NZ | RUGBY WORLD CUP 2011

[Snorky33]

Knock at your own leisure to make yourself feel better, but dont come jumping on a bandwagon you really know little about. You dont see me harping on about how shocking it is that NZ really have not done much for the Rugby World Cup - simply because i do not know enough on the matter to comment.

YAWN

[IHaveNoLegs]

Yet all of your posts in the Eden park thread seem to say otherwise

Love the petty nationalism in this forum
I could say Swedish people are a vile scum the world could live without or the roads in Malawi are shit and within 5 minutes some troll from Sweden or Malawi will be here to refute what I just said

Rubbish article.

"Green Point, overlooking Cape Town's Table Bay, was the most expensive of the new stadiums built and it staged just eight matches.

That equates to a capital outlay of $117.5 million for each game held there.'

Yeah because the stadium was demolised the day after the world cup never to be used again.

[Svartmetall]

Originally Posted by Mr_kiwi_fruit

I think that you are all missing the point of the article, it is not only based on the lack of events at the stadiums in South Africa but it is more directed at the expense of the stadiums. Nobody can deny the fact that there was huge budget over-runs on most of the projects related to the FIFA World Cup when the money could have been used more responsibly and redirected towards the people of South Africa who are in dire need of assistance. In a country where millions are living on approximately a $1 a day in slums not fit for human habitation. It is clear that South Africa was short-sighted, they had to prove a point and create iconic structures at the expense of the poor. New Zealand on the other hand places citizens first and doesn't need to prove anything to the world.

Agreed and exactly what I said in my post.

Originally Posted by Mr_kiwi_fruit

Eden Park might not be iconic but it is a huge improvement - nobody can argue against that. Other stadiums in NZ are fantastic and we have created stadiums that will serve New Zealand's needs, not that of a country twice the size.

Agreed too. We don't need huge stadia for there to be a successful world cup and that is not what I was saying in my post. Our stadiums are fine and not once did I knock them in my post. We do, however, have the capacity in Auckland to relocate our main stadium from Eden Park to an iconic Waterfront Stadium as we have an established rugby league both for Union and League. This, combined with other events held at stadiums such as cricket, concerts etc would ensure the viability of a Waterfront Stadium. This is primarily what I was arguing. We wouldn't create white elephants like other nations might.

Originally Posted by Mr_kiwi_fruit

Also, almost everything being built for the rugby world cup is way ahead of schedule and under budget, that in itself is a huge feat and a job well done.

Yep, the fact things are on-time and under budget is excellent.

Originally Posted by Mr_kiwi_fruit

The legacy for Auckland will be immense, 3 new hotels at the airport, major motorway upgrades, entire streets in the city centre are being ripped up and being turned into shares spaces, Aotea Square upgrade, The Auckland Art Gallery upgrade, a brand new waterfront which will serve as the foundation for bigger things to come, train station upgrades, improvement districts have been formed for Kingsland and Eden Valley, Queen's Wharf has been reclaimed as a people friendly space, Q Theatre, the beginnings of a tram network for downtown Auckland, Civic crescent, the area around Eden Park has seen some major improvements for the people living there and lets not forget the K'Road overbridge upgrade. If it wasn't for the RWC we would probably wait for a couple of years to see all of this develop at the current rate.

Now here is where I disagree with you I'm afraid. I think a lot of these things are token efforts or efforts that would have taken place anyway. The motorways would definitely have been upgraded anyway. None of these have any direct correlation to the World Cup and are simply old plans that have existed for a long time. Motorways will, in large, not be used by tourists. Cars are difficult for tourists to hire and drive to the venue given that they like to arrive, drink, drink and drink some more then party afterwards.

The party central concept which includes the waterfront upgrade is the only major project that I can see is directly linked to the RWC and it's a great idea. I hope that the fact that Eden Park and North Harbour are miles away from the downtown venue that this won't be a detraction for the fans.

As for transport improvements, well, they're a drop in the ocean to what is required - especially when you consider cities outside of Auckland. The Kingsland upgrade is good, but our rolling stock will not be delivered in time for the RWC and so capacity on the rail network won't be high enough to support the record crowds that the final is expected to draw. We'll have to wait and see on that front. When you consider transport arrangements that sporting events of this size require in other nations, we'll just have to wait and see to judge how our infrastructure (outside Wellington and Auckland in particular) copes.

