Cricket: Cricketers back plan for upgrade of Eden Park

Brent King

Auckland cricket has found itself toeing an increasingly diplomatic line during the debate over a proposed international sports stadium on the waterfront.

Joint beneficiaries (with Auckland rugby) of the Eden Park Trust Board, the provincial association has been largely silent on the issue since it was raised this week, and was still playing a perpendicular bat yesterday.

The only hint of its position came when chairman Brent King first offered a hearty endorsement of the current Eden Park redevelopment project, before shouldering arms to all questions on the waterfront option.

King, the only Auckland cricket official allowed to speak on the issue, said his organisation was excited about the Eden Park upgrade plans even though the expansion would mean the end of the No 2 ground as Auckland's domestic base.

The association was most likely to be compensated for the loss by the trust board, after which it would begin a search for a replacement venue.

"We think the ideal venue for the Rugby World Cup games in Auckland is Eden Park," King said yesterday. "We're fully behind the Eden Park redevelopment, even though it will create some challenges for us in terms of the playing future of the No 2 ground. But we're currently in negotiation with the Eden Park Trust Board on how we can be best accommodated and those talks are progressing extremely well."

But he refused to pass judgment on the waterfront proposal, saying there was little information available at present and that it would be unwise to comment until more details emerged.

King said Auckland cricket met Minister of Sport Trevor Mallard about four weeks ago and although being made aware that other options were being considered, had no advance notice of the waterfront idea.

"I think the Government's taking the prudent steps that any potential funder would and that it's entirely logical to review all prospects and options.

"But until we know the outcome of those investigations it's not appropriate to speculate. We don't know enough about it to know what might go there, and what might not go there."

King did say, however, that the potential venue for a replacement international standard, dual (rugby and cricket) purpose stadium would entail far more room than simply a playing surface and grandstands.

He noted the Eden Park redevelopment plans included a specific training area for rugby players on what is at present the Outer Oval, as well as indoor and outdoor nets and a large fielding area for cricket internationals.

One of the problems of the present set-up at Eden Park is that any major grant from the public purse would be headed for the bank account of the Eden Park Trust Board, which is essentially a private enterprise.

But King said the idea of altering the trust board's governance structure to create more accountability for any major influx of public money was something that had already been discussed.

"The trustees and the various committees have signalled quite strongly that the governance structure could change," he said. "It could be seen as a win-win situation for local or central government, because they'd gain access to a marvellous asset at a fraction of the price it would cost to re-create it somewhere else."

He believed the question of Eden Park remaining as the home for Auckland provincial rugby and cricket and a new stadium taking over as a base for test rugby and one-day internationals, would come down to money.

"The hardest thing for any civic venue is that very few of them make money," he said. "It's very hard to justify them on a commercial basis, so the question will always come down to this - how much are you prepared to pay as a ratepayer?"