Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Lansdowne Road to be renamed Aviva Stadium

  • 12-02-2009 3:30pm
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,263 ✭✭✭✭Eoin


    From breakingnews.ie
    Lansdowne Road is to be renamed Aviva Stadium for a 10-year period, it was announced today.

    The deal sees insurance company Hibernian Aviva provide investment to the IRFU and FAI for their grassroots programmes, in a deal reportedly worth around €40m.

    In making the announcement, Philip Browne, chairman of the Lansdowne Road Stadium Development Company (LRSDC) and chief executive of the Irish Rugby Football Union (IRFU) said that he was “delighted” with the deal.

    “We believe that in the difficult economic conditions we are now going through, Aviva Stadium will be of huge benefit to the economy as a whole,” he said.

    “Even taking the most conservative view I do not think it would be exaggerating to say that Aviva Stadium could have an impact of some €250m on the local economy each year. Hibernian Aviva’s support will drive both our sports and the economy at a time when it needs it more than ever. We are delighted to welcome them to the team.”

    FAI chief executive John Delaney, said the move would strengthen grassroots programmes which encourage participation in football among children and young adults.

    He said the recent announcement that the 2011 UEFA Europa League Final would be played at the stadium is a fantastic start for the partnership.

    “It really is a tremendous endorsement of just what is being achieved,” he said. “I think it is fair to say that everyone in UEFA could see the potential of what we are developing. One has only to think of some of the other stadia that were in line for the final to see just how world-class the facility we are building is going to be

    Innocent that I am, I never realised they would be renaming it.


Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 813 ✭✭✭dave13


    They also mentioned they're gonna bid for the 2011 Heineken Cup. I thought it'd be too small for that.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,739 ✭✭✭Jello




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,263 ✭✭✭✭Eoin


    Jello wrote: »
    Oops - missed that thread. Nothing to see here so.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 82 ✭✭HELLO132


    Aviva Arena would sound much better;)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,301 ✭✭✭Snickers Man


    Well that's just fantastic!!

    Murrayfield, Twickenham, Millennium Stadium and now this: the Aviva Stadium. Surely we are the leading prostitutes in European rugby.


    Why stop there? I reckon the players should be made change their names to reflect the various products offered by Aviva. I mean what's a backline of Bowe, Wallace, O'Driscoll, Kearney and Fitzgerald compared with

    Tracker Mortgage
    Third Party Fire and Theft
    Fully Comprehensive Motor Insurance
    Building and contents Insurance
    Unit trust investment saving scheme.

    Think it couldn't happen?

    Wait and see


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 123 ✭✭Ceartgoleor


    Not a massive fan of this myself, but still €44m over ten years is not to be sniffed at. Plus, anyone Irish is always gonna refer to it as Lansdowne Road anyway.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,828 ✭✭✭ven0m


    This is disgusting in light of Aviva shedding 580 Irish jobs in recent months. If they have 44 million to spend on this, they had money to keep those jobs here.

    Government need to step in & hang Aviva over this bull****.

    Not to mention the reaming of a LEGENDARY Stadium to some corporate bull**** name.

    Man U would NEVER & have turnd down HUGE offers to rename Old Trafford but wouldn't budge on it, & have stated they NEVER will as their fans would never forgive them.

    Irish Rugby fans need to start flooding the IRFU offices with letters calling foul on this ****.

    It is is bad as Munster testing the water over Toyota Mars Bar Park ...... & that got buried very VERY quickly.


  • Posts: 4,149 ✭✭✭ Bobby Obnoxious Pebble


    ven0m wrote: »
    This is disgusting in light of Aviva shedding 580 Irish jobs in recent months. If they have 44 million to spend on this, they had money to keep those jobs here.

    Government need to step in & hang Aviva over this bull****.

    Not to mention the reaming of a LEGENDARY Stadium to some corporate bull**** name.

    Man U would NEVER & have turnd down HUGE offers to rename Old Trafford but wouldn't budge on it, & have stated they NEVER will as their fans would never forgive them.

    Irish Rugby fans need to start flooding the IRFU offices with letters calling foul on this ****.

    It is is bad as Munster testing the water over Toyota Mars Bar Park ...... & that got buried very VERY quickly.

    What do you mean they had the money to keep those jobs here.They are a business,they are probably only able to afford huge sponsorship deals like this beacause they are taking jobs to places like India and paying people a pittance compared to what they got paid here.

    See your forgeting the multiple differences between Man u and The irfu.

    The IRFU need to pay their players with the money that comes from tickets.

    They want to get rid of a nice bit of stadium dept with this naming thing,so that the ticket sales dont all have to go to paying for the stadium each year and they have enough money left after paying bills to cover grass roots development and suppliment player wages.

    Manchester utd would be worse off naming old trafford.The stadium is a brand name in itself,they have such huge revenue already that they dont need the money.

    The two situation cannot be compared.

    Why should the IRFU care about Avivas business practises,they have their own intrests to look after i.e the provinces.

    They run a business aswell.
    Do you think they should have called it the quinn direct stadium and got 10 million instead??


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,193 ✭✭✭[Jackass]


    First of all, €44 million over 10 years is a very cheap deal. Infact in sponrship terms it's a complete giveaway. It's taking advantage of the financing problems of the stadium thanks to FAI failing to deliver on insane promises of Revenue over corporate box sales (close to double that promised by IRFU for the same boxes - which are sold out, FAI still trying sell - with a far less attractive product in general ticket sales standards - not sure FAI have sold out Croke Park at all, still a scramble for tickets to get into a 80,000 seater stadium for rugby matches) and also the lack of priority of sponsorship which is bottom of the agenda for almost all business at present - and this is a shrewed move from Aviva but a complete sell out by IRFU and FAI and a terrible shame. IF this was a fore gone conclusion to sell the naming rights, I don't think I could think of a possible worse time over the last number of decades to negotiate a deal like this and obtain the maximum value. €4.4 million per year? Isn't that less than the amount of Revenue that is generated by one rugby fixture in Croke Park?

