Long Kesh Park takes another step forward

[Maguire01]

Doesn't matter if the stadium is for football, rugby, GAA, field hockey, athletics or hare coursing, it will stand or fall on it's merits.

I demand more information on hare coursing stadia. 

[feetofflames]

Dear NI Football afficionados
Does  it take the openminded forward thinkers in the GAA to aspell it out to IFA each time.  Listen folks the GAA and to a lesser extent the rugby have revitalised, and reinvigorated the public interest in Sports here.  Have a bit of sense and at least ride on the crest of our wave.  If ever the GAA could do the IFA a turn it would be to take the NI soccor team and give them a game on Casement, I guarantee that the crowd would be bigger than anything at Windsor in the past 20 years.  We just fcukin love sport, us Gaels but more importantly we can do it better, but we dont want to do it at anyones expense.  As far as Im concerned we have saved the blushes of rugby and soccor in the south, would it not be also charitable to save soccor in the North.  Us gaels will always help out a 'partner'
Yours in sport
A gael in the gale 

[SammyG]

Sammy, you have a vested interest in opposing the Maze/Long Kesh stadium so I expect you to try and ridicule the PWC report,

Correct

even if you haven't managed to do it very successfully on this thread so far.

That's probably because I haven't discussed the PWC figures on this thread (as I repeat for the sixth time)

Now, if (and that's a very big if) the case doesn't stack up when the land is coming for free then it's hardly likely to stack up anywhere else.

You're ignoring several issues, namely the cost of infrastructure (at least £120 million for the Maze and unknown for other sites), the cost of the land at the Maze (how the fcuk can millions of pounds worth of land be deemed free, just to make the figures add up?), the fact that a 20-25K stadium will cost considerably less than a 38K one, the option of upgrading existing facilities etc.

Besides, the GAA have already said that none of the other sites are suitable for our games.

And I repeat again I couldn't care less where the GAA build their stadium, my interest is only in the NI football team (and to a lesser extenet Ulster Rugby)

So what you are left with is the zero sum game of the DUP vetoing the Maze and SF vetoing any other venue.

Firstly the DUP can't veto anything, it will be down to the executive to look at the figures and decide and secondly what grounds would SF have for vetoing a football stadium, provided the figures add up?

You don't get a stadium and we go ahead and plough our own furrow. The only loser I see here is the IFA and their supporters.

Only if you accept your zero-sum blackmail.

[saffron sam2]

Brian feeney in today's Irish news.

Symbolism at heart of DUP stadium turnaround Brian Feeney
By Brian Feeney
12/03/08

The signals that the DUP has got cold feet about a sports stadium at the Maze are evidence of a wider malaise in unionism.

When Peter Robinson finally turns down the plans for the stadium you'll hear lots of talk about 'the business case' and where to find £240 million and 'revenues consequences' and other gobbledegook.

The real reason the DUP will turn down the stadium is symbolism.

It's not just the concerns about a conflict transformation centre in the complex, which will certainly incorporate memorials to republican hunger strikers.

It's also the prospect of sharing the place with the GAA, the fact that the stadium will be used regularly on Sundays, that tricolours will be flown and the Soldier's Song played.

Unionists want what they call a 'national' stadium, though of what nation they can't say, but more importantly one that they own. They can't own one if they have to share it with fenians prancing about in it.

That's why you hear talk now of Windsor Park and the Blanchflower stadium in east Belfast. They know there's no danger of the GAA buying into either venue or of fenians patronising such venues.

Symbolism is why the DUP were delighted to have the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure (DCAL), just as the UUP in 2000 were prepared to hand Sinn Fein health and education rather than let them get their hands on DCAL.

If you've ever thought about it, you may have wondered why the DUP wanted such a department.

After all, the DUP is to culture, arts and leisure what the Netherlands is to mountain climbing.

Well, that isn't strictly true because you can't do mountain-climbing in the Netherlands even if you wanted to. In the case of the DUP they are notoriously agin culture, arts and leisure. Even if they could engage in such pursuits they wouldn't.

You never know what they might lead to.

To paraphrase Doctor Johnson, a DUP minister, "culture is like a dog walking on its hinder legs. It is not done well but you are surprised to find it done at all".

