'Go build a stadium': England rugby boss snubs All Blacks plea over Twickenham

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

A national stadium in Auckland hosting every test wouldn't work for the NZRU from an internal politics pov. Financially I doubt the prices would be sustained if your are rely on basically the same pool of Aucklanders to make up that 60k 5 times a year rather than the current 48k 2 times a year, scarcity value and all that.

NZ basically had a chance just 10 years ago to build a 60k stadium in Auckand for the 2011 World Cup, consensus was it would be a white elephant so went with 48k upgrade with temporary seats. NZ just isn't a big sports attending country.

On the direct ownership of stadiums - Rugby union in NZ has gone the opposite way. The major grounds all used to be owned by the provincial Union of that city, or a trust of both the local rugby union and cricket association (Eden Park still has this structure, all the others are now municipal owned)

Question don't NZlanders travel? even to see the AB's?

 

[McTallshort]

Don't see what the fuss is about.

If you want an out of calendar game the AB's want a certain % of takings for that, if England don't want to pay it then fine. lets all move on and not worry about the game. Not a big deal at the end of the day.

As for the comment about NZ players playing in the NH, no dramas either, they are simply offered a **** load of money and choose to accept, nothing us NZ fans should be getting upset about.

Really see this as a non issue.

I have to agree with this, if this was a game in the regular window and NZ were demanding 25% then rightly the RFU should tell them to shove it but this is outside the international window so I really think the NZRFU have a point, why should they risk their players on a match that shouldn't really take place for nothing?

Anything outside the agreed windows is always going to be a pain and we should avoid it like the plague as it just causes problems like this. Seem to remember a problem with George North playing a game outside the window and Saints getting fined for it.

We should either stick to the window or change it. If the RFU or anyone else want to milk things outside the window then they shouldn't expect to get it for free.

 

[smartcooky]

Question don't NZlanders travel? even to see the AB's?

Not really. Here are a couple of things that might help you to appreciate how things differ for us compared with where you are

England (50,000 sq miles) is about the same size as the North Island (44,000 sq miles).

England test matches are almost always at Twickenham. Anyone in living in England is no more than a 6 hour drive or 3 hour train trip from London (based on Newcastle to London). Matches are usually on Saturday afternoon, so if I am an England fan living in Newcastle (furthest city from London), I can catch the train to London mid morning, a couple of train swaps, walk to the game. After the game, catch the return train and be home about 8pm in time to watch the replay on TV - £34 return (NZ$60)

For a New Zealand Test match at Eden Park; if I live in Invercargill (furthest city from Auckland)

Cheapest Option
- 28 hour bus journey to Picton - $58
- 3½ hour ferry trip to Wellington - $27
- 11½ hour train journey to Auckland - $28
- Total return travel time and cost - 86 hours (+ waiting time at Picton and Wellington) - NZ$226 (£127)

For a Saturday night test, I would have to take Thursday, Friday and Monday off work.

Quickest Option
- 3½ hour flight with a 1hr stop in Christchurch or Wellington - NZ$412 (£231)
(there is a cheaper flight on Friday night, but then I would need to pay for accommodation)

 

[nickdnz]

Possibly WR organised things this way after we played them six times 2012-2014.


Mind you - after all the blood and thunder is done - I don't know how the logistics and realities of it would work, but its not the worst advice the All Blacks have ever had. Going by wiki, if every game this year had been played in Eden Park, that's another 55k tickets sold. If NZ had a 60k seater stadium which they were always filling, that's another 120k tickets on top of that. We're talking about 2m a year, probably a little under, that they could be getting, not counting extra food/in stadium sponsorship sales. Now I don't know how much a 60k seater stadium in Auckland would cost and how much it would bite for NZ to pretty much only ever play in Auckland again but it looks appealing.

That said, I'm gonna guess the NZRFU have considered that one a couple of times what with it being, like, you know, their job. They probably even had fancy coloured pie charts when they did it! So I'm guessing it's a non-goer for the moment for whatever reason.
..

The NZ public would never stand for the All Blacks just playing at Eden Park. The reality is that stadium funding has to be spread around the country. The RFU can afford Twikenham - but the NZRU have to afford every pro team in the country and every stadium. As someone who pays fees for playing rugby, being told I need to drive 8 hours to watch an All Blacks game would be ridiculous. Imagine if you're from Southland.

It's for this reason occasionally you get All Blacks games in places like Nelson or New Plymouth. The All Blacks are a national entity, and All Blacks games genuinely effect local economies. Having games only in Auckland would see a very, very bad backlash by the NZ public.


So logistically it doesn't work. To add to that, Eden Park is 60,000 (at full capacity) but really only sells out for All Blacks tests - so that's a lot of resources spent to add new seats which would almost never get used.

 

[Peat]

So when Wiki tells me the All Blacks are getting crowds of 40,000 at Eden Park, its lying?

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

What about a North island stadium and a South Island stadium.

Eden being the north one and maybe build a 50k stadium on the South Island maybe in Christchurch or Dunedin.

Or is that not feasible either?

£34 Newcastle to Twickenham is a slight exaggeration though isn't it for a weekend?

