The old suburban VFL/AFL grounds

[Silvagnis]

Now it's pitch black and stacks of IT equipment has been dumped there. I'm talking hard drives, printers, usb sticks, DVD's, Cd's, laptops, monitors....etc. Just staggering that a professional organization would leave this sort of stuff just laying about in an area of the ground where anybody can just help themselves. I had a backpack with me and could have easily pocketed this stuff for myself without anybody knowing and potentially had access to vital intellectual property about the club. I'm sure opposition clubs would love to get there hands on those hard drive.

I want that ironing board.

It would also be very interesting to see what's on those computers. As you've said it's totally baffling that a professional organisation would expose material like that. Considering the storage capabilities is one thing, but even in terms of aesthetics, it really isn't a good look. Especially when you're sharing it with the Rebels, TAC Cup, and there's a fourth organisation too, right? It reeks of amateur.

Unless all this junk belongs to the Rebels who are based in the Elliott Stand.

It would be really something if Carlton stored junked software and hard drives in another area of the ground.

 

[Riccardo11]

Looking forward to going to the Junction on Monday for St Kilda training.

This year, in my capacity as Port Melbourne supporter, I will get to go to a game at Punt Road for the first time, as well as Coburg (we don't often play there, and I was sick last year). I can see they are doing up Punt Road a little bit to make it VFL standard. I will also return to Windy Hill, but we skip the Vic Park and Western Oval trips, and we always play the Bullants-come-Blues at Preston for historical reasons, but I saw the Saints play at Princes Park a few times anyway.

 

[Silent Alarm]

Not former, not AFL, and not even footy... but the Guardian have just started running a column on old grounds. The first one is all on Leichhardt Oval.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2014/apr/09/away-days-leichhardt-oval

 

[Bomber Bears]

That Leichhardt Oval article is great

 

[Silent Alarm]

Just having a google around, refusing to knock off a half-finished assignment, I've just been checking out some images on Blueseum. Now there's this newspaper clipping from 1976. The Hawthorn stand was literally named after the club?! I assumed it was some ex-player or administrator with an ill-fitting surname.

Why did the Hawks go to Optus Oval? Waverley was functional. You could say it was even in its heyday. I'm piecing together that the VFL was in the frame of keeping a third ground, so any major developments would be at Optus Oval. Was this just a mutually beneficial agreement: Carlton get a new stand, the Hawks have a social club, and the VFL can put money into their third ground?

It seems a wrong fit for the Hawks. Totally illogical. I mean, why would they go to a suburb in the opposite pocket of the city? Waverley was perfect for no club but Hawthorn – why not go there? Why not maintain a social club presence at Glenferrie and then have members' facilities at Waverley – I mean it's not like the VFL had a third party to deal with to get the Hawkers a members area on game day.

What's weirder is that, not really that much later, the Blues were reaming Fitzroy and not letting them make money off of the ground.

Any explanations from anyone?





Anyway, there's some nice photos on there of Optus back in the halcyon days. I love the way the sun hits that park. You go around the old stand way and there's a really beautiful orange that just takes the whole park over. On a Saturday afternoon in summer, son-of-lawyer Melbourne Uni students running laps and kids having a kick and young punks with a footy and a block of lagers... great place. These really show that northern suburbs afternoon vibe...

How modern this all seems is pretty funny too. Or funny to a footy poindexter...

 

[Teagueeee15]

I'm not sure how formal the term "Hawthorn stand" was or whether it was an informal name given by fans and the media because that's where the Hawks rooms were and their members would sit there. This is the official foundation stone and it's formal name was the southern stand and later the Richard Pratt Stand after Hawthorn left.

I'm to young to know why Hawthorn went to Princes Park, but I guess Hawthorn were a small club then and maybe finances had a part to play with Glenferrie being tiny and not really oval shaped. Waverley was supposed to be a neutral venue at the time with each club playing 1-2 home games there each season if I'm not mistaken so maybe that was out of the question.

Even though I'm 26, I was just young enough to remember that old end at Princes Park. I'm lucky that I was able to see around 100 games at the place and worked there for a bit in 2003, so I have very strong memories of the now deolished Harris and Heatley stands, as well as that Lygon Street end.

 

[Wallaby]

Why did the Hawks go to Optus Oval? Waverley was functional.

Hawthorn went to Optus Oval in 1974 (Glenferrie was a dump - quaint, romantic, but still a dump). At that stage VFL Park (Waverley) was almost the No 1 stadium in the State. Every team played there on a rotating basis - you didn't know which team would play there. It was very often the match of the round - the big teams played there regularly. There were still plans in 1974 that eventually the Grand Final would be played at Waverley, breaking the VFL away from the control of the MCC.

