Meh. After discussing it with Christo, I agree that FBS is a positive move. I don't agree that it'll provide the same level as benefits as Wellington received from the RoF, but that's just splitting hairs
But I've included my clarifications anyway
AWB wrote:
Carisbrook is getting removed for land development. So no two stadium in one city.
[/QUOTE]
My point about two stadiums was based on the idea of University Oval not being big enough to cater to cricket, so Carisbrook would need to be kept anyway. However as Christo has pointed out, NZC has basically written off Dunedin as a venue for anything other than tests, so there's no point in having a large capacity cricket stadium anyway. My point would have held for Wellington, where we do get Black Caps T/20 and ODI's, but Dunedin doesn't have that luxury.
AWB wrote:
IRB in Auckland not Wellington? Rest of the country won't because the Aucklanders won't. But I really having a laugh here. Without the ROF it would be Eden Park so Wellington having ROF was a great leverage over Eden park by a long shot.
[/QUOTE]A little confused by this paragraph - By IRB do you mean the IRB Sevens? My point on this was that with 2011 projected to lose money (and that was BEFORE the recession!), the NZRU may be tempted to make up the shortfall by selling the extra 20K tickets Eden Park would allow. This is just speculation.
AWB wrote:
Phoenix with Terry's money and a good location in ROF nabbed the licence, it couldn't have happen if there was no ROF for Wellington. But I am not suggesting that Dunedin was making a bid for A-league, just pointing out the advantage that ROF gave Wellington.[/QUOTE]You're right in that the RoF provided this advantage to Wellington. However, it would not provide the same advantage to Dunedin. Otago cannot sustain an A-League or NRL team, so the capacity to do so is meaningless, so the point is irrelevant.
[quote=AWB]
Seriously if the ROF was not chosen for the U17WWC where was the alternative? Newton Park?
Thing is, the RoF ALWAYS was going to be chosen. The matches went to the four biggest cities. The only way the RoF wouldn't have been chosen was if it didn't exist, in which case the match would be played at the "Aotea Centre in Porirua", which was never built, or Athletic Park. And the only way Wellington wouldn't have hosted pool matches was if Athletic Park was incredibly rubbish as a host stadium. In which case, I'd have personally gone for Palmy myself due to the central region population base.
That being said, you're correct for other events. If we got the U-20 Men's, we'd need at least six stadia. Dunedin would make sense for one of those two other spots, and Awatea would clinch it IMHO.
[quote=AWB]
...instead Dunedin has rail access from the rest of the province. The rail access is 10 minutes walk down ANZAC Parade from Lower Stuart Street railway station to the stadium. Or they could make a mini rail station next to the stadium which then make the walk to the stadium less than a minute. So that really defeats the rail access being superior in Wellington. The geographic landscape is identical to Wellington in this case.
You've missed the point here. I said myself that Dunedin has intra-provincial rail access. So does Wellington. However you're not taking into account INTER-provincial. Rail links between. The fact that Dunedin doesn't have rail access to Christchurch means one less option for travelling. Wellington has rail access to Palmy, Hamilton and Auckland. It's not a huge advantage, but Wellington wins hands down in terms of having it at all.
[quote=AWB]
Eden Park looking to become the true NZ natural stadium? That is debatable. It will have a larger seating capacity because it is a much bigger city but outside of Rugby and maybe League what other major use has it especially with Mt Smart and North Habour Stadium hanging about plus most smaller stuff is at the vector arena. The Forsyth Barr is made to contain more than just Rugby. Besides many things have shifted to Hamilton from Auckland. Auckland is seen by the rest of the country as a sporting wasteland of support nowdays.
I might not have been clear on this one enough - national
rugby stadium. For other national team matches ie AW's, Kiwi's, you're correct in that there is North Harbour (Mount Smart is pretty much a goner). However as stated earlier, the RWC isn't going to turn a profit so for the NZRU to make up the shortfall, it makes sense to maximise the income of it's #1 ticket - the AB's. Hence, the NZRU is more likely to schedule most major matches to Eden, and to appease Wellington and Christchurch, the lesser matches to Westpac and Lancaster. This means lesser matches may be less likely to be schedule to Hamilton and Dunedin. That being said, I thought the max capacity was 30K when I stated this so hopefully the 35K max would mitigate this. And again, it's speculation on my part.
I do realise that FBS is set up for more than just rugby, and I'd love to see other events there, most likely being All Whites friendlies IMHO. I'm just saying that Carisbrook's status as an All Blacks ground isn't necessarily transferrable due to the conditions that may see a more pro-Auckland allotment of AB matches.
....but after all that crap, I do now agree that FBS is a good move for Dunedin. I just don't think it's AS good as the RoF was for Wellington
Awatea Street/Forsyth Barr has the capacity to host the same three rugby teams, plus adds the chances of
irregular NRL/A-League/FIFA/Kiwis events. Westpac Stadium gave the capacity to host the same three rugby teams as Athletic, plus the chances of
regular NRL/A-League and irregular FIFA/Kiwis events.
So I agree with you, but still think the comparison to Wellington falls short
robbwatson2009-04-25 10:08:48
). However I think in the interests of cricket, multi-purpose stadiums are the best bet with the exception of cities that can sustain both a large capacity oval and rectangular stadium (perhaps the only thing the AFL is good for 
