The Cumberland Throw

The New Stadium – Focus Group Feedback

The new Parramatta Stadium (Western Sydney Stadium) is due to begin construction after the conclusion of the 2016 NRL season. It will take approximately 2 years to build. Naturally, this is great news for both Parramatta Eels and WSW fans. I have been invited to be a member of the fan/user focus group, which will meet at various times during the design process. This focus group is being coordinated by PWC, along with Venues NSW and Infrastructure NSW.

The discussions within this focus group will not be bound to any confidentiality agreements. Accordingly, I have decided to share this information with readers of The Cumberland Throw and welcome feedback on the topics listed below. Please be realistic with your suggestions as I will forward relevant suggestions at the next meeting.

 

Parra Stadium

 

Stadium Capacity

This was listed as being locked in at 30K. The reason behind this was the stadia strategy for Sydney, with ANZ, Allianz and Parramatta having a range of capacities to cater for a variety of events. It should be noted that this capacity would include 3000 corporate seats. Essentially we would have a stadium catering for only 27000 general public seats.

Although we were told that this was a set capacity I felt it needed to be discussed and raised my concerns. Credit to our hosts for allowing this discussion and noting the main points.

It is my belief any major construction made using government funding must cater for future needs. To only meet current needs means that the development has come up short from the moment that the design has been completed.

A new stadium in Parramatta which only seats 27000 punters allows for minimal growth. The Wanderers cannot significantly grow their member base. As for the Eels, our membership base has increased to in excess of 20000 during a period of premiership failure. What level of growth could be expected with a successful team? Furthermore, a significant supporter corridor for the Eels is located in north-western Sydney, the suburbs which are currently experiencing major population growth.

From my perspective, a stadium capacity of 35K to 40K would not impact ANZ Stadium’s likelihood of hosting “blockbuster” events. The difference between a nearby 30000 seat stadium or a nearby 35000 seat stadium would surely be minimal in terms of the impact on the hosting of major events. Yet, the difference between the two capacities in catering for the growth of the membership of tenant clubs is significant.

An argument from the government would then be that the flow on cost of providing amenities for an additional 5000 people would be substantial. My counter would be that the cost of a future under-utilised stadium would be far greater.

There seemed to be universal agreement about the need for a venue capable of holding at least 35000.

It would be a concern if the government is looking to save money on the Parramatta development with a view to spending it on another venue.

  • NB – your feedback on this is important

 

Rail Seating

 

Seating

Two aspects were considered

  1. Seating depth vs field proximity
  2. Conventional seating all around the stadium or rail seating behind goals

There was uniformity across the supporter group that maintaining close field proximity was a priority.The issue of seating depth (meaning space between the rows) would be solved by flip back seats which allow the patron to stand when another needs to walk past.

There was a difference of opinion concerning rail seating. The football (soccer) fans want rail seating, which turn terraces into standing room. They have a seat which can lock down when patrons don’t stand. Parramatta have concerns and want this investigated as the rails may block vision when patrons are in seated mode. I also want to know whether standing or seated mode is determined by the stadium at the event and then cannot be changed individually by patrons.

This will again be discussed at the next meeting with seating models to be viewed.

Access Points

It was agreed that the current stadium has issues with delays in patrons entering the ground. The consensus was that more access points are needed.

Stadium Precinct 

There was some discussion about a spectator area outside the stadium. You would enter this area with your ticket and fan events – similar to “tailgate parties” – would be held. It would also be possible for a range of catering trucks and fan displays and activities to be held there.

Catering

There was universal opinion that food and beverage choices need to cater for a variety of tastes. The possibility of outside of ground/precinct catering was tabled. There was some discussion about providing a range of local boutique beers.

Technology

The current substandard PA system was noted. It was accepted that advanced technology would need to be incorporated into a 21st century stadium. The ability to deliver game feeds through stadium WiFi, a stadium App which provides match, ticketing, catering and security services was seen as essential by the group.

Police Presence

The capacity for having highly visible police custody vans within the precinct was discussed. There appears to be a great resentment by WSW fans toward the police and they do not welcome high police visibility. They cite over policing as their reasoning. The perspective of the Parramatta fans was that we do not feel intimidated by a highly visible police presence and welcome the security provided.

The feedback taken by PWC was that there was a distinct difference of opinion on this topic.

Other

  • improved EFTPOS facilities
  • traffic/transport solutions
  • dressing up the Stadium (eg like AAMI Park’s lights)
  • fully utilising the stadium – restaurant, sports museum, local history museum, PCYC facilities – for non match day use
  • special seating – eg “Field Club” suites on the edge of the field and “coaches club” suite next to the coaches box (with a window looking into the side of the coaches box)

Author’s Note

Accompanying this new stadium will be the substantial Leagues Club development. There will be significant precinct development undertaken by the club and any Stadium precinct inclusions should work in tandem with what will be an entertainment hub for Parramatta.

Please feel free to offer suggestions that I can feed back to the next meeting.

Sixties

If you liked this article, you might consider supporting The Cumberland Throw.

86 thoughts on “The New Stadium – Focus Group Feedback

  1. Colin Hussey

    I see no point, in fact having a stadium that currently sits around 20000 fans to only be increased to 30000 is very much short sighted. A stadium in the centre of the western suburbs growth area needs a stadium to seat at least 40000 paying fans.

    It would be different if the Parramatta eels were the only locked in full time users of the facilities but with the Western Sydney Wanderers also using the facilities they, like the eels have the potrential into the future to have fans of at least those higher numbers. Last year the Eels attained over 20000 members which will only increase as success comes to the club.

