearly the best in Australia. SCG doesn't come close nor does Telstra Stadium.
What is actually so bad about it? It is barely a blunder, Docklands before 2000 was a wasteland, a literal dump. Where else should they have built it? Don't say Waverley, that's closer to Geelong then Melbourne, and that was more of a blunder.
AFL fans are alittle precious with it, suburban grounds in this day and age are long gone. Unless they have the developments similar to the scale done in England, it's not going to happen.

 

[Allan Shorty]

My view and The view of many is that it is in the wrong spot from a town planning point of view. It's about how docklands and the CBD relate to each other. So it's not about it being a good or bad stadium, or Waverley being better or suburban ground being nice. It's about improving that critical part of the City. Doyle is expressing a view on planning.
Perth has never needed to worry about planning because it is all about sprawl, all about driving and the CBD has never been somewhere people want to go.

 

[FreoRicci]

My view and The view of many is that it is in the wrong spot from a town planning point of view. It's about how docklands and the CBD relate to each other. So it's not about it being a good or bad stadium, or Waverley being better or suburban ground being nice. It's about improving that critical part of the City. Doyle is expressing a view on planning.
Perth has never needed to worry about planning because it is all about sprawl, all about driving and the CBD has never been somewhere people want to go.

But it's hardly that far from the CBD. Went from apartment in Collins Street to the stadium, only a good 15-20 minute walk. and even from Flinders St Station it's not overly far (2 kilometres I think). It's on the waterfront, think the area in general is what's causing the problem. Docklands has often been referred to a waste/dump land prior to the stadium. The distance is really a lame excuse.
The problem with Subiaco is that's it's the ONLY stadium we can attend the games. Have no choice, the waiting period for both Freo and West Coast's membership is huge. Perth never needed to worry about planning because it's stuffed as it is and no government recently wanted to combat the problem until the past few years with the new stadium. It's a slow process in WA compared to what Victoria get.

 

[footyfan1978]

What is actually so bad about it?

Built the wrong way so too hard for natural grass to grow and useless for day games due to fact been built wrong direction means that the glare of sunlight on tv on sunny day is terrible for everyone and worse at the ground where it goes from complete shadow to bright sunshine in other areas. To top it off it basically is 25,000 smaller size ground in terms of crowd capacity than the Waverley Park was. A lot of people that used to goto Waverley out in Gippsland region and south eastern area no longer goto the footy because Docklands has cost them a ground close to their population. The Docklands is another stadium in city built primarily to make it smaller on purpose to force inner city football fans to pay for reserved seats which the ticket centres and shareholders of Docklands ground like. Wayne Jackson at the time had his speak of "educating fans". A bloody joke. We lost a ground in Melbourne that was more central to population of many for another inner city ground close to MCG. All done for profit.

If Waverley had been replaced with a ground in south-eastern area close to trains and was a ground capacity of 60 to 75,000 then fair enough. But this did not happen. Basically all Docklands has done is kill off both Waverley Park and Princes Park and none of the clubs have gained anything of substance out of it. If it helped clubs such as North Melbourne or Footscray on it's own it would make some sense but even those two clubs look to play games in Tasmania and Ballarat to make ends meat. They are closest suburbs to where it is located. If it has not helped them it's net value is nothing to me as an overall football fan living here. I can only find one positive in the whole place and that is if it is dead middle of winter and you are already planning a night out in city and happen to have your team play a twilight game on Saturday at 4-40pm you can see your team play basically an indoor game and still go out afterwards. Given that advantages you as a person maybe once in four years I will let that very rare pro slide as the cons of the whole ground existing for the expense to broader Melbourne population is massive in comparison.
If it ever gets bulldozed I will be more likely to celebrate than shed a tear.

 

[1061]

Was this Doyle one of the Liberal Politicians who constantly blocked building Public Transport out to Waverly in the 70's and 80's?
If so this might explain his dumb idea on where to build Stadiums.

 

[FreoRicci]

Built the wrong way so too hard for natural grass to grow and useless for day games due to fact been built wrong direction means that the glare of sunlight on tv on sunny day is terrible for everyone and worse at the ground where it goes from complete shadow to bright sunshine in other areas. To top it off it basically is 25,000 smaller size ground in terms of crowd capacity than the Waverley Park was. A lot of people that used to goto Waverley out in Gippsland region and south eastern area no longer goto the footy because Docklands has cost them a ground close to their population. The Docklands is another stadium in city built primarily to make it smaller on purpose to force inner city football fans to pay for reserved seats which the ticket centres and shareholders of Docklands ground like. Wayne Jackson at the time had his speak of "educating fans". A bloody joke. We lost a ground in Melbourne that was more central to population of many for another inner city ground close to MCG. All done for profit.

If Waverley had been replaced with a ground in south-eastern area close to trains and was a ground capacity of 60 to 75,000 then fair enough. But this did not happen. Basically all Docklands has done is kill off both Waverley Park and Princes Park and none of the clubs have gained anything of substance out of it. If it helped clubs such as North Melbourne or Footscray on it's own it would make some sense but even those two clubs look to play games in Tasmania and Ballarat to make ends meat. They are closest suburbs to where it is located. If it has not helped them it's net value is nothing to me as an overall football fan living here. I can only find one positive in the whole place and that is if it is dead middle of winter and you are already planning a night out in city and happen to have your team play a twilight game on Saturday at 4-40pm you can see your team play basically an indoor game and still go out afterwards. Given that advantages you as a person maybe once in four years I will let that very rare pro slide as the cons of the whole ground existing for the expense to broader Melbourne population is massive in comparison.
If it ever gets bulldozed I will be more likely to celebrate than shed a tear.

Waverley was never going to be a viable option. It is a fair distance away from the CBD and required millions to redevelop the public transport system as well as road. Princes Park also needed to be redeveloped, specially with the halves collasping on each other.
Don't think Waverley and Princes Park are sadly missed today.
If the sun is so much of a problem, then that's what the roof is for! In any stadium with any uncovered areas, the sun will always be a problem. I have been a member in the same seats at Subi Oval for 18 years and when it is a 2.10 Local bouncedown, am right bang opposite the setting sun. The whole game I am forced to either wear a hat in line with my eyes or shield the sun using my hand. MCG has the same problem, when the sun sets on the Ponsford End, it is in the eyes of the players and happened a few times in the Grand Final a month ago. Etihad has the luxury of a roof and that compensates for the wrong direction.

Today Etihad hosted one of the most anticipated fight in Australian/UFC history, and nearly sold 70k tickets. It has it uses, and is used nearly all year round. A League uses it, especially with the Melbourne Derby.
What about MCG? All it is used for in summer is cricket. Apart from Boxing Day test match, it hosts First Class One Day and Tests where only 500-2k if that turn up. Not bad for a 100k capacity stadium.

Why would the victorian government bulldoze a world class stadium not even 20 years after it was built? Unless Whitten Oval and Princes Park are indeed marked for redevelopment then sure why not.. But AFL won't support having suburban grounds as nearly every club would want to have their own stadium in the end. As a Freo fan, would ask the AFL if we could redevelop Fremantle Oval or even build the new stadium nearby.
Will have operating losses and empty stadiums in the off season, not the greateast look.

 

[footyfan1978]

Waverley was never going to be a viable option. It is a fair distance away from the CBD

It is irrelevant about how far it is from CBD. Melbourne is quite a big city now. Waverley Park area is very central to millions of people. For some a lot closer than the CBD to get to.