End of the line for Belfield Park

The pitch beside Belfield Park,(New Merville) being dug up at present is not being resurfaced. It is being dug up to make space for Student Residences.
Speaking to Club official Gerry Horkan after last night's game, a man well versed in how the academic political system works, reckons it is only a matter of time before UCD Fuehrer Hugh Brady demolishes Belfield Park to create more lebensraum for students.

It's not as if there are not enough crappy pitches on campus that could easily have been built on and not missed. Owenstown 1,2 and 3 spring to mind. Apparently the agenda is to move all sports away from the SE corner of the campus ( i.e. the Fosters Avenue corner) over to the Sports Centre/ Bowl side of the campus. And on the subject of the Bowl it looks as if we will be roommates of the Rugby club so to speak when the axe falls on Belfield Park. Now the Rugby club are fine people and there's nothing wrong with them from that aspect, the problem is the playing surface. The Bowl is not even a good rugby surface. We will be going from having one of the top 3 surfaces in the EL to having one of the worst by leaving Belfield Park.

And why? Just to build apartments for bloody students who won't even go to games most likely?... .They could go up anywhere else on campus as outlined earlier! rant over for now

The Owenstown pitches are of a higher ground level and i would imagine their proximity to residential areas would inhibit a potential Planning Application for student accom which usually comprises relatively high rise buildings.

My opinion would be to endure a rugby share for a period with an agreement to gain a new home somewhere on campus in the near future. BP may have an okay surface but the stadium as a whole is no great shakes.

On a side note, is Hugh Brady really viewed as an authoritarian president?

How would the Bowl fare as regards licencing requirements, spectator facilities etc?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paudie

How would the Bowl fare as regards licencing requirements, spectator facilities etc?

---

It doesen't. The name gives it's design away. It's a hole in the ground where spectators stand on a grass slope. The players get changed in the sports centre and walk accross to the pitch.

That's the only saving grace in this fiasco. The Bowl would have to be completly rebuilt and the money should be available from the apartments finance it(property in D4 is quite valuable these days).

In my opinion, more student res is not necessary given that what is already bulit (particularly Glenomena, behind the goal in Belfield Park) is not full. Don't forget that planning permission is also in for 400 apartments on the two rugby pitches behind Hugh Brady's house. In all 5 pitched are being lost to Belfield in the coming years, granted, with the addition of 1 plastic pitch. Campus is running out of space and there is no chance of seperate stadiums for soccer and rugby.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bald Student

The Bowl would have to be completly rebuilt and the money should be available from the apartments finance it(property in D4 is quite valuable these days).

---

Should or would?

You'll hardly get a licence to play in the bowl

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Poor Student

Should or would?

---

Should. I'd be surprised if it wasn't though. The alternative would be a loss of eL soccer to the college and even Hugh Brady wouldn't take that step.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Magoo

On a side note, is Hugh Brady really viewed as an authoritarian president?

---

Yes.


...

What's he been up to? I take it his Sports Commitment is not to UCD FC's liking...?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Magoo

What's he been up to? I take it his Sports Commitment is not to UCD FC's liking...?

---

He see's the university as one big research lab. The students and useless subjects like humanities just get in the way.

He'd like to hire thousands of nerds to research into the natural sciences so as he can go to the big international conferences and act the man.

There's no point in having a sports field in Hugh Brady land when instead you can have apartments generating money to hire more nerds.

I'm not bitter, I'm a generously paid nerd/reseacher myself (thanks for paying your taxes by the way) but he's ruining the place here.

Bald Student, his real plan is to get the nerds to build him the most ultra modern personal gym in the world. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bald Student

He see's the university as one big research lab. The students and useless subjects like humanities just get in the way.

He'd like to hire thousands of nerds to research into the natural sciences so as he can go to the big international conferences and act the man.

There's no point in having a sports field in Hugh Brady land when instead you can have apartments generating money to hire more nerds.

I'm not bitter, I'm a generously paid nerd/reseacher myself (thanks for paying your taxes by the way) but he's ruining the place here.

---

That sounds fairly crap alright. Although I would be tempted to suggest that at least he seems to be making an impact. Cosgrove didn't seem to me to be doing much at all. Apart from attempts to reduce library capacity and opening hours. This was set against the introduction of 24hour library access and increased facilities in many other 3rd level institutions. And he had an Arts background :rolleyes:

I know my department Classics seems to be warring heavily with the authorities. I don't know what over exactly whether it is cut backs or abolition but the authorities seem to want to do something to us feeling we are quite an irrelevant subject.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Poor Student

I know my department Classics seems to be warring heavily with the authorities. I don't know what over exactly whether it is cut backs or abolition but the authorities seem to want to do something to us feeling we are quite an irrelevant subject.

---

I thought a big gripe in the Arts dept. was the intention to split it up in to different sections. From what i could make out, only one of the proposed sections (can't rem which one) were okay with it because it meant they would see an increase in funding whereas the others would see a decrease.

As regards the sciences in UCD, i only have first hand experience of the Engineering & Architecture faculty, but I do believe that over the last ten years or so corporate interest has been afforded to much influence in the material covered by both undergrads and postgrads. A QA analysis seems to be flagging this at the moment, thankfully, as i read on the net recently.

Sorry for taking this off topic, maybe a mod could split?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Magoo

I thought a big gripe in the Arts dept. was the intention to split it up in to different sections. From what i could make out, only one of the proposed sections (can't rem which one) were okay with it because it meant they would see an increase in funding whereas the others would see a decrease.

---

You're right. It has been (?) split into the Faculty of Human Sciences, subjects like Sociology, Politics and that kind of stuff and Humanities like History, Geography, languages etc. You'll see this division if you got to the horribly laid out and confusing www.ucd.ie . I have no idea what it implies or means to be honest. I for example am taking Greek & Roman Civilization and Politics one from each and I never received any info on this division.

I don't think this has gone off topic Magoo. The future of the college has a direct bearing on the future of UCD AFC.

A lot of the modernisation plans make sense to me but I am firmly against the loss of green areas in Belfield. I acknowledge that this isn't entirely the Administration's fault as getting planning to build anything higher than Schumi's noggin is a nightmare in this country but the fact that the tallest buildings in UCD are only three or four stories high (with part of Arts being an exception) is farcical. We could make better use of the space available without destroying the natural environment of Belfield.

This is true but i suppose the problem is that UCD encompasses a huge area with acres of green space and pressure is more than likely put on them to keep filling this before going up. I suppose, in fairness, areas like the Owenstown pitches only get token use anyway - just because they are there. even over towards Richview there is a fair bit of space, the use of which is not being maximised.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paudie

How would the Bowl fare as regards licencing requirements, spectator facilities etc?

---

As far as I know, there is an agreement that our move will coincide with building the Bowl up to UEFA Licence requiments - i.e. 1,500 seater stand, changing areas, etc. There is, I imagine, some money in the club's refurbishment account from when we had intentions to build a 1,200 seater stand on the West Bank hill in Belfield Park, so I don't know if the College are gonig to build the ground for us in compensation for kicking us out of Belfield Park or if we're going to have to put money into it ourselves.

Another issue with regards the destruction of the green areas and pitches is that the Superleague could well be forced to become much smaller. At the moment, I think there are 60 teams each year with some being turned away. The league, as far as I know, is effectively run by the club, so any reduction in teams would reduce our profits from it (after paying for rent of pitches, etc.)