Let’s face it. The 30K stadium we want is not going to get built. There are far too many ‘ifs’ for this to eventuate - IF Labor win, and IF someone comes to their senses and suggests a smaller cheaper stadium and IF it gets the go ahead.
I’d be happy with a 45K stadium with curtains, which can then be opened up for derbies and grand finals. It’ll also mean that derbies at SFS will always be bigger than at Parra.
This is how FC Seoul cover up the upper stands of their huge stadium for most K-League games except for matches vs their main rival team Suwon Bluewings.
It’s just tarpaulins covering seats. Does not reflect sound or make the ground feel any more intimate. We could have done something similar at Allianz which would have done… Nothing…
If Labor dont build a school and a hospital in the front yard of every house in NSW then by golly i’ll string Daley up by his balls in public for being the liar he is!!!1111
Its not only a shortage of materials but it is also general labor and consultants whose availability is severely limited and is reflected in their fee’s at the moment. Its part of the reason why so much of the light rail project works have been contracted outside Australia.
I don’t recall a period in my life time where there has been as much investment in NSW infrastructure as there has been in recent years. That includes road, rail, light rail and hospitals. If anything, its a small argument against having so much investment in infrastructure at the same time.
The thing that winds me up about this whole fiasco is the claim that its an issue that has been brought up on the eve of the state election. Feasibility studies and planning for this sort of thing take years and its been featuring in the media prominently for the last 2 years.
Article does not once mention an improved seating rake or roof covereage at all, let alone how those things could contribute to any sort of improved attendance. Nor does it mention improved corporate facilities benefitting the clubs that play out of said stadium.
In fact, I’m not sure what that article was actually talking about in any respect???
It’s just discussing the fact that the designers need to plan to make it a better experience, rather than just focusing on making it glamorous and look cool. It’s a very general article with no specifics in it but a decent enough point
Still, it does a pretty poor job at explaining what would make a stadium good for the actual sports being played there, which is what the writer seems to introduce the article as being about. @scooter is right in questioning why he doesn’t mention the features that actually achieve a better atmosphere for fans and players (like the rake).
When I read the title I assumed it would discuss how the right stadium could vastly improve the match day experience for sports lovers and summarise what is wrong with the former stadium.
Completely agree there. Just sounds like it was written by someone that wanted to voice an opinion on the issue, but had no clue what they’re talking about
Am I wrong is assuming there’s actually no cheaper way out this for any party because any alternative proposal will incur penalties for breach of contract? I had been thinking that there might be a sliver of hope if they started the demolition and then the ALP won the election and went for a cheaper smaller rebuild. But surely they can’t do that without incurring penalties right?
If that is right, then I would think a new ALP government will have no choice but to proceed and blame it on the previous government.
The contract has been awarded to Lendlease last year. So if Labor got in and decided they won’t fund the construction, and SCGT cannot service a huge loan as Labor says they should, the developer needs to be compensated to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars, if not the full $729m. Similar thing happened in Melbourne a while ago, with the developer getting something like 600m after cancellation of a road or tunnel project.
But people don’t know that, they no stadium crowd are hoping to vote Labor in, to save $729m and put it into ‘schools and hospitals’. “The best argument against democracy is a 5-minute conversation with the average voter” indeed.
