Sammyboy RSS Feed
02-12-2014, 02:30 AM
An honorable member of the Coffee Shop Has Just Posted the Following:
FT HIRED TO OVERSEE SPORTS HUB PITCH WENT MISSING WHEN THE PROBLEMS BEGAN
.node-article .field-name-link-line-above-tags{float: right;}.node-article .field-name-ad-box-in-article {float: left;margin: 15px 15px 10px 0;}.node-article .field-tags{clear: both;} Post date:
1 Dec 2014 - 11:02am
http://therealsingapore.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/field/image/Greg%20Gillin%20Straits%20Times%20edited.jpg?itok= fS-MMIlW (http://therealsingapore.com/sites/default/files/field/image/Greg%20Gillin%20Straits%20Times%20edited.jpg)
Why was the Australian man hired to oversee the pitch at the Sports Hub always not around to actually oversee the pitch?
"Why was SHPL's senior director of stadia Greg Gillin, the person overseeing the pitch installation, working on a major overseas project during the crucial final months of construction at the Sports Hub?," Michael Y.P. Ang asked in an editorial for Yahoo! Singapore.
Mr Ang worked at the former Singapore Sports Council and was a journalist at the Channel NewsAsia, for local and international sports.
Mr Ang also said, "Within three months of joining SHPL in April 2013, Gillin was hired as a pitch consultant for the Indian Super League (ISL). The Australian soon became a frequent flyer to India, visiting ten sports centres, eight of which were eventually selected as ISL stadiums."
"Is it logical that the Sports Hub's own pitch chief was consulting overseas while the Sports Hub was forced to hire foreign consultants to find solutions to its own pitch problem?," he asked.
In June, Leeladhar Singh of the IMG Reliance, which launched the ISL last year, said, "Gillin will oversee all the facilities from drainage to the main pitch for the much-awaited ISL, which is likely to kick off in October this year.
"Gillin has already visited the various stadiums identified for ISL matches and the work should be completed by earl˙ August."
However, the Sports Hub was opened on June 30 and the pitch's teething problems started becoming an issue by August.
During the most crucial period, Gillin was actually away most of the time in India, rather than in Singapore where he should be ensuring that the pitch would be pitch perfect.
"This year, from May to October alone, Gillin “made around 120 visits to the eight venues”to ensure that they met international standards," Mr Ang had written.
"To be fair, there's nothing wrong with engaging in external work. But puzzlingly, Gillin was spending time away from Singapore when he himself had expected "teething problems" at the rebuilt National Stadium."
To make things worse, Mr Ang wrote, "The ISL kicked off on Oct 12, and there's been no pitch fiasco reported in India.
"Why was Gillin able to do so much and so well for eight stadiums overseas but not for the only stadium he is responsible for in his full-time job?"
In August, Gillin admitted to the problems on the pitch, but he said, "As with any new stadium, we expect teething problems as we continue to ramp up operations, and are concurrently evaluating what additional measures we need to implement to achieve an elite playing surface that meets the needs of our multi-purpose calendar."
But in May, he had sung a different tune: "With this surface, we don’t change it. Even if we lose the grass, we can still play a game on it. You are (already) in front by about S$1.5 million to S$2 million per year just in operating costs.
Gillin had revealed that they had looked through 22 different types of grass and tested them over 15 months to get the best pitch for the Stadium.
It was eventually decided that the Desso GrassMaster pitch would be used, like at the Wembley Stadium, where Gillin was a facilities director.
The pitch costs $833,000.
Glllin also said, "We want to avoid mistakes that were made at other stadiums."
However, despite all the testing, when the pitch's problems became an issue, Gillin said in October, “We certainly do not have the canopy or grass density we would like to have."
He said that the “micro-climate within the stadium” had resulted in “some part of the pitch that gets eight or nine hours, and some parts that only get an hour’s worth of sunlight.”
What was worse is that it was reported in The Straits Times a few days ago that $1.5 million will be spent on new lighting equipment to enhance the quality of the pitch, before the report was retracted.
The promises of not having to replace the pitch and the cost savings came to nought.
But the contradictions do not end there.
