64 metres is piss-small for an international cricket boundary, isn't it?
The Auckland Stadium Question
Depends on which boundary I think, but I believe still small on the whole. But bigger than is currently and more symmetrical.
If my numbers are sound, it would be the biggest cricket oval (by capacity) in the world that is not in India or doesn’t host an AFL franchise - by about 25,000.
If my numbers are sound, it would be the biggest cricket oval (by capacity) in the world that is not in India or doesn’t host an AFL franchise - by about 25,000.
https://ourauckland.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/news/2024/05/auckland-main-stadium-options-invited-to-feasibility/
Working group’s recommendations agreed on. Attached report explains process.
Working group’s recommendations agreed on. Attached report explains process.
https://infocouncil.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/Open/2024/05/20240523_AE_MAT_12492.PDF
As per this Eden Park's plan is to basically go full oval - 64m boundaries all sides.
It'll be a funny timeline to end up in if the two biggest stadiums in NZ are both cricket ovals.
As per this Eden Park's plan is to basically go full oval - 64m boundaries all sides.
It'll be a funny timeline to end up in if the two biggest stadiums in NZ are both cricket ovals.
Is there a similar document for the other options?
Eden Park so desperately wants to keep cricket, I reckon they should let the Quay Park stadium go ahead and then Eden Park can do away with trying to be a multi-purpose ground. They could then demolish the stands and build back smaller cheaper ones (maybe even a hill) and that would surely give them at least 70 metres on each boundary.
Then they would easily get cricket tests there.
Win win for everyone - except the Eden Park board's pockets of course
Then they would easily get cricket tests there.
Win win for everyone - except the Eden Park board's pockets of course
Eden Park 2 is a lovely field to watch cricket on, they should develop that
The projected EP revamp cost is up there, so I suspect grandstands will be retractable. Out for the cricket & in for rectangular sports. Then with the roof you might get some smart acoustics that traps the noise in for concert goers and keeps the decibels down outside, for Helen Clark and friends. So no usage restrictions
But nah, I'm for bowling it over, putting in some much needed housing in that area - maybe keeping a 25,000 cricket ground in the middle (alot of the English cricket grounds have housing bordering right up to the stadiums) - and building something perfect, for the football codes down at Quay Park.
The projected EP revamp cost is up there, so I suspect grandstands will be retractable. Out for the cricket & in for rectangular sports. Then with the roof you might get some smart acoustics that traps the noise in for concert goers and keeps the decibels down outside, for Helen Clark and friends. So no usage restrictions
But nah, I'm for bowling it over, putting in some much needed housing in that area - maybe keeping a 25,000 cricket ground in the middle (alot of the English cricket grounds have housing bordering right up to the stadiums) - and building something perfect, for the football codes down at Quay Park.
Is the usage issues the noise of the events or the associated road closures and noise of fans after the game etc? I thought it was always more the latter. Some seats moving slightly forward are going to be extremely underwhelming.
Agreed!!!
https://infocouncil.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/Open/2024/05/20240523_AE_MAT_12492.PDF
As per this Eden Park's plan is to basically go full oval - 64m boundaries all sides.
It'll be a funny timeline to end up in if the two biggest stadiums in NZ are both cricket ovals.
As per this Eden Park's plan is to basically go full oval - 64m boundaries all sides.
It'll be a funny timeline to end up in if the two biggest stadiums in NZ are both cricket ovals.
Is there a similar document for the other options?
Not to the best of my knowledge - this was just a presentation for the local board
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/in-depth/519290/eden-park-operators-urge-fast-track-process-for-more-stadium-events
Eden Park submits in favour of the fast track bill.
Eden Park submits in favour of the fast track bill.
It really depends on the crowds.
Some piss in your garden, climb up on the fence, throw bottles etc.
Others are just quite loud in what is an otherwise fairly quiet area. There’s a lot of road restrictions in place and near gridlock pre- and post game. It can mean not being able to get access to your property easily at certain times of the day. Worrying if someone will walk behind or in front of your car as you go out the driveway. It makes it harder and harder to have a normal life.
And the residents that I know are already fairly gracious about having to put up with that once or twice or (three times with a concert and a couple of games?) a week for a better part of a year. And apparently about 80% were fine with a few more concerts. EDIT: apparently 32 events a year. I’m not sure if that’s 32 in the evenings or 26 games and 6 concerts plus other daytime events…
As well you never know when you might have a sharke day or week at work or in your relationships and you just wanna go home, without several thousand people walking past your front gate.
