|
Post by craftyvet on Aug 20, 2010 9:06:49 GMT 10
I went out to the Showgrounds in the early days of this proposal and the field jumps out at you as the right choice...... It may be a little short down the left field lines however to centre and right it is ample..... And after a first season Im sure the infield could be pushed further back into the corner and allow a slightly deeper homerun fence down the left and right field corners.... And are my eyes failing me here or did John "The Hercules" Edwards complain about the prospect of the field being to small?
|
|
|
Post by deadfish on Aug 20, 2010 10:42:49 GMT 10
..... And after a first season Im sure the infield could be pushed further back into the corner and allow a slightly deeper homerun fence down the left and right field corners.... Which would just create a new issue with inadequate space behind home plate (what is the proposed distance there?). Future improvements would have to involve moving out. But anyway - I'm perfectly happy to live with the dimensions that have been quoted here - the right and left field porches are short but not ludicrous - or even unprecedented in professional baseball. Fenway's Big Green Monster has been mentioned a few times where left field is only 310, but the right field line is an even cosier 302! The LA Dodgers once played in a stadium with a 251 ft left field porch - though that would never fly today. Yakima Bears a minor league team play with 295 ft corners.
|
|
|
Post by oldracer on Aug 20, 2010 12:34:26 GMT 10
great location however I feel St Kilda would attract more non baseball people, dimensions don't really matter as stated the fences can be lifted and everyones played at Narrabundah and Fitzroy so the backstop isn't really an issue either, let's get it going!!
|
|
|
Post by stockley on Aug 20, 2010 12:35:52 GMT 10
..... And after a first season Im sure the infield could be pushed further back into the corner and allow a slightly deeper homerun fence down the left and right field corners.... Which would just create a new issue with inadequate space behind home plate (what is the proposed distance there?). Future improvements would have to involve moving out. But anyway - I'm perfectly happy to live with the dimensions that have been quoted here - the right and left field porches are short but not ludicrous - or even unprecedented in professional baseball. Fenway's Big Green Monster has been mentioned a few times where left field is only 310, but the right field line is an even cosier 302! The LA Dodgers once played in a stadium with a 251 ft left field porch - though that would never fly today. Yakima Bears a minor league team play with 295 ft corners. I was thinking the same thing, but if you look on Google Earth, or nearmaps, it seems like that dirt backing was still a good 20 - 30 feet... plenty of room for the backnet.
|
|
|
Post by outsider on Aug 20, 2010 13:34:43 GMT 10
I like the St Kilda location but think the time frame and spending required don't make it viable for this year. For non baseball people whilst the showgrounds is a little further from the city than Albert Park.
It has existing seating and facilities available for corporate functions, changerooms, parking & public amenities that St Kilda just doesn't have nor is there the room to add them.
I think the showgrounds would give a much more polished and professional look than temporary stands and portable toilets at St Kilda let alone the difficulty of stopping people passing the grounds just stopping in for a free look.
The concern over the dimensions and look of the ground are only worries to baseball people, non baseballers will not be worried by that so long as the spectacle and the amenities are good they will be happy.
The showgrounds seems a great idea and congrats the lateral thinkers that found it. I for one hope this location comes to fruition.
|
|
|
Post by berwickboy on Aug 20, 2010 19:11:56 GMT 10
I don't see the short prorches as necessarly a bad thing, ultimately we are trying to bring new people to the game and one thing that they want to see is homeruns, not 1-0 ballgames.
I think the showgrounds is a great idea and hopefully if it is succesful futher development can take place.
|
|
|
Post by roly on Aug 22, 2010 8:39:01 GMT 10
Ahhh.....I love the smell of grilled shark in the morning!! Bring on the new season. I'm not up with all of the goings on but I'll catch up soon enough. Roly just had to cut short his holiday in the Bahamas to spend a few weeks with the Scottster getting him back in shape after his little hammy strain. Jeez Louise, that boy really knows how to milk an injury. Roly had to b.i.t.c.h slap him around with his concrete stub but I think it did the trick.
The butcher's wife's bestie told me that the showgrounds is GO. Heavens to murgatroid, roly will have to watch himself out there, broke a few hearts there during the sheepdog trials back in the late 80's early 90's!!
With the Gorilla back at the controls the Aces will fly in 2011.....roly will just sit back for a few weeks to see how he goes but I'll offer him some sage advice when I think he needs it. Look forward to seeing all you Ace fans out there in November, if any of you old boys are bringing new chicks along this year I better warn you that roly's engagement broke off over the Winter so don't be surprised if your babes throw a few sideways glances at the wily old chick magnet....sorry but there's nothing roly can do about that ...................
