The Rugby World Cup

So I just read the two articles below and thought there could be a need for a thread here on Biggie for the RWC as an event , even as separate from the sportting side of it. A lot of stuff has been happening in Auckland with the timeline structured around the cup even the Art Gallery for some strange reason will be ready by September.

This journalist is berating Eden Park very badly which does seem a bit of mischeivous thing to be doing, accurate or not.
http://msn.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=10734566
Eden Park will let down NZ
At the cost of $240 million, New Zealand has built an utter dog of a stadium and one that will taint the World Cup....

Scaffolding that looks like it could fall down; thousands of uncovered and temporary seats and a field that is a hybrid for cricket and rugby - that's what awaits the world and goodness only knows what impression of New Zealand they will draw from that.



I find it odd that in this video in the last twenty seconds the interviewee talks about people sitting at home and watching sport on the 3D plasma with a cold beer and a pie, and sees the stadium as trying to recreate that !! ?
wtf ??
hasnt this gone completely full circle - I thought the stadium would have a complete different experience to offer . meh

http://msn.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/video.cfm?c_id=4&gal_objectid=10734566&gallery_id=119353

and it does by surrounding fans by thousands of other fans as well allowing everyone the ability to see the action up close, on a screen.

Everyone would moan if they paid hundreds for tickets and were so far from the action they couldn't see what was happening in rucks and there was no screen to allow them to see what was happening.
Some pretty intense scaffolding for the temporary seating; doesn't look like it will be collapsing anytime soon.

also looks pretty good to me, don't see why people would feel let down being here

According to the weather people, there is a 50% chance it will rain on the day of the RWC final. Given that there are also the semi-finals to consider, rain is almost certain at one of the final three big games. Overseas visitors will be paying many thousands of dollars to potentially watch a game in the rain. Eden Park has so far cost $240 million, but with classic Kiwi “good enough” mediocrity we’ve not spent the extra the extra few tens of millions to enclose the entire stadium. Now our idiotic insistence on penny wise, pound foolish incrementalism means we’ve wasted 240 million dollars on a hard to get to stadium in a densely populated inner city suburb that large numbers of people are actually expected to WALK from (and back to) the CBD to get to it! And to top it off, we’ve not bothered to roof large parts of it – even though we know there is 50% chance of rain. Imagine what a florrid Englishman who has spent many thousands of pounds will think of walking an 8km round trip to sit in an uncovered seat and doing it all in the rain. Madness!

I had a choice on Friday – go to the rugby or go to a birthday dinner in Kingsland. I chose the dinner, because only a moron would pay good money to go and sit in an uncovered stand at night in Auckland with the threat of rain to watch a massively over-exposed sport at the fag end of a competition that everyone was sick of a month ago. The alternative was to part with almost fifty dollars for a covered seat – which for some reason seems always to be in the worst part of the covered stand for Joe public anyway.

Everyone is getting heartily sick of rugby. It is incessantly covered from February to December. For the last couple of years the NZ public has been telling the NZRFU with its feet – and now with plummeting viewing figures their TV remotes – that rugby is chronically over-exposed and if the entire Super 15 and tri-nations was cancelled for a year lots of rugby fans would breath a huge sigh of relief.

Lack of covered seating is a scandal, but it probably wouldn’t stop me going to Eden Park if the games were good and the opportunities rare. As it is, lack of covered seating just provides another good excuse not to go along.

You've just pointed out there's no winning with the public. In your whinge you've suggested there was too much spent on Eden Park but also suggested they should have spent more tax payers money keeping punters dry at a winter sport. So which one is it? One would hope people who have purchased cheaper seats in the uncovered sections will go prepared, umbrellas, ponchos etc. It very rarely rains 90 minutes non stop.

They're putting on free buses to transport people to town and these will stretch down Sandrigham road; however Lion's tour supporters a few years back had no problems walking to town from Eden Park, so they're making it a bit nicer to walk Bond St, Great North by re-doing the footpaths and bulldozing houses to cut out a massive chunk of the walk between the Stadium and Bond Street..

Since i posted earlier i've read the scaffolding will be covered too so it will look better than it does atm.

even if that stat is right though, the game itself is only 90 minutes long. it can rain on the day without marring the event. we all know auckland weather is showery - it doesnt rain all day very often at all.

football fans in northern hemisphere never seem to tire of over-saturated coverage of their sport or, strangely enough, of the privations necessary to enjoy the spectacle of their favoured sport in the flesh

strange that...joe public must be more hardy than one would think

interesting to note from that first article linked that its about attending the game up north yet here we focus on telvised coverage

as for the stadium - harden up moaners its the rugger... a bit of rain is nothing (are all stadiums in Europe covered?) Is the experience here going to be that vastly different to say a game in the UK? (other than our pies and pissheads)

or we're in the phase of bad press (get readers stat) it'll reverse clsoer to the day

in short rugby

It can be both. There is such a thing as spending too much money on the wrong thing vs actually spending more money on what would be more worthwhile.

