Test Cricket Stadiums [Archive] - Page 2

jumoni

March 20th, 2009, 03:23 PM

How on earth did a stadium big as this cost that little? Are you sure that's the right number?

Well in India construction comes a lil' cheaper.:)
Various reasons that I can cite for cheaper/economical cost:-
1) Labour cost is significantly lesser, much lesser compared to the Europeans.
2) Fit and finish quality is not up to international standard. That stadium is of quality only if it is compared with other Indian stadiums.:lol:
3) Simple and age-old construction techniques were used.
4) Design elements used in the construction (esp. for that stadium) has been in existence for a long time. Mark a circular patch of land, build 4 stands around it, install the roofs, and then install the cheap plastic seats. Pls note, the seats are fixed ones, unlike the foldable ones used in stadiums all over the world.
5) That stadium is built far from city limit, hence, cost towards land acquisation is minimal.
6) Cost saved on landscaping as none was done...:lol:
7) Roof of that stadium is very basic. Nothing much to write about.:bash:
(if reports are to be believed, significant cost has to be bourne for installing the roof in a stadium, esp. in Europe where roofs are considere an integral part of the structure). Here the aesthetic appeal of the roof wasn't given so much importance.
8) Notice the video screen. I think its one of the smallest ones installed in a open-air permanent stadium. That screen is good enough only for beach volleyball, kabaddi, kho-ko, or some indoor stadiums like table-tennis, badminton.:bash:

Thats it....if you are to ask me, I think even $ 20 millions seems a tad expensive.

jumoni

March 20th, 2009, 03:39 PM

PCA stadium Mohali,
http://img53.imageshack.us/img53/8733/800pxlightsmohali.png

Can you guess what was the cost of this stadium?

KingmanIII

March 21st, 2009, 12:10 AM

To substantiate my points, below rendering is of another stadium getting built in Western Indian city of Pune.

http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/6585/pune.jpg

http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/7938/mcapuneinternationalcri.jpg

Wow, that is a pretty sweet stadium!

Mickeebee

March 22nd, 2009, 05:15 AM

I hate Brisbane & Melbourne, give me Sydney & Lords anyday.

Cricket grounds should have character, not be bland souless bowls

The atmosphere at the MCG when it has 80,000+ people watching the game is hardly 'souless'.

BobDaBuilder

March 22nd, 2009, 12:50 PM

Sydney has lost a lot of it's character over the years. It is now just an unco-ordinated hotch-potch of a mess of concepts.

For test match grounds I would have to say, Lord's and Adelaide.

Melbourne is good if you want to get in and never have to worry about booking for a ticket as it has such a large capacity you are always going to get in.

p.s. they might be wasting their money in India building that new ground in Prune. Due to terrorism, they are being forced to move the 20/20 to England or South Africa.

Its AlL gUUd

March 22nd, 2009, 08:03 PM

^^ You mean they are moving this years IPL tournament. From what i've heard it is due to the government not being able to guarantee security as the elections are happening at the same time.

BobDaBuilder

March 22nd, 2009, 11:12 PM

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Indians cannot guarentee ANYTHING period!

We all know what they are capable of 'delivering' if you have had half your IT department outsourced.

They need 10 people to do what one person previously did and they still fuck that up.

They make Fawlty Towers management appear like Swiss Railways by comparison.

jumoni

March 23rd, 2009, 11:11 AM

^^ Thats insulting...
IPL had to be moved coz' of the General Election where huge nos. of the security personal needs to be mobilized across the length and breadth of the country. Mind you, India has a population of over 1 billions, some 7000 cities and and over 300,000 villages where election is going to take place. So, its very tough on part of Govt. to provide security covers for these games as well. Tell me any other country that can manage an election at this scale???

Brother, managing a country with few millions is easy enough but one with 1000 millions is a bit tough, but, we are still able to manage ourselves and we are doing good enough......

BTW, can your country gurantee cent % security for these games if it is held there? The best they can do is to provide few thousands security personals and not more than that....but I doubt that'd be possible if elections were going on at the same time there as well...

Wezza

March 23rd, 2009, 12:00 PM

A new stadium with pillars to support the roof? Everything should be cantilevered these days. :ohno:
http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/3963/09112008140.jpg

jumoni

March 24th, 2009, 10:53 AM

^^ Exactly...
In India, they are still near-sighted. Hopefully in 10-15 years time this roof will look worn out and they might think of going in for those fancy looking roof.

bthj

March 25th, 2009, 10:45 PM

[QUOTE=jumoni;34032068]^^ Thats insulting...
[B] Tell me any

no other country have to??

bthj

March 25th, 2009, 10:47 PM

^^
Tell me any other country that can manage an election at this scale???

no other country have to??

BobDaBuilder

March 26th, 2009, 12:11 AM

^^^^^^^^^^^^^

If Indians were smart they would break their country up into manageable pieces. They should create 20 odd different states.

How can a centrally administered country possibly serve the interests of well over a billion people?

They cannot even manage it in Australia and we only have 20 million in total.

The smart move in India would be to create small breakaway states and introduce the Swiss method of government to reduce the cronyism and corruptism.

jumoni

March 26th, 2009, 03:16 PM

^^... Well India has infact accept your suggestion....there are 30 STATES(administered by local government) and 5 UNION TERRITORIES (administered by Central Govt.). Each of these 30 states are again divided into DISTRICTs which are inturn administered by respt. local govt. Here I am talking about General Elections where the entire country participates in a phased manner. The only difference is the huge population....

Anyways, leave all these aside...lets get back to the topic of Test stadiums....any new pics of test stadiums...

trmather

March 28th, 2009, 01:36 AM

Does anyone have any pictures of Punjab Stadium in Pakistan.

Every stadium site I've looked at says it has a huge capacity and was built recently, but you never see any pictures.

Andrew_za

March 28th, 2009, 01:53 PM

http://www.twenty20worldcup.net/cricket/newlands.jpg
http://www.worldstadiums.com/stadium_pictures/africa/south_africa/cape_town_cricket.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/4/7875689_65bf6ec767_m.jpg
Its not the biggest, but hosted the ICC cricket world cup opening ceremony and will host the opening ceremony for the 2009 IPL
http://www.gilesridley.com/shop/images/Ref.Newlands-01.%202003%20Opening%20Ceremony%20small.jpg

Cruise

March 29th, 2009, 12:28 PM

Its not the biggest, but hosted the ICC cricket world cup opening ceremony and will host the opening ceremony for the 2009 IPL

When does the IPL start?

Andrew_za

March 29th, 2009, 05:09 PM

Cape Town to Host Opening Ceremony of IPL
The lucrative Indian Premier League cricket tournament has been moved to South Africa and Cape Town will host the opening ceremony

Cape Town will host the opening ceremony of the second season of the DLF Indian Premier League after it was announced that South Africa has been chosen as the official host venue for the lucrative cricket tournament.

The decision to move the IPL to South Africa was made after a meeting between IPL Commissioner, Lalit Modi and Cricket South Africa Chief Executive Gerald Majola at Johannesburg on Tuesday 24 March.

The IPL will now begin on 18 April in South Africa with the final to be played on 24 May 2009. The final schedule for the 59 matches and the host venues for the eight franchises will be announced shortly.

Season II of the DLF Indian Premier league will feature the eight Franchises doing battle over 36 days in South Africa and each franchise will continue to play on a home and away basis with 7 matches at home.

The top 4 Franchises in the league will contest the semi-finals and the victorious semi-finalists will meet in the Grand Final all over one weekend.

The league will showcase a grand total of 59 matches providing broadcasters and in-stadia spectators with 177 hours of live "family entertainment", which will also be viewed by a significant international audience. All matches will be at 4 pm and 8 pm IST to coincide with prime time for television audiences in India.

England was not considered as the venue due to the inclement weather that prevails in the month of May during which England’s domestic season would be also be starting. There was a fear that 70% to 75% of IPL matches would be affected by rain and weather if England was chosen as the venue.

Even though some of the franchisees preferred England as the venue, there was always an alternate available for IPL and that was South Africa.

Further, while shifting IPL out of India, it was promised that the first match of the day at 4.00 PM and the second match of the day would be at 8.00 PM, Indian Standard Time. IPL had assured the Indian viewing public that the prime time for watching the match on Television would not be compromised. This timing could be achieved more practically in South Africa than in England.

Matches will be held in 6 cities - Johannesburg, Durban, East London, Centurion, Port Elizabeth and Cape Town, which will also hold the Opening Ceremony.

It is reported that the cost of telecasting matches, transportation, accommodation and security would work out cheaper if the tournament is conducted in South Africa.

BobDaBuilder

March 30th, 2009, 04:53 AM

Will they rename the franchises to reflect the South African cities?

ie Calcutta 'Knight Riders' = Cape Town etc..

Cruise

April 13th, 2009, 08:16 AM

http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25312192-5006301,00.html

SANFL and AFL leaders will meet in Melbourne today in an extraordinary session which could bring AFL games to the redeveloped Adelaide Oval.

And there is the expectation SA Cricket Association officials will be drawn into the talks.

SANFL president Rod Payze confirmed he and league chief executive Leigh Whicker have been called to meet AFL Commission chairman Mike Fitzpatrick and league chief executive Andrew Demetriou today.

Mr Payze was not aware of any SACA involvement in today's meetings. "This is not a meeting called by the SANFL; we are going there at the invitation of the AFL," he said.

"It is to discuss a number of football things."

SACA officials are already in Melbourne for end-of-season meetings with Cricket Australia but would not confirm any session with the AFL.

The Advertiser understands Mr Fitzpatrick and Mr Demetriou ultimately want the SANFL and SACA in face-to-face meetings to resolve Adelaide's long-running stadium debate. The potential consequences of the session are:

AFL games at Adelaide Oval after capacity at the city ground is increased to 35,000 and facilities improved by the $90 million redevelopment due for completion by the end of 2010.

