I notice the MFC will be lobbying the AFL to have a "boutique" stadium at Casey which now appears to be high on the AFL agenda. The investment in such a facility if its happens there will easily offset any initial outlay and possibly see other teams play at Casey.

A boutique stadium would cost many millions, but maybe just a minor upgrade to cater for 10-15,000 people mostly standing would be a financial bonanza for Melbourne compared to opening the MCG for 25,000 against Western Sydney.

And it would create a home ground advantage for Melbourne. Interestingly, the Scorps are undefeated at home this year - 8 from 8. Away from home they have won 2 from 8.

A boutique stadium would cost many millions, but maybe just a minor upgrade to cater for 10-15,000 people mostly standing would be a financial bonanza for Melbourne compared to opening the MCG for 25,000 against Western Sydney.

And it would create a home ground advantage for Melbourne. Interestingly, the Scorps are undefeated at home this year - 8 from 8. Away from home they have won 2 from 8.

Ironically ..its all a bit like history repeatig itself. what we are witnessing is almost the birth of High end suburban footy. and along with that the way the demand will dictate the necessities.I suspect if after a year or so with al parties realising that there is indeed promise in all this then you may well see a plan to"renovate' the place and increase seating and other facilities...just like it all happend scores of years ago, funny that !!

Now we just need some decent lobbying to get that station built sooner rather than later

Need seating to host AFL games, IMO.

...if we want a half-decent crowd, that is.

Now we just need some decent lobbying to get that station built sooner rather than later

An added reason for the State Government to grab the issue and make a winner out of it.

But I agree, some decent lobbying will be needed first.

cant see the point in playing games at a stadium with capacity of 10-15k if that means 5-10k supporters miss out. sure we might make money but how dissapointing for the fans?

cant see the point in playing games at a stadium with capacity of 10-15k if that means 5-10k supporters miss out. sure we might make money but how dissapointing for the fans?

Actually the comment I made about 10-15,000 is probably an under-estimate. There were over 10,000 people at a NAB Challenge match between Essendon and Hawthorn in 2007, and there was plenty of spare capacity over on the outer side of the ground. A crowd capacity of around 20,000 is probably more accurate.

This year the following MCG Melb home game crowds have occured:

v North Melb - 21,220

v Freo - 19,423

v Bris - 23,278

Casey Fields may have struggled with the Brisbane crowd, but could have taken the Freo and NM crowds. Add in Port Adelaide, Western Sydney, Adelaide and the Gold Coast and you have a number of matches to choose from.

cant see the point in playing games at a stadium with capacity of 10-15k if that means 5-10k supporters miss out. sure we might make money but how dissapointing for the fans?

Unfortunately that's what clubs need to make good money.

Part of the reason that Freo and West Coast make so much is because their memebers are forced to buy reserved seats if they want to be guaranteed to get in.

call me a traditionalist, and perhaps the reason we get low crowds is because supporters know they can turn up if they like and get a great seat, but i think, for the good of the club, excluding possible supporters is not a good thing.

if the capacity was 25-30k then these games are feasible, but i'll be very dissapointed if we exclude what few supporters we have.

members need guarenteed access at home games.

call me a traditionalist, and perhaps the reason we get low crowds is because supporters know they can turn up if they like and get a great seat, but i think, for the good of the club, excluding possible supporters is not a good thing.

if the capacity was 25-30k then these games are feasible, but i'll be very dissapointed if we exclude what few supporters we have.

members need guarenteed access at home games.

If you want to make money from reserved seats and such, it's better to have demand exceed supply (or at least have that as a possibility).

I know what you mean, though - it'd be frustrating to miss out even after forking out for a membership.

Casey Fields may have struggled with the Brisbane crowd, but could have taken the Freo and NM crowds. Add in Port Adelaide, Western Sydney, Adelaide and the Gold Coast and you have a number of matches to choose from.

How many were at the Melb v Roos NAB game? It seemed fairly busy then, and would have been pretty miserable if it had been a bad day (ie. during the middle of footy season).

call me a traditionalist, and perhaps the reason we get low crowds is because supporters know they can turn up if they like and get a great seat, but i think, for the good of the club, excluding possible supporters is not a good thing.

if the capacity was 25-30k then these games are feasible, but i'll be very dissapointed if we exclude what few supporters we have.

members need guarenteed access at home games.

I too understand where youre comig from but I sense the reality will be we ( as a collective ) will need toprove the real 'need" for extra seating by cramming the place all but !! and on more than one occasion otherwise the arguments will come that its the exception rather than the rule.

Once the powers that be ( whomever) see a futiure in teh ground then the extensions will come, not the other way around.

call me a traditionalist, and perhaps the reason we get low crowds is because supporters know they can turn up if they like and get a great seat, but i think, for the good of the club, excluding possible supporters is not a good thing.

if the capacity was 25-30k then these games are feasible, but i'll be very dissapointed if we exclude what few supporters we have.

members need guarenteed access at home games.

It would only be for 2 or 3 games a season and we would make half a mil each game (with 20 000) if organised a deal as good as the Cats have.

Melb v Gold Coast, 2.10, Saturday, Casey Fields (CF), Radio: SEN, TV: Get real...FOXSPORTS...delayed.

How many were at the Melb v Roos NAB game? It seemed fairly busy then, and would have been pretty miserable if it had been a bad day (ie. during the middle of footy season).

About 6,000 spectators at the NAB match Melbourne v Kangaroos.

