No Test for the WACA - WA stadium mentality comes to fruition...
- Thread starter basashi
- Start date
- Tagged users None
If the WACA can get its redevelopment over the line it'll survive. Dennis Lillee again reiterated on radio that 28000 is the target capacity of the redevelopment. For the majority of international matches, that is more than enough for a boutique cricket ground. The only matches that might exceed that capacity is the first 3 days of an Ashes test, potential world cup games and Big Bash, and Lillee has already flagged that BB games and large drawing ODIs would be moved to Burswood. Tests never would however, no need when a test against anyone other than England probably won't draw close to 30000 outside of day 1. People need to remember than the WACA owns the WACA ground and the land it's on. It doesn't pay rent nor does it lose any % of ticket sales to anyone else in a stadium deal. Moving any games to Burswood is dependant on whether the extra revenue gained from more ticket sales would exceed the losses of renting out the stadium in a stadium deal enough to make it worthwhile.
- Jun 18, 2010
- 4,085
- 5,487
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- FFC Quay Club
- Thread starter
- #28
One thing it has going for it, the best cricket Pitch in the world.
Scaremongering from Hughes. Only 4 tests next season is because of the World Cup. After that it'll go back to at least 5, and some years 6 to include Tasmania. It does set a precedent that when if the season does get culled to only 4 tests Perth misses out, but I dont think channel 9 would be too happy losing their only prime time test match on a regular basis after paying a record amount for the rights.
bkozican
Norm Smith Medallist
basashi = Great post mate 
Them facts presented are somewhat scary.
the only thing I do not understand is that 2 out of the other wickets are drop in wickets, while the WACA is A cricket ground.
^^ That i do not understand
On the flip side, Cricket is now a buisness just like the AFL. So it is not that much of a surprise
Them facts presented are somewhat scary.
the only thing I do not understand is that 2 out of the other wickets are drop in wickets, while the WACA is A cricket ground.
^^ That i do not understand
On the flip side, Cricket is now a buisness just like the AFL. So it is not that much of a surprise
Sell the WACA ... gotta admit, the very idea makes me sick at heart.
Portsmeff
All Australian
- Banned
- #33
its no where near as extensive as WA or Qld, or prob even NSW. From what I know we have huge deposits of expensive rocks but they aren't close to the earth's surface so its easier and cheaper to concentrate on the WA and Queensland ones. If technology allows our mining sector to really develop, then I hope we will rightfully regain our status of Australia's third most important city
I'm in the "sell up and move to Burswood" camp... drop-in pitch or not. There's no point having a non drop-in pitch if it's not going to be used for test cricket.
This whole "staying for tradition" mindset is going to send them bankrupt... and every time they go running to the government for money it just reinforces how much money they could make if they redeveloped the WACA area into complete residential area.
Don't even get me started on the proposed redevelopments which will add apartment buildings around the ground. Name another test cricket stadium that has that.
The WACA are quickly becoming a joke and losing the test match this year is one of the least surprising news stories of the week. The only surprising bit is that it didn't happen earlier.
This whole "staying for tradition" mindset is going to send them bankrupt... and every time they go running to the government for money it just reinforces how much money they could make if they redeveloped the WACA area into complete residential area.
Don't even get me started on the proposed redevelopments which will add apartment buildings around the ground. Name another test cricket stadium that has that.
The WACA are quickly becoming a joke and losing the test match this year is one of the least surprising news stories of the week. The only surprising bit is that it didn't happen earlier.
- Jun 18, 2010
- 4,085
- 5,487
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- FFC Quay Club
- Thread starter
- #35
I will take your point on the hotels. If they are all in progress then is something - albeit too late.
In general, WA has a very strong tendency to underspec things.
I also think the only thing holding the state back from winning the occasional major event is the "keep it small / this isn't Hollywood" mentality.
