Football and a freak fall: Manitoba judge eyes new rules for stadiums

STEVE LAMBERT

Canadian Press

Should sports stadiums be required to curb beer sales and improve safety features to protect fans in the stands?

Those are two of the questions being considered by a Manitoba judge following a wide-ranging inquest into the death of a spectator at a Canadian Football League game in Winnipeg in August 2006. The inquest concluded Friday after hearing from 50 witnesses over the last 15 months.

A lawyer for the CFL and the Winnipeg Blue Bombers argued Andrew Szabo’s deadly fall from the north-end stands at Canad Inns Stadium was a freak accident that neither a booze ban nor safety upgrades could have prevented.

“There have been millions of people there ... going up and down those stairs,” Bob Sokalski said. “[Mr. Szabo’s fall] was a unique, extraordinary event that was not readily foreseeable.”

Mr. Szabo, 52, was a chronic alcoholic, his widow, Barbara, testified at the start of the inquest last year. But he didn’t appear drunk the day the couple and a friend went to see the Bombers play, she said.

Mr. Szabo stumbled and fell down a flight of stairs near the start of the game, tumbled through a guardrail at the bottom and crashed onto the concrete several metres below. He died several hours later in hospital from internal bleeding and a broken pelvis that went undetected, according to Manitoba's chief medical examiner, Dr. Thambirajah Balanchandra.

The inquest was told Mr. Szabo’s blood-alcohol level, taken five hours after the fall, was more than double the legal driving limit — enough to indicate that he had consumed roughly 12 beers or the equivalent in hard liquor.

Most of the booze had been consumed at home. He drank two beers at the stadium prior to game time and had just purchased another two when he fell.

The inquest heard from people sitting near Mr. Szabo as well as security staff who remembered seeing the tall, lanky man. By all accounts, he did not appear to be intoxicated.

Medical experts testified that chronic alcoholics build up tolerance and learn how to avoid showing symptoms of drunkenness such as slurring their speech or losing their balance.

Still, provincial court Judge Mary Kate Harvie asked lawyers for all sides to comment on whether the Bombers should impose further restrictions on beer sales, which are currently limited to two cups per person at any one time.

Mr. Sokalski rejected the idea. He said Mr. Szabo had hardly consumed any alcohol at the stadium. He also said beer-sellers at such events are trained to look for impaired people and can refuse to serve them.

“And no one, including his wife, observed him to show visible signs of impairment.”

The inquest also considered how safe the north-end stands, which were built in 1966, really are. The guardrails have large openings of up to 53 centimetres — too big according to current building codes. But the space, noticeably wider than the average economy-class airplane seat, was perfectly acceptable when the stadium was built.

Judge Harvie has indicated she may recommend that stadiums and other public facilities be required to renovate every 20 years or so to meet new building codes. That would make building codes retroactive for the first time.

“I think that what we have heard evidence about is some public-use facilities — outdoor facilities that might be subject to the weather — and is there some room for consideration of some type of retroactivity?” she asked earlier in the week.

Mr. Sokalski said the move would be heavy-handed, because changes to building codes govern everything from staircases to seat sizes.

“Does that mean that you would have to tear the stadium apart [to make upgrades]? I think it does,” he said.

The inquest also focused on the health care Mr. Szabo received. Paramedics took him to Winnipeg’s Grace community hospital instead of the major trauma unit at the Health Sciences Centre. Barbara Szabo testified doctors at the Grace said her husband was doing fine and had no broken bones.

Hours later, his blood pressure plummeted and he was rushed to the Health Sciences Centre, where he died. Doctors there discovered a broken pelvis and internal bleeding.

Mr. Szabo’s widow has filed a lawsuit against the Grace hospital and the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority. The hospital’s lawyer, Bill Olson, has said the fracture was too small to appear on X-rays. He also said the Grace did not have advanced equipment at the time that could have detected the internal bleeding.

The judge is expected to issue her findings in the first half of 2011.

