Long Kesh Park takes another step forward

[Evil Genius]

Nobody's doubting that the DUP will try and get an Orangedome built instead of building a stadium that accommodates the much better attended sport of gaelic football.

Wrong. Formerly, in so far as the DUP was ever interested in sport (they weren't, and still aren't, btw, unless you count marching up and down  ), they would no doubt have tried to get an "Orangedome", as you charmingly put it, built, at the same time as neglecting the GAA. But times have changed and under the present dispensation, they understand full well that unless they promise to "divide the sweeties up" evenly, then the "Teacher" (Westminster) won't allow them to be in charge of the tuck shop (Stormont).

Or did you fail to notice Robinson's acknowledgement that: "No more is it sensible to say that if the Maze was not to go ahead that we would do nothing with football, rugby and GAA facilities elsewhere."

The big square they have yet to circle is how they can do this without having to pick up the tab for the GAA building a new stadium of adequate capacity for themselves.

Wrong. The square which couldn't be circled (actually, don't you mean "circle that couldn't be squared"?) is that the differing requirements of the three codes as regards ideal location, capacity and design could not all be facilitated on the one site. GAA require rural, mixed standing/seating, 40k and a huge pitch, whereas soccer requires city, all seated, 25k and a smaller pitch. (In so far as rugby is bothered - and it isn't - its requirements are much closer to soccer's).

In the end, the only way this could be resolved by a single venue such as the Maze, would have been by throwing unconscionable amounts of money at building it and then sustaining potentially huge losses in the running of it: a "White Elephant", if ever there was one.

Much better to recognise, as is done in other places where they have sports with similarly conflicting needs (e.g. Australia with RL/Soccer and Rules/Cricket, or USA with American Football/Soccer and Baseball), that separate, purpose-built stadia are not only "better" for all, but also work out economically more viable in the long run.

[Evil Genius]

Whilst "the usual suspects" are (predictably) rushing to shoot the messenger, McDonald's article appears to be corroborated by Robinson himself by this latest pronouncement on the (decidely pro-Maze) BBC:

Where is it "corroborated"? I think it's obvious there that Robinson knows he can't do anything. Nowhere does it say that anything will happen to the Maze/Long Kesh site because he knows that (i) the Assembly does not own the site and (ii) he needs SF support to do anything with the site.

He says existing stadiums will be improved but does not mention to what extent or where the money comes from because of (i) the Assembly does not own the site and (ii) he needs SF support to do anything with the site. Any improvements will have to come from the existing budget, which is all accounted for in the foreseeable future.

Time to hit the road lads. 

"Where is it corroborated?" If you read McDonald's report, the key points are all alluded to by Robinson, albeit that the latter is rather more circumspect (presumably due to political considerations).

McD: "The concept of a multi-sports stadium has also been dropped along with the Maze project. Instead, the soccer authorities are looking at a number of projects in Belfast for a 25,000 capacity football-only ground to replace Windsor Park as the home of the national team. Rugby will remain at a refurbished, larger capacity Ravenhill, while the Gaelic Athletic Association will receive millions to improve facilities at Casement Park in West Belfast"

PR: "No more is it sensible to say that if the Maze was not to go ahead that we would do nothing with football, rugby and GAA facilities elsewhere."

AND

McD: "Robinson is understood to be planning to offer the site as the new home of the Royal Ulster Agricultural Society's annual show.
A leisure and retail complex will also be proposed at the former prison, including an all-purpose motorcycle racetrack, DUP sources said"

PR: "I don't think it is sufficient to say that if the Maze was not to proceed that we would walk away and do nothing with it," he said.

Unless something major arises to cause him to think again (and Robinson is normally too cute to speak before getting all "his ducks in a row"), it seems clear that Robinson has decided to pull the plug on the Maze Stadium.

Which means the only question is whether he has the political nous to replace it with alternative arrangements suitbale to all parties. On which point, I suspect he will hope to satisfy them all as follows.

For the three sports, soccer will get a Belfast stadium of around 25k- either new, or a refurbished Windsor. The GAA will get "millions" (per McDonald) for themselves - possibly to upgrade Casement (also as per McD). Rugby will get a token, since they've already done OK out of public money to satisfy their needs (and besides, it actually doesn't have that many supporters, either terrace or armchair)

As for the political parties, SF will end up getting their Museum and Conflict Transformation Centre at the Maze, which in truth, is all they're really worried about. As an "attraction", this will be "enhanced" by relocating the RUAS and building a motor sports track etc. Meanwhile, the DUP will seek to get the "credit" amongst their own support-base, of serving the needs of soccer (and rugby), as well as saving millions of taxpayers' hard-earned. And if the DUP and SF are sorted, the UUP, SDLP and Alliance etc will just have to fall into line.