It's an inherent absurdity.

It's reminiscent of the American satirist Tom Lehrer who decided he could no longer perform after Henry Kissinger won the Nobel peace prize in 1973. "That day," Lehrer said, "satire died."

Why were the DUP so keen to get DCAL? Simple.

To stop fenians gaelicising culture, arts and leisure, that's why.

The DUP wants to continue the well-worn unionist pastime of trying to abolish or conceal any manifestation of Irishness.

That's what lies behind the daft nonsense going on in Banbridge and Limavady about saucers and mugs.

There's a simple way for unionists to avoid these silly confrontations and that is for unionists to accept equal prominence for nationalist symbols.

Ideally, somewhere in the shimmering Shangri-La there will be a day when both the union jack and tricolour fly over the town halls in Banbridge and Limavady and at Stormont too.

It won't be any time soon. Unionists refuse to countenance any Irish symbolism full stop, even though in some cases they aren't aware that some of their own cherished symbols are Irish.

If they did accept equal prominence for Irish symbolism there would be no reason to remove unionist kitsch from town halls. It could happily sit alongside Irish kitsch. They won't however, so the result is no symbols of either side are permitted.

Unionists whinge on about republicans removing every unionist article from public buildings, denying unionist identity and so on. Yet no-one can get it into their bone heads that it is precisely because they refuse to recognise the existence of the other side's symbols that they can't have their own.

The agreement that Ian Paisley signed up to prevents them from owning anything exclusively any more, from the Office of First Minister down to a display cabinet in Ballygobackwards town hall.

If they turn down the Maze stadium Sinn Fein will veto any other location. The same principle applies as to saucers.

If they want to call some place their 'national' stadium then they have to recognise there's another legitimate view of the world.

If they won't, then they get nothing.

[saffron sam2]

And the Editoral in the same 'paper'.

Maze investment too shaky a bet
Pro Fide et Patria
Editorial
12/03/08

IF a new stadium was ever to be built at the Maze, it needed the unequivocal support of our main sporting bodies, a range of political parties and, perhaps most importantly, the ordinary ticket-buying supporters.

While the project did not lack ambition, and in other circumstances might even have symbolised the new era which has emerged in Northern Ireland, the consensus which it required has simply failed to materialise.

Sports officials offered a general en-dorsement of the proposals, without ever displaying firm enthusiasm for the wider concepts which were involved.

GAA and rugby followers appeared at best apathetic about the prospect of heading to the new complex, while soccer fans made it abundantly clear that they were fund-amentally opposed to the entire scheme.

The final straw could well have arrived through a split in the DUP, which may have been subject of half-hearted denials but is plainly waiting to make its presence felt.

It remains to be seen whether a different location can be seriously considered or if the upgrading of existing venues is the only real option.

However, investing at least £240 million at the Maze, against a background of growing uncertainties, looks like a gamble which will be very difficult to justify.

[snatter]

Now, if (and that's a very big if) the case doesn't stack up when the land is coming for free then it's hardly likely to stack up anywhere else.

You're ignoring several issues, namely the cost of infrastructure (at least £120 million for the Maze and unknown for other sites), the cost of the land at the Maze (how the fcuk can millions of pounds worth of land be deemed free, just to make the figures add up?), the fact that a 20-25K stadium will cost considerably less than a 38K one, the option of upgrading existing facilities etc.

Sammy, as per the Belfast Telegraph's editorial today, unless you get a site in Belfast for free, the Belfast option can't be cheaper than the Maze.

If BCC try to gift soccer and rugby a site, but not one to the GAA, I can't imagine any self respecting nationalist party backing the proposal.

Besides, the GAA have already said that none of the other sites are suitable for our games.

And I repeat again I couldn't care less where the GAA build their stadium, my interest is only in the NI football team (and to a lesser extenet Ulster Rugby)

So what you are left with is the zero sum game of the DUP vetoing the Maze and SF vetoing any other venue.