    The least the facility should be built to in the initial stages would be to 35000, with the planning to & construction to make allowances for increases in the paying spectators to the 40000 mark.

  2. Bean

    The railing style seating is a terrible idea from a rugby league perspective. I hope they don’t go with this. The snap back seats would be the best option (same as ANZ).

  3. Walpy

    I am not sure that I like the idea of a stadium being built that accommodates what some may perceive as anti-social behaviour…IE standing up and jumping around during the whole game, especially if its construction has a deleterious on all other users. Also, it has got to be at least 35k seating!

  4. Elliott Richardson

    The stadium definitely needs to be larger than 30K. Should the Eels or Wanderers undergo any sustained period of success they’ll outgrow the stadium in a season or two.

    An in-built museum and the ability to customise the tunnel for the home side should also be looked at. Second your points RE Wi-Fi and having a 21st century stadium.

    Access for the disabled should also be looked at, ie elevators around the ground to provide easy access.

  5. Serpent

    Rail seating ? Completely ridiculous, who wants to sit amongst those poles, lets not turn this ground into a ground for football thugs and idiots, its just not needed, how uninviting do these rails look.
    Lets keep this family friendly and not turn it into some Euro ground thats catered for idiots.
    Only a complete imbecile would pass this rail seating, surely it couldnt happen.
    This would turn many RL fans away from the ground.
    Cheers and nice blog 60s.

  6. Steven W

    Sixties, thanx for the update.
    Rail seating .. doesn’t look too comfy ! … i suspect a lot of “banged” heads on the steel railing.
    Capacity .. i can’t see any point in anything below 35k .. but … if the parking / access / transport isn’t improved by more than a 1,000% having more punters will be a nightmare (i can see access is a discussion point .. gr8!)
    In one of the other responses i read “in built museum” … what about a serious Hall of Fame Walk into the ground … i am not sure i mean like Hollywood with hands in cement .. but .. a bit like at ANZ where past games host cities and past gold medal winners are recognised.

  7. Serpent

    It needs to be 35k minimum, the whole ”we can only cater for 30k’ is just spin, imagine if everybody who built a stadium said that?
    This is the year 2016 and we are living in a 1st world country in a thriving city, wtf do these clowns mean they can only cater for 30k, theres no excusses, if you can cater for 30 you can cater for 35k, its all spin.
    We need to do this right the first time.

  8. Michael

    Forget rail seating. It looks horrible and uncomfortable. Hopefully they don’t cater for a few idiots that like to jump up and down during a soccer game. The majority of WSW fans are seated.

  9. Xxxxxxxx

    On the old dj’s site their erecting a73storie apartment block with a90 storie one approved across the road not to mention the development around the town hall precint ,the council has declared parramatta will be city proportions in the very near future,based on that any thing short of 35,000 seems backward thinking . As for the police presence they only present a problem to troublemakers and parra crowds behaviour is exemplary, other codes problems belong to themselves but safety belong to us all ,i would welcome the safety of extra police presence !

  10. sixties Post author

    I have no intention of placing any divide between WSW and Eels fans groups. The ability to work collaboratively is an important parameter of focus groups such as this. There was much more agreed upon than there was dissension. Issues like policing and rail seating will ultimately be determined by those who are tasked with Work Health and Safety matters. I am happy that the supporters agree on key matters like stadium size and value comments on this issue. I also appreciate other ideas that have not been raised in the subject areas above.

  11. Hamsammich

    It is absolutely shocking that there is set to be a small increase in the capacity of the stadium, that isn’t future planning and will not allow for the growth of either team. We should be looking at an increase closer to the 35k-37k mark so that when the population of Western Sydney grows the stadium will not be as outdated as it currently is. If it is only increasing to 27k then will there be opportunity to add on to the design if it needs or will the capacity be set in stone once the stadium is built?

    As Walpy pointed out why should we be encouraging bad behaviour with the “safe standing areas”? The way that the RBB carry on a rail in front of them will not prevent injuries and accidents occuring. Also what is preventing them from damaging that structure much like they do now with the seats? Numerous times I have turned up to Pirtek stadium after a game has been played by the Wanderers and there’s a few extra red seats to show what original ones they’ve had to replace. I imagine that the push back from the police in this regard will be the increased capacity when the seats are lifted, they already have enough trouble as it is with a large crowd at the Wanderers and with that increasing further I don’t think they’d be too happy. My issue with these sort of seats isn’t necessarily that they’ll be bad for League, we do have to cater to the Wanderers supporters as they are part of the reason that we are getting the upgrade; my concern is the Wanderers supporters themselves and their complete lack of respect for their environment. I know you can’t bring that up in discussion Sixties as it is important to keep the groups harmonious.

    1. sixties Post author

      Correct Ham. I won’t criticise the fans. Multi-use stadiums are the venues that are most likely to receive government venues. This new Stadium therefore becomes nobody’s home base – meaning no club controls it – the example being both clubs have their own training bases.
      As for capacity, once this is built, that’s it. The structure will not be built in a design which allows for future expansion. We are going to be left with this stadium until such time in the future where it is demolished. Do we really think that this size stadium would cater for a successful Parra now, let alone in 5 years! The big derby games at ANZ already draw up to 50K.

  12. EelsFan

    Stadium needs to be a minimum of 35k seats. 27k (no point including the corporates) is ridiculous for the expenditure given vs capacity growth.

    IF and its a big IF the provisions for a standing area for WSW games could be provided without impediments in line of site, then I am for it. This stadium needs to suit both tenants.

    Wifi, quality sound, and adequate video screens are an absolute must (didn’t see mention of video screens in your report). 2 large video screen at each end of opposing corners must happen.

