Some interesting cost info here (Go 2/3rds of the way down).

rlhttp://www.rugbyfootballhistory.com/scotland.htmlrl

In 1991 it cost £250k to install undersoil heating at Murrayfield and the running costs were between £400-£900 per game. Inflation between then and now is a little over 60% (But maybe energy inflation is more??) but given like for like costs a similar project would cost say £400k. I doubt very much that any RL club would even consider installing UH either in a new build or in an already built stadium.

The whole argument for "Wigan RL Having their own stadium" keeps cropping up time and time again. As does the "Wigan RL play second fiddle to Latics". It's more Sky who mess around with fixtures which causes the conflics. As we've been informed time and time again, D Whelan is a Rugby League fan also, and often attends the games.

Would I want Wigan RL to have their own stadium outside DW? No. The DW Stadium, being used by both sports, is in use year round, this means it's not left to fall apart over the down-season. We're not having to pay the upkeep on a stadium that isn't in use. The DW Stadium is a year round money spinner, there's no need to struggle to make money for it while it's open to maintain it while it's not. Additionally, what's the point in having two large sporting venues in one town?

At the same time, Saints now have a replacement for Knowsley Road. But there isn't a professional Football Team in the town to share with.

Different towns, different situations...

Lets not forget we have another RL team in the borough too, we are in a totally different position to Stains. Rather a poor show that they have not done it before, they do like to tell us that they are the most succesful side in the SL era, but have treated there fans and visitors to sub standard facilities for years.

Reet back to the original topic...

Got a piccy of the NEW Stains banner and its a corker

Why? Undersoil heating is not cheap. For just a handful of games every year it is hardly worth the outlay. However, Saints have invested heavily in the pitch itself. It has been designed such that it can take a significant rainfall without any undue effects whatsoever. I think spending on that rather than undersoil heating is a far more sensible option given the amount of rain we get in a year. Also, one of the selling points to the council during the planning phase was that it was a 'green' stadium. It has a special kind of boiler (no idea about the technicalities of it but it is 'green') and uses rainwater for plumbing needs. There are other green features as well. Installing undersoil heating could hardly be called green I should imagine.

I don't know why some Wigan fans are obsessed with the relative sizes of the two stadia. Wigan is a bigger town and so a higher number of supporters would be expected, has had access to a newer stadium for a lot longer (Knowsley Road was off putting to Saints fans for a long time) and has a premier league soccer club sharing the facilities (soccer generally attracting greater numbers than rugby league). 18,000 is fine for Saints. The club has now sold 9000 season tickets, which is a first, and the magic number 10,000 is not beyond the realms of possibility given the length of time to the start of the new season. Building bigger was feasible but at the time of designing the club believed it preferable (and more realistic) to keep the capacity similar to Knowsley Road but build the stadium to a higher spec. I'm glad they did that as it is a fantastic stadium. I can't see Saints ever needing more than 18,000 places but it would be great if one day we did.

On the point about the club 'treating' the fans to substandard facilities, that fans had to go to Knowsley Road for so long was not actually the club's fault. For the last 20 years the club has been trying, and failing, to secure the necessary finance and planning permission to build a new stadium. Ten years ago they got as close as putting up a sign announcing the new stadium, strangely enough on the same site as the new stadium now stands. Given the costs involved in cleansing and servicing any site where a new stadium could be built, the club needed the financial support of the Council, which it didn't fully secure until we had a hung Council. It was during that period that the money for infrastructure work to the former UGB site was forthcoming from the Council and planning permission was granted. The club had the right man in charge to take the process forward and hey presto, we have a new stadium.

I would have thought that building a new stadium where the spectators were guaranteed to stay dry would have been a good idea. Whoever signed off that initial Saints stadium should have been shot (best Jeremy Clarkson mode) However we all know Mr. Teflon will blame someone else. The fact that Saints have had to borrow a large amount of money to complete the project is being swept to one side. They would rather talk about a bloody bridge with lights.

The fur coat and no knickers stadium is probably an apt description.

But the point regarding undersoil heating is valid.

You won't find many Saints fans disagreeing with you on that point, me included. It was worse, too, because originally there was no wall around the stadium either. It was due to be a wooden fence! However, as has been said many times before, planning permission has been granted for perforated cladding to be installed around the rest of the stadium. While that might not be completed by the start of the new season, it will be completed shortly after.


You seem to be inordinately obsessed with the fact that Saints have borrowed money to build a brand new stadium. I would like to know of one organisation that does not borrow money for a new build. Can you suggest one? Also to be borne in mind is that due to the current economic climate, Taylor Wimpey wanted £1.5 million less for the purchase of Knowsley Road than had originally been agreed and given that Taylor Wimpey were a major partner in the whole thing going ahead, Saints had no choice but to negotiate down. That accounts for a sizeable chunk of the money loaned and is hardly the fault of Saints. The new cladding will account for some more and then there are fit out costs which the club has to pay for in addition to the build.

But Saints have secured some excellent sponsorship, they have sold all their corporate boxes, they have sold 9000 season tickets (10,000 and they will have earned well over £2 million in season ticket sales alone for 2012) and there are already corporate events being booked into the stadium. You have no idea of the level of revenue Saints are securing to fund their loan, which given it was provided by a friend of the chairman means it will likely be at a competitive rate.

Your obsession with our finances looks decidedly unhealthy.

What of this council funding you suddenly agree with?

My folks, and a good number of Wigan fans, live in Garswood, and pay their Council tax to St Helens... it is very much of their opinion that they would rather see their council tax spent on public services, not private ventures. I'm not actually certain it's legal to spend council money on private ventures....

I agree with any Council funding that brings jobs to the town, which is exactly what this Council funding has done.


Very good. They can always move to Wigan if they don't like what they see.

Why should they? They've lived there well before the backhanded councillers were in "power". The council are supposed to be the voice of the people.

bloody hell I started a right argument there didnt I,icon_smile.gif, anyway the lit up bridge does look awesome, thanks St Helens council. I fully agree with you spending £2,000,000 on it out of council tax money,