There were no plans to make Waverley a specific team home ground. That only changed after John Cain swung the deal with the MCC to keep the GF at the MCG - suddenly Waverley appeared like a white elephant with no home team and no one wanting to play there. St Kilda and Hawthorn kept it going a few more years.

Thre AFL learnt their lesson with Docklands - they made sure that it was 3 or 4 teams home ground from the start.

 

[Silent Alarm]

Even though I'm 26, I was just young enough to remember that old end at Princes Park. I'm lucky that I was able to see around 100 games at the place and worked there for a bit in 2003, so I have very strong memories of the now deolished Harris and Heatley stands, as well as that Lygon Street end.

I've seen two games there. For someone born in the mid-90s and growing up in country WA, I'm happy I can say one of those was Carlton - Freo in a proper game in the late 90s. It may have even been my first ever game of live footy. I romanticise football grounds a lot because I never experienced it really, I guess – some people analyse fetishes and their relationship to youth. Who wants to analyse why footy ground poindexters exist?

It's, along with Fremantle Oval and Vic Park, probably my favourite ground in terms of romanticism. Obviously the facilities are poor at those grounds but nonetheless, they're the ones I find most interesting.

What work did you do there?

Also, were those photos I posted coming up before? They're seemingly cooked.

 

[Teagueeee15]

I've seen two games there. For someone born in the mid-90s and growing up in country WA, I'm happy I can say one of those was Carlton - Freo in a proper game in the late 90s. It may have even been my first ever game of live footy. I romanticise football grounds a lot because I never experienced it really, I guess – some people analyse fetishes and their relationship to youth. Who wants to analyse why footy ground poindexters exist?

It's, along with Fremantle Oval and Vic Park, probably my favourite ground in terms of romanticism. Obviously the facilities are poor at those grounds but nonetheless, they're the ones I find most interesting.

What work did you do there?

Also, were those photos I posted coming up before? They're seemingly cooked.

Yeah, most of those old suburban grounds had closed by the time I was old enough to attend matches, so I can relate to your romanticism. Vic park only seemed to host around 2 games per season in its last 5 or so years and Whitten Oval was killed off around the same time Fitzroy were.

I worked as an Administration Trainee, so I know my way around the stands there as different departments were located in different stands so I always got lots of exercise exploring around the stands.

I found that your pictures worked once I clicked on the quote button, not sure why they don't show up otherwise.

 

[Teagueeee15]

The foot path used to go underneath the outer stand.

I went along to see the Footscray VFL team play at the Whitten Oval and its become such a lovely ground now.

The area in the quoted post is hardly recognisable now.

The Whitten stand is locked during the week, so I had a good look around in there today. Not much leg room and the height of the seats is in an awkward position. I guess I know what Subiaco is like now. The front half of the stand gives you an excellent view, but the pillars would be a massive pain in the arse if you were seated towards the back. Overall the stand is still in excellent condition for its age.

 

[bradrowe#32]

The oval looks in great nick. Cheers for the pics.

 

[Borussia Teeth]

Thanks for the pics Teague15. Seems we have similar interests in visiting the old VFL grounds. I always smile at the 'no dogs allowed' sign at the Western Oval.

 

[The King!]

Looks a good size surface

 

[Silent Alarm]

I must be the only one who hates the Western Oval. Well not hate, but I think it's really ruined the charm it had. You look at the old photos, like even from four or five years ago, and the place represented the club and suburb it should. That overhanging terrace and walkway was nice, the way it just made do with what it had and just used it as barrenly as possible – so Footscray, and I mean that endearingly.

But now the outer seems like it's just overgrown grass. I would've liked them to keep the West Footscray Station end with full-on terracing too. I hate the makeup of the stands these days as well. That breaks it for me. The two stands are nice enough in isolation, certainly not like Glenferrie Oval, but reminiscent of what the ground always seemed to imply. The way they just bridged them together is seriously tacky and removes anything good about either, it just cheapens the wing and seems like such a last minute botch-job. Disappointing.

When you're at the ground, the eastern end near the Drill Hall has this shed tacked on too. I think that's where the Bullies actually train or have some facilities. Anyway, the way it's integrated makes 'integrated' seem a wrong word. It is just tacked right onto the end.

The whole assembly seems like everything was built over a 10, 15 year period when that isn't the case at all. They had space at the sides of either stands, which they've used, so why not just build facilities that way? They could've had two carbon copy looking buildings, one hosting the Footscray PCYC or whatever it is or whatever you call PCYC's in Victoria and the other being for the club, and have the two proper stands work as mantle pieces and focal points that balance out the two identical buildings.