  13. Gol

    It’s hard to consider anything more than the terrible mistake they are making with capacity here, remembering that Parramatta Stadium was originally built to hold 27,000 back in 1986 it is ridiculous that the new stadium will only hold 30,000. 30,000 makes it a glorified suburban ground, exactly what they are trying to move away from. I don’t know what political machinations are in place that limit the capacity so badly or if it really just is a cost issue but I think 35,000 should be the minimum for this stadium. It is by far the most important issue and honestly I wonder why they are bothering to build a new stadium at all if they are just going to add 9,000 new seats to the current capacity.
    As for the rest of the ideas, I think rail seating for the north terrace is a must, like it or not the Wanderers are co-tenants, they will play more games than us there and active support is very important to them. It needs to be done in a way that doesn’t impede views when in a seated configuration (not just for Eels fans preferences but for any of the other events they hope to lure) but I’m confident if they can design retractable roofs and birds nest stadiums they can figure out how to keep a rail out of your eye line when sitting down. I don’t think petty objections to this from Eels fans will do any good, it is very possible to build a ground that is great for both soccer and league and we need to do that with this stadium. It’s only the north terrace, there will be plenty of other places for you to sit if the sight of rails truly offends you.
    I like the idea of a stadium precinct but am not sure we have the room to do that idea justice. I’m not sure what else is going to go down with the stadium (i.e. are the pools being knocked out, the warm up fields, the car parks?) but things like tailgating and market style precincts, while an awesome idea and one I strongly support, need a lot of space. Parking is already a major issue at the stadium as well, was this discussed? Will the new leagues club car park be sufficient for a new stadium?
    Another thing I feel strongly about is that the stands must be as close to the ground as possible.I don’t know much about the minimum dimensions between field and fence required for safety in a league game but any new design certainly shouldn’t have more room between stands and field than the current stadium on any side. The massive space between the field and stands on the north and south could be shortened too.
    I saw mentioned that the field length would be set to a size suitable for union, which is a ridiculous idea. There will be a dozen league games and 15 soccer games played there a year, at minimum, and there is no prospect of a full time union tenant in the future. To push league and soccer fans an extra 20 metre away from the field just to cater for a sport that won’t use the facility is a horrible idea.
    Again, capacity is the only major issue at this point. If they don’t get that right then everything else won’t matter, in a decade we’ll be moving big games to ANZ once more, the Wanderers will have the entire stadium sold out in season tickets and we’ll all be wondering how to fish this half a billion dollars out of the toilet.

    1. sixties Post author

      Gol, I must emphasise two points.
      Firstly there was almost universal agreement on most issues between the fan groups, with capacity being highlighted even though it was originally not up for discussion.
      As for “petty objections” about rail seating from fans, it was reported in that manner on another site which was not correct. The only concern is finding a design which does not impede views and is safe. There was a decision made to provide a model of the desired rail seat at the next meeting which surely is not petty! To write off one end of a stadium with unsuitable seating is not any form of compromise. The Wanderers are not the primary tenants, they are co-tenants with the Eels, so it is vital to work together. Ultimately, the decision makers will come to an agreement which will primarily be based on providing the best and safest fan experience.
      Compare my report to another floating around on the net. I offer no criticism of WSW in my report. You will note that my replies further encourage cooperation rather than criticism. My only criticism is against improper reporting elsewhere. The fan focus group, to have any worth, must be cooperative, not antagonistic.

      1. Gol

        My point on objections is more directed at the response outside of the forum, not the forum itself. I’m finding a few days later responses are much more reasonable than the initial reactions, I’d say the trolls have had their say and moved on while those more invested continue to put forward ideas. The anti-Eels WSW fans appear to be just as bad as the anti-WSW Eels fans but those committed to working together need to be louder and make sure this stadium is all that it can be.

  14. Serpent

    Ive got a feeling that this whole 30k cap is about Govt deals, they dont want this stadium in any way to take business or big games away from ANZ or homebush, if this new Eels stadium gets any bigger they fear that it will get in the way of legalities struck a long time ago regarding new stadiums in the west.
    And can we not have red and black seats at this stadium, how about a neutral green like at the storms home ground, WSW are blow ins, if anybody deserves the seats in club colours its the eels faithful that have been turning up to the ground for 30 odd years rain hail or shine, and they betta make strung seats because WSW will do their best to rip them out and jump all over them.

    1. sixties Post author

      We’ve pretty much been in agreement with most issues as fan groups. I’d reckon that when it comes to seat colours, with no shared colour, we’d be looking at neutral.

      1. Paul

        There is SOME reasoned discussion here which takes into account the thoughts of both League and Football fans.
        That is great.
        I’m happy that both sets of fans are adamant that the proposed capacity is inadequate. I agree that a minimum 35000 should be the requirement. Sixtiesboy, what impression did you get that this could be a possibility. It appears from a Wanderers forum that the 30000 proposal was set in stone. Did you get that impression? And what impression did you get the representatives from both the Eels and Wanderers might be able to change this?

        1. sixties Post author

          Paul, it was indicated at the beginning of the meeting that it was set in stone. However, when I questioned this, it was opened up for discussion. In my opinion, if we are still in the design process, we must push this issue – both organisations.
          Let me also clarify, multi-use stadiums are more likely to attract funding. There is no reference by me about the Eels being primary tenants nor have I portrayed WSW supporters in attendance in a poor light. Unfortunately, this has not been the case with regard to the portrayal of myself and other Parramatta reps on a WSW website. It is my intention to approach the process in a respectful manner.
          At this point I have not moderated any post. However, I would now ask that people post considered suggestions that I can take back to the meeting. I do not want what I intended to be an avenue for feedback to turn into a sledging match.

