Quote Originally Posted by Dave Hughes View Post
Contrary to popular belief, my stadium article in Super Rugby yesterday was not a puff piece of Government propoganda. The Government doesn't deal with us, remember?
Dave, Firstly, Thanks so much for posting on this site and giving us some background to your article. I for one have been appeased somewhat by your explanation and reasoning.

I guess you have recieved some savaging in the past week or so, much of it undeserved, and I feel it right to respond, or at lease explain some of this.

While you wrote the piece after having some of the features of the stadium explained to you and being pleasantly surprised, very few of the long term members of this site have been in the dark about the Kitchener Park Proposal. Several members of the site downloaded copies of the Langoulant report as soon as it was published and much discussion ensued. This discussion has continued in this forum since before the Government announced their acceptance of the proposal.

Members of TWF and WNC are painfully aware of the recommendations of the report, and the (well at least the public) content of the plan. The protest continues though. even with the understanding that 22000 seats will be in Rectangular configuration, even with the understanding that the concourse will contain eateries, even with the knowledge that ALL Force members will be seated in the bowl, there is opposition.

The premise of the Petition is not that Kitchener Park is unuseable as a stadium, rather it is that sharing a stadium is problematic. Many people have made reference to the Football Commission's sensitivity about ground markings and such like. the Petition contends that since the Operable stands run on "Trenches and Rails situated underneath the grass playing surface" there will be damage to the playing surface when these stands are moved.

Such damage will obviously cause a win-lose between the tenants of this stadium. If rugby wins, AFL will be played on a substandard surface, if AFL wins, rugby will play games in an oval stadium which is never converted. I think NEITHER situation is acceptable......I would also consider that Rugby is going to lose, we have fewer spectators, and less money...not to mention the fact that AFL has already been named the "Priority Tenant"

I hope you can understand why people on this site are sensitive regarding this issue.

I would be delighted to have the opportunity to respond to Mr Alexander's assertions and would frankly want to ask some pointed questions of Mr Alexander. If it is possible that such a meeting could be set up in time to publish for this week's super rugby liftout, please PM me at the site. I will happily pass contact details to you.

Might I close by reiterating that we don't want to attack you as a journalist....we are aware that you have been of great assistance to the rugby public over the past couple of years, but this community is populated by some people who are concerned about the reach of Mr Kobelke and Mr Fong!

Yours

GIGS20