Originally Posted by Mr_kiwi_fruit

The above-mentioned projects are far more important than a stadium which will only be used for a couple hours, every other day. It is Kiwi's who will be left with a much improved city, not just during the RWC but long after that, and most important of all extra cash in their pockets. As for doing things on the cheap, bullshit, public spaces are upgraded to the highest quality using the best products they can afford. If you want to see cheap then you must go and visit South africa and make a fair comparison. We don't use ash bricks for paving, bus shelters without any decent form of seating, 80's brick landscaping, twigs/branches for barricades and concrete benches - you get top-notch quality here and it is evident in all the recent public realm upgrades.

When I mentioned doing things on the cheap, I wasn't referring to the quality of what is being done, I am referring to the scope of what is being done. Infrastructure in particular should have been invested in more heavily than it has been. In terms of Auckland, we should have our new rolling stock for Auckland, we should have more central Auckland accommodation, in Dunedin we should have more infrastructure such as extra-wide walkways to the stadium, we should have dedicated bus transit corridors to the stadium etc etc. Do you see my point? These kind of improvements are citizen-orientated, not event orientated and so I do believe they would be a legacy for the population of NZ.

Is that a bit more clear now?

Originally Posted by Mr_kiwi_fruit

You might like to disagree with the article but he is on the money (his points are valid although some of it might be outdated) ... for a little island downunder with a population of 4.3 million we can be very, very, very proud of what we have achieved thus far. I am willing to bet that most of the rugby supporters won't even notice the stadium/s, it is only people like us who are interested in architecture and we are in the minority. Who cares, let the party begin. It is going to be a huge bash for all to enjoy in style.

Again, it's not about the stadiums, it's about the whole package. I don't doubt we'll have a great atmosphere, but we don't want the experience to be diminished for tourists by having complicated and inefficient transport, poor accommodation or anything along those lines.

[Snorky33]

True, Eden Park itself should be OK but for me my biggest worry is that small Kingsland rail station...have you checked out the size of the platforms, you could squeeze in more people on my patio.

[buildemhigh]

Originally Posted by Svartmetall

Now here is where I disagree with you I'm afraid. I think a lot of these things are token efforts or efforts that would have taken place anyway. The motorways would definitely have been upgraded anyway. None of these have any direct correlation to the World Cup and are simply old plans that have existed for a long time. Motorways will, in large, not be used by tourists. Cars are difficult for tourists to hire and drive to the venue given that they like to arrive, drink, drink and drink some more then party afterwards.

The party central concept which includes the waterfront upgrade is the only major project that I can see is directly linked to the RWC and it's a great idea. I hope that the fact that Eden Park and North Harbour are miles away from the downtown venue that this won't be a detraction for the fans.

As for transport improvements, well, they're a drop in the ocean to what is required - especially when you consider cities outside of Auckland. The Kingsland upgrade is good, but our rolling stock will not be delivered in time for the RWC and so capacity on the rail network won't be high enough to support the record crowds that the final is expected to draw. We'll have to wait and see on that front. When you consider transport arrangements that sporting events of this size require in other nations, we'll just have to wait and see to judge how our infrastructure (outside Wellington and Auckland in particular) copes.



When I mentioned doing things on the cheap, I wasn't referring to the quality of what is being done, I am referring to the scope of what is being done. Infrastructure in particular should have been invested in more heavily than it has been. In terms of Auckland, we should have our new rolling stock for Auckland, we should have more central Auckland accommodation, in Dunedin we should have more infrastructure such as extra-wide walkways to the stadium, we should have dedicated bus transit corridors to the stadium etc etc. Do you see my point? These kind of improvements are citizen-orientated, not event orientated and so I do believe they would be a legacy for the population of NZ.

Is that a bit more clear now?



Again, it's not about the stadiums, it's about the whole package. I don't doubt we'll have a great atmosphere, but we don't want the experience to be diminished for tourists by having complicated and inefficient transport, poor accommodation or anything along those lines.

Well said, forget about the private sector (Airport building 2 Hotels) etc but in term of what is being done for the event there are things that are being brought forward that were planned anyway such as upgrades within the CBD.. It is interesting to look at Delhi in terms of the money they have ploughed in with no real way of recouping that spend.. it is purely a statement to the world, however that statement has turned into a rambling drunken wedding speech..