PORT ADELAIDE, which is losing money playing at the 51,515-seat AAMI Stadium while averaging crowds of 30,000, moving home games to Adelaide Oval.

A JOINT bid by the SANFL and SACA in seeking Federal Government money to redevelop both AAMI Stadium and Adelaide Oval.

AN end to the Opposition's plans for a new city sports stadium on Adelaide's western edge with neither cricket nor football endorsing the project.

The SACA last night confirmed it had meetings yesterday in Adelaide with SANFL officials. The cricket association said these were to discuss how SANFL football could be played at Adelaide Oval during the redevelopment of the ground's western flank.

The AFL has declined to make any public comment on a meeting which could end 40 years of tense relations between the SANFL and SACA. The SANFL in 1969 opted out of sharing Adelaide Oval, which is controlled by the SACA, to build its first football-owned headquarters at West Lakes.

The SANFL last played its grand final at Adelaide Oval in 1973 and then took football's best games to AAMI Stadium, originally called Football Park, in 1974. The league has refused to sanction any AFL games at Adelaide Oval, insisting all Crows and Power home matches be played at West Lakes. The SANFL, which owns the AFL licences of the Crows and Power, says its licence agreement with the AFL demands there be 22 AFL premiership matches – 11 from Adelaide and 11 from Port – played at AAMI Stadium each season.

The SANFL in 2002 gained assurances from the AFL that any AFL games transferred by non-SA clubs to Adelaide would be played at AAMI Stadium and not Adelaide Oval.

http://www.portadelaidefc.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/6038/newsid/74718/default.aspx

ANDREW Demetriou says the AFL is fully supporting Port Adelaide in the face of the South Australian club's financial crisis.

The club requested financial help last month due to cash flow, stadium deal and debt issues, but Demetriou said the AFL and the SANFL would ensure the club's future.

"It's very serious, it's a very serious financial situation," Demetriou said in Melbourne on Thursday afternoon.

"It's on the public record that they have got significant debt and they've got a significant shortage in their cash flow.

"But we're committed, like the SANFL, to working with Port Adelaide – they're a very important franchise in the AFL competition, and they're a great club, rich in history.

"We'll work very closely with the SANFL and Port Adelaide to make sure we get things right."

Demetriou said the club was in no danger of falling over.

"We don't believe so – all of our clubs, from time to time, go through various difficulties, and what's important is to reiterate how committed we are, with the SANFL, to helping Port Adelaide."

Demetriou also said there would be no third stadium in Adelaide.

"We discussed various options, and we do not support the option of a new stadium – there are already two very very good stadia in South Australia.

"The option of a third stadium, at a considerable cost, is not one that we support during this period of time."

Demetriou said there would not be any AFL teams – either Port Adelaide or all non-South Australian games – played at the Adelaide Oval in the short term.

“SACA (South Australian Cricket Association) presented a concept design to the SANFL and the AFL to expand Adelaide Oval’s capacity to beyond 50,000 while the SANFL reaffirmed its commitment for the game’s home to be at AAMI Stadium and restated the importance of the $100 million required from the State Government for its $200 million redevelopment,” he said.

Demetriou said more work needed to be done by all parties to explore what could work best for the SANFL and the SACA and all parties have agreed to meet again late next month.

Looks like Adelaide OVal could be getting a further upgrade very shortly.

amidcars

April 13th, 2009, 01:36 PM

Hardly the best cricket stadium in the world, but its got a great atmosphere, pitty about the shitty turnouts for test matches tho.

HoldenV8

April 13th, 2009, 09:02 PM

Hardly the best cricket stadium in the world, but its got a great atmosphere, pitty about the shitty turnouts for test matches tho.

Which ground are you talking about??

Andrew_za

April 13th, 2009, 10:08 PM

which stadium?

kuquito

April 14th, 2009, 05:21 AM

A new stadium with pillars to support the roof? Everything should be cantilevered these days. :ohno:
http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/3963/09112008140.jpg

Yeah that's weird!

jumoni

April 14th, 2009, 09:34 AM

Below two images are not of test stadiums but posting as I think they will be of importance esp. after ICC has moved from London to UAE.

Sheikh Zayed Cricket Stadium in Abu Dhabi, UAE
http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/9070/sheikhzayedcricketstadi.jpg
A multipurpose sporting venue, Sheikh Zayed Stadium in Abu Dhabi in Middle East is mainly used for football & athletic events but cricket matches are also hosted here frequently. Capacity of some 30,000 spectators at a time, Zayed stadium in UAE became premier cricket ground when Sharjah missed out due to match-fixing allegations. Named after President Sheikh Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan, built at a cost of around 25 million US dollars, this cricket stadium was inaugurated in 2006 with a India vs Pakistan match. Located around an hours drive from main Abu Dhabi city, Zayed stadium in Dubai sports city is all production ready = Systems integrator, Gearhouse Broadcast had previously installed production cabling, 37 wall boxes, 33 triax camera positions, 27 fibre camera positions, 53 video tie lines, 92 data tie lines and 136 audio tie lines, all of which use Belden or Draka cable.

Cricket stadium inside Dubai Sports City
Capacity: 25,000
http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/4962/dubaisportscity.jpg

BobDaBuilder

April 14th, 2009, 10:02 AM

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

It's got white elephant written all over it. Those guys have more money than sense.

jumoni

April 14th, 2009, 11:52 AM

BoB, what makes you think these people do no have senses.....I think its only their senses that prevailed upon them not to build world's biggest cricket stadium at some 120 K-150 K capacity 'coz they know they will never be able to fill them up. They went for a 25 K which is just perfect.

You sound more jealous that some small country without any cricketing back-ground is building those beautiful stadiums. This is only magnifying the sheer viewing pleasure of the cricket crazy peoples in this world and I think you are missing that point. Anyways couple of pics from Dubai Sports City....

http://img244.imageshack.us/img244/7371/600dubaisportscitycrick.jpg

http://img524.imageshack.us/img524/4201/dubaisportcity.jpg

Bobby3

April 15th, 2009, 03:11 AM

I don't think it's a white elephant. Cricket is growing among Emiraties and the UAE has a substantial ex-pat population from Britain and the sub-continent.

Plus if that fails, there's always football.

They've always been crazy about sports, but they always have to settle for one off big events, now they're building their own leagues so they need these venues.

Cruise

April 15th, 2009, 03:32 AM

They could also play Australian rules football in these cricket stadiums lol.

ArchieTheGreat

April 15th, 2009, 11:51 AM

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

It's got white elephant written all over it. Those guys have more money than sense.

Where do you think Pakistan will be playing all their home test matches and ODI series from now on?

Plus the UAE wiould be good host for things like the 20/20 world cup.

jumoni

April 17th, 2009, 02:13 PM

Where do you think Pakistan will be playing all their home test matches and ODI series from now on?

:lol:

But its really sad.... Pakistan was one of the most versatile team some 7-8 years back. I always liked and admired the team that Wasim Akram handled.

koolio

April 18th, 2009, 03:54 AM

That stadium in Dubai is pretty neat. Nothing amazing but it has a very clean, circular form.

BobDaBuilder

April 19th, 2009, 12:22 PM

Pakistan needs to sort it's country out first and foremost. There needs to better sharing of wealth. You have the top 5 percent there with 99 percent of the wealth. Any wonder they have terrorism issues and Islamic fantatics because they are not an educated people and easily led astray.

As for UAE cricket, hopefully some good comes out of the Pakis problems and they can spread the game there. They need to get cricket into the schools in Arabia. It might get them away from those mosques which are spreading all this hatred which we are seeing the results of on the news everynight.

dvdrumls

April 20th, 2009, 09:07 AM

I love cricket and I love every thing related to cricket.

BobDaBuilder

April 23rd, 2009, 10:16 AM

I stand corrected.......... I did not realise that half the population of the Emirates was Indian/Pakistani or Bangladeshi.

UAE scores victory as cricket host
Tim Brooks
Last Updated: April 23. 2009 12:31AM UAE / April 22. 2009 8:31PM GMT

The National

DUBAI // It was a great victory for Pakistan last night over the cricket world champions Australia in a tense game at Dubai Sports City. But for the city and the nation, the historic first match marked an even greater milestone.

The game heralded the emergence of Dubai as an international cricket venue and could lay the foundations for major tournaments to be hosted in the UAE in the near future.
The large Pakistan community and close geographical proximity have made the UAE the favoured “second home” for Pakistan, following the terror attacks last month that made domestic fixtures untenable. Shahid Afridi, the all-rounder and crowd favourite, made sure his fans weren’t disappointed when he took six wickets to pave the way for a four-wicket win over Australia.

Following the success of the Abu Dhabi-hosted West Indies series in November, the addition of another world-class stadium and the visit of the world champions have put the cricketing spotlight firmly on the UAE.
With terrorism and political instability making cricket in the subcontinent a risky proposition, the UAE’s emergence as the leading neutral venue could not have come at a better time. The series serves as a showcase to demonstrate that the UAE has the infrastructure, security and cricketing culture to replace Pakistan as a World Cup host in 2011.

The festival of cricket in Dubai and Abu Dhabi, which will include five One-Day Internationals (ODIs) and a Twenty 20 match, started with a bang yesterday as both teams sought to entertain the passionate crowd.

The arena, which has taken three years to complete, welcomed its first cricket supporters and thorough organisation and planning helped avoid the chaos that has marred some sporting events in the city in the past.

The majority of the crowd were drawn from the city’s large Pakistani community, many of whom wore face paint and waved giant flags from the terraces of the state-of-the art, 25,000-capacity stadium.
However, a small but vocal group of Australians assured that the match was played in a competitive, carnival atmosphere.

Peter Chapman, 41, a civil engineer from England, had expected chaotic scenes at the ground but was pleasantly surprised by the organisation.

