SWC stadiums fears mount

T

the354

Honorary Master
Joined
Sep 23, 2007
Messages
11,237
Reaction score
1,434
Thats just not cricket!! :p

Johannesburg - Too small for cricket and passed over by rugby, the stadiums that cost South Africa more than R7bn ($1bn) for this year's World Cup already appear to be turning into white elephants.

Both rugby and cricket are more commercially successful than football in South Africa, and both sports need to move into the new stadiums - built and renovated for Africa's first World Cup - to keep them alive financially.

On Tuesday, South African Rugby Union president Oregan Hoskins told members of parliament in Cape Town that there had been no discussions between Durban city officials and rugby representatives before the R2.8bn ($400m), 70 000-capacity Moses Mabhida Stadium was built, and now it did not have enough suites to accommodate the local Sharks rugby team's suite holders.

Hoskins said that the Sharks, who compete in the annual Super Rugby competition and the domestic Currie Cup and could offer near year-round use, would have a "massive problem" to move to the new stadium.

"What we are discussing today should have been discussed before we built the stadiums," Hoskins said. "It is tragic for us as a nation that we have to act in reverse."

The situation in Cape Town is just as bad, according to Hoskins, because of the deteriorating relationship between the local Western Province rugby union and the Green Point Stadium operators.
Click to expand...

http://www.sport24.co.za/Soccer/SWC-stadiums-fears-mount-20100818


The South African Press Association quoted Western Province Rugby president Tobie Titus as saying that on the advice of an independent financial adviser, Western Province Rugby was staying at its current stadium, Newlands.

So Cape Town Stadium could now be rarely used and is set to cost more than R43.3m ($6m) a year just to maintain.

Cricket South Africa chief executive Gerald Majola added that the pitches at the stadiums were too small to host cricket games, and blamed this on the failure of cities to consult cricket authorities before construction.

Hoskins said the hype generated by the recent World Cup also hid many of the issues, leaving the stadiums now struggling to bring in income.

"In 2007, before the new stadiums were built, I wrote to the minister of sport and said I foresaw major problems coming and I asked for the intervention of the ministry," Hoskins told the committee. "Unfortunately, we were all taken up by the soccer World Cup and in the hype we forgot we should have been talking to each other."

In July, South African Football Association chief executive Leslie Sedibe conceded to the same parliamentary committee that football faced a major challenge to keep the stadiums in use and profitable - largely due to traditionally low ticket prices charged at local matches and the high cost of running the world class arenas.

Sedibe's observation came just 10 days after the World Cup ended, and after South Africa spent an estimated R9.4bn ($1.3bn) building and upgrading the 10 stadiums used for the tournament.

It was hoped rugby and cricket would help out.
Click to expand...

More opinions?
 
Hmm, I still think it is a bit early to tell... but it is worrying that the cricket and Rugby guys are not happy with the construction of the stadiums. :(
 
the354 said:
More opinions?
Click to expand...

Also read that government want's to force the stadium managers to reduce their prices.


Garyvdh said:
Hmm, I still think it is a bit early to tell... but it is worrying that the cricket and Rugby guys are not happy with the construction of the stadiums. :(
Click to expand...

Well, it's definitely to small for cricket, not much one can do about that not.


These things should have been taken into consideration with the original planning. Surely cricket, rugby & soccer events will also clash with a single stadium. How does one maintain the pitch with such high usage?
 
Last edited:
Even if the Green Point stadium was GIVEN to WP Rugby for free... in the hope that it will keep the stadium profitable....

They still have to do something to build some suites to accommodate the business class.

With Newlands long history... the best bet is to give the stadium to them for the move to happen...but the non-suites will be their downfall... but worth the possibility... they can be built on
 
Typical South Africans - well and good for Hoskins and Majola to moan "nobody came to speak to us" - did they ever think to be proactive and approach the LOC to check whether cricket and rugby would be able to be played at the new stadiums? Oh no - they must come to us? Everyone just sits back and waits for the other guy to do the work - no one is proactive
 
AfricanTech said:
Typical South Africans - well and good for Hoskins and Majola to moan "nobody came to speak to us" - did they ever think to be proactive and approach the LOC to check whether cricket and rugby would be able to be played at the new stadiums? Oh no - they must come to us? Everyone just sits back and waits for the other guy to do the work - no one is proactive
Click to expand...

"In 2007, before the new stadiums were built, I wrote to the minister of sport and said I foresaw major problems coming and I asked for the intervention of the ministry," Hoskins told the committee. "Unfortunately, we were all taken up by the soccer World Cup and in the hype we forgot we should have been talking to each other."
Click to expand...
More like typical government departments.
 
AfricanTech said:
Typical South Africans - well and good for Hoskins and Majola to moan "nobody came to speak to us" - did they ever think to be proactive and approach the LOC to check whether cricket and rugby would be able to be played at the new stadiums? Oh no - they must come to us? Everyone just sits back and waits for the other guy to do the work - no one is proactive
Click to expand...

did you miss this part?

"In 2007, before the new stadiums were built, I wrote to the minister of sport and said I foresaw major problems coming and I asked for the intervention of the ministry," Hoskins told the committee. "Unfortunately, we were all taken up by the soccer World Cup and in the hype we forgot we should have been talking to each other."
Click to expand...

edit: damn you mike hoxbig! damn you! :D
 
Last edited:
Durban city approached the Natal Rugby union before they started building the stadium with an eye to moving them accross the road.

The issue of suites or boxes was raised then by NRU as a solid reason not to move from the existing stadium.

This is not a new issue, it's being hanging over the stadium from inception.

I heard about it (third hand) years ago.

I maintained then, as I do now, is that they should have built a multistory car park on the site, and a transport centre with trains and buses shuttling people into the city.

Practical forward thinking is however not a strong point of the Sutcliffe regime.
 
zeridine said:
did you miss this part?

edit: damn you mike hoxbig! damn you! :D
Click to expand...
Sorry for you :P

Anyway with cricket and rugby being far more profitable than football in this country, why should the respective organisations approach the stakeholders? Surely it should be the other way around, if the stakeholders want to keep the stadiums profitable to be able to maintain them?

I somehow don't think that SARFU and CSA are moaning - they're just saying that they weren't approached. That's a fsckup on the organisers part if they didn't have the foresight to plan for after the SWC.
 
ponder said:
These things should have been taken into consideration with the original planning. Surely cricket, rugby & soccer events will also clash with a single stadium. How does one maintain the pitch with such high usage?
Click to expand...

Where's the commonsense?

The city already has a world class cricket stadium which pays for itself, it already has a world class rugby stadium which pays for itself.

If the soccer stadium couldn't pay for itself then it shouldn't have been built.

Did no one ask why the existing stadium on the site couldn't compare to Kings Park accross the road?
 
Still too soon to tell.

I think we might lose some of the old stadiums though, places like Newlands might have history but the property that they are built on is worth a fortune. Tearing it down and using it for business will actually make a lot of sense.
 
Nerfherder said:
I think we might lose some of the old stadiums though, places like Newlands might have history but the property that they are built on is worth a fortune. Tearing it down and using it for business will actually make a lot of sense.
Click to expand...

Depends on who owns the stadiums. If the stadium is owned by a local rugby union, already paid for & maintenance costs are less than using the new stadium then why should they move. I can't see them being forced either.
 
Next you'll want Soccer at Lords and cricket at Wembley, This is honestly a non-issue for me.
 
Screw all the rich idiots and their suites.

Break 'em all down and put more seats down for the real fans!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X