General footy chat SCG - a cricket ground

[barry]

SCG trust is doing its best to avoid putting in drop-in cricket pitches, and apparently designed the new stands so there would not be a wide enough gap to drive in a new pitch in the future.

Nasty pieces of work that bunch.

[Blood Fever]

SCG trust is doing its best to avoid putting in drop-in cricket pitches, and apparently designed the new stands so there would not be a wide enough gap to drive in a new pitch in the future.

Nasty pieces of work that bunch.

Cricket fan as well as Swans fan. AFL overreaching and arrogant as usual. Historic NSW cricket ground. Leave it alone.

[wolftone57]

Cricket fan as well as Swans fan. AFL overreaching and arrogant as usual. Historic NSW cricket ground. Leave it alone.

Why? Drop in pitches are used extensively today. They are good pitches and it stops the problem of pitches having to be relayed after every winter

Sent from my ANE-LX2J using Tapatalk

[Blood Fever]

Why? Drop in pitches are used extensively today. They are good pitches and it stops the problem of pitches having to be relayed after every winter

Sent from my ANE-LX2J using Tapatalk

Only used in states where AFL dominates. Not used overseas. Melbourne wicket was lifeless for years after drop in first used. Only marginally better now. Pitch preparation traditional part of the game. MCG, SCG, Gabba, Adelaide Oval all originally cricket grounds. SCG especially doesn't have to roll over to the demands of the AFL.

[Faunac8]

SCG trust is doing its best to avoid putting in drop-in cricket pitches, and apparently designed the new stands so there would not be a wide enough gap to drive in a new pitch in the future.

Nasty pieces of work that bunch.

Apparently being the key word. Any actual facts to back up this allegation?
And just curious what does SCG stand for again?

[Captain]

I would be interested to see if this is actually the case but my feel is that more people would go to the SCG every year to watch AFL than watch cricket.

[neilfws]

I would be interested to see if this is actually the case but my feel is that more people would go to the SCG every year to watch AFL than watch cricket.

I wasn't sure about this but according to the SCG 2017-18 annual report (PDF) - you are correct.

Total cricket attendance for that period was 371, 470. Total AFL attendance was 421, 838.

I've read that cricket brings in more revenue, but haven't seen the numbers for that anywhere yet.

[Blood Fever]

I wasn't sure about this but according to the SCG 2017-18 annual report (PDF) - you are correct.

Total cricket attendance for that period was 371, 470. Total AFL attendance was 421, 838.

I've read that cricket brings in more revenue, but haven't seen the numbers for that anywhere yet.

Clarkson brought up the different nature of the centre area as an excuse after we beat Hawks recently despite winning there over the last few years. Never been heard about since Swans started there nearly 40 years ago. AFL not the major sport in Sydney and the Swans have established themselves brilliantly and the proposed new facilities are fantastic. Club is really well respected. This sort of over reach, especially in conjunction with the AFL, could backfire in terms of PR.

[neilfws]

Clarkson brought up the different nature of the centre area as an excuse after we beat Hawks recently despite winning there over the last few years. Never been heard about since Swans started there nearly 40 years ago.

Yes, for anyone a little baffled as to what the issue really is (as I was) - it's alleged that the cricket square is slipperier than the rest of the ground. There were also concerns as to how the surface would hold up under the increased schedule of other sports this season.

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/cricket/pitch-battle-afl-says-drop-in-strip-would-look-better-for-game-20190702-p523hg.html

That article states that "Swans players have privately complained for years about slippery conditions on the cricket square once it was wet."

[KTigers]

I wasn't sure about this but according to the SCG 2017-18 annual report (PDF) - you are correct.

Total cricket attendance for that period was 371, 470. Total AFL attendance was 421, 838.

I've read that cricket brings in more revenue, but haven't seen the numbers for that anywhere yet.

Yes, you'd think it would. Tickets to the cricket are definitely higher than Swans ticket pricing. Also, people are there
for six or seven hours as opposed to three for a Swans game, so cricket fans will be spending more on food & drinks.

[bloodspirit]

Cricket fan as well as Swans fan. AFL overreaching and arrogant as usual. Historic NSW cricket ground. Leave it alone.

I'm with you Blood Fever. I feel this way despite being way more passionate about footy (I only care about first class cricket) and despite the fact that I'm unsurprised that footy attracts greater numbers to the SCG, I'm only surprised the difference is so small but that's because I'm barely aware of BBL.

[KTigers]

Whether the centre square is "slippery" or not "slippery", don't both teams play on it at the same time, right? I don't understand
the fuss.

[Hotpotato]

So is it more to do with injuries ?

[liz]

So is it more to do with injuries ?

I'd have thought that was the major concern. I've heard players talk about how difficult it is to select appropriate footwear to cope with the difference in traction and hardness, especially when the ground is wet. That also has a knock-on effect for the quality of football that we get to watch, if it means players are likely to slip over.

I don't think the team has suffered a high incidence of injuries that could be attributed to the state of the ground (compared to, for example, the WA teams who are still struggling with playing so regularly on the hard Optus ground). So it's probably not a major issue.

That said, whether AFL or cricket pulls in more people, or generates more revenue for the SCG Trust, they are both clearly important sports to the commercial operations and community purpose of the stadium. I don't think it's unreasonable for the AFL competition (and the Swans in particular) to wish for their requirements to be taken into consideration in the ongoing management of the stadium, something that I suspect happens less than it might.

[Blood Fever]

I'd have thought that was the major concern. I've heard players talk about how difficult it is to select appropriate footwear to cope with the difference in traction and hardness, especially when the ground is wet. That also has a knock-on effect for the quality of football that we get to watch, if it means players are likely to slip over.

I don't think the team has suffered a high incidence of injuries that could be attributed to the state of the ground (compared to, for example, the WA teams who are still struggling with playing so regularly on the hard Optus ground). So it's probably not a major issue.

That said, whether AFL or cricket pulls in more people, or generates more revenue for the SCG Trust, they are both clearly important sports to the commercial operations and community purpose of the stadium. I don't think it's unreasonable for the AFL competition (and the Swans in particular) to wish for their requirements to be taken into consideration in the ongoing management of the stadium, something that I suspect happens less than it might.

Probably not unreasonable to ask, but NSW is and has been the powerhouse of Australian cricket, has won the most Sheffield Shields easily and the current Test team has at least half the side from there. The Swans get a really good run in relation to the iconic Sydney sporting arena and are now further enhancing their presence in the new facilities within the same precinct. Reckon they and the AFL should pull their heads in a bit on something, whilst probably annoying to the players, is not such a big deal.