“I feared that, being a new ground, there would be long delays entering the stadium but to their credit it was well signposted and the stewards were very helpful. My expectations were exceeded.”
Umanath Rama, 37, from Dubai, said he was amazed that he managed to park his car and find his seat within 15 minutes.

“There was ample parking and regular shuttle buses took people right to the stadium entrance. The stadium is new and it hasn’t got as much infrastructure as an existing one but considering that I think it has been organised well.”

Given recent tragic events security at the ground was very tight, with every supporter passing through a metal detector and all bags thoroughly searched. Brett Draper, 31, a marketing executive from Adelaide, said that tight security was important following the recent incidents in Pakistan. “The reason this series is being played here in the first place is that the management and players are confident that the UAE is a safe and secure venue. The security checks did lead to a slight delay but I think everyone expected that and if it means the safety of the supporters and players is assured then it is justified.”
Rashid Mahmood, 49, an electrical supervisor from Pakistan, said that the security staff were fair and courteous and looked forward to the stadium establishing itself as one of the best on the world. “There are many Pakistan supporters in Dubai and so it is a natural choice as a home venue for the team. It is a popular destination and the facilities here are among the most modern and innovative in the world. I am proud to be part of history with the first ever international cricket match in Dubai.
“I think it is fantastic for Dubai. You can hear by the chants of the crowd how enthusiastic they are about cricket. The anticipation has been building for weeks and it is the talk of the town. I hope it will be the home of Pakistan cricket for many years. I’m sure other teams will come here soon.

“The stadium is absolutely fantastic. The ring design is beautiful and all the seats enjoy a great view. You really feel part of the action. The stadium has been visible on the horizon for months and it is great it is finally being used. With ICC headquarters here and the Global Academy opening, Dubai is becoming an important centre for cricket and the stadium opening is a major milestone in meeting that ambition.”
The ground filled up rapidly from around 6pm as people rushed to attend the game after work. The high attendance and vocal, passionate support went some way to show that Dubai will prove a popular cricketing venue. “I’ve seen cricket all over the world and the crowd here today are perhaps the most passionate. The mix of cultures in Dubai really helps create an atmosphere. All teams that travel are assured of some home support because it is so cosmopolitan” said Mr Chapman.
As daylight began to ebb the stadium’s advanced “ring of fire” lighting system was demonstrated for the first time, replicating daylight conditions with over 350 adjustable floodlights. The lighting is just one of the technological innovations being showcased in the stadium, which is the newest and most advanced international cricket stadium in the world. It was an encouraging start for the Sports City Stadium and the Friday game could see the first sell-out at the stadium. The stadium will also host the first ever Twenty 20 international in the UAE on the 7th May.

Mo Rush

April 23rd, 2009, 11:22 AM

who do you think builds everything in Dubai?

Cactus

April 24th, 2009, 03:37 AM

Planning has started on the next new stand for the Sydney Cricket Ground.
This is a similar curved roof (forground) to the new Hill Stand (at the back). I imagine that this style of roof is planned to eventually go around all of the newer stands, leaving the members and ladies stands as the historical contrast.
http://img301.imageshack.us/img301/1127/scgstands.png

Wezza

April 24th, 2009, 03:44 AM

^^
Do you think they will knock down the members stand? :(

Cactus

April 24th, 2009, 05:39 AM

^^
Do you think they will knock down the members stand? :(

Not in a million years Wezza. those two stands have seen plenty of test matches in Cricket and also rugby union and rugby league, they are a real link to the grounds rich sporting history.
The hill also had a lot of history, but it was a mess, The old scoreboard was covered by the Doug Walters stand and the grass had been lost to concrete and plastic seats, it was either develop it into a new stand or put the grass and trees back. they chose to develop.
This new stand will cover the Noble and Chuchill stands, the Noble holds a lot of member seating and facilities as well as the historic stands.
The overhang of the upper seating of the new planned stand will allow it to run around to the hill stand without incroaching on the grounds of the movie studios next door.

khilani003

June 3rd, 2009, 12:54 PM

Not sure if anyone is keeping up on this, but 3 architecture firms have presented to the Cricket Association of Bengal here in Kolkata over the last month in hopes of getting the renovation project. The teams are:

Burt Hill Architects w/ VMS Group
HOK Singapore
Research Design Office (REDO) w/ REX, Tom Leader, & Ove Arup

The CAB is looking to do a major renovation of Eden Gardens with 3 deadlines in mind - IPL 2010, World Cup 2011 (Eden Gardens will be site for one of the Semi-Finals, among other matches), and 2018 - 100th Anniversary of the initial First Class Match.

Decision should be made within the next week or so.

jumoni

November 13th, 2009, 12:02 PM

^^ Hmn, thats correct. They are preparing the stadium for the World Cup.
Below are some rendering of the proposed renovation.
http://www.burthill.com/FILES/projects/733_550/Eden_Garden_5.jpg

jumoni

November 13th, 2009, 12:03 PM

http://www.burthill.com/FILES/projects/733_550/Eden_Garden_2.jpg

NavyBlue

November 21st, 2009, 04:40 AM

From The Times
November 18, 2009
Revolution in the air for Lord's, the home of cricket

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00646/lords1_585x350_646747a.jpg

Marylebone Cricket Club will consider selling the naming rights to Lord’s, the sport’s most famous ground, as part of a £400 million redevelopment revealed in The Times today.

The most radical scheme in the 195-year history of the home of cricket will see it transformed into a 21st-century super-stadium.

Vision for Lord’s, as the proposals are titled, will be funded partly by luxury flats around the periphery that estate agents estimate could sell for £1.2 million each. The redevelopment is designed to increase seating by about 7,500, create an underground cricket academy, a brasserie and a bigger museum.

It is the idea of a sponsor-backed Lord’s, however, that will divide fans. MCC committee members know that they must move fast because of competition from the Football Association and the Rugby Football Union, understood to be seeking £1 million-a-year naming rights deals for Wembley Stadium and Twickenham. Chelsea Football Club are also looking at a deal for Stamford Bridge.

Keith Bradshaw, MCC chief executive, told The Times that he hoped to sell sponsorship packages to India before exploiting naming rights. He conceded: “That is obviously an option but you reach a point at which you do not want to sell your soul.”

Sponsoring arenas is not new but is still fraught with risk because fans are creatures of habit. Tim Crow, of Synergy Sponsorship, said: “They have to be very careful about the brand they choose. Even then, I think there would be a negative reaction. The disadvantages outweigh the gains.”

The revamp would also offer naming rights for the seven stands. Gone would be the testimonials to such legends of the game as Denis Compton, Bill Edrich, Sir Pelham Warner and Sir Gubby Allen, whose names grace the ground alongside the Investec media centre — the one incongruous nod to commercialism to date.

The plans, to be submitted to Westminster City Council after approval by MCC members, will even open the exclusive club to prying eyes by demolishing the high perimeter wall and creating a more inviting exterior.

The new design is in the hands of the architects Herzog & de Meuron, whose work includes the Tate Modern and the “Bird’s Nest” stadium in Beijing, the centrepiece of last year’s Olympics. The Swiss firm was also responsible for the Allianz Arena, the home of Bayern Munich football club, named after the insurance company that paid £4 million a year under the biggest naming rights deal in Europe.
WHAT???

Link 1 (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/cricket/article6920888.ece)
Link2 (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/cricket/article6920786.ece)
PDF (http://extras.timesonline.co.uk/pdfs/ttslords.pdf)

magic_johnson

November 21st, 2009, 03:24 PM

400 million pounds for that???!?!?!?!?!?
Crap, could build a new 80,000 seat stadium for that :weird:.
Not good about the naming rights bizzo aswell...

Its AlL gUUd

November 21st, 2009, 08:32 PM

The MCC have rejected the use of naming rights. it will stay as Lord's.

The £400 million isn't just the redevelopment of the ground, but the luxury flats etc.

KingmanIII

November 24th, 2009, 09:31 AM

The MCC have rejected the use of naming rights. it will stay as Lord's.

The £400 million isn't just the redevelopment of the ground, but the luxury flats etc.
Ah, so they're redeveloping the area around the ground, as well?

AdidasGazelle

March 29th, 2010, 03:04 AM

The MCG is not only the best cricket stadium in the world, it is one of the best stadiums in the world regardless of which sport it hosts.

Having said that I like cricket stadiums that are quirky and full of character. I hope that cricket 'grounds' in England do not go the way of English football grounds. ie: cheap and nasty souless places. The building of the rose bowl does not fill me with confidence. Who the hell came up with that design? :nuts::nuts::ohno:

jandeczentar

March 29th, 2010, 05:38 PM

I'm not a fan of the Lords proposal. It's a lot of money for a modest capacity increase (I know it includes flats and a shopping mall). My biggest complaint, however, is the fact that it will be empty most of the time. England might sell it out but they only play a couple of test matches and ODI's per year there; and even then the attendance depends on who they're playing. Middlesex CCC will certainly struggle to fill it. They can't fill the current stadium, let alone an expanded one. The MCC should save their money and work instead on filling the capacity they currently have before shelling out on expansion.

marrio415

April 1st, 2010, 09:20 AM

Harry1990

April 14th, 2010, 06:28 AM

i don'yt like the lords proposal at all. i think the two stands next to the media centre. the compton and edrich i think look terrible in that picture. i think they shoul keep the pavillion like it is and make a bowl like ground around the rest of the stadium like the the new yankees stadium.

28,000 is far to small for people to go to games. the ECB need at least 2 or 3 grounds capable of 50,000 for test cricket

Kazurro

April 16th, 2010, 09:41 AM

Is there any new stadium scheduled in India thanks to the success of the IPL appart of Pune? Any thread for that stadium?

