Was at South Fremantle oval yesterday and made these observations.
Of the 1800 or so people that were there
150 of them were behind closed windows 30 meters from playing area.
150 of them were sitting in the old stand 25 meters from playing area.
300 of them were sitting in the comfy seats of members area ( these comfy seats are behind 15 meters of run down seats though ) and hence these 300 were 15 meters away from playing area.
This in my opinion took 600 pf the 1800 people at the game (33%) out of the games atmosphere.
Any redevelopments like Claremont oval, and East Fremantle oval and Lathlain must take this into account and design grounds in a way that bring the spectators to the edge of the oval.
It’s actually called Fremantle Oval, not south Fremantle oval.
anyway , not really sure what your point is, fact is these older grounds were designed when 10 - 15 000 people were the regular norm at WAFL grounds, obviously now when your getting Sunday League turnouts all the WAFL grounds are largely obselete and inappropriate to today’s games.
As I’ve said ground rationalisation is desperatly needed, as well downsizing of facilities to be viable,
I’m fairly certain that ground sharing won’t happen from what I can tell.
The key is we have to get better/fairer deals from the councils in terms of rent etc…much like the 16 WACA clubs do that are spread throughout the metropolitan area.
Sure, their costs aren’t as high in terms of player payments but they are on a “better wicket” than us.
It’s important to keep the grounds as it’s getting difficult enough to attract kids to train for development squads/colts etc.
Subi are lucky as their home ground is only a 10 minute train ride from the heart of the zone. It is indeed the closest WAFL ground to the most central part of it’s zone.
And god knows what we’re going to do when in 30 years time when the metro area spreads out beyond Mandurah, Yanchep and most likely gets close to Northam.
My point is that these grounds should be redeveloped to bring the now smaller crowds closer to the action. I I am well aware that the current wafl grounds were developed to cater for 10,000 plus crowds. In fact that is pretty much my point. Sorry about calling it South Fremantle oval.
And god knows what we’re going to do when in 30 years time when the metro area spreads out beyond Mandurah, Yanchep and most likely gets close to Northam.
[/quote]
I certainly hope you are not right about the ground sharing, as the current set up is a financial liability.
how can they sustain so many licensed premises with bugger all patronage. They sit there empty for 6 months of the year. Clubs in general are pushing crap up hill to make a quid, bowling clubs, rsl’s etc.
The Mandurah Dockers are well placed in a area of growth..
Whats the go with Lathlain once the eagles move in??
I cant see both East Fremantle and Fremantle ovals being sustainable , I think Leederville is the best example of how to do it long term.
We just have to get the same deal the 16 WACA clubs have. They all survive with a home ground no problem. And they have no revenue stream. It’s as though the councils know this and charge them accordingly.
Good point about the facilities being underused. Clubs have to be more pro-active about making money out of their function areas. I think they’re onto this at last.
The ground sharing thing has it’s problems. Even for Subi and EP.
Our colts aren’t even able to train at Leederville most of the time because of the EP and S league sides taking preference which is a massive disadvantage. We even had to secure a second oval because of it down the road a bit. Then we had to pump some cash into the second oval. Then that ground get’s used for other sports in summer so we had to do pre-season at bloody city beach oval. Development squads end up in woop-woop.
Nah honest mate, I wouldn’t even recommend ground sharing if you want to maximise your zone.
I’d even suggest to East Fremantle to move out into the heart of their zone and set up a deal with Murdoch University if the Town of EF doesn’t play ball soon.
South Fremantle are in a good spot anyway. Kind of central as you can get with such a vast area to cover - Armadale to Leda.
Although I’d prefer in time to see all of Rockingham, Safety Bay, Warnbro go back to South and Armadale, Roleystone, Kelmscott go back to Perth.
But that is unlikely to happen until 2024.
EP and S was an exception too I guess. East Perth remained in it’s zone and Subi actually got closer to it’s zone. We’re a bit closer to Tuart Hill now. Both clubs only had to move 2 kms to relocate. If Perth or Swans were to ever ground share it would be a disaster for their development programs. And I believe that would in time kill-off the one that moved.
as LaHincha said ground sharing is not without its problems. i think clubs can still work around these things as Subi & Ep do.
i would have thought once Dockers vacate to Cockburn, it would seem logical for the arch enemy east freo to move into those state of the art facilities at fremantle oval.
i dont think it would be that bad? rivalries & hatred aside.
for the record i dont mind fremantle oval. while souths are struggling the perception about the ground can be a misguided one. it may not be the most comfortbale venue, but on a good day it has a tremendous feel about the place. the most historical ground in australia. dont mess with it too much.
who is too say in a few years if both south & east are back up the top, a long weekend crowd of 15,000 is not unlikely. /
Hate to break the news to you boys but the State of the Art facilities will still be used by the Fremantle Football club regardless of where they are stationed.That has already been stated by the FFC.
What about the ground designs and getting people closer to the action.
[/quote]
It’s happening mate.
Peel’s new facility is good in that regard, as is Joondalup and the designs for Claremont are too.
[/quote]
And don’t forget mate, at some grounds the place to be on a sunny day is in the outer with the diehards. Particularly at Bassendean. Can bar firing. Best seat in the house out there.
I agree, woth the dockers moving out soon, that presents the most obvious oppuortunity for a move by EF, EF oval is a maintenance liability and the local council are keen to redevolpe it.
Both clubs shared up till the 50’s and that was when thousands poured through the gates each week in fremantle, i really see no reason why when were getting 1800 to games now why they cant do it. I would love to think SF could get bar turnover every week from visiting fans as Subi and EP get at leederville.
South already use Hilton Oval for some training , so i dint see any big deal with some over flow there.
Would love to see Rockingham etc back with their traditional club SF.
the comparison with the Ams clubs isnt a fair one, most of those ovals have very basic infrastructure, most are just change rooms with a hall all of which are owned and operated by Local Government, WAFL clubhouses and building are huge in comparison are basically dinosaurs built for 10,000 people each home game, and the clubs have the burden of owning, maintaining and operating them.
a better comparison is to look at what the perhaps the VFA now VFL or SANFL does…even the AFL has unloaded most of its older dated venues in Melbourne.
as far as fremantle oval goes, your right by far the host historic ground in WA , and has an amazing amphitheater feel and atmosphere when the crowds are big, theres was no problem getting close to the action when they had the benches right on the boundry fence, unfortuntley they removed them during the dockers redevelopment.
None of the VFL or SANFL clubs ground share mate. They all have their own home ground. West Torrens old ground Thebarton was ditched in favour of Woodville Oval when the two team almalgamated. That’s the only change.
I agree with you that EF and SF could ground share but under no circumstances should P and SD. That would be a disaster for their development programs.
There’s only one way to be successful now with the points system.
That’s identifying juniors, keeping them in the system all the way to league and then have a percentage of those get drafted for the cash flow. If that is compromised in any way, it will be the end for a WAFL club and eventually the end for zoning and thus the end for the sustainability of the WAFL. Trust me, if that happens and the WAFC rezones the metro area into 10 TAC Cup style districts with a revamped 18’s comp, the WAFL is done.
For as long as each of the nine clubs have a base within easy access of their zone, a program that makes it easy for players to get to dev squad/colts training and a method of keeping players in the system for as long as possible, the WAFC and the AFL will stay off our backs.
Yep seems to be on the run for sure, but as usual there will be stuff going on behind the scenes we dont know about.
Re Burswood, I reckon they may do , but lets be honest I dont think it will ever really suit WAFL games a crowd of 15 - 20 000 will loke terrible in a big place like that, far better to properly develope Leederville as a boutique ground for 20,000 people to play finals.