 

[Cudi_420]

I went along to see the Footscray VFL team play at the Whitten Oval and its become such a lovely ground now.

The area in the quoted post is hardly recognisable now.

The Whitten stand is locked during the week, so I had a good look around in there today. Not much leg room and the height of the seats is in an awkward position. I guess I know what Subiaco is like now. The front half of the stand gives you an excellent view, but the pillars would be a massive pain in the arse if you were seated towards the back. Overall the stand is still in excellent condition for its age.

Looks very nice. I imagine the winds from the bay would make training in the middle of August tough

I was there for Fitzroy's last win, against Freo in 1996. Went randomly with my dad. Melbourne was plays the Hawks at Waverley that day and dad didn't have a car to get out there for whatever reason.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

What was Vic Park actually like? Were the facilities reasonably poor, or did the (hostile) atmosphere make up for it?

Only went there once, standing about 20-30 people back on the flank as a 10 year old, was suprisingly able to see most of the game. Don't remember much of the facilities but the hamburgers there were delicious!

 

[Demonic Ascent]

Gate pooling (introduced to give demonstrably unviable clubs like Hawthorn and St. Kilda a chance to succeed) did not allow the economically viable clubs such as Carlton, Collingwood, Richmond and Essendon to improve their grounds, especially when crowds were in the 1960s rising to levels beyond which they could cater for. This became more troubling when attendances declined as costs rose late in the 1960s, so that clubs had no hope of improving their grounds with their own money.

When did gate pooling commence?

 

[Silent Alarm]

Gate pooling (introduced to give demonstrably unviable clubs like Hawthorn and St. Kilda a chance to succeed) did not allow the economically viable clubs such as Carlton, Collingwood, Richmond and Essendon to improve their grounds, especially when crowds were in the 1960s rising to levels beyond which they could cater for. This became more troubling when attendances declined as costs rose late in the 1960s, so that clubs had no hope of improving their grounds with their own money. This led to the beginnings of “ground rationalisation”, but by the 1990s gate pooling was still making it difficult for clubs to compete financially, which led to the development of luxury stadiums (like Docklands, plus many in US gridiron and baseball) paid for largely with public money and the complete elimination of the suburban grounds. If home teams could have kept all gate revenue between 1945 and 2000, not only might the AFL have been able to retain fairer home ground advantage, but also a huge amount of public money spent on new stadiums might not have been required.When was the heyday of the “boutique” stadium anyway??

Hey? But didn't plenty of clubs manage to build grandstands in the 1960s? Didn't St Kilda, Collingwood, Footscray, Carlton, and the Bombers all manage to build new stands? I mean the Blues were even able to not necessarily afford, but definitely build a stand in the late 1990s.

Also, pretty much every club in Australia was struggling at some point. Collingwood had no money at one stage. Richmond were on a death bed with as little of a chance as the Bullies at one point. Could this club feasibly continue to upgrade grounds? If other clubs could go well in those times, and some did, then surely it's all a matter of investment and management (which essentially, when you go back a long way, is what axed Fitzroy).

And I guess the other question is why would a club spend a lot of money itself when it doesn't have to? I mean Essendon are a great example. Why pump their own money into Windy Hill when they can up and leave to the MCG? There's no point but romanticism in staying in Essendon. The MCG is entirely funded by non-Essendon cash, has a bigger capacity, is easier to reach, is safer for kids. I mean there's no way these clubs would voluntarily plunge money into their own facilities when they don't have to –– clubs won't even do it with training facilities now. Don't North share it with a public pool? Collingwood have the Demons, Victory, and Storm all out of their pockets. The Hawks went to a facility that was essentially paid for by surrounding buildings. The Bulldogs and Saints couldn't afford their gyms and HQ without government grants that only come because people in the West and Franga can use them too.

I think rationalisation is and was inevitable. It's totally different in the UK. You can't compare the US model either because you don't have 10 teams in New York. I'm sure if we had two 150-year old clubs, West Melbourne and East Melbourne, who hated each other and sold out games, we'd have a big stadium for each as well (like American franchises). Sydney's NRL teams are being pressured into it now too and that competition is a bush league in comparison to how the AFL runs.

 

[Rusty Brookes]

I think rationalisation is and was inevitable. It's totally different in the UK.

Totally agree. What's also worth noting is that the vast majority of English soccer clubs are in major financial trouble due mainly to two factors: exorbitant player salaries plus clubs having to invest to keep their stadiums up to date. Ground rationalisation means clubs don't have to worry about ensuring they are responsible for the upkeep and development of their stadiums. The AFL has got it right in this regard. So while the days of suburban football are looked back with a lot of fondness (I should know I was there) it was also inevitable and the right thing to do to rationalise the use of grounds. From my own clubs POV, I doubt we'd be averaging 50,000 people at our home games if we were still at Waverley.

