Auckland stadiums - Eden Park, Western Springs etc
-
Wow, so they opted for the half in / half out option .... what a surprise ...
Not been to EP since 2017, but found it reasonably accessible both in and out. Trains were crammed, but nothing new there.
Doesn't look like my dream it being a proper rugby/football stadium with cricket played elsewhere will ever come to fruition though as I assume thats what the retractable seating is all about?
-
Wow, so they opted for the half in / half out option .... what a surprise ...
Not been to EP since 2017, but found it reasonably accessible both in and out. Trains were crammed, but nothing new there.
Doesn't look like my dream it being a proper rugby/football stadium with cricket played elsewhere will ever come to fruition though as I assume thats what the retractable seating is all about?
@MajorRage said in Auckland stadiums - Eden Park, Western Springs etc:
I assume thats what the retractable seating is all about?
The seating at the base of the North stand is at a low gradient. Making it retractable gives back a lot of room.
Personally I'm glad one of Eden Park, Athletic Park, Lancaster Park and Carisbrook will continue to exist. We've lost a lot of history
-
@MajorRage said in Auckland stadiums - Eden Park, Western Springs etc:
I assume thats what the retractable seating is all about?
The seating at the base of the North stand is at a low gradient. Making it retractable gives back a lot of room.
Personally I'm glad one of Eden Park, Athletic Park, Lancaster Park and Carisbrook will continue to exist. We've lost a lot of history
@Duluth Thats a decent proposition but reality is that if you are in that stand above the lower seats you are still a long way from the action. I don't know how many seats are in that part, but lets suggest it's 5k, do we really need a 45k seater for cricket?
Totally agree your second point.
-
@Duluth Thats a decent proposition but reality is that if you are in that stand above the lower seats you are still a long way from the action. I don't know how many seats are in that part, but lets suggest it's 5k, do we really need a 45k seater for cricket?
Totally agree your second point.
@MajorRage
I think the lower North stand is a bad place to watch from. But height improves things.
It looks like the the area you're talking about is just below the current North lounge seating. The view from there is good.. not as good as the other side but still decent (I think I've watched 100+ games from there)
-
Is that the actual design, or just an artist impression?
-
Is that the actual design, or just an artist impression?
Not sure, I just got it from the link posted earlier by Dogmeat.
-
i might be loosing my mind, doesnt EP currently have retractable seating?
-
i might be loosing my mind, doesnt EP currently have retractable seating?
@Kiwiwomble said in Auckland stadiums - Eden Park, Western Springs etc:
i might be loosing my mind, doesnt EP currently have retractable seating?
I don't think it's retractable, but they do put in temporary - I think!
-
this is what i remembered from the redevelopment before the 2011 RWC
-
this is what i remembered from the redevelopment before the 2011 RWC
-
@Kiwiwomble that’s the south stand
-
@Duluth i realise that, i was just meaning the chat seemed to be amazed about this new idea
@Kiwiwomble said in Auckland stadiums - Eden Park, Western Springs etc:
@Duluth i realise that, i was just meaning the chat seemed to be amazed about this new idea
My understanding is that the proposed retractable seating would be much more significant than the current arrangement. I think they are basically looking to put in a whole new lower half to the North Stand.
-
Probably the best outcome given the realities of funding. A staged implementation to develop the best compromise is all we can hope for.
-
Pretty much agree with Gregor's opening point
Let’s get this straight: on Thursday Auckland Council voted in favour of redeveloping a stadium it doesn’t own or manage on the basis the city needs a state-of-the-art facility, and the country a national venue to attract the best sport and entertainment.But the council doesn’t want to pay money towards redeveloping it and says it doesn’t have any. The Government is also suggesting it too doesn’t want to contribute the $100 million Eden Park needs to begin its upgrade that it says will cost $546m in total, but others say will be closer to $1 billion.On top of that, you have a national sports body in New Zealand Rugby, which has openly declared – through its support for the Quay Park bid – that it does not want Eden Park to be the national stadium, and had ambition and desire to see the All Blacks play in a contemporary, larger venue that aligns more with their brand values and commercial aspirations.
Frankly, it’s hard to tell how this situation could be any less inspiring or underwhelming, as what Auckland Council voted for was precisely nothing – a prolonged stalemate over stadium development that will last until bits of Eden Park are literally falling off, which will force one body – probably the government – to reluctantly provide the cash for the urgent maintenance work.
