I'd love to see the SG renovated but, realistically, with the dogs and us not owning the ground the IRFU are never going to put any money into it....and for once I agree with them- that's like renovating a house you're renting.

For me the only viable alternative is ~10k municipal stadium built with ourselves and Galway United as joint tenants. That way you get money from the two organisations as well as funding from the government.

Edit to say: the IRFU have put some money into the place in the last few years but when I say "any money" I mean significant money.

I'm not sure that demand will be the problem.

I think (depending on results, touch wood, etc.) all three games will sell out with very little promotion at all.

I think the problem is likely to be an inability to satisfy demand.

When a week before the game, the last remaining tickets are for standing behind the goal, I'm not sure that the casual supporter will be bothered.

Both Leinster and Munster should draw upwards of 5k per match. The thing is, if the weather improved, we'd get even more in on the day.
The branch should be doing a big push already for the Leinster game. I know they put up signs on the roads to promote the game, but there must be more that they can do.
The odd ad on national morning radio.
Selling match packages like the IRFU do for the November Internationals, for example
Leinster €30
Munster €30
Glasgow €25

Leinster and Glasgow package €45
Munster and Glasgow package €45
Leinster and Munster package €50
Leinster, Munster and Glasgow package €70

Numbers in the door at this stage is very important.

As for temporary stands, they definitely should be looking to add something at the side of the main stand, even if it is just tiered standing.
I would still love to see them put up some sort of folding gazebo at both ends of the pitch. Something which comes down easily, and covers fans from rain if it happens.

Also, slightly off topic, but one of the lads on the Craggy Island podcast, cant remember who, was talking about how he wants Connacht to stay in the Sportsground, rather than build a new stadium. I'm completely behind that, if it's possible
Can we also start a petition to rename College Road to "Pat Lam Way" (depending on how many trophies we win this season) :woohoo:

Yeah, we can expect big crowds for the last 3 games and with the possibility of one or two more knockout games would be great to get the capacity up.
But even if you put up temporary stands behind the goals, you'd have to put them up and down for each game, otherwise it means shutting the dogs down for two months.
Putting back up the temporary one beside the main stand might be an idea though.

ShaneM wrote: 'the Dog people' are on their knees at the moment. At the moment we are the only thing that's keeping them going (Connacht Rugby - rent and match day income form the bars).

The dogs will exist for as long as elected representatives want cushy jobs for their mates. That is to say forever.

'the Dog people' are on their knees at the moment. At the moment we are the only thing that's keeping them going (Connacht Rugby - rent and match day income form the bars). Would be class if we could get temporary seating for both terraces that didn't look out of place. But as RonanL said we've no chance for anything permanent for either terrace because the' dog people' :evil: :evil: :evil:

Evil_g wrote: I wonder have they considered expanding the capacity in any way for the last few home games? Bring back the temporary seats beside the main stand or even those temporary seats behind the goals maybe?

The costs of erecting these things probably mean it's more economical if they're to be used for the entire season, but they used to erect seats behind the goals for once off Parker Pen games years ago.

If they can avoid some sort of calamity on the road (makes donation to the mocker gods) I think they could easily get 7 or 8k through the gate for the last three home games. Say it quietly, but we might even have a Challenge Cup Semifinal.

Now's the time to start thinking about season ticket sales for next year (I've no doubt that our clearly very competent marketing department have been doing so for a long time) and (a) the better the place looks on TV and (b) the more craic infrequent attendees have (like, y'know, being able to see the match) the more tickets they'll flog over the summer.

What is the record attendance anyway? The Pro 12 record looks like 7,789 against Munster on the 22nd of December 2012. If I recall correctly that night was baltic and a few of my (literally) fair weather Munster friends actually watched the match in the Huntsman in spite of having tickets to the game. I think we had the advantage of whatever temporary facilities were in place for Heineken Cup rugby at the time as well.

In April 2004 we had 6,000 (a suspiciously round number) for the Parker Pen semifinal against Harlequins. I was in temporary seats at the Bohermore end for that one. Can't remember what was where the clan is now. The year afterwards we had 5,800 for the semi against Sale. We had 7,000 for a semi against Toulon in 2010.

In the Heineken Cup the record seems to be 9,120 for our first game against Toulouse in November 2011 (which I missed), but that dropped off to the 5000s for Gloucester and Harlequins. In subsequent years we achieved 8,199 for Harlequins and 7,661 for Saracens, but attendances for other games were pretty ordinary.

Wouldn't it be a great news story if we could break 8,000 and set a record attendance for a Pro12 game at the Sports Ground?

I think a couple of temporary seats behind the goals would be a reasonable investment for the rest of the season (I'm not talking about buying the dogs out or building a 15k capacity white elephant on a green field site).

I also think a seated level on top of the clan for next season wouldn't be overstretching ourselves.

I think "the dog people" are the problem here. Nothing that will obscure the view of the dog track can be erected for any length of time as far as I know. I agree though, it would be great. In general, I don't think we can really move forward until we have a viable option for fans at the ends of the pitch.