          1. Anonymous

            Let us know what site this is there has been some banter plenty dont understand the importance I have not seen any personally aimed at those there on the night.

    2. Bob

      Blow ins who got this new stadium approved.

      If the Eels supporters hadn’t bent over when their club sold game after game to ANZ, you might have got it 10 years ago.

      Face it, Wanderers are the primary tenant.

      The view from rail seating is the same as from a normal seat, unless you’re 3 feet tall.

  15. Luke

    lol love the perception by some off you on here that safe standing promotes anti-social behavior hahaha really clueless.
    capacity is an issue that needs to be done right from the start 30k is not good enough for the growth of either club. Definitely want safe standing in the north terrace however not at the expense of restricted view if eels fans wish to sit at that end, if we can have safe standing and still allow a seated section with no view restrictions then why not? caters for both sets of supporters.

    the Wi-Fi discussion is a joke dont waste the money we got there to watch Football/NRL not web surf the whole game money can be spent in better ways

    seating as close to the field as possible is important as it will create the best atmosphere at all events and screens on both sides of the stadium.

    and to those NRL supporters here talking about anti-social this, thug’s that, just remember it is the success of our club combined with your club that is making this possible put aside your pathetic views on our code so we can get this upgrade done right and both sets of supporters get what they want.

    1. Serpent

      Luke would you invite a guest to sit on a seat that has been stood and jumped on for hours every week with dirty grubby feet scratcking and marking them up?
      Its not respectful to a stadium, nor to other tenants, same with rail seating.
      Just have a look at the carry on from Parra train station to the ground before a WSW its clear to see for everybody exactly what we are dealing with here.
      I see one of the most important things spoken about was police presence and designing a stadium with that in mind, lets get this clear mate, Eels fans are exemplary in their behaviour, thats for you blokes not us.
      Who should this ground be turned into some try hard euro soccer ground for you blokes to act like imbeciles?

      1. Paul

        Snake, can we please leave this conversation open to reasonable discussion and not name calling?
        This stadium is for two tenants, and maybe more, and those childish comments do not belong in a blog that is open to serious discussion.
        Like it or not, the Wanderers are a huge part of why this stadium is getting an upgrade, and in the end, we all want the best stadium possible for both sets of fans.
        I’m hoping from here on in, there will be positive discussion on this subject.

        1. Serpent

          Sounds very reasonable to me Paul, are you here to tell me that the march from the station to the ground from the WSW is not thuggish?
          It defines Thuggish, the whole tone of it is thuggish, if the WSW fans want to be treated with respect they have to earn it instead of a large proportion of their fan base acting like a pack of try hard euro thugs.
          Theres no insults there mate, its calling a spade a spade.

          1. Paul

            You say what you want Snake.
            The discussion here is about the stadium and what can be best for the Eels and Wanderers because both us Eels and them are co-tenants.
            I’ll let sixtiesboy sort out what posts should be moderated.
            I’m just hoping that both clubs get what they want in a joint conclusion.
            There are clearly some small points of difference, yet it seems that they are not insurmountable.
            It appears that both clubs working together is the best chance of getting the best stadium possible.
            I just hope that ultimately, the govt listens.

          2. Paul

            And, I think you’ll find, Green River Eel, that the march is from the Collector, and not the station, and if it was as thuggish as you suggest, the police would not allow it to proceed.
            Anyway, let’s talk about the best stadium the Eels can get shall we?

          3. Serpent

            As the great Michael Bolton once said Paul, ”How can we be lovers if we cant be friends? How can we start over if the fighting never ends oh baby? ”

  16. JJ

    Thanks for the feedback 60’s, overwhelming the consensus is the capacity needs to be increased it will be interesting to see if the feedback on this is catered for in the design submissions.
    Personally if they could build a 35k seating Suncorp equivalent then we will be well served. Its best ground I’ve been to at full capacity to watch footy at.
    Is there a timeline for when concept & pre lim design submission need to be in by after feedback from the focus group ?

  17. Wswanderer

    27k with 3k corporate is not enough. We cannot let this happen. There are ways (including email campaigns, letter writing etc.) of getting our elected officials to give us what we want.

    To Serpent: If you don’t like the RBB standing on your seats give them somewhere to stand. With safe standing 0 seats will be broken. The seats will be wonderfully

    1. Paul

      Not to forget that all of the seats are 30 years old. They are not broken on purpose. They break because plastic becomes brittle, and yes, they are jumped upon, but not broken on intentionally.

    2. Serpent

      ”If you dont want the WSW to stand on your seats give them somewhere to stand”

      Mate how about they just stand on the concrete ground/floor like any normal person?, what exactly is the point of standing on the chairs?
      Its exactly the same view as if everybody stood on the ground, its thuggish, disrespectful and borish stuff copied from Euro soccer, there is no way as Eels fans this should of behaviour should be encouraged by eels fans through catering a stadium for it.

      1. Wswanderer

        The Capos of the RBB make it clear regularly that jumping on seats is not acceptable. However seats do get broken not because people intend to but rather because the venue is not fit for purpose. You can claim that jumping and singing are somehow ‘thuggish’ but that’s not going to stop us. Rail seating would allow both groups (eels and wanderers) to engage in their form of support in environments that totally suit their needs.

        I agree with many here that the rails need to be configured so they do not affect sight lines for seated patrons. This has been done successfully all over the world.

  18. Parramatta Tragic

    I would hope that the names of the existing grandstands, terraces and bars are carried into the new stadium. Those guys have at least earned that. I want to go to a game and watch football, not police and vans. Enough nanny state already thank you.