Especially considering the character of people who represent Eden Park, claiming that Taylor Swift was coming when they clearly couldn’t provide the arena size required. They’re a bunch of sharke stirrers just grabbing all the money they can, while everyone else is being told to cut back. They no longer bother hiding their bad faith in asking for the parliament to override everything just for them…
And dealing with the lovely people who think the treaty is infringing their rights to have daily and nightly concerts and events in the middle of suburban Auckland, when they had no interest in helping the local music industry in central Auckland as retirees bought apartments and then complained and shut down long running venue or a bunch of other hypocrisies…
But yeh, Eden Park is plenty busy. It’s just a terrible location for the stadium that it obviously aspires to be.
If it was a downtown stadium they’d be able do construction at night most likely?
Some piss in your garden, climb up on the fence, throw bottles etc.
Others are just quite loud in what is an otherwise fairly quiet area. There’s a lot of road restrictions in place and near gridlock pre- and post game. It can mean not being able to get access to your property easily at certain times of the day. Worrying if someone will walk behind or in front of your car as you go out the driveway. It makes it harder and harder to have a normal life.
And the residents that I know are already fairly gracious about having to put up with that once or twice or (three times with a concert and a couple of games?) a week for a better part of a year. And apparently about 80% were fine with a few more concerts. EDIT: apparently 32 events a year. I’m not sure if that’s 32 in the evenings or 26 games and 6 concerts plus other daytime events…
As well you never know when you might have a sharke day or week at work or in your relationships and you just wanna go home, without several thousand people walking past your front gate.
Especially considering the character of people who represent Eden Park, claiming that Taylor Swift was coming when they clearly couldn’t provide the arena size required. They’re a bunch of sharke stirrers just grabbing all the money they can, while everyone else is being told to cut back. They no longer bother hiding their bad faith in asking for the parliament to override everything just for them…
And dealing with the lovely people who think the treaty is infringing their rights to have daily and nightly concerts and events in the middle of suburban Auckland, when they had no interest in helping the local music industry in central Auckland as retirees bought apartments and then complained and shut down long running venue or a bunch of other hypocrisies…
But yeh, Eden Park is plenty busy. It’s just a terrible location for the stadium that it obviously aspires to be.
If it was a downtown stadium they’d be able do construction at night most likely?
Lol- what a prick that Sautner sounds. Wants to clean out every park and grab every source of funding.
These are events in parks all over the many many charming places in the city- Coyle Park, Pt England, Victoria Park, the Domain, Mt Eden reserve, Western Park, Grey Lynn Park, Aotea Square, Albert Park, Cornwall Park, the Showgrounds, and Wynyard quarter to name just a few off the top of my head. Eden Park wants to grab those as well!
From your article above:
‘We currently host the Eid Festival and would welcome more religious and community festivals - imagine Carols in the Park, noodle markets, the Auckland Lantern Festival, the Auckland Pride Festival and even Movies in the Park. ‘
Imagine more community festivals in a place that doesn’t want to listen to its community.
These are events in parks all over the many many charming places in the city- Coyle Park, Pt England, Victoria Park, the Domain, Mt Eden reserve, Western Park, Grey Lynn Park, Aotea Square, Albert Park, Cornwall Park, the Showgrounds, and Wynyard quarter to name just a few off the top of my head. Eden Park wants to grab those as well!
From your article above:
‘We currently host the Eid Festival and would welcome more religious and community festivals - imagine Carols in the Park, noodle markets, the Auckland Lantern Festival, the Auckland Pride Festival and even Movies in the Park. ‘
Imagine more community festivals in a place that doesn’t want to listen to its community.
Nothing like an ex aussie rules player to tell us how we ought to feel about our 'national stadium' :)
Being fair to the guy it’s a hospital pass of a job.
The disconnect between the massive grand vision and the idea that it’d be kept financially viable by pinching small community events that are currently fairly happy in comparatively undeveloped small local parks all over the isthmus is kinda staggering.
It’d also mean almost all local cricket would struggle to be there given it bulldozes the historic and charming number 2 ground and non-super rugby there would also likely be a no go. Even Super rugby there would feel fairly empty. But that’d be a problem with a waterfront stadium too.