As for the Governments, Stormont will be happy to have saved millions - whether it is all reallocated elsewhere in NI, or not. And Westminster has long since lost interest, but no dobt will be relieved to have avoided another Millennium Dome fiasco. Meanwhile, Dublin has much better concerns of its own to wrry about, without getting tied down here.

It's called "Politics", memorably defined by Harold Wilson as "The Art of the Possible", and it's looking as though Robinson considers he can bring this one off, somewhere along the lines in McDonald's report.

If so, whilst I've never liked the man (and still don't), then I'll take my hat off to him over this one.        

[snatter]

unless they promise to "divide the sweeties up" evenly, then the "Teacher" (Westminster) won't allow them to be in charge of the tuck shop (Stormont).

GAA require rural, mixed standing/seating, 40k and a huge pitch, whereas soccer requires city, all seated, 25k and a smaller pitch. (In so far as rugby is bothered - and it isn't - its requirements are much closer to soccer's).

No way - an equal carving of the pie isn't on.
Our need, as you only half correctly describe below, is for a 40k stadium.

You conceed that the GAA need a 40k capacity, but then falsely claim that we NEED to have a mixed seating/standing capacity.
The latter claim is a bald lie - we have no such NEED to force fans to stand.

There is no GAA rule, or biological predisposition that requires GAA fans to stand.

If separate stadia are to be publicy funded, I would expect all fans to have the same level of compfort, namely
1. a seat
2. a roof
3. uninterruptted sightlines to the pitch.

To achieve this, it is clear that the GAA stadium will require funding well in excess of the smaller capacity Orangedome.

And before you come up with your whatabouttery, the mixed seating/standing element of the Maze was merely a compromise on our part to give us our required capacity, whilst at the same time giving you a maximum seated capacity that you had some chance of filling.

Oh, and the Robinson / McDonald spin doctors obviously haven't looked at google maps recently.
If they had, they would see that Casement is not a big enough site to accommodate a 40k stadium that, by your own admission, the GAA require.

Its hemmed in by housing on three sides, and a road on the other.

Have a gander if you like:

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=owenvarragh+park&sll=54.573169,-5.984652&sspn=0.005834,0.014591&ie=UTF8&ll=54.573256,-5.983665&spn=0.002917,0.007296&t=h&z=17

[SammyG]

You conceed that the GAA need a 40k capacity, but then falsely claim that we NEED to have a mixed seating/standing capacity.

Ignoring all your usual sectarian rantings, just a quick one on that specific point. There are no plans for a 40K stadium, the Maze is planned at 35K and the Belfast options range from 20-30K. So if you're adamant that the GAA need 40K then they'll have to build their own.

[snatter]

You conceed that the GAA need a 40k capacity, but then falsely claim that we NEED to have a mixed seating/standing capacity.

Ignoring all your usual sectarian rantings, just a quick one on that specific point. There are no plans for a 40K stadium, the Maze is planned at 35K and the Belfast options range from 20-30K. So if you're adamant that the GAA need 40K then they'll have to build their own.

Hi Sammy.

POINT 1:

RE The Maze Stadium:

In the interests of correctness, you are most welcome to refer to the following link:

See http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=maze+stadium+42000+capacity&btnG=Search&meta=

and then pick out any link you like.
If you disagree, you can contact all the publisheres concerned.
You'll be a long time writing.


POINT 2:

Even in the unlikley event of the whole world being wrong and you being correct about a non existent 42k/35k capacity at the Maze, as Evil Genius has already conceeded, the GAA still have a need for a 40k capacity in any new publicly funded stadium.

That was the discussion myself and EG were having - we didn't even mention what the capacity of the MAze was.
We were discussing the capacity the GAA requires for any new publicly funded stadium.
Comprendez?

I have no idea why you made teh interjection you did - its not remotely relevant.
Maybe you don't understand the debate, or maybe you are just trying to obfuscate?

Moving on, I stand by my points that, in any carve up of funding for separate stadia, it is vitally important that allocation is by need, and that all fans get treated equitably.

My metrics for all fans being treated tot he same level of compfort would be
1. a seat
2. a roof
3. uninterruptted sightlines to the pitch.

