TOPIC:

anchorman wrote: I would think that the WACA be far better for the GF than Subi as Subi is too big, and looks vacant GF day.I would have thought that any ground other than Subi would be good for all the finals.Though guess the sponsors and corporate bodies have to have the comfort of private boxes and the such.Far be it for them to brave it like the plebs.
I think they are redeveloping the area a round the WACA as well with apartments so just a chance that they may drag a few more people in to watch.

What is the capacity of the WACA now A/man?

jardine wrote: the WACA is exactly the same length as the SCG (149 metres) and 3 metres wider.

the WACA also is only 7 metres shorter than the GABBA.

given afl football is played at these venues based on these sizes, wafl could definently still be played there, despite the reduction in size. it might be exciting watching players take pot-shots from the centre square like they do at the SCG

also, the WACA is 11 metres wider than Etihad in melbourne.

So we want to continue to prostitute our competition further. Perhaps we should start at the beginning of the season to determine which teams will play in the finals.

anchorman wrote: I would think that the WACA be far better for the GF than Subi as Subi is too big, and looks vacant GF day.I would have thought that any ground other than Subi would be good for all the finals.Though guess the sponsors and corporate bodies have to have the comfort of private boxes and the such.Far be it for them to brave it like the plebs.
I think they are redeveloping the area a round the WACA as well with apartments so just a chance that they may drag a few more people in to watch.

Just showing your complete & utter lack of knowledge of the WAFL yet again I see!
The WACA can now only accomodate about 17,000!
My team Swans have drawn nearly 25,000 to recent GF's vs Claremont & Subi so you would expect at least 30,000 if we ever played WP, EP or P in a GF same goes for if WP played EP or SF vs EF played in a GF!
So you would then turn away more than 20,000 WAFL supporters to a GF taking into account WACA members who have privilege seating!
Absurd

i think their is this element of hysteria with some wafl issues. some of it justified but if the WACA was looked at for football, i cant see it being the end of the world.

yes the ground is smaller, but its overall size is bigger than the SCG and afl footy is played there. according to the website i checked the capacity is currently 23000 give or take.

the reality is at the rate things are going, for example in 10 years time we will have a 60,000 seat stadium at burswood, with a wafl grand final crowd of 15,000 max. unless something changes the publics mindset.

prepare for the end of subi oval as a grand final option because it wont be around that long. there is no way that ground will just sit there doing nothing. its mega prime real estate and the ants will be all over it. like Richmond Raceway land ended up. i think people need to just take a breath and not over-react to this. it was Perths home ground originally so it does have a steep wafl history.

I agree with jardine, I see nothing wrong at all with using the WACA for WAFL footy, as you say jardine, forget Subi it's gone in less than a decade, the WACA presents a far better more intimate venue for smaller WAFL crowds, the only other option would be Leederville which is just not developed enough at this stage.

Your right WAFL finals GF crowds look at settling around the 15 - 20,000 going forward now with the host clubs and past indicia dont show any marked increase in crowd trends, to say that a WAFL GF will attract 30,000 in years to come in pure fantasy.

If its WAFL dockers v east perth eagles GF every year they will probaly just play it as a curtin raiser to a AFL game in years to come...thats what most footy fans in WA will probably want.

I would much rather have a full small venue then a giant morgue on GF day, imagine a WAFL GF at the new Burswood Stadium 15,000 people in a 60,000 seat stadium, how bad would that be!

Also, I would much rather get back to playing all finals at a set venue, I think the nevelty of the homeground finals has worn off and detracts from the sense of finals occasion.

anchorman wrote: I have no idea how many the WACA hold now but is still a much better option that Subi regardless.
The last ten years has not produced a crowd of over 25,000 at a WAFL G?F.24,638 was the biggest between Claremont and Swans.
WACA would be ideal.

I agree , most WAFL crowds have barley cracked 22,000 in recent years, to hold out on a venue just because of some sort fantasy fixture that might result in a sell out if it ever happens is just nonsense, and even if it does once and a decade - so what! so the games a sell out - big deal! happens all the time at other sporting events.

SD v WP would pull 30k this year

I vaguely remember East Perth's brief tenure at the WACA. Both EP and P were promised they'd be able to generate $200k in marketing rights by playing there but that did not eventuate and watching games there was crap.

A lot of this talk assumes that Subi Oval is history. The WAFC seemed pretty keen to keep it as a 'boutique' ground which would probably be ideal for WAFL finals - or has this idea been dumped?

Personally though I think it should be liquidated and any funds put aside for downsizing Subi poured into Leederville Oval to become the new league HQ. I think getting this ground up to 25,000 capacity would suit the WAFL better into the future and would save money for footy - I just don't see the logic in retaining Subi Oval.

While I understand channel 9's wish to have all televised games at the WACA, empty seats never make good viewing and it will prove counter-productive.

I don't wish to pre-empt anything David, but isn't Subiaco Oval being given the flick when the new Stadium is finished? That was my understanding of it. In 2007 a state government report recommended against the further development of Subiaco Oval, which would be demolished in 2016. I was under the impression Leederville Oval would then become like the centre piece of the Wafl. But then again with the Wafl taking it's last breathes and looking very wonky because of these damned alignments, the thought of pouring money into Leederville Oval probably won't happen. The money from Subiaco Oval maybe to be spent on Perth Oval because of the rugby and soccer, and the WACA for the cricket because the developers have their fingers in the pie too. I think the works at the WACA are due for completion in 2015 aren't they?

i think the last time the wafl had over 30,000 at a grand final was east perth v west perth 2001 which was also a horrible, wet, miserable day. that game would have got over 35000 if the weather wasnt so terrible.

i agree some team match-ups today would push a big attendance. but from 2020 and beyond there will be a decline. and if Subi Oval is gone, forget playing grand finals at burswood. But wafl GFs will be played at Subi until 2016-17 anyway.. after that, the city of Perth does not need 3 major venues like Burswood, the Waca & Subi Oval. either the Waca or Subi has to go and with that in mind the Waca has more going for it on a domestic level.

maybe this channel 9 proposition will see neutral games being played there. with a focus on eastperth and peel games due to their afl connections. which is why the ABCs continued coverage is still the most important piece in this big puzzle. i dont see channel 9 suddenly having an interest in wafl football. it has to be because of this host club thing and channel 9 may see it as a way to keep a foot in the door, albeit at a lower level. that is the angle i see with all of this. thats not necessarily a negative thing. it still gets commercial interest in the wafl and all clubs. it may allow sections of the public to be re-educated on local footy. thats not a bad thing.