Western Bulldogs and their partnership with Ballarat a success

[dogwatch]

A joust instead of a ballup certainly would make for an entertaining start to a game. Chopping the arms may also take on a different context.

"It's only a scratch, coach!"

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

"It's only a scratch, coach!"
View attachment 537055

Our players are such wusses.

 

[LondonBulldog]

A novelty 1 game a year in May and a preseason game is enough.

Any more and you devalue your core Melbourne / Western Suburb members / reserve seat holders. You can't have an early April home game there as this is traditionally when some Melbourne members sign up on the day.

I've been, didn't mind it, yet its a novelty, something I'll do with the family once every 2 or 3 years. I'm not going twice a year and by the crowds so far neither are many members or Ballarat locals. It was a bit naive to think just because we rock up Ballarat people will change this alliance to whoever they already support. I hope they are studying the numbers and if we are not getting at least 50% from Ballarat locals eg 5,000 then what the point of the whole exercise.

 

[lachy]

Interesting that Peter Gordon has said what we dished up in the Ballarat experience was totally unacceptable for our members.

“Having said that, I reckon our fans are entitled to a much better match-day experience on and off the field than what we gave them on the weekend.

“I’m terribly disappointed in my own performance and our club’s in relation to that.’’

This on top of Roogals posts shows this entire process does require a significant overhaul to achieve any of the goals it set out to as it is now in a postion worse than having done nothing at all.

My contention has always been it was poorly planned with a total lack of specific outcomes and rushed. The Stadium is not ready to host AFL games yet and more ground work does need to be done, alot of which has been addressed in this thread for it to work

 

[dogwatch]

Interesting that Peter Gordon has said what we dished up in the Ballarat experience was totally unacceptable for our members.

“Having said that, I reckon our fans are entitled to a much better match-day experience on and off the field than what we gave them on the weekend.

“I’m terribly disappointed in my own performance and our club’s in relation to that.’’

This on top of Roogals posts shows this entire process does require a significant overhaul to achieve any of the goals it set out to as it is now in a postion worse than having done nothing at all.

My contention has always been it was poorly planned with a total lack of specific outcomes and rushed. The Stadium is not ready to host AFL games yet and more ground work does need to be done, alot of which has been addressed in this thread for it to work

I hadn't expected it, but the longer this discussion goes on, the more it looks like you and Roogal are on the same page. Or pretty close anyway.

 

[Roogal]

I hadn't expected it, but the longer this discussion goes on, the more it looks like you and Roogal are on the same page. Or pretty close anyway.

I think as long as we keep the discussion at a mature level and can admit the failings but also identify the solutions in an honest and forthright way then the thread certainly has its place.

 

[DelRe]

I hadn't expected it, but the longer this discussion goes on, the more it looks like you and Roogal are on the same page. Or pretty close anyway.

In a perverse way you could argue that the weekend was good in that it was so bad. In other words it was so bad the AFL has been forced to fix it and agree to better scheduling. If it had been at 1pm for example it might’ve just been said ‘oh well it’s Ballarat what did you expect other than cold weather’ and just got the same scheduling again next year.

Not sure if I’ve articulated that well.

 

[lachy]

I hadn't expected it, but the longer this discussion goes on, the more it looks like you and Roogal are on the same page. Or pretty close anyway.

Roogal is just coming at it from a different angle with a different perspective. More of a frustration with the rush into it without the proper structure, planning, articulation of purpose which leads to a lack of co operation and working together of all stakeholders driven by a shared vision

 

[Dogs 13]

Interesting that Peter Gordon has said what we dished up in the Ballarat experience was totally unacceptable for our members.

“Having said that, I reckon our fans are entitled to a much better match-day experience on and off the field than what we gave them on the weekend.

“I’m terribly disappointed in my own performance and our club’s in relation to that.’’

This on top of Roogals posts shows this entire process does require a significant overhaul to achieve any of the goals it set out to as it is now in a postion worse than having done nothing at all.

My contention has always been it was poorly planned with a total lack of specific outcomes and rushed. The Stadium is not ready to host AFL games yet and more ground work does need to be done, alot of which has been addressed in this thread for it to work

Didn't you love "the AFL did not let down the club by scheduling a late afternoon start". He said " I don't believe that, I will say I have no stronger supporter than Gillon McLachlan in respect to the Ballarat concept".

Well, if the AFL didn't let us down with the scheduling who did ?

 

[lachy]

Didn't you love "the AFL did not let down the club by scheduling a late afternoon start". He said " I don't believe that, I will say I have no stronger supporter than Gillon McLachlan in respect to the Ballarat concept".

Well, if the AFL didn't let us down with the scheduling who did ?

