Brushing Brookvale for blockbusters makes sense
By Luke Doherty, 16 Jul 2012 Luke Doherty is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- Brookvale Oval, Canterbury Bankstown Bulldogs, Des Hasler, Manly Sea Eagles, NRL, Rugby League
View of Manly vs South Sydney from the stands at Brookevale Oval (Image: WikiCommons)
Related coverage
Suburban grounds are one of the most romantic parts of rugby league. There are few things better than walking through the streets of Balmain as the floodlights and the smell of sausages cooked on street corners tell you that Leichhardt Oval is getting closer.
Brookvale Oval means the same thing to Manly fans. It’s where the rest of the world meets the fortress.
The stereotype says people from the northern beaches of Sydney don’t like to travel far from home. Why should they? Sun, sand, restaurants and ‘Brookie’ are sewn into the local fabric.
On Friday night, 23,000 will pack onto the hill or fight for a seat in the stand. It doesn’t matter that they’ll queue for the toilet or a hot-dog. That happens anywhere.
What matters is that one man’s decision to defect from Brookvale to Belmore has turned this fixture into a blockbuster. Des Hasler used to sit in the home coach’s box and rant and rave, but now he comes back an outsider to the empire he once ruled.
His side no longer flies under the radar, but rules over the rest of the league.
The first time these two sides met was in round eight. It was also a Friday night game, but with the Dogs still finding their feet under their new leader, just 24,743 turned up at ANZ stadium to see them go down swinging 12-10.
It should’ve been more. It deserved more. This time around, at a bigger stadium, it probably would’ve got more.
Apart from the fact a couple of thousand people won’t be able to get a ticket there’s also the fact there’s a dollar to be made. Financial compensation is something that most NRL clubs can’t afford to miss out on.
Can you imagine how much money either of the two major stadiums in Sydney would pay to get a game like this? Add it to the ARL Commission’s growing to-do list.
This isn’t a call to end suburban football. In fact, if that were to happen, then those in charge of the game would’ve made a major mistake.
But it’s also a concern that a giant financial opportunity goes missing when premium product is undersold.
The ARLC and the clubs should come up with a list of games that fall under the blockbuster banner. It would then be up to the chief executive of the home club to sell those games to either Allianz Stadium or ANZ Stadium prior to the season.
This wouldn’t be the end of suburban rugby league, but instead, a way of making sure it continued. It would only make sense to move games when another high profile Sydney club is involved.
Manly playing Brisbane or Melbourne at Brookvale would be fine, but this game has the potential to be huge. The neutral is almost as interested as the die-hard.
It deserves a bigger stage.
You can follow Luke Doherty on Twitter @Luke_Doherty and on Sky News Australia.

July 16th 2012 @ 7:31am
Matt_S said | July 16th 2012 @ 7:31am | Report comment
Manly deserve government funding to develop Brookvale into a modern 25,000 seat stadium.
Moving this blockbuster would only mean more Bulldog fans at the game and less Manly fans which defeats the piurpose of a home match. Stick to Brookie and encourage a larger TV audience perhaps.
July 16th 2012 @ 8:09am
Rabbitz said | July 16th 2012 @ 8:09am | Report comment
Government funding? Why?
The NRL, Manly-Warringah Football club, news limited, channel 9 and the rest are private companies. If as private companies they can not provide finances to create the work environments they need then they are not viable companies.
The government should not be expected to pick up the shortfall.
It is a business, nothing more, nothing less.
July 16th 2012 @ 8:59am
Andrew said | July 16th 2012 @ 8:59am | Report comment
WIN Kogarah, Centrebet Stadium and Toyota Stadium have received government funding in recent years.
July 16th 2012 @ 9:25am
Matt_S said | July 16th 2012 @ 9:25am | Report comment
Yes, but all this funding I think was under Howard.
July 16th 2012 @ 9:47am
Andrew said | July 16th 2012 @ 9:47am | Report comment
Win Kogarah for sure as howard is a dragon fan.
Campbelltown Stadium got some funding as well $8 million Labor Federal Government
July 16th 2012 @ 9:54am
Matt F said | July 16th 2012 @ 9:54am | Report comment
NSW Labor chipped in some cash as well when they were in government. To be honest, i question the governments giving any money to the small suburban grounds given that there are two perfectly modern venues in Sydney (SFS and ANZ) already available for use. How many stadiums can we really expect them to support?
July 16th 2012 @ 1:40pm
B.A Sports said | July 16th 2012 @ 1:40pm | Report comment
Wollongong and Kogarah got state funding – the then STate sports minister Kevin Greene (of Oatley) and no 2 Dragons ticket holder was the driver.
The previous State Government invested over $300m in state sports infrastructure, but many Not for Profit sports missed out while they propped up the grounds for these “professional clubs”.
I don’t mind the money they spent on Hunter, because it is used by a range of sports, but Kogarah is used 6 or 7 times a year, as is WIN’s main ground. Why should we pay for that when tennis courts and public golf courses are missing out?
July 16th 2012 @ 10:35am
Crosscoder said | July 16th 2012 @ 10:35am | Report comment
Who had the abilty to think outside the square.The current mob governing the country are good at contemplating their navels.
July 16th 2012 @ 10:27am
Rabbitz said | July 16th 2012 @ 10:27am | Report comment
So the taxpayer should continue to prop up these businesses because they once helped out?
A better idea would be for the government to compulsory acquire the NRL and make all the employees public servants.
This will solve a number of issues:
Ground funding
Player payments – they will all be under the same award.
Salary Cap – won’t be needed
Club financial transparency – as public sector entities their financial will be available under FOI
Player agents will be a thing of the past
If a team performs badly the Minister can wear the blame – not just the coach
I don’t know why no-one has thought of it before…
July 17th 2012 @ 8:27am
Crosscoder said | July 17th 2012 @ 8:27am | Report comment
It’s not a case of propping up businesses.It’s simply providoing infrastructure, that can be used for all rectangular sports,and tha5t can be a govt requirement.