    But the naming rights should never have been sold in the first place - Parc y Scarlets, Liberty Stadium, Thomond Park, Ravenhill, Wembley, Old Trafford, Twickenham, Millenium Stadium - none of these stadiums felt the need to rename when redeveloping or even building new stadiums, to remove from the identity of a team to name but a few.

    It's another chapter of failure in a stadium that is already inadequete before they've even got the roof on. It was inadequete 5 years ago. That's a whole other debate and I know there are major issues with planning and alternative locations that no one would be a fan of, I'm glad it stayed where it is, but I am very disapointed at this and certainly wont refer to it as anything other than Lansdowne Road. Even to enter into such a long term agreement shows desperation on the IRFU and FAI part that this stadium is struggling to be completed. The figures didn't add up when it began, based on a lot of promises of revenue generation that can not now be fulfilled, and this is the net result. But what's a major project in this country without lack of planning. :) Brilliant.


  • Posts: 4,149 ✭✭✭ Bobby Obnoxious Pebble


    TBH I dont think either of us is in a position to say whether the naming rights were sold cheaply.

    But I would think they werent,the emirates stadium cost 100m pounds to name for 15 years at the height of the economic boom.

    This equates to roughly 6.6 million per year,which isnt bad compared to us getting 4.4 or so.Considering the usage of both.

    That stadium is used week in and out by one of the most popular teams in world football and it combines naming rights with the jersey sponsor and would get alot more public attention than the Aviva stadium will.

    I would be pretty sure that the IRFU and the fai(no matter how badly run they are) got the maximum they could in light of the current economic situation,which if we are realistic is dire at best.

    I also think that the FAI still wouldnt have had as much of an involvement as the IRFU,who still own the land.I would imagine they met but the IRFU got the final say on the naming rights,to what is a historic stadium.

    Personally I dont think the name is that bad and there are lots of things and parts to it and its construction that I dont agree with,but I dont think that either the IRFU/Fai or Avivas moral ethics as companies/organisations should be brought up in relation to the naming rights..

    They got the best deal they could in the current situation,end of.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,828 ✭✭✭ven0m


    What do you mean they had the money to keep those jobs here.They are a business,they are probably only able to afford huge sponsorship deals like this beacause they are taking jobs to places like India and paying people a pittance compared to what they got paid here.

    See your forgeting the multiple differences between Man u and The irfu.

    The IRFU need to pay their players with the money that comes from tickets.

    They want to get rid of a nice bit of stadium dept with this naming thing,so that the ticket sales dont all have to go to paying for the stadium each year and they have enough money left after paying bills to cover grass roots development and suppliment player wages.

    Manchester utd would be worse off naming old trafford.The stadium is a brand name in itself,they have such huge revenue already that they dont need the money.

    The two situation cannot be compared.

    Why should the IRFU care about Avivas business practises,they have their own intrests to look after i.e the provinces.

    They run a business aswell.
    Do you think they should have called it the quinn direct stadium and got 10 million instead??


    Lansdown Road is a LEGENDARY stadium around the world for Rugby.

    The 580 jobs didn't cost 10 million a year in wages to keep. It was call centre staff mainly, who earn at most 21K a year if even that.

    Yet again you fail to see a problem because why should you care yet again your tax money is being abused & you'll incur another income tax hike to help asshole companies like this with their redunancies to staff because the people running it are degenerates.

    ING are pulling sponsorship from Renault F1 after laying off staff, RBS are pulling sponsorship & event dalliances from F1 also.

    There are also other companies doing the same around the world as it was seen as too much in light of trying to save money.

    Aviva shed jobs here, shedding at least 4 different types of tax contributions from the system, increasing social welfare burdon (these all add up), they have already said they are going to put huge hikes on insurance premiums because they say 'they are too cheap at the moment' & then suddenly have 44 milion to spend on a stadium name.

    It's horse**** & you know it.

    Edit: Oh go & tell your reasoning to a member of Aviva's staff who did lose their jobs & see which side of your jaw they dot for you for it.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,414 ✭✭✭✭Trojan




  • Posts: 4,149 ✭✭✭ Bobby Obnoxious Pebble


    ven0m wrote: »
    Lansdown Road is a LEGENDARY stadium around the world for Rugby.

    The 580 jobs didn't cost 10 million a year in wages to keep. It was call centre staff mainly, who earn at most 21K a year if even that.

    Yet again you fail to see a problem because why should you care yet again your tax money is being abused & you'll incur another income tax hike to help asshole companies like this with their redunancies to staff because the people running it are degenerates.

    ING are pulling sponsorship from Renault F1 after laying off staff, RBS are pulling sponsorship & event dalliances from F1 also.

    There are also other companies doing the same around the world as it was seen as too much in light of trying to save money.

    Aviva shed jobs here, shedding at least 4 different types of tax contributions from the system, increasing social welfare burdon (these all add up), they have already said they are going to put huge hikes on insurance premiums because they say 'they are too cheap at the moment' & then suddenly have 44 milion to spend on a stadium name.

    It's horse**** & you know it.

    Edit: Oh go & tell your reasoning to a member of Aviva's staff who did lose their jobs & see which side of your jaw they dot for you for it.


    No,
    Im a realistic person who understands that companys need to do what they feel best whether that be shedding jobs or sponsoring a stadium.

    Please take your gripe about Avivas ethics elsewhere,it has nothing to do with this thread.

    This is a rugby forum and this thread was about the name,not the ethics of the company of said name.