Auto dealer: scrap deal for Marlins ballpark
Associated Press

MIAMI — Norman Braman, a former owner of the NFL's Philadelphia Eagles, opposes a giant $3-billion (U.S.) public works deal that includes a long-sought stadium for baseball's Florida Marlins.
Braman is suing to stop Miami's so-called "global agreement" in its tracks, contending it was illegally hatched in secret and improperly uses money intended to cure urban blight and help poor people. Braman wants voters to decide projects of such magnitude, rather than politicians.
"Taxpayers in this town have been ripped off constantly over the years," Braman said in a recent interview in his downtown Miami office. "It's time that as citizens of this community that we say enough is enough — that we're not going to put up with this any more."
The 37,000-seat, retractable-roof Marlins stadium — along with a 6,000-space parking garage and possibly a future adjacent soccer stadium where the soon-to-be-razed Orange Bowl now sits — is only one part of the grand agreement between the city of Miami and Miami-Dade County.
It also envisions a $1-billion tunnel under Biscayne Bay for trucks rumbling to and from the Port of Miami, a passenger trolley line serving the downtown area, additional money for a just-opened performing arts centre with budget problems and work on a park that will become home to several Miami museums.
Miami Mayor Manny Diaz, politically an independent, said each project has been discussed exhaustively for years, and each will contribute to the city's revitalization and create jobs in different ways.
"This agreement really deals with a number of issues which I think are essential for us to create the kind of city we want to create," Diaz said in an interview.
Braman contends in his lawsuit that the deal approved in December violates Florida's Sunshine Law requiring open government because many negotiating sessions were conducted in private between the city, county and the Marlins. The lawsuit claims that money intended for districts created to fight poverty and blight is being illegally diverted into the projects.
Braman, the Eagles' owner from 1985 to '94, said he's not flatly opposed to a new Marlins stadium but favours private financing — a method the cost-conscious Marlins aren't willing to consider.
If officials would put the issue to voters in a referendum, the 76-year-old Braman said he would drop his lawsuit. But Diaz said many of the projects have already been approved by voters.
As for the Marlins ballpark, Diaz called it "one piece of the puzzle" that adds up to a vibrant economic future for the city. "It's one of these destinations that fill it out," the mayor said. "There's a tremendous intrinsic value to sports."
The Marlins, who hope to play in the new stadium in 2011, have threatened to move to another city if it doesn't get built. They currently play in Dolphin Stadium, home of the NFL team, under financial terms the Marlins don't consider favourable to them.
Marlins executives and owner Jeffrey Loria declined comment on the lawsuit, as did Miami-Dade County officials.

