News Jack Dyer Stand may go in $60m Punt Road Oval redevelopment

[JAKLAUGHING]

Because it will cost a lot more than $200k to make the renos of the stand

Should have started 5 year ago and then kept it current with donations from all supporters of the club...

 

[tigerdan]

The point about heritage listing is moot, it doesn't so it doesn't matter imo.

What i'm trying to do is get people to think laterally. I know it's the internet and we are all prone top being stubborn but there's been hardly any talk of compromise on this whole thread.

I suspect people (including the board) really just want a new facility to be the envy of all the other clubs and would rather that than a sort of hybrid that might look funky as you drive past it. Especially if you have been to some of the giant sporting clubs with their fancy digs.

This kind of lateral thinking should also apply to things such as: the potential future redevelopment of Richmond Station. The potential future widening of Punt Rd. I dare say where was the lateral thinking when building the Swinburne Centre which has no balcony and now appears to be at maximum capacity only a few years after it was built.

A few people here have suggested alternatives. Build higher behind the goals. Build in the car park. Keep all the Women's team at Craigieburn. Move non-essential roles to sites elsewhere in Richmond. Very few of these have actually been addressed rationally, just dismissed out of hand. But hey it's what passes for discussion on the internet so i'm not fazed.

I think there should be room for compromise in the discussion stage. That's why I ask 'what if?' Is there a way to have shiny new digs and our heritage? What is the cost and could we afford it? I am also wary of what happened at Carlton when they built the Legends Stand. Hubris creeping in. I am concerned we might sink too much of our own money into this, and at the end of the day I also question which government is going to throw money at it unless it's an exercise in pork barrelling.

 

[tigerdan]

Should have started 5 year ago and then kept it current with donations from all supporters of the club...

I can remember what seems like only a few years ago but was probably about 1994 or 1995. There was a big fund raising push to fix up the stand. This was before it got renamed the Jack Dyer Stand. Actually it might have been the impetus for the Jack Dyer Foundation. At the time the stand was condemned, it had cyclone fencing at the top of the steps to stop people going up there. I remember I donated to it, and there is (or was) a plaque right up the back of the stand with the names of all the donors on it. I know this because my name is on it, and I remember being pleasantly surprised that Duncan and Andrew Kellaway were also donors.

Here are the details:

http://www.richmondfc.com.au/club/fighting-tiger-fund/jack-dyer-foundation

"The successful launch of the Foundation saw $1.2 million raised. This allowed Stage One to be completed with the main focus being the refurbishment and restoration of the Grandstand."

So yeah, the JDF, which many of us donate tax deductible dollars to was set up to fix the grandstand. How times have changed.

When you factor in inflation that's equivalent to a lot more than the 2 million figure being bandied about.

I also remember when the stand had "CROWN" written on it when the casino first went up. I didn't like it then and don't really like it now either, but if you can bring in x million dollars for the advertising revenue if it pays for the upkeep, then I am all for it. I need not even be a permanent fixture, and get it painted over once the necessary funds are raised.

 

[Wacko23Jacko]

They can build alongside the stand in the same way they have retained the Ladies' Stand at the SCG.
The Tottenham project includes a 60,000 seat stadium and hosting NFL matches.
The project has taken a decade to build and costs have escalated from £400 million to £850 million (approximately $1.5 billion AUD) so it is incomparable in terms of cost and scale.

Tottenham's stadium is seperate to their training HQ. Different project. But the point is that accommodation and elite sporting facilities is not as far fetched an idea as is being made out.

Was the ladies stand at the SCG left to go into disrepair over the years or has it been maintained? From a construction point of view aren't there a heap of factors outside of "that's an old stand and old stands have been incorporated into designs before so it must be okay". One would imagine that construction standards have changed a lot since the building of the stand.

 

[Wacko23Jacko]

What i'm trying to do is get people to think laterally. I know it's the internet and we are all prone top being stubborn but there's been hardly any talk of compromise on this whole thread.

I suspect people (including the board) really just want a new facility to be the envy of all the other clubs and would rather that than a sort of hybrid that might look funky as you drive past it. Especially if you have been to some of the giant sporting clubs with their fancy digs.

This kind of lateral thinking should also apply to things such as: the potential future redevelopment of Richmond Station. The potential future widening of Punt Rd. I dare say where was the lateral thinking when building the Swinburne Centre which has no balcony and now appears to be at maximum capacity only a few years after it was built.