But that’s why we’ve kept leaving the decisions on the stadiums, because much like around the world they’re great for the big set pieces like world cups and then never really used anywhere close to capacity. There’s no obvious answer and all answers we have come up with have significant drawbacks.
The disconnect between the massive grand vision and the idea that it’d be kept financially viable by pinching small community events that are currently fairly happy in comparatively undeveloped small local parks all over the isthmus is kinda staggering.
It’d also mean almost all local cricket would struggle to be there given it bulldozes the historic and charming number 2 ground and non-super rugby there would also likely be a no go. Even Super rugby there would feel fairly empty. But that’d be a problem with a waterfront stadium too.
But that’s why we’ve kept leaving the decisions on the stadiums, because much like around the world they’re great for the big set pieces like world cups and then never really used anywhere close to capacity. There’s no obvious answer and all answers we have come up with have significant drawbacks.
Both the EP 2.0 and Quay Park stadium proposals have ‘club mode’. That 15-30K crowd range that will be enough for the Blues, Warriors & Auckland FC.
Again that setup (top tier closed off, retractable lower tiers etc), seems to work okay at other big stadia like, Vancouver's BC Place
Again that setup (top tier closed off, retractable lower tiers etc), seems to work okay at other big stadia like, Vancouver's BC Place
Surely even that wouldn’t help NPC or cricket with sub-5k crowds.
Super Rugby it’d probably suit. Likely to be too small for the derby what with the flood of political philosophers and sailors to support AFC…
Never post on the Auckland stadium debate when you’re hungry. It’s a new maxim to live by.
Super Rugby it’d probably suit. Likely to be too small for the derby what with the flood of political philosophers and sailors to support AFC…
Never post on the Auckland stadium debate when you’re hungry. It’s a new maxim to live by.
I was skeptical about the feasibility of building a stadium above the busiest rail junction in the city, but I've flip-flopped. I am now pulling hard for Te Tōangaroa to win just to shut Sautner's mouth.
Surely even that wouldn’t help NPC or cricket with sub-5k crowds.
Super Rugby it’d probably suit. Likely to be too small for the derby what with the flood of political philosophers and sailors to support AFC…
Never post on the Auckland stadium debate when you’re hungry. It’s a new maxim to live by.
Super Rugby it’d probably suit. Likely to be too small for the derby what with the flood of political philosophers and sailors to support AFC…
Never post on the Auckland stadium debate when you’re hungry. It’s a new maxim to live by.
I think with both proposals they want the Warriors as tenants, but Mt Smart stays. The idea being Penrose is then used for alot of smaller crowd community type sport, which I guess would include the Auckland NPC Rugby team.
Auckland Cricket would have to make Colin Maiden, Cornwall Park or somewhere it's permanent home. And of course if Quay Park is chosen (which I'd favour), then what does happen with international cricket in Auckland, presuming the Eden Park precinct is turned into housing. Or maybe there is room to keep a cricket oval in that precinct, surrounded by housing as you find with alot of the UK cricket grounds.
Surely even that wouldn’t help NPC or cricket with sub-5k crowds.
Super Rugby it’d probably suit. Likely to be too small for the derby what with the flood of political philosophers and sailors to support AFC…
Never post on the Auckland stadium debate when you’re hungry. It’s a new maxim to live by.
Super Rugby it’d probably suit. Likely to be too small for the derby what with the flood of political philosophers and sailors to support AFC…
Never post on the Auckland stadium debate when you’re hungry. It’s a new maxim to live by.
I think with both proposals they want the Warriors as tenants, but Mt Smart stays. The idea being Penrose is then used for alot of smaller crowd community type sport, which I guess would include the Auckland NPC Rugby team.
Auckland Cricket would have to make Colin Maiden, Cornwall Park or somewhere it's permanent home. And of course if Quay Park is chosen (which I'd favour), then what does happen with international cricket in Auckland, presuming the Eden Park precinct is turned into housing. Or maybe there is room to keep a cricket oval in that precinct, surrounded by housing as you find with alot of the UK cricket grounds.
Still holding out for that Victoria Park redevelopment if we can't get Western Springs.
I was skeptical about the feasibility of building a stadium above the busiest rail junction in the city, but I've flip-flopped. I am now pulling hard for Te Tōangaroa to win just to shut Sautner's mouth.
