Stadium Ireland Should it have been built??

Johnny_the_fox

Stadium Ireland should have been built.

In the North, as the UK are bidding for the Olympics - a 30,000-seater sports stadium for the north is mentioned as a possible venue. The new stadium will house soccer, rugby and gaelic in the future...

As the south calls for croke to open its doors.. they lag behind. The Irish government cant decide, whether to pick their nose or built a stadium.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Big Ears

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

Im not saying what has happened , im just saying in the lower rounds of the Heineken Cup(group stages lets say)
Muster would probably only get 30,000)at the most , im not talking semi-finals .
I live and am from Munster I know what the demands for tickets were .
The majority of the provence would havee gone if it could have .
They're capacity's are around 12,000 (less for Musgrave Park) and thats why they want to develope them .

I was speaking hypotheticly , and I probably didn't make myself clear , and probably still haven't , so hopefully you will understand this post .

take the could in my post before this as : would only be able to get.
and put earlier rounds before, Heineken Cup .

Flukey

Although there is more demand than space, Thomond Park holds a special place in rugby and moving Munster games to anywhere else would not quite be the same. That is the feeling amongst the fans. Playing in Lansdowne Road was in some ways like an away game for them.

Big Ears

Flukey wrote:

Although there is more demand than space, Thomond Park hold a special place in rugby and moving Munster games to anywhere else would not quite be the same. That is the feeling amongst the fans. Playing in Lansdown Road was in some ways like an away game for them.

Tis true but they are hardly going to build a stadium in excess of 40,000 now are they ? , and thats the minumun they would need to host a semi-final .
Id say people would be more upset playing a semi-final at Thomand with only 12,000 tickets available .
There would be chaos .
Although it would be interesting to know , if Thomand would be used for a semi ahead of Lansdowne if Thomands re-developed to 25,000-30,000 .
25,000 : I think not , 30,000:maybe .

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

thejollyrodger

This thread was started becuase of the poor state of affairs of Irish sport. Should stadium ireland have been built really refferred to the rest of the smaller projects earmarked for Abbotstown, the swiming thing went ahead, but the rest of the projects didnt.

I dont think the actual stadium should have been built there. Landsdowne road will do at 50,000. Its open to all field games and will serve dublin well, GAA,Soccer,Rugby etc. (Even Shels will get use of it wen they qualify for the group stages of the Champions league )

The rest of the sporting infasturcture should have been built. The rowing facilites down in Cork are a disgrace, 1/2 built in the middle of no where. The shooting facilites should cost next to nothing but we have absolutely nothing. We should do very well at that sport considering. Running is another sport that doesnt have any centre of excellence. The list is endless. Abbotstow catered for all those sports, it should have went ahead (bar the 80,000 stadium). It still can.


No where outside Dublin has a decent stadium. GAA might be able to come to a deal with IRFU and FAI to build a stadium down in Munster. Its only croke park that is the problem is with, AFAIK. The government should defintely go ahead with something that is new and can accomadate 30,000 seating with a roof either in Cork or limerick on existing sports ground. A small 30,000 wouldnt cost a great deal.

Some of those so called stadia are a disgrace, as someone described, concrete slabs with standing room only. Who wants to go to the toliets in one of those. Pumping money into them wont make much of a difference, they are well past their sell by date.

Flukey

I haven't been in it, but the Gaelic Grounds in Limerick is meant to be a fine stadium now. There should be more work put into different venues around the country across all sports. There should be more investment in the sports themselves too. Investment in sport has long term benefits in all sorts of ways, so more money should be put into it.

Big Ears

The Gealic grounds does look a nice stadium now , although I would like to see some all-seater GAA stadiums , even Croke Park had to have terracing because of room issues .

Most of the Gaelic grounds is seated and it looks a very nice stadium .

and back on topic , yes I think the facilities that would have gone with stadium Ireland should have been built .

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Flukey

Terraces have a special sort of atmosphere. I viewed many a match from the old Canal End. In a corner near the Cusack Stand there was a great view and it was there that I usually stood. Croke Park has lost some of its character in the redevelopment, but nowhere moreso than in the loss of the Canal End terrace.

bonkey

This appears to be turning into a "what I'd like to see in a stadium", as opposed ot a somewhat political issue of whether or not the Stadium Ireland project should go ahead.