    1. Luke

      perhaps an interchangeable naming of the grandstands etc so in the football season we get wanderland and everything including granstand naming etc is about our club and then in the NRL season everything is easily removed and covered etc so you can have a completely covered eels ground, grand stands etc. Because we dont want to go to our home games and see parra grand stands, bars etc and im sure you would feel the same way about us. so i feel like this is going to be a delicate situation in the future of the stadium

  19. sixties Post author

    The antagonistic comments on this post now need to stop. We have not had to worry too much about moderating but I am looking for comments that offer ideas for the group. TCT will now scrutinise every comment posted from this point. We will not achieve the world class stadium that we all desire without being to work with, not against, other tenants. As the post author, I ask you to respect my intention to inform fans of the process.

  20. Luke

    haha great working together serpent some amazing insight you have given us lol
    on a serious note i havnt seen much said about a retractable roof?
    is this just to expensive surely we would both benefit from that it would increase the atmosphere that we provide and probably boost you attendances as well when there is bad weather

  21. Forty20

    Echoing the sentiments of sixtiesboy here, I will be deleting comments that are not conducive to a productive discussion of the matter at hand.

    To date user comments and discussion on TCT have absolutely been a credit to our viewers/readership and have required little-to-no moderation but given the importance of this particular issue I will not be tolerating attempts to incite a divide between fans of the two stakeholder codes.

    That said, your feedback on the proposed stadium changes is of the utmost importance to us so please do continue to share your thoughts with us and indeed please encourage other fans you know to do the same. Just keep in mind that stirring hostilities between two franchises that are shooting for a mutually beneficial goal will get us no where fast.

  22. Anthony76

    It is vital for spectator comfort & for improved atmosphere that the stadium roof extends all the way to the front row of the lower tier of seating, this ensures that every spectator is sheltered from the elements. Stadiums in Europe are designed this way & a major drawback in Australian stadiums(including ANZ & Allianz) has been lack of shelter from rain. The atmosphere on game day will also improve with a larger roof creating better acoustics for crowd noise.

  23. Colin Hussey

    60’s, just a bit of an addition to my first post.

    I still believe the need is for a statdium with at least a 35000 capacity, along with if its possible based on architecture allowing for a future increase up to my suggestion of being able to extend to 40000 capacity of paying spectators.

    IIRC the staduim as some have indicated was originally of a higher capacity owing to the grassed areas at both ends of the ground, when that was still there it was how the ground record was achieved. The removal of the grass & building the terraces is what reduced the capacity to todays standard.

    I note that some are suggesting that areas be available for standing room which really means grassed areas, as to stand on concrete would be quite hard over the time of a game. My suggestion then is to perhaps look into the idea of returning both goal post ends to grassed areas, with a stand of seating to the same upper level as the side stands constructed over the grassed area to create a equal levelled structure would meet the needs of all groups in this, & would certainly go towards increasing the stadium capacity.

    Looking at the photo of the red seats & SS rails above them, certainly would be a turn off for me, the seats look very uncomfortable, although the holes would mean rain would not pool in them like happens now. Seats that are the same as they are now are not really that bad, & one can sit in reasonable comfort, so if they were fold up seat with holes for drainage would be ideal. NO bars though as there is nothing wrong with the way it is now.

    1. Luke

      im not 100% certain but i think there are restriction from the FFA that do not allow an active group to occupy a grass hill, safety reason but again i could be wrong

      1. Paul

        That is correct Luke.
        Anyway, the govt is spending $300 million on a state of the art stadium. There will be no grass hills and it is quite extraordinary that it even be suggested.
        There have been some great stadium designs posted on the WSW forum.
        I’d be happy if any of them were selected as our new stadium.
        I just hope we can get the govt to agree to a larger capacity than 30 000.

  24. John

    There was a quote in the Telegraph early in the week (I think this week) by Paul Lederer that he wanted a 35,000 seat stadium and that the design for the stadium as yet was not signed off. I also seen that the Eels management was quoted as saying that they beleived it would be 32,000 seats. clearly 35,000 is the correct number.

    Further when the stadium was first built there was no consideration given to corporate seating as I remember and this contributed to the reduction in capacity from 27,000 along with the loss of parts of the hill as Colin has suggested.

    1. Anonymous

      Am I being to conspiratorial in thinking there is something suss behind the rejection of 35,000 is it insurances ? Anz contract ? Prexisting design?

  25. John

    Looking at the comments so far I do like the suggestion that if there can’t be a retractable roof then the the roof at least be extended as far as possible and to the front of the terraces as a minimum.

    Also as a minimum there needs to be good Wifi and decent catering at reasonable prices.

    1. Paul

      Agree about the roof line John. Essential that in this day and age, there is as much roof coverage as possible because the media coverage of sport is so good, people will just stay at home at the slightest hint of rain.
      Not sure about the Wi-Fi.
      I go to Pirtek to watch the Eels and Wanderers. Not to play on my phone, and if I do, I have service anyway through my provider.
      Why do people expect free Wi-Fi everywhere they go these days?
      Also, I don’t mind paying a fair price for food if I have to, but the quality needs to be improved if the stadium caterers are going to charge exorbitant amounts for below average quality.
      Spotless stadium at Homebush probably has the best stadium food in Sydney, yet it is still well below the standard set by the USA at their stadiums.

      1. Luke

        100% about the wi-fi, for the people who believe that Wi-Fi is a necessity can you explain to me why?
        (no sarcasm intended i genuinely want to know why you believe we need it)

      2. John

        Paul I apologise about being slow o get back to you but I have been away. I agree on the issue of food. I am also happy to pay a fair price and enjoy buying food at the football but sorry what is served up at Pirtek at the moment barely passes for food. Further to this I am diabetic and basically I am unable to eat anything that they sell and I tend to bring my own from home.

