Punt Rd 40,000-seat stadium proposal

[soupaman]

I would not imagine the AFL would schedule two games consecutively played. I can't remember the last time they even played two consecutive games at the MCG & Etihad. So using this precedent it would not be an issue at all.

Just using this year as an example (I have excluded games the 1.10 and 7.20 combo because that should have enough time to changeover, but even that is pushing it when you consider how clogged up the area can get for over an hour prior to and after the match). Ones marked with an asterisk start and finish within half an hour of eachother roughly.

Round 2 Saturday MCG 2.10, Etihad 7.25, Sunday, MCG 3.20, Etihad 4.40
Round 3 Saturday, MCG 1.45, Etihad 2.10
Round 4 Sunday, MCG 3.20, Etihad 4.40
Round 8 Sunday, Etihad 1.10, MCG 3.20
Round 9 Sunday MCG 1.10, Etihad 4.40*
Round 10 Saturday Etihad 4.35, MCG 7.25*, Sunday Etihad 1.10, MCG 3.20
Round 11, MCG 1.45, Etihad 2.10, Sunday MCG 1.10, Etihad 3.20

...you get the point. Heaps of conflicts and consecutive games. Some could be solved by fixturing the first game at 1.10 and the other being a night match but it pretty much rules out two Melbourne games on a Sunday and is very inflexible otherwise.

Having said that it's a much better idea than Eddies, but this flaw applies to both proposed stadiums.

 

[aCunningPlan]

Just using this year as an example (I have excluded games the 1.10 and 7.20 combo because that should have enough time to changeover, but even that is pushing it when you consider how clogged up the area can get for over an hour prior to and after the match). Ones marked with an asterisk start and finish within half an hour of eachother roughly.

Round 2 Saturday MCG 2.10, Etihad 7.25, Sunday, MCG 3.20, Etihad 4.40
Round 3 Saturday, MCG 1.45, Etihad 2.10
Round 4 Sunday, MCG 3.20, Etihad 4.40
Round 8 Sunday, Etihad 1.10, MCG 3.20
Round 9 Sunday MCG 1.10, Etihad 4.40*
Round 10 Saturday Etihad 4.35, MCG 7.25*, Sunday Etihad 1.10, MCG 3.20
Round 11, MCG 1.45, Etihad 2.10, Sunday MCG 1.10, Etihad 3.20

...you get the point. Heaps of conflicts and consecutive games. Some could be solved by fixturing the first game at 1.10 and the other being a night match but it pretty much rules out two Melbourne games on a Sunday and is very inflexible otherwise.

Having said that it's a much better idea than Eddies, but this flaw applies to both proposed stadiums.

You do realise this proposal means Etihad will still be used, so there is no issue whatsoever having two games on a Sunday in Melbourne with one being at Etihad at say 1:10 and the other being at the MCG or Punt Rd at 3:20, so long as the games are played on the other sides of the CBD there is no issue with time clashes. Hell, you could have three games in Melbourne on a Saturday under the proposal. 1:45 at Punt Rd, 4:40 at Etihad, 7:20 at the MCG.

 

[nick1408]

Just using this year as an example (I have excluded games the 1.10 and 7.20 combo because that should have enough time to changeover, but even that is pushing it when you consider how clogged up the area can get for over an hour prior to and after the match). Ones marked with an asterisk start and finish within half an hour of eachother roughly.

Round 2 Saturday MCG 2.10, Etihad 7.25, Sunday, MCG 3.20, Etihad 4.40
Round 3 Saturday, MCG 1.45, Etihad 2.10
Round 4 Sunday, MCG 3.20, Etihad 4.40
Round 8 Sunday, Etihad 1.10, MCG 3.20
Round 9 Sunday MCG 1.10, Etihad 4.40*
Round 10 Saturday Etihad 4.35, MCG 7.25*, Sunday Etihad 1.10, MCG 3.20
Round 11, MCG 1.45, Etihad 2.10, Sunday MCG 1.10, Etihad 3.20

...you get the point. Heaps of conflicts and consecutive games. Some could be solved by fixturing the first game at 1.10 and the other being a night match but it pretty much rules out two Melbourne games on a Sunday and is very inflexible otherwise.

