- Jul 9, 2010
- 24,163
- 26,536
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
It seems a lot more common to have weekends where it feels like there's almost no footy in Melbourne.
There's now four guaranteed matches outside of Victoria, generally with a match scheduled in Geelong, Tassie, Ballarat, or the Northern Territory. You add in the Thursday night game and suddenly the squeeze on grounds really relaxes. The Cats want more and more games at their home ground.
My point is, how necessary is this stadium?
fwiw I love Etihad. I reckon it's location is just about perfect – it's not the ground's fault that the area is nothing but banks, offices, and foreigners in little cubicle-apartments. There's a tram line which is 50 metres away from every major metropolitan train line, V-Lines that go to Geelong (sensical), and big footy towns like Ballarat, Bendigo, and Gippsland. The city is a 20 minute walk away with another couple of trams going downward. This works well as it has no real true bias for any club and their traditional geography. It also suits families and younger people – the sorts who are going to massive concerts. I think the sight-lines are world standard, the atmosphere no worse than 60% of MCG games, and the concourses are expansive and comfortable.
An interesting point is it seems Hawthorn and North Melbourne won't be in Tasmania when their deals expire. Whether that is for the fabled Tasmanian team... not worth speculating.
Basically, is there scope for a third Melbourne ground? Will it become even more of a simplified split of some teams playing every home match at the MCG and others every game at Etihad, and due to their pull, you'd end up with Richmond, Collingwood, and the Hawks potentially playing 15 matches at the 'G? While the Saints and Dogs play as many at Etihad?
Do people think the AFL would be interested in selling Etihad and its land, milking the government for upgrades at Princes Park and Western Oval (31,000 - 22,000) and tying them into women's and junior football? This would mean they bank a lot more money in terms of percentages. Or is it just easier for them to maintain and slowly upgrade Etihad? Is the concert and football money – big Melbourne derbies in the A-League of which there'll now be two or three and massive shows like Taylor Swift – too good to pass up?
What is future of the stadium in Melbourne?
The facilities are now 20 years old. It's in pretty good condition and no one is saying it's uncomfortable. People there just hate it and have a bias against it because, basically, it isn't the MCG. Victoria also doesn't have the culture and politics of New South Wales, where if this was the Sydney Football Stadium, you'd be heading for a rebuild in 10 years. But do people really see the AFL pouring millions into this thing, potentially hundreds of, to keep it as an elite venue?
Is Docklands the major point, the central figure in the future of the AFL stadium in Victoria?
There's now four guaranteed matches outside of Victoria, generally with a match scheduled in Geelong, Tassie, Ballarat, or the Northern Territory. You add in the Thursday night game and suddenly the squeeze on grounds really relaxes. The Cats want more and more games at their home ground.
My point is, how necessary is this stadium?
fwiw I love Etihad. I reckon it's location is just about perfect – it's not the ground's fault that the area is nothing but banks, offices, and foreigners in little cubicle-apartments. There's a tram line which is 50 metres away from every major metropolitan train line, V-Lines that go to Geelong (sensical), and big footy towns like Ballarat, Bendigo, and Gippsland. The city is a 20 minute walk away with another couple of trams going downward. This works well as it has no real true bias for any club and their traditional geography. It also suits families and younger people – the sorts who are going to massive concerts. I think the sight-lines are world standard, the atmosphere no worse than 60% of MCG games, and the concourses are expansive and comfortable.
An interesting point is it seems Hawthorn and North Melbourne won't be in Tasmania when their deals expire. Whether that is for the fabled Tasmanian team... not worth speculating.
Basically, is there scope for a third Melbourne ground? Will it become even more of a simplified split of some teams playing every home match at the MCG and others every game at Etihad, and due to their pull, you'd end up with Richmond, Collingwood, and the Hawks potentially playing 15 matches at the 'G? While the Saints and Dogs play as many at Etihad?
Do people think the AFL would be interested in selling Etihad and its land, milking the government for upgrades at Princes Park and Western Oval (31,000 - 22,000) and tying them into women's and junior football? This would mean they bank a lot more money in terms of percentages. Or is it just easier for them to maintain and slowly upgrade Etihad? Is the concert and football money – big Melbourne derbies in the A-League of which there'll now be two or three and massive shows like Taylor Swift – too good to pass up?
What is future of the stadium in Melbourne?
The facilities are now 20 years old. It's in pretty good condition and no one is saying it's uncomfortable. People there just hate it and have a bias against it because, basically, it isn't the MCG. Victoria also doesn't have the culture and politics of New South Wales, where if this was the Sydney Football Stadium, you'd be heading for a rebuild in 10 years. But do people really see the AFL pouring millions into this thing, potentially hundreds of, to keep it as an elite venue?
Is Docklands the major point, the central figure in the future of the AFL stadium in Victoria?