The govt had no trouble in propping up a team that just arrived on these shores and threw money around like confetti,despite the fact they can hardly draw breath let alone a crowd.
Yes we say how public service operated with a former Labor backbencher.
July 16th 2012 @ 9:02am
Matt_S said | July 16th 2012 @ 9:02am | Report comment
By that logic, then how did GWS, GC Suns get 100 million plus in govt funding for new stadiums?
Brookie is a council owned stadium and should be upgraded appropriately for community use. The council have allocated $5 million for redevelopment but the state/federal governments aren’t coming to the party and it apparently has to do with politics and the area being a liberal safe seat so labor govt won’t have a bar of it and the libs/nat don’t need to do anything as they won’t loe that seat anyway.
July 16th 2012 @ 9:10am
Andrew said | July 16th 2012 @ 9:10am | Report comment
Agreed.
July 16th 2012 @ 9:48am
Matt F said | July 16th 2012 @ 9:48am | Report comment
Community use? Is Brookvale Oval used for anything other than Manly games? I don’t think you could classify people spending money to watch a professional sport team play once a fortnight for six months “community use.”
July 16th 2012 @ 10:21am
eagleJack said | July 16th 2012 @ 10:21am | Report comment
Yes Brookie is used for a number of other things like schoolboy games etc. But at present they can only use the oval for a max of 15 hours per week to keep it to an NRL standard. That is why the synthetic turf issue has arisen. The council want to be able to use it for up to 60 hours a week for the community but with the current state of the turf they are unable to do so.
July 16th 2012 @ 10:45am
Matt F said | July 16th 2012 @ 10:45am | Report comment
Fair enough. I like the idea of artificial turf as long as the technology is right. It’s certainly a good financial move in the long run.
I’m not sure that spending millions of dollars on upgrading the capacity is nescessary for things like schoolboy games though
July 16th 2012 @ 4:20pm
soapit said | July 16th 2012 @ 4:20pm | Report comment
i read this also, is this a common amount of use for nrl grounds?
July 16th 2012 @ 10:50am
Matt_S said | July 16th 2012 @ 10:50am | Report comment
Matt F, you must remember the Sea Eagles pay rent. If they increase their recvenue streams via a more modern stadium, increased corporate facilities, crowds etc then that means more money for the council, thus community benefits as well.
July 16th 2012 @ 11:30am
Matt F said | July 16th 2012 @ 11:30am | Report comment
If the council wants to spend their own money on a stadium upgrade then that’s their perogative, but I doubt that the local council can aford a large upgrade on their own. They’ll need to get money of the state and/or federal government. What would they get out of it? Why should state governments be expected to prop up lots of small subruban grounds when Sydney has two perfectly suitable and modern stadiums alrady in operation? taht goes for all clubs who use those grounds, not just Manly.
I doubt that the rent that the Sea Eagles pay is based on how much they generate (though it could be.) It would most likely be a flat fee so any extra revenue generated wouldn’t go to the council but to the club, unless the council also increased the rent.
Besides, they are averaging just over 13k this season which is a fair way off the current capacity. All of this in a year after they won the premiership. If they were selling out almost every game then they would have a case for increasing capacity.
July 16th 2012 @ 12:04pm
Matt_S said | July 16th 2012 @ 12:04pm | Report comment
Gee then how did GWS get a brand spanking redeveloped stadium with a 25,000 capacity? based on what? AFL forcasts?
Brookvale is a dump and not condusive to big crowds on a consistant basis. Why shouldn’t it get state & federal funding? Surely having an NRL team in your area has economic consequences for a community? I hear pubs & restaurants do a roaring trade around Balmain on game day. Same would go for other grounds.
And ANZ is not condusive to RL. Allianz also does not cater for the likes of Manly, Penrith, Parra, Cronulla given distance. Sydney is not Melbourne which have central location in a city where the çentre’is in the middle of the city.
Suburban grounds have a future in the NRL, they just need to be upgraded, an appropriate capacity with a good larger RL specific stadium for big games and easier access for most clubs.
There is nothing better than your club having its own ground in its own community.
July 16th 2012 @ 1:26pm
Matt F said | July 16th 2012 @ 1:26pm | Report comment
Well for starters the AFL chipped in a portion of that which helped sweeten the deal. The NRL and its clubs very rarely, if ever, contribute their own money to a stadium upgrade. If they did then they’d probably get more government support.
Besides Skoda Stadium is one of 3 grounds where AFL is played in NSW and the other two (ANZ and the SCG) are used for multiple sports so have more benefits then just AFL. I can think of 7 grounds off the top of my head which exclusively host NRL games in NSW on a regular basis. You can’t expect governments to prop up up to 7 stadiums forever. That doesn’t include ANZ, SFS and Parramatta (with the new A-League side) which host more than one sport.
It’s all well and good to say “they just need upgrading” but just think of how much money it would cost to do these upgrades for 7 stadiums. Besides, they’ll all need to be upgraded again in the future as well.
Pubs and restaurants in Balmain do a roaring trade when NRL games are on? They play 3-4 games a year there. I highly doubt they generate enough to justify tens of millions of dollars in upgrades. Even restaurants/pubs around a ground that hosts 10 or so games like Brooky wouldn’t see a big enough increase in revenue to justify a serious upgrade.
Judging by the average attendance at Brookvale over the years, it’s current capacity is more then adequate for it’s needs for the vast majority of games. I don’t see anything wrong with them playing most games at Brooky but moving some of the higher drawing games to a bigger ground if need be. Let’s be honest, that would be 0-2 games a year which fits in well given they take 1-2 games a year to Gosford (and Perth this season) anyway. When they start selling out most of their games then they can try and ask for an upgrade. Unless they can produce some actual evidence that a total upgrade of brookvale would dramatically increase attendance figures then I’m sure the state/federal governments have more important priorities for their spending.