As the RFU put it, quite pithily, 'if you want more money, build your own stadium'. Well NZR are never going to be able to build from scratch, but as partners in a bigger venture, they would've been in a much better place than paying money 'too much, had been hinted before' to a third party
-
The councillors comments about the vote sums up the situation (see video)..
https://www.stuff.co.nz/nz-news/360631753/eden-park-revamp-gets-backing-over-new-waterfront-stadium
-
Pretty much agree with Gregor's opening point
Let’s get this straight: on Thursday Auckland Council voted in favour of redeveloping a stadium it doesn’t own or manage on the basis the city needs a state-of-the-art facility, and the country a national venue to attract the best sport and entertainment.But the council doesn’t want to pay money towards redeveloping it and says it doesn’t have any. The Government is also suggesting it too doesn’t want to contribute the $100 million Eden Park needs to begin its upgrade that it says will cost $546m in total, but others say will be closer to $1 billion.On top of that, you have a national sports body in New Zealand Rugby, which has openly declared – through its support for the Quay Park bid – that it does not want Eden Park to be the national stadium, and had ambition and desire to see the All Blacks play in a contemporary, larger venue that aligns more with their brand values and commercial aspirations.
Frankly, it’s hard to tell how this situation could be any less inspiring or underwhelming, as what Auckland Council voted for was precisely nothing – a prolonged stalemate over stadium development that will last until bits of Eden Park are literally falling off, which will force one body – probably the government – to reluctantly provide the cash for the urgent maintenance work.
As the RFU put it, quite pithily, 'if you want more money, build your own stadium'. Well NZR are never going to be able to build from scratch, but as partners in a bigger venture, they would've been in a much better place than paying money 'too much, had been hinted before' to a third party
@Machpants NZ is never going to have a national stadium (where all home tests are played) either, so it seems even less likely.
-
A quick Google tells me EP is currently the world's smallest cricket ground with a 55 metre straight boundary. Whereas the basin reserve boundary is between 137 and 150 metres.
I wonder what would the new dimensions of EP be with the retractable seating? Does it bring it up to test standards?
Currently EP is not test standard, but it was awarded test status before the minimum boundary length was brought in, so that's how EP gets test cricket.
-
A quick Google tells me EP is currently the world's smallest cricket ground with a 55 metre straight boundary. Whereas the basin reserve boundary is between 137 and 150 metres.
I wonder what would the new dimensions of EP be with the retractable seating? Does it bring it up to test standards?
Currently EP is not test standard, but it was awarded test status before the minimum boundary length was brought in, so that's how EP gets test cricket.
@WestieFella said in Auckland stadiums - Eden Park, Western Springs etc:
A quick Google tells me EP is currently the world's smallest cricket ground with a 55 metre straight boundary. Whereas the basin reserve boundary is between 137 and 150 metres.
Those comparisons aren't apples and apples.
A 55m boundary is from the stumps to the boundary. So an edge just needs to go 55m and a straight hit is 75m::
55m plus 20m for the length of the pitch.The Basin straight is about 65m
Caketin is about 60m in all directions.
These are with the ropes and electronic signage pushing them in a few meters.
-
Ok, so will EP now be a decent cricket ground with the retractable seating in the upgrade?
From the illustrations it actually looks like it could be a very good cricket ground.
I hope they also do something with the west stand, like make it connect to the north and south stands so it's just one continuous stand. It doesn't need to go as high as the north and south. It always looks odd especially with the gaps either side of it.
But I can still remember the old old west stand and the members stand, and while that corner has improved it's still looks out of place.
I'm always sceptical of the artist impressions of buildings, cause the end result seldom looks like the impressions... -
I actually think my explanation of the 55m boundary is wrong.
To the eye, I think the straight boundaries are only about 50m.
I think 55m (that is being used) is half of the straight diameter. Which from a cricketing pov is the centre of the pitch and a totally useless starting point.
The ICC minimum is 55m, and Eden Park doesn't conform, but has an exemption.
I can't think of any ground in the world that even gets close to the 55m minimum, though. Seddon Park is probably next smallest in the world at about 58/59m straight.