A few people here have suggested alternatives. Build higher behind the goals. Build in the car park. Keep all the Women's team at Craigieburn. Move non-essential roles to sites elsewhere in Richmond. Very few of these have actually been addressed rationally, just dismissed out of hand. But hey it's what passes for discussion on the internet so i'm not fazed.

I think there should be room for compromise in the discussion stage. That's why I ask 'what if?' Is there a way to have shiny new digs and our heritage? What is the cost and could we afford it? I am also wary of what happened at Carlton when they built the Legends Stand. Hubris creeping in. I am concerned we might sink too much of our own money into this, and at the end of the day I also question which government is going to throw money at it unless it's an exercise in pork barrelling.

I am a big fan of heritage architecture and especially the combination of new and old. It’s one thing I hate about Melbourne compared to some other cities in the world and Aus which have maintained a much higher number of heritage buildings and seamlessly weaved the new with the old.

One of my guiding beliefs is the utilisation of history and the past in combination with thoughtful and appropriate use of contemporary technology.

I’d love for it to happen that we can preserve the stand and get what needs to be created done. It just doesn’t look credible or likely even on paper at this stage due to a number of constraints such as funding, safety, time and floorplan space.

I’d be all in favour of keeping as much of the stand or as many aspects as possible as long as it didn’t compromise on our potential for the HQ and facilities.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

What i'm trying to do is get people to think laterally. I know it's the internet and we are all prone top being stubborn but there's been hardly any talk of compromise on this whole thread.

I suspect people (including the board) really just want a new facility to be the envy of all the other clubs and would rather that than a sort of hybrid that might look funky as you drive past it. Especially if you have been to some of the giant sporting clubs with their fancy digs.

This kind of lateral thinking should also apply to things such as: the potential future redevelopment of Richmond Station. The potential future widening of Punt Rd. I dare say where was the lateral thinking when building the Swinburne Centre which has no balcony and now appears to be at maximum capacity only a few years after it was built.

A few people here have suggested alternatives. Build higher behind the goals. Build in the car park. Keep all the Women's team at Craigieburn. Move non-essential roles to sites elsewhere in Richmond. Very few of these have actually been addressed rationally, just dismissed out of hand. But hey it's what passes for discussion on the internet so i'm not fazed.

I think there should be room for compromise in the discussion stage. That's why I ask 'what if?' Is there a way to have shiny new digs and our heritage? What is the cost and could we afford it? I am also wary of what happened at Carlton when they built the Legends Stand. Hubris creeping in. I am concerned we might sink too much of our own money into this, and at the end of the day I also question which government is going to throw money at it unless it's an exercise in pork barrelling.

Why would we want to separate the club into different offices at different sites after seeing how badly other clubs have handled it (Melbourne and now the saints)?

 

[Infamy]

Should have started 5 year ago and then kept it current with donations from all supporters of the club...

We didn't always have 100k members either so at $2 per member per year, it would take around 20 years to pay off a proper refurb of the stands and even then it would hold us back from redeveloping the site properly.

 

[JAKLAUGHING]

At $2 per member per year, it would take around 20 years to pay off a proper refurb of the stands and even then it would hold us back from redeveloping the site properly.

Ok lets not do anything let it crumble into disrepair...

 

[Bojangles17]

I was at PRO the other day , there is a decent amount of space between jack dyer stand and goals that could be utilised as a reasonably practical option notwithstanding that the base of the grand stand could be completely gutted and redeveloped. There’s more than one way to skin a cat

 

[TheTick]

It does bear mentioning that off-field success i.e. big revenue, does provide the club with an ability to devote ever greater resources to winning games, and hopefully premierships. Without the revenue, we fall into the equalisation trap of hoping that the dollars given to us by pokies subsidised clubs will be enough to hire elite professionals.

The amount of time people spend sitting in the stands is extraordinarily low. The amount of revenue we can bring in from those wonderful souls watching VFL and buying pies and chips is pretty low. When you compare that to the potential of a facility that gets used orders of magnitudes more often, across a wide breadth of categories, all year around, we can bring in vastly more revenue, and also provide a greater outcome to society.
For those of us in a privileged position of employment, housing, gender, race etc. we simply cannot fathom what others suffer. We can be in a position to help hundreds/thousands of people live better lives, whilst being able to have the best resources for our team. Win/Win.

Unfortunately, the comparison to the ladies stand at the SCG is slightly unfair. The SCG's primary revenue stream is selling hosting of events, getting people to watch the events and selling the people food. They have the space to build big around it, and the entire SCG holds 48,000 and the most they've had since 2003 is 46,323. They have never run out of space in the last 15 years, so they don't need to think about expansions or replacements.