Naming rights deal for Giants, Jets stadium could set record
Associated Press

EAST RUTHERFORD, N.J. — All sports teams want bragging rights, but with the cost of a new stadium now more than $1 billion, it's naming rights they're after.
As several of the most storied franchises in sports replace their stadiums, sports marketing experts expect corporations to pay record amounts for the right to name them.
And the teams are finding ways to make the big price tags worthwhile by maximizing the amount of exposure of a company's name and logo, even integrating it into the design of the building.
"There's more value to what's being offered," said Marc Ganis, president of SportsCorp Ltd., a Chicago sports marketing firm. Especially in the New York market, where several new stadiums are going up and garnering record deals, corporations are getting more exposure and visibility, he said.
Already sold for record numbers: rights to the New York Mets' new stadium, purchased by Citigroup Inc. for more than $400 million over 20 years. Next up, the Chicago Cubs, as its new owner, Sam Zell, says he wants revenue from the historic ball field that still bears the name of a former owner that pays nothing to call the stadium Wrigley Field.
But the deal expected to set naming rights records is the new football stadium for the New York Giants and New York Jets in East Rutherford.
The stadium would create a historic proposition, Ganis said: The most value ever offered, in the most expensive media market, and for two NFL franchises. He predicts the deal to go for at least $25 million to $30 million annually.
"The NFL is such a marketing juggernaut in the world of sports, that there's just no other league that's close to it," said Denver sports consultant Dean Bonham. While he wouldn't estimate the amount, he predicted it would be a landmark deal.
Naming rights prices are escalating for several reasons: public support to build stadiums is waning, player salaries are increasing and stadium construction costs are rising. Stadium costs are "out of control," said Ganis, from the $325 million it cost to build the New England Patriots' Gillette Stadium in 2002 to $1.3 billion for the Giants and Jets stadium opening in 2010, a 300 percent increase.
David M. Carter, executive director of the Sports Business Institute at the University of Southern California, said recent deals are moving away from just advertising and branding. For example, the Oakland A's new Cisco Field would use Cisco Systems, Inc.'s technology to enhance ticketing, concessions and management of game-day operations.
"These newer deals are crafted as very, very elaborate business alliances such that these corporate partners are really involved in the building," he said.
Such will be the case, literally, at the new home of the Giants and Jets, where less will mean more.
The teams are seeking only five corporations who will pay to see their names on the stadium: One for the building itself, and four others in each corner of the structure, rather than the hodgepodge of billboards seen in other stadiums. Jeff Knapple, who is marketing the naming rights deal, declined to discuss an asking price.
"We feel the marketplace is always challenged by clutter," he said.
Uncluttering the field could make it more likely for the sponsors to be seen on TV broadcasts, therefore making it more valuable.
If the stadium brings in at least $25 million to $30 million annually as predicted, and with the four additional sponsorships, the teams could get more than double or even triple what the highest deal has brought in so far.
That belongs to the New York Mets, which will receive $20 million annually from Citigroup to name its new baseball stadium, or about $400 million over a 20-year contract. The New Jersey Nets got a similar deal from Barclays Bank PLC for their proposed new arena in Brooklyn, N.Y.
The Mets wanted a sponsor to extend the reach of its brand globally, and New York-based Citigroup was a perfect fit, said Dave Howard, the team's executive vice president of business operations. More than many teams, the Mets have drawn players from around the world.
"New York is the most international city, quite frankly in the world," he said. "It made a lot of sense to have a substantial New York presence as well as a global perspective."
For the sponsors, the reasons to enter into a long, expensive naming rights deal are varied, whether it's global expansion or hometown pride. Timing is also important.
Barclays wanted to expand its brand to the U.S., said Nets CEO and president Brett Yormark. The arena, part of a $4 billion project, has also earned cachet with star architect Frank Gehry and Brooklyn's reputation as an up-and-coming borough, he said.
"It's not about the team," he said. "It's about the building. This will be landmark building, a destination area."
For Prudential Financial, Inc., the decision to buy the naming rights to a new hockey arena meant improving its hometown of Newark, said Arthur Ryan, Prudential's chairman who retired as CEO last month.
Since its October opening, the Prudential Center name is heard daily on radio, the Internet and in print as the new home of the New Jersey Devils. Prudential paid $105.3 million over 20 years.
And before the Nets and Mets deals, the Houston Texans had negotiated an annual $10 million from Reliant Energy for its stadium that opened in 2002. Team president Jamey Rootes said Reliant wanted to take advantage of a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to bring a football franchise back to Houston.
Some teams hold out, however.
The Washington Nationals are still talking with potential candidates for a naming rights partner for their $631 million, publicly financed stadium, which opens this spring, said team president Stan Kasten.
"I don't know if anything will be done by opening day," he said. "There's not a particular deadline. We want partner to be correct and deal to be correct."
The New York Yankees balked at selling naming rights for a new stadium opening in 2009, potentially leaving hundreds of millions on the table.
Randy Levine, the team's president, said a naming rights deal would diminish the team's value.
"The Yankee Stadium name is sacred," he said. "Yankee Stadium is the cathedral of baseball and would be unseemly for a naming rights deal."

"In New York it's not whether you win or lose--

it's how you lay the blame."
- Fran Lebowitz

Cost of new Yankee Stadium up to $1.3B
Canadian Press

NEW YORK - The new Yankee Stadium will have party suites, a members-only restaurant, a martini bar and a price tag to match all the luxury - US$1.3 billion, up from the original estimate of $1 billion.
"We tried to reflect a five-star hotel and put a ballfield in the middle," said Yankees chief operating officer Lonn Trost, who hosted a media tour Thursday.
The new ballpark, set to be ready for the 2009 season, is directly across the street from the old House that Ruth Built. The site is now a welter of cranes and construction trailers, with hard-hatted workers patrolling the infield.
The granite and limestone exterior is designed to evoke Yankee Stadium when it opened in 1923, before it was remodelled in the 1970s.
But inside there will be amenities unheard of in Babe Ruth's day - or in Reggie Jackson's.
There will be a conference area with video conferencing so that a corporate group could have a day-long meeting and then stay for a game. A concierge will be available to procure theatre tickets or restaurant reservations.
There will be 51 luxury suites, two large outdoor suites and eight party suites with seating for up to 410 people in total.
The 58-by-103-foot centre-field television screen will be six times the size of the video screen at the current stadium.
The dimensions of the field will be the same as at the old ballpark, which will be partially demolished.
Trost said the cost overruns included $150 million in enhancements such as the giant video screen, $138 million in food and beverage costs not included in the original estimate and $50 million from delays due to a lawsuit by community groups that sought to halt construction of the stadium.
The community groups sued because two city parks were razed to make way for the new stadium. The Yankees have said the lost parkland would be replaced at the site of the old stadium and elsewhere in the Bronx.
Asked if the Yankees had been securing additional financing, Trost said, "We will be."

New York v. Texas: Whose got bigger _ _ _ _ _ envy?