I'll give the thread 24 hours.

jc

Sparks

Er, jc, the Stadium Ireland project is cancelled, has been for some time. The Campus Ireland project is what's running now, and it's quite a different animal than Stadium Ireland. Stadium Ireland wouldn't have done any of the minority sports much good, but Campus Ireland might - though some changes need to be made. For example, we were asked to put forward a business plan for building and opening a shooting range there. Which sounds reasonable until you realised that they were asking for a "beverly hills gun club" rather than a training and competition facility for athletes...

bonkey

Sparks wrote:

Er, jc, the Stadium Ireland project is cancelled, has been for some time.

/me looks up at the thread title and the poll question.

It may be cancelled, but the question appears to be whether or not it should have been and/or whether or not it should be resurrected and completed.

I've I've misunderstood the question, maybe the thread starter may wish to reword it to ask what its supposed to be asking.

jc

Cork

I think a sports campus for all sports would be a great idea in Abbotstown.

Even if it will take another generation to build a stadium out there.

Flukey

Definitely they should be doing more to create sports facilities, whether that be in Abbotstown or somewhere else. Really we need sports facilities on a regional basis as well as the main facilities.

Bonkey, I think the thread is progressing fine. All threads change as they progress and this one is no different. Let it run its course.

monument

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

Totally agreed.

Just on cost, it was good SI was never built.

Sparks

For those who weren't watching the Network 2 coverage of the close of the Games today, even John Treacy is saying that the focus for the development of sport needs to be at primary and secondary school level.

Now, to rerun that transition year air rifle course...

thejollyrodger

whats this talk about terrraces etc, its the remainder of stadium ireland thats on the agenda.

we need to get the 4+ year olds out and started on a sport, but bringing them down into any old paddy field isnt going to make much progress. We need modern sporting infastructure to produce athlethes which are capable of at least competiting on the world stage.

For example, ever see the Dutch footballing set up ? they take so many gifted players, teach them their education and teach them technical skills. We need something like that.

Similarly, work needs to be done on training for boxing, running, swiming..

The government can put out a plan to say add one component one year, another part a few years later etc. At least there is a plan, a proper plan, not pladdy planning

Flukey

Sparks, is teaching schoolkids to use air guns a good idea? It may be harmless but it can't help but have negative connotations. I am sure a lot of people would be shocked at even the suggestion of it, regardless of what it is actually like. If you mentioned teaching the to use cap guns or even water pistols, there would be people who would have reservations. It could actually turn out to be a bit of bad PR, however noble the intentions, if you see what I mean.

Sparks

It's perfectly safe Flukey. Right now, the UCD and TCD clubs take in about six to eight hundred students every year and train them with air rifles and smallbore rifles - with ages ranging from 17 upwards. And we're getting them about five years too late there - Derek Burnett, for example, started at age 11 with his dad. In every country where they take medals in this sport, they start training at a young age - if we really want medals, we have to do the same. And since target shooting is the safest sport in Ireland (seriously, last injury from target shooting was in 1801, and the last injury on a shooting range was about several decades ago when someone walking on the range put their foot in a rabbit hole, fell over and broke their ankle), there's an argument for teaching it to kids instead of sports like hurling where there's an injury in virtually every match.

On the PR side of things, yes, there would be some of the "you want to do WHAT?!?!?" factor, but the pilot project received no complaints from pupils, parents or teachers (and only an insane demand for insurance to cover the entire school (including the playground) during training caused problems).
And the thing with that factor, is that you have to educate people on the sport to get over it - the sport itself is perfectly safe. And to educate, you have to do it...

(Besides, for reference, the US gold medallist in Athens in the 50m prone - and almost in the 50m 3P - was a univeristy student from Alaska. He started at age 10. Most of the chinese and indian shooters are aged from 17 to 22 or so, and also started that young).

Flukey

Sparks wrote:

there's an argument for teaching it to kids instead of sports like hurling where there's an injury in virtually every match.

