Analysis Cockburn vs Freo - Should we move back

[Sully90]

Fake news. Rosich was being a schlongsucker and kept on asking for more as soon as the council said yes to his latest offer.
But anyway. it's done and dusted. We're 100% a heartless franchise based at Cockburn and proud of it.

Unfortunately you can't just say "fake news" at things that you don't want to be true. That only works if you're the President of the United States. I don't think it stretches the imagination too much to say that Freo Council have always been difficult at dealing in these sorts of matters.

 

[Square Peg]

Unfortunately you can't just say "fake news" at things that you don't want to be true. That only works if you're the President of the United States. I don't think it stretches the imagination too much to say that Freo Council have always been difficult at dealing in these sorts of matters.

Of course they are difficult, the mayor's a numpty on many issues, but the narrative on this board over the years that negotiations all fell down because of the council being 100% intransigent are rubbish, the council to my knowledge twice agree in principle to ideas put forward by FFC/Rosich for redevelopment, only for Rosich to turn around and say well actually no, he wanted more. He just used Freo Council as a patsy to extract more out of Cockburn, there was never any intention of staying at Fremantle Oval no matter how hard the Freo Council tried to accommodate him. All part of his idea to make us into the west coast dockers.

 

[Square Peg]

What the council would allow at Fremantle Oval was not good enough so the right decision was made.

The historic element of Fremantle Oval worth preserving was its role as a modern, relevant, appropriate setting for the Australian game at its highest level. That historic element has been trashed, not preserved. And it is a disgrace.

It was not possible to build what was needed at Fremantle oval due to the approach of the council. They have misled themselves into thinking that heritage is merely about preserving relics the past. There is another angle to heritage - having a SENSE of history... living up to history... maintaining traditions.

A more advanced understanding of heritage would have allowed them to identify the role that Fremantle Oval had played in the past, rather than simply identifying the style of limestone or the colour of the walls. If their understanding of heritage was more advanced they would have done what was need to PRESERVE THE ROLE of Fremantle Oval as a preeminent venue for football in WA and allowed the necessary changes. Instead, they have ironically put history to the sword, trashed the historic role of the ground and turned the venue into a dusty and meaningless relic. That status is utterly inconsistent with the history of the ground and the needs of the community. It is a triumph of ignorance. It wasn't a dusty meaningless relic for over a hundred years, making it one now is not a way of preserving heritage.

The Victorians have correctly identified what was special about the MCG and they have preserved it. They have preserved it and lived up to history by making the tough decisions to maintain the relevance and historic role of the MCG. If Fremantle council was in charge of the MCG it would be a well located dump and the GF would be played at an outer suburban ground.

I agree with this but it is predicated on the idea that the club under Harris/Rosich also wanted to keep that Freo heritage. The evidence is to the contrary, they spent their time pursuing the idea that the way to expand the supporter base and rival big brother up the road was to de-Fremantle the club, because identifying with that heritage was holding us back.

 

[basashi]

I agree with this but it is predicated on the idea that the club under Harris/Rosich also wanted to keep that Freo heritage. The evidence is to the contrary, they spent their time pursuing the idea that the way to expand the supporter base and rival big brother up the road was to de-Fremantle the club, because identifying with that heritage was holding us back.

I don't accept that. I think if they could have built the required facilities in that location they would have done it.

The council's mismanagement of the oval is so bad that the state government should take it off them and vest it in a different authority.

 

[blue shark]

I agree with this but it is predicated on the idea that the club under Harris/Rosich also wanted to keep that Freo heritage. The evidence is to the contrary, they spent their time pursuing the idea that the way to expand the supporter base and rival big brother up the road was to de-Fremantle the club, because identifying with that heritage was holding us back.

You want heritage, premierships, then get E Freo to move to Cocburn, they haven't been part of Sth Fremantle in over a hundred years.

 

[estibador]

What the council would allow at Fremantle Oval was not good enough so the right decision was made.

The historic element of Fremantle Oval worth preserving was its role as a modern, relevant, appropriate setting for the Australian game at its highest level. That historic element has been trashed, not preserved. And it is a disgrace.