Cut and covering the rail tracks + realigning Quay St will be expensive business, but worth noting that this has always been part of the 'masterplan' for the area - stadium or no stadium. So an issue that will have to be faced at some point or another.
Both the EP 2.0 and Quay Park stadium proposals have ‘club mode’. That 15-30K crowd range that will be enough for the Blues, Warriors & Auckland FC.
Again that setup (top tier closed off, retractable lower tiers etc), seems to work okay at other big stadia like, Vancouver's BC Place
Again that setup (top tier closed off, retractable lower tiers etc), seems to work okay at other big stadia like, Vancouver's BC Place
For the most part I am calling bullshark on every stadium proposal's 'club mode'. From what we've seen nothing resembles Vancouver. But at least a rectangle stadium with steep sides will feel cosier and less empty than an oval with temporary seating.
Yeah, the club modes look like "we put some blankets over the top seats". I love the look of Vancouver but I doubt we'd execute well.
Interesting little read.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/nz-news/350313356/dunedin-stadium-boss-calls-time
https://www.stuff.co.nz/nz-news/350313356/dunedin-stadium-boss-calls-time
The Stadium Debate – What About the Transport Options?
"The need to build a podium over the top of the existing rail lines is likely to not only add quite a bit of cost to the project, but would also be quite disruptive to rail services during construction. One way to minimise that would be realign and trench that section of the Eastern Line. It does seem they want to take some land from the port to shift Quay St north, which would likely provide the needed space.
"This would also provide a golden opportunity to grade-separate the Quay Park junction. This would have large benefits for the entire rail network by helping to improve reliability. This flat junction already imposes a significant constraint on all rail services in Auckland, as trains travelling in opposite directions entering and exiting Britomart need to cross paths – and when that happens, even small delays on a single service can quickly cascade across the network. That will only get worse as service frequencies increase post CRL. The need to grade-separate this junction has been identified as a likely future requirement in Auckland Transport and Kiwirail’s 30-year rail business case – so hopefully the designers of this stadium have included it in their plans."
https://www.1news.co.nz/2024/06/24/scotty-stevenson-theres-life-in-eden-park-yet-just-add-people/
Some light comedic reading. Suggests we should keep EP because:
1) We should be romantically attracted to its 'shambling architecture and odd angles'
2) It doesn't matter how good a stadium is!
A damning and witty defeat laid to any idiot who has ever cared about the accessibility, shape, sightlines, and aesthetics of a stadium.
Some light comedic reading. Suggests we should keep EP because:
1) We should be romantically attracted to its 'shambling architecture and odd angles'
2) It doesn't matter how good a stadium is!
A damning and witty defeat laid to any idiot who has ever cared about the accessibility, shape, sightlines, and aesthetics of a stadium.
“The Eden Park re-development makes much more sense across the board, taking in the considerations and needs of all the different sports and events that will be impacted,” NZC CEO Scott Weenink said. https://t.co/kiw527LxxX
— BLACKCAPS (@BLACKCAPS) July 11, 2024
“The Eden Park re-development makes much more sense across the board, taking in the considerations and needs of all the different sports and events that will be impacted,” NZC CEO Scott Weenink said. https://t.co/kiw527LxxX
— BLACKCAPS (@BLACKCAPS) July 11, 2024
What class of membership at the Northern club for life?
It'd need a five story car park alongside of it.
Kicking the can down the road
Get cricket the fudge away from there. My second favourite sport has already ruined Wellington's stadia for a generation. We don't need that in Auckland too.
Get cricket the fudge away from there. My second favourite sport has already ruined Wellington's stadia for a generation. We don't need that in Auckland too.
The Stadium Trust predicted that the Black Caps were going to be a strong force for years and chose that design. Sadly in the mid/late 90's & early 2000's, that did not happen and stadium attendances for 1 day & T20 Cricket sucked unless it was Australia. It should have been a rectangle stadium up close to the pitch like Forsythe Barr. Rugby, Rugby League AND Football would have loved it. Especially if it had had a roof.
So Auckland, do NOT make the same mistake.
Why in blithering hell would NZC continue to support a stadium you can't actually play test cricket at?!?
