sydney clubs havent spent a cent because we have governments doing it for us.

over the past 10 years just in sydney weve had :

1. kogarah oval - $20 million spent including seats all the way round and an extension to the main grandstand
2. cronulla - $10 million spent building a GS on one of the hills and complying with codes re. disabled access etc
3.cambelltown stadium - $20 million spent by council
4. penrith - $10 million for grand stand extensions.

and thats only the tip of the iceberg. our clubs now realize they cant rely on Poker Machine revenues and so more pressure will be placed on governments for ground improvements.

outside sydney we have :

1. townsville - $20 million in improvments for more seats
2. suncorp stadium - $300 million brand new ground to replace lang park
3. Skilled park GC - $300 million new ground as the clubs entry into NRL was conditional upon new ground
4. Newcastle - $26 million new Eastern grand stand replacing hill, $20 million works underway to replace existing western grandstand, further funds sought to complete the remaining hills

over the past 10 years or so the NRL has seen a massive improvements in its grounds.

the NRL told the Gold Coast bid team that without a new stadium they wouldnt be getting a license.

the bid team then went to council and state governments and got funding for a new ground.

without the NRL demanding a new ground for the bid team, they wouldnt have a new ground.

but hey in australia we want to see the game grow. we dont see growth as a bad thing

Whereas the RFL told Celtic all they needed was a field in Wales and voila you have a franchise. Worlds apart

the bit in bold is the important bit.

I think we have all seen that the important bit is the backing of the council/community. Without that it doesnt matter where you put a team it is destined to fail.

Just a thought, but if it does come to pass that Wakefield and Cas end up sharing a ground, will this resurrect the merger debate?

Calder may yet live after all

Having had a half built stadium for a couple of decades I wouldn't recommend it! Problem with this apporach is the ground never gets finished, or at least takes forever to happen and ends up being a bit of a mish mash in the process.

WMDC do not have any money to contribute to the stadiums, they may pay for facilities such as swimming pools that may be a part of the stadium but as for actual construction, you can forget it. Besides, if they ever become involved on a larger scale then the stadium would more then likely not happen for another 10 years.

The Castleford ground is only worth what a developer is willing to pay, the Hickson blast zone means it will be very difficult to secure planning permission for the Jungle which in turn would severely reduce the value of the land. The area is near to/on a flood plain as well (check the EA website).

BV was sold for £2.8m, which might get you an end terrace but not much more, besides Trinity have already had £1.7m of that.

Castleford have always wanted to go this alone, the development at Stanley, should it come off, is available for them to use as they wish, as it is for Featherstone. Both have chosen to decline the offer due to their own stadium plans. One stadium may end up a reality, but if all clubs played out of there I can only see one thing, a merger, with new Castleford, Featherstone and maybe Wakefield clubs formed in protest.

australian clubs share grounds and nobodies forcing them to merge

eg roosters and tigers at SFS or souths / dogs at homebush

why a shared stadium means a merger is just an internet furphy.

the economics of a shared stadium are much better than stand alone

in the current economic environment clubs will have to face up to bitter realities of compromising or being kicked out of SL

the beauty of the franchising process is widnes are a sword of damocles hangning mainly over the head of wakey, but to a lesser extent cas

sort out your ground or bye bye

I wouldn't mind a shared stadium, as long as it was in Cas, which coincidentally is also in Wakey. But the Wakey fans don't want a stadium in Cas, and Cas fans don't want one in Wakey. It's as simple as that really.

For Cas fans the solution is Wakey share at Glasshoughton
For Wakey fans the solution is Cas share at Stanley

That is why there won't be a stadium share

Ground is getting sorted, of course until steel, bricks and mortar are seen no one will believe it, but still.

So, in the RFL’s grand plan of expansion they would be more then content with two teams playing out of one stadium? Anyhow Cas fans will not watch them play in Wakefield, even though Newmarket is the same distance from Cas as it is from Wakefield, and vice versa. Wherever the share is, one club will naturally wither and the remaining club will take over/merge, with new teams forming in the original area. ala Gateshead and Sheffield.

Chose not to believe it, that’s your prerogative, but you know little of how people feel on these matters..

Moderator curls up into ball and starts whimpering!

which is probably why there will be only 1 of the teams playing in SL in 2012.

So, now that your stadium driven attempts to get rid of Wakefield and/or Cas are failing, you want to make it an attendance competition!

Make a list of all the franchise-assessed reasons why Wakefield should be the team dropped from SL and let's have a proper, reasoned look at the situation; Ground, crowds, junior development etc etc.

What's the result? Bye bye Salford!

exactly dboy. Salford are gone first.
For me it's the strength of Stade, Toulouse, Halifax or Barrow as to whether one of the Calder clubs goes

as long as there is a chance the stadium at barton gets built, they offer expansion via manchester

that leaves wakey vs cas.

cas are the stronger club.

junior development - both clubs benefit from pretty much the same junior development so it cancels out

cas much larger crowds put them in front of wakey, given neither will get their ground started within a year

if it takes relegation for people to open their eyes so be it

a ground share doesnt mean a merger.

it seems cas proposal is more advanced and closer to completion so it makes more sense for wakey to share with them

by sharing i mean on equal terms as cas, not as their tenants.

either way the distances arent very large and its just ego as to where the stadium is built

if i were a wakey fan, i wouldnt care if my club had to ground share at glasshoughten if it meant the clubs SL status remains,

I think Wakefield feel they are at a much stronger position.

Dont forget Dally the license criteria points were more complex than 'crowds and juniors'.

If we take the ten points highlighted on sky and apply them up to the end of 09 so to speak i'd have Wakey 5-4, what about anyone else?

In planning terms, Cas are in a stronger position due to them having outline PP. In funding terms Wakefield are in a stronger position because that is all accounted for and indeed if they are able to secure further funding can boost capacity to 15K.

We’ll find out this year whether or not the Stanely stadium will get the go ahead, if/when it does they can more or less crack on with construction.

Unfortunately this piece of "new" news has started all the old debates but lets just stick to basic facts for a moment....
the news item referred to simply says that the stadium will be launched in stages. It doesn't say it won't be built. Why is building in stages a problem? As said above, if it's fit for purpose and is not breaking the bank then it's good enough.
If 12k capacity is no.1 priority importance to the RFL then Cas are not the only one in trouble and if the stadium is built with "capicity increasability" then I'm ok with that too.
Sounds like sensible Project Management if the alternative is proving difficult.

Also, when deciding who should be getting franchise, why not stick to the criteria already stated by the RFL rather than picking the one that fits your arguement.....otherwise we'll just end up mirroring the previous epic threads and getting it locked at 500 pages.

The biggest concern I would have if I were a Cas supporter isn't that it's that potentially the ground is going to be built in stages, it would be the fact that he has confirmed they don't have the funding in place to build any of it at present.

I wonder if any of the money that has been WASTED on overseas players could have gone towards the cost of a new stadium for some clubs?

wow, bang on the money for once

I’m sure some of it could, but enough to fill a funding gap for a new stadium, perhaps not?

Besides money wasted is very subjective, some overseas players have proved very useful, for example the number of overseas players Wakefield had in 2006 probably enabled them to stay in SL, and if they hadn’t spent that money on them then the situation they find themselves in now would be very different.

Chances are, with little clout as a Championship team, they wouldn’t find themselves in such a position to be on the verge of securing a new stadium. The developers probably wouldn’t have bothered involving them in their scheme.