It was not possible to build what was needed at Fremantle oval due to the approach of the council. They have misled themselves into thinking that heritage is merely about preserving relics the past. There is another angle to heritage - having a SENSE of history... living up to history... maintaining traditions.

A more advanced understanding of heritage would have allowed them to identify the role that Fremantle Oval had played in the past, rather than simply identifying the style of limestone or the colour of the walls. If their understanding of heritage was more advanced they would have done what was need to PRESERVE THE ROLE of Fremantle Oval as a preeminent venue for football in WA and allowed the necessary changes. Instead, they have ironically put history to the sword, trashed the historic role of the ground and turned the venue into a dusty and meaningless relic. That status is utterly inconsistent with the history of the ground and the needs of the community. It is a triumph of ignorance. It wasn't a dusty meaningless relic for over a hundred years, making it one now is not a way of preserving heritage.

The Victorians have correctly identified what was special about the MCG and they have preserved it. They have preserved it and lived up to history by making the tough decisions to maintain the relevance and historic role of the MCG. If Fremantle council was in charge of the MCG it would be a well located dump and the GF would be played at an outer suburban ground.

Fantastic post!

 

[blue shark]

East Fremantle had the chance to move to Willetton, we know now how that turned out. It's the same with the Dockers, you have to be in a young
vibrant community where there is scope for growth.
Would it really be that hard to fence the second oval, etc, and utilise the oval? State and federal projects for the population, rather than a surf park?

 

[88mph]

Of course they are difficult, the mayor's a numpty on many issues, but the narrative on this board over the years that negotiations all fell down because of the council being 100% intransigent are rubbish, the council to my knowledge twice agree in principle to ideas put forward by FFC/Rosich for redevelopment, only for Rosich to turn around and say well actually no, he wanted more. He just used Freo Council as a patsy to extract more out of Cockburn, there was never any intention of staying at Fremantle Oval no matter how hard the Freo Council tried to accommodate him. All part of his idea to make us into the west coast dockers.

This is also my understanding of what transpired.

 

[88mph]

What the council would allow at Fremantle Oval was not good enough so the right decision was made.

The historic element of Fremantle Oval worth preserving was its role as a modern, relevant, appropriate setting for the Australian game at its highest level. That historic element has been trashed, not preserved. And it is a disgrace.

It was not possible to build what was needed at Fremantle oval due to the approach of the council. They have misled themselves into thinking that heritage is merely about preserving relics the past. There is another angle to heritage - having a SENSE of history... living up to history... maintaining traditions.

A more advanced understanding of heritage would have allowed them to identify the role that Fremantle Oval had played in the past, rather than simply identifying the style of limestone or the colour of the walls. If their understanding of heritage was more advanced they would have done what was need to PRESERVE THE ROLE of Fremantle Oval as a preeminent venue for football in WA and allowed the necessary changes. Instead, they have ironically put history to the sword, trashed the historic role of the ground and turned the venue into a dusty and meaningless relic. That status is utterly inconsistent with the history of the ground and the needs of the community. It is a triumph of ignorance. It wasn't a dusty meaningless relic for over a hundred years, making it one now is not a way of preserving heritage.

The Victorians have correctly identified what was special about the MCG and they have preserved it. They have preserved it and lived up to history by making the tough decisions to maintain the relevance and historic role of the MCG. If Fremantle council was in charge of the MCG it would be a well located dump and the GF would be played at an outer suburban ground.

What historical elements do you refer?

 

[salim malik]

What historical elements do you refer?

The wall, grandstand,, calling box, fig trees are heritage listed.
Hard to build around them.
The council wanted all the buildings in the same design as the grandstand.
Impossible restrictions to deal with.
All of that plus lack of area to put in place what was required for a facility to last well into to the
future.
Cockburn has the room to expand , Fremantle no

 

[88mph]

The wall, grandstand,, calling box, fig trees are heritage listed.
Hard to build around them.
The council wanted all the buildings in the same design as the grandstand.
Impossible restrictions to deal with.
All of that plus lack of area to put in place what was required for a facility to last well into to the
future.
Cockburn has the room to expand , Fremantle no

The wall? Was built in the 80's.
Grandstand? Obviously worth keeping.
Same design? lol.
The footprint of the ARC building fits onto the portion of land offered by Fremantle City Council.
How much space do you actually need?