WOOF
|
|
|
Post by oldnotstupid on Aug 22, 2010 10:48:30 GMT 10
Showgrounds .... Melbourne Aces Home ground !!!!
Brilliant short and long term decision
Once confirmed will be happy to purchase seasons pass
|
|
|
Post by wheezer on Aug 22, 2010 12:03:57 GMT 10
Random thoughts: - The idea of separate venues for day games and night games would be really annoying if both took place on the same day. Unless, the schedules start double-headers in the very early afternoon.
- A ground being more accessible by car and public transport will ultimately mean more attendance and more money for the league. An investment in infrastructure for an easy-access field may be the best investment, even short term. In fact, particularly short-term, as this easy access will be a large determining factor in attending for the uncommitted crowd while the league warms up in the first few years.
- I remember when Norwood Oval in Adelaide was prepared for the 09/10 Claxton Shield after 10 years of nothing but footy. It seemed like the process of painting the lines, digging the diamond, planting the bases and sculpting the pitcher's mound took 6-7 ground staff an afternoon. I am sure it is a bigger task than simply that but was surprised at how easy it seemed to be to turn a field of turf into a baseball field.
- kc says "We are talking here about a permanent Aces home, not a stop-gap measure for a season or two. - are the ABL talking the same? By now, I would have thought the priority is just landing something in time to sell tickets for this November. While longer term planning for the best home field can take place after the 10/11 season is done. In fact, the rumours about a home field going forward 3-4 years sound pleasantly ambitious. Although if Melbourne Showgrounds ticks all the boxes, there's no point doing anything but holding it there 10/11 and staying there in future years.
- "In any case, the final decision will be made by people who have not sought input from the baseball public." Hehe well that appears to be standard operating procedure this year. Although, just because they aren't asking questions, doesn't mean they aren't listening to answers. It is obvious that the league refer to this board and others in their own planning.
- Nearmap is awesome.
- The Showground's grandstand seating colours look awesome from an aerial POV.
- 300-foot corners might turn a lot of games into a battle of the sluggers. I don't like that style of play compared to more strategic offense, but I could imagine being in the minority. Most fans will probably like the numerous big hitting.
- The field itself is barely 300 feet long. Every part of the field used that is not between the batter and the fence will be subtracted from that number. Home plate will want to be as close to the edge of the field as humanly possible.
- The gravel track around the field can be temporarily converted into more turf for the season. I have seen it done for lesser events. It could well be worth it financially if it means the location is a viable option and it will attract more ticket sales than the other options.
- By the looks of things, assuming the grandstand would be along the foul-lines (pretty safe assumption) the batter is looking directly into the main light tower. Ew.
- "But will the general public be willing to venture [to the Showgrounds] to see a game?" It is probably our best bet.
- Looking forward to seeing the space in a few weeks as I'll probably head to the Melbourne Show.
|
|
|
Post by philallen on Aug 22, 2010 12:32:51 GMT 10
Random thoughts: - The idea of separate venues for day games and night games would be really annoying if both took place on the same day. Unless, the schedules start double-headers in the very early afternoon.
- A ground being more accessible by car and public transport will ultimately mean more attendance and more money for the league. An investment in infrastructure for an easy-access field may be the best investment, even short term. In fact, particularly short-term, as this easy access will be a large determining factor in attending for the uncommitted crowd while the league warms up in the first few years.
- I remember when Norwood Oval in Adelaide was prepared for the 09/10 Claxton Shield after 10 years of nothing but footy. It seemed like the process of painting the lines, digging the diamond, planting the bases and sculpting the pitcher's mound took 6-7 ground staff an afternoon. I am sure it is a bigger task than simply that but was surprised at how easy it seemed to be to turn a field of turf into a baseball field.
- kc says "We are talking here about a permanent Aces home, not a stop-gap measure for a season or two. - are the ABL talking the same? By now, I would have thought the priority is just landing something in time to sell tickets for this November. While longer term planning for the best home field can take place after the 10/11 season is done. In fact, the rumours about a home field going forward 3-4 years sound pleasantly ambitious. Although if Melbourne Showgrounds ticks all the boxes, there's no point doing anything but holding it there 10/11 and staying there in future years.