Robbery in the park: Fans and taxpayers soaked by new Yankee Stadium
John Rolfe

Many moons ago, while scrawling a hidebound tract for children about the life of David Robinson, I came upon a tale I've never forgotten: Robinson marveling at how, after he'd signed his first contract with the San Antonio Spurs in 1989, everyone wanted to give him free meals and merchandise even though he could more than afford to pay.
This little anecdote came to mind when the New York Daily News reported that VIPs will get free valet parking at the new Yankee Stadium for the next 40 years while fans pay handsomely for the privilege of stowing their junkers, starting this year when the tag jumps from $14 to $17 and then to $19 when the new ballpark opens in 2009. The thumb in the eye is that rates could go as high as $35 per jalopy by 2014.
In the Yankees' defense, parking rates are the bailiwick of New York City which happily trumpeted the wondrous benefits of the new billion dollar House That Steinbrenner Built thanks to team money and tax exempt bonds. The city and state are subsidizing the parking facilities and other goodies. Now the city's Economic Development Corp. admits there will be a shortfall in recouping those funds due to soaring construction costs, thus the need for rate hikes. Meanwhile, 700 VIP spaces will deprive the city of $80 million in revenue during the life of the bonds. Another 900 spaces will be discounted.
Any surprise that Joe and Jo-Ann Fan, not to mention Frank and Francine Taxpayer, will pay the freight twice while the fat cats who can most afford it get a free ride?
Two years ago, Neil deMausewarned in The Village Voice two years ago that the new Stadium, for a cash-machine franchise valued at around $1 billion, would be a money pit, and he has produced a tidy spreadsheet of the public and private costs of New York's two new ballparks. This recent development should make you suspicious when owners and politicians crow that no or few public dollars are being used in these ventures. Always check the fine print, and stay up past midnight when little perks like that valet parking deal are snuck in the back door.
This space has bemoaned the use of public loot to erect palaces for private businesses (teams) on several occasions, and the actual benefits to a city or community have been widely debated and disputed, so I'll spare you another stemwinder. But as Ken Belson noted in the New York Times in July 2006: "The Yankees need the subsidies, tax breaks and new revenue [from a new stadium] not only to pay for the stadium, but also the team's hefty payroll. Without that padding, the Yankees might find it harder to assemble a winning team. And without a winning team, it will be harder to raise tickets prices, broadcast rights and other fees."
If there's a positive here, it's that fans will be encouraged to use mass transit, although the Metropolitan Transportation Authority will raise fares in March and another hike is expected in two years. This is the same poverty-stricken MTA that wanted to sell a valuable parcel of land in Manhattan at a low, low discount price to the New York Jets for a new pigskin parlor. Fortunately, the sale and stadium were ultimately torpedoed by state legislators who smelled tar boiling.
All of this makes me cringe when I hear some poobah proclaim that something is being done for the fans. "We're just happy that we're able to do this for the Yankees," George Steinbrenner said most revealingly at the August 2006 groundbreaking, "and happy to do it for you people."
Lately, Roger Goodell was just happy to proclaim that the NFL Network was created for the fans, although it should be obvious that if those mean old cable companies had only agreed to carry it, you would have paid to see Patriots-Giants last Saturday night or been forced to find a gin mill that had it. Once the NFL Network is fully distributed, what do you wanna bet that plum games are kept behind the glass?
Hey, I may be a relic of a time when attending games was cheaper and sports were entirely on free TV, so I'm reacting like someone who finds that their favorite website is asking them to pony up good for content they once got gratis. And I understand that the NFL, or anyone, has a right to sell their own products for whatever the market will bear. But what should smoke your trout are high cockalorums of politics and commerce grinnin' in your face and patting you on the back while they ultimately grab you by the wallet.

Q: What do you do if your college doesn’t have a football team? (or an athletic department for that matter?) A: Sponsor an NFL one.

Cardinals get collegiate feel: University of Phoenix buys naming rights to stadium

Associated Prees

The University of Phoenix, the nation's largest private university, will pay $154.5 million over 20 years for the right to put its name on the Arizona Cardinals' new stadium here, team officials said Tuesday.
The naming-rights deal is the first sports-marketing venture for Apollo Group Inc., the University of Phoenix's parent company, said Apollo President Brian Mueller, and is part of a major new branding campaign for the school.
The for-profit University of Phoenix has 250,000 students, most of them working adults. Its parent company had $2.3 billion in revenue last year, ranking it among Arizona's largest companies.
"We want to lend more credibility to the students who earn degrees from here," Mueller said.
The stadium also is the new home of the Fiesta Bowl, and in January, will host the first of the new national college championship games. It also will be the site of the 2008 Super Bowl.