Firstly the DUP can't veto anything, it will be down to the executive to look at the figures and decide and secondly what grounds would SF have for vetoing a football stadium, provided the figures add up?

eh?.... I'd imagine that SF would have more than a passing interest in the fair allocation of resources to all sports, not a lop-sided allocation to the lesser supported NI soccer team.
In fact they ahve already shown an interest in the unfair allocation of resources at council level: Sports Council statistics show that out of 662 council-owned pitches; just 59 are set aside for Gaelic games

http://www.ballymoneytimes.co.uk/news/GIVE-GAA-ITS-FAIR-SHARE.1380045.jp

[Donagh]

Firstly the DUP can't veto anything, it will be down to the executive to look at the figures and decide and secondly what grounds would SF have for vetoing a football stadium, provided the figures add up?

You don't get a stadium and we go ahead and plough our own furrow. The only loser I see here is the IFA and their supporters.

Only if you accept your zero-sum blackmail.

The DUP have already taken the decision to veto Long Kesh - I'm sure you must have heard, they're jumping for joy over on OWC - before anyone has analysed the figures. So it's quite obvious that it's not the figures they have a problem with but sharing a stadium with the GAA. Call it blackmail if you like but the DUP can't expect to veto every nationalist request, insulting us as they do it, and then expect to get their pet projects like this and the 11 council model in the RPA.

[his holiness nb]

I reckon Feeney hit the nail on the head there.
Its the symbolism of the Maze and the prospect of sharing with the GAA that they really cant stomach.
All other arguments they have come up with are because of these factors.
Lets be honest, if they were planning a shared stadium in Belfast with a memorial to republicans on site and the other option was a stadium somewhere like the maze, without the history, they would be coming up with arguments against the Belfast site.
Of this I am sure.

[Main Street]

It would be interesting to see the costing for a Belfast soccer stadium

Planning issues
design
land value
Site clearance
Construction
Infrastructure
Water supply and exit
electricity
sewage
parking

All for an anchor tenant Glentoran who will pay some rent
and 3 or 4 soccer  internationals a year.

[snatter]

It would be interesting if the shinners agreed to park the memorial centre idea for a year or two, eg hand the issue over to some commission or somthing.

It could be argued that the shinners are exerting a veto of their own by insisting that the centre get built.

After all, if
1. the UK govt has donated the site
2. the UK govt agrees to fund the stadium
3. all three sports bodies are united in wanting the stadium,

then why shuld the shinners and dup exert any sort of veto over the issue?

[Donagh]

It would be interesting if the shinners agreed to park the memorial centre idea for a year or two, eg hand the issue over to some commission or somthing.

It could be argued that the shinners are exerting a veto of their own by insisting that the centre get built.

After all, if
1. the UK govt has donated the site
2. the UK govt agrees to fund the stadium
3. all three sports bodies are united in wanting the stadium,

then why shuld the shinners and dup exert any sort of veto over the issue?

I really can't understand why you are still persisting with this. The CRC has nothing to do with the DUP vetoing the site. As Fenney has said in the article above, they don't want to share with the GAA e.g. Maurice Morrow and Nigel Dodds comments on the GAA Monday and yesterday. SF said in the Assembly yesterday they would veto the East Belfast venue because of the insulting and triumphalist way the DUP have wielded their veto so far in terms of the Irish Language Act, devolution of P&J and now the Long Kesh stadium. If they insist in playing that game, then the nationalist electorate will expect SF to respond in kind. As I said before, we have no real need for the new stadium but the soccer people have and because of the DUP, they will not get it.

[snatter]

It would be interesting if the shinners agreed to park the memorial centre idea for a year or two, eg hand the issue over to some commission or somthing.

It could be argued that the shinners are exerting a veto of their own by insisting that the centre get built.

After all, if
1. the UK govt has donated the site
2. the UK govt agrees to fund the stadium
3. all three sports bodies are united in wanting the stadium,

then why shuld the shinners and dup exert any sort of veto over the issue?

I really can't understand why you are still persisting with this. The CRC has nothing to do with the DUP vetoing the site. As Fenney has said in the article above, they don't want to share with the GAA e.g. Maurice Morrow and Nigel Dodds comments on the GAA Monday and yesterday. SF said in the Assembly yesterday they would veto the East Belfast venue because of the insulting and triumphalist way the DUP have wielded their veto so far in terms of the Irish Language Act, devolution of P&J and now the Long Kesh stadium. If they insist in playing that game, then the nationalist electorate will expect SF to respond in kind. As I said before, we have no real need for the new stadium but the soccer people have and because of the DUP, they will not get it.

