I BELIEVE the constant premature cancellation of sporting events by council or administrators due to a bit of rain needs urgent review. Unless there is a severe weather event or chance someone may drown, I say let the games be played, especially for the kids. They may just get a bit muddy.
The recent postponement of the rugby at No. 2 Sportsground highlights the need for review. Surely the Saturday's game should have been transferred to Maitland or similar. By Sunday the ground was virtually dry. With respect, this was not Under 10s.
People have lives and arrange things around scheduled dates such as a grand final. After 20 years of playing rugby and cricket, from my experience grounds recover 99 per cent of the time.
David Young, Merewether
ROCK STOCKTON'S WORLD
I WOULD like to offer a possible solution to the erosion along Stockton Beach ('Wipeout', Herald 4/9).
Have a look at Nobbys break wall, especially out past the lighthouse. One will notice the huge six-metre cubic concrete blocks that form the foundation of the break wall. This wall has withstood the test of time for over 100 years. Huge seas continually pound the wall, but even the Pasha Bulka storm didn't leave a dent.
Why can't hundreds of these blocks be cast and lifted down onto the beach and back-filled with sand or dirt to lay a solid foundation to reinstate this part of the beach? In other words, build a break wall type structure parallel to the shore. These blocks need to be huge in size to prevent them moving. They could even be cast at all different angles on the beach. Steel beams could also be hammered into the sand behind these blocks. Whilst I acknowledge this will be a very expensive project, something has got to be done soon rather than just talking and buck passing as has been happening for years. It always seems to be someone else's job and we continually go round and round. Soon the waves will be washing down Stockton's main street.
Graeme Bennett, Warners Bay
RAIL COULD HAVE PREVAILED
IN light of recent reports in this publication regarding the declining fortunes of businesses in the city centre ('Flying Tiger crashes to close', Herald 28/8), one has to wonder what those who pushed for the closure of the railway and the construction of the light rail in Hunter Street were trying to achieve.
We were told that the railway had to pull out and be replaced with light rail in Hunter Street for the city to be revitalised. So far, the reverse seems to have happened. It begs the question; what were they thinking? Now some are questioning the benefit of the Supercars races, with suggestions the figures quoted of those who attended may not be accurate. Some who campaigned for the railway to be retained are saying that what they said would happen has happened. I notice that another report speaks of a proposal for gardens to improve the look of the former Newcastle station.
What took them so long? It's interesting that part of this proposal has a concrete strip that allegedly represents the railway lines that ran into the station. I seem to remember, when the trains were still running, some suggested that the railway lines be decorated with gardens and turf in order to improve their appearance. Sadly this fell on deaf ears. The look of the railway could have been vastly improved and the city would have been easier to access had such a proposal been adopted. It seems a bit late for that now.
Peter Sansom, Kahibah
IT JUST DOESN'T FIGURE
THE truth about the Supercars attendance figures is slowly coming out as we approach the third year of this fiasco.
We now find out that rather than comparing a similar weekend in November to work out how many extra people have come into Newcastle for the Supercars event the comparison weekend used was an abnormally wet weekend in May ('Professor questions Supercars research', Herald 2/9).
This is the weekend that the Hunter Research Foundation say they were instructed to use even though they suggested an alternative weekend, logically a similar weekend in November. Why did the council pick the May weekend after it had voted unanimously to commission a true cost benefit analysis?
In my opinion the answer is obvious: I believe it was a cynical exercise, wasting $156,000 of ratepayers' money for a worthless report in order to save face after their rushed decision to hold this race. The Central Coast Council administrator had previously taken the correct course and decided that a business case would be needed before any decision could be made about running this race.
I think Supercars were desperate for a venue after this knock-back. Luckily, they found a council who fell for the spin and glitter and rushed to give their support, the acting CEO signing a secret agreement to hide the terms from ratepayers and even more outrageous, from the councillors ('V8s race deed kept secret', Herald 9/6/18).
John Hudson, Newcastle East
A BAD KISS IS NO TREND
OMG Pru Goward (SMH, 4/9), are you kidding me? One guy does something utterly inappropriate with Leigh Sales ('That kind of behaviour is intolerable': Leigh Sales responds to unwanted kiss, SMH 2/9) and the rest of us are tarnished with the same brush. Pecking on cheeks is commonplace in a variety of cultures.
Personally I am no huge fan of it, particularly in a business setting, as it can be an enormous clanger when not expected or welcomed. A handshake is safer, easier, healthier (I presume) and far less controversial. Having said that, many women over the years have rejected the offer of a hand for the peck in my business life.
So please, refrain from your man-bashing opinion when what you are commenting upon is such an isolated incident. The man was wrong, I think we would all agree.
Antony Bennett, Bar Beach
LAW MORE THAN FEELINGS
PEOPLE should look at the big picture when deciding refugee compassion. "Let them stay" has been repeated throughout Australia because people are compassionate ('PM won't intervene for Tamil family', Herald 3/9), but they are missing the bigger picture. If all hard decisions were put to public debate, law and order would be a shambles and those who flaunt the system be the winners.
Do we really want winners without regard for those who obey our system? I ask how much money has been spent so far for legal representation for this family, or in general has been given to people who have clearly broken the law?