        On the WiFi I like to go to the game early and watch the U20’s so whilst I am waiting for the NRL to start rather than working on installing the beer goggles I get on the internet. Also there is often more than one NRL game on at a time and I like to keep track of any other games that may be being played. I also like to track the stats as the games is played.

        When I go to the SCG I get free WiFi the same at the Olympic stadium. If we are spending hundreds of millions of dollars building a stadium to get the lastest and greatest why not free WiFi. I live at Pyrmont and always carry my Tablet as I walk around there is plenty of free WiFi and rarely do I have to tether to my phone to get service. I fail to see why it is an issue.

        1. Luke

          good point you raise john about wifi, i think it is more a personal opinion of not needing it and seeing the money spent better in other areas but if it is and important addition to the stadium for eels fans and no other area of the upgrade is affected (due to lack of funds) i dont see the issue with having it

  26. Glenn

    The capacity need to be 35k minimum, WSW matches regularly attract a full stadium and I’m sure so will Parra once successful. However, even if the stadium is built to 35k is there enough room outside the stadium for seating on grass looking at a large screen, similar to tennis at Wimbledon. This would cater for the times the stadium is full, or cater for patrons for a lesser fee. Also a mode of transport (perhaps light rail) from parking areas away from the stadium and train patrons should be considered. This could be funded partly by State and Federal government and even Parra City Council and Parra Leagues.

  27. Michael

    Hi Sixtiesboy, have you been advised of a date when the final decision will be made on the design of the new stadium?
    Instead of having a standing area wouldn’t it be easier just have seats that flip up when there not being sat on.

    1. Anonymous

      So if you have abay of 300 rail seats you can have extra capacity once its locked into safe standing mode (maybe up to 500for those 300 seats ) also the rail provides safety higher than a back of a seat for crowds that stand and so no avalanches something to keep in mind for eels fans in finals would be extra capacity, super league stadiums still have terraces at grounds even in st helens new ground I believe they have a standing terrace looking for eels fans to get behind this as parra club have set against it , mindlessly.

      1. sixties Post author

        Anonymous, this will be a multi-use modern stadium. If a major tenant and the government want an all seat venue, it cannot be achieved if it’s built with terraces. The Parramatta Eels are working with WSW in looking at suitable rail seating models. Although the fans don’t see eye to eye, the two clubs have had no issues at working together. We will look at seating models as part of the focus group. But it is essential that views are not blocked by rails.

        1. Anonymous

          That sounds great I was under the impression that the parra club had said a straight out no to the rail seats in the north terrace and completely understand regarding views but if its just a case of not being interested in something different think about having a semi with with extra capacity

    2. sixties Post author

      The flip up seats were discussed for all around the stadium. This allows for movement past patrons as others move to their seats. No dates given, but next meeting should be soon.

      1. Anonymous

        Let reiterate that the wanderers fans would only want safe standing for the northern terrace, no more , so flip up seats for the rest would be completely expected

    3. sixties Post author

      Michael, I haven’t been told. As for the flip up seats, they will be the likely seats for the stadium. However, you couldn’t safely have flip up seats in a standing area without some sort of rail. Hence the problem.

  28. Mitchy

    Good read sixties.i along with the fans agree that we need 30+k stadium. Sorry but this stupid idea of rail seating is crap…and sorry but the police need a presence and the Wanderers issues are not important about over policing?.police wouldn’t have to POLICE if they behaved. It’s simple.
    The extras sound good. PCYC, etc. and restaurants. The cetering besides subway is atrocious.

    1. Luke

      our issues are not important??? its comments like that that make me despise the fact our success has been a major part of you getting a shinny new stadium, i couldn’t careless what crap you have swallowed from the media or what you think of us and how we choose to support our club, but this is something we must work together on and i dont understand how hard that is to get that through your head, rail seating and over policing are major issues and concerns for us, i CAN NOT STAND that statue at the entrance of the north terrace of some league player but i understand it is of great importance to eels fans so we live with it and would expect it to remain even when the new stadium is constructed. We also understand your concerns of obstructed view and i have not had one wanderers fan disagree with the idea that we will only have rail seating if it does not obstruct the view of seated spectators. If this is going to get done right and everyone is going to be happy your opion of how we support our club or our code really need to take a back seat because your opinion on that topic is irrelevant

      1. sixties Post author

        Luke, you are now entering into the territory where, as the author, I intend to pick you up on a major misconception. The Wanderers are not the reason for the Stadium upgrade. This needs to be understood. Having a multi-use Stadium is the reason for the upgrade, and the organisations must and will work together to achieve this. I don’t mind passionate debate over key issues like the pros and cons of features, but any suggestion of the Wanderers being the major tenant is way off. If we, as fans, wish to get some say in what is built then the barbs need to cease. If they can’t, then we may find the fan groups without a voice in the process.

        1. Colin Hussey

          60’s absolutely correct, many people here & on a multitude of fan groups, seem to have the view or mistaken belief that the eels own the stadium, as they have been the primary users of it in ages past, going back to when the oval was used for dog races, then small stock car races, over the years of the old Cumberland it was shared with RU, on alternate weekends.

          Who paid for the new, existing stadium, certainly the eels didn’t as it was owned by in part Parramatta Council & the Parramatta Park Trust. Today its in whose hands, still not the club, & probably part owned by Council as caretakers including the Park Trust, who also employ the staff for maintenance. The eels & wanderers pay a hire fee & both are tenants & that’s it.