I've followed the Tigers my entire life, my family has been on the bandwagon for nigh on 75 years, and none of us have any emotional connection to the stand. I imagine there will be more members/supporters that are in that category than emotionally attached to the stand.

The stand looks great, but I can tell you that I will trade in all of the stands in Victoria for a premiership.

tl;dr - I want premierships for the club, and to be a better societal contributor. If the stand stands in the way of that, and it's not heritage listed, it probably should go.

 

[RFCGloryJC]

The issue is too, as Caroline writes, why the secrecy?
Promoting the blueprint to political elites in Canberra and Spring Street, but ignoring the members.

 

[JAKLAUGHING]

The issue is too, as Caroline writes, why the secrecy?
Promoting the blueprint to political elites in Canberra and Spring Street, but ignoring the members.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

The issue is too, as Caroline writes, why the secrecy?
Promoting the blueprint to political elites in Canberra and Spring Street, but ignoring the members.

Because with fed and state funding, there is nothing to show

We are mid way through a negotiation for funding, and the amount of funding we get will determine what can be done

Remember we got $0.00 from the last state govt $300m plan for local grounds.

 

[Bojangles17]

It does bear mentioning that off-field success i.e. big revenue, does provide the club with an ability to devote ever greater resources to winning games, and hopefully premierships. Without the revenue, we fall into the equalisation trap of hoping that the dollars given to us by pokies subsidised clubs will be enough to hire elite professionals.

The amount of time people spend sitting in the stands is extraordinarily low. The amount of revenue we can bring in from those wonderful souls watching VFL and buying pies and chips is pretty low. When you compare that to the potential of a facility that gets used orders of magnitudes more often, across a wide breadth of categories, all year around, we can bring in vastly more revenue, and also provide a greater outcome to society.
For those of us in a privileged position of employment, housing, gender, race etc. we simply cannot fathom what others suffer. We can be in a position to help hundreds/thousands of people live better lives, whilst being able to have the best resources for our team. Win/Win.

Unfortunately, the comparison to the ladies stand at the SCG is slightly unfair. The SCG's primary revenue stream is selling hosting of events, getting people to watch the events and selling the people food. They have the space to build big around it, and the entire SCG holds 48,000 and the most they've had since 2003 is 46,323. They have never run out of space in the last 15 years, so they don't need to think about expansions or replacements.

I've followed the Tigers my entire life, my family has been on the bandwagon for nigh on 75 years, and none of us have any emotional connection to the stand. I imagine there will be more members/supporters that are in that category than emotionally attached to the stand.

The stand looks great, but I can tell you that I will trade in all of the stands in Victoria for a premiership.

tl;dr - I want premierships for the club, and to be a better societal contributor. If the stand stands in the way of that, and it's not heritage listed, it probably should go.

You make a very good point that the actual usage of the grand stand is extraordinarily low and completely disproportionate to the shockwaves prompted with any discussion around removing it.

 

[RFCGloryJC]

The tone of Caroline's article is the board has adopted a secretive "tight-lipped" approach and members are being kept out of the loop.
Why not consult with members, even in preliminary stages?
If she had not published the article, we would have been none the wiser.

 

[KiwiTiger]

Why would we want to separate the club into different offices at different sites after seeing how badly other clubs have handled it (Melbourne and now the saints)?

Indeed.

And is that what the staff want?

Wouldn't be surprised if they did not want split offices.

Haere Ra

 

[tigerdan]

Indeed.

And is that what the staff want?

Wouldn't be surprised if they did not want split offices.

Haere Ra

What is not clear is whether the women's teams are going to host their admin at Punt rd.

My opinion is no. They can be based elsewhere. Maybe at Craigieburn. By all means play matches at Punt rd but the two clubs are effectively independent (not all will agree with my sentiment I suppose) but if we are short of space and it doesn't contribute to winning a flag well sorry ladies but you will be housed elsewhere. I can remember the Ill fated attempt by both Collingwood and Carlton to try to enter teams in the Victorian soccer comp. Complete cluster *. If it's not core business it doesn't get priority access to Punt rd oval. Well that's my attitude.

 

[Infamy]

What is not clear is whether the women's teams are going to host their admin at Punt rd.

My opinion is no. They can be based elsewhere. Maybe at Craigieburn. By all means play matches at Punt rd but the two clubs are effectively independent (not all will agree with my sentiment I suppose) but if we are short of space and it doesn't contribute to winning a flag well sorry ladies but you will be housed elsewhere. I can remember the Ill fated attempt by both Collingwood and Carlton to try to enter teams in the Victorian soccer comp. Complete cluster ****. If it's not core business it doesn't get priority access to Punt rd oval. Well that's my attitude.