July 16th 2012 @ 3:02pm
Australian Rules said | July 16th 2012 @ 3:02pm | Report comment
That’s a point that many people don’t understand Matt F.
People look at Metricon and Skoda and ask: “How did that happen?”
Well, it happened because the AFL contributed millions ($10M & $12M), and gathered other stakeholders to share the cost. The NRL has never chipped in one cent to a stadium. And the club’s don’t want to pay anything either…it’s just fantasy land stuff.
Yet people still EXPECT the govt to simply shell out millions for one run-down stadium, which is rarely half full, and which services just one club.
Frankly, that’s bizarre.
July 16th 2012 @ 6:44pm
JVGO said | July 16th 2012 @ 6:44pm | Report comment
How many clubs do Skoda and Metricon cater for AR? Just out of interest.
July 17th 2012 @ 8:58am
Matt F said | July 17th 2012 @ 8:58am | Report comment
1 obviously. There’s only one AFL team on the Gold Coast and it needs to play somewhere. If there were 9 AFL or NRL teams on the Gold Coast each requesting their own individual stadiums then your comparison might start being somewhat valid
July 17th 2012 @ 10:26pm
apaway said | July 17th 2012 @ 10:26pm | Report comment
Our school athletic and sports carnivals were always held at Brookvale Oval.
July 16th 2012 @ 1:44pm
B.A Sports said | July 16th 2012 @ 1:44pm | Report comment
GWS got govt funding because the AFL invested in the infrastructure also. – And they must have had sound detailed strategies around growth. The NRL still doesn’t know if they are going to the Central Coast, Perth, Guatamala or Egypt!
July 16th 2012 @ 5:27pm
Crosscoder said | July 16th 2012 @ 5:27pm | Report comment
Not quite correct.,people look at Skoda and see govt waste (regardless of money spent by the AFL).There is a stadium nearby ,in place,perfectly suited for AFL
You guys continually live in this la la land world because the AFL throws in a figure ,the state govt and the Feds are therefore are morally obliged to throw taxpayers in also.That is Ok ,provided all are treated fairly not just the flag waving community.
And more so when the same state and fed govt are either crying poor or wasting it.Anyone for the NBN.
What is bizarre is a govt spending tens of millions of dollars on a stadium with duplication(ANZ nearby) and a stadium that is lucky to atract 10,000(inclduing inflated figures).
Grounds and clubs that have been around for nearly 100 years are somehow ,not worthy.The arrogance simply stifling.Breakfast Point instead of Blacktown LOL.
July 16th 2012 @ 5:57pm
Jack Russell said | July 16th 2012 @ 5:57pm | Report comment
GWS and the Suns aren’t privately owned either.
July 16th 2012 @ 6:39pm
JVGO said | July 16th 2012 @ 6:39pm | Report comment
Aren’t they funded by the AFL? The AFL is not a government body as far as I know. Or does paying the bills not amount to ownership? I would imagine the AFL has made the decisions to relocate from Blacktown etc.
July 17th 2012 @ 12:00am
Jack Russell said | July 17th 2012 @ 12:00am | Report comment
Funded by the AFL, but the AFL aren’t privately owned either. I believe both GWS and GC are member based clubs – i.e community owned.
July 17th 2012 @ 7:57am
Crosscoder said | July 17th 2012 @ 7:57am | Report comment
Being privately owned applies to Manly, howeve4r it is still a council owned ground.They pay rental monies whichj goes back to the council to improve the condition of the local area.
It does not apply to West Tigers,Sharks,Penrith,Parramatta,Canterbury.These clubs have been around for at least 45 years.
They have therfore been part of the community for a hell of a lot longer than say GWS which community includes many from Canberra.They have paid their taxes and rates therefore paid their dues..
July 17th 2012 @ 8:44am
Australian Rules said | July 17th 2012 @ 8:44am | Report comment
Both clubs are member-owned, as all AFL clubs are.
Both have been given grants from the AFL in their start-up years, but this will level off. As many know, the Suns made a profit in their first year.
July 17th 2012 @ 8:32am
Crosscoder said | July 17th 2012 @ 8:32am | Report comment
And the good old taxpayer lobbed in $45m and $10m .rarley ever brought up,funny that.
The AFL monies were a small percentage.
Amazingly the head office is involved in monetary cuts,probably realising(horse has bolted) their expendiure for the that club is out of control.
July 17th 2012 @ 10:24pm
apaway said | July 17th 2012 @ 10:24pm | Report comment
But Rabbitz, that “business” is all taking place on a council-owned ground.
July 16th 2012 @ 7:56am
eagleJack said | July 16th 2012 @ 7:56am | Report comment
I have no idea who labelled Brookie as having a 23,000 capacity. I am yet to see it get anywhere near that. I’m guessing the crowd will be under 21,000. Last years Storm game got 20,500 and there was no chance of fitting another soul in there. The house full sign usually goes up at the 20,000 mark. Clearly not an exact science.
As for taking this blockbuster away from Brookie? Well I can see the merits from a financial perspective. But the players and fans would hate it. As Watmough said last week a packed Brookie lifts the team and the boggy pitch will trouble the big pack of the Bulldogs. Although I think that comment was primarily aimed at big Sam Kasiano who is no chance of playing. His high shot on FuiFui in isolation probably doesn’t warrant a suspension. But the fact he has already pleaded guilty to a dangerous contact charge this year means that even a Grade 1 will see him miss a week. It’s unfortunate for the contest as it would have been great to see both squads at full strength.
July 16th 2012 @ 1:05pm
Mals said | July 16th 2012 @ 1:05pm | Report comment
Agreed. Capacity would be even smaller at the moment with the Jane Try grandstand renovations still not complete & the area around the new canteen still closed off.