          The club can be asked for input, along with other interested parties including the general public in these matters but, it will be the government bodies that make the final decision. That decision will be very much based on the best way to build the new stadium to suit all the tenants, in this case the primary users being Wanderers & Eels.

          If rail heights are a problem, & a focus put on the Wanderers because they like to stand, when RL is played on any ground & a move is on to score a potential try, most of the seated people stand up to roar their team on.

          Perhaps its possible for the rails to be temporary or removable features & put in at the beginning of the respective codes year, & tenancy. Would or should suit all sides of the debate.

        2. Luke

          Sixties i apologize if my post came across as if we owned or we are the only reason for the upgrade that is not how i see it, however if we did not exist this upgrade would not happen it is the success of both the eels and the wanderers that made this upgrade possible and it annoys me when you have league fans on here commenting on how we support our club or what they think of football fans when quiet frankly that has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand, and there complete disregard of what we believe are major issue’s is concerning, so i wanted to remind the people that love to hate football that with out us this would not have happened and i complete agree that in order for this to be a success we need to work together and compromise and agree to get the best out of this upgrade.

          1. sixties Post author

            Appreciate that Luke. As a member of the focus group I am committed to work towards having the best possible (35K+) stadium.

  29. Luke

    the other thing i would like to suggest once the upgrade is complete (not sure exactly how good NRL/eels are at listening to there supporters) but fight for your home. we have been fortune enough to have an owner that really engages and listens to fans and as much as the FFA and ANZ daydream over the possibility of a Sydney derby at ANZ. we do not allow it as Parramatta is our home and were we want to play our games regardless of who will turn up. standing strong on this point is the reason we have not gone to ANZ yet although it will happen (when the upgrade takes place we will have no choice) . unless you enjoy playing games at ANZ but lets be honest unless you are getting 60k+ it is a lifeless stadium and the new capacity at Parramatta will suite most of your games. Although i know you guys are tied in to some ANZ contract but for how long? if your not stuck in a 20+ year contract with them fight for all your games to be played at Parramatta it provides a much better fell and atmosphere and is your home you have a right to play your games there

    1. Gol

      I don’t think there are many Eels fans that want games to be taken to ANZ but even if the club didn’t already have an agreement, the NRL is ‘influencing’ a lot of clubs to take their biggest games to big stadiums to draw crowds. There wasn’t exactly a consultation process when the deal originally happened that let the fans protest the decision but the current Eels CEO has stated that even if we didn’t have this agreement the NRL would force us to move games. With a 30K new stadium chances are we’d be forced to move games yet again within a few years.
      Be very grateful for private ownership that consults and cares about fans, that is a very rare thing in professional sports. Hope that when big money is thrown at the team to move these games they stay strong and put fans first.

      1. sixties Post author

        Luke, this is a big reason for needing that 35 to 40K stadium. The Eels have always been proven to have massive support in successful years. They have not played finals football for 6 years. Having a stadium close in capacity to the current one is not forward thinking – either for the growth of WSW or the engagement of Parramatta fans in successful seasons. It really leaves me shaking my head. As for Parra specifically, you can bet that a successful Eels selling out matches at Parra (and that will happen) will lead to the NRL to push for more games at ANZ.

        1. Luke

          agree completely it is not big enough and pointless to only go to 30k. although with the whole staying at parra for all games is a bit tricky for league i would imagine, football and nrl have two very different cultures. We take our home ground very very seriously and to us it is home away from home we are supporters we dont care what extra money the governing body can make off us moving, we fight to stay where we are because it is our home but this fight does have at serious cost several times we have had to protest and leave the stadium or not attend matches so our voices can be heard, ultimately this was a success but every minute we were not on the terrace getting behind the boys was like a dagger through the heart, we also had to make sure that the club and players new exactly what we were protesting so they did not feel we were turning our backs on them, at the end of the day i have no doubt if this is a major issue for you and all eels fans are on the same page there are things that can be done so that you get what you want but as i said earlier it takes alot of pain, sacrifice, and hard work for just a small step forward. This is why i think the focus group and the fact MOST eels AND wsw fans seem to be on the same page and working together only then will we get the maximum benefit from this stadium.
          lol after that rant (apologizes for those who read it lol) i would like to know as i have not seen you comment on it sixties, how much was spoken about a retractable roof or much more cover then we have now, i feel like that is almost as important as the capacity as bad weather does affect both of our attendances particularly with families and small children (the future of our codes) and these are supporters we need to nurture and provide the best match day experience for.

          p.s in my rant i dint not meant you do not care for your home ground or we care more purely just explaining from my point of view lol

  30. Anonymous

    An article for safe standing In 2013-14, six of the clubs in the top 10 for attendances on the continent were German – and campaigners in England want to follow their lead to improve the fan experience

    By Brian Oliver

    “When a church choir want to sing they stand up. Same for a pop singer. And you don’t sing an opera sitting down. If you want to sing and cheer to support your football team, you want to stand up.”

    So says Jon Darch, one of the most vociferous campaigners for safe standing areas in football stadiums.

    English supporters can still be among the noisiest in the world, as England fans showed by outsinging the Italians throughout the recent friendly in Turin. But the atmosphere at many Premier League stadiums has diminished since the introduction of seats-only legislation in the UK in the early 1990s, which was followed by Uefa’s ban on standing at all their club and international games from 1998.

    The famous Kop at Anfield became all-seated, as did the biggest bank of terracing in English football, the 32,000-capacity South Bank at Molineux, home of Wolverhampton Wanderers.

    Many grounds were old and unsafe, and in need of refurbishment – so many famous arenas all around Europe soon became all-seated. The Bernabeu in Madrid, which once held 125,000, became an 80,000 all-seat stadium. Lisbon’s Estadio da Luz was completely rebuilt, as was Hampden Park in Glasgow. 