    You clearly have a personal gripe with Aviva through a layoff I would presume.

    I urged my family to cancel policies with Aviva after they laid off those people but you cant expect the IRFU and FAI to make a point to Aviva about laying Irish jobs off at the expence of securing some good extra funding.

    Who are you to tell the IRFU or FAI who to choose as a sponsor?

    Please take your gripe to the business or after hours forum as this isnt the place for it.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,828 ✭✭✭ven0m


    No,
    Im a realistic person who understands that companys need to do what they feel best whether that be shedding jobs or sponsoring a stadium.

    Please take your gripe about Avivas ethics elsewhere,it has nothing to do with this thread.

    This is a rugby forum and this thread was about the name,not the ethics of the company of said name.

    You clearly have a personal gripe with Aviva through a layoff I would presume.

    I urged my family to cancel policies with Aviva after they laid off those people but you cant expect the IRFU and FAI to make a point to Aviva about laying Irish jobs off at the expence of securing some good extra funding.

    Who are you to tell the IRFU or FAI who to choose as a sponsor?

    Please take your gripe to the business or after hours forum as this isnt the place for it.


    I have a HUGE problem this as a Rugby fan & an equally large problem about the company involved in it. Neither are mutually exclusive. So get a glue before telling me to 'take my gripe elsewhere'.

    It should remain as Lansdown Road. End of.


  • Posts: 4,149 ✭✭✭ Bobby Obnoxious Pebble


    If it should have remained Landsdown road and you have such a problem with it,did you go and protest when the meetings were being held 4 years ago?

    How do you suggest they fund it without selling the naming rights?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,326 ✭✭✭Serenity Now!


    How do you suggest they fund it without selling the naming rights?

    They don't. Typically and begrudgingly, they expect money akin to that from Sports Funding in the UK to appear out of nowhere while whingeing and moaning about the bloody name of a stadium.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,828 ✭✭✭ven0m


    If it should have remained Landsdown road and you have such a problem with it,did you go and protest when the meetings were being held 4 years ago?

    How do you suggest they fund it without selling the naming rights?

    Ever tried to arrange a protest for a public meeting held by the IRFU? Next to near impossible. They 'change it last minute' without much notice & it is the biggest closed circle of caravans in the country - even more than Fianna Fail.

    They answer to no-one in the membership of the union & unless you're in the 'boys club' there, good luck.

    Also - ever heard of "if you can't afford it. don't buy it" - it's what has our country in the ****s; developers leveraging their own mothers. If they couldn't afford it, maybe perhaps they should have waited until they were in a position to, or are you saying the normal rules don't apply.

    The way you're carrying on - I suspect you're an IRFU troll or an IRFU employee.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,198 ✭✭✭✭Crash


    ven0m debate the post, not the poster. I don't want to see you calling anyone else a troll again.


  • Posts: 4,149 ✭✭✭ Bobby Obnoxious Pebble


    ven0m wrote: »
    Ever tried to arrange a protest for a public meeting held by the IRFU? Next to near impossible. They 'change it last minute' without much notice & it is the biggest closed circle of caravans in the country - even more than Fianna Fail.

    They answer to no-one in the membership of the union & unless you're in the 'boys club' there, good luck.

    Also - ever heard of "if you can't afford it. don't buy it" - it's what has our country in the ****s; developers leveraging their own mothers. If they couldn't afford it, maybe perhaps they should have waited until they were in a position to, or are you saying the normal rules don't apply.

    The way you're carrying on - I suspect you're an IRFU troll or an IRFU employee.

    Look stop behaving like an idiot.

    Why are you calling me a troll,I have posted nearly every single one of my posts in the rugby forum,unlike you.Who seems to have appeared over an issue involving Aviva?
    How the hell does that make me an IRFU employee.

    There were meetings held in the county council offices that you could have gone to,no potest needed,you were allowed in.If you were a member of a supporters club you could have had it brought up.

    Cant afford it dont buy it,are you bloody serious???????????????

    They budgeted the stadium on the fact that they would sell the naming rights,they could afford it!

    I for one would prefer a nicer stadium called the Aviva,the continuation of being able to keep and attract high profile players in our provincial teams,grass roots development to keeping the name Landsdown road.

    The fact of the matter is,I dont even think you know anything about rugby judging from your lack of posts in this forum and you have a severe chip on your shoulder about the name of a stadium because the said company has affected you somehow.

    You do not care about the name Landsdowne road,you want to shove down everyones throats your agenda with Aviva and judging by other posts also the government and Dell,well no one cares.

    We are rugby fans,the stadium could be called **** park for all we care as long as it betters our rugby.

    You will soon have to learn that cheap labour is a fact of life in these harsh economic globalised times and to hold a grudge against a company who can slash huge costs by emloying elsewhere is futile.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22 JohnnyBbad


    ven0m wrote: »
    I have a HUGE problem this as a Rugby fan & an equally large problem about the company involved in it. Neither are mutually exclusive. So get a glue before telling me to 'take my gripe elsewhere'.

    It should remain as Lansdown Road. End of.

    You're absolutely right about name changes. It'll always be Norwich Union Stadium to me.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,407 ✭✭✭Quint


    **** park would be good :D
    But in this day and age who gives a ****e about the name? As mentioned before, it was a great price when you compare Arsenals stadium. Can anyone turn down 40m? Anyone i talked to about this have the same view, it's a shame, but **** it, 40m. Should we get rid of sponsors on jerseys and advertising hordings?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,193 ✭✭✭[Jackass]


    They don't. Typically and begrudgingly, they expect money akin to that from Sports Funding in the UK to appear out of nowhere while whingeing and moaning about the bloody name of a stadium.

    :confused: I didn't realise it was required to sell naming rights to fund a stadium? Maybe if we didn't p!ss around for 10 years with our fingers up our arse talking about a bertie bowl (€800+ of public funds iirc) and a seperate venture for the football and buying barron sites around the country in abbots town and surveying other sites such as bottle works factory with a view to buy and were actually compitant and decisive, we could have had a stadium years ago and wouldn't have p!ssed away this magic money that comes from no where. If we had developed Lansdowne from day one it would have been built years ago and naming rights would never have been an issue.

    We're very good at wasting this imaginery money, wherever it comes from. Forgive some people for being frustrated at the oldest rugby stadium on the planet being named after some insurance broker cause we couldn't stop fannying about waiting for one of the multiple interested parties to actually take the inititave and get some of the multi million design plans into action rather than sitting there looking at them and talking about them. But I might have to take any further views on that to the politics forum.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 15,914 ✭✭✭✭tbh


    well, I'm going to keep calling it lansdowne road until I get a cheque. Whos with me guys?!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,326 ✭✭✭Serenity Now!


    [Jackass] wrote: »
    :confused: I didn't realise it was required to sell naming rights to fund a stadium? Maybe if we didn't p!ss around for 10 years with our fingers up our arse talking about a bertie bowl (€800+ of public funds iirc) and a seperate venture for the football and buying barron sites around the country in abbots town and surveying other sites such as bottle works factory with a view to buy and were actually compitant and decisive, we could have had a stadium years ago and wouldn't have p!ssed away this magic money that comes from no where. If we had developed Lansdowne from day one it would have been built years ago and naming rights would never have been an issue.

    We're very good at wasting this imaginery money, wherever it comes from. Forgive some people for being frustrated at the oldest rugby stadium on the planet being named after some insurance broker cause we couldn't stop fannying about waiting for one of the multiple interested parties to actually take the inititave and get some of the multi million design plans into action rather than sitting there looking at them and talking about them. But I might have to take any further views on that to the politics forum.

    And when somebody actually takes the initiative, the curmudgeons get to work and whinge about it.
    Arguing about the name of the building...LOL! :rolleyes:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,193 ✭✭✭[Jackass]


    And when somebody actually takes the initiative, the curmudgeons get to work and whinge about it.
    Arguing about the name of the building...LOL! :rolleyes:

    Well, when there were whispers of renaming stadiums to get a bit of extra cash, just do a bit of research into how the Munster faithful felt about potentially going to watch their home games in Mars Bar Park or the English football public were in disgust at losing the name of the soccer equivalent to Lansdowne Road (open to correction, but Wembley the oldest international football stadium?) by going to their home games in the Argos arena or the Manchester fans disgust at the prospect of watching games in Vodafone Collosium.

    Sure what's in a name? You're right, I'm pathetic. So, Munster fan, eh? All about the tradition and heritage and pride? You're saying this has no place in sport and in fans passion for their team / country?

    Well let me know how the Wheetabix Ready-Breks Franchise (formerly know as Munster Rugby) get on with their new kit in preperation for next season. I hear it's yellow and purple. ...

    Oh no wait, or would you be apposed to that? I'm trying to figure out which traditions YOU respect, so that we don't sell those off...the others don't matter..It's only naming rights after all...passion, history and heritage is irrelivant in sport...


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 777 ✭✭✭dRNk SAnTA


    I suppose you moaners would rather ticket prices went up, or we built a smaller capacity stadium instead of changing the name.

    Honestly, there's bigger issues in the world. It's a NAME.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,326 ✭✭✭Serenity Now!


    [Jackass] wrote: »
    Well, when there were whispers of renaming stadiums to get a bit of extra cash, just do a bit of research into how the Munster faithful felt about potentially going to watch their home games in Mars Bar Park or the English football public were in disgust at losing the name of the soccer equivalent to Lansdowne Road (open to correction, but Wembley the oldest international football stadium?) by going to their home games in the Argos arena or the Manchester fans disgust at the prospect of watching games in Vodafone Collosium.

    Sure what's in a name? You're right, I'm pathetic. So, Munster fan, eh? All about the tradition and heritage and pride? You're saying this has no place in sport and in fans passion for their team / country?

    Well let me know how the Wheetabix Ready-Breks Franchise (formerly know as Munster Rugby) get on with their new kit in preperation for next season. I hear it's yellow and purple. ...

    Oh no wait, or would you be apposed to that? I'm trying to figure out which traditions YOU respect, so that we don't sell those off...the others don't matter..It's only naming rights after all...passion, history and heritage is irrelivant in sport...

    Don't bother trying to figure what 'traditions' I respect. You seem to have other trivial tosh on your mind already judging by your over-the-top and overreactive reply.
    Don't be surprised if Thomond Park goes down the same road in the not-too-distant future, by the way. You seem to think that 'people power' got the deal shirked before. Not in the slightest. Only one thing stopped that place becoming Toyota Park and that is money.

    All this over a...bloody name :rolleyes: lol


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,828 ✭✭✭ven0m


    Look stop behaving like an idiot.

    Why are you calling me a troll,I have posted nearly every single one of my posts in the rugby forum,unlike you.Who seems to have appeared over an issue involving Aviva?
    How the hell does that make me an IRFU employee.

    You seem to think calling it Aviva Stadium is a good idea & don't seem to care about the history of that venue.
    There were meetings held in the county council offices that you could have gone to,no potest needed,you were allowed in.If you were a member of a supporters club you could have had it brought up.

    I will in fact point to a certain meeting in 2005 where 2,000 Connacht fans turned up to a public meeting, & since then any forms of mass dischord at IRFU public meetings have been met with 'changes' to the schedules to those meetings.
    Cant afford it dont buy it,are you bloody serious???????????????

    They budgeted the stadium on the fact that they would sell the naming rights,they could afford it!