We , like more than half of the clubs are very dependant on the governing body. You don't want to bite the hand that feeds you, however it is one of the reasons that at this stage the heading of this thread is more than just ironic. For this to work we need AFL assistance in fixturing, no doubt at all. No home games in Melbourne for the last 7 weeks of the season, never heard of that before

 

[dogwatch]

Roogal is just coming at it from a different angle with a different perspective. More of a frustration with the rush into it without the proper structure, planning, articulation of purpose which leads to a lack of co operation and working together of all stakeholders driven by a shared vision

There probably IS a long term plan and vision but it hasn't been fully spelled out. Is that because

1. the club doesn't want to show its hand and is keeping its IP to itself? (excusable but probably unnecessary)
2. it has a plan but it's far from complete - perhaps making some of it up along the way - and it would not stand up to public scrutiny? (not excusable),
3. it doesn't want to be scrutinised and held accountable for intermediate goals? (understandable but not really excusable)
4. it just didn't think to explain itself better to members? (unlikely but not excusable anyway)

It could be a combination of 2 and 3.

This may not be as reprehensible as it sounds though, if in fact the WB were given an offer too good to refuse (or one they simply couldn't refuse ) and they had to agree to it hastily without putting in all the detailed planning, consultation and modelling normally required.

As pointed out above all clubs like to think they can determine their own destinies but only about half of them truly have that luxury.

 

[Roogal]

In a perverse way you could argue that the weekend was good in that it was so bad. In other words it was so bad the AFL has been forced to fix it and agree to better scheduling. If it had been at 1pm for example it might’ve just been said ‘oh well it’s Ballarat what did you expect other than cold weather’ and just got the same scheduling again next year.

Not sure if I’ve articulated that well.

It's funny because I made a comment last year that if the first game had been a complete washout, that it would have likely prompted quicker action toward development.

 

[Roogal]

There probably IS a long term plan and vision but it hasn't been fully spelled out. Is that because

1. the club doesn't want to show its hand and is keeping its IP to itself? (excusable but probably unnecessary)
2. it has a plan but it's far from complete - perhaps making some of it up along the way - and it would not stand up to public scrutiny? (not excusable),
3. it doesn't want to be scrutinised and held accountable for intermediate goals? (understandable but not really excusable)
4. it just didn't think to explain itself better to members? (unlikely but not excusable anyway)

It could be a combination of 2 and 3.

This may not be as reprehensible as it sounds though, if in fact the WB were given an offer too good to refuse (or one they simply couldn't refuse ) and they had to agree to it hastily without putting in all the detailed planning, consultation and modelling normally required.

As pointed out above all clubs like to think they can determine their own destinies but only about half of them truly have that luxury.

Stage 2 was always loosely defined in the beginning as simply adding more seats. A forumer from a while back was far more knowledgeable on the Stadium's development than I. He stated long before stage 1 was finished that there should be a three year break between completing stage 1 and commencing stage 2. His view point was that this would allow the Council and Government to take stock of the Stadium's appeal, how it was being used and specifically that the priority of needs for users would emerge thus defining exactly where themoney for subsequent stages should be prioritised.

I think that it has become apparent to all and sundry that the 3 biggest priorities for the ground are an additional 7,000 covered seats, upgraded lighting, and improved PT access. That's very much the impression that I get which the Ballarat Council are putting up as their main recommendations for Stage 2.

 

[Freshwater]

Sometimes it’s just good to start a project and then sort out the problems along the way. I’m a carpenter and some jobs would never start if we waited for everything to be perfect. We have made it possible, let’s iron things out from now.

 

[Dogs 13]

We , like more than half of the clubs are very dependant on the governing body. You don't want to bite the hand that feeds you, however it is one of the reasons that at this stage the heading of this thread is more than just ironic. For this to work we need AFL assistance in fixturing, no doubt at all. No home games in Melbourne for the last 7 weeks of the season, never heard of that before

You and I both know exactly why Gordon had to say that, but it just sounded ridiculous. And don't get me started about our draw for the last 7 rounds. Try that on with the big clubs and see what happens.

 

[Roogal]

Sometimes it’s just good to start a project and then sort out the problems along the way. I’m a carpenter and some jobs would never start if we waited for everything to be perfect. We have made it possible, let’s iron things out from now.

That can be expensive, the Victorian Arts Centre, Melbourne's Citylink, Federation Square, the State Museum, the City Square, Southern Cross Station and even Myki are all shrines to public projects that were started well before the details had been thought out and all of those projects went masively over time in construction or implementation and over budget by 50-200%. They started early by politicians eager to get things done, but it was left to the engineers to sort out some very expensive fixes along the way, costing tax payers billions.