    But there was resistance to sitting down in Germany: the fans stood up for their rights and the clubs found a way around the new rules, with a lot of help from clever German manufacturers. Even now, they are finding new ways to meet the demands of fans who want to stand up. The capacity at Bayern Munich’s Allianz Arena is increasing, thanks to the installation of more standing room. 

    This weekend there will be 25,000 fans standing on Dortmund’s ‘Yellow Wall’ – the South Stand – for the game against Eintracht Frankfurt. Plenty of Manchester United fans at Everton and Chelsea’s following at Arsenal will stand up too, but they will be asked to sit down. 

    They would not have to if German stadium technology was permitted. 

    “Half of the 18 clubs in the Bundesliga have rail seats,” says Darch. These are seats that lock upright, leaving rows of standing areas with built-in safety barriers. They are seats for Uefa-licensed matches and standing areas for domestic games, where standing is not banned but welcomed.

    Werder Bremen were the first club to use the technology about 10 years ago, since when many others have installed it. Clubs in Austria, Hungary, Switzerland, Belgium and Norway have put in rail seats too. 

    There are other options: bolt-on seats, and aluminium foldaways that tuck into a terraced metal step. All are safe and modern, as opposed to the old terracing of 50 years ago. “I don’t even like to use the T-word,” says Darch. “The 21st-century stadium has safe standing areas, not terracing. I think they are all German solutions.”

    An anti-seating protest movement was started in Denmark in the year of Uefa’s announcement in 1998, but it made little impact. The Germans showed the way to do it.

    “German clubs are majority-owned by supporters and are there to keep those supporters happy,” says Darch. “Germans always have stood up at games, and they always will. They did not accept all-seat stadiums.”

    There are, on average, 10,000 standing fans at every Bundesliga game. The crowd noise is praised by managers and players from other countries and even by politicians, whose support means that standing areas will probably, at some point, become legal in Britain.

    Alastair Campbell, Tony Blair’s chief strategist in the government from 1997-2007, tried to put safe standing in the Labour party election manifesto.

    “The debate is shifting,” he said. “I’d advise anyone who fancies a weekend away to go to a big match in Germany, where lower prices and safe standing have helped make the German leagues better attended and with better atmosphere.”

    All thanks to German stadium technology – and supporters who refuse to be told to sit down and shut up.

    1. sixties Post author

      Thanks for the post. The issue is mainly rail seat heights, not the concept. If the height doesn’t impact vision, the clubs will sort it out.

  31. Trouser Eel

    It’s not that I am an alcoholic – I thought I should get that statement out of the way nice and early.
    The new stadium needs to have bar facilities suited to having a significant proportion of the 25-30K people all wanting to grab a beverage in a short 10 minute interval. I observed at a recent ACDC concert that technology is available whereby 4 x beers can simultaneously be poured from the one pull handle.
    Similarly, toilets should be designed with the following in mind:
    1. Women take 50% longer than men to do their business – there should accordingly be 50% more female toilets to prevent those depressing lines forming in front of their toilets.
    2. Each toilet area should have one entry and one exit point for ease of ingress and egress.

    I think most other points have been adequately made above so I’ll refrain from making the same points about seating, capacities, wifi etc etc.

    1. John Eel

      Well said Trouser Eeel and you should not have to trudge down to ground level when you are sitting in the Thornett stand to get a drink or go to the toilet

    2. Serpent

      Trouser the answer is not more ladies toilets, the answer is introducing female Troughs along the wall, similar to the male single units, they could just turn around and use them, then they could be moved in and out fast, even just Chinese style holes in the concrete floor, why should our stadium money go to creating more womens toilets?, you dont see blokes having to go into cubicals to do their number ones, these women need to get real, they are so pampered for its not funny.
      The better you design and make their bathrooms the LONGER they will stay in there, do it my way and they wont be staying in there any longer than needed.
      cheers

        1. Serpent

          Haha 60s, yes pass it on please, good to see some light hearted humour is accepted on TCT, a site without humour is a site without a soul, cheers

    3. sixties Post author

      Cheers Trouser and Johneel. The female toilet facilities hadn’t crossed my mind to be honest so I will take note of that. There’s no alcoholism involved, but trouser and I did select the Cronin stand for season tickets as it retained a public bar with a viewing area!

      1. John Eel

        60’s that is a good tip but it is not going to help me for next year but we will see what the new stadium brings. The guys working at organising the season tickets this year have been very helpful to me and moved my seats from the rear to the front of the Thornett stand on the Northern side of halfway so that I can watch Semi score his try a match this season at Pirtek.

  32. Jim

    Any less than a 35,000 seat capacity would be a huge mistake as it dose not allow for ticketed membership growth. Having a strong police presents is a great idea. I question the intensions of anyone that has an objection to a strong police presents at the games regardless of what is happening. Sadly there are a lot of people that go to events with the intension of causing trouble & this has been seen recently with the use of flairs at the stadium. Apart from being dangerous Flairs would destroy the seats in OUR new stadium & that should also not be tolerated. Transparency is vital in business as it exposes wrong doing & that has certainly been an issue for the Eels board over many years & now that the NRL are forcing the Eels board to make changes to increase the transparency of our boards operating, I feel it is also vital that the police have a strong presents so the users of the new Parramatta stadium adhere to the rules so all of us can enjoy whatever event we are attending.

    1. sixties Post author

      The 35K is really a no-brainer.
      As for the crowd problems, there is quite a debate within the WSW fan base. They love active supporter groups because of the colour and atmosphere. But it seems that there are some issues for them to work out from within.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

%d bloggers like this: