$50-$60 million for a 20k stadium.

I know it sounds like a lot of money, but when you consider that the City of Casey is currently building a leisure centre (50 metre pool, water slides, gymnasium etc) just down the road that it is costing $37 million it just puts the figure into a bit of perspective.

If this does indeed take off however, I want it to be our ground. I don't want other Victorian clubs playing home games there.

Ideal world, yeah. But how can we hope to do that?

Frankly, a boutique stadium will only come about with the strength of club numbers. MFC, NMFC, ST.KFC, RFC, and WBFC require a small stadium to make money out of.

Ideal world, yeah. But how can we hope to do that?

Frankly, a boutique stadium will only come about with the strength of club numbers. MFC, NMFC, ST.KFC, RFC, and WBFC require a small stadium to make money out of.

I can't see any of ST.KFC, RFC, and WBFC playing home games at casey in the short term. The bullies have the NT match which is a boutique game and has worked well so far. Richmond provided they are going ok have the support to not require a smaller ground and I think the saints would stay at the dome. North would definately benifit from a small ground like this and I would be more then happy to share this ground with other sides provided we never play a vic side there (expect for geelong!) How good would it be to have a game sold out to MFC members only! I would hate to be one of the umpires that day!

Ideal world, yeah. But how can we hope to do that?

Frankly, a boutique stadium will only come about with the strength of club numbers. MFC, NMFC, ST.KFC, RFC, and WBFC require a small stadium to make money out of.

I think the boutique stadium at Casey idea is reliant on GC-17 & West Syd coming in, my reasoning is that I think the contract between the AFL & MCG is for a certain No of games a year to be played & the 'G'.

Lets hope something can be done as the MCG is draining football clubs @ the moment, WHO'D OF THOUGHT.

better off building a stand at punt road

better off building a stand at punt road

To line richmonds pockets?

you would be better to save the money and just play in geelong!

better off building a stand at punt road

That would be a total waste of time & money, as the AFL is in a battle to win hearts & minds of the new growth areas beforw these people are converted to other sports.

The Cattery is a winner, as would be the Waverly ground as a boutique, the Casey venture would be in the right area.

That would be a total waste of time & money, as the AFL is in a battle to win hearts & minds of the new growth areas beforw these people are converted to other sports.

The Cattery is a winner, as would be the Waverly ground as a boutique, the Casey venture would be in the right area.

You're right - it's about getting it in the right place.

Waverley is in the right area, but there is so little parking in the vicinity that they have to tell their members who come to a Family Day to park over at Waverley Gardens Shopping Centre and walk across.

Casey Fields is likewise in the right area. With an increase in parking, and extension of the railway line and a station at Casey Fields, it will all start to come together.

You're right - it's about getting it in the right place.

Waverley is in the right area, but there is so little parking in the vicinity that they have to tell their members who come to a Family Day to park over at Waverley Gardens Shopping Centre and walk across.

Casey Fields is likewise in the right area. With an increase in parking, and extension of the railway line and a station at Casey Fields, it will all start to come together.

They would have to do some serious work on the traffic flow.

They would have to do some serious work on the traffic flow.

That would be the understatement of the year. But it is in hand.

Planning is for:

* a 4 lane road running north-south alongside Casey Fields (Casey Fields Boulevard)

* traffic lights at the intersection of Casey Fields Boulevard and Berwick-Cranbourne Road

* 3 connecting roads into Casey Fields from Casey Fields Boulevard

* extensive carparks inside Casey Fields.

Timing is the issue, but it will happen in stages.

Initial stage - a 2 lane road with 2 connecting roads into Casey Fields and traffic lights at Berwick-Cranbourne Road (with Casey Fields Boulevard at 4 lanes in the vicinity of the intersection).

Subsequent stages - upgrade Casey Fields Boulevard to 4 lanes and build 3rd connecting road into Casey Fields further to the south.

The initial stage should be in place in about 2-3 years, provided land development continues at the same frenetic pace. If development stops to a crawl, then so will the infrastructure construction.

Planning is for:

* a 4 lane road running north-south alongside Casey Fields (Casey Fields Boulevard)

* traffic lights at the intersection of Casey Fields Boulevard and Berwick-Cranbourne Road

* 3 connecting roads into Casey Fields from Casey Fields Boulevard

* extensive carparks inside Casey Fields.

Timing is the issue, but it will happen in stages.

Initial stage - a 2 lane road with 2 connecting roads into Casey Fields and traffic lights at Berwick-Cranbourne Road (with Casey Fields Boulevard at 4 lanes in the vicinity of the intersection).