So you're saying it's more important to keep a few more punters dry, in case it rains, over 3 games, in temporary seating than having seating that works for the long tearm - 3 tiered stand?

I think it was more important to build a proper stadium in an appropriate location, rather than spend money doing a patch up job.

I think the lesson learnt (I hope) is NZ isn't wealthy enough (nor progressive) to host these sorts of sporting events

Sums it up really.

I'm here all week if there are other pressing concerns

? is this is the written version of the late night talk back with Kerre Woodham.

Me I'm a simpleton I look forward to the foreign visitors and bit of difference out and about in the city...

hopefully loads of hot canadian guys :>

will get tickets hopefully in the next ballot to a canada v someone else game maybe france are they playing against france?

Man... the hard-core lefties are spinning out the positivity today aren't they?

50% chance of rain on a date 3 months away. Rubbish. They have no way of predicting it - people are confusing historic weather data with forecasting. And, from knowing someone who has done it - they cheat at it too... as they can chose the exact date (i.e. 3rd October) OR the relative date (1st Sunday in October) to paint the picture that suits the story.

Regardless of weather and political leanings, the stadium is a dog by international standards.



gc.

Even if that weather prediction is right it needs examining.

50% chance of rain ON THAT DAY. Well a rugby game experience is what ....2.5 hours long if you want to count bump in and out, and theres 24 hours in a day. So scaremonging with that 50% number is pretty stupid

and rain could just be a light shower or two

harden up rugby buggers

It's a winter sport, it rains in winter, harden the fuck up you pansies

Most major US stadiums are also uncovered

Don't see a problem?

Few rain drops and people run for the covers. Kiwi's know how to complain, doesn't matter what you do or how you do it, if the one lot is not complaining the other lot will.

Hard to disagree, but give us a break we were colonised by the British

We gonna see a lot more RWC hateing yet

Much as I liked the basic idea of a waterfront stadium, and much as I think Eden Park is a white elephant what with all the use restrictions on it, I STILL don't think a wide open chequebook for a billion dollar behemoth making yet more of our waterfront inaccessible when we're in the middle of trying to open up as much of it as possible from commercial use was in any way a good idea.

We were always going to do this on the cheap, we're going to make fuck all money on it anyway, so what's the point in dropping all the money? At least as it stands we have got some decent infrastructure improvements out of it, even if a bunch have been delayed as fuck, and still too much focus on "get these roads done before RWC". Because you know, tourists bring their cars with them on the plane. And this Queens Wharf bullshit is still...bullshit.


Also lol at people getting a little bit wet.

Interesting rebuttal editorial today to the article in the OP: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/new-zealand/news/article.cfm?l_id=71&objectid=10734901

When was the last time you went to a game of anything?

The atmosphere definitely dampens (lol pun) when it's a bit wet. The whole reason why people go to the game is for the atmosphere which can't be replicated on TV, no matter how good your high definition is.

now they're asking for schools to be closed and commuters to leave early ..
national holiday if we win?

To be fair, that article is talking about the first game day, which also features a bunch of other shit going on around town, so that's just a sensible suggestion. Suggestions like that are made for lots of different major events around the world.

School terms were re jigged this year to make it so the busy end of the competition falls during school holidays anyway.

Me not going to games is due to being a brokeass who spends half the weekend drunk and the other half hungover, not because of inclement weather. If I've paid for a ticket, I'll go regardless of rain.

We're talking about fucking winter sports, it rains, it's part of the territory. There's no reason to drop a billion dollars on an enclosed stadium which sells out about twice a year usually, maybe.

World Cup waterfont plans unveiled
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10735465

Are the Feelers John Key's old bros or something? How the hell does such a terrible band keep getting all these RWC handouts?

Its the RWC with dudes chasing wet balls in the mud, you can't expect the cutting edge of culture

Like there's no need to drop billions of dollars into public transport because nobody ever uses it?

:O

If you build it, they will come... Shitty old Dunedin gets a covered stadium, why can't Auckland?

