Eden Park favourite to win stadiums war showdown
Auckland looks set to blow it again at harsh cost to ratepayers
Sports writing is prone to using sporting cliches so I’ll get my apologies in early — almost two decades ago Auckland horribly fumbled the ball in turning down the Government’s offer to fund a new national stadium on the waterfront in time for the 2011 Rugby World Cup.
Now — 18 years on and with the benefit of ongoing warnings about the cost of retaining Eden Park — we are once again about to drop a perfect pass, and knock-on with the line wide open.
If there is any good news, it’s that we are rapidly reaching the end of the interminable Auckland stadium debate. There will be no turning back after this.
On Monday, the working committee convened to provide a recommendation to the 21 Auckland councillors meet for the final time.
By the end of the day, it will have arrived at a final decision which the councillors will then vote on in mid to late May.
The bad news is that Sports Insider’s many ears to the ground predict Eden Park will win out over the three waterfront stadium options as the country’s premier sports stadium.
It will be far from an unanimously endorsed recommendation.
But in the end, it seems there’s enough conservatism in the room to get the old white elephant nudged across the line.
As the panel members sit down for the last time and the councillors contemplate how they will vote, it’s timely to remind Auckland citizens of two key points that seem to have become obscured in recent times.
1 Auckland Council and the public were told four years ago that the city can’t sustain four big stadiums — yet we’re still doing nothing about it.
“The harsh economic reality is Auckland neither needs nor can afford four stadiums [Eden Park, Mt Smart, Western Springs and Albany Stadium].”
That was a blunt conclusion within the 2019 independent review of Auckland’s Council Controlled Organisations (CCOs) leaked to the media.
To his credit, the mayor has tackled this issue front-on and decided to finally bring this whole notion of Eden Park v The Waterfront to a head once and for all. Hence the process we are in.
Given the economic times we are also in, the burden that Auckland’s ratepayers are carrying of financing four major stadiums — five years after we were warned it was unsustainable — bears further financial examination.
This is particularly so when it comes to Eden Park and Albany, and needs to be weighed against the build cost and new commercial opportunities a new stadium on the waterfront would bring.
2 Eden Park is the biggest anchor of all. The 2019 report highlighted “under utilisations leading to poor financial outcomes” among the region’s stadia stock and raised particularly strong concerns around the ongoing cost of Eden Park, warning the council it faced financial and reputational risk and commented that “doing nothing was not an option”.
The report then laid out the financial implications of continuing down the same track for the next 20 years.
If Eden Park was to be retained, it would commit council (meaning ratepayers) to a capital spend of more than $600 million over that time, whereas a new stadium strategy could be implemented for $300m.
The council could have saved ratepayers $300m had it acted back then.
Since 2019, the bar has been raised further. The successful bidder for Auckland’s national stadium must have a roof and include a sporting precinct that will draw fans and visitors regularly to the area.
Otherwise the city is handicapping itself in competing for major events. That should make a waterfront option a no-brainer. Eden Park does not work as a go-to precinct and therefore has less commercial potential.
But Eden Park’s backers have rather skilfully used ratepayer fear of funding a waterfront stadium as a lever for public sentiment. The Government faces similar challenges around contributing to a stadium build during a cost-of-living crisis.
A conservative approach is winning the day.
Here’s what really needs to happen.
The financially pragmatic solution to Auckland’s stadia drama is to sell Eden Park to real estate developers and plough the proceeds into a waterfront stadium as a valuable kick-starter.
That will minimise the contribution required from the public purse.
Yes, there are complications. Eden Park is run by the Eden Park Trust on behalf of its owners, Auckland Rugby and Auckland Cricket.
If Eden Park is ever sold, the proceeds are meant to be shared equally between those two sporting bodies, unless it is deemed to be more important that the funds be directed towards the citizens of Auckland.
I’d argue that’s the point we’re at now and I’d be surprised if a poll of Aucklanders didn’t agree.
It’s 2024, not 1924. Sports Insider has criticised Eden Park’s charmed existence before, protected by special legislation, sitting outside council’s control but impacting massively on it, benefiting rugby and cricket solely with all other sports shut out.
Life has changed dramatically since the council gave a rails ride to the only two organised team sports of the time with the Eden Park land parcel. Both should be treated no differently to other sports now.
Any sale to developers would comfortably cover off the relatively low costs of relocating Auckland Cricket to Colin Maiden Oval in Glen Innes and Auckland Rugby, both playing out domestic matches in
front of diminishing crowds, elsewhere.
After that, I think most ratepayers would hold the view that they’re on their own to compete with everybody else and we would slowly wind the Eden Park Trust down, perhaps sending the old girl off for a last time when the British and Irish Lions tour in 2029.
As for Albany, nobody can convince me that there will ever be a regular demand for 10,000 to 20,000 sized crowds at sporting and other events at that stadium.
It is the least favoured site in Auckland for major event promoters.
North Shore sport actually needs investment in community facilities and not maintaining another white elephant. A reworked boutique stadium with a 3500 capacity is perfectly adequate for NPC rugby and other events.