- "In any case, the final decision will be made by people who have not sought input from the baseball public." Hehe well that appears to be standard operating procedure this year. Although, just because they aren't asking questions, doesn't mean they aren't listening to answers. It is obvious that the league refer to this board and others in their own planning.
- Nearmap is awesome.
- The Showground's grandstand seating colours look awesome from an aerial POV.
- 300-foot corners might turn a lot of games into a battle of the sluggers. I don't like that style of play compared to more strategic offense, but I could imagine being in the minority. Most fans will probably like the numerous big hitting.
- The field itself is barely 300 feet long. Every part of the field used that is not between the batter and the fence will be subtracted from that number. Home plate will want to be as close to the edge of the field as humanly possible.
- The gravel track around the field can be temporarily converted into more turf for the season. I have seen it done for lesser events. It could well be worth it financially if it means the location is a viable option and it will attract more ticket sales than the other options.
- By the looks of things, assuming the grandstand would be along the foul-lines (pretty safe assumption) the batter is looking directly into the main light tower. Ew.
- "But will the general public be willing to venture [to the Showgrounds] to see a game?" It is probably our best bet.
- Looking forward to seeing the space in a few weeks as I'll probably head to the Melbourne Show.
Good post wheezer With regard to the lights in CF, they will not be an issue to the batters. Whilst it is not ideal, the pitchers hand at delivery will not come out of the lights....if that was the case it would be unplayable. We have the option of redirecting the lights and this would be done if any issues arise. The distances to the RF/LF fences will cause plenty of discussion.....and lots of exciting ballgames. The game will not be out of reach until "the fat lady sings" If the front office decides to use the Showgrounds as our home venue I'm convinced it will be great in the short term, then it will get better! I'm optimistic about the league in general and feel that this will be a positive decision which will place the Melbourne Aces in an very workable location.
|
|
|
Post by The Jack on Aug 22, 2010 13:45:00 GMT 10
For those looking to play around with the technology, NearMap should satisfy your interest in regard to location, dimension, access and associated infrastructure. The Showgrounds facility is the square, grassed area. Use your mouse to negotiate around. www.nearmap.com/Having a look at the layout, I have a few queries. * Do people really like the look of a square outfield? Do we want to see three outfielders with range and good arms or 1 center fielder who can track a ball down. *Cut outs on the infield. Do people prefer to play their position on gravel (whichever type) or grass. Do we prefer to run on a base path that goes from one surface to another and then back again? *Lighting looks a little bit lacking. i read the earlier post about hitting some balls up etc, but only four towers? Can we get two more towers put in just behind the infield say 50 feet behind the bases? Myself, I would prefer a more uniform outfield where good fielding is essential. I also prefer to stand on a form of gravel when taking ground balls and much prefer running just on gravel between bases as well. I think the extra lights too would be a good addition to help with vision. Not sure if these things could be adjusted at all. Not sure if people agree with me or not. Is the idea about Albert park serious or just people having a say? Wouldn't it be great to go in with a group of people and hit a bar afterwards. The bar might then become invovled as a supporters bar or something. That would be great.
|
|
|
Post by Chardy on Aug 22, 2010 20:01:24 GMT 10
The Brooklyn Dodgers used to play at a field called "Ebbets Field". The right field fence was once as short as 292 feet and only ever as long as 301 feet. I believe some guy named Jackie Robinson used to play for the Brooklyn Dodgers..... Good enough for him then should be good enough for us. I don't care where they (Aces) play to be honest as long as its a half decent park and people come to watch. I pitched for the Hunter Eagles MANY moons ago and it was only 240 feet or so to right field with a higher than usual fence - we still managed to keep enough balls in the ballpark to win the occasional game I think 300 feet would make it more interesting and exciting for the people whom we (baseball community) are trying to attract - non-baseball people. If we want this league to survive then these are the people we want coming back for more.
|
|
|
Post by p26 on Aug 22, 2010 21:01:22 GMT 10
that was in the tin days too chardy. can imagine a lot more being hit with tin at 240 than with wood at 300 odd.
|
|
|
Post by johne on Aug 22, 2010 21:06:21 GMT 10
I think show grounds will be a real winner. I hope it can get off the ground. 300ft on the lines is fine, and it will be a good antidote to years and years of Altona baseball.
|
|
|
Post by 6for8 on Aug 22, 2010 21:39:11 GMT 10
Chardy... Johne... you guys are legends. two bang on posts.
as for square outfields, running on various surfaces and knocking up a couple extra light towers... pfft... pedantics. We'll get what we're given.