Subsequent stages - upgrade Casey Fields Boulevard to 4 lanes and build 3rd connecting road into Casey Fields further to the south.

Hear is a picture to help.

http://maps.google.com.au/maps?q=Cranbourn...sa=N&tab=wl

I can't see any of ST.KFC, RFC, and WBFC playing home games at casey in the short term. The bullies have the NT match which is a boutique game and has worked well so far. Richmond provided they are going ok have the support to not require a smaller ground and I think the saints would stay at the dome. North would definately benifit from a small ground like this and I would be more then happy to share this ground with other sides provided we never play a vic side there (expect for geelong!) How good would it be to have a game sold out to MFC members only! I would hate to be one of the umpires that day!

The WBFC would much prefer to play that game in Victoria and make the same amount of money than play it in Darwin.

St.Kilda has one of the worst stadium deals with Collins apparently.

Richmond struggle, like most clubs, to make money at the G against Freo and the like.

All these issues lead me to believe they wouldn't mind playing two to three games each year at a small stadium that they can make money out of.

The WBFC would much prefer to play that game in Victoria and make the same amount of money than play it in Darwin.

I have never seen the WBFC come out and state this, actually they have always claimed how happy they are. If they were to play a game anywhere except the dome I think it would be in geelong as this is closest to the growth corridoors in the west.

St.Kilda has one of the worst stadium deals with Collins apparently.

Again source? but they have had their chance with the casey zone before us and chosen against it. Very strange descision to walk away, it will be interesting where stkilda is at off field in 3-5 yrs vs the dees. Who knows they could well be where we were or worse at in the middle of 08.

I have them penciled in ATM as the next club to fall in a heap onfield. Retirement of champions, not much young talent coming through, reasonable finishis each year = low picks, a board history of instability etc etc. Who knows the saints could become the devils (As in Tassie Devils). I would be very suprised to see Stkilda involved initially with any new stadium like this.

Richmond struggle, like most clubs, to make money at the G against Freo and the like.

Agree, but only when they are not going well. If the tigers are rolling they will pull 35k+ I have a feeling that strange smell of moth balls might be in the air in 09 (well early at least).

All these issues lead me to believe they wouldn't mind playing two to three games each year at a small stadium that they can make money out of.

Agree re making money out of it, but I don't think there would be as many games as you are suggesting initially. If its a success for 1 or 2 clubs others will then get on. Re freo crowds the same could be said of probably any club ex collingw#@d. Ess and Carl can both pull under 30k for intersate games at times, but i think a game at casey would not be in their direction. It would be the clubs that are currently selling home games interstate. Therefore MFC,Kanga's, Bullies. Take bullies off the list as I would expect them to play in geelong if this was the case. This leaves original 2 to give 3-4 games/year plus preseason. I will agree that if it was to take off then it is likely more games would be played especially if an 18th side came in. But at this point you would have to budget for only 17 sides by 2020.

Can I also make a point that i think it is a discrace that we sell our home game v syd away. They were the 1 interstate team that we would always get a reasonable crowd due to the sth melb connection. v Bris fair enough but to do it against sydney is a joke and we are the laughing stock of the AFL every time we play a home game in canberra.

the quicker we get out of this deal the better. Play freo somewhere, play WC somewhere, Even port or adel. But STOP playing the swans in canberra. It doesn't work at all for us and all we are doing is growing supporter base for the swans! I would be happy to play any of these sides even on the GC until their side comes in. The game does not work for us. I would suggest we were better off playing bris in bris - at least it wasn't growing their supporter base! Why did north walk away from this deal - it gave them nothing long term!

Hence why casey is a must! I don't think it has to wait for trains, surely the local council and state government would have enough buses to shuttle back into the city etc. 15k would not cause massive traffic jams. (I'll take a deep breath now!)

Hence why casey is a must! I don't think it has to wait for trains, surely the local council and state government would have enough buses to shuttle back into the city etc. 15k would not cause massive traffic jams. (I'll take a deep breath now!)

I agree it doesn't have to wait for trains, to schedule a match at Casey. But the long term possibility of a boutique stadium (ie 20k seated @ $50-60 million)probably wouldn't get off the ground without a govt commitment to a station nearby. Nevertheless, the planets are coming into alignment for this to happen in about a decade.

In the meantime matches could be played at Casey with little additional infrastructure beyond what is currently planned at the VFL oval. There would be very little seating - it would be standing room only.