Not even a sensible proposal to part-sell the stadium and use the profits to fund those recreational needs could get any traction as local councillors and the MP for the area dug in.
I believe most Aucklanders do want a modern stadium on the waterfront with a roof and accompanying sporting and accommodation precinct — the latter two being key stipulations of any fresh bid.
If the cost to the public purse can be minimised with shrewd commercial planning around a precinct attracting private capital, Auckland’s citizens will buy in.
There is always a cycle of predecision angst around these big projects but ultimately once they open up and people have the benefit of enjoying them, no one complains about the cost.
It will be the same when Te Kaha Stadium opens in Christchurch in two years. There is no Wellingtonian lamenting the passing of Athletic Park. Likewise for Carisbrook among Otago folk.
But my moles suggest there is not the courage in the room to do the obvious.
Another golden opportunity botched.
What a pity.
Sports precinct can be a key funder of a waterfront stadium
A final word on this sorry saga . . . in last week’s column, I mentioned the economic benefits of a roofed stadium following the New South Wales Government’s decision to look at adding one to Accor Stadium in the Sydney Olympic precinct to attract major events to the city.
A roof is a requirement the four bidders have all had to meet in Auckland — and the economics support its importance.
It prompted me to delve deeper into another important component of modern stadia — building a precinct which could be a mixture of real estate, accommodation, retail, bars and restaurants and experiences creates a commercial engine to sustain a project.
Sporting organisations and team owners are understanding this internationally and even investing in stadia developments themselves to help propel this trend.
It’s why New Zealand Rugby chief executive Mark Robinson took the big step away from endorsing Eden Park as a future home for the All Blacks in Auckland and are backing the Quay St bid instead.
A branded hotel and other opportunities are a strong lure.
Likewise, a giant precinct offering fans experiences and gathering spaces is a key feature of the Tank Farm bid near Wynyard Park.
Wynyard Park is a strong contender for this reason. It can attract significant private capital via accommodation, residential, retail and fan experiences that will ultimately reduce the amount of ratepayer and taxpayer contribution.
This is a proven international model for assisting in funding new stadia builds and is what Sydney and Melbourne are doing.
It is also a key differentiator to what we’re being asked to do with Eden Park which is to totally fund it via taxpayers and central Government.
‘Lord of the Flies’ attitudes reveal Australian league’s unsavoury side
Two incidents in the past week have revealed the more unseemly side of the professional game across the ditch.
The alleged Lord of the Flies-style treatment of NZ-born NRL prospect Jackson Topine at Sydney club the Bulldogs is confronting but hardly unprecedented in Australian league.
Topine misread the starting time for a training session, arrived late and claims he was punished by a Bulldogs trainer by having to individually wrestle 30 to 35 top grade players one after another.
He became rapidly fatigued, resulting in a “marked deterioration in his capacity to defend himself” and leading to teammates to call for the trainer to ease off.
According to Topine’s sevenfigure lawsuit he has now taken against the club, the Bulldogs trainer ignored them and said words to the effect of: “No, don’t congratulate or help him. He deserved that. He was f***ing late”.
A “humiliated” Topine left the club that day.
Such an incident might not surprise anybody involved in some elite physical contact team sport, especially within the rugby codes, but those dinosaur days are surely behind us now.
The events described by Topine sound like something out of a gang initiation, not the actions of a professional and responsible sporting league entrusted with the welfare of young men.
It is the type of boorish behaviour that has been a hallmark of Australian league for too long.
We saw it also in the over-the-top verbal assault launched on Sonny Bill Williams by long-time Sydney radio “personality” and league caller Ray Hadley.
Hadley, who has a long-time history of workplace bullying, teed off on his Channel Nine “colleague” in SBW over the former All Black’s social media postings on the Gaza conflict before veering into a tirade over Williams’ TV commentary skills and calling for his sacking.
It was yet another reflection of the dog-eat-dog nature of the Aussie code — an attitude that needs to return to the Neanderthal cave it belongs in.
Team of the Week The Mt Smart faithful
Rewarded in the last week by the key signings of Kiwi captain James Fisher-Harris and rising teenage star Jett Cleary, the New Zealand-born son of former Warriors coach and Penrith maestro Ivan. Warriors fans will undoubtedly follow the progress of both after the Panthers duo were lured back across the Tasman by coach Andrew Webster who had worked with both during his time as a Penrith assistant.
Cleary, only 19 and the younger brother of the NRL’s best player Nathan, is a particularly intriguing signing who if the Warriors can hold onto him, may be Shaun Johnson’s ultimate successor in the No 7 jersey.
Arsenal
The Gunners routed local London rivals Chelsea 5-0 this week to take a three-point lead in an exciting English Premier League title race with Arsenal, Liverpool and Manchester City the key contenders.
Darwin Blanch
The 16-year-old American has produced an early contender for the Snapchat of the year after posting his reaction to drawing Rafael Nadal in the first round of the Madrid Open. “Guys I play Nadal wtf,” he posted.