They lose money on test cricket wherever it is played. Having a test ground in Auckland won’t change that
But they make money on the international white ball versions esp 20/20. And having nowhere to play that in Auckland will hit NZC’s pockets
But they make money on the international white ball versions esp 20/20. And having nowhere to play that in Auckland will hit NZC’s pockets
NZ Cricket can have Eden Park if they support knocking down its stands to build back a smaller 20k ish ground - allowing a bunch of space currently used for stands to be used to make the boundaries longer and fit for test cricket
Then build the new rectangle stadium by the waterfront - Auckland then has 2 stadiums fit for purpose and everyone wins
Then build the new rectangle stadium by the waterfront - Auckland then has 2 stadiums fit for purpose and everyone wins
NZ Cricket can have Eden Park if they support knocking down its stands to build back a smaller 20k ish ground - allowing a bunch of space currently used for stands to be used to make the boundaries longer and fit for test cricket
Then build the new rectangle stadium by the waterfront - Auckland then has 2 stadiums fit for purpose and everyone wins
Then build the new rectangle stadium by the waterfront - Auckland then has 2 stadiums fit for purpose and everyone wins
I very much like this idea. Even for the bigger crowds you get with international 20/20, a ground size of 20,000 capacity is enough.
Unfortunately couple of problems I can see.
1. I think with the Quay Park proposal, they want to see Eden Park demolished completely and then used for housing. I maybe wrong but with the previous Waterfront projects there was a developer involved who would fund the new stadium construction downturn, if they then basically got given the Eden Park site to develop for housing
2. Eden Park Trust runs at a loss, even with all the events it currently hosts. Sure a 20K cricket ground should be cheaper to run and maintain than a 50K multipurpose ground, but with cricket as your only tenant, and what 15-20 days/year maximum of occupancy (2 tests, 5-10 white ball games) that's not alot of income. And yes a red ball test cricket I think loses NZC about $500K-$1M every time, unless it's India and it's big TV money.
I've no idea if existing purpose built cricket grounds like the Basin, Hagley Oval, Bay Oval, Seddon Park etc make a profit, or are propped up by local Council dollars.
But yeah overall cricket shouldn't be the reason Eden Park 2.0 is chosen over Quay Park. It's not for the other codes and all their fans to suffer, because of the summer game. It needs to find it's own alternative solution.
I miss tests at Eden Park. And actually domestic first class. It used to be free after 5pm, so you could nip down for a few overs. Sometimes it was quite tense if the home team were on the hunt. I remember being amazed by the way they’d all move in as the bowler came in. I don’t think it really helped the field, but it must have been intimidating to bat against.
And I vaguely remember being able to walk most of the way around the ground as you can at the Basin, getting signatures from deep set fielders. And of course you could go and play tennis ball either on the number 2 or the concrete.
Why bother with even pretending to consult? Just do what is always done. Pile some old blokes into a boardroom, make a decision that is far from brave and then start badgering the council and government for more money.
Part of the problem with cricket is the game itself. It’s making money and not much else. The potential for an whisp of romance is there with games up near the Himalayas or at Hagley Oval or Lords. But it doesn’t even convince itself. And in England they keep selling young fans down the road by not having anything fee to air. They could buy their own board argues against it.
In the Windies tests are a joke format for some young players.
And sport is a full time thing, rather than a summer/winter proposition too. Rugby and football eat away at summer.
I suppose worst of all for me is living in a country where baseball is the number one sport! Cricket is here as baseball is in NZ.
Eh.
At least it’ll give us a big stage for the derbies!
And I vaguely remember being able to walk most of the way around the ground as you can at the Basin, getting signatures from deep set fielders. And of course you could go and play tennis ball either on the number 2 or the concrete.
Why bother with even pretending to consult? Just do what is always done. Pile some old blokes into a boardroom, make a decision that is far from brave and then start badgering the council and government for more money.
Part of the problem with cricket is the game itself. It’s making money and not much else. The potential for an whisp of romance is there with games up near the Himalayas or at Hagley Oval or Lords. But it doesn’t even convince itself. And in England they keep selling young fans down the road by not having anything fee to air. They could buy their own board argues against it.
In the Windies tests are a joke format for some young players.
And sport is a full time thing, rather than a summer/winter proposition too. Rugby and football eat away at summer.
I suppose worst of all for me is living in a country where baseball is the number one sport! Cricket is here as baseball is in NZ.
Eh.
At least it’ll give us a big stage for the derbies!
Missed opportunity in my opinion. If you want inner harbour parkland with views of the bridge plus amenities go to Devonport.