There has already been a crowd of 10,000+ for Hawthorn v Essendon in 2007 (NAB Challenge series).

The Casey Fields Boulevard connections would be necessary, but that's only a couple of years away. A possible scenario could be:

2009 - NAB Challenge match

2010 - NAB Cup match (the building extensions would be finished IF MFC signs the agreement with the Council)

2011 - AFL match (Melb v Freo??) if the Casey Fields Boulevard works are complete, otherwise 2012.

I agree it doesn't have to wait for trains, to schedule a match at Casey. But the long term possibility of a boutique stadium (ie 20k seated @ $50-60 million)probably wouldn't get off the ground without a govt commitment to a station nearby. Nevertheless, the planets are coming into alignment for this to happen in about a decade.

In the meantime matches could be played at Casey with little additional infrastructure beyond what is currently planned at the VFL oval. There would be very little seating - it would be standing room only.

There has already been a crowd of 10,000+ for Hawthorn v Essendon in 2007 (NAB Challenge series).

The Casey Fields Boulevard connections would be necessary, but that's only a couple of years away. A possible scenario could be:

2009 - NAB Challenge match

2010 - NAB Cup match (the building extensions would be finished IF MFC signs the agreement with the Council)

2011 - AFL match (Melb v Freo??) if the Casey Fields Boulevard works are complete, otherwise 2012.

Seating is easy, there would be a warehouse full of it for the GP. a few port-a-loo's and caravans selling hot food/beer.

It would be awsome - bring on 2010

Seating is easy, there would be a warehouse full of it for the GP. a few port-a-loo's and caravans selling hot food/beer.

It would be awsome - bring on 2010

It would be for a say MFC v Freo clash. Crowd might be 15,000, with few opposition supporters present. Most of the crowd would be MFC members, so the gate wouldn't be high, although you would expect quite a few locals who wouldn't otherwise go to the footy. Assuming an avalanche of free tickets for kids would soon gobble up a lot of seating with no revenue.

Temporary seating (uncovered) costs around $20/seat (installed and removed) in place for a couple of weeks.

It seems to me that it wouldn't stack up (so to speak), unless the AFL subsidised the seating costs in the interests of getting AFL footy into the growth area.

Anyway, a game can still take place without seating - I always used to stand on the Moorabbin terraces until Waverley Park was built. If we are keen on seeing a couple of matches at a venue which makes it more viable for the MFC then maybe a few creature comforts like seating and cover can be forgone. Fixture the matches in early April and late April/early May and the weather should be kinder than in June/July/August.

I always used to stand on the Moorabbin terraces until Waverley Park was built. If we are keen on seeing a couple of matches at a venue which makes it more viable for the MFC then maybe a few creature comforts like seating and cover can be forgone. Fixture the matches in early April and late April/early May and the weather should be kinder than in June/July/August.

Yep, done plenty of standing at Princess Park, Arden Street, Victoria Park, Western Oval, Kardinia Park and Windy Hill too from memory, even bought a standing room ticket to the 1982 Grandfinal to see the Dees in the under 19's , cost $1. Standing is fine (seating is better of course :-), just wondering how many would fit within the current fencing boundaries of Casey Fields. I didn't make the preseason game last year Melb V North where there were 8000? Was there much standing room remaining?

Also while it is standing room, more people would fit. If seating was put in on a permanent basis I imagine the viewing area would need to be expanded outward?

Also while it is standing room, more people would fit. If seating was put in on a permanent basis I imagine the viewing area would need to be expanded outward?

Permanent seating would have to be looked at in the context of a boutique stadium. The whole facility would then be re-designed.

just wondering how many would fit within the current fencing boundaries of Casey Fields. I didn't make the preseason game last year Melb V North where there were 8000? Was there much standing room remaining?

There were 6,000 at Melb v North:

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

However, the year before, there were 10,000 at Haw v Essendon:

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

The photos show solid crowd for the Haw v Essendon game, but this was on the grandstand side of the ground to behind the goals. In the Melb v North game, even on the grandstand side, the crowd was far thinner.

There were far fewer people on the outer side for both games, and therefore plenty of room for more people - even for the Haw v Essendon game.

I would think that it would hold at least 15,000 people standing and probably 20,000 at a squeeze.

Thanks for the reply casey scorp

Casey is pretty easy for me to get to; I saw it on the TV before I went to a practice match last year and then the North match. Both times I took my own fold-up chair and sat on the outer side. You can position yourself right at the top of the mound and get great view; the comfort of the seat is up to you.