Over the last few years, many have called for the demolition of Etihad Stadium and the construction of a newer, better venue in a different location.
Usually the objections are the following: it’s hard to get to, it has no soul, or it blocks the CBD from Docklands and means that the two are to be forever disconnected.
But all are baseless – Etihad is an exceptional sporting venue.
The argument that Etihad has no soul or atmosphere is without merit. In fact, it seems to be the only place in the entirety of Docklands that has any soul at all. That might be the problem with it – the surroundings that it’s in.
I parked at Waterfront City before going to a game last year, and the area is just dead – even on Saturday nights. That’s not a problem with the stadium, that’s a problem with Docklands, it’s not yet a destination that people want to go to.
I think some people still also think that the stadium has no history, and its soulless for that reason. I think that they forget that the stadium is now nearly 20 years old, and in that time, it has created many stories and is making its own legends.
Etihad Stadium: A soulless monolith or a modern day colosseum? (Photo: Creative commons)
The atmosphere itself, as with anywhere, surely depends on the crowd. And not just crowd size, but how invested the crowd is in the game, and how the game is progressing on the field. A one-sided game between North Melbourne and Gold Coast will of course not have the same atmosphere as a close contested game between Richmond and Geelong. But that is not due to the stadium, that is to do with the crowd itself.
A close, important game between the Bulldogs and North Melbourne on a Saturday Night will have have a much better atmosphere than an unimportant Collingwood Carlton game on a Sunday afternoon.
If a game is exciting, then 20,000 people can easily seem louder than 100,000. Crowds not grounds make the atmosphere, so if you find Etihad soulless, it’s the people there that are the problem.
The stadium can easily be improved though. The food options are basically non-existent and there are few places to actually eat it, especially when compared to stadiums such as the MCG. If the AFL is serious about modernising it, then providing more food has to be priority number one. Give us different options, and places to eat.
That’s what the AFL and management of Etihad Stadium can do. What the state government can do is better connect the stadium (and the entirety of docklands) with the CBD. It’s not the stadium that’s forming a barrier, it’s the rail yards.
While it might be a dream, the idea of building over the yards is certainly achievable. That alone would give the stadium a connection to the city, and give the city more space.
Etihad stadium is not the MCG, but it is a good stadium. It could be better – but to blame the stadium for a lack of atmosphere is a horrible argument.
It is a stadium which is creating it’s own legends and history. It has become central to the story of the AFL this century, and will continue to be central to it for the foreseeable future.
Leonard
Guest
Another candidate for "emptiest stadium" of its core demographic would have to be the NRL's Sydney Football Stadium (i. e., the rectangular one next to the SCG - stuff the stupid brandings): NRL Finals Week 1: Sydney's SFS - 21212 (c. half empty), 16115 (c. 60% empty) and 15408 (c. 2/3rds empty, admittedly the only all-Sydney matchup). Highest NRL such crowd? "South of the border, down 'Mexico' way": at Melbourne's MRS - 22626 (given their circs, a good roll-up to c. 2/3rds full). Three SFS NRL Finals totaling about 53000 / one AFL SCG Final with a record 46232. Sydney may be 'an NRL town', but such faint-hearted absentee fans can't be GFF, surely?
Leonard
Guest
"Stadiums generally have a lifespan of 30 odd years" - Rome's Flavian Amphitheatre over 300, more like 450. Still in [limited] use today, but with distinctly different events; perhaps drug dealers and people traffickers could be 'for-one-appearance-only star attractions.
bryan
Guest
Subi isn't really hard----just take a train, & you're there!. It is annoying that they push you to West Leederville Station instead of Subiaco itself, but it really isn't that much of a drama. The atmosphere is terrific, especially at Dockers home games,with all the fans walking up together. I went to a Glory versus WSW game there,when the NIB was being refurbished. The fans from both teams formed up together & walked up with much good humoured banter. When those games are at the NIB, everybody just drifts up like "Brown's cows"'which detracts from the experience a bit.
anon
Roar Pro
Docklands is in a superior location to the MCG. Better sightlines, closer to the action, more intimate, better atmosphere. The MCG is showing its age now. Amenities just aren't up the standard of Adelaide and what we'll see in Perth.
mickyo
Guest
I like Etihad better than the MCG for watching football, however i like the pubs around Richmond for a beer before and after a game, so it sort of evens out.