It was nothing like as busy as the year before with Essendon v Hawthorn (over 10,000 spectators).

I can possibly see attndances going up as more Melb folk become familair with the place and adopt it (CF )

I can possibly see attndances going up as more Melb folk become familair with the place and adopt it (CF )

And as the Casey community embraces MFC (but that won't be a bad problem to have)!

If attendances start to rise significantly, it would justify considerable facility upgrades (I imagine that a capacity of 30,000 could be achieved wth York Park type stands).

And as the Casey community embraces MFC (but that won't be a bad problem to have)!

If attendances start to rise significantly, it would justify considerable facility upgrades (I imagine that a capacity of 30,000 could be achieved wth York Park type stands).

A capacity of 30,000. What sort of time frame would you 'guesstimate' for that to happen? 10-15 years time?

A capacity of 30,000. What sort of time frame would you 'guesstimate' for that to happen? 10-15 years time?

I think it depends on the timing of the AFL's commitment to a 3rd stadium in Melbourne. Such a project would require financial commitment by the AFL and the State Government, and a long term commitment by the AFL to schedule matches at the facility.

It would only be for 2 or 3 games a season and we would make half a mil each game (with 20 000) if organised a deal as good as the Cats have.

Melb v Gold Coast, 2.10, Saturday, Casey Fields (CF), Radio: SEN, TV: Get real...FOXSPORTS...delayed.

Doubt that the ground would be of a capacity that can handle an AFL game unless millions are spent on the place.

At best, they might get it up to a standard necessary for a NAB Cup game v one of the lesser drawing interstate sides.

And as the Casey community embraces MFC (but that won't be a bad problem to have)!

If attendances start to rise significantly, it would justify considerable facility upgrades (I imagine that a capacity of 30,000 could be achieved wth York Park type stands).

very much along the lines I was thinking.. maybe a tad less ..at say 20-25. The other thing is if we, again as a collective of MFC ,Scorps and Casey can drive this thing then we may just end up in the box seat come time for the AFL to annoint a defacto 'third' ground. whilst we as a club may not directly benefit in a cash way from other teams playing there it all goes to why anyone would spend money on it..As the defacto home team...it then works in our favour

Doubt that the ground would be of a capacity that can handle an AFL game unless millions are spent on the place.

At best, they might get it up to a standard necessary for a NAB Cup game v one of the lesser drawing interstate sides.

It's already had 2 NAB Challenge matches (Ess v Hawthorn in 2007 - over 10,000, and NM v Melb in 2008 - over 6,000). The NAB Cup matches aren't all that heavily attended, although a later one closer to the finals between 2 Victorian teams would attract a larger crowd.

I have 2007 figures. For example:

1st week

Carl v Essendon (TD) - 28,568

Melb v Hawthorn (TD) - 14,338

Geelong v Richmond (SS) - 12,924

2nd week

(NAB Cup)

Bris v WB (TD) - 12,789

Kangas v Freo (TD) - 9,191

(NAB Challenge)

Coll v St Kilda (Princes Park) - 3,594

3rd week

(NAB Cup)

Bris v Geelong (TD) - 14,475

(NAB Challenge)

Ess v WB (SS) - 7,352

Melb v Rich (Princes Park) - 4,334

4th week

(NAB Cup Final)

Bris v Carlton (TD) - 46,094

(NAB Challenge)

Kangas v St Kilda (Princes Park) - 1,712

Hawthorn v Essendon (CASEY FIELDS) - 10,099

Geelong v Melb (SS) - 3,356

It's really easy to get some conclusions from all of that. When you take into account the 2008 Melb v NM crowd of over 6,000, the most obvious one is that Casey Fields is a magnet for football.

About 6,000 spectators at the NAB match Melbourne v Kangaroos.

It was nothing like as busy as the year before with Essendon v Hawthorn (over 10,000 spectators).

Photos from both events are on the Council website:

Essendon v Hawthorn

http://www.casey.vic.gov.au/caseyfieldspho...e.asp?Item=9644

Melbourne v Kangaroos

http://www.casey.vic.gov.au/caseyfieldspho....asp?Item=13079

The difference in crowd thickness can be seen.

The difference in crowd thickness can be seen.

It looks like many people would have struggled to get a decent view of the game in 2007.

It looks like many people would have struggled to get a decent view of the game in 2007.

I didn't hear that as a complaint from anybody. It mightn't be apparent from the photographs, but there is a substantial spectator mound ringing the oval which makes it relatively easy for people to see.

I didn't hear that as a complaint from anybody. It mightn't be apparent from the photographs, but there is a substantial spectator mound ringing the oval which makes it relatively easy for people to see.

I've been there, and seen the mound which rings the oval. It's also apparent in the photographs - particularly the Roos v Melb game, where you can see people sitting down.

Two things i remember, being blinded by the Sun in the 3rd(?) quarter and it taking about 5 minutes to walk from one side of the grandstand to the other. This must have been horrible at the Bombers Hawks game

Two things i remember, being blinded by the Sun in the 3rd(?) quarter and it taking about 5 minutes to walk from one side of the grandstand to the other. This must have been horrible at the Bombers Hawks game

The ground runs north-south, and the sun is at the same angle as anywhere else in Melbourne. The sun also doesn't shine any stronger in Cranbourne.

Depending on where play is, you might look into the sun. The same can happen at the MCG.

Walking across the front of the granstand I assume you mean. One of the access ways may have been blocked off, and the other obstructed by people. If so, fair comment. The management may need to keep the access way clear of standing spectators.