 

[Rob]

Totally agree. What's also worth noting is that the vast majority of English soccer clubs are in major financial trouble due mainly to two factors: exorbitant player salaries plus clubs having to invest to keep their stadiums up to date. Ground rationalisation means clubs don't have to worry about ensuring they are responsible for the upkeep and development of their stadiums.

I've always wondered by we don't see more ground sharing in English soccer, especially now given the advances in turf technology. I know there'd be some opposition on a tribal basis, but gee you'd think the supporters could see the benefits of being able to save money and plough it back into the team on the field. Aston Villa and Birmingham City are a classic example, their grounds are only a few km away from each other and both will, in their current form, only ever be mid table clubs at best. Liverpool and Everton were looking at it at one stage, but I think it got scrapped.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

I've always wondered by we don't see more ground sharing in English soccer, especially now given the advances in turf technology. I know there'd be some opposition on a tribal basis, but gee you'd think the supporters could see the benefits of being able to save money and plough it back into the team on the field. Aston Villa and Birmingham City are a classic example, their grounds are only a few km away from each other and both will, in their current form, only ever be mid table clubs at best. Liverpool and Everton were looking at it at one stage, but I think it got scrapped.

Just a huge cultural no-no more than anything. Football in England has a pretty vicious, unhinged history which has probably only cleaned up in the last 20 years. They literally hate each other - I think the thought of sharing stadiums is still some way off.

Inter and Milan are probably the only high profile example I can think or.

 

[Silent Alarm]

Just a huge cultural no-no more than anything. Football in England has a pretty vicious, unhinged history which has probably only cleaned up in the last 20 years. They literally hate each other - I think the thought of sharing stadiums is still some way off.

Inter and Milan are probably the only high profile example I can think or.

And at the basis of all that is religion and socioeconomics. It's such an old country that a suburb across can have an entirely different set of values and people. I mean you've got your Old Firm with your Irish, Catholic Celtic and British, Protestant Rangers. Then there's your Chester and Wrexham who represent entirely different countries and where games start in the AM to prevent pissed up-fights. Not every rivalry is like that, I mean Fulham played at QPR and Wimbledon died at Crystal Palace (I think?) and I can't really remember reading anything kicked off.

Surely though, that should set a precedent for clubs in London. It's ludicrous that West Ham are singlehandedly taking over that massive Olympic Stadium, after Leyton Orient felt entitled to it. In a city like where you don't get much space where the clubs actually 'live,' and even if there was most clubs can't afford the land... would you really rather see your Crystal Palace move out to the limits when you could go with Charlton and AFC Wimbledon?

 

[Rob]

Just a huge cultural no-no more than anything. Football in England has a pretty vicious, unhinged history which has probably only cleaned up in the last 20 years. They literally hate each other - I think the thought of sharing stadiums is still some way off.

Inter and Milan are probably the only high profile example I can think or.

It happens a bit across Europe. Lazio and Roma share the Stadio Olimpico. Allianz Arena is shared between the 2 Munich teams. The big one outside Europe I can think of is the Jets and Giants at New Meadowlands. Lakers and Clippers share a stadium in LA too.

The most ridiculous example I can think of with teams having 2 separate grounds is Dundee and Dundee United. Their respective grounds are literally across the road from each other. You'd think they could sort something out given the city is about the size of Geelong.

 

[jethro11]

Surely though, that should set a precedent for clubs in London. It's ludicrous that West Ham are singlehandedly taking over that massive Olympic Stadium, after Leyton Orient felt entitled to it.

Moving Orient to the Olympic Stadium is Barry Hearn's pet project. Selling off Brisbane Road is the only way he's ever going to get any money out of a League One side. It's a real shame as Brisbane Road is one of my favourite grounds in London (great mix of old and new) and fits a club like Orient perfectly. It would be embarrassing to see them in 55k seater.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

It happens a bit across Europe. Lazio and Roma share the Stadio Olimpico. Allianz Arena is shared between the 2 Munich teams. The big one outside Europe I can think of is the Jets and Giants at New Meadowlands. Lakers and Clippers share a stadium in LA too.

The most ridiculous example I can think of with teams having 2 separate grounds is Dundee and Dundee United. Their respective grounds are literally across the road from each other. You'd think they could sort something out given the city is about the size of Geelong.

Haha yep. Liverpool isn't much better



I dunno, I love it - each club having their own turf. Hope they never go down the groundshare path