Showgrounds = A+
|
|
|
Post by deadfish on Aug 23, 2010 9:48:19 GMT 10
Having a look at the layout, I have a few queries. * Do people really like the look of a square outfield? Do we want to see three outfielders with range and good arms or 1 center fielder who can track a ball down. *Cut outs on the infield. Do people prefer to play their position on gravel (whichever type) or grass. Do we prefer to run on a base path that goes from one surface to another and then back again? *Lighting looks a little bit lacking. i read the earlier post about hitting some balls up etc, but only four towers? Can we get two more towers put in just behind the infield say 50 feet behind the bases? snip... On your first question - why not? Baseball has been and still is populated with fields that have quirky layouts - sharp corners, nooks, slopes, zig-zags etc. Check out this website ( www.andrewclem.com/Baseball/index.html) to see some of the weird and wacky from MLB - here's a couple that might interest if you think square diamonds are too bizarre - and these are far from the oddest layouts (note Wrigley Field is not THE Wrigley Field, they share a name) On the cut-out question I'd definitely prefer and hope that they would cutout full dirt basepaths, but accept it's probably not high on the priority list. As for lighting, I would expect that adequate lighting would be a massive priority and I'm confident if it's not up to scratch surely they'd either improve or veto.
|
|
whynot
Junior Member
Posts: 79
|
Post by whynot on Aug 23, 2010 10:44:09 GMT 10
I remember moving to a new park, it was 305 in the corners and they took the string line to the mound and drew the outfield fence, obviously 60 further on the arc, for proximity to the spectators 365 in center was fine, 80's baseball was big hitting, big pitching affair and a golden age both here and overseas. We dont need have a square center field, simple enough to cut the corner off. Whilst it sounds small what it is, in reality is a invitation to swing harder and go for the fences which allows pitchers to strike more batters out. Runners have to put in big time and stretch for extra bases and fielders have a real shot at throwing them out for big plays rebounding from the outfield wall. Imagine if we had big hitting, big K's, big plays all of a sudden the spectacle is back, and the "SHOW " is the key to success of the Professional game and its survival.
Ive played in a failed franchise, it doesnt feel good losing your gig and being not quite good enough didnt help either, the reality is we cant let this league fail, we need new fans we have captive market with existing players in BV but they will not maintain a team without substantial sponsorship, a team thats self sufficient must be the goal so lets make the field the game the team an excitement machine and watch the new fans roll in .
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2010 10:58:08 GMT 10
Whilst there is nothing better than seeing great pitchers (and catchers) apply their craft in a game, the truth (in my view at least) is that if we want to get the average punter to go to multiple games (which is what we need) it will be the spectacle of hitting that will do it.
I reckon the newbies to the game would much rather see an 8-10 game (on perhaps a smaller quirky field) than a 2-0 game.
I think we all remember some of those games at Altona way back when. There would be two great teams playing but with the wind blowing in it hardly made for exciting baseball for those that didnt know the game that well.
|
|
|
Post by heavesrock on Aug 23, 2010 14:03:23 GMT 10
I don't know about the rest of you, but I find hits that stay in the ballpark are more exciting than home runs. With a home run, there is no action after the ball flies out, but when there are runners on the bases, you know that every pitch could lead the hit (which could be a home run also) that could bring in several runs, and every hit leads to the possibility of close plays and keeps the inning going with the same situation. I'd rather see the race between the outfielders and the runners than home runs.
|
|
|
Post by johne on Aug 23, 2010 16:09:06 GMT 10
Chardy... Johne... you guys are legends. two bang on posts. as for square outfields, running on various surfaces and knocking up a couple extra light towers... pfft... pedantics. We'll get what we're given. Showgrounds = A+ I sense the sarcasm in your post 6for8, but beggars can't be choosers as the saying goes. Yes we would all love to have a beautiful symmetrical field with a surface like dodger stadium right in the heart of the city, but this is not likely to happen. With the season due to start in just a couple of months the Showgrounds in my opinion offers the best opportunity as a venue for commercial success.
|
|
|
Post by Diesel on Aug 23, 2010 16:23:13 GMT 10
anyone smart enough to put the above images on the showground site?