    I for one would prefer a nicer stadium called the Aviva,the continuation of being able to keep and attract high profile players in our provincial teams,grass roots development to keeping the name Landsdown road.
    Yes, because our grass roots are sooooo well looked after by the IRFU, & importing foreigners en masse into our provincial sides is not helping our national game or national side.
    The fact of the matter is,I dont even think you know anything about rugby judging from your lack of posts in this forum and you have a severe chip on your shoulder about the name of a stadium because the said company has affected you somehow.
    No, because I only played both codes for several years, played for the Mets team, had a trial at Leinster, had two uncles in the Lansdown first XV, one of whom played for AC Bezier, then upon retirement form playing coached at Bezier & a grandfather who was a massive financial supporter in an AIL club .... so no, of course I don't know anything at all about Rugby :p
    You do not care about the name Landsdowne road,you want to shove down everyones throats your agenda with Aviva and judging by other posts also the government and Dell,well no one cares.
    Really, so me standing there as a child watching my uncles turn out for the lansdowne first 15 & having such fond memories of the place stretching back over 25 years is not caring ..... that's a new one to me. Or as a small child being taken to games standing on the South terrace watching games & trying to understand what was going on & eventually coming to love a game that would become a HUGE part of my life.
    We are rugby fans,the stadium could be called **** park for all we care as long as it betters our rugby.
    Really, tell that to English rugby fans who have seen their domestic game fall down the pan with such overly commercialised thinking or NZ/AUS rugby where they are bordering on insolvency in their own leagues & in the Super 14.
    You will soon have to learn that cheap labour is a fact of life in these harsh economic globalised times and to hold a grudge against a company who can slash huge costs by emloying elsewhere is futile.

    Yes, because I'm sure you like having your tax money abused or maybe you don't because you don't work hard for your money judging by such a careless attitude to it, or you're a welfare scrounger in which case hey, not your money being used.

    So have it at there hoss since you're up on that big old might horse........


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,326 ✭✭✭Serenity Now!


    ven0m wrote: »
    You seem to think calling it Aviva Stadium is a good idea & don't seem to care about the history of that venue

    You can call it whatever you like. It STILL doesn't affect the stadium's history. The name changes NOTHING.
    ven0m wrote: »
    I will in fact point to a certain meeting in 2005 where 2,000 Connacht fans turned up to a public meeting, & since then any forms of mass dischord at IRFU public meetings have been met with 'changes' to the schedules to those meetings
    Hmmm...where are these alleged 2000 fans now? This is all very...erm...Bohemians, isn't it? Hardly ever see them all year through the season and then all of a sudden as soon as a grudge matter appears, they're out in force :rolleyes:
    ven0m wrote: »
    Yes, because our grass roots are sooooo well looked after by the IRFU, & importing foreigners en masse into our provincial sides is not helping our national game or national side
    Compared to France and England, yes it is looked after very well.
    ven0m wrote: »
    No, because I only played both codes for several years, played for the Mets team, had a trial at Leinster, had two uncles in the Lansdown first XV, one of whom played for AC Bezier, then upon retirement form playing coached at Bezier & a grandfather who was a massive financial supporter in an AIL club .... so no, of course I don't know anything at all about Rugby :p
    What about professional rugby? Who did you play Rugby League for, by the way?
    ven0m wrote: »
    Really, so me standing there as a child watching my uncles turn out for the lansdowne first 15 & having such fond memories of the place stretching back over 25 years is not caring ..... that's a new one to me. Or as a small child being taken to games standing on the South terrace watching games & trying to understand what was going on & eventually coming to love a game that would become a HUGE part of my life.
    If thats the life of rugby union you want then the stadium shouldn't have been knocked down. You'd prefer a crumbling concrete stadium with no facilities.
    ven0m wrote: »
    Really, tell that to English rugby fans who have seen their domestic game fall down the pan with such overly commercialised thinking or NZ/AUS rugby where they are bordering on insolvency in their own leagues & in the Super 14
    Rugby union has troubles in NZ and Aussie because European money attracts its star players. The Super 14 has been won too many times by Kiwi sides and has been growing stale. F**k all to do with 'commericialism'.
    In England, the GP has been doing well over the past six years. The division below it has improved steadily and numbers of playerbase at all levels are up.
    ven0m wrote: »
    Yes, because I'm sure you like having your tax money abused or maybe you don't because you don't work hard for your money judging by such a careless attitude to it, or you're a welfare scrounger in which case hey, not your money being used..
    I saw my tax money go into a stadium that wouldn't open to other sports but kept it for itself (for sports I don't particularly give a stuff about). Now that's scandalous.

    How the hell do people like you expect a professional game and grassroots game to be run? What hole in the ground or money tree do you expect the funds required to come from?
    As amateurish as the game before 1995 :rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,828 ✭✭✭ven0m


    You can call it whatever you like. It STILL doesn't affect the stadium's history. The name changes NOTHING.
    Really. I'd beg to differ, as I'm sure a great deal may others would too, but hey - opinions etc etc
    Hmmm...where are these alleged 2000 fans now? This is all very...erm...Bohemians, isn't it? Hardly ever see them all year through the season and then all of a sudden as soon as a grudge matter appears, they're out in force :rolleyes:

    Quite happy they have a province they can still go to support actually, so that's where they are =)


    Compared to France and England, yes it is looked after very well.
    What about professional rugby? Who did you play Rugby League for, by the way?
    Obviously if 'a trial at leinster' as as far as I made it, I obviously didn;t make it to pro Rugby. I played amateur league here in my early twenties for Tallaght Tigers, & when I lived in the UK near Doncaster I also played some amateur league for a team there.
    If thats the life of rugby union you want then the stadium shouldn't have been knocked down. You'd prefer a crumbling concrete stadium with no facilities.