Mr Ang also highlighted that, "The Straits Times reported on Oct 14 that "The Sports Hub have flown in overseas consultants such as Alex Garbea, who was responsible for ... the best field at the recent World Cup in Brazil".
But he asked, "Is it logical that the Sports Hub's own pitch chief was consulting overseas while the Sports Hub was forced to hire foreign consultants to find solutions to its own pitch problem?"
He also asked, "Is a public-private partnership like the one at the Sports Hub the best way to build and operate a cluster of highly important, public sports facilities?"
"Such a fiasco would have been unlikely had Sport Singapore been chosen to manage the National Stadium. After all, it has an outstanding record of running Singapore's largest sporting arena for 37 consecutive years."
To Mr Ang, the current fracas over the Sports Hub arose because of a disparate organisational structure which sublet too much pieces of a national icon to various parties which have obviously been unable to match up to the standards required.
Thus where there should be centralised organisation and coordination, is this what has compromised the standards of the stadium?
It also does not help that Minister for Culture, Community and Youth Lawrence Wong's response in parliament last month showed that the government was in on the problem but only acknowledged it when the problems arose.
Mr Wong had said, "Sports Hub Pte Ltd (SHPL) had taken 3 months longer than expected to complete the National Stadium, and this meant that there was not enough time to allow the grass on the pitch to take root and stabilise.
But in spite of the claims being thrown around, it is still difficult to pinpoint where the responsibility of the problem lies.
Mr Wong had said: "In addition, SHPL misjudged the impact that the intensive events calendar would have on the pitch.
But as Mr Ang had said, if there was a central authority overseeing the project, would the kinks have been ironed out right from the start instead of having Sports Singapore only come out to say that they would not pay for Singapore Sports Hub until the pitch is fixed?
Indeed, the question here is where coordination on a national level is required for a national icon, has a tender system which the government has decidedly veered towards compromised on the standards required?
Click here to view the whole thread at www.sammyboy.com (http://www.singsupplies.com/showthread.php?194948-Ft-hired-to-oversee-sports-hub-pitch-went-missing-when-the-problems-began&goto=newpost).
FT HIRED TO OVERSEE SPORTS HUB PITCH WENT MISSING WHEN THE PROBLEMS BEGAN
.node-article .field-name-link-line-above-tags{float: right;}.node-article .field-name-ad-box-in-article {float: left;margin: 15px 15px 10px 0;}.node-article .field-tags{clear: both;} Post date:
1 Dec 2014 - 11:02am
http://therealsingapore.com/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/field/image/Greg%20Gillin%20Straits%20Times%20edited.jpg?itok= fS-MMIlW (http://therealsingapore.com/sites/default/files/field/image/Greg%20Gillin%20Straits%20Times%20edited.jpg)
Why was the Australian man hired to oversee the pitch at the Sports Hub always not around to actually oversee the pitch?
"Why was SHPL's senior director of stadia Greg Gillin, the person overseeing the pitch installation, working on a major overseas project during the crucial final months of construction at the Sports Hub?," Michael Y.P. Ang asked in an editorial for Yahoo! Singapore.
Mr Ang worked at the former Singapore Sports Council and was a journalist at the Channel NewsAsia, for local and international sports.
Mr Ang also said, "Within three months of joining SHPL in April 2013, Gillin was hired as a pitch consultant for the Indian Super League (ISL). The Australian soon became a frequent flyer to India, visiting ten sports centres, eight of which were eventually selected as ISL stadiums."
"Is it logical that the Sports Hub's own pitch chief was consulting overseas while the Sports Hub was forced to hire foreign consultants to find solutions to its own pitch problem?," he asked.
In June, Leeladhar Singh of the IMG Reliance, which launched the ISL last year, said, "Gillin will oversee all the facilities from drainage to the main pitch for the much-awaited ISL, which is likely to kick off in October this year.
"Gillin has already visited the various stadiums identified for ISL matches and the work should be completed by earl˙ August."
However, the Sports Hub was opened on June 30 and the pitch's teething problems started becoming an issue by August.
