North Hobart Fizzer
A highly-promoted AFL event held at North Hobart on Saturday, 1 July 2023, was attended by less than 8,000 people despite children under 16 being freely admitted with adults being charged only $16. This same stadium’s record capacity was set in 1979 with almost 25,000 in attendance. Such a very poor attendance should put an end to the proposed new stadium.
No doubt much of the small crowd that did attend only did so in support of the proposed new stadium because supporters of the said stadium had asked for them to attend to try and justify the reasons for building a larger capacity stadium. The AFL matches referred to above were also held in ideal weather conditions. Has Jeremy Rockliff already worked out who will build this stadium – and make a fortune out of we poor taxpayers?
One must consider corruption in such matters where so much money is being given away for something totally unnecessary. I am sick of people like Jeremy Rockliff saying that Tasmanians want and need a new stadium and AFL team. I could not care less about it, and the people who want it should pay for it themselves.
Take a hike – and take your stadium with you!
– Allan Hamilton, Hobart
The AFL is wrong
I seem to remember somewhere along the way in this stupid stadium business the AFL saying that a new stadium was ‘essential’ to the success of a Tasmanian team. Well. I argue that there is nothing more essential than widespread public support, and that is incompatible with the stadium. Too big, too expensive, wrong location, no consultation, likely white elephant … you name it, the stadium is on the nose with a majority of the Tasmanian people. It is costing the nascent team their social licence. The AFL is therefore wrong. The stadium, far from being essential, is exactly what will prevent the team being successful. Every day the AFL and the rump of the Rockliff government persist with this sideshow is a travesty. Let’s get on with doing the things that actually matter.
– Mike Frood, New Norfolk
Sporting identities spruiking a stadium
Several sporting identities have now been trotted out to spruik a new stadium, a project that’s caused needless community division, despair and anger from the day it was announced. It’s also been evident from Day One that well over half the Tasmanian population is opposed to it. For good reason when there are so many more urgent priorities for our state – not least of which is ensuring everyone has a roof over their head. Initial plans for redeveloping the Mac Point site included a Reconciliation Park, an Arts and Cultural Centre, social housing and a people’s park. A wonderful concept. Federal funding was granted for such a redevelopment project – with no mention it should all go towards building a football stadium to comply with the AFL’s rather high-handed demands.
But that original concept was completely superseded when the AFL arrogantly insisted that for Tasmania to finally have its own team, a new stadium must be built. And it must be built at the Mac Point site. How outrageous. Especially when we already have two stadiums where AFL games have been played for some time, one of which is already being refurbished. What is even more outrageous though is that our premier committed us to a one-sided deal with the AFL, without apparently consulting with his colleagues. A deal that will mean the inevitable cost blow-outs will be borne by Tasmanians, along with the penalty costs for over-runs on the project’s timeline, that could also see the license withdrawn. No wonder so many Tasmanians are furious – or that two Liberal MPs chose to resign over this deal about which so little detail has been revealed.
– Anne Layton-Bennett, Swan Bay
Clarity
New words are constantly cropping up in our lexicon to describe the ever-changing complexities of modern life.
As we consider our new stadium build and the AFL deal; racing integrity; grants programs; political donations; wilderness development EOIs; Marinus Link and now the appointment of the Premier’s temporary media advisor from a lobbyist firm, I offer jeremparency: something which, when viewed by others, is as clear as mud.
– Greg Pullen, Miena
Letters are welcome on any Tasmanian subject, up to 300 words (we allow a few longer ones occasionally but you’d be surprised how much people appreciate you getting to the point). Letters should be concise, respectful of others and rely on evidence where necessary. No links please! Letter writers should provide a real name and town / suburb. Letters can be send on behalf of organisations or groups. Submit letters in the body of an email to [email protected]
Comments are turned off on this post…send us a letter!