Bombay Boy

April 17th, 2010, 12:55 PM

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=625189

jandeczentar

April 17th, 2010, 02:40 PM

circum

April 17th, 2010, 03:06 PM

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B002RJQT84?tag=anarchojose08-20&camp=14573&creative=327641&linkCode=as1&creativeASIN=B002RJQT84&adid=1FQSFGYYWFNTN7EPCPMA&cricket it boring as fuck

jandeczentar

April 17th, 2010, 05:42 PM

^^And that's the reason why attendances are so low (in England at least).

salgovernale

April 17th, 2010, 06:53 PM

^^And that's the reason why attendances are so low (in England at least).

attendances are'nt low in England! They sell out every test match.:cheers:

salgovernale

April 17th, 2010, 06:54 PM

jandeczentar

April 17th, 2010, 09:11 PM

attendances are'nt low in England! They sell out every test match.:cheers:

No, they don't. See their last test series against the West Indies as proof. Besides, I was refering more to the county game that uses the venues the most and for which attendances often appear comically low (3 figures or less in some cases). I wish national newspapers in England would print the official attendances for cricket matches in the same way they do for football and rugby (both codes).

They're about to get worse as well because this year the football World Cup is coming and almost everyone in England will be watching that and not watching cricket either live or on TV. More people will probably be watching Honduras v Switzerland in Group H than any county cricket match and possibly any England test match (and not just because the World Cup will be on terrestrial TV).

There is a perfectly obvious reason for this: cricket is a ponderously dull sport that takes up far more time than people actually have to give (unlike football or rugby). The exception to this rule is Twenty20 and that is why it attracts the biggest attendances for the counties.

AdidasGazelle

April 18th, 2010, 02:04 AM

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B002RJQT84?tag=anarchojose08-20&camp=14573&creative=327641&linkCode=as1&creativeASIN=B002RJQT84&adid=1FQSFGYYWFNTN7EPCPMA&cricket it boring as fuck

Some cricket could be classed as boring I agree, and attendances for county cricket would back this up to a degree, but to simply dismiss all cricket as boring is unfair.

koolio

April 18th, 2010, 02:37 AM

How much more financially viable are the county clubs since the invention of T20? If the IPL continues to spiral upwards in terms of popularity, I wonder if the counties will indeed consider a franchise setup in order to get on a more even footing. I realize a lot of their patrons will be against such an idea but considering how attendance has been on a downwards trend in the long-term, I think status quo will not remain a plausible option in the future.

salgovernale

April 18th, 2010, 04:07 PM

No, they don't. See their last test series against the West Indies as proof. Besides, I was refering more to the county game that uses the venues the most and for which attendances often appear comically low (3 figures or less in some cases). I wish national newspapers in England would print the official attendances for cricket matches in the same way they do for football and rugby (both codes).

They're about to get worse as well because this year the football World Cup is coming and almost everyone in England will be watching that and not watching cricket either live or on TV. More people will probably be watching Honduras v Switzerland in Group H than any county cricket match and possibly any England test match (and not just because the World Cup will be on terrestrial TV).

There is a perfectly obvious reason for this: cricket is a ponderously dull sport that takes up far more time than people actually have to give (unlike football or rugby). The exception to this rule is Twenty20 and that is why it attracts the biggest attendances for the counties.

who cares??? County games are played during the day when people are at work!! Why cant predominantly boring football fans like yourself celebrate diversity you numpty..its always FOOTBALL FOOTBALL FOOTBALL..yawn.Cricket is a 2rd tier sport in England which is well followed with most international games and the big domestic one dayers and 20 20 sold out.Why would you get 80,000 going? It does very well as it is and its good that we have a variety of sports to watch and follow.

jandeczentar

April 19th, 2010, 08:14 PM

who cares??? County games are played during the day when people are at work!! Why cant predominantly boring football fans like yourself celebrate diversity you numpty..its always FOOTBALL FOOTBALL FOOTBALL..yawn.Cricket is a 2rd tier sport in England which is well followed with most international games and the big domestic one dayers and 20 20 sold out.Why would you get 80,000 going? It does very well as it is and its good that we have a variety of sports to watch and follow.

Who Cares? The counties themselves ought to since they're businesses and not charities. Like all businesses they exist to make money and at the moment they are kissing possibly millions of pounds goodbye trying to peddle a product that almost no one wants.

Cricket is a dull sport, but infuriatingly so because it needn't be that way. All it needs to do is get shorter and play its matches at a time when people can actually watch them, ie: in the evenings, under lights, when people aren't at work or school. If it does that then maybe it becomes the national sport, the summer alternative to football, that it should be. As it is, it will stay as the 4th most popular sport in Britain, if it's lucky.

salgovernale

April 19th, 2010, 08:20 PM

Who Cares? The counties themselves ought to since they're businesses and not charities. Like all businesses they exist to make money and at the moment they are kissing possibly millions of pounds goodbye trying to peddle a product that almost no one wants.

Cricket is a dull sport, but infuriatingly so because it needn't be that way. All it needs to do is get shorter and play its matches at a time when people can actually watch them, ie: in the evenings, under lights, when people aren't at work or school. If it does that then maybe it becomes the national sport, the summer alternative to football, that it should be. As it is, it will stay as the 4th most popular sport in Britain, if it's lucky.

it isnt a dull sport at all you arrogant wanker.If you have played it and know the banter,rules and great history and fun of the game you would know that you tosser.All the things you mentioned are being done anyway and it is our national summer sport as it is.

jandeczentar

April 19th, 2010, 10:32 PM

it isnt a dull sport at all you arrogant wanker.If you have played it and know the banter,rules and great history and fun of the game you would know that you tosser.All the things you mentioned are being done anyway and it is our national summer sport as it is.

If it's not a dull sport then why aren't more poeple watching the games? Why can I find average attendance figures for every team sport in the world except cricket (even Wisden seems not to know)? Why is it that whenever I see a picture of county cricket in a national newspaper there is almost invariably a backdrop of empty seats? "Banter, rules and great history" are meaningless if there's only 3 sleeping geriatrics watching.

Maybe the things I previously mentioned are being done, but not to the extent that they should be. The 4-Day County Championship (played on week days) still dominates the calendar which means the least popular version of the game takes up most of the season and the effort of the players.

Frankly, it's people like you, Selgovernale, keeping cricket in the dark ages. Any sport that can be stopped for 'bad light,' in an age when stadia can be lit up like the proverbial Christmas tree, is clearly living in the past. Any sport that has breaks in the middle for 'lunch' and 'tea' is clearly taking too long. However, time is on my side. Most of the people who think as you do are old: they'll be dead or dying within the next decade or two; and they'll be replaced. Hopefully the new people will not be as blind to the obvious as you seem to be. They'll see that sport is no longer a passtime but a business. They'll see thousands going to Twenty20 games and hundreds going to County Championship matches. Gradually the shortest, most lucrative, version of the game will ease out the others, possibly superceding them completely. You might not like it but money talks and people are already voting with their feet and their wallets.

salgovernale

April 20th, 2010, 09:16 AM

If it's not a dull sport then why aren't more poeple watching the games? Why can I find average attendance figures for every team sport in the world except cricket (even Wisden seems not to know)? Why is it that whenever I see a picture of county cricket in a national newspaper there is almost invariably a backdrop of empty seats? "Banter, rules and great history" are meaningless if there's only 3 sleeping geriatrics watching.

Maybe the things I previously mentioned are being done, but not to the extent that they should be. The 4-Day County Championship (played on week days) still dominates the calendar which means the least popular version of the game takes up most of the season and the effort of the players.

Frankly, it's people like you, Selgovernale, keeping cricket in the dark ages. Any sport that can be stopped for 'bad light,' in an age when stadia can be lit up like the proverbial Christmas tree, is clearly living in the past. Any sport that has breaks in the middle for 'lunch' and 'tea' is clearly taking too long. However, time is on my side. Most of the people who think as you do are old: they'll be dead or dying within the next decade or two; and they'll be replaced. Hopefully the new people will not be as blind to the obvious as you seem to be. They'll see that sport is no longer a passtime but a business. They'll see thousands going to Twenty20 games and hundreds going to County Championship matches. Gradually the shortest, most lucrative, version of the game will ease out the others, possibly superceding them completely. You might not like it but money talks and people are already voting with their feet and their wallets.

Most of our grounds didnt have lights until recently because they couldnt get permission from local residents because of objections in the past.Im not sure if youve played the game but would you like to bat in poor seeing conditions with someone bowling bouncers at you at 90 miles an hour.The longer game will never die out as a test match over 5 days is the finest form of the game..just look at the recent ashes series.So what if they break for lunch and tea..they play all day.Why does football have a half time?Your arguments are not only facile,banal and pointless they are stupid as well.

jandeczentar

April 20th, 2010, 03:05 PM

Most of our grounds didnt have lights until recently because they couldnt get permission from local residents because of objections in the past.Im not sure if youve played the game but would you like to bat in poor seeing conditions with someone bowling bouncers at you at 90 miles an hour.The longer game will never die out as a test match over 5 days is the finest form of the game..just look at the recent ashes series.So what if they break for lunch and tea..they play all day.Why does football have a half time?Your arguments are not only facile,banal and pointless they are stupid as well.

Baseball players have the same problem with light that cricketers do, playing at dusk and having a ball thrown at them at 90mph. Even during day games they have to contend with shadows being cast across the field by the seating decks. Often the pitchers mound can be in sunlight when home plate is in the shade meaning the ball travels from light to dark mid pitch. The issue of light is the same in both sports yet it is not a reason to stop a baseball game. On the contrary, the pitchers use it to their advantage. Why should it be different for cricket?