Get your facts right please.

 

[Sully90]

Of course they are difficult, the mayor's a numpty on many issues, but the narrative on this board over the years that negotiations all fell down because of the council being 100% intransigent are rubbish, the council to my knowledge twice agree in principle to ideas put forward by FFC/Rosich for redevelopment, only for Rosich to turn around and say well actually no, he wanted more. He just used Freo Council as a patsy to extract more out of Cockburn, there was never any intention of staying at Fremantle Oval no matter how hard the Freo Council tried to accommodate him. All part of his idea to make us into the west coast dockers.

It wasn't the narrative on this board, it was the situation as reported by the media.

 

[Nodgey]

I'm sure we were promised two ovals at Cockburn. As I recall, this was a big selling point and further evidence there was insufficient room at Parry St. So where is the second? Is it planned for the Northern side?

I guess I'm just a grumpy old man, but it's not the same for me at Cockburn. And North Melbourne won flags with crap facilities. And lastly, why on earth do we do sessions at Cottesloe Beach? Last time I checked there are still beaches in the Fremantle area. And don't go telling me the 'facilities' are better in Cottesloe.

 

[Cesoir]

So where is the second? Is it planned for the Northern side?

It is on the northern side, across the road. Always has been.

 

[88mph]

I'm sure we were promised two ovals at Cockburn. As I recall, this was a big selling point and further evidence there was insufficient room at Parry St. So where is the second? Is it planned for the Northern side?

I guess I'm just a grumpy old man, but it's not the same for me at Cockburn. And North Melbourne won flags with crap facilities. And lastly, why on earth do we do sessions at Cottesloe Beach? Last time I checked there are still beaches in the Fremantle area. And don't go telling me the 'facilities' are better in Cottesloe.

Training in Cott just makes us look like WCE MKll.

It's weird.

We're Freo FFC and should own that.

 

[Alfonz]

Even if the facilities are top notch, it would be easy to see how players might not like going there. Such a shithole and wasteland.

Seeing as a big part of ARC is the A ... was there ever any thought to redevelop the aquatic centre up near the Arts Centre? There's a big oval right there as well. I'm sure there would be things to fix like parking, or some lawn bowlers or cricketers would kick up a stink, but it seems a reasonable option if Freo Oval is out of the picture.

 

[Torree]

I'm sure we were promised two ovals at Cockburn. As I recall, this was a big selling point and further evidence there was insufficient room at Parry St. So where is the second? Is it planned for the Northern side?

I guess I'm just a grumpy old man, but it's not the same for me at Cockburn. And North Melbourne won flags with crap facilities. And lastly, why on earth do we do sessions at Cottesloe Beach? Last time I checked there are still beaches in the Fremantle area. And don't go telling me the 'facilities' are better in Cottesloe.

Their beach session involves a swim then they go over and train on Cottesloe Oval.

 

[salim malik]

The wall? Was built in the 80's.
Grandstand? Obviously worth keeping.
Same design? lol.
The footprint of the ARC building fits onto the portion of land offered by Fremantle City Council.
How much space do you actually need?

Get your facts right please.

1880,s, maybe for the wall. Built long before I started to go to Freo oval.

The council wanted the buildings in the roof shape of the grandstand, exactly the same as the previous Freo buildings.
You need to get your facts in line . The trees are listed , what do you do with those.