Nineteen
Guest
Totally agree with The Doc in regards to Southern Cross and great central location. In 2016 I had the good fortune of attending more than a dozen games there in a corporate box and I will say that the boxes at Etihad are superior to those at the MCG as they are closer to the ground. It's easier to 'feel' the action there. At the G you're too far back and on an acute angle. Stadium wise I really like Etihad. General seats are comfortable, some sections have armchair TVs and as others have pointed out you're sheltered from the weather. In the final round I watched the Dogs vs Hawks and we had general admin tickets. The only issue was our seating was in the back row near the 50m arc and the angle of such a position meant you could not see the goal square. The venue is newer, cleaner but devoid of the decorated history of the G. The covered roof and surface make for a faster gameplay (perhaps it's also the teams that play there). Finally there not too much difference in the dinning experience compared with the MCC dining room and the Medalion Club. Sure you have the history and the food maybe slightly better at the G but nothing material. All in all I'm a convert!
Paul D
Roar Guru
Cricket wasn't paying the bills anymore
I ate pies
Guest
The only problem with the Adelaide oval is that they wrecked the most unique cricket ground in the country to do it.
Liam Salter
Roar Guru
Adelaide Oval is absolutely amazing; was walking past it today and I just love looking at it. When the stadium is full, it is electric. Amazing. And, I may have ranted about my city online enough; but it genuinely is pretty good. We're a nice little place. Come and visit sometime!
Paul D
Roar Guru
Apparently Subiaco is god awful to get to. Adelaide is on the list. Finally have a reason to visit.
TomC
Roar Guru
I never particularly liked it when I was living in Melbourne, but I appreciate it a lot more now I'm a tourist in that city. It's wonderfully accessible. I've never been to Subiaco, but the only other venue I can think of that's as good for visitors is the Adelaide Oval.
Paul D
Roar Guru
The emptiest major stadium in the AFL the past few years is undoubtedly the Gabba. If anyone wants to know all about the experience of being in a quarter full stadium hit me up
Leonard
Guest
"There’s a lot of empty [AFL] seats at most matches held there which is a bad look, like ANZ in the NRL" Er, no. A "lot of empty seats [and] a bad look, like [Homebush] in the NRL" means that of the 20 lowest 2017 NRL crowds, eight were at 82,000-seat Homebush ranging from 6213 to 9112 - now THAT'S a "bad look"! (Source - https://afltables.com/rl/crowds/2017.html#ven) PS: amusing that some right-of-screen banks of Docklands seats are yellow with some seats picked out in red. Which, OF COURSE, is visible only if nobody sits in them!! (As is often the case.)
Leonard
Guest
No.
I ate pies
Guest
I'm with you Gyfox. I think it's a great ground to watch footy; and you're really close to the action compared to the MCG. I went to the very first game under a roof there (the first footy game ever under a roof), and it was fantastic. It's still fantastic 20 years later.
Cat
Roar Guru
13 out of 46 games at the MCG this year had over 60k. Not sure what your definition of rarely is but it should be far less than 28% of the games. They'll be a 14th game and biggest of the year on Friday also.
Casper
Guest
Gee that made me laugh. Well done to Nick though for coming up with the most inane comment of the year.
Paul D
Roar Guru
All up in the top tier. Who cares. Knock down the MCG and replace it with something smaller – what a strange perspective. About as likely as male member size reduction being the next craze sweeping men’s health
Paul D
Roar Guru
All up in the top tier. Who cares. Knock down the MCG and replace it with something smaller - what a strange perspective. About as likely as penis reduction being the next craze sweeping men's health
Nick Symonds
Guest
The MCG rarely attracts crowds of over 60,000. There's a lot of empty seats at most matches held there which is a bad look, like ANZ in the NRL. Keep Docklands and knock down the MCG then replace it with something smaller.