London Irish. WHY???

[Terminal Boardom]

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...

[Sun Tzu]

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...

Doesn't that raise a whole different problem though. If a ground is in use 52 weeks of the year when do they do essential repair work ? At the end of a season football pitches are worn and are usually reseeded and repaired but if you go straight to rugby league you have no chance to do that. i would have thought the cumulative effect of using a pitch winter and summer would be worse than using it heavily in the winter and then not at all for 4 months.

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 ?)

[Terminal Boardom]

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 ?)

I hadn't realised that ground shares as per Blunts and Cobblers were ever favoured

NZ groundshare tends to favour the concept of dropping in cricket pitches which I think happens in one or two Australian examples. However, the concept of pitch maintenance when the playing surface is in use 52 weeks of the year has had me thinking. Am I right in thinking that there is less wear and tear by rugby leaue compared to union? Uncontested scrums, no rucks or mauls, no line outs??? Plus alternate week usage of the pitch in a season of regular growth?

So far I am yet to come across an argument that supports rugby at the Mad Stad.

[Sun Tzu]

So far I am yet to come across an argument that supports rugby at the Mad Stad.

Funny that - I've not seen a convincing one against it !

For me the biggest arguments in favour are

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....

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 !

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

[Terminal Boardom]

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? 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.

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 !

I like rugby. Played it at school as well as after a 20 odd year break (and yes, it hurt!). 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.

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

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.

[SpaceCruiser]

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?

[Sun Tzu]

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.

Irish contribute to pitch costs over and above the rent.

IIRC they paid for half of the cost of the work last summer an dhalf the cost of installing the Desso pitch (was that money well spent ? !!). I don't know if they contribute to the cost of the groundstaff in any way.

[Terminal Boardom]

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?

Which brings us onto an entirely different matter altogether

[Sun Tzu]

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.

As i understand it pop concerts are high risk. promoters want venues to provide guarantees of ticket sales before they will use a stadium so they are potential loss makers !
Just about every club in the country in the last 20 years has been trying to diversify so they aren't totally reliant on the football for income. For us the hotel and conference centre have I believe been very succesful and they use the executive boxes as part of the conference centre. The big grass area and 24,000 seats are a little bit harder to fill for anything other than sports events....

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.

The in goal area is the one that seems a real problem - the subs all warm up in it as well ! Presumably that is the way with all shared grounds, we don't have a small playing area ! That's an issue for rugby though, rather than an arguement for not having LI here. if they are happy with the dimensions then there's no issue.

[Terminal Boardom]

You are spot on with the diversification and it does seem obscene to have a facility that is so hideously underused. The Conference Centre and Hotel really do seem to be excellent pieces of business. But neither of these facilities would have been built without the Mad Stad being there in the first instance.

Royalshow makes an exceelnt comment regarding Arsenal's lighting rigs. SUrely the cost isn't that prohibitive or is it?

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?

[Sun Tzu]

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?

Last season we borrowed the lights from the Millenium Stadium - they have a full set . Again, purely as I understand it, they aren't cheap to buy or run but you would think that they are the sort of thing we should aspire to have to make the share work as well as possible.

I think you are spot on when you say the objective must be to make sure both sports have the best conditions possible - rather than the knee jerk 'kick out the irish' which arises in some quarters.

By the way, nice to have a sensible and well tempered discussion on the topic ! We even seem to be reaching an agreement !!

[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.

[Terminal Boardom]

Love to see either an olympic sized ice rink, or olympic sized swimming pool, or an indoor athletics track , just something really.

What you are proposing is about 12 years too late. This is the sort of forward thinking that was required at the time that the mad stad was being planned. It would also follow a more traditional "Sportspark" concept favoured on the continent. The closest that we have to such an ideal is Sixfields in Northampton. The biggest stumbling block, however, would have been that SJM would refuse to subsidise such an ideal.

The idea of a multi functional indoor sports arena? As you suggest, lose the dome and the nonsense behind it and you may just have the space available. Question is, who is going to fund it let alone use it?

[The 17 Bus]

There was a proposal for a new pool in Reading, part of Chatham Place i believe, funding for many such schemes comes from Government, and Lottery as well.

It is never too late, if the will and desire are there.

All too late for 2012 though, which is a shame, with a bit of thought they could add another hotel to it as well, there seems to be demand for as many of those as can be built.

The Madejski Coppell Millenium hotel

[West Stand Man]

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.

Plymouth has the 'advantage' in marketing terms, of being miles from any other venue. The problem for us is that any big star who is looking for an outdoor venue has a wide range of possibilities in pretty close proximity (including Twickenham and Wembley which are much bigger). That doesn't mean it couldn't happen, but the package that RFC offer has to be pretty good to compete.

[Sun Tzu]

I'd agree that a good multisports complex would be a superb addition - the Dome is used a lot and moving it out to the training ground would probably curtail the usage of it but no reason why something bigger couldn't include the facilities offered by the Dome and more besides. Wigan have a sports park next to their ground and IIRC several other grounds do too (Doncaster ?)

As for hotels, JM already owns two within spitting distance of the ground so not sure adding a third would work. With the new Hilton opening just across the road and plans for another on the speedway site I'd think they would need a lot more of Green park to be let before they added more rooms.

[The 17 Bus]

The dome is just a giant polytunel so would be easy to move, i would go further, second level on half the car park, then there would be loads of room for more facilities.

Now just need to win the Euromillions, for about 5 weeks in a row!!

[Sun Tzu]

The dome is just a giant polytunel so would be easy to move,

Apart from the playing surface of course !

The Dome was supplied by a Canadian company IIRC and they had to send a crew over to install it

i would go further, second level on half the car park, then there would be loads of room for more facilities.

Just using the area of the Dome and the field behind should give you plenty of space for a sports hall, bowling or whatever. Stick extra car parking underneath. Leave the current parking area as is - if you build on it then where do all the users of the facility park and how do you deal with St Paddys and the marathon ?

[West Stand Man]

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?

But some of them are at real risk of going broke. And I wonder how many would love to have a nearby rugby club that they could groundshare with? The fact is that there aren't many top rugby clubs to go around.

I'll bet that Southampton are wishing they had the additional income stream right now.

[Sun Tzu]

You get bizarre situations like at Leicester where you have the Walkers and Welford Rd within spitting distance of each other. The Walkers is the perfect size for Tigers, whereas their own ground is too small. Yet they couldn't agree a way of sharing and building one top notch stadium. Part of the issue was primacy of tenure - but that should have been resolvable.
I can understand to some extent Liverpool and Everton fans not wanting to share a ground (even then if Milan and Inter can do it....) but the Leicester situation is just stupid IMHO.