I think we have done ok with respect to not going mad over an event which will come and go. and lets face it the rugby populus of the world that has an interest in Rugby will know about NZ already so we arent reaching out to an audience that isnt aware of Brand NZ... Eden Park is perhaps the biggest example of an opportunity lost, there needs to be consolidation of our sporting facilities and a Central (in terms of sporting codes etc rather than location) would have made the most sense as the upkeep on the multiple stadia will no doubt be something that the Supercity looks at longterm.. Its done now so no real point going on about it.. But it would be nice to see a bit more of a focus on the event, now we have the countdown clock which is great, however I cant help but feel its in a average location (is it going to be moved across the road to Party Central once complete?)

[Mr_kiwi_fruit]

Sorry for the delay Smart-metal, I forgot about this one.

Originally Posted by Svartmetall

Agreed too. We don't need huge stadia for there to be a successful world cup and that is not what I was saying in my post. Our stadiums are fine and not once did I knock them in my post. We do, however, have the capacity in Auckland to relocate our main stadium from Eden Park to an iconic Waterfront Stadium as we have an established rugby league both for Union and League. This, combined with other events held at stadiums such as cricket, concerts etc would ensure the viability of a Waterfront Stadium. This is primarily what I was arguing. We wouldn't create white elephants like other nations might.

Agreed but we all know that it will not happen. One day we might look back and say thank God that it wasn't allowed to be built,but then again we may look back and regret it

Originally Posted by Svartmetall

Now here is where I disagree with you I'm afraid. I think a lot of these things are token efforts or efforts that would have taken place anyway. The motorways would definitely have been upgraded anyway. None of these have any direct correlation to the World Cup and are simply old plans that have existed for a long time. Motorways will, in large, not be used by tourists. Cars are difficult for tourists to hire and drive to the venue given that they like to arrive, drink, drink and drink some more then party afterwards.

The party central concept which includes the waterfront upgrade is the only major project that I can see is directly linked to the RWC and it's a great idea. I hope that the fact that Eden Park and North Harbour are miles away from the downtown venue that this won't be a detraction for the fans.

As for transport improvements, well, they're a drop in the ocean to what is required - especially when you consider cities outside of Auckland. The Kingsland upgrade is good, but our rolling stock will not be delivered in time for the RWC and so capacity on the rail network won't be high enough to support the record crowds that the final is expected to draw. We'll have to wait and see on that front. When you consider transport arrangements that sporting events of this size require in other nations, we'll just have to wait and see to judge how our infrastructure (outside Wellington and Auckland in particular) copes.

When I mentioned doing things on the cheap, I wasn't referring to the quality of what is being done, I am referring to the scope of what is being done. Infrastructure in particular should have been invested in more heavily than it has been. In terms of Auckland, we should have our new rolling stock for Auckland, we should have more central Auckland accommodation, in Dunedin we should have more infrastructure such as extra-wide walkways to the stadium, we should have dedicated bus transit corridors to the stadium etc etc. Do you see my point? These kind of improvements are citizen-orientated, not event orientated and so I do believe they would be a legacy for the population of NZ.

I agree and disagree, there is no denying that certain upgrades were planned but I firmly believe that most were fast tracked to be completed in time for the RWC 2011. Some plans were shelved while other projects were proposed for the RWC 2011, for example, Albert and Victoria Streets were shelved so that they could instead focus on streets that lead off our main street i.e. Queens Street. We would have had to wait until after 2014 for the streets to be upgraded but because of the RWC 2011 they decided to fast track Elliott Street etc. It makes far more sense to delay Albert and Victoria Streets to focus on the inner core. Federal Street was never planned but because of the RWC, SkyCity have asked for this to be fast tracked.

Kingsland train station could be much better but the area has received a major facelift with new connections, landscaping etc. This is all thanks to the RWC 2011. The streets will also be closed off for the games and because of that there is no need to build elevated causeways etc. I am sure that they will do the same in the other cities. More could have been done but I still think that it is a great effort within the means of New Zealand, especially now that we have had so many natural disasters where the money is needed.

Originally Posted by Svartmetall

Is that a bit more clear now?

You will always be heard, if not you will make sure that you are heard

Originally Posted by Svartmetall

Again, it's not about the stadiums, it's about the whole package. I don't doubt we'll have a great atmosphere, but we don't want the experience to be diminished for tourists by having complicated and inefficient transport, poor accommodation or anything along those lines.