    big + shiney =/= better or good. Sometimes history is more important.
    Rugby union has troubles in NZ and Aussie because European money attracts its star players. The Super 14 has been won too many times by Kiwi sides and has been growing stale. F**k all to do with 'commericialism'.
    In England, the GP has been doing well over the past six years. The division below it has improved steadily and numbers of playerbase at all levels are up.
    Sorry, the NZRFU & the AUS RFU think that the extent of their commericialism has been a huge player in their current problems & their problems with losing players to Europe, & the effects it is having on their own game development.
    I saw my tax money go into a stadium that wouldn't open to other sports but kept it for itself (for sports I don't particularly give a stuff about). Now that's scandalous.
    Yes, it was HUGELY scandalous & still is given the current ****storm. As for England, they have admitted the cub/country issue is directly related to commercialism with clubs viewing players as 'assets' & players feeling more obliged to respect club over country. it is a constant battle the RFU in England face with the GP clubs.
    How the hell do people like you expect a professional game and grassroots game to be run? What hole in the ground or money tree do you expect the funds required to come from? As amateurish as the game before 1995 :rolleyes:

    Pretty sure this is how the grassroots game is STILL being run. Rugby Clubs having fund raisers etc. I'm pretty sure this is STILL how my own local rugby club does things, infact - I know so.

    What does the professional game have to do with lansdown being renamed to Aviva - two totally different things. That 44 million from Aviva is NOT going into the grassroots or to the development of our 'professional game' - it is going to a STADIUM. S-T-A-D-I-U-M.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,326 ✭✭✭Serenity Now!


    ven0m wrote: »
    Quite happy they have a province they can still go to support actually, so that's where they are =)
    They don't bother their jacksies. There was barely 800 people at the Ospreys opening ML game. A season opener ffs! Aside from the Leinster and Munster games, where are all these alleged staunch Connacht supporters? Their attendances are poor.
    ven0m wrote: »
    I played amateur league here in my early twenties for Tallaght Tigers, & when I lived in the UK near Doncaster I also played some amateur league for a team there
    I was just curious what RL you played. I played RL in Australia (Richmond leagues in NSW).
    ven0m wrote: »
    big + shiney =/= better or good. Sometimes history is more important
    How about facilities? How about access? Safety? Amenities? When the only modernisation in a stadium is painting the p*ss wall black and white in a Guinness theme, you know there's problems.
    ven0m wrote: »
    Sorry, the NZRFU & the AUS RFU think that the extent of their commericialism has been a huge player in their current problems & their problems with losing players to Europe, & the effects it is having on their own game development
    The effect is players need to earn a crust and if they don't make their national side or the better S14 teams they have to look elsewhere to earn a living with the game.
    ven0m wrote: »
    Yes, it was HUGELY scandalous & still is given the current ****storm. As for England, they have admitted the cub/country issue is directly related to commercialism with clubs viewing players as 'assets' & players feeling more obliged to respect club over country. it is a constant battle the RFU in England face with the GP clubs
    You left "and the players seeing themselves as true professionals playing a high level of the sport therefore requiring MONEY"...
    ven0m wrote: »
    Pretty sure this is how the grassroots game is STILL being run. Rugby Clubs having fund raisers etc. I'm pretty sure this is STILL how my own local rugby club does things, infact - I know so.

    What does the professional game have to do with lansdown being renamed to Aviva - two totally different things. That 44 million from Aviva is NOT going into the grassroots or to the development of our 'professional game' - it is going to a STADIUM. S-T-A-D-I-U-M.

    The alternative is that the 40m in question is taken out of domestic games budgets and put to the stadium instead then? Or will another good old fashioned race-night down at your local clubhouse support the development of the stadium? Or scalp your club's allocation of international tickets to the highest bidder maybe?
    The way you're posting, you'd swear the stadium never needed upgrading at all! If that is the case, then all I can say is 'ffs' :rolleyes:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,828 ✭✭✭ven0m


    They don't bother their jacksies. There was barely 800 people at the Ospreys opening ML game. A season opener ffs! Aside from the Leinster and Munster games, where are all these alleged staunch Connacht supporters? Their attendances are poor.
    Wrong, attendances are up this season on all previous seasons, as are gate receipts, & merchandise sales.
    I was just curious what RL you played. I played RL in Australia (Richmond leagues in NSW).
    :-o
    How about facilities? How about access? Safety? Amenities? When the only modernisation in a stadium is painting the p*ss wall black and white in a Guinness theme, you know there's problems.
    It was renouned & held in very high global esteem by the rugby community.
    The effect is players need to earn a crust and if they don't make their national side or the better S14 teams they have to look elsewhere to earn a living with the game.
    But what has that to do with 44 million to be used exclusively to pay for a stadium
    You left "and the players seeing themselves as true professionals playing a high level of the sport therefore requiring MONEY"...
    Yes, & in England where there is a salary Cap, Wasps this week lost 3 of their top players to France where there is no wage cap, this will have further repercussions & it is only a matter of time until this kind of madness will cause clubs to have to fold financially. Newcastle Falcons are hanging on by a ballhair at this stage. Also, the RFU over there promised payments (approx £146k per English panel player per year) to clubs for accepting the wage caps, & have renaged on a shedload of payments to clubs.

    The alternative is that the 40m in question is taken out of domestic games budgets and put to the stadium instead then? Or will another good old fashioned race-night down at your local clubhouse support the development of the stadium? Or scalp your club's allocation of international tickets to the highest bidder maybe?
    The way you're posting, you'd swear the stadium never needed upgrading at all! If that is the case, then all I can say is 'ffs' :rolleyes:

    I never said that, implied it or otherwise. Corporate boxes prior to this were always a big bucks spinner, & is in other sports where new stadiums need paying for.