[Evil Genius]

You conceed that the GAA need a 40k capacity, but then falsely claim that we NEED to have a mixed seating/standing capacity.
The latter claim is a bald lie - we have no such NEED to force fans to stand.

There is no GAA rule, or biological predisposition that requires GAA fans to stand.

If separate stadia are to be publicy funded, I would expect all fans to have the same level of compfort, namely
1. a seat
2. a roof
3. uninterruptted sightlines to the pitch.

To achieve this, it is clear that the GAA stadium will require funding well in excess of the smaller capacity Orangedome.

And before you come up with your whatabouttery, the mixed seating/standing element of the Maze was merely a compromise on our part to give us our required capacity, whilst at the same time giving you a maximum seated capacity that you had some chance of filling.

The original Maze Stadium proposal, after the GAA had declined to consider any Belfast location, was for 28,000. The GAA declined to accept this, and demanded a bigger capacity, even though this inevitably was going to cost tens of millions of extra to build and severely affect the financial viability of the project.

Fair enough, the Government acquiesced, stumped up the extra cash and proposed a 42k capacity - 35k seated and  7k standing, all with perfect sightlines and under cover. And despite all your protests and cries of "foul", "discrimination" etc, this compromise was acceptyed by your own organisation, the GAA.

Which doesn't surprise me at all, since a mix of seating and standing allows for a mix of ticket pricing i.e. children, students, unemployed etc can easier afford one of the (cheaper) 7k standing places than the (dearer) 3.5k seats, which is the maximum could be fitted into the same space. Further, though perhaps it doesn't apply to GAA the same as it does soccer(?), a standing section can contribute to a better atmosphere, if for no other reason that mates etc can choose to stand together in a way not usually feasible in all-seater stadia. Indeed, this is why a significant section of soccer fans wish that (safe) standing was now allowed for big matches, except that FIFA/UEFA will not allow it.

Anyhow, isn't there still a standing section on Croke Park? Or don't you find that "offensive"? 

[snatter]

You conceed that the GAA need a 40k capacity, but then falsely claim that we NEED to have a mixed seating/standing capacity.
The latter claim is a bald lie - we have no such NEED to force fans to stand.

There is no GAA rule, or biological predisposition that requires GAA fans to stand.

If separate stadia are to be publicy funded, I would expect all fans to have the same level of compfort, namely
1. a seat
2. a roof
3. uninterruptted sightlines to the pitch.

To achieve this, it is clear that the GAA stadium will require funding well in excess of the smaller capacity Orangedome.

And before you come up with your whatabouttery, the mixed seating/standing element of the Maze was merely a compromise on our part to give us our required capacity, whilst at the same time giving you a maximum seated capacity that you had some chance of filling.

The original Maze Stadium proposal, after the GAA had declined to consider any Belfast location, was for 28,000. The GAA declined to accept this, and demanded a bigger capacity, even though this inevitably was going to cost tens of millions of extra to build and severely affect the financial viability of the project.

Fair enough, the Government acquiesced, stumped up the extra cash and proposed a 42k capacity - 35k seated and  7k standing, all with perfect sightlines and under cover. And despite all your protests and cries of "foul", "discrimination" etc, this compromise was acceptyed by your own organisation, the GAA.

Which doesn't surprise me at all, since a mix of seating and standing allows for a mix of ticket pricing i.e. children, students, unemployed etc can easier afford one of the (cheaper) 7k standing places than the (dearer) 3.5k seats, which is the maximum could be fitted into the same space. Further, though perhaps it doesn't apply to GAA the same as it does soccer(?), a standing section can contribute to a better atmosphere, if for no other reason that mates etc can choose to stand together in a way not usually feasible in all-seater stadia. Indeed, this is why a significant section of soccer fans wish that (safe) standing was now allowed for big matches, except that FIFA/UEFA will not allow it.

Anyhow, isn't there still a standing section on Croke Park? Or don't you find that "offensive"? 

You're either missing the point I'm making, or doing a Sammy-esque obfuscation attempt.

I'm not on an anti-standing crusade.

I'm merely pointing out that if you guys get an all seated stadium built for your required capacity, it is only fair and equal treatment that we get the same.

The 12k standing capacity at the Maze was a gracious compromise put forward by the GAA, in a genuine attempt to make it easier for the IRFU and particularly IFA to accept the higher 35/42k capacity.