I'd say that just becasue the DUP aren't flexible on this doesn't mean that you have to be as well.
If you show some flexibility, you might find one or two unionists might reconsider.

I don't doubt that for some unionists, the CRC is the real and only obstacle.
Remove it, and you will be seen as having done al you can to facilitate any chance of us using a new maze stadium.

It all seems a bit mad to me that all 3 sports bodies can agree on the stadium - so why not push ahead with it regardless of all the vetos, political noise, posturing, etc.

btw, what did Maurice Morrow and Nigel Dodds say about the GAA?

[feetofflames]

If this stadium is built, within 1 month of it being opened the IIFA will be falling over themselves to give Linfield the birdie and to play GSTQ in it.  Imagine a national stadium in NI where the only anthems ringing out at sporting events are Amhran Na bhfiann and Irelands Call.  If i was a unionist Id be shitting chocolate oranges over that one, and Id be writing no later than tomnorrow to the IFA demanding they move out of the garage they call home and stop underselling my national pride and national team.   
Then again Im a gael in the Gale.

[Evil Genius]

Match 1 was at Croker.
Match 2 (the repplay) was a capacity crowd at Clones.
The combined attendance of both matches was 93000.
Two 42k capacities would give a combined 84000 attendances, which isn't that far from what we got.

In combining the first two match attendances, you are employing bizarre, almost laughable "logic". For Match 1 (Armagh v Tyrone), nearly 20k spectators would be locked out of the Maze. This would be in return for allowing a maximum of an extra 10k specatators at Match 2 (the replay) by playing that at the Maze instead of Clones. Note that it is not certain that Match 2 would have attracted this extra 11k, that the GAA would have had to pay two sets of rent, plus VAT, for the use of the Maze, plus the fact that the 42k fans accommodated in the Maze for Match 1. might have preferred to travel to Croke for a day out.

It is notable that Croekr is now generally unavailable for Ulster matches - especially after we generously allowed soccer and rugby to camp there.
If the same two matches were played now, we would have a forced combined attendance of 64000.
If anything, these two matches underline just how much we could do with the Maze!

It is the GAA's choice to rent Croke out to the IRFU and FAI. They are perfectly entitled to withhold use of the stadium should soccer or rugby matches conflict with their own needs (indeed they have, come to think of it, since ROI are playing a "home" match vs Colombia in London in May). Or are you seriously saying the GAA couldn't find a date for an Ulster Final between Armagh and Tyrone at Croke because of a soccer or rugby match taking priority? 
Anyhow, the present use of Croke by FAI/IRFU is only temporary (2-3 years?). Whereas the Maze will have to last for the next 50-odd years.

Matches 15 & 16 would almost certainly continue to be played in Croker as thye are the AISF and AIF.

And? How does that help your case for the Maze?

The crowds for the remaining 12 matches varied from 10,500 to 32,187 (plus the anomaly of the 3,865 Cavan/Antrim replay), which equals an average of 20,632. Clearly, with 42k GAA places, the Maze would be too big.

Not so, again some of these attendances were constrained by capacity.
I can't recall offhand exactly which ones, but my guess is that a fair few were played at Omagh (capacity back then of 20 something thousand?).

Your logic is again awry. Matches which achieved attendances of 30k+ cannot have been played at Healy Park. Which means, if HP's capacity was 20k+, that Matches 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 were not sold out, even in a small-to-medium sized stadium. Therefore, why would they need 42k for games attracting, say, 18k in a stadium holding greater than that? Which again demonstrates how your figures show that of 16 or 18 major Ulster games p.a., most only require a small-medium venue, but some require a v.large venue (CP), leaving only a handful requiring a medium-large venue like the Maze. And for those, Clones is available.

Have you read my earlier post - the one in which the GAA itself establishes that it does indeed need a 40k + stadium in Ulster?

Did you read within the same post that UCC economists have independently verified the attendance assumptions and costings?