In a small city like Ballarat where Mars Stadium is already being misrepresented by certain opportunistic Councillors (Amy Johnson), Liberal Party politicians (Joshua Morris) and vested-interest and highly vocal community groups (the Ballarat Residents and Ratepayers Association led by Ron Egberg), every dollar spent at the Stadium is being heavily scrutinised. These detractors are deliberately putting it all back on the Council and are erroneously trying to convince the community (with some success) that it's their rates that paid for its construction. The figure of $32 million is occasionally touted as its construction cost by those seeking to detract from it for their own reasons. Of course they don't mention that the $32 mil was funded entirely by the State Government and actually was divided $15.2 mil for Stage 1 of Mars Stadium, $10 mil toward Stage 1 of the new basketball stadium, $5 mil to redevelop the showgrounds and $1.8 mil was spent upgrading the Lake Wendouree Football/Cricket/Netball Club pavillion.

The ground's detractors incorrectly argue that it is costing a fortune to operate but don't ever quote actual running costs. The real figure is quite low because the ground is essentially a large country oval. When the scoreboard and lights are off and the media centre closed up it's not costing a cent! But the detractors still try to play on other people's ignorance and the Council and those promoting the Stadium's development are very aware of this. This is why they are preparing their case for future development to ensure that it is water-tight and will withstand scrutiny from all levels, and deliver the most needed and best outcome overall with the limited amount of money that the government will likely provide. The government will only provide a fixed amount of money based upon what the Council determines is needed as part of their detailed $500,000 feasibility study.

Finally keep in mind that the Council have not made it's determinations and recommendations alone, that they in fact consulted with the WBFC as well as other major users to determine what they considered as priorities.

 

[dogwatch]

In IT project management the textbooks often say that you should spend about 50% of your time and effort on the planning stages (including risk management and stakeholder communications) because after that it's incredibly hard to change course or claw anything back from a project going off the rails. I don't think I've ever seen an IT project actually DO that though.

The pressure on politicians, business execs etc to actually be doing something and getting tangible results is so great that the process gets subverted. Nobody wants to wait 6 months or a year while some airy-fairy planning process meanders along with seemingly nothing to show for it. Instead project managers are lucky if they get to spend 10% of their time on planning. Small wonder so many IT projects go awry. Either canned or massively over time and over budget.

I imagine it's pretty much the same with building projects, especially where it's public infrastructure and public funds.

However ...
This doesn't make it wrong. At least not all the time. If everyone knew ahead of time how much the Sydney Opera House was going to cost they would never have built it. But they did build it - a daring post-war venture in a country that was far from the depressing post-war ruined cities and had a bright sunny future with high economic growth. Now, despite the massive cost overruns, it is a tourist attraction and a symbol of Australia. How many other buildings in Australia can you say that about? Maybe just one - the Sydney Harbour Bridge.

So sometimes leaders go out on a reach - deep down they know it's not thoroughly thought through and will probably cost a lot more when it's all finished, whenever that might be. But the vision and the symbolism is as important as the bricks and mortar. The people need aspirational works.

That may well have been the case with Fed Square, the Arts Centre, CityLink, etc too. In this case it's about regional development, local pride, etc as far as the government bodies are concerned. And yes, maybe buying votes too. It's hard to say there's a really strong cost-benefit case for doing it in purely dollar terms especially when the real cost will probably be much greater than the projected cost at the outset. But 10-15 years down the track - if it's not derailed by the political opportunists and short-term thinkers - it may be something that all of the Ballarat region may be proud of. A home for diverse activities, not just AFL matches. A symbol that Ballarat is going places and can match it with any regional city in the country.

Maybe even somewhere that the WB are also happy to call their home away from home ... with windbreaks, modern ground facilities, convenient transport and covered seating for 20,000?

 

[BeMoreBont]

We can't have it all.. so we need to pick our battles for stage 2.

Leave the lights. Just play day matches 1:10 or 1:45 starts.

Continue the main grandstand around to the scoreboard, this will block some of the wind and not make 95% of the game live on one wing.

Build a little station drop off zone in the abundance of space near the ground.

And obviously play both games before the end of May.

 

[VogonProsthetnic]

We can't have it all.. so we need to pick our battles for stage 2.

Leave the lights. Just play day matches 1:10 or 1:45 starts.

Continue the main grandstand around to the scoreboard, this will block some of the wind and not make 95% of the game live on one wing.

Build a little station drop off zone in the abundance of space near the ground.

And obviously play both games before the end of May.