That depends if the women's admin team are completely dedicated to the women's team, or if there is some overlap of staff
I would have thought that there would be some people who are across both leagues, which could cause issues if split

 

[Heisenberg_]

I could be wrong, but the women’s team being based at Punt road also significantly increases any chance of government funding.

 

[Bojangles17]

What is not clear is whether the women's teams are going to host their admin at Punt rd.

My opinion is no. They can be based elsewhere. Maybe at Craigieburn. By all means play matches at Punt rd but the two clubs are effectively independent (not all will agree with my sentiment I suppose) but if we are short of space and it doesn't contribute to winning a flag well sorry ladies but you will be housed elsewhere. I can remember the Ill fated attempt by both Collingwood and Carlton to try to enter teams in the Victorian soccer comp. Complete cluster ****. If it's not core business it doesn't get priority access to Punt rd oval. Well that's my attitude.

I don’t believe there’s any remaining connection with craigieburn , much of the focus on shire relationships has been with Cardinia , south east of Melbourne

 

[theflea]

What i'm trying to do is get people to think laterally. I know it's the internet and we are all prone top being stubborn but there's been hardly any talk of compromise on this whole thread.

I suspect people (including the board) really just want a new facility to be the envy of all the other clubs and would rather that than a sort of hybrid that might look funky as you drive past it. Especially if you have been to some of the giant sporting clubs with their fancy digs.

This kind of lateral thinking should also apply to things such as: the potential future redevelopment of Richmond Station. The potential future widening of Punt Rd. I dare say where was the lateral thinking when building the Swinburne Centre which has no balcony and now appears to be at maximum capacity only a few years after it was built.

A few people here have suggested alternatives. Build higher behind the goals. Build in the car park. Keep all the Women's team at Craigieburn. Move non-essential roles to sites elsewhere in Richmond. Very few of these have actually been addressed rationally, just dismissed out of hand. But hey it's what passes for discussion on the internet so i'm not fazed.

I think there should be room for compromise in the discussion stage. That's why I ask 'what if?' Is there a way to have shiny new digs and our heritage? What is the cost and could we afford it? I am also wary of what happened at Carlton when they built the Legends Stand. Hubris creeping in. I am concerned we might sink too much of our own money into this, and at the end of the day I also question which government is going to throw money at it unless it's an exercise in pork barrelling.

I get this, but in my considered opinion, we have outlived PRO in its current state, and if its the choice between moving or staying and getting rid of the old stand then so be it. As i said, if it was heritage listed, then that is another conversation, but since its not, lets not get into hypotheticals.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

I could be wrong, but the women’s team being based at Punt road also significantly increases any chance of government funding.

this is bang on

The feds and Vic govt have zero interest in funding elite high performance training monuments for professional sporting teams

any funding they give has to be linked to direct community benefit

before the vic govt mega deals, i heard from one club chairman that when they got a AFL-W team would determine the degree of vic govt funding they received

we got the initial $20m of fed money off of the KGI initiative, not the greater glory of richmond

AFL-W, KGI, and Houli Foundation will deliver us the next round of funding

shoving them off to the burbs will 100% guarantee that we get SFA

 

[RFCGloryJC]

The reality is the site is cramped as it is.
We will wait to see.
I don't see the point of expanding education and other facilities on site when they could be provided in the suburbs.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

The reality is the site is cramped as it is.
We will wait to see.
I don't see the point of expanding education and other facilities on site when they could be provided in the suburbs.

if they are provided in the suburbs, thats where the govt will spend the dollars for a start - not at punt road

also kgi, the school, next gen academy, and the club are all integrated. separating them loses that benefit

the recruiters and development staff get to see kids as they learn at the kgi and play for the languntas

the kgi is used by us to develop the leadership skills of our next gen academy prospects

swinburne allows us to not only teach, but identify future talent to hire at the club or aligned leisure (and this fact is a key selling feature in getting people to sign up for our programs)

we are doing things in our academy zone no other victorian clubs are close to doing. the kgi is leagues ahead of any other indigenous development programs run at club land. why would you change all of this to pull apart these synergies AND lose our ability to get govt funds to better our club facilities?

 

[RFCGloryJC]

Alex Rance's academy is in the suburbs.
He leases a property.
There is no need to expand education facilities on the Punt Road Oval site.
If the ulterior motive is to receive donations from the federal government, I am not in favour of it.
Why should Richmond receive donations when many schools are struggling?