England's football team play Andorra (one of the weakest teams in Europe) and get 80,000+. England's rugby union team play Italy (the weakest of the 6 nations) and get 80,000+. England's cricket team play Australia (the best team in the world), in the most prestigious competition the sport has to offer (the Ashes) and they get maybe 20,000 (on a good day). Cricket's administrators will look at that and wonder why their gates are so much smaller than their competitors. In an increasingly crowded marketplace cricket is in danger of being squeezed out. In that situation I wouldn't be so sure that longer forms of the game are untouchable. Even if they aren't superceded completely, I can see a period of retrenchment in which the five different forms of the game are trimmed down to two (probably tests and Twenty20 since they make the most money) and the rest are abandoned or at least marginalised.

"So what if they break for lunch and tea...they play all day," and that is far too long for most of the population of Britain.

Football has a halftime because footballers (excluding the goalkeepers) are expected to run 5-7 miles a game and that is tiring. Watching cricket, most of the players seem to spend most of their time standing around. Even Wisden has complained about the gindingly slow over-rate in many matches, especially tests. I would theorise that footballers cover more gound in 90 minutes than cricketers do in 7 hours. It's faster, more exciting and people get more of an emotional buzz from it. That's why more people watch football.

You may think my points are facile, banal, pointless and stupid but you'd be wrong. My questions should be asked by cricket's fans, players, coaches and administrators and there'd better be some answers because these questions go to the heart of the sports future prosperity. Do you want matches watched by a few elderly gentlemen? Or do you want real crowds to show up? Do you want people to talk about last night's cricket match when they go to work or school the next day? Or do you want to be ignored by the vast majority of the population? Most importantly, do you want people to care about cricket and support their team in the same way they do for football? Or would you rather languish in an ocean of apathy peppered with only a few small islands of real interest?

salgovernale

April 20th, 2010, 03:59 PM

Baseball players have the same problem with light that cricketers do, playing at dusk and having a ball thrown at them at 90mph. Even during day games they have to contend with shadows being cast across the field by the seating decks. Often the pitchers mound can be in sunlight when home plate is in the shade meaning the ball travels from light to dark mid pitch. The issue of light is the same in both sports yet it is not a reason to stop a baseball game. On the contrary, the pitchers use it to their advantage. Why should it be different for cricket?

England's football team play Andorra (one of the weakest teams in Europe) and get 80,000+. England's rugby union team play Italy (the weakest of the 6 nations) and get 80,000+. England's cricket team play Australia (the best team in the world), in the most prestigious competition the sport has to offer (the Ashes) and they get maybe 20,000 (on a good day). Cricket's administrators will look at that and wonder why their gates are so much smaller than their competitors. In an increasingly crowded marketplace cricket is in danger of being squeezed out. In that situation I wouldn't be so sure that longer forms of the game are untouchable. Even if they aren't superceded completely, I can see a period of retrenchment in which the five different forms of the game are trimmed down to two (probably tests and Twenty20 since they make the most money) and the rest are abandoned or at least marginalised.

"So what if they break for lunch and tea...they play all day," and that is far too long for most of the population of Britain.

Football has a halftime because footballers (excluding the goalkeepers) are expected to run 5-7 miles a game and that is tiring. Watching cricket, most of the players seem to spend most of their time standing around. Even Wisden has complained about the gindingly slow over-rate in many matches, especially tests. I would theorise that footballers cover more gound in 90 minutes than cricketers do in 7 hours. It's faster, more exciting and people get more of an emotional buzz from it. That's why more people watch football.

You may think my points are facile, banal, pointless and stupid but you'd be wrong. My questions should be asked by cricket's fans, players, coaches and administrators and there'd better be some answers because these questions go to the heart of the sports future prosperity. Do you want matches watched by a few elderly gentlemen? Or do you want real crowds to show up? Do you want people to talk about last night's cricket match when they go to work or school the next day? Or do you want to be ignored by the vast majority of the population? Most importantly, do you want people to care about cricket and support their team in the same way they do for football? Or would you rather languish in an ocean of apathy peppered with only a few small islands of real interest?

Its clear youve never played the game so i will let you off on some of your naive opinions.Cricket is far more dangerous than baseball.In cricket you are bowling into the body and near the head, in baseball its is down the middle of the plate and contact with the batter is extremely rare so there is less likelihood of being hit.Also a quick bowler bowling 20 overs a day will put an unbelivable amount of strain and pressure on their body and joints over the course of a day so the tea and lunch sessions are needed.I suppose footballers need to put up their pampered primadonna feet up and get a manicure.

Lords holds 30,000 and is having its capacity increased to 45,000 as are all the other test grounds.Dont forget England play 7 test matches very summer plus 10+ one dayers and 20/20 games which means they are fully occupied 45+days in the summer which gives them far more revenue in the coffers than the RFU who play 5-7 internations a year so its the RFU who need to look at their money generating sources..hopefully rugby will survive.

Cricket can never be as popular Football and why should it be, there are only finite resources and money that is available.Id rather Cricket retains its soul and idendity,history and traditions rather than becoming the gold digging whore who sells its soul to the highest bidder which English football has become.Cricket has far more followers than Rugby; why arent you concerned about that game.

Dimethyltryptamine

April 21st, 2010, 01:02 PM

That's all good and well, jandeczentar, but when England play Australia IN Australia, the MCG sells out... guess what? That's 100,000 people.

jandeczentar

April 21st, 2010, 05:59 PM

Its clear youve never played the game so i will let you off on some of your naive opinions.Cricket is far more dangerous than baseball.In cricket you are bowling into the body and near the head, in baseball its is down the middle of the plate and contact with the batter is extremely rare so there is less likelihood of being hit.Also a quick bowler bowling 20 overs a day will put an unbelivable amount of strain and pressure on their body and joints over the course of a day so the tea and lunch sessions are needed.I suppose footballers need to put up their pampered primadonna feet up and get a manicure.

Lords holds 30,000 and is having its capacity increased to 45,000 as are all the other test grounds.Dont forget England play 7 test matches very summer plus 10+ one dayers and 20/20 games which means they are fully occupied 45+days in the summer which gives them far more revenue in the coffers than the RFU who play 5-7 internations a year so its the RFU who need to look at their money generating sources..hopefully rugby will survive.

Cricket can never be as popular Football and why should it be, there are only finite resources and money that is available.Id rather Cricket retains its soul and idendity,history and traditions rather than becoming the gold digging whore who sells its soul to the highest bidder which English football has become.Cricket has far more followers than Rugby; why arent you concerned about that game.

It's also clear that you've never played or even watched baseball. If you had you'd know that pitching the ball right down the middle of home plate is a sure way to give up a home run. Pitchers will try and pepper the edges of the plate, often the inside closest to the batter where the margin for error is tiny. If it moves inside just a hair too much it will hit the batter and keep in mind they wear far less armour than their cricketing counterparts. Plus most batters stand as close to the plate as possible to get as much plate coverage as they can which increases their chances of getting hit even further. Yet still they don't complain about bad light or stop the game because of it.

It's also clear that you don't watch much football. If you did you'd know that even the 'primadonnas' have to put in the effort or they will be dropped (see Balotelli being dropped by Mourinho at Inter, for example). Even the most preening of players would baulk at a half-time manicure, plus the managers would never allow it.

England will be at Lords for a combined total of 17 days for the remainder of this season (assuming all their tests go the distance). Middlesex will be there for 40 days (also assuming their 4-day matches run the course) and for most of those they will struggle to fill the 30,000 seats they currently have, never mind the 45,000 of an expanded stadium. Even when England are there, one of their tests is against Bangladesh which I doubt will drum up much enthusiasm.

"Cricket has far more followers than rugby." Are you sure? The average attendance in the Guinness Premiership in 2008/9 was 10,943. The average attendance in the Super League (played in summer) was 8,730. The 2008 County Championship average (both divisions, I couldn't find separate figures for each) was 3,882 per game or 970 per day. The Twenty20 Cup average in 2008 was 6,250: higher for all the reasons I've stated in previous posts. The Guinness Premiership average will increase in the coming years when Bath and Leicester get new or expanded stadiums, which they will fill. Rugby doesn't need my concern for it has never been in better health.

How, in all seriousness, can cricket claim to be a national sport in Britain when its premier club competition attracts an average of less than 1,000 people? It's not even the leading summer sport. In fact it's more in line with non-league football or supposedly minority sports like Basketball and Ice Hockey. You'd "rather cricket retains its soul and identity, history and traditions," but it's that mindset that is preventing cricket achieving the position of eminence that it should have in Britain. Twenty20 achieves higher attendances for good reasons. The sooner cricket's administrators realise that, the sooner cricket can become a national sport. Anyone who thinks it already is now deludes themselves as demonstrated by the figures above.

jandeczentar

April 21st, 2010, 06:02 PM

That's all good and well, jandeczentar, but when England play Australia IN Australia, the MCG sells out... guess what? That's 100,000 people.

That's all well and good, Dimethyltryptamine, but when England play Australia IN England, the SWALEC Stadium might sell out...guess what? That's not 100,000 people (even if you add up all 5 days).

AdidasGazelle

April 21st, 2010, 07:15 PM

That's all well and good, Dimethyltryptamine, but when England play Australia IN England, the SWALEC Stadium might sell out...guess what? That's not 100,000 people (even if you add up all 5 days).

I think you are being unfair on Test cricket. I agree with you about most county cricket but the Ashes Test series is one of the highlights of English and Australian sport. The last two Ashes series in England have been nothing but thrilling, for English cricket supporters at least!

Are you saying that because attendances in Test cricket aren't as high as for International football and rugby that they are a failure? I'm not sure what you are getting at. The powers that be are testing pink balls for possible night-time test cricket as I'm sure you are aware but IMO there will always be a place for the highest form of the game over 5 days.