July 16th 2012 @ 8:13am
Will Sinclair said | July 16th 2012 @ 8:13am | Report comment
You’re forgetting the people who will ONLY go to the game BECAUSE it’s at a suburban ground.
I despise Manly and the Bulldogs, but I’ll be heading up to the game because it’s at Brooky and I can walk to the ground.
If it was at Homebush, I doubt I’d even bother watching it on telly.
July 16th 2012 @ 8:51am
Christo the Daddyo said | July 16th 2012 @ 8:51am | Report comment
The evidence would suggest you’re in a very small (but vocal I’m sure) minority.
July 16th 2012 @ 9:35am
Will Sinclair said | July 16th 2012 @ 9:35am | Report comment
I think people who despise Manly and the Bulldogs are a huge majority.
HUGE.
July 16th 2012 @ 9:46am
Matt F said | July 16th 2012 @ 9:46am | Report comment
Probably, though I would have thought that the focus should be on the few thousand Manly and Bulldogs fans who will be probably locked out of the game over a handful of fans who don’t like either side but might decide to go because they live close enough to the ground.
I find it strange that clubs complain about Monday night football because it hurts attendances but will then refuse to move a game like this one to a bigger stadium to accomodate demand.
July 16th 2012 @ 9:56am
Will Sinclair said | July 16th 2012 @ 9:56am | Report comment
Oh right – in that sense I am certainly in the minority (I’m heading up with a group of Manly and Dogs supporting mates. Or, as I like to call them – “Losers”.)
But I don’t think you would get a much bigger crowd at a bigger stadium. Manly fans really do not travel and, now that I live here, it’s easy to see why. It’s hard to get ANYWHERE from Manly.
July 16th 2012 @ 10:14am
Matt F said | July 16th 2012 @ 10:14am | Report comment
Losers? I think a certain Tigers fan should take a closer look at the table
It’s true about transport from Manly. Public transport is shocking on the northern beaches. That being said there are those special event buses to Olympic park for the big events (Origin, GF etc) which makes it much easier to get to ANZ from the beaches, though your regular season NRL match doesn’t have enough demand to warrant them.
The fact that the round 8 game between the two sides only got 24k, despite media speculation of a 35k+ crowd, probably shows that few Manly fans would travel to ANZ or the SFS for the game.
July 16th 2012 @ 11:36am
Will Sinclair said | July 16th 2012 @ 11:36am | Report comment
Matt – I never said the Bulldogs or Manly are losers, just that my Manly and Bulldogs-supporting mates are losers.
And I stand by that comment!
July 16th 2012 @ 11:38am
Matt F said | July 16th 2012 @ 11:38am | Report comment
You can tell a lot about a person by the company that they keep
July 16th 2012 @ 1:27pm
Matt F said | July 16th 2012 @ 1:27pm | Report comment
Actually Will you do make a good point. I’ve had the misfortune of standing on brookvale hill near the half way line and your description would fit in well there!
July 16th 2012 @ 9:07am
Steve said | July 16th 2012 @ 9:07am | Report comment
If it wasn’t at Brookvale there is no way I would be going. At all costs I try to avoid the dark side of Sydney.
–
Comment left via The Roar’s iPhone app. Download The Roar’s iPhone App in the App Store here.
July 16th 2012 @ 9:42am
Aljay said | July 16th 2012 @ 9:42am | Report comment
West of Chatswood?
July 16th 2012 @ 9:07am
Johnno said | July 16th 2012 @ 9:07am | Report comment
-Reality is the Manly fans have voted with there feet and the NRL should take note. Fans are unwilling to travel over the spit bridge and watch Manly VS NTH QLD , when it could easily be staged at Brooky. Does that make the Manly fans selfish yes. But why should they cross the bridge to watch some far flung cane toad team from north queensland.
-NRL take note sydneyisders are couch potatoes i am one myself we hate long distance travel to our sports matches, we are stuck in traffic all week , we don’t want to be stuck in traffic on our weekend either.
July 16th 2012 @ 10:45am
John Davidson said | July 16th 2012 @ 10:45am | Report comment
Manly are the defending champions. Certainly not losers, Will.
July 16th 2012 @ 11:35am
Will Sinclair said | July 16th 2012 @ 11:35am | Report comment
I never said Manly are losers John!
I said my Manly-supporting mates are losers.
And they are.
July 16th 2012 @ 11:21am
turbodewd said | July 16th 2012 @ 11:21am | Report comment
Did anyone know that Manly came 4th last in home crowds last year despite winning the GF?
July 16th 2012 @ 12:19pm
Australian Rules said | July 16th 2012 @ 12:19pm | Report comment
That’s what I don’t get about this article.
Luke says that the potential for a big crowd is huge…Why?
The Round 8 game got below 25,000 at ANZ…and that was a Bulldogs home game.
This year, Manly is averaging less than 14,000 at Brooky…you think people will travel to ANZ this week from Manly. Not likely.
July 16th 2012 @ 5:18pm
Crosscoder said | July 16th 2012 @ 5:18pm | Report comment
Have you checked how 14,000 at Brookvale looks ,bleeding packed.the comfortzone for the majority is zero.
If it is good enough to spend millions of state govt money on skoda to get 7,000 on for new kids on the block,it is not asking too much for the same govt to spend a few dollars on a ground that has been around for yonks as has the team.
July 16th 2012 @ 6:19pm
Australian Rules said | July 16th 2012 @ 6:19pm | Report comment
We’ve been thru this before CC.
There’s 3 ovals in Sydney to play cricket and AFL. How many rectangular stadiums are there? At least 12 by my count. Does the State govt pay millions to upgrade them all? Does it foot the entire bill as you’d like it to?
Moreover, do all clubs get millions for upgrades…even when they’re half empty most weekends?