Having said that it's a much better idea than Eddies, but this flaw applies to both proposed stadiums.

Didn't Gale say this idea was in addition to Etihad? The MCG becomes a Punt Road game so no issues with fixturing times.

Edit: Apologies - it says that thic can be built without the sale of Etihad. My thought remain the same though. It's a third stadium but only two games fixtured in Melbourne per day

 

[smasha]

Way more pra tical solution thkan Eddies but because it's a Richmond idea,watch thwe.

Like the McGuire idea it's okay on the surface but really very little thought has gone into it.

It always worries me when someone has no idea how to fund something besides Government money. Richmond just want a free upgrade.

Richmond have been thinking about this for many years way before Eddie came up with the idea.

 

[soupaman]

You do realise this proposal means Etihad will still be used, so there is no issue whatsoever having two games on a Sunday in Melbourne with one being at Etihad at say 1:10 and the other being at the MCG or Punt Rd at 3:20, so long as the games are played on the other sides of the CBD there is no issue with time clashes. Hell, you could have three games in Melbourne on a Saturday under the proposal. 1:45 at Punt Rd, 4:40 at Etihad, 7:20 at the MCG.

Yeah I missed that my bad.

 

[Kram]

lol.

 

[KissKiss]

As several people have stated its a much better and more feasible idea than the other one, but still has a few issues. The heritage stand would be one and the fact that you would have to shift the whole thing further into the parkland to have the room for the stands next to Punt Rd. Richmond would have to (at least temporarily if not permanently) lose their training facilities. And as argued pretty well above fixturing would have to be taken into account to make sure you don't have further chaos at the space between.

 

[JohnZ]

Perfect opportunity to consolidate to E-Gate (Next to North Melbourne Station) or Arden Gardens (Where the metro station will go), MCG, Punt Rd and Kardinia Park as the four AFL venues for Victoria imho. Sale of docklands helps pay for the E-Gate / Arden stadium as well as Punt Rd. Governments have been planning to upgrade Richmond Station for quite a while now, so I wouldn't think that burden would go to the AFL, unless the AFL, Tennis Australia, A-League and NRL, Super Rugby and Cricket Australia all pitched in as they all benefit from an upgraded Richmond Station. Does it need to be buried, no, but a lot more gates or gates dedicated to each platform segregating passengers would improve people flow a lot more.

 

[Rouel_14]

As several people have stated its a much better and more feasible idea than the other one, but still has a few issues. The heritage stand would be one and the fact that you would have to shift the whole thing further into the parkland to have the room for the stands next to Punt Rd. Richmond would have to (at least temporarily if not permanently) lose their training facilities. And as argued pretty well above fixturing would have to be taken into account to make sure you don't have further chaos at the space between.

So sell Etihad,
Build a brand new stadium at E gate, and also redevelop punt road?

Now that is some good thinking right there!
3 state of the art stadiums in Melbourne, one holding 100000, one holding 60000 and one holding 40000.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Rouel_14]

Could it ever be justifiable for the likes of Richmond football club, or say them and Collingwood got together and did a venture like this by themselves ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Pessimistic]

Looks like a 20k stadium to me.. and yet more demolition of taxpayer funded buildings less than a dozen years old.

This may be sarcasm, but what will the indigenous people do without their cultural centre?

and you can watch the footy from the station...bonus!

 

[KissKiss]

So sell Etihad,
Build a brand new stadium at E gate, and also redevelop punt road?

Now that is some good thinking right there!
3 state of the art stadiums in Melbourne, one holding 100000, one holding 60000 and one holding 40000.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Or just keep the perfectly fine Etihad.