During the most crucial period, Gillin was actually away most of the time in India, rather than in Singapore where he should be ensuring that the pitch would be pitch perfect.
"This year, from May to October alone, Gillin “made around 120 visits to the eight venues”to ensure that they met international standards," Mr Ang had written.
"To be fair, there's nothing wrong with engaging in external work. But puzzlingly, Gillin was spending time away from Singapore when he himself had expected "teething problems" at the rebuilt National Stadium."
To make things worse, Mr Ang wrote, "The ISL kicked off on Oct 12, and there's been no pitch fiasco reported in India.
"Why was Gillin able to do so much and so well for eight stadiums overseas but not for the only stadium he is responsible for in his full-time job?"
In August, Gillin admitted to the problems on the pitch, but he said, "As with any new stadium, we expect teething problems as we continue to ramp up operations, and are concurrently evaluating what additional measures we need to implement to achieve an elite playing surface that meets the needs of our multi-purpose calendar."
But in May, he had sung a different tune: "With this surface, we don’t change it. Even if we lose the grass, we can still play a game on it. You are (already) in front by about S$1.5 million to S$2 million per year just in operating costs.
Gillin had revealed that they had looked through 22 different types of grass and tested them over 15 months to get the best pitch for the Stadium.
It was eventually decided that the Desso GrassMaster pitch would be used, like at the Wembley Stadium, where Gillin was a facilities director.
The pitch costs $833,000.
Glllin also said, "We want to avoid mistakes that were made at other stadiums."
However, despite all the testing, when the pitch's problems became an issue, Gillin said in October, “We certainly do not have the canopy or grass density we would like to have."
He said that the “micro-climate within the stadium” had resulted in “some part of the pitch that gets eight or nine hours, and some parts that only get an hour’s worth of sunlight.”
What was worse is that it was reported in The Straits Times a few days ago that $1.5 million will be spent on new lighting equipment to enhance the quality of the pitch, before the report was retracted.
The promises of not having to replace the pitch and the cost savings came to nought.
But the contradictions do not end there.
Mr Ang also highlighted that, "The Straits Times reported on Oct 14 that "The Sports Hub have flown in overseas consultants such as Alex Garbea, who was responsible for ... the best field at the recent World Cup in Brazil".
But he asked, "Is it logical that the Sports Hub's own pitch chief was consulting overseas while the Sports Hub was forced to hire foreign consultants to find solutions to its own pitch problem?"
He also asked, "Is a public-private partnership like the one at the Sports Hub the best way to build and operate a cluster of highly important, public sports facilities?"
"Such a fiasco would have been unlikely had Sport Singapore been chosen to manage the National Stadium. After all, it has an outstanding record of running Singapore's largest sporting arena for 37 consecutive years."
To Mr Ang, the current fracas over the Sports Hub arose because of a disparate organisational structure which sublet too much pieces of a national icon to various parties which have obviously been unable to match up to the standards required.
Thus where there should be centralised organisation and coordination, is this what has compromised the standards of the stadium?
It also does not help that Minister for Culture, Community and Youth Lawrence Wong's response in parliament last month showed that the government was in on the problem but only acknowledged it when the problems arose.
Mr Wong had said, "Sports Hub Pte Ltd (SHPL) had taken 3 months longer than expected to complete the National Stadium, and this meant that there was not enough time to allow the grass on the pitch to take root and stabilise.
But in spite of the claims being thrown around, it is still difficult to pinpoint where the responsibility of the problem lies.
Mr Wong had said: "In addition, SHPL misjudged the impact that the intensive events calendar would have on the pitch.
But as Mr Ang had said, if there was a central authority overseeing the project, would the kinks have been ironed out right from the start instead of having Sports Singapore only come out to say that they would not pay for Singapore Sports Hub until the pitch is fixed?
Indeed, the question here is where coordination on a national level is required for a national icon, has a tender system which the government has decidedly veered towards compromised on the standards required?
Click here to view the whole thread at www.sammyboy.com (http://www.singsupplies.com/showthread.php?194948-Ft-hired-to-oversee-sports-hub-pitch-went-missing-when-the-problems-began&goto=newpost).