In terms of Skoda, here’s who contributed: the AFL ($12M), State Govt ($45M) and the RAS ($7M). The facility will be used for AFL matches, cricket, the Show and concerts etc.
By and large, Brookvale is only used for Manly games every second week.
Your “handout” mentality is fundamentally wrong.
July 17th 2012 @ 12:42am
JVGO said | July 17th 2012 @ 12:42am | Report comment
There are not 12 NRL grounds in Sydney AR (if that’s what you are talking about as there are numerous small rectangular stadia such as Marconi Apia Concord etc) Newcastle Wollongong and Central Coast are not really considered part of Sydney but are separate regions and their grounds have all had substantial upgrades recently anyway. They are more than adequate.
Parramatta, Campbelltown, Hoembush and SFS are obviously adequate. That would leave Brookvale, Shark Park, Kogarah and Penrith that we are talking about. kogarah has had money spent on it recently and it is adequate. If the other 3 clubs are assured of a long term position in the NRL I would expect those grounds to have money spent on them. Brookvale would be the number one priority I imagine.
The equivalent of the $45m that GWS have had spent on Skoda which they have so far about a quarter filled for about 4 home games a year would go pretty well between any two of those options. If we got the equivalent of what the AFL has recieved for Blacktown, Manuka and Wagga I’m sure that would go a long way to addressing issues at the 3rd ground, whichever that is. That is not even taking into account the huge money going into the SCG which to me seemed hardly necessary, even for the cricket.
Your whole argument is as usual blatantly facile and prejudiced in favour of the AFL AR. The current demand for AFL seating in Sydney would average at about 15,000 attendees per week, given that the Swans are averaging 21,000 (maxed I’d imagine since they are top of the table) and GWS look like leveling at about 7,000.
The massive level of NSW Govt funding the AFL have recieved is way out of proportion to their significance in the city.
July 17th 2012 @ 8:54am
Australian Rules said | July 17th 2012 @ 8:54am | Report comment
You put in & you get back…not sure why that’s hard to understand.
Cricket and Australian football have been partners for over a century in Australia. Just about every oval ground in the country services both.
In terms of the grant money vs crowds argument – that’s an interesting one.
Obviously the NSW government saw a sports body willing to commit millions from their own pocket into a stadium (and councils, towns, schools etc) and thought, “yep, we’ll get involved in that”.
I guess time will tell if it was a good investment.
July 17th 2012 @ 9:18am
Matt F said | July 17th 2012 @ 9:18am | Report comment
JVGO – When cricket in NSW asks for money for an upgrade it’s only asking for one stadium. The NRL asks for 9. That’s the clear and obvious difference. Numerous NRL grounds have been upgraded over the last 10 years but they can’t keep upgrading so many stadiums forever.
Kogarah and Toyota stadium are 15 minutes from each other, Why can’t the Sharks and Dragons share a ground? If they did this they’d have a fantastic chance of getting an upgrade. It works for the AFL sides and it works for Inter and AC Milan. It’s good enough for these two sides and would substantially improve their chances of getting upgrades.
Leichardt Oval is 15 minutes from the SFS and 20 from ANZ. The Tigers can move their Leichardt games there quite easily. The travel factor isn’t an issue. They can still play at Campbelltown due to the travel time. Or, they can keep playing at Leichardt but stop asking for upgrades when they have two more than adequate stadiums within 1/2 hour of the ground.
July 19th 2012 @ 8:45pm
Crosscoder said | July 19th 2012 @ 8:45pm | Report comment
You asked the question ,you are not aware of any NRL clubs that have contribute toward their grounds.I gave you an example the Sharks .You deflected.
I mentioned rates and rent paid by the clubs and fed and state taxes paid by the clubs,as their contributions to govt coffers.You didn’t want to read about it.
Fact: Showground received $45m from govt.used for a handul of games.Plus some played in canberra..The stadium is 16.23km from the Sydney CBD.
ANZ a perfectly good stadium for AFL practically next door 14km from sydney CBD.
Translation = Government waste.
Clubs that are situated within their locale ,have been lobbying for funding ,to no avail it appears.
Of course it’s too hard, to justify Govt waste or duplication.
July 17th 2012 @ 8:21am
Crosscoder said | July 17th 2012 @ 8:21am | Report comment
Yes we have AR.And you still have failed to justify govt expenditure for one and not the other.
When you do ,get back to me.
I again will spell it out to you in spades.i have no objection for codes to receive govt funding,in fact I applaud it.My objection has always been about fairness,which goes over your head like a wisp of wind.The State govt spent $45m on skoda plus the monies for the Blacktown white elephant,when they were stone broke,ignoring other council grounds been around for ever,and you call that not a handout.
The AFL paid less than 20%.the taxpayers over 70%,without even bringing up the $86m SCG.
All the NRL clubs have been paying into govt coffers for yonks.If that äint”a handout I am not typing this post.
Skoda is used for one code in winter,and even then for not a full season,with Canberra involved and their largesse.In fact it is less than half full,and many of its members are from Canberra.
You think the other council owned grounds are not used for other sports or concerts during the summer.
You believe Parramatta stadium will get money to provide cover now the WSW will play there .
.
There are in fact 4 ovals to play both cricket and the AFL.SCG/ANZ/Nth Sydney Oval.So we have at least 4 ovals for 2 AFL teams or 3 ovals for 2 AFL teams.One team struggling to get a quorum at its matches
.
Be careful with the term by and large,the SCG is in the same boat.
And to use an old saying”there is none so blind than ones who cannot see”.Insert govt of the people not a select few.And that my friend is the fundamental basis of the argument.
BTW a grant is a contribution is a HANDOUT.I back the Oxford Dictionary .
July 17th 2012 @ 8:42am
Australian Rules said | July 17th 2012 @ 8:42am | Report comment
“All the NRL clubs have been paying into govt coffers for yonks.”