 

[JohnZ]

Or just keep the perfectly fine Etihad.

Perfectly fine because:
* It's a depressing jungle of steel and concrete. Try sitting in the last 15 rows of the top deck
* The 2nd Tier is always empty due to the medallion club, segregating General Admission guests from the action
* It faces N-S necessitating the roof to be closed during broad daylight?
* During night games, the roof has to be closed due to god knows why, resulting in 30c temperatures inside (Yes, this has happened, I went to a Carlton v Geelong game where the inside temp was above 30c + humidity)
* There is four entry points to a 55,000 seater stadium, 3 of which are merged into a footbridge which can't handle a Melbourne v GWS game flooding into the main country train station causing a bottle neck for people who are trying to head into the city without going to the train station
* The ground rises so much in the middle that if you sit on the fence you can't see the other wing / goal end depending on position?
* Just the fact that it's the footy, and it's an indoor stadium? Footy is about the cold, the wet and how that changes the game, just as the wind changes the game. Why do we want to remove this from our game?

 

[Kram]

Perfectly fine because:
* It's a depressing jungle of steel and concrete. Try sitting in the last 15 rows of the top deck
* The 2nd Tier is always empty due to the medallion club, segregating General Admission guests from the action
* It faces N-S necessitating the roof to be closed during broad daylight?
* During night games, the roof has to be closed due to god knows why, resulting in 30c temperatures inside (Yes, this has happened, I went to a Carlton v Geelong game where the inside temp was above 30c + humidity)
* There is four entry points to a 55,000 seater stadium, 3 of which are merged into a footbridge which can't handle a Melbourne v GWS game flooding into the main country train station causing a bottle neck for people who are trying to head into the city without going to the train station
* The ground rises so much in the middle that if you sit on the fence you can't see the other wing / goal end depending on position?
* Just the fact that it's the footy, and it's an indoor stadium? Footy is about the cold, the wet and how that changes the game, just as the wind changes the game. Why do we want to remove this from our game?

Geez, talk about first world problems.

 

[KissKiss]

Perfectly fine because:
* It's a depressing jungle of steel and concrete. Try sitting in the last 15 rows of the top deck
* The 2nd Tier is always empty due to the medallion club, segregating General Admission guests from the action
* It faces N-S necessitating the roof to be closed during broad daylight?
* During night games, the roof has to be closed due to god knows why, resulting in 30c temperatures inside (Yes, this has happened, I went to a Carlton v Geelong game where the inside temp was above 30c + humidity)
* There is four entry points to a 55,000 seater stadium, 3 of which are merged into a footbridge which can't handle a Melbourne v GWS game flooding into the main country train station causing a bottle neck for people who are trying to head into the city without going to the train station
* The ground rises so much in the middle that if you sit on the fence you can't see the other wing / goal end depending on position?
* Just the fact that it's the footy, and it's an indoor stadium? Footy is about the cold, the wet and how that changes the game, just as the wind changes the game. Why do we want to remove this from our game?

- The top 15 rows of any stadium are usually pretty crap seating, but if you are forced up there then it generally means its a big crowd and the atmosphere and game would be more interesting than the roof.
- That is a big annoyance. I generally think that the growth in set seating is to the detriment of sport in this country. I get that it might be a commercial reality but I dont think it improves things.
- Its orientation is badly put out but I don't have a problem with an indoor stadium. There is nothing wrong with having a stadium that can provide perfect (ie no wind) conditions
- Yes I don't understand why the roof is mostly closed (I think I have been to open events at night but not sure). But again having the option to close out rain and the cold isn't a bad thing.
- The entry points are kind of stupid especially with that new crap building they put in the way. But only because most people are sheep and dont use the other paths around. Also removing the ground won't magically fix the area. There will just be more badly planned towers there. It won't be more open or attractive. Bridging over the rail lines and the road (which is very difficult) could potentially fix the access.
- It could be flatter I think. I'm not sure the last time I bothered to sit on the fence.

