Stadium of Canterbury
-
I get what Shark is saying. If Christchurch goes this route then when the Lions tour in 2029 it will be two tests in Auckland and one in Wellington. Again. If we host another Rugby World Cup, they won't get a KO game. They will get Rugby Championship tests but are more likely to get Argentina or a 3rd Bledisloe than Australia or South Africa.
I think on balance he is wrong. The smaller stadium with a roof won't attract more events to Christchurch but those events are few and far between anyway. It will be a better experience for 95% of events and that should be the consideration.
@hydro11 said in Stadium of Canterbury:
I get what Shark is saying. If Christchurch goes this route then when the Lions tour in 2029 it will be two tests in Auckland and one in Wellington. Again. If we host another Rugby World Cup, they won't get a KO game. They will get Rugby Championship tests but are more likely to get Argentina or a 3rd Bledisloe than Australia or South Africa.
I think on balance he is wrong. The smaller stadium with a roof won't attract more events to Christchurch but those events are few and far between anyway. It will be a better experience for 95% of events and that should be the consideration.
I'm not wrong. It's fucking simple. The budget is shrinking, costs are rising and the project has already downsized in spec. It'll be downsized and/or down spec'd again.
It's easy for those outside the region especially, to look at the situation and think the Canterbury public should accept what's being offered up. And unfortunately the vast majority of the local populous simply assume they're going to get a great facility and never miss out on a great event. But for $475m you simply can't have both.
-
@hydro11 said in Stadium of Canterbury:
I get what Shark is saying. If Christchurch goes this route then when the Lions tour in 2029 it will be two tests in Auckland and one in Wellington. Again. If we host another Rugby World Cup, they won't get a KO game. They will get Rugby Championship tests but are more likely to get Argentina or a 3rd Bledisloe than Australia or South Africa.
I think on balance he is wrong. The smaller stadium with a roof won't attract more events to Christchurch but those events are few and far between anyway. It will be a better experience for 95% of events and that should be the consideration.
I'm not wrong. It's fucking simple. The budget is shrinking, costs are rising and the project has already downsized in spec. It'll be downsized and/or down spec'd again.
It's easy for those outside the region especially, to look at the situation and think the Canterbury public should accept what's being offered up. And unfortunately the vast majority of the local populous simply assume they're going to get a great facility and never miss out on a great event. But for $475m you simply can't have both.
As local tax payer, I think you're wrong.
Even though I live overseas, I own land in Canterbury - driving distance from the stadium - and will definitely go to games in a roofed stadium.
In a freezing massive regular assed stadium where there is a good chance that half the seats are miles away from the action? Not so much.
The limited size of Christchurch is what makes it nice, and is why we chose it. But it won't get a Lions test.
-
As local tax payer, I think you're wrong.
Even though I live overseas, I own land in Canterbury - driving distance from the stadium - and will definitely go to games in a roofed stadium.
In a freezing massive regular assed stadium where there is a good chance that half the seats are miles away from the action? Not so much.
The limited size of Christchurch is what makes it nice, and is why we chose it. But it won't get a Lions test.
@gt12 said in Stadium of Canterbury:
As local tax payer, I think you're wrong.
Even though I live overseas, I own land in Canterbury - driving distance from the stadium - and will definitely go to games in a roofed stadium.
In a freezing massive regular assed stadium where there is a good chance that half the seats are miles away from the action? Not so much.
The limited size of Christchurch is what makes it nice, and is why we chose it. But it won't get a Lions test.
Roof or no roof, it's a rectangular stadium so you're off the mark re seating being worse if there isn't a roof. And freezing? Do you think being in a large plastic box will prevent the crowd from being cold if it's 2 degrees? Nooooo. It'll keep the rain off whilst seated, but the way the design is going you'll probably get soaked as soon as you go for a beer and chips.
-
@gt12 said in Stadium of Canterbury:
As local tax payer, I think you're wrong.
Even though I live overseas, I own land in Canterbury - driving distance from the stadium - and will definitely go to games in a roofed stadium.
In a freezing massive regular assed stadium where there is a good chance that half the seats are miles away from the action? Not so much.
The limited size of Christchurch is what makes it nice, and is why we chose it. But it won't get a Lions test.
Roof or no roof, it's a rectangular stadium so you're off the mark re seating being worse if there isn't a roof. And freezing? Do you think being in a large plastic box will prevent the crowd from being cold if it's 2 degrees? Nooooo. It'll keep the rain off whilst seated, but the way the design is going you'll probably get soaked as soon as you go for a beer and chips.
@shark said in Stadium of Canterbury:
And freezing? Do you think being in a large plastic box will prevent the crowd from being cold if it's 2 degrees?
Actually, yes. Have you been to Dunedin? The stadium heats up with a few thousand people inside - about a hundred watts a person, so every 10k is like 500 fan heaters on full bore. It won't be 2 degrees inside, and the rugby will be fantastic - dry balls, etc.
That said, it's a massive amount of money for a stadium. Stadium economics don't make sense, so spend what you need to get a decent venue --but as you say, it's a tradeoff between a roof and big events with the current budget.
-
@shark said in Stadium of Canterbury:
Do you think being in a large plastic box will prevent the crowd from being cold if it's 2 degrees?