 

[McTallshort]

What about a North island stadium and a South Island stadium.

Eden being the north one and maybe build a 50k stadium on the South Island maybe in Christchurch or Dunedin.

Or is that not feasible either?

£34 Newcastle to Twickenham is a slight exaggeration though isn't it for a weekend?[/QUOTE]

Depends if you can book a few months in advance but yes its closer to a ton and you wouldn't be getting back for 8pm...

 

[nickdnz]

So when Wiki tells me the All Blacks are getting crowds of 40,000 at Eden Park, its lying?

Well even Wikipedia lists Eden Park as 50,000. At capacity (which includes all additional seating) it is just over 60,000. For the RWC final in 2011 it was at 61,000.

What about a North island stadium and a South Island stadium.

Eden being the north one and maybe build a 50k stadium on the South Island maybe in Christchurch or Dunedin.

Or is that not feasible either?

Again, no. For the reasons I have already listed. I wouldn't travel 8 hours to watch an All Blacks game. And as a Wellingtonian I'd be pretty outraged that our 35,000 seat stadium never got an All Blacks game, despite my funding going towards the All Blacks. You'd cut a huge section of the population off watching the All Blacks and it would harm the local economy.

Dunedin just got a new indoor stadium with a 32,000 or so capacity. Again, any larger would be a bit pointless, Dunedin has a population of around 125,000. You give them a 50,000 seat stadium then 2/5th of the population have to be at rugby events for them to hit capacity. Christchurch had a stadium which was just extended to 40,000 people, then it was hit by a big ****-off earthquake. But again, if you're from Dunedin and just spend a tonne of money paying for Forsyth Bar, you'd be pretty damn furious not getting any All Blacks tests. I am sure at some point Christchurch will build a larger stadium again, but I think right now they're a bit more focused on rebuilding the city centre..

 

[Peat]

I was going by the attendances given on Wiki for matches this year, not the capacity given by Wiki for the venue.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

So NZ is in a lose lose situation in its own infrastructure?

It can't play just at bigger sized stadiums (50,000+) all the time as it will **** off the supporters but it can't earn its full potential due to not having being able to hold all the games at said stadium?

So rod for its own back kind of thing.

 

[nickdnz]

So NZ is in a lose lose situation in its own infrastructure?

It can't play just at bigger sized stadiums (50,000+) all the time as it will **** off the supporters but it can't earn its full potential due to not having being able to hold all the games at said stadium?

So rod for its own back kind of thing.

Well it's also really a victim of its own geography and population. Getting 80,000 people to sell out Twikenham, in a city with 8.5 million and pretty convenient transport system to the rest of the country with 55 million- is always going to be an easier prospect than consistantly selling out a 60,000 seat stadium in a city with 1.4 million - that is a very difficult prospect for over half the population getting to without having to book accommodation, expensive flights etc.

Add to that, they'd burn bridges with half the country, would probably have to lower prices as Aucklanders would be less likely paying the same for 6 games a year as they currently do for 1 or 2...etc etc etc

 

[smartcooky]

So NZ is in a lose lose situation in its own infrastructure?

It can't play just at bigger sized stadiums (50,000+) all the time as it will **** off the supporters but it can't earn its full potential due to not having being able to hold all the games at said stadium?

So rod for its own back kind of thing.

Its the geology that is the problem, not infrastructure. We have mountain ranges to cross, while England is essentially flat; your highest "mountain" in England is Scafell Pike at about 3,200 feet, that would be a mere foothill here. Its one of the first things I noticed when I visited there years ago... your horizon IS your horizon!

And before someone suggests building tunnels through the mountains, I will simply say "earthquakes and fault lines".

Our infrastructure is fine within the constraints placed on us by the geology of the country; it is what it is.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

If you want to see flat look at the Netherlands, England has glorious rolling landscape.

 

[smartcooky]

£34 Newcastle to Twickenham is a slight exaggeration though isn't it for a weekend?

I went through the booking procedure online as a test to see what I would be charged (and didn't complete it of course). I just picked a random time for that cheapest single standard fare.

Just now I tried for 9:00 am on a Saturday with a 6pm return - £42.25 with a Railcard was the cheapest. Still very cheap

- - - Updated - - -

If you want to see flat look at the Netherlands, England has glorious rolling landscape.

Yes I know. When I drove from Manchester to Hull with an English friend of mine a few years ago, he said that we would be driving over the "Pennine Hills". Late in the journey I asked when we were going to drive over the Pennines?

"Oh, you already drove over them about half an hour ago"

PS: I'll never forget my first look at Lincoln Cathedral when I was on my way to RAF Scampton for the Red Arrows the 25th anniversary Airshow. I could see the top of it through the binoculars from 15 miles!

 

[Immenso]

NZRU arent in the business of building and operating stadiums. So that isn't going to happen. Only the RFU and SRU currently can do this sucesfully. This model almost bankrupted the Weslh rugby union. The IRFU bailed on this model when upgrading Lansdowne.


NZ, as a nation, building a big national stadium, isn't going to happen. NZ has been historically a distributed nation with its centrally located capital never having been the nations largest city. The concentration of the population in Auckland is quite a recent phenomenon, so maybe give it another 20 odd years and the pop is 2m then perhaps 'never' no longer applies (still problem that Auckland isn't central)

NZ almost built a quasi-national stadium of 60k in Auckland for 2011 but this didn't happen due to the differing opinions and interests of the Auckland rugby union, cricket association, trust board, municipality, and national govt. (the Auckland cricket association are on a very good wicket being basically 50% owners of a stadium they now generate bugger all revenue for that just got a $200m of free govt grant)

The other historical reason for the differences in the models of the SH unions compared to NH unions is from the amateur days the SH hosted 3 or 4 test series tours by the single visitor while NH hosted one-off tests each year against different opponents.

- - - Updated - - -

Btw, good to see a sensible discussion has managed to break through the first page of unhinged rantings.

- - - Updated - - -

The FFR are about to follow the RFU model and sink a kazillion euros into an 80k stadium on the outskirts of Paris.

I'm really interested to see how this pans out. I understand they don't like their financial terms they get from the FFF dominated SdF.

Currently France play 4 of their 6 home tests in Paris. For this to be financially viable it means 100% (6 out of 6, plus maybe they will need to also go down the out of window rabbit hole). No more Marseille, Toulouse, Bordeaux heartland tests for France after this.

Brand new 50k stadiums for euro 16 built in Lyon, Bordeaux, Nates, Nice. Won't be taking games here.

Will this alienate them from their heartland? Or is the club tribalism so strong down there they don't care, and already feel alienated?

 

[Immenso]

One last thing.

The whole reason that out of window tests exist is because the WRU got in financial difficulty building their big national stadium and needed the revenue.

The 75/25 % split originated with this about a decade ago.

This is not some long tradition being bucked. And it's cause (a big national stadium and its debt) is being spruiked as being 'the solution'.

- - - Updated - - -

One final, final thing.

The RFU are about to embark on another upgrade of Twicksnham. The oldest part of what is now an excellent stadium is just 25 years.

Why? Seems a never ending self feeding cycle.

Is the RFU run for the Twickenham debenture holders? Why not divert that money into grass roots? Or elite rugby? Get it into schools?

Imagine how good England would be if they ran rugby on the SH model rather than being shackled to national HQ .....

- - - Updated - - -

Question don't NZlanders travel? even to see the AB's?

Fair point. Not much now, as they don't need to. But maybe that behaviour would change.
Travel dies occur from the regions closest to the main centre (eg a day trip).

Had a friend who acciden bought tickets to Auckland Wales test instead of Wellingtin. He sold them online rather than travel.

- - - Updated - - -

Immenso

You may not be aware that Canterbury never owned Jade/AMI stadium. That was owned by the Victory Park Board

The Victory Park trust was a mirror of the Eden trust. 50/50 split ownership between Cantebury rugby unions and cricket associations.

 

[The Jones Boy]

Don't see what the fuss is about.

If you want an out of calendar game the AB's want a certain % of takings for that, if England don't want to pay it then fine. lets all move on and not worry about the game. Not a big deal at the end of the day.

As for the comment about NZ players playing in the NH, no dramas either, they are simply offered a **** load of money and choose to accept, nothing us NZ fans should be getting upset about.

Really see this as a non issue.

Agreed.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

The RFU are about to embark on another upgrade of Twicksnham. The oldest part of what is now an excellent stadium is just 25 years

Twickenham is a big modern cash cow. It is not excellent if you're remotely interested in actually seeing what's going on on the pitch without binoculars and generally has the atmosphere of a corpse. I used to love going there but now seldom bother. SDF is just as bad, but at least the Principality designers actually gave some thought to spectators. The best ground I have ever seen an international at was the Parc des Princes - only 50,000, but a genuine atmosphere and everyone was reasonably close to the action. As ever it's all to do with money.

 

[smartcooky]

The whole reason that out of window tests exist is because the WRU got in financial difficulty building their big national stadium and needed the revenue.

The 75/25 % split originated with this about a decade ago.

This is not some long tradition being bucked. And it's cause (a big national stadium and its debt) is being spruiked as being 'the solution'.

THIS!

 

[Immenso]

Twickenham is a big modern cash cow. It is not excellent if you're remotely interested in actually seeing what's going on on the pitch without binoculars and generally has the atmosphere of a corpse. I used to love going there but now seldom bother. SDF is just as bad, but at least the Principality designers actually gave some thought to spectators. The best ground I have ever seen an international at was the Parc des Princes - only 50,000, but a genuine atmosphere and everyone was reasonably close to the action. As ever it's all to do with money.

I think u have very high standards if you think a rectangular rugby specific stadium is not excellent.
SdF I'd agree if you have a cheap seat.

The next investment the RFU make in Twickenham isn't going to change that either. Structurally the stadium is as close as you can get 80,000 people. As for the atmosphere - well, keeping all games at an expensive HQ means debenture holders, expensive tickets, corporate jollies. That just entrenches the lack of atmosphere.

This is all relative of course, NZ fans wouldn't consider a Twickenham crowd lacking in atmosphere compared to ours. Although I've not actually been to twickers for a test - but seems fine on tv.