I'm already getting a bit bored of watching 20/20 cricket.

salgovernale

April 21st, 2010, 10:44 PM

salgovernale

April 21st, 2010, 10:51 PM

It's also clear that you've never played or even watched baseball. If you had you'd know that pitching the ball right down the middle of home plate is a sure way to give up a home run. Pitchers will try and pepper the edges of the plate, often the inside closest to the batter where the margin for error is tiny. If it moves inside just a hair too much it will hit the batter and keep in mind they wear far less armour than their cricketing counterparts. Plus most batters stand as close to the plate as possible to get as much plate coverage as they can which increases their chances of getting hit even further. Yet still they don't complain about bad light or stop the game because of it.

It's also clear that you don't watch much football. If you did you'd know that even the 'primadonnas' have to put in the effort or they will be dropped (see Balotelli being dropped by Mourinho at Inter, for example). Even the most preening of players would baulk at a half-time manicure, plus the managers would never allow it.

England will be at Lords for a combined total of 17 days for the remainder of this season (assuming all their tests go the distance). Middlesex will be there for 40 days (also assuming their 4-day matches run the course) and for most of those they will struggle to fill the 30,000 seats they currently have, never mind the 45,000 of an expanded stadium. Even when England are there, one of their tests is against Bangladesh which I doubt will drum up much enthusiasm.

"Cricket has far more followers than rugby." Are you sure? The average attendance in the Guinness Premiership in 2008/9 was 10,943. The average attendance in the Super League (played in summer) was 8,730. The 2008 County Championship average (both divisions, I couldn't find separate figures for each) was 3,882 per game or 970 per day. The Twenty20 Cup average in 2008 was 6,250: higher for all the reasons I've stated in previous posts. The Guinness Premiership average will increase in the coming years when Bath and Leicester get new or expanded stadiums, which they will fill. Rugby doesn't need my concern for it has never been in better health.

How, in all seriousness, can cricket claim to be a national sport in Britain when its premier club competition attracts an average of less than 1,000 people? It's not even the leading summer sport. In fact it's more in line with non-league football or supposedly minority sports like Basketball and Ice Hockey. You'd "rather cricket retains its soul and identity, history and traditions," but it's that mindset that is preventing cricket achieving the position of eminence that it should have in Britain. Twenty20 achieves higher attendances for good reasons. The sooner cricket's administrators realise that, the sooner cricket can become a national sport. Anyone who thinks it already is now deludes themselves as demonstrated by the figures above.

i have played club football and cricket most of my life.I havent played baseball but then im English:lol:Youre talking bollocks comparing cricket to basketball in the UK.I know youre trying to be a troll but at least cricket hasnt sold its soul to a load of foreign carpet baggers and dodgy yank businessmen.Most footballers when i was growing up were proper hard men and proper people not the overpaid and yes pampered preening tasteless arrogant morons like ashley cole and john terry we see today.At least cricketers arent cunts..90% of modern footballers are.

Dimethyltryptamine

April 22nd, 2010, 03:14 PM

Anywho :)

the MCG

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/1/128769213_c6c684fa95_b.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3538/3472274585_4333775613_b.jpg
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dowdenphotography/3472274585/

kingfisher09

April 22nd, 2010, 03:46 PM

@salgovernale : You are really naive. Cricket is not played only in England and Australia. Look at its popularity across the globe, specifically Asia. It is the most popular sport in India, Pakistan, SriLanka and Bangladesh. You have no idea about the revenue the game generates. In just in 3rd year after conception the IPL today is worth $4.13 billion. If a sport is not popular the it cannot generate such high revenues. Spoke to a friend of mine in India who was telling me that the seats for the semifinals and finals of IPL were all sold out and were now being sold in the black market for 20 times the original value.

As far as it being a boring sport it depends on how you view it. People classify test matches which is the 5 day version as slow, but trust me I have seen some close fights for all 5 days of the game when no team has had the upper hand. 20/20 is the short version and is a real excitement to watch.

I live in Toronto and have seen and played baseball as well. Have you ever been hit by a baseball compared to a cricket ball. The baseball will feel like a soft tennis ball while the cricket ball will knock your wind out even if you are wearing a helmet. Recent example, Rahul Dravid from the Indian cricket team who had his jaw fractured in 3 places when he ducked into a bouncer in a test match against Bangladesh. Note that he was wearing a helmet with a grill to cover his face. personally I was hit on the fingers while batting and I was wearing gloves. End result, 1 broken finger and lost the nails on 3 fingers. The ratio of cricketers getting injured while batting, bowling or fielding is way higher than that in baseball.

You can argue and discuss all you wish to salgovernale. Thanks.

jandeczentar

April 22nd, 2010, 08:31 PM

i have played club football and cricket most of my life.I havent played baseball but then im English:lol:Youre talking bollocks comparing cricket to basketball in the UK.I know youre trying to be a troll but at least cricket hasnt sold its soul to a load of foreign carpet baggers and dodgy yank businessmen.Most footballers when i was growing up were proper hard men and proper people not the overpaid and yes pampered preening tasteless arrogant morons like ashley cole and john terry we see today.At least cricketers arent cunts..90% of modern footballers are.

I am not "talking bollocks" comparing cricket to basketball in the UK. For both, their premier club competitions attract 3-figure average attendances. The comparison is valid.

Carpet baggers are an unfortunate side-effect of financial success. The only certain way to avoid them (in any business) is to be financially unsuccessful.

Footballers may be "pampered, preening, tasteless, arrogant morons" but a lot more people pay to watch them perform every week compared with humble, salt-of-the-earth cricketers. Why do you suppose that is?

I am not trying to be a troll. I am trying to make a serious point: that cricket in Britain is in dire need of an overhaul, especially at county level. Never before have I encountered a sport with such low attendances where the answer to raising them is so obvious but so ignored. The IPL and Twenty20 has shown the way forward for cricket in Britain. The question is, does the sport want to be successful or does it want to remain on a par with basketball?

salgovernale

April 22nd, 2010, 08:43 PM

AdidasGazelle

April 23rd, 2010, 06:29 PM

Hey Kingfisher i was arguing in favour of the great game of Cricket.India rules Cricket because it is the dominant player..cricket is very popular in England but it will never reach the levels of popularity it has in India and Pakistan.I dont want to be criticaL but dravid should have taken leg guard and he would have been able to play better of the back foot..POOR TECHNIQUE LAD!!:lol:

To be fair, the stadiums are empty for test cricket in India and Pakistan.

The Pakistani team will get better support here in England for their test series against Australia in the summer.

koolio

April 23rd, 2010, 08:19 PM

I think in the future they should have separate stadiums for test crickets and one-day/T20. It sucks watching test matches inside near empty stadiums. It would be better if they only had like 10,000 seats ... would be much more intimate a setting.

Pimpmaster

April 24th, 2010, 09:59 AM

Solopop

April 24th, 2010, 03:15 PM

when england play australia at lords they get 150,000 ticket sold sunshine.

I'm sure it did. :ohno:

AdidasGazelle

April 24th, 2010, 06:55 PM

probably the best cricket stadium in the world when its full

Probably? :lol:

One of the best stadiums in the world full stop.

Aashiq

April 24th, 2010, 07:35 PM

They need to get cricket into the schools in Arabia. It might get them away from those mosques which are spreading all this hatred which we are seeing the results of on the news everynight.

You think mosques spread hatred? :lol:

The news are getting into your head now:ohno:

salgovernale

April 26th, 2010, 01:33 PM

I'm sure it did. :ohno:

what do you mean by that?:nuts:

Solopop

April 26th, 2010, 01:57 PM

It can only seat like 40 000 how could it fit 150 000!?

AdidasGazelle

April 26th, 2010, 02:43 PM

It can only seat like 40 000 how could it fit 150 000!?

I think he/she meant that 150,000 people applied for tickets.

3SPIRES

April 26th, 2010, 03:27 PM

^^ Lord's holds 30,000 so over a 5 day test 150,000 tickets are sold if all 5 days are sold out. 30,000 x 5 = 150,000:)

Solopop

April 26th, 2010, 10:36 PM

It dosn't matter it dosn't count as 150 000 it counts as 30 000 over 5 days of sell outs.

Pompey77

April 27th, 2010, 01:16 AM

salgovernale

April 27th, 2010, 04:00 PM

It dosn't matter it dosn't count as 150 000 it counts as 30 000 over 5 days of sell outs.

back to school dumbo:lol:

Pompey77

April 27th, 2010, 06:21 PM

He cant help it, he’s Australian. Probably above average if he's managed to operate a computer on his own.

CharlieP

April 27th, 2010, 07:01 PM

It dosn't matter it dosn't count as 150 000 it counts as 30 000 over 5 days of sell outs.

Better tell Ausstadiums.com to correct this article about the MCG then:

http://www.austadiums.com/news/news.php?id=33

kingfisher09

April 27th, 2010, 09:40 PM

Probably? :lol:

One of the best stadiums in the world full stop.

Boxing day test matches are a tradition at Melbourne.

Dimethyltryptamine

April 28th, 2010, 07:29 AM

The Gabba (42,000), Brisbane
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2271/2238651404_ca1cc0e1bf_b.jpg
http://www.flickr.com/photos/denniseagles/2238651404/sizes/l/

Sydney Cricket Ground (46,000), Sydney
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2538/3867728868_5669f04976_b.jpg
http://www.flickr.com/photos/keith_mcinnes/3867728868/sizes/l/

Solopop

April 28th, 2010, 09:14 AM

Guys calm down, okay.

I was mearly confused... no need to be rascist.

Hindustani

May 5th, 2010, 09:17 PM

My vote for the Best cricket stadium ever built by a mile easily.

Boxing Day test at the MCG :cheers:
Pic taken by Sathc @austadiums.com
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y83/Sathc/MCG-BoxingDay.jpg

EPA001

May 5th, 2010, 10:47 PM

^^ I have visited the stadium in February. It is magnificant. :).

jandeczentar

June 1st, 2010, 06:00 PM

OMFG thats not his point. Are you slightly simple?