You mean via pokies? How generous.
CC I’m not suggesting that all stadiums don’t have a right to government grants. What I AM saying, is that the NRL or the ARL have never… not on one occasion (as far as I’m aware)…chipped in any capital for stadia or facilities.
The reason that governments “appear” to be more recently accommodating for Australian football facilities, is because the AFL will arrive at a meeting and say (for eg) “Here’s $15M. We have another $10M from another stakeholder. Can you chip in the other $25M for a new stadium in a growth area?”
The NRL (or its fans) say: “Please give us $50M for a new stadium…in an existing heartland area that is currently half full most wknds.”
That’s the reality.
July 17th 2012 @ 9:07am
Matt F said | July 17th 2012 @ 9:07am | Report comment
The NRL has received stacks of funding for ground upgrades. Others have mentioned this in earlier comments. Grounds like Toyota, Centrebet, Kograh, WIN, Hunter etc have all had upgrades fairly recently. You act as if the NRL get nothing when in fact they get heaps. But when you use so many grounds, and so many of them need upgrades, the money will only spread so far.
July 17th 2012 @ 9:38am
Crosscoder said | July 17th 2012 @ 9:38am | Report comment
Council rates for starters .
Poker machine tax,similar to the tax clubs like Collingwood have.How generous LOL.And lets not forget the rl fans who at last reports are taxpayers in this fair state,and are not a mere handfull.The players and club employess are also taxpayers.Geez.
Well AR as you ignorance has come to the fore.Try a club called Cronullawho went to the trouble and at great expense and with a large debt to develop their ground and infrastructure.
As far as I am aware St george over the years put in money into their
gounds together with govt funding.
I stated I am fine withGovt grants>I am just appalled at govts stating on one hand they have no money,the next they find large amounts for a club that just arrived in town.
And that takesinto account a code saying we have $10 m to assist.FHS if you have no money ,you have no money.
We have learnt how thing operate with the questionable decision by the fed govt to grant colliwngwood monies,which apparnetly went via the back door.Kate Lundy no less.
The reality is Govts lie when it suits,and the AFL in this case GWS were the beneficiaries.
You honestly believe if a 2nd NRL club lobbed into melbourne,and stated we have $15m,will the state govt grant us the balance to build a new stadium they would accede to the request.Fat chance.
The fact that your code’s head body has had to cut back on expenditure says something.
July 17th 2012 @ 11:06am
Australian Rules said | July 17th 2012 @ 11:06am | Report comment
CC
1) You’re saying that NRL have been paying into government coffers for yonks…”via their rates”???
How wonderful that a club actually pays their council rates to use facilities they don’t own. Bravo!
2) You wanna talk about the Collingwood upgrade? (you’ve been wrongly citing this one for a while now btw). Collingwood FC is contributing $10M to upgrade a sports/fitness facility that will be open to the PUBLIC (key difference) as well as other sporting clubs like the Storm/Rebels etc. The Fed Govt is matching their $10M.
How much did Cronulla get from the Fed Govt 5 years ago to upgrade? That’s right, about $10M…for a PRIVATE facility. Care to tell us how much the club kicked in?
(I’ll give u a clue…it wasn’t $10 Million).
3) In terms of your “2nd NRL Club in Melb” scenario, it’s a bit of a moot point isn’t it?
The Vic government has already footed the entire bill for a new stadium. If the NRL wanted an exclusive home for 2 teams, and they turned up with $15M, I reckon the State Govt would jump at the chance. I’m tipping they were hoping for some help with AAMI Park…from anyone.
4) Re: the AFL cutting back on expenditure “saying something”…well, they’ve cut their budget by $5M per year…which is probably what they spend in Auskick waterbottles. Given the AFL has been pouring tens of millions into stadia all over the country…I’d say cutting back by a mere $5Mp.a is a pretty decent call.
July 18th 2012 @ 1:28pm
Crosscoder said | July 18th 2012 @ 1:28pm | Report comment
AR Rates is just one aspect as are rental costs.
When you go to an NRL match ,you pay for tickets GST included,you buy product cooked (GST),players and employees of licensed clubs and football teams pay income tax.people arrive by public transport pay into the states coffersSecurity guards ,groundsmen,. I could go on.
Yo do understand the way taxation works.Maybe not.You must believe fans and players and employees of the NRL are non citizens, who pay no state or fed taxes.We äint ‘utopia .
The fed govt is pay $10m into one of the wealthiest clubs in the country,when there are perhaps more
pressing issues.The intrigue involved in that monies left quite a few people bemused.
The same club that does exceptionally well out of poker machines also.Good luck to them.
Let’s talk Cronulla,I have already stated the Sharks received monies for their Southern Stand.The club has been in existence for nigh on 45 years not 1 year.I have been watching the team since there were wooden seats on the sideline,so don’t try and lecture me on that team.You will be shot down in flames.
I can handle the fact Cronulla will not get any more ,as their new development if approved will handle that aspect.
What I find incongruous are grounds like Brookvale and Leichhardt,and even the SFS do not provide the cover and comfort ,that should be afforded in the 21st century.When govt’s cry poor one minute and then open the mothy wallets the next.Go figure.
The club owns a licensed club,the ET stand and the Peter Burnes stand ,plus the ground and car parks .You go figure how much the club has kicked in.A hell of a lot in todays monies.
The Vic govt would not have built the stadium if just the Storm were involved.It has been mentioned in desptaches more than one occasion.
Of course it’s a moot point,but deep down we know the result,with all the cutbacks in that state.
I keep repeating and it is pretty hard to get through to a mindset,I have no objection to any code securing grants for facilities, for juniors from Government.What I do object to ,are Govts one minute proclaiming they have no ,money yet find over $140m,regardless of any code contributing.
It reminds me so much of what is happening with Ford.Money going to one industry,whilst others are struggling.Sorrry I believe in even handedness.