Did you notice that the attendance figures used in the justification were from the early 1990's?
Championshiop attendances have actually gone up markedly since then.

There is a difference between "need" and "want" - especially when Govt money for the former is not forthcoming, but is for the latter, indeed "free" of charge! Ideally, I might "need" an expensive cashmere coat for the occasional severe storm like today's, but I can't afford one. However, if someone offers me a Duffle Coat for nothing, I'm hardly going to say no, especially when it will prove perfectly serviceable 90% of the time!

As for the UCC economists, there have been other, equally independent analysts (e.g. NITB, UU) whgo have rubbished the case for the Maze. You pays your economists money, you take your choice...

As for attendance figures, I have used those from 2005, as supplied by you.

If the GAA itself and independent economists both agree that it does need, and can afford to build a 40k capaity stadium in Ulster, what makes you feel qualified to say that they don't?

THE NEED HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED.
THE MAZE MEETS THAT NEED.
IF ITS BUILT, THE GAA WILL HEAVILY USE IT. FULL STOP.

The GAA has not "established" an unanswerable case for anything. Rather, they have asserted why they would accept the Maze. As others here have pointed out, at least part of their motivation is likely that they don't want to be seen to be so ungrateful as to say "No" to a "sharted space" venture which is being supplied for free. And for all the Reports and Statements etc from them, can you discern any real enthusiasm? For instance, why weren't they jumping up and down at the delays which have been experienced up to now, never mind since the weekend's rumours that the stadium may be scrapped?

And I would repeat, out of those 2005 games, when you exclude those where the Maze is too small (Croke) and then those where the Maze is too big (the 18k games etc), how many does that leave in between?

Remember, too, that the GAA would have to pay rent to HMG, plus VAT (avoided at Clones) and also see all their many existing Ulster stadia sit empty, whilst showpiece games were played on someone elses property.

The GAA certainly aren't in the business of making major decisions on ill-costed grounds.
It will alerady have satisfied itself that it makes financial sense to use the Maze.

Its pretty obvious (even to an untrained accountant like SammyG)  that renting the MAze at pretty low rental rates is far batter than having to sink 10's of millions of our own money into a lesser standard stadium of our own.

When it comes to moeny, the GAA are cute hoors.

My whole point is that if the Maze were scrapped, even a fraction of the money saved could be substituted for the GAA's own money, which presently needs to spent on the County Grounds etc.

Maybe I'm missing something (on my second point, at least), but surely to goodness a significant cash injection from the money saved by scrapping the Maze could be better used by the GAA - e.g. cover, toilets, facilities etc at Casement, Healy Park etc?

You are missing something - if you guys are sitting in an all seated, all covered stadium, tailored to your attendance needs, then we wnat the same.
We won't be satisfied with anything less.
Better toilets just won't do.

It seems to me that one of the reasons why facilities are so poor at so many GAA grounds is because of the GAA's policy of building so many relatively large, but somewhat under-utilised ground throughout the country. Inevitably, the push for size and numbers has diluted the money to ensure high standards. Whereas, had they instead concentrated on mostly smaller, well-appointed grounds (10k capacity, with seating and cover etc) for most counties, but one or two larger regional grounds* in each Province, these latter could also have been to a better standard. (And before you go off on one about me telling the GAA how to run its business, this is an argument I've gleaned from this Board!)

But I return to my central point that a fair share of the £240m+ which could be saved by scrapping the Maze would go a hell of a long way towards improving existing GAA grounds, grounds which inevitably will be used even less should the Maze get built. And if they are being used less, what incentive will there be to improve them over and above the minimum necessary?

* - Speaking of which, you have kept rather quiet about Monaghan's plans both to enlarge and improve Clones. What will you say if the Maze is built and Monaghan go ahead anyhow, as they've claimed they will?

Croppies lie down no longer mate.

At no time in this debate with you have I used offensive or perjorative terms like this, nor have I ever. Such snidey remarks only demean your argument. Indeed they actually say a great deal more about you than they do about me.

[thejuice]

Ive read that the maze stadium has already cost £10m in consultancy and other fees already. My sources arent 100% reliable but thats the figure being tossed about. still a long way of the Bertie bowl.