All together its a stadium close to the city and fantastic transport options. Its in better condition than almost every other stadium in the country and many others around the world. Selling it off won't make things better for Melbourne or the docklands. It probably won't make things better for the AFL. Most of the reasons people have against Etihad really do come down to 1st world problems. Hell many of them still apply to the MCG

 

[PerfectFooty]

Would Richmond use the stadium for games though, or still keep most of their Home and Away games at the MCG, i would suspect the latter if it where to happen

 

[Kram]

- Yes I don't understand why the roof is mostly closed (I think I have been to open events at night but not sure). But again having the option to close out rain and the cold isn't a bad thing.

Because the non closing part of the roof hangs significantly further over the playing field than regular stadiums, on a bright sunny day the dark shadows cover a lot of ground and are as annoying as heck when the ball moves in and out of them.

 

[KissKiss]

Because the non closing part of the roof hangs significantly further over the playing field than regular stadiums, on a bright sunny day the dark shadows cover a lot of ground and are as annoying as heck when the ball moves in and out of them.

At day yeah but not sure why it has to be closed at night

 

[HTT]

There's probably a few too many restrictions on the ground to do this, it already sits practically on top of Brunton Ave and pretty close to punt rd. The reason it's probably been thrown out there is because Ed's just come up with his thing and everyone's going 'well it's better than eddies idea'. Also I'm concerned about the JD stand in all of this.
Also, no way we'll play more than 2 or 3 games a year if even that at the ground should it eventuate. It'd host low drawing games like North/St Kilda/WB v Interstate side when Etihad stadium is unavailable for whatever reason.

 

[The Plowking]

At day yeah but not sure why it has to be closed at night

Gee I don't know, cos Melbourne is not Brisbane in winter?

 

[Supercoach Bargain]

Would Richmond use the stadium for games though, or still keep most of their Home and Away games at the MCG, i would suspect the latter if it where to happen

Would think so too. The stadium would be for lower drawing games. Sides like North and the Doggies playing the Dockers, what would the punters think of playing at Punt Road?

 

[KissKiss]

Gee I don't know, cos Melbourne is not Brisbane in winter?

But its not that bad in Spring and Autumn.

 

[telsor]

Would Richmond use the stadium for games though, or still keep most of their Home and Away games at the MCG, i would suspect the latter if it where to happen

Depends on the $$$ a bit I'd think, but I'd be surprised if they played more than one or two token games there.

The whole 3rd stadium thing isn't viable anyway...Between the MCG and Docklands contracts, there are only about half a dozen games in Melbourne 'free' to be moved there (unless they stop playing in Tassie, Darwin & Cairns, which would be bad PR for the AFL, so wont happen).

 

[Pacman82]

Depends on the $$$ a bit I'd think, but I'd be surprised if they played more than one or two token games there.

The whole 3rd stadium thing isn't viable anyway...Between the MCG and Docklands contracts, there are only about half a dozen games in Melbourne 'free' to be moved there (unless they stop playing in Tassie, Darwin & Cairns, which would be bad PR for the AFL, so wont happen).

It gives the AFL another ground if they want to sell or refurbish Etihad down the track. The NAB Cup could become played properly again too.

In a perfect world the 3rd stadium could also be used as a soccer pitch during summer and or World Cup/Olympics, bringing in more parties to fund it.

 

[telsor]

It gives the AFL another ground if they want to sell or refurbish Etihad down the track. The NAB Cup could become played properly again too.

In a perfect world the 3rd stadium could also be used as a soccer pitch during summer and or World Cup/Olympics, bringing in more parties to fund it.

The AFL wont want another ground taking games away from the AFL owned Docklands...

As for a soccer pitch...There is a rectangular stadium that seats 30K about 1km away, I doubt they'd want a lot of games on an oval ground just for those extra seats (they play some games at Docklands, but that's ~25K more seats).