Throw in a 40kt southerly at 2 degrees and a roof is really quite a good idea, especially as the event will be better. Cancelling concerts due to weather and watching rugby teams struggle with the conditions isn't that appealing.
Agree about the concourse and design though. It should be an attractive design (that doesn't cost much) and you should be able to get beer and chips without getting wet.
-
I was at the game yesterday. Rugby is a winter sport and adverse conditions are a part of that.
Having been wet the whole time, to varying degrees, I believe even more that the genuine need is for a state of the art open stadium with extended stand roofing.
-
@shark said in Stadium of Canterbury:
And freezing? Do you think being in a large plastic box will prevent the crowd from being cold if it's 2 degrees?
Actually, yes. Have you been to Dunedin? The stadium heats up with a few thousand people inside - about a hundred watts a person, so every 10k is like 500 fan heaters on full bore. It won't be 2 degrees inside, and the rugby will be fantastic - dry balls, etc.
That said, it's a massive amount of money for a stadium. Stadium economics don't make sense, so spend what you need to get a decent venue --but as you say, it's a tradeoff between a roof and big events with the current budget.
@nzzp said in Stadium of Canterbury:
@shark said in Stadium of Canterbury:
And freezing? Do you think being in a large plastic box will prevent the crowd from being cold if it's 2 degrees?
Actually, yes. Have you been to Dunedin? The stadium heats up with a few thousand people inside - about a hundred watts a person, so every 10k is like 500 fan heaters on full bore. It won't be 2 degrees inside, and the rugby will be fantastic - dry balls, etc.
That said, it's a massive amount of money for a stadium. Stadium economics don't make sense, so spend what you need to get a decent venue --but as you say, it's a tradeoff between a roof and big events with the current budget.
I've been to several games at FBS, and a couple of those were on really cold nights. It was only marginally warmer inside.
-
@Stargazer
If FIFA funds it then why not but it will be a completely useless upgrade if the stadium is finished the next year. -
minor upgrades should be fine, Football are more likely to be day games which makes the experience much more enjoyable, i went to a few games during the Fifa u-20 world cup and it was nice on a sunny day
It's highly unlikely a new stadium could be completed for it, or at least to any respectable standard, best to go with this seeing as everyone will know the history of why its there than to try and fail to do a new one
-
minor upgrades should be fine, Football are more likely to be day games which makes the experience much more enjoyable, i went to a few games during the Fifa u-20 world cup and it was nice on a sunny day
It's highly unlikely a new stadium could be completed for it, or at least to any respectable standard, best to go with this seeing as everyone will know the history of why its there than to try and fail to do a new one
@Kiwiwomble said in Stadium of Canterbury:
Football are more likely to be day games which makes the experience much more enjoyable
Those are the upgrades that need to be paid for.
Upgrade the lighting and have back up power. You're good at this ferning - never read the article.
-
@Kiwiwomble said in Stadium of Canterbury:
Football are more likely to be day games which makes the experience much more enjoyable
Those are the upgrades that need to be paid for.
Upgrade the lighting and have back up power. You're good at this ferning - never read the article.
@Snowy said in Stadium of Canterbury:
@Kiwiwomble said in Stadium of Canterbury:
Football are more likely to be day games which makes the experience much more enjoyable
Those are the upgrades that need to be paid for.
Upgrade the lighting and have back up power. You're good at this ferning - never read the article.
apologies, assumed it would be similar to the U-20 world cup where most games were during the day
Either way, they won the bid with this listed as one of the venues so there shouldn't be surprises for anyone
-
@Snowy said in Stadium of Canterbury:
@Kiwiwomble said in Stadium of Canterbury:
Football are more likely to be day games which makes the experience much more enjoyable
Those are the upgrades that need to be paid for.
Upgrade the lighting and have back up power. You're good at this ferning - never read the article.
apologies, assumed it would be similar to the U-20 world cup where most games were during the day
Either way, they won the bid with this listed as one of the venues so there shouldn't be surprises for anyone
@Kiwiwomble said in Stadium of Canterbury:
@Snowy said in Stadium of Canterbury:
@Kiwiwomble said in Stadium of Canterbury:
Football are more likely to be day games which makes the experience much more enjoyable
Those are the upgrades that need to be paid for.
Upgrade the lighting and have back up power. You're good at this ferning - never read the article.
apologies, assumed it would be similar to the U-20 world cup where most games were during the day
Rule one - never read the article.
Rule two offight clubferning never apologise. -
I'd be astonished if FIFA gave a shit about hosting matches in Christchurch to the point of agreeing to pay for upgrades to infrastructure when you could just schedule them elsewhere.
@antipodean said in Stadium of Canterbury:
I'd be astonished if FIFA gave a shit about hosting matches in Christchurch to the point of agreeing to pay for upgrades to infrastructure when you could just schedule them elsewhere.
Yep. I agree. Who's the news hound who's come up with the idea of a FIFA-funded upgrade? There would be 20 stadiums better than this dump in Australasia.
-
Fifa does grants like this, just like UEFA gives them for teams that make it into Europe for the first time or the FA gives them to teams as they come up through the football leagues in England
-
@shark said in Stadium of Canterbury:
Waste of money, on this dump.
not if the alternative is Chch missing out of hosting games, the end goal for any of this or the new stadium isn't the stadium....its what it brings to the city, either events for people to enjoy or boosts to the economy