I wouldn't be too concerned about that, most will be too drunk to notice, also, many hotels have had makeovers/upgrades. Let's wait and see, I am sure that there will be some hiccups but there is no major event that is without any.

[darkhorse09]

i think stadiums do matter when hosting the 3rd most watched event in the world. people are paying hugh amounts of money just to watch the semi and finals.

[SYDNEY]

[AOTEA SQUARE] opened today, in time for the RWC 2011.

The first phase of Aotea Square's refurbishment was officially revealed today, the second phase will include the installation of a big screen and art works which will be on display during the RWC 2011.

image hosted on flickr

AOTEA SQUARE by Urban+Explorer, on Flickr

image hosted on flickr

AOTEA SQUARE by Urban+Explorer, on Flickr

image hosted on flickr

AOTEA SQUARE by Urban+Explorer, on Flickr

image hosted on flickr

AOTEA SQUARE by Urban+Explorer, on Flickr

image hosted on flickr

AOTEA SQUARE by Urban+Explorer, on Flickr

image hosted on flickr

AOTEA SQUARE by Urban+Explorer, on Flickr

[GoluBoy]

According to the factsheet http://www.nz2011.govt.nz/documents/...fact_sheet.pdf we have the white cloud underway in Feb 2011.

But wait.Lets invisage a large covered space occupying a wharf, with a raised walkway presenting a model advertising summer wear.



http://www.nz2011.govt.nz/queens-wharf

I love N.Z

[ebar86]

where to buy online-ticket?
any suggestion?

[nthbeach]

NZ Hearld suggesting all Chch RWC games would go to Auckland. All speculation at this stage but if Chch does miss out, I would like to Dunedin get some more games and maybe Nelson too, QFs would have to go to Auckland or Wellington, slim change for Dunedin. Is FBS even confirmed yet as Dunedin's venue?

http://msn.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...711835&ref=rss

[whkfan]

I think in the end all the christchurch games will go to Auckland for logistical and commercial reasons.Would love NZ's flagship stadiums FSB and the Cake tin to at least get some of those games. Hamilton cant complain as the city's ground is not big enough.the Hamilton city council is cutting on spending big time so i cant see them making any upgrades or replacing that ugly stand on the otherside of the new one in the next few years.

[Richard7666]

Pool games should go to Tauranga or perhaps Queenstown, both of which missed out completely. I don't recall which teams Chch was hosting..perhaps the aforementioned would be too small?

Also looking at matches, Palmerston North, Nelson and Rotorua definately drew the short straws. Napier did pretty well, scoring a France game.

[Shayno]

Christchurch had pool games with Australia, Russia and England from memory.

[GoluBoy]

I'd like to see pool games transfer from AMI to Forsyth Barr.

Do the people of Christchurch deserve the inconvenience of having to travel to the North Island,if said games are not hosted in Dunedin?.

[nthbeach]

Originally Posted by GoluBoy

I'd like to see pool games transfer from AMI to Forsyth Barr.

Do the people of Christchurch deserve the inconvenience of having to travel to the North Island,if said games are not hosted in Dunedin?.

Yeah fair point, if Chch loses its games, the people of Chch deserve fair access to games, Dunedin would probably best choice.

[Richard7666]

Moving at least the Argentina v Scotland game to Invercargill has been mooted I read today.

[nthbeach]

That would be a huge game for Invercargill. What other games do they have?

[Richard7666]

Invercargill has

Scotland v Romania
Argentina v Romania

so you can see where the idea came from.

For reference, the games up for grabs in the event Christchurch lost them would be:

Argentina v England
England v Georgia
Argentina v Scotland
Australia v Italy
Australia v Russia
Quarter Final 1
Quarter Final 2

[KLK]

I can't see the big 3 pool games - Eng/Arg, Arg/Sco and Aus/Ita going anywhere with a capacity less than 30,000. So FBS (at a tick over that mark) would be the big winner, perhaps picking up two, and Wellington the other.

And the more I think of it, I can't see Invercargill or Nelson picking up matches where England or Australia play, given the potential number of supporters involved - the capacities are too small. So that would mean no additional games for them.

The Q/Fs are interesting. I think QF1 will go to Dunedin - its most likely the ABs Q/F and would be the only chance they have to play in the SI the whole tournmanent.

The second Q/F looks like being Eng v Fra. both teams look like they will be based in Auckland (Eng to relocate from ChCh apparently) so it makes sense to have the game up there. And that match will draw a huge crowd.