Forceful Stadium Demands

[fulvio sammut]

Barnett said an interesting thing during an interview on ABC Radio News today.

He stated that he was meeting with Demitriou and was prepared to consider anything put before him in respect of the Subiaco redevelopment. But he went on to say that "It'll depend on the costings of the various projects".

This of course implies he will consider telling Demitriou to get stuffed, and that he is looking at other possibilities and is open to alternative options which cost considerably less and don't involve giving AFL anything it wants.

Not much, but an opening for pressure to be applied to him in respect of a low cost Members Equity upgrade.

With people like him, who know the price of everything, but the value of nothing, it is important to press for the bare minimum in Government financial contribution, which will at least satisfy the Force's interim interests, with a view to pushing for more at a later stage.


Forget about $200m plus upgrades, it won't happen while Mr WTF-Happened-And-Why-Am-I-Premier is heavily mortgaged to the Blackmail Party and is trying to figure out how to wriggle out of that commitment without losing his majority on the floor of the House.

Better to seek $30-40m for a makeover and 5000 seat expansion until we have a Government in place - Labor or Liberal - that is more attuned to community needs, is not beholden to extortionists, and has the cojones to do something meaningful.

OK, I can dream.

[Egan]

A bid that would have crippled the Force due to a stadium that wouldn't house all the members in the first year.

Egan, you're asking that the full story be told therefore don't omit all the details that may not suit your slant.


The truth is out there

I agree, it may have crippled them from the first year. But it could also have meant we would have a redeveloped venue and then there would have been progress of going to 35,000. Because they never accepted the Government offer and demanded the 35,000 seat stadium straight away, they ended up getting nothing.

But the common story that is out there is that the Government renegged on the initial commitment for 25 million dollars to fund the redevelopment. It was actually the Force.

I definitely want an upgrade, but I also find it important that we not start blaming government for issues they are not responsible for. As at the end of the day, they will be providing the funds...

[Darren]

I also find it important that we not start blaming government for issues they are not responsible for.

This is where you have it wrong - the government are to blame.

Whilst offering $25million to Rugby for a Members Equity upgrade, there were willing to throw 40 times that figure at AFL!

There's a difference between knocking back an offer and not allowing yourself to be royally screwed. The goverment is to blame.

RugbyWA holding out seems to have suited their purposes well. Match attendence has settled to manageble levels, other parties are now willing and eager to put money into the re-development and there is a new goverment which (as yet) doesn't wish to be seen as AFL's whipping boy ...

[shasta]

But it could also have meant.............

You've provided us with some valuable pointers during this stadium saga, Egan and thanks for that. But we shouldn't get bogged down with the "what if's". Just continue efforts to push Rugby's position forward (e mails, talkback radio etc). I'm sure that's what Andrew Demitriou intends doing for AFL .

[The EnForcer]

I agree, it may have crippled them from the first year. But it could also have meant we would have a redeveloped venue and then there would have been progress of going to 35,000. Because they never accepted the Government offer and demanded the 35,000 seat stadium straight away, they ended up getting nothing.

But the common story that is out there is that the Government renegged on the initial commitment for 25 million dollars to fund the redevelopment. It was actually the Force.

I definitely want an upgrade, but I also find it important that we not start blaming government for issues they are not responsible for. As at the end of the day, they will be providing the funds...

I believe I'm right in saying that the $25million was not going to be enough to give us the corporate seating required, which is the life blood of The Force. It is all very well saying one party renegged or rejected but I'm pretty sure that the arguments and decisions made by RugbyWA were sound and in the interest of ensuring The Force's future.

And, I wouldn't be too concerned or worry about the importance of blaming the Government because as history tells us they are more than capable of spinning the truth to their own ends.......more often than not nothing is as it seems.

[AndyS]

Ehh, there is blame enough all 'round.

RugbyWA grossly underestimated interest in their sport - a common problem for rugby in Australia but understandable if you only have the amateur game as a reference point. A bit more research wouldn't have gone astray, but the ARU would have probably called them liars if they had presented a realistic estimate.

But when it became apparent that both corporate and individual interest in rugby was far greater than expected, the $25M was never going to be appropriate or in any way adequate. At that point the governments response was to say "Oh well, you are on your own then"?

[Burgs]

RugbyWA grossly underestimated interest in their sport - a common problem for rugby in Australia but understandable if you only have the amateur game as a reference point.

Also understandable when you continually sell out (or as good as) your one International each year but have no way of knowing how many extra others wanted to come if they could get decent seats, but choose to watch it on TV rather than waste good money on....hang on...that sounds like the Force at MES!!!

[jargan83]

worst seat at MES is better then the best seat at subi
Posted via Mobile Device

[AndyS]

Not for the poor buggers that would miss out.

[Swee_82]

Not for the poor buggers that would miss out.

The poor buggers that currently aren't even attending games at Subi??

[AndyS]

Well, OK, assuming interest in rugby has peaked and it is all downhill even if we did get a rectangular stadium - who knows, if no seats were available that might even be self-fulfilling.

[Swee_82]

Well, OK, assuming interest in rugby has peaked and it is all downhill even if we did get a rectangular stadium - who knows, if no seats were available that might even be self-fulfilling.

I'm jsut saying if the options available within the next decade are 25,00 seat MES or upgraded Subi then missing at seat at MES is probably no worse a result than being able to get a seat at Subi, that demonstrably, these people don't want.
What we would get is a waiting list for memberships that resembles the Eagles and some political ammunition to lobby for a bigger stadium, just like the WAFC are now (thier last refit isn't that old either).

[jargan83]

wouldn't a case be better built for a 30-35,000 upgrade with the Force playing in front of a sell out crowd at MES instead of having attendances drop every year because the punters have the shits with subi?
Posted via Mobile Device

[Burgs]

Yep, the ones who left after the first season and said they would return to a rectangular ground but aren't being factored in to the magical fitting a round peg (average attendence) into a square hole (MES, with the emphasis on hole).
Once it is full it is full.
There have been Test matches at Subi where, as master in charge of tickets for my mates, there have been heaps more interest in the days before the match but it's been sold out.
RWA and ARU would never know the true potential for those crowds as once Ticketec put up the full house sign they don't record any further numbers.
Same with MES.
Once the 22k seats are full that will become the average attendance.
"You only get 22k to a match? No need for a new stadium!"

[Darren]

How is turning people away from MES when it sells out, worse than having them not even care enough to show up at all at Subi because it's such a crap venue?