What hes saying is attendances are perfectly healthy (getting 150,000 spectators to see any single sporting fixture is a good result in anyone's book, be it over in 90 minutes or 5 days that's not important). Yes over rates do need to improve and sure there is room for improvement in certain forms of the game. But mainly the point is Lords will expand to 45,000 and everything will be great. O.K.

Anyway I think Lords is already the finest sporting venue in the world this is only going to make it better.

I notice they only averaged about 9,000 per day for England v Bangladesh meaning it was only about 1/3 full for and England test match. Are you really so certain that expanding Lord's (and spending £400m doing so) is going to be so great given that figure in addition to paltry Middlesex attendances?

I've said it before but I'll say it again: they should save their money and concentrate on filling what they have more frequently before they spend millions on expansion.

seaphorm

June 3rd, 2010, 04:17 AM

Sydney Cricket Ground (46,000), Sydney
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2538/3867728868_5669f04976_b.jpg
http://www.flickr.com/photos/keith_mcinnes/3867728868/sizes/l/

i love the SCG. they've managed to improve the seating over the years without losing the gentlemanly feel of cricket

the white picket fences and the old members stand have kept the place grounded (pun intended).

this is also one of the reasons i love the basin reserve in wellington...

grass embankments, the old members stand, give the place a formal english county feel... exactly how test cricket should be.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4046/4484818217_88d1d087e5.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3138/2410599396_d0071994e0.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2409/2334727340_a94f4f268d.jpg

i'm biased though... as i walk through the ground most evenings...

they stand in contrast to the gabbas and mcgs of this world which are wonderful, but do lack that old charm.

magic_johnson

June 4th, 2010, 04:49 PM

cooldude8

August 15th, 2010, 12:01 AM

cooldude8

August 20th, 2010, 10:45 PM

The info is correct. Eden Gardens has 90,000 seats. However, it is capable of holding about 120,000 with just about everyone standing. And that has happened on plenty of occasions. Dangerous I know but that's India for you.
no it has always had those bucket seats the capacity now is reduced as old bucket seats are now replaced with new ones and in old days it wasn't that every stood to make it accommodate 1,20000 infect only a few seat from front rows used to be removed to accommodate big crowds.

ANANDPAZARE

August 21st, 2010, 10:01 AM

no it has always had those bucket seats the capacity now is reduced as old bucket seats are now replaced with new ones and in old days it wasn't that every stood to make it accommodate 1,20000 infect only a few seat from front rows used to be removed to accommodate big crowds.

dude eden gardens had concrete bench seating in most of the stands and only a few stands had bucket seats

KingmanIII

August 22nd, 2010, 04:11 AM

Perhaps....?

http://i31.tinypic.com/2uj409u.jpg

Just sayin'...

jandeczentar

August 25th, 2010, 03:40 PM

KingmanIII

August 25th, 2010, 09:21 PM

Certainly not. Cricket in Britain doesn't fill the capacity it already has so it certainly doesn't need a new 80,000 seat stadium. Plus, Lords and the Oval are perfectly adequate venues that already exist in London.
I'm not talking about T20/county matches -- I'm talking about the 2013 Ashes.

It would be cool, if only for just once, to bring an MCG-like atmosphere to England.

bhupenparikh

December 7th, 2010, 04:38 AM

aaronaugi1

December 7th, 2010, 04:52 AM

Certainly not. Cricket in Britain doesn't fill the capacity it already has so it certainly doesn't need a new 80,000 seat stadium. Plus, Lords and the Oval are perfectly adequate venues that already exist in London.

Isn't the capacity being reduced to 40,000 after the Olympics anyway?

bhupenparikh

December 7th, 2010, 05:26 AM

Motera-SVP (ahmedabad india) 55000 capacity one of the main venue of world cup 2010

C:\Documents and Settings\satyam\Desktop\Aerial_View_Motera_Stadium.jpg

bhupenparikh

December 7th, 2010, 05:33 AM

http://img703.imageshack.us/img703/2027/aerialviewmoterastadium.jpg
http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/7357/800pxsardarpatelgujarat.jpg

Walbanger

December 7th, 2010, 05:54 AM

It amazes me how many venues in the sub continent have had recent developments but still have a mass of obstructed views especially from roofs still built with roofing columns.
I can assume the answer / reason but still disappointing.

KingmanIII

December 7th, 2010, 07:54 AM

Isn't the capacity being reduced to 40,000 after the Olympics anyway?
Not immediately.

Like I said, they could wait until after the 2013 Ashes to reduce capacity.

bhupenparikh

December 8th, 2010, 06:51 AM

Walbanger

December 8th, 2010, 09:50 AM

^^ Column Free Roofing like most of the world :bash:

roninja1999

December 8th, 2010, 12:10 PM

so the temperature facilitates the neeed for a column - no its just cheap cost cutting. This kind of thing looks like a ground from the 1950's!!!!

KiwiRob

December 8th, 2010, 12:35 PM

what is the size of eden gardens ?? which is bigger in ground area size amongst eden gardens and mcg ?? plese give me the size of both the stadiums !!! i know their capacities plese do post some pics to compare..

If wikipedia is correct then I'm stunned as somehow they managed to cram 390,000 people into Eden Gardens in 1987, I know Indians aren't big so don't take up a lot of space but surely this is nuts and not correct.

Andy-i

December 9th, 2010, 04:47 PM

Not immediately.

Like I said, they could wait until after the 2013 Ashes to reduce capacity.

Its virtually certain that West Ham are going to move in and the capacity will be reduced to 60,000.
they have talked to Essex CC about playing some 20/20 games in the summer.

I cant see the ECB taking any Ashes tests away from Lords or the Oval as they will lose money on corporate and hospitality bookings as well as the stadium rent they would have to pay to West Ham.

The only other bidder consided, Spurs, plan to knock the stadium down and build an 80K football only stadium!

Will737

December 9th, 2010, 04:52 PM

Will West Ham have the need for a 60000 seat stadium after they get relegated?

Pants

December 15th, 2010, 05:53 AM

Proposed Adelaide Oval redevelopment:

http://resources2.news.com.au/images/2010/06/17/1225881/089774-new-adelaide-oval.jpg

http://resources1.news.com.au/images/2010/06/17/1225881/089789-new-adelaide-oval.jpg

http://resources0.news.com.au/images/2010/06/17/1225881/088860-new-adelaide-oval.jpg

http://resources0.news.com.au/images/2010/06/17/1225881/089764-new-adelaide-oval.jpg

Pants

December 15th, 2010, 05:57 AM

Few more:

http://www.adelaideovalredevelopment.com.au/files/16_popup_large2.jpg

http://www.adelaideovalredevelopment.com.au/files/batch1285649213_corporatefacilities.jpg

http://www.adelaideovalredevelopment.com.au/files/batch1285649213_fanfamilyfriendly.jpg

seaphorm

December 15th, 2010, 09:36 AM

The Adelaide redevelopment is probably my favourite at the moment... the way it balances park with stadium... trees and grass with seats is admirable in an age of wall to wall seats and heaving ipl masses...

nihad

June 4th, 2011, 11:36 AM

A list of few famous and high capacity cricket grounds

1. Melbourne Cricket ground, Australia
2. Eden gardens, Kolkata , India
3. ANZ stadium, Sydney, Australia
4. Gaddafi Stadium, Lahore, Pakistan
5. DY Patil Stadium, Mumbai, India
6. Raipur International Cricket Stadium, Chhattisgarh, India
7. Jawaharlal Nehru International Stadium, Kochi, India
8. Pune International Cricket Centre, India
9. M. Chinnaswamy Stadium, Bangalore , India
10.Rajiv Gandhi International Cricket Stadium, hyderabad , India

nihad

June 4th, 2011, 11:40 AM

1. Melbourne Cricket ground, Australia

http://cricket.butjazz.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/melbourne-cricket-ground.jpg

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-OW43f8QDsgU/TbzmDGhxeuI/AAAAAAAAHDk/uEFkBnF4hJU/s1600/MCG+%25284%2529.jpg

http://cricketonline.pk/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/MCG-7.jpg

murlee

June 4th, 2011, 11:51 AM

U missed South African and West Indian stadiums which are cool and famous...

And also, u include Raipur and Kochi and miss Mohali, Chennai which are some of the best cricket stadiums?

Ecological

June 4th, 2011, 01:38 PM

Birmingham's Edgbaston Cricket Ground has almost completed it's redevlopment.

Once the stand has been handed over to Warwickshire there will be just two weeks before the first floodlit match on July 15 and then the India Test begins on August 10.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2312/5722198515_c9a457e2cd_b.jpg

http://i30.tinypic.com/24o2j3d.jpg

http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/355/skyviewa.jpg

http://images.icnetwork.co.uk/upl/birmpost/jun2011/3/0/floodlights-at-edgbaston-cricket-ground-261789326.jpg

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5298/5496093313_b361799804_b.jpg

Ecological

June 4th, 2011, 01:49 PM

U missed South African and West Indian stadiums which are cool and famous...

And also, u include Raipur and Kochi and miss Mohali, Chennai which are some of the best cricket stadiums?

He also leaves of the home of cricket, the best and most famous ground in cricket.

sathya_226

June 4th, 2011, 02:09 PM

Yeah he missed lords...

nihad

June 4th, 2011, 03:59 PM

U missed South African and West Indian stadiums which are cool and famous...

And also, u include Raipur and Kochi and miss Mohali, Chennai which are some of the best cricket stadiums?

No offences mate.. its jus capacity wise.. i haven't completed the list its starts over again from 11

ArnageWRC

June 5th, 2011, 05:18 PM

PrevaricationComplex

June 7th, 2011, 12:08 AM

Remember this from a while ago, luckily the beeb put it up on the youtubes

ZEWw5hCMzTw&feature=relmfu

R.I.P Jan Kaplicky :master:

ps. can someone explain to me how a 'semi-monoqocue' can exist? thought the whole point of a monoqocue was that it either is one or it isn't, kinda like how half a hole can't exist.