Well it will never have the allure of hurling. I can't see 80,000 people going to see Derek Burnett shooting. The type of shots DJ Carey takes are what most people want to see. Shooting is certainly not a sport of the masses. Fair play to you for trying to promote it. You have a huge amount of competition out there. It may have a novelty attraction that will make people try it once, but only a few people will stay with it. It would be great if Derek Burnett does well and goes to Beijing and brings a few colleagues with him. It is sports like that that we need to get people into as they are ones we can potentially compete at. It is however never going to attract the mass and sustained attention that other sports do. Its profile may increase at certain times, like a lot of sports do from time to time when someone does well, but it will not maintain that level. For example, there may be a short-lived boost in the amount of people interested in showjumping now, but it will level off again soon. Keep plugging it Sparks. It is all you can do.

Big Ears

Flukey wrote:

Sparks, is teaching schoolkids to use air guns a good idea?

Theres a huge amount of them with airguns already (post primary school) , so getting them into proper competition isn't all that bad .

Too bad my fecking pistol broke ............what no I don't have an air gun ......... :rolleyes: , em its de-activated anyway , lahdedadeda .

Seriously though , I actually beleive target shooting could become very popular if it was promoted to the young , and was'nt too expensive .
Think how many youths in Ireland have air-guns (you could go into 6 figuires there) , and think how much people love to compete .
All you need to do is be more lenient with certain laws , get youths more into the sport and have competitions for the young , then all you need to do is let quality guns be available at a decent price .

Thats quite a bit , but oh well , its achievable .

Flukey

Maybe. While kids love these shoot-em up games, I don't know how they would take to this. I think they would be looking for a bit more action and excitement than shooting at targets. Other sports probably would be more appealing over the long term. How expensive is it and how accessible is it anyway?

Big Ears

Pitch and Putt is popular to teenagers where im from , so anythings possible .
Im not sure on expenses for pistols you could compete with , but im sure Sparks could enlighten us .

Sparks

Big Ears wrote:

Theres a huge amount of them with airguns already (post primary school) , so getting them into proper competition isn't all that bad .

Actually, it's a better idea from a safety point of view - at least with trained coaches and range officers, there's less chance of someone doing a "hold my drink and watch this!" kind of stunt and injuring someone.

Too bad my fecking pistol broke ............what no I don't have an air gun ......... :rolleyes: , em its de-activated anyway , lahdedadeda .

*slap*
Though you can now apply for a licence for one, if you had one, that is, which you don't.

Seriously though , I actually beleive target shooting could become very popular if it was promoted to the young , and was'nt too expensive .
Think how many youths in Ireland have air-guns (you could go into 6 figuires there) , and think how much people love to compete .
All you need to do is be more lenient with certain laws , get youths more into the sport and have competitions for the young , then all you need to do is let quality guns be available at a decent price .
Thats quite a bit , but oh well , its achievable .

It wouldn't even take that much. Get a few facilities founded and bring school groups to them, rather than bringing the gear to the schools (tried that, it's a horrendous amount of work and the schools have fits over insurance). Allow the sports capital grants to be applied for. Don't ban the olympic events' firearms again in the Criminal Justice Bill 2004 (see here for details) as was done in 1972 by oversight. That'd be about all we'd need in reality.

Flukey wrote:

Maybe. While kids love these shoot-em up games, I don't know how they would take to this.

Some won't. That's life, and that's why we have lots of different kinds of sports. Thing is - some of the best shooters we have in the country never knew they were any good until late in life when by accident they came across the sport.

I think they would be looking for a bit more action and excitement than shooting at targets.

And some of the best college shooters we have actually had no interest in shooting because they thought it was more like a shoot-em-up game than an olympic sport. Remember, girls generally make better shooters than boys, and boys tend to be more the testosterone-and-adreneline-driven members of the species.

Other sports probably would be more appealing over the long term.

Dunno about that - I know guys who are still actively shooting after decades of competitive shooting. It's a lifetime sport.

How expensive is it and how accessible is it anyway?