Some hard surfacing and some sort of protective coverage for the GA standing area along Creswick Rd would cost very little and improve things a lot. Maybe even some food/ drinks vending areas over there will help the experience as well. Do the simple and easily achievable stuff first would be good.

 

[Roogal]

In IT project management the textbooks often say that you should spend about 50% of your time and effort on the planning stages (including risk management and stakeholder communications) because after that it's incredibly hard to change course or claw anything back from a project going off the rails. I don't think I've ever seen an IT project actually DO that though.

The pressure on politicians, business execs etc to actually be doing something and getting tangible results is so great that the process gets subverted. Nobody wants to wait 6 months or a year while some airy-fairy planning process meanders along with seemingly nothing to show for it. Instead project managers are lucky if they get to spend 10% of their time on planning. Small wonder so many IT projects go awry. Either canned or massively over time and over budget.

I imagine it's pretty much the same with building projects, especially where it's public infrastructure and public funds.

However ...
This doesn't make it wrong. At least not all the time. If everyone knew ahead of time how much the Sydney Opera House was going to cost they would never have built it. But they did build it - a daring post-war venture in a country that was far from the depressing post-war ruined cities and had a bright sunny future with high economic growth. Now, despite the massive cost overruns, it is a tourist attraction and a symbol of Australia. How many other buildings in Australia can you say that about? Maybe just one - the Sydney Harbour Bridge.

So sometimes leaders go out on a reach - deep down they know it's not thoroughly thought through and will probably cost a lot more when it's all finished, whenever that might be. But the vision and the symbolism is as important as the bricks and mortar. The people need aspirational works.

That may well have been the case with Fed Square, the Arts Centre, CityLink, etc too. In this case it's about regional development, local pride, etc as far as the government bodies are concerned. And yes, maybe buying votes too. It's hard to say there's a really strong cost-benefit case for doing it in purely dollar terms especially when the real cost will probably be much greater than the projected cost at the outset. But 10-15 years down the track - if it's not derailed by the political opportunists and short-term thinkers - it may be something that all of the Ballarat region may be proud of. A home for diverse activities, not just AFL matches. A symbol that Ballarat is going places and can match it with any regional city in the country.

Maybe even somewhere that the WB are also happy to call their home away from home ... with windbreaks, modern ground facilities, convenient transport and covered seating for 20,000?

Abraham Lincoln once said, "Give me six hours to cut down a tree, I'll spend the first hour shapening the axe"

 

[Freshwater]

That can be expensive, the Victorian Arts Centre, Melbourne's Citylink, Federation Square, the State Museum, the City Square, Southern Cross Station and even Myki are all shrines to public projects that were started well before the details had been thought out and all of those projects went masively over time in construction or implementation and over budget by 50-200%. They started early by politicians eager to get things done, but it was left to the engineers to sort out some very expensive fixes along the way, costing tax payers billions.

In a small city like Ballarat where Mars Stadium is already being misrepresented by certain opportunistic Councillors (Amy Johnson), Liberal Party politicians (Joshua Morris) and vested-interest and highly vocal community groups (the Ballarat Residents and Ratepayers Association led by Ron Egberg), every dollar spent at the Stadium is being heavily scrutinised. These detractors are deliberately putting it all back on the Council and are erroneously trying to convince the community (with some success) that it's their rates that paid for its construction. The figure of $32 million is occasionally touted as its construction cost by those seeking to detract from it for their own reasons. Of course they don't mention that the $32 mil was funded entirely by the State Government and actually was divided $15.2 mil for Stage 1 of Mars Stadium, $10 mil toward Stage 1 of the new basketball stadium, $5 mil to redevelop the showgrounds and $1.8 mil was spent upgrading the Lake Wendouree Football/Cricket/Netball Club pavillion.

The ground's detractors incorrectly argue that it is costing a fortune to operate but don't ever quote actual running costs. The real figure is quite low because the ground is essentially a large country oval. When the scoreboard and lights are off and the media centre closed up it's not costing a cent! But the detractors still try to play on other people's ignorance and the Council and those promoting the Stadium's development are very aware of this. This is why they are preparing their case for future development to ensure that it is water-tight and will withstand scrutiny from all levels, and deliver the most needed and best outcome overall with the limited amount of money that the government will likely provide. The government will only provide a fixed amount of money based upon what the Council determines is needed as part of their detailed $500,000 feasibility study.

Finally keep in mind that the Council have not made it's determinations and recommendations alone, that they in fact consulted with the WBFC as well as other major users to determine what they considered as priorities.

Thank you for all your posts. I had no idea there would be a negative feeling from any locals about playing AFL footy in their town. I get there would be if it was from rate payers. Like my rates go to the Geelong football stadium, but as you say it’s mostly state government money. I don’t get why they wouldn’t want AFL footy?