What wall are you talking about? The perimeter wall is a lot older than me and I sure wasn't born in the 80,s

 

[Steinfreo]

The wall, grandstand,, calling box, fig trees are heritage listed.
Hard to build around them.
The council wanted all the buildings in the same design as the grandstand.
Impossible restrictions to deal with.
All of that plus lack of area to put in place what was required for a facility to last well into to the
future.
Cockburn has the room to expand , Fremantle no

- A good architect could have done an abstraction of the existing ( pitched saw tooth roof, red brick, some hardwood, limestone, colorbond, sink the derpy car park) and the council would have been totally happy with that, it may have cost a bit more than cockburn but to say they had to be identical is disingenuous. look at the new cafe/pub on the corner now its combining modern and existing beautifully (that site would have been a totally dope and unique team store and admin.

- There is enough space for everything we have at Cockburn bar the second oval and probably anything more than a 4 lane 25 metre pool. 2-3 storey massing using the existing area available at Fremantle would have been more than enough.

- Things moved to slowly for the Steves, we probably would have had 2-4 more years in the old set up but it would have been worth the wait. wed probably be in the middle of construction right now, training out of Curtin Uni or something.

Its a shame we moved

 

[FreoRicci]

I don't accept that. I think if they could have built the required facilities in that location they would have done it.

The council's mismanagement of the oval is so bad that the state government should take it off them and vest it in a different authority.

The mismanagement dates 50-100 years. What is going to change within 2-5 years. Hardly much. The old grandstand and crumbling concrete standing area is evident, we moved in 1995. It’s practically the same presently. If the council wanted change, it could’ve created significant rejuvenation for 20+ years. It didn’t. Now they’re blaming the club for ‘De-Fremantle’.
Please.

 

[88mph]

- A good architect could have done an abstraction of the existing ( pitched saw tooth roof, red brick, some hardwood, limestone, colorbond, sink the derpy car park) and the council would have been totally happy with that, it may have cost a bit more than cockburn but to say they had to be identical is disingenuous. look at the new cafe/pub on the corner now its combining modern and existing beautifully (that site would have been a totally dope and unique team store and admin.

- There is enough space for everything we have at Cockburn bar the second oval and probably anything more than a 4 lane 25 metre pool. 2-3 storey massing using the existing area available at Fremantle would have been more than enough.

- Things moved to slowly for the Steves, we probably would have had 2-4 more years in the old set up but it would have been worth the wait. wed probably be in the middle of construction right now, training out of Curtin Uni or something.

Its a shame we moved

You're right, that new venue in the corner is grand.

Funnily enough, FFC are having their end of year function at that venue.

 

[88mph]

1880,s, maybe for the wall. Built long before I started to go to Freo oval.

The council wanted the buildings in the roof shape of the grandstand, exactly the same as the previous Freo buildings.
You need to get your facts in line . The trees are listed , what do you do with those.

What wall are you talking about? The perimeter wall is a lot older than me and I sure wasn't born in the 80,s

I'm talking about the entire perimeter wall. It's mock heritage.

 

[basashi]

What historical elements do you refer?

The historic element I refer to is articulated in the second half of the sentence from which you lifted the words "historic element." It starts off with "The historic element of Fremantle Oval worth preserving was ..." and the rest of the sentence is what the historic element was.

I know the language can be tricky but yours is an unusual question.

 

[salim malik]

I'm talking about the entire perimeter wall. It's mock heritage.

It's a ridiculous thread.
FFC will stay at Cockburn , end of story ,end of thread.

 

[Rob]

The wall? Was built in the 80's.
Grandstand? Obviously worth keeping.

Why? It's outlived its purpose. It's uncomfortable and miles from the field. The space in front of it is a bloody carpark and generally unsuitable for spectators. The back of it is prime Freo commercial real estate and is wasted. Shift it to Fremantle Park if they really want to retain it, because its worthless where it is.

They need to build a decent modern grandstand in that area. Build a pub into the back of it facing Parry St. How good would that be?

Same design? lol.
The footprint of the ARC building fits onto the portion of land offered by Fremantle City Council.
How much space do you actually need?

Get your facts right please.

No it doesn't - and even if you make it a bit smaller you still need to demolish a bunch of things that, according to the council, are non-negotiable. Never mind that you would still need spectator facilities that Cockburn doesn't have or need.