50,000 capacity limit at Lansdowne Road bad for Rugby

[patslatt]

The 50,000 capacity of the rebuilt Lansdowne Road is very inadequate for a modern stadium. If it were 75,000 capacity, the extra 25,000 seats would make a huge difference,millions of Euro in bottom line profits every year from an extra 150,000 or so potential ticket sales. More important, the capacity limit will increase the proportion of high priced corporate guests in attendance at key games at the expense of the average genuine rugby fans who follow the local club games.

The planners didn't want to upset the local nobs and Nimbys in the stadium's vicinity. Well if the locals are upset by the occasional large crowd, why did they choose to live there in the first place? Planners often have no idea.

[Keith-M]

I have some sympathy for the residents here. I bought my house on Dublin's NCR almost 20 years ago, long before Croke Park was the enormous eyesore it is today and there was no debate about changing the whole format of the Gaelic and Hurling competitions to bring more matches and bigger crowds to Croke Park. Noadays when there are games on a SAturday and Sunday, the place is mental and getting in or out is just impossible.

[alonso]

pat it replaced a ground which had a 54,000 capacity in a decrepit hovel with a modern arena with 50,000 seats. No big deal

FYI the nobs and nimbys did not oppose this on the grounds of "occasional large crowds" they objected to certain details of the proposal. And it was govt policy to build this stadium. The ABP inspector recommended refusal. It's not up to the planners to make applications, the IRFU and FAI went for 50,000. The site has massive constraints but this issue of location was beyond the remit of the application, even though the inspector used it in his recommendation.

You often bring up issues here without the full facts.

[johnfás]

pat it replaced a ground which had a 54,000 capacity in a decrepit hovel with a modern arena with 50,000 seats. No big deal

FYI the nobs and nimbys did not oppose this on the grounds of "occasional large crowds" they objected to certain details of the proposal. And it was govt policy to build this stadium. The ABP inspector recommended refusal. It's not up to the planners to make applications, the IRFU and FAI went for 50,000. The site has massive constraints but this issue of location was beyond the remit of the application, even though the inspector used it in his recommendation.

You often bring up issues here without the full facts.

Current Lansdowne (well just demolished!) had a 49,000 capacity for rugby actually. And you are correct, the number of tickets available for each match through the clubs will actually diminish under the new stadium due to an increase in t he number of corporate seats. Beyond that, Wanderers Rugby Club have taken most of the additional 1,000 tickets as a bribe to stop their planning appeal .

[alonso]

only recently. It used to be 54,000 for soccer and rugby. My response was more to do with the age old hobby of bashing the professionals when it's the politicians, and chairpersons of the organisations that are to blame

[patslatt]

pat it replaced a ground which had a 54,000 capacity in a decrepit hovel with a modern arena with 50,000 seats. No big deal

FYI the nobs and nimbys did not oppose this on the grounds of "occasional large crowds" they objected to certain details of the proposal. And it was govt policy to build this stadium. The ABP inspector recommended refusal. It's not up to the planners to make applications, the IRFU and FAI went for 50,000. The site has massive constraints but this issue of location was beyond the remit of the application, even though the inspector used it in his recommendation.

You often bring up issues here without the full facts.

People who must have all the facts before thinking usually can't think very well! If the application was for 50,000,surely in the preplanning discussion stage IRFU was told 75.000 or so was not on. Constraints on the site could be eased by a ban on cars within a half a mile of the stadium.

[patslatt]

I have some sympathy for the residents here. I bought my house on Dublin's NCR almost 20 years ago, long before Croke Park was the enormous eyesore it is today and there was no debate about changing the whole format of the Gaelic and Hurling competitions to bring more matches and bigger crowds to Croke Park. Noadays when there are games on a SAturday and Sunday, the place is mental and getting in or out is just impossible.

Just like rush hour,which people tolerate Monday to Friday.

[johnfás]

They could have fairly easily made it 60,000 anyway. Little do people know the new Lansdowne Road is actually just the Emirates Stadium with a different roof and modified at one end, which lowers the capacity by 10,000. Designed by the same people and it is the same basic bloc - so the IRFU told me anyway .

[alonso]

People who must have all the facts before thinking usually can't think very well! If the application was for 50,000,surely in the preplanning discussion stage IRFU was told 75.000 or so was not on. Constraints on the site could be eased by a ban on cars within a half a mile of the stadium.

bizarre first sentence!

Possibly they looked for a bigger stadium, and they were looking at different alignments but still couldn't get the numbers. They did all that pre pre-planning with their architects, designers and surveyors. Cars are banned within a large cordon anyway.

but the constraints I referred to had nothing to do with traffic, but physical constraints - O'Connell Gardens, and the requirement to retain the back pitch. These could only be eased by a ban on living within 100 yards of the stadium - ie purchasing and demolishing a terrace of houses worth E650,000 each or so

[coc]

I have some sympathy for the residents here. I bought my house on Dublin's NCR almost 20 years ago, long before Croke Park was the enormous eyesore it is today and there was no debate about changing the whole format of the Gaelic and Hurling competitions to bring more matches and bigger crowds to Croke Park. Noadays when there are games on a SAturday and Sunday, the place is mental and getting in or out is just impossible.

Back in the eighties the capacity of Croke Park was pretty much the same as it is now. Granted, there are now more matches in a year than then, but I cannot believe anyone buying a house in the vicinity could really have been surprised to learn that on match days the traffic would be mental.

As for the capacity of The New Lansdowne Road I'd reckon 50,000 is about right. The reality is that both the FAI and IRFU would have serious difficulty filling a bigger stadium more than once or twice a year - there just isn't the interest. Look at the Millenium Stadium when Wales are playing soccer. The place is less than half full (on a good day) and the atmosphere is terrible. The GAA can alleviate this problem by playing 2 (or sometimes even 3 fixtures on the one day, but that's not an option for Soccer or Rugby and even then, I doubt the GAA draw crowds of 65,000 plus more than 12 times a year. Then they can fill it 4 or 5 times a year with concerts and that's it. It'll be interesting to see how many show up to Croker next year for Italy in the rugby.

If it were 75,000 capacity, the extra 25,000 seats would make a huge difference,millions of Euro in bottom line profits every year from an extra 150,000 or so potential ticket sales.

There's a big difference between actual ticket sales and potential ticket sales. What do you do if you can only draw a crowd of 50,000 to a 75,000 seater? It's just a waste of resources.

The reality is that Dublin doesn't need two Croke Parks. Now that the principle has been breached, I'd be surprised if we don't see soccer and rugby back in Croker for really big fixtures on a case by case basis even after Lansdowne Road is finished, expecially since the soccer and rugby seasons are mostly in the winter and spring, when Croker is largely lying idle.