 

[Roogal]

Broadly speaking the greater majority of Ballarat people support the AFL being played and understand the benefits falling out from it. Most agree that Mars Stadium has been a huge upgrade for the city. As I said, many of the detractors are just opportunists and the ones specifically that I named very much have their own personal agenda's and axes to grind. Cr Amy Johnson was highly supportive of the stadium right up until she sought Joshua Morris's support for Liberal Party endorsement to run as the Csndidate for Wendouree in the forthcoming State Election. Suddenly she did a 180 degree about turn. Ron Egberg (the Director of the MADE) hates the stadium because he sees it as drawing council money and support away from his Museum of Australian Democracy Eureka which has been struggling for years and propped up by the Council costing rate payers $2 million each year since opening several years ago. Finally the council told the MADE to either sink or swim last year.

Then of course there are some people in Ballarat (mainly the oldies) who just want the place to be a living museum, they despise progress, are suspicious of outside investment, and protest that every person that runs for or represents a public office is naturally a criminal. Ballarat has some pretty militant, vocal and highly organised conservation lobby groups who keep VCAT on their speed dials and who have successfully had two councils sacked. It's always been a very revolutionary city of extreme views underneath its conservative and dour facade.

 

[Mattdougie]

Roogal is just coming at it from a different angle with a different perspective. More of a frustration with the rush into it without the proper structure, planning, articulation of purpose which leads to a lack of co operation and working together of all stakeholders driven by a shared vision

Garbage

She clearly has a vested interest and has some connection to the game and th stadium.

I couldn’t care less about building a stadium in Ballarat off our cooperation when it is losing us members. Check out the social media pages and the scores of members who are dropping off with this part of the problem.

The horse is dead stop flogging it and trying to spin positives there are none.

15 people and a dog in the freezing cold and we can’t win at the place either. Another three years of this will have us near bottom of the membership ladder below even GWS

I don’t understand why the western bulldogs have to give two sh!ts about developing a stadium in Ballarat??

 

[Roogal]

More feedback resulting from my email last week offering your Suggestions:

From the AFL:

Hi RG

Thanks for your email. We agree the match in Ballarat didn’t showcase the city in the most positive light.

We will be looking to schedule future matches in early afternoon slots – either Saturday 1.45pm or 2.10pm or Sunday 1.10pm to minimise the impact of any weather. I note your suggestion of 1.10 pm Saturday – this can’t be accommodate given our contractual obligations with broadcasters, however the 1.45pm or 2.10pm slots should still be ok.

The Bulldogs had requested one match early in the year and one in the latter part of the year. We understand the Bulldogs will seek both matches to be played in April/May in line with your suggestion.

There are some fixturing challenges here in that we will be exploring a very narrow set of parameters – early afternoon slots only, early part of the year only, and a limited opponent mix (noting the Bulldogs will want to limit the opponents to interstate clubs and this might need to exclude the WA clubs given the significant travel required) – but we will do what we can to optimise the Ballarat games in future.

Regards

Marcus

Head of Broadcasting and Scheduling
AFL HOUSE | 140 Harbour Esplanade | Docklands VIC 3008
GPO Box 1449 | Melbourne VIC 3001


From the State Member for Wendouree:

Hi RG,

Thanks for your email re. improvements to the stadium and the games held at Mars stadium. Really appreciate your input! The points you made regarding the state government investment is really interesting. There was a commitment in the last budget to do a feasibility study into stage 2 of the stadium. It was always my dream to have the stadium wrap around the ground (maybe leaving the mound? Maybe not..) in order to not only accommodate AFL and other footy a bit better, but to also accommodate other major events. I think it’s equally important in summer to provide sun protection at events. I also want to acknowledge that we are still in the beginning stages of doing this, and of course there will be many lessons to learn and improvements to make. I hope we approach every single event with an eye to improvements!

Thanks again for your input, RG. I am not standing again – I will be retiring from politics and the next stage will be up to whichever candidate is successful at the next election. I’ll always take a keen interest in what’s happening in my community, of course.

All the best,

Sharon Knight, MLA Wendouree

From Commerce Ballarat:

Thank you for your email RG, we will continue to advocate for AFL footy in Ballarat and you are right we need to continue to work on improvement of the offering.

Regards,

Jodie Gillett

Chief Executive Officer
Commerce Ballarat
27 Doveton St Nth
03 5333 3233
www.commerceballarat.com.au

 

[BallaratBulldog]

Ballarat is slightly different trip than to Melbourne. Boo hoo if they have to stay elsewhere. Freo would be better than port as we should win it.