MS20

June 7th, 2011, 12:31 PM

None of England's Test grounds are stadiums. They're grounds - well, that's by my definition - a stadium is 40,000+. Strange that the home country of cricket has such pitifully small grounds.
Football, Rugby Union & League all attract bigger crowds at International level than cricket...32,000 for a supposed 'National sport' - not very good.

Well, they're not used very often are they? The MCG by comparison is used year round by other sports. Lords doesn't have a football tenant...

The only 40k plus stadium rugby union in England has is Twickenham. Rugby League doesn't have any stadiums over 20,000 of their own. They sponge off football for basically every major event they have.

And I don't know where you got the idea that cricket is the national sport. It would be like saying the sport in your avatar is American's national sport. It may have been at one point in the past, but that ship has long sailed.

I just had a look at your profile to gauge where you might be from...and shock horror it turns out you live in the UK. I would have thought most of this would have been crystal clear to you.

ArnageWRC

June 7th, 2011, 02:17 PM

CharlieP

June 7th, 2011, 02:25 PM

I mostly love Lord's, but I really wish they'd do something about the Compton and Edrich stands, even if it means compromising the Nursery Ground or fixing the famous slope. They look as though somebody's taken the supports between the two levels away and they've fallen down - at the western end the upper tier is practically the same level as the lower tier of the new grandstand!

idlewild

June 9th, 2011, 09:49 PM

I know that football is our national sport – but cricket is meant to be the national summer sport. But the crowd figures apart from the Ashes and the odd other test series – are pretty poor. I just find it sad that it just doesn’t get the interest. The result of this is most counties are in financial strife. Ther game is pretty poorly run – and going off for bad light when there are floodlights is just folly.

I'm not so sure it's as straight forward as a lack of interest. Certainly Cricket in general in this country (England) is not hugely well supported financially with the counties not having anything like the resources of other sports such as Football. Lord's could certainly be greatly increased capacity-wise in theory but one of the fundamentals and traditions that seems to be prevalent with the MCG at Lords is the need to keep things on a modest, serene scale something akin to the humble roots of village cricket, rather than a gradiose money-making 'Melbournesque' scale.

jandeczentar

June 12th, 2011, 01:07 PM

I'm not so sure it's as straight forward as a lack of interest. Certainly Cricket in general in this country (England) is not hugely well supported financially with the counties not having anything like the resources of other sports such as Football. Lord's could certainly be greatly increased capacity-wise in theory but one of the fundamentals and traditions that seems to be prevalent with the MCG at Lords is the need to keep things on a modest, serene scale something akin to the humble roots of village cricket, rather than a gradiose money-making 'Melbournesque' scale.

Increasing capacity is one thing but filling it regularly is quite another. Lord's could be expanded but for what: one or two test matches a year? Middlesex CCC, who use Lord's the most, certainly don't need the extra capacity.

Rev Stickleback

June 12th, 2011, 06:02 PM

I'm not so sure it's as straight forward as a lack of interest. Certainly Cricket in general in this country (England) is not hugely well supported financially with the counties not having anything like the resources of other sports such as Football. Lord's could certainly be greatly increased capacity-wise in theory but one of the fundamentals and traditions that seems to be prevalent with the MCG at Lords is the need to keep things on a modest, serene scale something akin to the humble roots of village cricket, rather than a gradiose money-making 'Melbournesque' scale.

None of the large cricket grounds in Australia are large because of cricket. It's the AFL games that drive demand.

Make Lords hold 60,000 and how often would it get filled? Once every three years for an ashes clash. Maybe a cup final or two each year at best.

Cricket may be the national summer sport here, but that's rather like being the tallest of the seven dwarfs. There's not a lot of competition.

Harry1990

July 21st, 2011, 03:41 AM

KingmanIII

July 21st, 2011, 05:25 AM

I wish to see the Olympic Stadium host an Ashes test before West Ham convert it into a full-time football ground.

Imagine, if only just once, an MCG-like atmosphere in England...

jandeczentar

July 22nd, 2011, 07:17 PM

i think personally England fills out its test matches every year regardless of opposition and out test grounds are too small imo. i think Lords needs to definitely expand to at least 40k and not go bigger than 50k so they can keep it a tastful criket ground/stadium not like the mcg something like the sydney cricket ground would be perfect. i would knock down at least the edrich and compton stands, and probs the two little stands near the pavillion.

for Englands other venues i say between 25 and 35k should be the capacity of the grounds. alot of the grounds could host concerts in the summer as well to make up money etc

would like to see oval,edgbaston,old trafford, headingley expanded at the very least

40,000 for Lord's? I hope not. The test stadiums are already too big for their most frequent users (the counties). Spending millions expanding them in the hope of attracting one test match a year is a waste of money. Better to have them small and expand with temproary seating if the demand for a specific game warrants it.

As to the Olympic Stadium, it might work as a one-off (and the Ashes is the only cricket match in England that might fill a stadium that size) but the venue has no financial future without football and no football club needs a cricket club as co-tennant.

KingmanIII

July 25th, 2011, 02:48 AM

As to the Olympic Stadium, it might work as a one-off (and the Ashes is the only cricket match in England that might fill a stadium that size) but the venue has no financial future without football and no football club needs a cricket club as co-tennant.
That's why I said I'd like to see it host one before the conversion, because it obviously won't happen afterward.

Besides, West Ham should be the last to aggressively push for the conversion to commence immediately after the Games; what I'm still trying to figure out is how a somewhat-recently redeveloped Upton Park fails to meet such a middling club's needs - I'm really gonna get my chuckles outta this thing re-opening with a Championship team -- if not worse...:lol:

CharlieP

July 25th, 2011, 10:57 AM

Having seen pictures of the new stand at Edgbaston, and having seen the weedy Compton and Edrich stands at Lord's during coverage of the England v India Test, I can't help thinking something very similar in bulk and configuration to the former could be built in place of the latter to radically improve Lord's.

The problem seems to be the Nursery Ground - such a development would encroach on its playing area and increase the size of shadows. It seems a shame that such a small ground handicaps one of the most prestigious venues in world sport. :(

CharlieP

July 25th, 2011, 11:03 AM

That's why I said I'd like to see it host one before the conversion, because it obviously won't happen afterward.

Yes, but that would involve a conversion of its own, to cover the running track, long jump pits, technical areas etc. with a decent playing surface. The MCG had to do the same before the 2006 Commonwealth Games, but they had a decent programme of AFL games bringing in enough income, rather than a single Test.

KingmanIII

July 25th, 2011, 11:51 AM

Yes, but that would involve a conversion of its own, to cover the running track, long jump pits, technical areas etc. with a decent playing surface. The MCG had to do the same before the 2006 Commonwealth Games, but they had a decent programme of AFL games bringing in enough income, rather than a single Test.
Yeah, I guess I can see what'd make it impractical...it's just a pipedream of mine. :)

T74

July 27th, 2011, 12:01 AM

There is one other big negative for dual use, the pitches.

Previously the pitches had to be protected in winter, and while it wasn't rolled, it was still hard enough to result in injury and wear and tear issues. Football hated it.

Finally due to this issue, drop in pitches were introduced at the MCG. While this kept the footy happy, and the pitch quality is okay, it's not great. You don't get the same quality of pitch with a drop in one because of the need to move it.

Harry1990

July 27th, 2011, 03:59 PM

40,000 for Lord's? I hope not. The test stadiums are already too big for their most frequent users (the counties). Spending millions expanding them in the hope of attracting one test match a year is a waste of money. Better to have them small and expand with temproary seating if the demand for a specific game warrants it.

As to the Olympic Stadium, it might work as a one-off (and the Ashes is the only cricket match in England that might fill a stadium that size) but the venue has no financial future without football and no football club needs a cricket club as co-tennant.

i would say 40k to 50 k is perfectly acceptable for Lords, london has 6 million people plus a home counties population of approx 20 mil so why not. Lords is also the home of cricket, admired by cricket lovers the world over it should be to a similar size to the other major cricket grounds.

plus England sell out every test match bar probably bangledesh plus good crowds in the ODI and 20/20's. 20 thousand people got turned away on monday on the test match

Harry1990

July 27th, 2011, 04:00 PM

can the OS be used for cricket then?

KingmanIII

July 27th, 2011, 06:40 PM

can the OS be used for cricket then?
When the track is removed, there's just enough room; might need to reorient the pitch slightly.

jandeczentar

July 30th, 2011, 05:43 PM

i would say 40k to 50 k is perfectly acceptable for Lords, london has 6 million people plus a home counties population of approx 20 mil so why not. Lords is also the home of cricket, admired by cricket lovers the world over it should be to a similar size to the other major cricket grounds.

plus England sell out every test match bar probably bangledesh plus good crowds in the ODI and 20/20's. 20 thousand people got turned away on monday on the test match

Why not? Because the India test was an exception rather than the rule. The population of London and the Home Counties is irrelevant. What matters is the number of people coming through the turnstiles and cricket does not generally attract that many customers. Middlesex CCC (the most frequent user of Lord's) plays in a largely empty stadium as it is most of the time. Making it bigger would only exacerbate that problem, as it would for the CCC in every other test stadium. As mentioned previously on this thread, the reason Australian cricket stadiums are so big is beacuse of Aussie Rules. Their counterparts in England do not have an equivalent so building similarly sized venues for cricket in England would not work.

England do not sell out every game they play. The West Indies and even Pakistan could be added to Bangladesh among recent tourists against whom England failed to garner much support.

To conclude: the capacities of England's cricket stadiums are fine as they are. On the rare occasions when more is needed (such as the current India tour) then install temporary seating as was done at the Rose Bowl this year. Otherwise, the counties should save their money.