If the GAA were the sole occupants of any new stadium then we wouldn't have to prersuade other sports bodies.

The key point (and it is very simple) is that if the public are subsidising our new stadium and your new stadium, then it is only right and fair that both sets of fans are accomodated in an equal manner.

If your stadium
   is all seater
   is fully covered
   has uninterrupted views
   meets your capacity needs

Then our stadium should
   be all seater
   be fully covered
   have uninterrupted views
   meet our capacity needs

After all, we pay our taxes too.

[Evil Genius]

You're either missing the point I'm making, or doing a Sammy-esque obfuscation attempt.

I'm not on an anti-standing crusade.

I'm merely pointing out that if you guys get an all seated stadium built for your required capacity, it is only fair and equal treatment that we get the same.

The 12k standing capacity at the Maze was a gracious compromise put forward by the GAA, in a genuine attempt to make it easier for the IRFU and particularly IFA to accept the higher 35/42k capacity.

If the GAA were the sole occupants of any new stadium then we wouldn't have to prersuade other sports bodies.

The key point (and it is very simple) is that if the public are subsidising our new stadium to the same degree as your new stadium, then it is only right and fair that both sets of fans are accomodated in an equal manner.

If your stadium
   is all seater
   is fully covered
   has uninterrupted views

Then our stadium should
   be all seater
   be fully covered
   have uninterrupted views

After all, we pay our taxes too.

Are you saying that all other things being equal, the GAA would prefer all seater stadia to mixed standing/seater stadia? Is it now their stated policy for all major stadium new-buiilds to be all-seater, with a corresponding programme to convert existing major stadia to all-seater as soon as is feasible? And do they ever require any of their matches to be all-seater i.e. close the terraces?

Unless the answer to those questions is "Yes", it seems to me that your "How dare we be required to stand!" pleadings are more a stick with which to beat opponents of the Maze, than a reflection of GAA policy and practice.

[snatter]

The original Maze Stadium proposal, after the GAA had declined to consider any Belfast location, was for 28,000.

Ah, you almost sneaked that one by me.

You of course, know that the truth is that the GAA would have considered all options put to them.

As Danny Murphy has made clear, the GAA merely chose the Maze because it was the best economic option available.

It was closer to GAA heartlands, and it was reasonable to assume that it would attract more crowds on this basis.

He made it clear that
THE GAA HAD NOT REJECTED THE MAZE, RATHER IT HAD EXPRESSED A PREFERENCE FOR THE MAZE.

The Irish News article is printed in full somewhere in here.

[Main Street]

And Howard Wells IFA CEO prefers the Maze.
But some idiot somewhere will say that when he made that declaration that he was doing so in his capacity as volunteer firefighter with the Lisburn Fire Dept.
and not as CEO of the IFA

At least 32,000 seats and 10,000 standing might do for the GAA
But it wont be Casement.
£40m or £50m should bring St. Tiernach's Park up to modern standards.
There is plenty of room there and plenty of scope for improvement.
Armagh Gaelic grounds are being done up now and afair is restricted with housing right on the perimeter.
Healy Park looks neat as it is now.

[snatter]

You're either missing the point I'm making, or doing a Sammy-esque obfuscation attempt.

I'm not on an anti-standing crusade.

I'm merely pointing out that if you guys get an all seated stadium built for your required capacity, it is only fair and equal treatment that we get the same.

The 12k standing capacity at the Maze was a gracious compromise put forward by the GAA, in a genuine attempt to make it easier for the IRFU and particularly IFA to accept the higher 35/42k capacity.

If the GAA were the sole occupants of any new stadium then we wouldn't have to prersuade other sports bodies.

The key point (and it is very simple) is that if the public are subsidising our new stadium to the same degree as your new stadium, then it is only right and fair that both sets of fans are accomodated in an equal manner.

If your stadium
   is all seater
   is fully covered
   has uninterrupted views

Then our stadium should
   be all seater
   be fully covered
   have uninterrupted views

After all, we pay our taxes too.

Are you saying that all other things being equal, the GAA would prefer all seater stadia to mixed standing/seater stadia? Is it now their stated policy for all major stadium new-buiilds to be all-seater, with a corresponding programme to convert existing major stadia to all-seater as soon as is feasible? And do they ever require any of their matches to be all-seater i.e. close the terraces?

Unless the answer to those questions is "Yes", it seems to me that your "How dare we be required to stand!" pleadings are more a stick with which to beat opponents of the Maze, than a reflection of GAA policy and practice.