No single short answer there I'm afraid - shooting comprises literally dozens of disciplines and events, even in just the ISSF (International Shooting Sports Federation) disciplines. Seventeen events in the Olympic Games and that's only a small subset of the ISSF disciplines.
For example, 300m shooting (an olympic event until 1982, now in the World Championships) is horrendously expensive in this country and there's only one range you can really shoot it on (in the Midlands). You're looking at upwards of four or five thousand euro just to start off, and every shot will cost between one and two euros depending on ammunition brand. (But, for the record, that's because in Ireland, unlike the UK/N.Ireland/rest of europe, you can't reload spent shells).
But 10m Air Pistol, you're looking at about 300 euros for a beginner's pistol that will last ten to twenty years and get you to at least national championships level, and the pellets cost 5 euro for 500.
Plus, you have clubs where club gear is provided for beginner shooters.

But it's not as accessible as it needs to be, mainly because facilities are a nightmare to found, thanks to the firearms laws and planning permission problems.

Big Ears wrote:

Pitch and Putt is popular to teenagers where im from , so anythings possible .
Im not sure on expenses for pistols you could compete with , but im sure Sparks could enlighten us .

Like I've said, a basic entry-level pistol (the IZH-44) will go for about $270 - so say 300 euro by the time you get it here. You can get more fancy models - up to around 1500 euro pretty easily - but the IZH is the best choice I know of for a beginner.

Imposter

I think all this can be applied to every sport. Shooting, hurling, boxing, martial arts etc. can all be dangerous if people are not taught properly. I went to school with guys who were pretty good boxers and they were warned that if they ever used their boxing skills outside of the gym that they would never box again. Similarly i'm sure shooters would be taught the safety aspects of the sport before they ever get anywhere near firing a gun.

All this discussion is largely dealing with kids and getting them involved in the first place. That is not what the campus ireland project is about though. Campus Ireland is about building the facilities needed so that our elite sportspeople get all the support that they need in this country for their chosen sports. Ok it may be possible to use these facilities on the side for other competitors but in the main this facility would be for the elite. Also don't forget that it wasn't just the actual sports facilites that were planned here. A medical centre with doctros, physios, sports nutritionists and (I think) sports psychologists was also planned. With proper coaching in the various disciplines that would put our sports stars on a par (or in some cases maybe better than that) with the rest of the world.

While it is important that the basic facilities are improved around the country I think building something like this would encourage more people to participate in sport and it would act as an incentive for them to reach the higher levels of their chosen sport, a bit like Croke Park is for most GAA players around the country. To compare with the current setup where the best competitors are far from happy with it and often have to go abroad in order to get the support and training they need and usually this comes at a significant financial cost.

Sparks

I disagree that CI should only be for the elite imposter. Right now, for example, what target shooting most needs is facilities to develop the grassroots of the sport - we have at the moment pretty poor facilities compared to the GAA or FAI or even swimming - and to be able to hold national-level competitions. We do have some elite-level athletes, but the lack of funding, the lack of training facilities (and for target shooting, the difference between elite athlete's training and grassroots training is about the coaches technique rather than a difference in facilities - there are some specialised pieces of equipment, but they're small potatoes compared to getting the facility) and the lack of domestic competition are the main problems.

Imposter

Sparks,
While shooting may have poor facilites for pretty much all in this country, sports like athletics, martial arts, boxing, showjumping etc have ok facilities in most areas. What they lack is the proper support structures at the top level.

IIRC the plans for campus ireland was about the elite athletes and not facilities for all. I'm not disagreeing that certain sports need a help with getting some basic facilities in place but CI was always intended to help the elite advance with their sports as opposed to having ot go abroad for that support.

Sparks

Thing is Imposter, that does show that if you want to promote sport, you need different things for different sports. Some minority sports desperately need to work on grassroots - others on midlevel - and yet more on the elite end. Sports Campus Ireland is meant to promote sport, not just the high-end elite, if all I've been hearing from their presentations is correct.

Besides, a 30-firing point range for air rifle would not just promote grassroots, but also the high-level of the sport. So there's no real conflict, at least for our sport. Other minority sports I can't really comment on though.