- Moderator
- #36
Old Trafford has a hotel, which 36 of the 68 rooms look out onto the ground
http://www.lccc.co.uk/otl.php?p=news&id=110
No other cricket stadium can do that because no other cricket organisation actually owns the land the stadium is on. The WACA is in a unique position as it does, so they can build apartments, sell them, and they get all the profits.
Just picking up on the shitty drop-in pitch arguments. Is there any reason why a decent drop-in pitch can't be produced?
The new stadium is only going to be 2km away from the WACA, so it has exactly the same climate conditions. I understand that the WACA truck in the soil and clay used for the pitch square, so we should be able to use the same source for the drop-in pitches.
Any reason why we can't have a half-decent drop-in pitch at Burswood that will have similar characteristics to a traditional WACA wicket?
The new stadium is only going to be 2km away from the WACA, so it has exactly the same climate conditions. I understand that the WACA truck in the soil and clay used for the pitch square, so we should be able to use the same source for the drop-in pitches.
Any reason why we can't have a half-decent drop-in pitch at Burswood that will have similar characteristics to a traditional WACA wicket?
Because there isn't actually much clay of the right composition I have heard.
Though the WACA definately should experiment with drop ins and see if it can.
The traditional WACA wicket is pretty much the main arguement for keeping cricket at the ground.
I still just can't see where that's coming from. Stage 1 includes the demolition of the Inverarity stand and a big chunk of the outer filled with an apartment block. Capacity will drop another 3-4000. Other developments will use up more land, yet capacity will increase by 10,000? Having seen the sketches of it, the Prindiville stand will go, to be replaced with a reasonably modest stand on that side similar to the Lillee Marsh (which is unlikely to get built unless they get significant government funding - which they won't). Even if it all goes to plan, I can't see 28,000 in there. It looks like a 20k capacity venue.
The Blue Baggers
Premiership Player
- Apr 7, 2013
- 3,919
- 3,280
- AFL Club
- Carlton
disappointing the perth test match is the best timing... you can actually watch most of the game
personally i prefer cricket @ smaller venues, like in england
personally i prefer cricket @ smaller venues, like in england
PykeDream
Only the Betts
- Sep 2, 2011
- 4,700
- 1,902
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
If they really can get 28000-30000 at the WACA + plus the number of people who can watch from surrounding apartments, than I'm happy with it to remain as a test venue.
Domestic and International Twenty20 must be played at the biggest venue possible though (ODIs will be dead by the time Burswood is completed) . Scorchers final could pull 60 000.
ODIs won't be dead.
Most popular format in the sub continent and still the highest rating in Australia.
https://soundcloud.com/6ix-perth/dennis-lillee-13-09-13
You can listen to Lillee's interview straight after the decision here. Says they're about to press the button on starting the redevelopment which is great to hear. Interesting that he says that Tests wont be able to be played at Burswood because of the ICC rules on drop in pitches, that it has to be in the ground for the entire season.
You can listen to Lillee's interview straight after the decision here. Says they're about to press the button on starting the redevelopment which is great to hear. Interesting that he says that Tests wont be able to be played at Burswood because of the ICC rules on drop in pitches, that it has to be in the ground for the entire season.
Well, that's a bloody fly in the ointment. Who the hell do the ICC think they are?
*shakes fist*
- Jul 9, 2010
- 24,163
- 26,536
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
Doesn't this mean that tests won't be able to be played at most grounds?
Bacon Warrior
D10
Well it rules out Jihad, not that it'd get a look in anyway.
- Jul 9, 2010
- 24,163
- 26,536
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
Doesn't the MCG have a drop in? Will Adelaide Oval? What about the SCG?
Bacon Warrior
D10
SCG is a 'natural' pitch, Adelaide Oval and the MCG both have drop-ins. I think they only mean cricket season, not all year round.
They way I read it, the drop-in need to be installed at the start of the cricket season, and stay in place till the end of the season. Basically locking the ground away from any other use for a few months. Not exactly what you want for a multi-purpose stadium, or for a sporting organisation like the WACA - to play a test match at the new stadium they'd have to book it out for the whole summer.
Similar threads
- Poll