ShaneM wrote: The 9,120 for the Toulouse Match is a myth - 7400 is our Max capacity (Fire safety regulations max capacity for the sportsground), that's what we had there that night.....Marketing loves to add to the stats.
Would be class to see a top tear on the clan though.

Ah boo.

The 9,120 for the Toulouse Match is a myth - 7400 is our Max capacity (Fire safety regulations max capacity for the sportsground), that's what we had there that night.....Marketing loves to add to the stats.
Would be class to see a top tear on the clan though.

I wonder have they considered expanding the capacity in any way for the last few home games? Bring back the temporary seats beside the main stand or even those temporary seats behind the goals maybe?

The costs of erecting these things probably mean it's more economical if they're to be used for the entire season, but they used to erect seats behind the goals for once off Parker Pen games years ago.

If they can avoid some sort of calamity on the road (makes donation to the mocker gods) I think they could easily get 7 or 8k through the gate for the last three home games. Say it quietly, but we might even have a Challenge Cup Semifinal.

Now's the time to start thinking about season ticket sales for next year (I've no doubt that our clearly very competent marketing department have been doing so for a long time) and (a) the better the place looks on TV and (b) the more craic infrequent attendees have (like, y'know, being able to see the match) the more tickets they'll flog over the summer.

What is the record attendance anyway? The Pro 12 record looks like 7,789 against Munster on the 22nd of December 2012. If I recall correctly that night was baltic and a few of my (literally) fair weather Munster friends actually watched the match in the Huntsman in spite of having tickets to the game. I think we had the advantage of whatever temporary facilities were in place for Heineken Cup rugby at the time as well.

In April 2004 we had 6,000 (a suspiciously round number) for the Parker Pen semifinal against Harlequins. I was in temporary seats at the Bohermore end for that one. Can't remember what was where the clan is now. The year afterwards we had 5,800 for the semi against Sale. We had 7,000 for a semi against Toulon in 2010.

In the Heineken Cup the record seems to be 9,120 for our first game against Toulouse in November 2011 (which I missed), but that dropped off to the 5000s for Gloucester and Harlequins. In subsequent years we achieved 8,199 for Harlequins and 7,661 for Saracens, but attendances for other games were pretty ordinary.

Wouldn't it be a great news story if we could break 8,000 and set a record attendance for a Pro12 game at the Sports Ground?

I think a couple of temporary seats behind the goals would be a reasonable investment for the rest of the season (I'm not talking about buying the dogs out or building a 15k capacity white elephant on a green field site).

I also think a seated level on top of the clan for next season wouldn't be overstretching ourselves.

I found the original drawings that have planning approval.

That's a lot of souls suspended above the clan on a very narrow support Base. I'm no engineer but sounds too much.

rossie wrote: The original plan had 1200 seats AFAIK and around 1800 standing underneath. Was a capacity published for the green plans?

just a rough count going from the images, seems to be 6 Sections of 18 Rows down and 24 Seats across (2592)
With 8 Rows down and 4 Seats across taken out of each Section (192)
So about 2,400

sea_point wrote:

rossie wrote:

Evil_g wrote: I think the clan is designed so that a seated second tier can be built onto it. Seats on the bottom level would be too low I'd say.

If we qualify for the Champions Cup I think that would be a reasonable investment without over stretching ourselves.

There is planning permission, or at least plans, for a top tier. The drawings were on here at one stage. That's a long time ago though and no mention since. I personally think it would be miserable up there though in the cold , wind and rain. I agree that a covered seated stand is badly needed though. I wonder if there is enough room to build a new stadium on the site of the back pitch and carpark inclusive?

These were the drawings drawn up by Steve Cunningham's practice..

www.3dgraphichouse.ie/indexd764.html?pag...ntnt01property_id=80

This was a later more developed and better edition than the one planning was granted for. The seats in the drawings for the original planning approved one were red for some reason. While the ones you have posted (including the small seated stand beside main stand) are ideal I don't think they were ever submitted for planning.
In relation to ownership, isn't the sports ground owned by the Royal Agricultural Society just as the RDS is? While I know Bord na Gcon are primary tenants on the main stand side , two small covered seated stands either side of the main stand would surely enhance the dog racing experience as much as the rugby one.
The original plan had 1200 seats AFAIK and around 1800 standing underneath. Was a capacity published for the green plans?

I always thought that Cardiff Arms Park is an ideal kind of stadium model with the mix of terrace and seated area.. 9,000 Capacity seems about right for Connacht..

It's great to be ambitious but would we fill a 15k stadium week in week out? Playing in an empty stadium kills any potential atmosphere

Unfortunately it looks like the dogs are here to stay, but saw it suggested somewhere that maybe stadium could be built on the current training pitch, onto the carpark?
A Stadium as part of the Docklands would have been ideal

EDIT: This is another nice 9,000 stadium. (2,000 seated, 7,000 terrace)

I really think we need to keep a city centre location. Walking distance to the pub is key for rugby in my view. That's why I'd be in favour of developing the sportsground, or even better, the development of a new stadium in the docks. In the past we had this conversation, and I suggested we should be no further from O'Connell's that we currently are!