You're still not getting it.

There is no GAA policy and practice to either insist on, or prohibit standing areas.
There is no policy on it full stop.

My opinion is simply that

If your substantively public funded stadium
  is all seater
  is fully covered
  has uninterrupted views
  meets your capacity needs (25k)

Then our substantively public funded stadium should
  be all seater
  be fully covered
  have uninterrupted views
  meet our capacity needs (40k)

The funding percentages whould be the same.
If your 25k costs 25M, then we should get a minimum of 40M for a 40k stadium.
In fact there's an argument that we should get more, because stadia costs increase logarithmically, not linearlly with capacity.

I suppose it is implicit in the above that a seat is better than standing.
I'd say most people would agree - after all, people are prepared to pay more to get a seat.
Its more comfortable, you can see more, and especially for children is much safer.
This is particularly important given that the GAA's fanbase is heavily family orientated.

I'd say that the GAA fans that would stand would do so because they can't get a seat - Casement's seated capacity is 2500 ffs.
Or some might want to avoid the higher costs.
After all there's not much fun being stuck behind some big heifer from Tyrone who refuses to move, or worse put down his umbrella.

The only argument in favour of standing would be that it can increase capacity.
But in a properly planned new stadium, substantively funded by local/central Govt, there would be no excuse for not building the required capacity to the higher standard.

[Evil Genius]

Oh, and the Robinson / McDonald spin doctors obviously haven't looked at google maps recently.
If they had, they would see that Casement is not a big enough site to accommodate a 40k stadium that, by your own admission, the GAA require.

Its hemmed in by housing on three sides, and a road on the other.

Have a gander if you like:

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=owenvarragh+park&sll=54.573169,-5.984652&sspn=0.005834,0.014591&ie=UTF8&ll=54.573256,-5.983665&spn=0.002917,0.007296&t=h&z=17

If the Maze is binned and Robinson instead offers money to the three Associations to spend as they wish, it is hardly his fault, or the taxpayers, that both Ravenhill and Casement are hemmed in and so restricted in their development potential, or that Windsor is owned by a private club who are "sinking the arm in" over the IFA's attempts to redevelop. Indeed, if he were prescribing where/how the money should be spent, you'd no doubt be complaining about that, too.

In the end, it ought (imo) to be for each Association to decide how and where it spends its money. In which case the GAA could do up Casement to its maximum, and/or do up another stadium or stadia, or even sell Casement and use the proceeds to put with the Government allocation and build a new Stadium in West Belfast/Antrim/Wherever.

Otherwise, if the only way the GAA can achieve their "ideal" stadium is if it is with the pooled contributions of the two other sports's entitlement (i.e. the Maze proposal), then it looks like they are going to be disappointed, since the resulting stadium is going to be a lot less than ideal for them.

Which, in a sense, may be what Robinson is actually saying, albeit that his reasons for considering it less than ideal for two of the sports (proximity to Museum, Conflict Centre etc), plus straight economics, are different to soccer fans' reasons for considering it to be less than ideal (location, size and design).

[his holiness nb]

What if the Dubs play there, where we gonna stand ! ? 

[SammyG]

In the interests of correctness, you are most welcome to refer to the following link:

See http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=maze+stadium+42000+capacity&btnG=Search&meta=

and then pick out any link you like.
If you disagree, you can contact all the publisheres concerned.
You'll be a long time writing.

Make your mind up. You were arguing that the GAA deserve an all seater/all covered/clear sightlines/40K capcity stadium. I point out that this isn't in the plans so you post a link (which agrees with me) and shows a 35K seated capcity with an option for 7K standing.

[Evil Genius]

The original Maze Stadium proposal, after the GAA had declined to consider any Belfast location, was for 28,000.

Ah, you almost sneaked that one by me.

You of course, know that the truth is that the GAA would have considered all options put to them.

As Danny Murphy has made clear, the GAA merely chose the Maze because it was the best economic option available.

It was closer to GAA heartlands, and it was reasonable to assume that it would attract more crowds on this basis.

He made it clear that
THE GAA HAD NOT REJECTED THE MAZE, RATHER IT HAD EXPRESSED A PREFERENCE FOR THE MAZE.

The Irish News article is printed in full somewhere in here.

We're clearly never going to agree on whether the GAA "vetoed" Belfast or not, so why don't we just leave it at that, then? In the meantime, perhaps you can address the question I put to you in Post #1061 (all seater etc)?