Most of us are just sick of Auckland having half arsed stadiums. Eden Park, Mt Smart, North Harbour... All half arsed... I'm sick of it. Can't we just have a fucking stadium that fucking WORKS?

they do work and they are luxuries

Except PT use is increasing constantly, and sport patronage...isn't.



Apples and Oranges, Dunedin has vastly more inclement weather than Auckland does.

There's no point arguing about them being luxuries so I won't, we're discussing first world problems here to be sure. The very fact that many sports fans are frustrated though surely points to the former statement not being entirely true.

The PT comment was tongue in cheek if it weren't obvious.

I disagree with that analogy. While yes Dunedin does have shittier weather, the fact that they made it work for a decent sized budget makes me think that Auckland could have done better with ours. I like the fact that they didn't try to improve Carrisbrook in half arsed piecemeal increments, they said: "fuck it" and started anew with a design that is eye pleasing (for a stadium) and technologically advanced and more importantly, giving them a fresh start to design and build from the ground up means they get a stadium that fucking works. Name one good stadium in this city. ONE.

Similarly sized Brisbane has Suncorp Stadium. An amazing stadium with an amazing atmosphere. Everytime I see that place I get stadium envy.

that Dunedin stadium was not built without a great deal of local opposition in case it missed your notice, not least because of its expense to local ratepayers

Weird. I thought I had mentioned that but I didn't heh. Yes it was an expense, it amounted to a rate increase of $50 a year. Not massive. What they hated was the lack of say in the public expenditure. Which is fair enough but it takes nothing away from what a great stadium it will be for the city for the next 20 years. Carrisbrook was a tired ugly looking ground that either needed a complete facelift or it needed to go.

I just showed you that most of the greatest stadiums in the world are UNCOVERED and have less covered seating than Eden Park
hell they play in the snow at gillette and lambeau
and games last 3hours not 80mins

They are uncovered for sure but they all look far better than anything we have. Ain't none of them look half assed. The atmosphere at some of those massive stadiums would be awesome! Think of how loud it would be echoing among those stands. The yanks know too how to put on an event, I'd love to catch a game over there.

Also the OP mentions the art gallery opening soon. I'm really looking forward to that! Place looks awesome so far.

Yea, Gallery update is looking ace!!!

Still think the atmosphere at Eden Park is good. Who did you see there play last that was such a let down dalai?

But then vadz, look at arguably the greatest most high-tech stadium in the US, and it's totally covered until they open the roof, Cowboys Stadium. But hey, that's what, about a billion US$? :>


Very keen to check out the Art Gallery - really love the design and how it ties into Albert Park.

Covered stadia are much better for noise, as much as I like the incredibly large Nou Camp (90k + capacity in the style of those giant open spread US college stadiums) the atmosphere at an international game at the covered Emirites in London was insane due tot he noise - shame theat stadium is wasted on Arsenal whose fans are more likely to shush you than sing. Thousands of fans banging drums and singing Brazil over and over was awesome. I'm also told that when they close the roof at the Millenium in Cardiff the noise is like nothing else you will ever experience.

Basicly weather should be the least of your concerns when considering a roof, atmoshpere is everythigng... But then again an Eden PArk crowd (or any in NZ outside of the Phoenix) would really struggle to do a covered stadium justice so perhaps there is no point.

Unlike football, rugby just feels wrong being played under a roof, Dunedin's looks like an indoor swimming pool complex.. Will be interesting to see how it works over the wold cup. The beams on the side of the field look so low, but granted they've researched on the height required. Would be pretty awesome to see someone put up a bomb and hit the ceiling though.

I don't know, rugby works pretty well at the Millennium Stadium, especially given how much the Welsh love to sing.

Wanted: stadium roofs and a nation of singers

please send to NZ

Rugby needs mud!

seems to me you're talking about that old game once played here... when men were men and no one wore a tight top

not even at the after match function

$50 down the drain for me, and as yet another subisdy to rugby, on top of the huge costs of injuries

Indeed, NZ crowds are incredibly boring and apathetic. Phoenix, Welly 7's, then maybe the Warriors crowds. Or maybe my Warriors crowd passion-o-meter is incorrectly calibrated due to my last few vists being seated close to dalai's mum, who makes enough noise for half the stand :>

You can always hear my mum yelling: "Squish him! Squish him!"

Which I like to autotranslate in my head, in her voice, to "CUT HIS FUCKING HEAD OFF!!!"

My mum would never be so vulgar. She gets embarrassed uttering even minor swears like hell or crap.

Last game I went there for was the Warriors season opening game but I've been to a few there.

Snedden defends
http://msn.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10735970

I see Hoyts here are screening the RWC Finals in 3D at their cinemas.

That would be interesting.

They had them on here in 3D for the Football World Cup last year. Seems a bit unnecessary to me.

from TV3 last week:



http://www.3news.co.nz/RWC-3D-screenings-suffer-lack-of-interest/tabid/415/articleID/218620/Default.aspx

and at between $50-$70 no wonder

pet match? that's ridiculous.

add another 10 on top of that for Auckland (at vector), I quoted Dunners price

http://www.viewauckland.co.nz/whatson/rugby-world-cup-rwc-2011-in-3d-bronze-final-article-31932.html

i figured out a good thing about the RWC
all the fricken road works will stop.

I suppose all those 'cheap' late release seats are in the scaffolding stands?

It seems to me that both the Fan Trail and Eden Park were a roaring success. People were actually catching public transport downtown so they could walk to the game because the walk in itself was an event. So glad this whinging fuckwit was wrong.

fair weather fans eh...

Hahaaaa!

While we're doing the hindsight thing, I thought the Dunedin stadium was awesome! Noisy and looked cosy.




Well you're entitled to have a say but the stadium allows so much more than rugby to come to Dunedin that never would have even considered it before. Elton John for example, is doing a concert there soon. The possibilities of all different kinds of events now possible for Dunedin is a huge lift for the southern region.

Yep agree with you there Dalai & Dunedin stadium did look really nice.

Dunners stadium does indeed look mint... but the cost for the ratepayers down there is simply stupid imo... no matter how one tries to justify the expense... there are no doubt hundreds of more important projects the city could have undertaken

hosting elton john is hardly a public benefit

$50 a year isn't very much.

$50 extra a year isn't very much for most people.... but that fact doesn't suggest for a second it was the right decision made for all

That's your opinion, which you're entitled to have but there was also a large majority of people who DID want it. You're never going to please everybody.

Also, this article backs up a lot of what I was saying in this thread.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/best-of-sport-analysis/news/article.cfm?c_id=1502180&objectid=10763215

Rattue is the biggest joke of all NZH sporting reporters........

The atmosphere was definitely not poor at Eden Park. What games did he attend? He makes some pretty wild claims in that article and nothing is backed up. I don't see what's so awful about it that it can't be used as a football ground; it already does get used as a league ground. I went to two games at the RWC, both A+. Eden Park worked in every way. Easy to get to and from; easy to get beers and chips in a full stadium; no queues. The crowds for Super 15 games now have the North and South stands that are covered, both with great, close views of the field. I'm really looking forward to getting to Super 15 games next year if I get the chance. Eden Park works..no point letting it sit there going to waste; as much as it would be great to have a studium downtown i still think it's bad planning building a stadium that is damn near impossible to get 60,000 people in and out of due to 3 of it's sides being seaside, meaning all entrances are on one side.

Heh, I don't think the Waterfront Stadium would have a sheer drop to the sea on three sides.

As for the shape, he's referring to how far away from the field you sit in the stands, compare it to the Dunedin stadium where the front row are almost right on the pitch. It's awesome. It's also a pet hate of mine. When I go to Mt Smart, I always choose tickets in the East stand because it is much closer to the pitch than the West.

I think being that low and close to the game would be awful, but i haven't sat in the Dunedin stadium so i can't say for sure. I can say that sitting in the South stand at EP is awesome! It seems everyone who commented on that article who actually went to a RWC game agrees that EP is not all that bad and money now needs to be spent on Chch rather than anothe stadium.

Whether or not you had a 10 meter gap between the stadium and the edge of the wharf or not, it would still be rediculous getting even 50,000 people in from one side. Has it been done anywhere in the world?

I haven't actually been inside the Cake Tin, but isn't their layout kinda based on a single ingress/egress for those on foot?
Looked like it worked quite well when I walked up there to check out some of the 7's costumes a few years ago.

I meant on a wharf. But maybe someone knows how the Cake Tin copes with it's 36,000 capacity when it's at capacity? you'd be adding another 24,000 to that.

this poster has it right



and this

Yeah. I went to a number of games at Eden Park and thought the atmosphere at all of them was great. I was impressed. Dunno what matches he went to.

The atmosphere ws great DESPITE the stadiums shortcoming though, not because of them. Rattue as usual is pretty much bang on with Auckland need for a purpose built boutique crowd-close-to-players type stadium instead of the 3-4 weird montrosities we currently have. Agree it wasnt his best article though

GTFO speedway and build it there, such a dated redneck concept belongs in the westie boondocks, not the CBD+ 1

we don't actually require a sports stadium in the CBD either