|
|
irb
Junior Member
Posts: 45
|
Post by irb on Aug 23, 2010 17:28:34 GMT 10
I understand that the ABL will decide on a venue from between the Showgrounds and Dandenong Baseball Ground. I would suppose that the key question for the ABL is not the current capability of either venue (at least for the initial season) but whether the location of the venue will attract spectators. I notice that question has been raised a few times in this thread, but it has not been addressed, other than to offer a view that the venue would be better if centrally located. As someone who attended the previous ABL at what was VFL Park, that attracted crowds up to 12,000, my query is whether either of the two venues now under consideration would draw crowds. I'd look forward to your thoughts, as I for one do not see these venues as doing that.
|
|
|
Post by 6for8 on Aug 23, 2010 17:42:16 GMT 10
Chardy... Johne... you guys are legends. two bang on posts. as for square outfields, running on various surfaces and knocking up a couple extra light towers... pfft... pedantics. We'll get what we're given. Showgrounds = A+ I sense the sarcasm in your post 6for8, but beggars can't be choosers as the saying goes. Yes we would all love to have a beautiful symmetrical field with a surface like dodger stadium right in the heart of the city, but this is not likely to happen. With the season due to start in just a couple of months the Showgrounds in my opinion offers the best opportunity as a venue for commercial success. no sarcasm inferred in my post whatsoever Johne. it is %100 sincere, although i may over use the triple period occassionally for... dramatic effect. You mirror my suggestive opinion. We dont have a plenthora of options, and what minor facility oddities the Showgrounds offer up, are far out weighted by its benifits. We are most definately debating the same side of the arguement. heavesrock, i disagree mate. Homeruns are the most exciting thing in baseball. although you are right in the regard that nothing much does happen after the ball leaves the yard, other than ofcourse the cheering, whooping and general yahooing of the entire crowd... yep boring. (<- sarcasm intended.)
|
|
|
Post by The Jack on Aug 23, 2010 18:22:14 GMT 10
I We dont need have a square center field, simple enough to cut the corner off. Whilst it sounds small what it is, in reality is a invitation to swing harder and go for the fences which allows pitchers to strike more batters out. Runners have to put in big time and stretch for extra bases and fielders have a real shot at throwing them out for big plays rebounding from the outfield wall. I don't mind that idea, perhaps the 'uniqueness' of the ground could be a waterfall, spa or gold ticket seating (or something) positioned right behind the center field fence. Perhaps there could be a raffle each game to win the chance to sit and be served nibbles in the gold seating area etc and of course any ball that goes in there 'you can keep courtesy of Knox City Shopping centre Wantirna South'. Maybe on the cut outs side of things, that could be the improvement between the first and second seasons?
|
|
|
Post by berwickboy on Aug 23, 2010 18:27:13 GMT 10
Something like this deisel? only rough, and the pic of the showgrounds is really old, but its the only one google earth had, give us a couple days i might be able to knock up a better one, I'd much rather be doing this stuff than school work anyway! any suggestions as to what could go in i.e the jacks post are welcome Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by Spice on Aug 23, 2010 18:32:55 GMT 10
Nearly every time I'm talking to somebody new (from outside the baseball community), once they find out I play baseball (if the stunning young lady in question is not an air head) they always ask how many home runs I've hit. It's a massive spectacle of the game. Home runs put bums on seats - fact.
PS - My normal reply is "How about we grab a seat and I'll show you the best way to get to 2nd base."
|
|
|
Post by longball77 on Aug 23, 2010 19:14:50 GMT 10
That is spot on spice if you talk to any one who might not be familiar about the game they ask you if you hit or pitch and if you say hit it is all about the home runs. Every time i tell someone i play baseball it's not about the batting average its about the home runs and we should all remember chicks dig the longball
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2010 20:26:12 GMT 10
Ahh baseball related pick up lines hey - might be a new topic. Re the possible/anticipated Showgrounds configuration... has there been some consideration given by the powers that be re the 'mound to plate' (and vice vera) direction/angle and any 'setting sun' issues ? I assume so, and it appears the dimensions can go four ways but then there is seating etc ? Just a thought !
|
|
|
Post by overthehill on Aug 24, 2010 16:06:02 GMT 10
just out of interest, can't we just round off the centre field fence to make it more normal...? or is it due to the positioning of the light which would be in centrefield being too far away?
and its true, chicks do dig the longball...
|
|
|
Post by durds on Aug 24, 2010 18:55:10 GMT 10
just out of interest, can't we just round off the centre field fence to make it more normal...? or is it due to the positioning of the light which would be in centrefield being too far away? and its true, chicks do dig the longball... Speaking from experience there Overthehill?
|
|