    Yes, Lansdowne needed fixing, Croke Park did too but that didn't become Guinness Park did it?

    Plus, where the IRFU are concerned, I'd be worried. They helped sign off on the redevelopment of Leinster's TRUE home at Donnybrook, only for Donnybrook to be deemed too bloody small, now all we have is a venue used for Schools Rugby & some Ireland 'A' games. That's hardly the sign of an organisation with good forsight or management of funds. Also bear in mind, in France - every Rugby's clubs stadium is part funded by the municipal authorities, as it is seen as 'local investment & endorsement'.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,326 ✭✭✭Serenity Now!


    ven0m wrote: »
    Wrong, attendances are up this season on all previous seasons, as are gate receipts, & merchandise sales
    Attendances have entailed three provincial games and they're higher. How high they going to be for other games? Pish. Just like the Ospreys game
    ven0m wrote: »
    It was renouned & held in very high global esteem by the rugby community
    And needed redevelopment. If you don't believe this to be the case then no wonder you're moaning about any modernisation of the stadium.
    ven0m wrote: »
    But what has that to do with 44 million to be used exclusively to pay for a stadium
    You brought up S14 players and while blaming 'commercialism' of the game in the Antipodes, ignored that these players are trying to make a living hence buggering off to Europe for a regular team place and income.
    ven0m wrote: »
    Yes, & in England where there is a salary Cap, Wasps this week lost 3 of their top players to France where there is no wage cap, this will have further repercussions & it is only a matter of time until this kind of madness will cause clubs to have to fold financially. Newcastle Falcons are hanging on by a ballhair at this stage. Also, the RFU over there promised payments (approx £146k per English panel player per year) to clubs for accepting the wage caps, & have renaged on a shedload of payments to clubs
    And with the likes of you ever having a say, even more players would bugger off in search of a living. Newcastle Falcons are privately owned. They are not a branch of their union.



    ven0m wrote: »
    I never said that, implied it or otherwise. Corporate boxes prior to this were always a big bucks spinner, & is in other sports where new stadiums need paying for.

    Yes, Lansdowne needed fixing, Croke Park did too but that didn't become Guinness Park did it?

    ven0m wrote: »
    Plus, where the IRFU are concerned, I'd be worried. They helped sign off on the redevelopment of Leinster's TRUE home at Donnybrook, only for Donnybrook to be deemed too bloody small, now all we have is a venue used for Schools Rugby & some Ireland 'A' games. That's hardly the sign of an organisation with good foresight or management of funds
    Leinster's 'true' home is barely fit to stage a professional game. The RDS has proven to be an excellent venue. No wonder the Leinster branch opted for investment in running games at it instead. You really do attach yourself to sh*thouse facilities and grounds, don't you? What next? Schools rugby is the be all and end all? No (open) payments to players like before?
    ven0m wrote: »
    Also bear in mind, in France - every Rugby's clubs stadium is part funded by the municipal authorities, as it is seen as 'local investment & endorsement'.
    Yes, Municipal stadia would have been the answer as in Australia. However, Ireland being Ireland thought otherwise and the GAA got their stadium all to themselves. What they had failed to see was that they would one day be required to fund it themselves.

    You waft on about 'commercialism' when the apt term is actually 'professionalism'. Where is the money to pay players ever going to come from then, in your ideal 'traditional' world?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,738 ✭✭✭thehighground


    Yes, Municipal stadia would have been the answer as in Australia. However, Ireland being Ireland thought otherwise and the GAA got their stadium all to themselves. What they had failed to see was that they would one day be required to fund it themselves.

    You waft on about 'commercialism' when the apt term is actually 'professionalism'. Where is the money to pay players ever going to come from then, in your ideal 'traditional' world?

    You seem to have forgotten that the GAA is an amateur game (its players don't get paid). The gates generate most the cash for them - and GAA tickets are very cheap. Lansdowne Road is receiving a heck of a lot more Gov. funding than Croke Park ever did or will. And at a guess, I'd say far more Irish people have played GAA than rugby. All you have to do is look at the international rugby players and quite a few played GAA to a high level and are all the better for it (Kearney, Bowe, Murphy, O'Leary, Horgan, Leamy, Hayes, Horan .... )

    I take it you are pleased that no GAA will ever be played in Lansdowne because the pitch is too small ;)

    The new Aviva Stadium will always be 'Lansdowne Rd' as far as I'm concerned. I'd be mad, bearing in mind the current economic climate, if the IRFU didn't take the money. Its only for 10 years. Aviva will probably have another name change by then and will be known as Chuengeng Stadium or something! But it will always be Lansdowne Road to me.


  • Posts: 4,149 ✭✭✭ Bobby Obnoxious Pebble


    Ven0m,why have you brought this completely off topic?

    First off all you had a problem with the company Aviva it seems even more than the actual naming of the stadium,in regard to their practices in ireland.

    Then you completely disregarded the fact that the stadium being named is actually helping get us a world class stadium and it seems you would prefer a ****ty stadium called Landsdowne than a really world class one,albeit with a smallish capacity called Aviva.

    You are then bringing Super 14 and Guiness prem and crowds into a debate about the naming of Landsdowne road stadium,what has that got to do with anything?

    You seem to be the only person with such a major problem about this.


    I also would like evidence of these 2,000 Connacht fans turning up to protest,because to be frank I find it hard to believe,seeing as these people wont even turn up to support their own province but they will trek to Dublin to complain about the naming of a stadium that would probably actually benefit Connacht rugby in the long run,as it will mean more money available for them.

    You are partly right when you say I dont care about the name change.
    I will always remember Landsdowne road fondly but times change and the naming of a stadium is common place now and it benefited the stadium,so I can look past it.

