The 17 Bus Hudderfield as well, ppich seems fine there
And that is because Rugby League is a summer sport. Doesn't say much fr Wigan's pitch though...

by Terminal Boardom » 31 Mar 2009 13:53
The 17 Bus Hudderfield as well, ppich seems fine there
by Sun Tzu » 31 Mar 2009 14:17
Terminal BoardomThe 17 Bus Hudderfield as well, ppich seems fine there
And that is because Rugby League is a summer sport. Doesn't say much fr Wigan's pitch though...
by Terminal Boardom » 31 Mar 2009 15:34
Sun Tzu Interesting that the football / cricket ground share a la Sheff Utd and Northampton seems to have gone out of favour ! Don't a lot of the Southern Hemisphere grounds double up cricket and rugby (most NZ grounds) or Aussie Rules (Melbourne ?)
by Sun Tzu » 31 Mar 2009 16:15
Terminal Boardom
So far I am yet to come across an argument that supports rugby at the Mad Stad.
by Terminal Boardom » 31 Mar 2009 16:48
Sun Tzu 1. The sheer wastefulness of having a big stadium that is used just once a fortnight for 40 weeks of the year. When you have another major sporting team in the area it would be even more wasteful for them to have a similar facility also used just once a fortnight for 40 weeks of the year....
Sun Tzu 2. of course we didn't have a second major sports team in the area (apologies to Reading Rockets, Reading HC and no doubt others...) but because of the groundshare we get to see world class rugby players at the Mad Stad and the ground gets wider coverage globally. I appreciate that for those who treat rugby as a sport with utter contempt this is no argument at all !
Sun Tzu I have no idea how the finances work out, whether having LI on board ends up with RFC having more cash, or whether the deal breaks even but means more gets invested in facilities. On the assumption the deal is not done on charitable basis then the income (which I have no doubt is more than just the rental - spin offs such as corporate use of the stadium by those who originally just come for the rugby
by SpaceCruiser » 31 Mar 2009 16:54
Terminal BoardomSun Tzu 1. The sheer wastefulness of having a big stadium that is used just once a fortnight for 40 weeks of the year. When you have another major sporting team in the area it would be even more wasteful for them to have a similar facility also used just once a fortnight for 40 weeks of the year....
Doesn't seem to do 95% of other football clubs up and down the country much harm?
by Sun Tzu » 31 Mar 2009 17:24
Terminal Boardom I would be surprised if the club were not making a tidy sum which should be reinvested into the playing surface as a primary concern.
by Terminal Boardom » 31 Mar 2009 21:22
SpaceCruiserTerminal BoardomSun Tzu 1. The sheer wastefulness of having a big stadium that is used just once a fortnight for 40 weeks of the year. When you have another major sporting team in the area it would be even more wasteful for them to have a similar facility also used just once a fortnight for 40 weeks of the year....
Doesn't seem to do 95% of other football clubs up and down the country much harm?
Are most of those clubs making money?
by Sun Tzu » 31 Mar 2009 21:33
Terminal Boardom Doesn't seem to do 95% of other football clubs up and down the country much harm? I do agree tough that having such a stadium under utilised is a waste. Are there any other ways the stadium can be used? Pop concerts have been tried but they are few and far between plus the damage to the pitch could actually be worse.
Terminal Boardom Apart from the damage to the pitch, the stadium dimensions do not permit for an ideal rugby playing arena. The distance between the 22 and 10 metre lines is shorter than on traditional rugby pitches and the In-Goal areas are too shallow. Also, with the nature of the game, the running track surrounding the pitch can cause injuries when players dive / slide full length.
by Terminal Boardom » 31 Mar 2009 21:44
by Sun Tzu » 31 Mar 2009 21:56
Terminal Boardom
If we are to persevere with rugby for however many years to come, then would it not be in both club's interests to have the best pitch possible?
by The 17 Bus » 01 Apr 2009 08:12
by Terminal Boardom » 01 Apr 2009 08:25
The 17 Bus Love to see either an olympic sized ice rink, or olympic sized swimming pool, or an indoor athletics track , just something really.
by The 17 Bus » 01 Apr 2009 08:31
by West Stand Man » 01 Apr 2009 09:17
The 17 Bus Another problem with music gigs is the sheer number of venues available, Plymouth have Rod Stewart this summer, I doubt that the club will make much from it tho, as he could just have easily performed at bristol, and wherever he did it would sell out.
Personally I think the biggest waste is the amount of car parking, this could be better used if they moved the dome to the training ground, once proposed i believe, and built something with more uses on the site, though of course the problem then is it cannot really be used when football or rugby are in progress.
Love to see either an olympic sized ice rink, or olympic sized swimming pool, or an indoor athletics track , just something really.
by Sun Tzu » 01 Apr 2009 10:22
by The 17 Bus » 01 Apr 2009 11:33
by Sun Tzu » 01 Apr 2009 12:54
The 17 Bus The dome is just a giant polytunel so would be easy to move,
The 17 Bus i would go further, second level on half the car park, then there would be loads of room for more facilities.
by West Stand Man » 01 Apr 2009 13:12
Sun Tzu 1. The sheer wastefulness of having a big stadium that is used just once a fortnight for 40 weeks of the year. When you have another major sporting team in the area it would be even more wasteful for them to have a similar facility also used just once a fortnight for 40 weeks of the year....
Doesn't seem to do 95% of other football clubs up and down the country much harm?
by Sun Tzu » 01 Apr 2009 13:28
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 57 guests