Anything in todays announcement i wonder?
As in the WA premier’s announcement of $5.5b COVID-19 stimulus?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Anything in todays announcement i wonder?
The reduced capacity but upgraded facilities for the WACA ground would be fantastic for the AFLW teams.
The shame though, is that the WACA ground wouldn’t be able to be used for the AFLW, as the season would conflict with when the cricket pitch would still be there.
YehAs in the WA premier’s announcement of $5.5b COVID-19 stimulus?
If AFLW is moved to winter, Townsville.
they're just going to play WA games at Burswood as curtain-raisers to the men's games.
Don't fancy the chances of the WACA being fully utilised as a women's footy venue.
they can't even capitalise on its huge potential for women's cricket.
I pretty much agree (and said so a few weeks ago), but the fact is the men's and women's seasons are overlapping more and more each year.That would make no sense what-so-ever.
Hasn't stopped them from playing a Friday 3pm curtain-raiser at Subiaco. Carlton are more than happy to host AFLW games at Princes Park, they were nevertheless fixtured to play a curtain-raiser this year at Docklands. Similar thing happened for Collingwood, GWS and Brisbane this year. Likely to occur more often in the future for all clubs.There's no sense in playing curtain-raisers. Not when the AFLW are more than happy at Fremantle.
It's a problem the WA government should consider before wasting $40m under the false impression of attracting more events.That's cricket's problem and cricket is a completely different sport and a completely different setup.
I pretty much agree
It's a problem the WA government should consider before wasting $40m under the false impression of attracting more events.
A lack of contractually guaranteed events.Apart from the expenditure what is the problem you are referring to?
A lack of contractually guaranteed events.
Precisely the point, fanciful maybes will amount to nothing. The state gov shouldn't spend one cent without getting CA to commit to the same deal as it did for North Sydney Oval, at an absolute minimum.but maybe some regular events.
The state gov shouldn't spend one cent without getting CA to commit to the same deal as it did for North Sydney Oval, at an absolute minimum.
No, it's used as a rugby league ground in winter, would've hosted an NRL game this season if not for unforeseen circumstances. Now please stop responding to me with repetitive non sequuntur.Did they upgrade North Sydney Oval to AFL standard?
No, it's used as a rugby league ground in winter, would've hosted an NRL game this season if not for unforeseen circumstances. Now please stop responding to me with repetitive non sequuntur.
Not at all, you've summed up my thoughts pretty well. $75m cricket ground redevelopment with no guarantee of increasing from the current schedule of 0 "lower-drawing Tests", 0 women's internationals and 0 Big Bash matches this summer. Who could say no to that.I think you have mostly missed the point of the proposed redevelopment at the WACA Ground.
The WACA is proposing to decrease the capacity, and replace falling apart infrastructure with smaller and cheaper to maintain facilities at the WACA Ground. Which reduces the ongoing operating costs for the existing numerous events they already host at the ground which they operate. A facility as the State Sporting Association they need (similar to Baseball Park in Thornlie, or the separate Rugby, Athletic, Netball and Basketball facilities in the Western Suburbs or the recently promised Football West facility in East Cannington).
And they are looking at including community facilities such as an aquatic centre and function rooms to benefit all the new residents in the East Perth area. And they are looking to allow feature WAFL game’s to be played which will make it a multi-purpose facility, which makes it more sustainable.
Those other items are only cherry’s on top, as the main point is replacing falling apart facilities with new and cheaper to maintain facilities.
Not at all, you've summed up my thoughts pretty well. $75m cricket ground redevelopment with no guarantee of increasing from the current schedule of 0 "lower-drawing Tests", 0 women's internationals and 0 Big Bash matches this summer. Who could say no to that.
In that scenario, part 1 of my preference would be for the state government to say "not our ground, not our problem". Part 2 of my preference would be for the WACA to do as much as they can with whatever money they have, and if that means getting more funding from the Feds or some other sucker then so be it.So if there was to be no guarantee of more events, what would be your preference?
I would imagine there would be two options, leave the ground in its current condition, which involves unnecessarily higher operating costs. Or demolish the old facilities and be left with insufficient facilities.
Both of which wouldn’t provide the new community facilities for the locals, or the ability to play night WAFL games.
I’m just not sure what your preferred alternative would be with no guarantees.
In that scenario, part 1 of my preference would be for the state government to say "not our ground, not our problem".
? The Federal government has already made a $30m commitment, mate. And even if they hadn't, I still don't know what your point is!part 1 of any reality preference would be for the federal government to say "not our ground, not our problem"
The federal governments policy has always been "no pay W.A.".
If the feds didn't chip in for the state-of-the-art multi-purpose Perth Stadium what chance has cricket-purpose, low-capacity and poor viewing WACA got?
And even if they hadn't, I still don't know what your point is!