    Its not actually Landsdowne anyway,because they moved landsdowne didnt they?
    I remember hearing something about paying them off to demolish their clubhouse.

    You also say that it will not help rugby in ireland and will just help the stadium.

    I would argue that because of this naming rights it will take 40 million off the loan taken out and thus reduce IRFU payments each month.This in turn will leave more money for the provinces to keep Irish players here instead of luring them to France and some of course will continue to be put into grass roots level.

    If the stadium hadnt been named,grass roots would have been the first to suffer.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,326 ✭✭✭Serenity Now!


    You seem to have forgotten that the GAA is an amateur game (its players don't get paid). The gates generate most the cash for them - and GAA tickets are very cheap. Lansdowne Road is receiving a heck of a lot more Gov. funding than Croke Park ever did or will. And at a guess, I'd say far more Irish people have played GAA than rugby. All you have to do is look at the international rugby players and quite a few played GAA to a high level and are all the better for it (Kearney, Bowe, Murphy, O'Leary, Horgan, Leamy, Hayes, Horan .... )
    This bears no difference. The GAA doesn't have a wage bill to fund. The IRFU and FAI do. GAA has got plenty of exchequer funding despite this and managed to get a large stadium up and running. As I said, the day was always going to come when they had to fun it themselves. I don't know why you're mentioning the rugby union players who have played GAA sports before. Are you insinuating that rugby union owes the GAA something??
    I take it you are pleased that no GAA will ever be played in Lansdowne because the pitch is too small ;)
    Doesn't bother me. You seem to think I hate the organisation. I don't. I just don't follow any of its sports.
    The new Aviva Stadium will always be 'Lansdowne Rd' as far as I'm concerned. I'd be mad, bearing in mind the current economic climate, if the IRFU didn't take the money. Its only for 10 years. Aviva will probably have another name change by then and will be known as Chuengeng Stadium or something! But it will always be Lansdowne Road to me.
    Same here. It'll always be Lansdowne to me. The name of it doesn't bother me, stop me thinking this or sh*t on any history of it as some melodramatics in this thread might have us believe. As said, Lang Pk is Lang Pk and the SFS will always be the SFS.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,828 ✭✭✭ven0m


    Attendances have entailed three provincial games and they're higher. How high they going to be for other games? Pish. Just like the Ospreys game


    And needed redevelopment. If you don't believe this to be the case then no wonder you're moaning about any modernisation of the stadium.


    You brought up S14 players and while blaming 'commercialism' of the game in the Antipodes, ignored that these players are trying to make a living hence buggering off to Europe for a regular team place and income.


    And with the likes of you ever having a say, even more players would bugger off in search of a living. Newcastle Falcons are privately owned. They are not a branch of their union.








    Leinster's 'true' home is barely fit to stage a professional game. The RDS has proven to be an excellent venue. No wonder the Leinster branch opted for investment in running games at it instead. You really do attach yourself to sh*thouse facilities and grounds, don't you? What next? Schools rugby is the be all and end all? No (open) payments to players like before?


    Yes, Municipal stadia would have been the answer as in Australia. However, Ireland being Ireland thought otherwise and the GAA got their stadium all to themselves. What they had failed to see was that they would one day be required to fund it themselves.

    You waft on about 'commercialism' when the apt term is actually 'professionalism'. Where is the money to pay players ever going to come from then, in your ideal 'traditional' world?


    I'm going to stop at this point as you're not reading what is in front of you & I'm not wasting further time on your arguments when you can;t even read what is in front of you & make pointless irrelevant arguments that are posted as answers to individual points that in fact do not address what was posed.

    An example is the case in point about newcastle Falcons - yes they are privately owned, but they have a DEAL IN PLACE WITH THE RFU which the RFU are not honoring with all clubs in the GP, & which is in fact threatening the entire GP. The GP was created for the commercialism of rugby which the RFU there was against, & rather than lose top quality english players from possible selection they agreed a compromise on what is now the GP, which also included things like the salary cap (which was introduced as a way of not allowing the commercialism run away with itself) along with the agreed payments to the clubs of 146,500 per year for each english panelist called up as a form of 'settlement' for the club losing the use of that player for international duty instead of club duty.

    I think you're the person here who doesn't understand commercialism in modern rugby & doesn't understand it's link to 'the professional' game.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,828 ✭✭✭ven0m


    If the stadium hadnt been named,grass roots would have been the first to suffer.

    that's speculation, & most likely untrue. The majority of rugby clubs in Ireland are self funded, with IRFU money being in the vast minority of their funding.

    And I didn't bring it off topic, it was people making wild accusation about me, my reasons for postig etc - so have a bounce at others before you bring that **** to my doorstep pal

    And as for proof of 2,000 fans marching on the IRFU:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/4195219.stm

    Go learn to read. ^^


  • Posts: 4,149 ✭✭✭ Bobby Obnoxious Pebble


    ven0m wrote: »
    that's speculation, & most likely untrue. The majority of rugby clubs in Ireland are self funded, with IRFU money being in the vast minority of their funding.

    And I didn't bring it off topic, it was people making wild accusation about me, my reasons for postig etc - so have a bounce at others before you bring that **** to my doorstep pal

    And as for proof of 2,000 fans marching on the IRFU:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/rugby_union/4195219.stm

    Go learn to read. ^^

    What do you mean go learn and read?
    I asked you to provide proof and you still have not.That refers to a lack of funding march,you were insinuating that it was about the naming rights.

    You rude tone and abuse is ridiculous at this stage,

    You have called me a troll,been generally rude to everyone who has responded to you and told me to learn to read,what the hell is your problem?
    Your a dick


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,198 ✭✭✭✭Crash


    Right, you've both been assholes to each other enough. Thread locked, cop on and cool down.


  • Advertisement
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement