The idea of the AFL returning to smaller grounds in Victoria has been brought up again after the Carlton versus Essendon match at Princes Park.
Western Bulldogs president Peter Gordon said last year that there was a need for smaller grounds that could hold around 20-25,000.
Gordon claimed it would be the perfect fit for games against teams lower on the ladder or interstate teams that don’t attract big crowds to the larger grounds.
For me this would work during the home-and-away season. There is already a ground that fits the bill, that being Carlton’s spiritual home Princes Park.
With a capacity of 22,000 it would work perfectly, other than needing some redevelopment for the change rooms and public toilets. But it is ready for use now, as proven with Carlton’s NAB Challenge match against Essendon.
Some would say that we don’t need to have another ground that is smaller, we have the Etihad Stadium, but for some games it is still too big. If you have teams that are playing there that are getting only crowds of 16-19,000 then it looks empty.
Examples from the 2015 season are Carlton versus Greater Western Sydney (16,676) and the Dogs versus Crows (19,915). Now imagine the same crowds for those games at Princes Park.
Which one has the better atmosphere? A crowd that is normally about 18,000 for Saints versus Giants would create a better atmosphere in a smaller stadium.
Other games that have been played at the MCG look like it is being watched by a handful of people. Like last year’s game between Melbourne and St Kilda, where there was a crowd of almost 23,000 but the stadium looked like a ghost town. A smaller ground would have been a better option.
The only problem with moving games away from the MCG for teams based outside Victoria is that they would get less experience playing at the venue. That is why it would be best to only move games between Victorian clubs that attract low crowds.
It would, in turn, open up a chance for teams outside Victoria to play more games at the MCG during the home-and-away season.
Even if Princes Park is not the favourable option, there are plenty other grounds that could be utilised, with a bit of redevelopment and added seats. Whitten Oval or Moorabbin Oval would be suitable. A crowd of 18,000 would be perfect for such venues rather than filling half a stadium.
But what happens when teams like Carlton, St Kilda and to a degree the Western Bulldogs start winning more games and are in the top half of the ladder? They would likely be selling out their smaller ground.
Well, then they can go back to Etihad or the MCG the following season. And the Victorian clubs whose attendances have dropped off can move their smaller crowds to smaller grounds.
The system could work and would provide a better atmosphere. Port Adelaide’s alternative option of canvassing over sets when their crowds are small is a poor man’s alternative.
Jackson Muscat
Roar Rookie
Nah it was Ian Collins, the president at the time, was also, and still is, the CEO of Etihad, so he put down the pen and paper and off we went to Etihad
Tricky
Guest
Sorry Samantha I should've mentioned that is avg attendances, in total attendances the AFL was 15th last year. In any case those figures are very heady and that's not even taking in consideration of our much lower population as opposed to the other leagues which backs up my point and I'll say it again. "If you are worried about “losing” crowd figures because of less “atmosphere” – well don’t" "If it’s only because you want a better atmosphere then that’s like spending a $100k paint job on a Hyundai Getz." Just close the top tier as pointed out by Anon.
anon
Guest
So we'd have two stadiums being used side by side on a Saturday afternoon or evening. It's bizarre wanting to spend $1 billion on a new stadium when the Docklands Stadium is perfectly fine, although with issues. The sun/shade contrast is a problem, and it's kind of dark and dank in there, but it has far superior sight lines to the MCG, better location, and better atmosphere.
anon
Guest
Probably was a mistake to listen to members and throw away all that history at their home ground. Now they don't really have a home. They just share a ground with half a dozen other teams.
Samantha
Roar Rookie
Tricky
Guest
Interesting ........................ a lot of people are not seeing the big picture, apart from the fact that the Etihad owners currently hold the AFL to ransom in that they're taking a portion of gate receipts for each game held there and hence why so many games at Etihad. Until the AFL owns it they're at the mercy of the owners (James Fielding Funds Management) - that name has greed written all over it). The other interesting "miss" in the bulk of the commentary is that the AFL is the 4th highest attended league in the world. Each year since 1996 the attendance has been just over 6 million and in the last decade closer to the 7 million mark and in fact over that in 2010-11, 07-08 . This idea of smaller capacity grounds based on "atmosphere" is rather drawing a long bow and would be contrary to what will be ever increasing crowd figures. If you are worried about "losing" crowd figures because of less "atmosphere" - well don't, for mine I can't see any evidence of a sharp downturn in crowd figures anytime soon if at all (AFL tables). If it's only because you want a better atmosphere then that's like spending a $100k paint job on a Hyundai Getz. If the AFL owned Etihad and moved games to more "appropriate" venues and funded the venue redevelopment instead of being a "tennant" then sure the idea is certainly feasible but by then we may well be looking at a min crowd figures of sold out between GWS and whoever else at Spotless (24k capacity -currently), ok figure of speech but crowd figures are highly likely to rise.
DB
Guest
I think the Carlton Members voted to leave PP.
Epiquin
Roar Guru
I suppose what I should have said is that many AFL fans I know say you have to see it live to appreciate it. I'm wondering if it's difficult to win new fans via the TV experience alone?
Tricky
Guest
I like the idea of closing off the top tier, that would create greater atmosphere.
Johnny Dalmas
Guest
I watch 9 AFL games a weekend on Fox Footy and think it is a fantastic TV experience. But watching footy live is far better -- if you understand the way that the game flows and how space on the field is used. You can definitely see the play unfold when you look at the entire ground at once rather than just a small part through a TV camera. I guess that is the same for most sports though. A rugby fan at the game enjoys looking at how the Full Back is positioning himself even though the TV cameras would be focussing on the line of scrimmage, 30-40m away, right?
Kaks
Roar Guru
Not an uncommon issue with stadiums in Sydney
Epiquin
Roar Guru
It probably needs to be somewhere else too. It's a nightmare to get to.
Kaks
Roar Guru
It was a tongue in cheek comment about Manly Paul Dont know how Manly can try and drum up support/funding to upgrade Brookvale, but one thing is for sure - it desperately needs a face lift.
mattyb
Guest
Pretty good article Wilson and something that's going to be discussed more and more in the future. Big stadiums are definitely a thing of the past and as we move forward and technology changers along with people the smaller ground issue is going to grow and grow.
Paul D
Roar Guru
Glib but untrue. As Epiquin says it would benefit Manly and only Manly, so no go. Manly can pay for their own ground, there's plenty of cashed up supporters on those Northern beaches if they want to pass the hat around.
Kaks
Roar Guru
Brookvale doesnt get state funding because no one likes Manly
Epiquin
Roar Guru
The Bulldogs did share Belmore with the Eels between 1982 and 1985 and Parra won 2 premierships in that time. As Paul D says above, if any of the clubs don't like it then they can pay for their own stadium. Beggars can't be choosers and this is the best solution for everyone. This is why Brookvale won't get state funding. There is only one club who will benefit.
Samantha
Roar Rookie
Geelong has offered, more than once, the Bulldogs have declined, despite the fact they would make around $500k a game.
Aransan
Guest
I think if the Bulldogs were allowed they would be happy to play some home games at Geelong.
Josephine
Roar Pro
This is a really good idea but the only problem could be that the location's aren't central and peole would have to travel further but really that's my only downside!