July 18th 2012 @ 4:10pm
Australian Rules said | July 18th 2012 @ 4:10pm | Report comment
CC
Not once in that rambled response did you provide any ACTUAL facts or figures.
Just comments like “Yo do understand the way taxation works” and “You will be shot down in flames.” Enlightening stuff.
- Thanks for the tax lesson btw. I had no idea that NRL fans…wait for it… pay taxes and GST for tickets and things like food. How groundbreaking. I guess followers of other sports are exempt from this onerous burden.
- You refused to comment on the Public facility (Coll) vs Private facility (Cron) argument: a major point of difference for any government grant. That’s ok, just ignore it and say “The intrigue involved in that monies left quite a few people bemused”. Crystal clear then.
- You also acknowledged that Cronulla received $10M from the Fed Govt but when asked to state how much the club contributed itself, you simply said: “You go figure how much the club has kicked in. A hell of a lot in todays monies”. Well, case closed.
Just so we’re clear, Collingwood got $10M because they put that amount in themselves.
- You declare that Leichardt and Brookvale deserve modern facilities in the 21st Century…ok fine…who pays? The clubs can’t seem to…the NRL won’t. Should all clubs get $10M like Cronulla? Is that “even handedness”?
- You seem angry that the Govt “lied” about its finances. Not only is that not true, it’s not the point of this discussion.
It’s mind boggling that you can’t acknowledge that SOME of the responsibility for upgrading rugby league stadiums, should fall to the clubs that use them and the League that profits from them.
Simply saying, “we pay taxes” just misses the point completely.
July 19th 2012 @ 8:12am
Crosscoder said | July 19th 2012 @ 8:12am | Report comment
When you get down to using the description rambled response,it shows you have run out of ideas.
.
Quite simply everyone who attends a game in sydney contribute in some shape or form to state and Federal tax.Whether it be via income or other state taxes.
You want me to quote the amount everyone that follows Sydney teams pays in income tax and state taxes FFS?.Judging by your earlier response it would indicate you have no idea.
The Sharks built a leagues club,built two stands,built a ground,built two carparks,and a junior s ground next door,at their own expense.If you believe in today,s money that would be chickenfeed you are kidding.
They started all this in the late sixties.
If clubs like GWS who have no history ,and are using a relatively new ground(Showground)and who are lucky to get a platoon in attendance can get $45m plus another $10m,then historical grounds like Leichardt and brookvale should be entitled to a decent amount.There is a perfectly good AFL style stadium next door ANZ
Not the point of the discussion !!!! It is the basis of the discussion.
Your idea of evenhandedness is the old Viking idea of gather the spoils in a raid,at little cost and the locals take like it or lump it.
Mind boggling LOL.You appear arrogant enough to believe that when a govt states they have no money to other codes,because you have money and will contribute a perecentage,the govt should open the ëmpty”walle at your behest.
That is living in a bubble thinking..
Not once repeat not once,have you rationalised a Govt who states they have no money,yet finds it to suit your code’s need and ignore the lobbying of others over the years..All you babble on about but we put in X amount that is not the point.The point is no money was supposedly available.Obviously available for GWS ,good one.
.
July 19th 2012 @ 9:04am
Australian Rules said | July 19th 2012 @ 9:04am | Report comment
How you could possibly think I was asking what Sydneysiders pay in tax…is beyond me.
You missed it completely pal.
You again refuse to comment about the $10M the Sharks got from the Fed Govt 5 years ago…but then somehow ratoinalise it by mentioning what the Sharks built in the 60s…!!!
Is that a serious comment?
You then finish with some “AFL are like vikings” comment.
I give up.
July 16th 2012 @ 6:33pm
Matt F said | July 16th 2012 @ 6:33pm | Report comment
14,000 at Brookvale does not feel “bleeding packed.” Maybe once you get closer to 18k it does but there’s plenty of space when there’s 14k. People may still be cramped up because they’re trying to get near the half way line on the hill but there’s plenty of space in other areas.
July 17th 2012 @ 8:28am
Crosscoder said | July 17th 2012 @ 8:28am | Report comment
It certainly looks that way on TV.Its the 21st century,standing on grass hills went out with brick phones.Especially when it is wet.
July 17th 2012 @ 9:00am
Matt F said | July 17th 2012 @ 9:00am | Report comment
Except that the manly fans love the hill. The latest proposal for a ground upgrade was a grandstand behind the hill. An upgrade won’t fix the hill issue because they don’t want it fixed
July 18th 2012 @ 1:31pm
Crosscoder said | July 18th 2012 @ 1:31pm | Report comment
Well the hill is really loved when the wild winds and rain blow at Brookvale,because i see more relatives in my extended family than I do watching from the hill.
if the fans choose to reatin the hill,tthen let them put up with the elements.
July 17th 2012 @ 9:19am
Crosscoder said | July 17th 2012 @ 9:19am | Report comment
Matt F.I act as though every code should be treated on a fair and equitable basis.
I am aware ofToyota I spend half my life there.The club paid for most of the infrastructure,the feds for the Southern stand.There is still stuff all cover available on wet days.
Hunter and Win are not 19th century grounds.
The by far majority of sporting codes in this state use rectangular grounds.Thye have been around for yonks,not 30 years not 1 year.
That is fine if the govt says they have no money so be it.When they say they have no money and throw around $141m on a minor code,then as a taxpayer and one who has nolove for Manly but believes people have a right to comfort have a right to question decisions.
July 17th 2012 @ 10:22am
Matt F said | July 17th 2012 @ 10:22am | Report comment
I’m not actually that enthused by the Skoda upgrade either. They do have ANZ right next door after all. However I can see how, when you’re only asking to upgrade one ground (as opposed to up to 9) and are putting up at least some money yourself, they got money.
