Not when CV is using the opportunity to lobby for a permanent ground. I don't have a problem with them doing that, but it does not justify the match being played at Bellerive instead of at the WACA.
-
LIVE: Gold Coast v Geelong - 7:30PM Thu
Squiggle tips Cats at 60% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
-
Weekly Prize - Join Any Time - Tip Round 10
The Golden Ticket - MCG and Marvel Medallion Club tickets and Corporate Box tickets at the Gabba, MCG and Marvel.
Round 9 Winner: philreich
-
Shield Final - venue dispute
- Thread starter Freo Big Fella
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Not when CV is using the opportunity to lobby for a permanent ground. I don't have a problem with them doing that, but it does not justify the match being played at Bellerive instead of at the WACA.
NSW hosted at canberra
NSW play a home match in Canberra every season and if pressed could have moved that final to Newcastle or one of Sydney's multiple first class grounds.
And from this season onwards they can move matches to Wagga Wagga
In no way shape or form does WA deserve to have a final at the WACA, CA created the problem and CA made the solution that's all there is to it.
Smells of double standards to me, NSW do it of their own free will and you don't care yet CV get forced into it and suddenly its not fair. A little bit more consistency wouldn't hurt
There's a rather obvious shape and form that justifies it. It's called the regulation that was created for this circumstance. CA's solution to the problem of a state waiving the right to host the final is to allow the second placed state to host. It is written.
There is no double standard
If WA complained last season NSW would have just moved the venue to another place in New South Wales. Plus for Sheffield Shield purposes, the ACT is part of NSW and NSW regularly play home matches there (and indeed hosted WA in Canberra in the last round of the season).
Victoria had years to prepare a Wagga Wagga standard stadium and made the decision not to do so.
This is what your states legal team have come to realise they can't win in court, CV are happy and willing to host the final at the one FC class ground they have and it is CA who have blocked that from happening by playing a WC game there. So long as its CA telling them and not CV requesting an interstate final then the grey area of waiving is a no-win for WA in court.
"Law. to relinquish (a known right, interest, etc.) intentionally." CV have not intentionally made the MCG unavailable, this would only be the case if the ground was being resurfaced/etc. Regardless of how many years planning have gone into the WC it does not make it a requirement for CV to create extra FC level grounds and it does not make it an intentional act to host an away final.
Where in the rules does it say they are required to pluck a FC class ground out of thin air?
Nope.
It's what CA have told the WACA to do behind the scenes.
The WACA loses far more from picking a public fight with CA than it could possibly win.
The rule says they need to provide a ground in their state. Obviously this ground has to meet first class standards.
Failure to do so is waiving the right to host.
I guess you do believe James Hird is a saint then
You clearly never been to Wagga Wagga. Sport is their heart beat out there. They invest heavily in it and the main social activity there, It is not a small town. People from all parts probably travel there to play their sports. Just off the top of my head Michael Slater and Mark Taylor come from there and so did Paul Kelly the Sydney Swans captain a number of years ago. I think even Wayne Carey or Longmire were not far off from that region so for a regional city it punches well above it's weight when it comes to many different sports. It probably has always had good backing for projects that needing funding in that region in recent decades so does not surprise me it has better cricket facilities than places like Bendigo and Albury.
At the end of the day WA went into the final round the equivalent of 6 runs behind Victoria, now instead of fight it out for hosting rights they prepared a pitch for a draw to finish 2nd.
They don't deserve to host it, or maybe they thought of the legal angle a week ago and it's blown up in their face?
They don't deserve to host it, or maybe they thought of the legal angle a week ago and it's blown up in their face?
They fit into the first class system if they have had shield games played at them.
- Thread starter
- #266
So in the end, we have big, bad, Victorian-hating Cricket Australia completely ignoring it's own rules to benefit Cricket Victoria.
Hope this puts an end to much of the perennial whinging we see on here.
Hope this puts an end to much of the perennial whinging we see on here.
Think you might be spot on there. It was strange to see them not try to win a game that may have seen them finish of the table.
Spot on. Wagga is not a massive city but it is in the heart of the Riverina and acts as the centre for a very large area where sport is a part of life.
And yes Wayne Carey is a Wagga boy as is Geoff Lawson.
- Sep 27, 2012
- 28,108
- 55,818
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Bushrangers Tottenham Hotspur
I doubt it unless those from the west put a sock in it
This complaint is entirely justified.
Can't help thinking that CV are using this situation to twist things their own way as much as possible in choosing the ground least convenient to their opposition. If Tasmania had finished second you could imagine CV would be approaching the WACA about playing the final there.
Way too many conspiracy theories here, the Vics just wanted the best road that they could find to give them the best hope of winning = Bellerieve Oval
Way too many conspiracy theories here, the Vics just wanted the best road that they could find to give them the best hope of winning = Bellerieve Oval
Not Glenelg?
Glenelg is unavailable so I am told - Bellerive prepared to order will be very hard to get a result on if you bat well.
- Mar 25, 2003
- 35,681
- 28,335
Didn't follow this too closely.
1 - It's a stupid rule IMO. Team on top earns right to host the final, if no suitable ground in their state, then they should still have the right to choose where to play it. That should not defer to the second team on the ladder.
2 - Seen as though the rule is written, what was the reasoning WA weren't given the chance to host the final? I don't agree with the rule, but seems pretty clear that if Vic couldn't host it, then WA get to choose where to host it, which obviously would've been the WACA.
3 - Surely there are more than two grounds in Victoria capable of hosting a FC game? One of the many first grade grounds in Melbourne must be up to scratch (grade clubs would be pissed as they are playing finals now themselves), or even regional places like Bendigo or Ballarat must have a decent ground somewhere. Surely Cricket Victoria would rather play a game there than risk the game heading to Perth.
4 - How does the NSW and Canberra situation compare? No one said anything last year. Is Canberra considered part of NSW for the purposes of this considering they don't have their own shield team?
1 - It's a stupid rule IMO. Team on top earns right to host the final, if no suitable ground in their state, then they should still have the right to choose where to play it. That should not defer to the second team on the ladder.
2 - Seen as though the rule is written, what was the reasoning WA weren't given the chance to host the final? I don't agree with the rule, but seems pretty clear that if Vic couldn't host it, then WA get to choose where to host it, which obviously would've been the WACA.
3 - Surely there are more than two grounds in Victoria capable of hosting a FC game? One of the many first grade grounds in Melbourne must be up to scratch (grade clubs would be pissed as they are playing finals now themselves), or even regional places like Bendigo or Ballarat must have a decent ground somewhere. Surely Cricket Victoria would rather play a game there than risk the game heading to Perth.
4 - How does the NSW and Canberra situation compare? No one said anything last year. Is Canberra considered part of NSW for the purposes of this considering they don't have their own shield team?