You also make it sound like the NRL get nothing. Heaps of NRL grounds have had upgrades recently including Kogarah, Hunter and Centrebet Stadium (some receiving more than others obviously.) it’s not about the govt telling the NRL that there’s no money, just saying that they’ve given the NRL tonnes of money and aren’t a bottomless pit.
Yes the majority of clubs use rectangular grounds, which is actually another great reason why they can share grounds! It’s practical.
Of course Hunter & WIN aren’t 19th century grounds, although isn’t there an issue with the main grandstand at WIN? I remember reading something about it but maybe that was something else. Hunter also got a major grandstand only a few years ago. Besides, given the distance between Sydney and Newcastle (and Woollongong) I can understand why they need their own grounds.
It’s the inner-sydney one’s that are close together that are the questionable ones. As I said to JVGO, Toyota and Kogarah stadiums are 15-20 minutes apart (in reasonable traffic.) If the Sharks and Dragons were to share a ground they could easily get an upgrade, and probably reduce expenses as they’ll split costs. 15 minutes extra travel isn’t a major issue and ground sharing works for numerous clubs in a variety of sports all over the world. There’s no reason why they can’t share apart from pride, which isn’t a good enough reason to demand tens of millions of dollars.
Leichardt is 15-30 minutes from the SFS and ANZ. If the Tigers want to keep playing there then that’s fine. Just don’t ask for millions of dollars in upgrades when they have two perfectly adequate stadiums within half an hour of Leichardt that more than meet their needs. Campbelltown is excused because of distance (though they’d need to play more than 3 games a year there to make an upgrade worthwhile.)
July 19th 2012 @ 9:17pm
Crosscoder said | July 19th 2012 @ 9:17pm | Report comment
What are you mumbling on about AR.
Because Sydney fans and people associated with the game are also taxpayers,and as such are entitled to some consideration…
I have already stated the Sharks received money from the Feds for the Southern stand.Please give me the courtesy of reading.
Of course its a serious comment,despite some of yours bodering on being hysterical.You came on board banging on about NRL clubs have not contributed toward grounds,which I refuted.The Sharks have done so,if you can’t see that I can’t help you.You are now deflecting in typical style.I have already alluded to the fact,the Sharks development ,will eventually include stadium updates.Change your glasses,they appear to be fogged up.
I will tell you what I did not miss pal :-
ANZ stadium an expensive stadium ,that is more than suitable for AFL ,is situated 14 km from the sydney CBD
The Showground (with a $45m grant is situated next door practically, 16.23km from the Sydney CBD.The same stadium used about half a dozen times for GWS,then some in Canberra.For a club here 1 year.
Govt excess or waste,take your pick.
If Govt has that sort of money to waste or spend ,then it should not be hard to find some for Brookvale,Leichardt ,improvements to the SFS.Here for decades ,not new kids on the block.
And I too give up in exasperation.
July 16th 2012 @ 12:41pm
eagleJack said | July 16th 2012 @ 12:41pm | Report comment
That just brings a smile to my face – Im surprised we beat anyone!! A crowd average of 13k at a stadium that is packed to the rafters at 20k isn’t too bad. No it’s not ideal but the club is sailing along nicely off the field kicking goals in other areas (memberships increasing, Kaspersky signing on for another 3 years etc). And other teams benefit from the hatred felt for Manly. Matt Gidley was impressed with the turnout for the Knights game on the w/end – the corporate facilities at Hunter Stadium were sold out for the first time this year – pleasing Mr Tinkler no end.
July 16th 2012 @ 11:28am
Matt_S said | July 16th 2012 @ 11:28am | Report comment
turbodewd, when the weather is bad, which was the case last season & this year so far, Brookvale crowds will plummet. When the weather is fine, crowds turn up. Not a great place to sit even if there has been a little rain.
Better facilities, new stand etc may assist just like 32,000 turned up at Suncorp on Friday in driving rain. Though they would have attracted 45,000 plus had it been a good night.
July 16th 2012 @ 11:51am
John Davidson said | July 16th 2012 @ 11:51am | Report comment
ha ha, apologies Will. I have many ‘loser’ Parra, Souths, Tigers, Knights, Panthers and Raiders fans.
July 16th 2012 @ 12:13pm
Will Sinclair said | July 16th 2012 @ 12:13pm | Report comment
Me too. Especially Parramatta. Those blokes really are sad cases.
July 16th 2012 @ 12:54pm
NF said | July 16th 2012 @ 12:54pm | Report comment
Manly draws pathetic crowds despite being premiers last year absolutely underwhelming. There attitude traveling to the SFS against the Cowboys last year embarrassing with there whining as a result there was a terrible finals crowd and bad look on the game due to there fans inability to travel.
July 16th 2012 @ 1:31pm
eagleJack said | July 16th 2012 @ 1:31pm | Report comment
Steady there NF. There were a number of factors at play for that poor showing at the final against the Cowboys.
Firstly it was the fact that the game was not at Brookie for a poorly supported out of town team. Yes, it was agreed that finals would be played at neutral grounds in Sydney. But the NRL had the opportunity to change this when it was clear the team would be the Cowboys as opposed to someone like the Tigers. The game would have easily got 20k+ at Brookie so the bad look rests solely on the NRL.
Secondly the game didn’t kick-off until 9pm. You need to understand the transport situation in Sydney to know that kills a lot of supporters chance to get to the game. I don’t have kids but having grown up on the Northern Beaches I wouldn’t have wanted to take my kids to the city at this time from there. Even without kids you are looking at atleast a 3 (closer to 4) hour round trip. Absolute nightmare!
You only have to look at the crowd size 2 weeks later at the SFS for the Broncos game to see it was an anomaly. Approx 35k with atleast 25k being Manly fans. Family friendlier game time and a team that was actually going to put up some resistance also contributed to that.
BTW I went to both games. But I do live across the road.