# HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
MR. WALTER M. SULKE asked the following question (in English):----Why is it not possible, in view of the constant closures of the Hong Kong Stadium because of bad weather, to replace the present grass surface with an artificial surface which is used elsewhere in the world for football and other games?
MR. KENNETH T. C. Lo, CHAIRMAN OF THE RECREATION SELECT COMMITTEE, replied as follows (in English):---This question concerns the replacing of the existing grass pitch at the Hong Kong Stadium with artificial turf and asks why this cannot be done.
The Hong Kong Stadium has a number of functions. It is the national venue for international soccer. Friendly games against visiting overseas teams are held on a fairly regular basis and from time to time international competition games, such as the qualifying rounds for the World Cup and the Merdeka tournament are held there. For competitive international games, artificial turf is not acceptable and to install such a turf now would deny Hong Kong the opportunity of staging international tournaments in future.
Another important function is the holding of athletic meetings at the Stadium. During the 1981-82 season, 104 such events were held at this venue and about the same number are expected in the current year. Members will appreciate that a soft surface is required for the javelin, discus and shot put events. Again, artificial turf would not be suitable.
The most frequent user of the grass pitch is the H.K.F.A. which stages the majority (and certainly the most important) of its First Division league and cup games at the Stadium. I understand that the H.K.F.A. is not in favour of artificial turf for such games. Nor is the Hong Kong Rugby Football Union likely to favour the idea and whilst that organization uses the pitch only once a year the event has achieved a status of high international repute and draws crowds which could not possibly be accommodated at any other grass pitch venues in Hong Kong.
Undoubtedly an artificial surface would allow very much greater utilization of the facility in good weather. At present, with natural turf, we have to limit the number of football matches played at the Stadium, so as to reduce wear. With an artificial surface there need be no such limit. It would also obviate the need to close the Stadium quite so often because of bad weather. Furthermore it would greatly relieve the Department of a considerable maintenance problem. However, despite these advantages the general view is that Hong Kong's only national stadium should retain its natural pitch.
In order to provide better drainage to the present pitch, consideration is now being given to installing a completely new underground drainage system. This is a major item of work which will probably commence in the spring of 1984. The opportunity will also be taken to relay the pitch completely, and it is likely that the Stadium will be closed for most, if not all, of the 1984-85 winter season. On completion of the work, inclement weather will not have such a disastrous effect on the playing condition of the ground.
Page 16 of 194
MR. SULKE (in English):-I thank Mr. Lo for the reply but would you not agree that especially in view of the Happy Valley experience, one good typhoon would undo all that relaying of turf and waste the money we spent on it and would it not be very much better if we have one stadium at least with artificial turf?
MR. Lo (in English):--Mr. Chairman, I don't think a typhoon would have any disastrous effect on the turf. Of course, you couldn't play immediately after the typhoon but the turf itself could recover in a few days. As for Mr. SULKE's other question, of course, it would be better to have a stadium with artificial turf on which games could be played many times. But at the moment, we only have one stadium which is the National Stadium, the Mong Kok Stadium in many ways is substandard.
MR. YOUNG (in English):—Mr. Chairman, there is no doubt that natural turf will be worn out by excessive use and at least there will be a limit. Rather than limit major matches unduly, would it be feasible to limit the number of what I understand are called curtain raisers before main matches and therefore not affect main matches at the stadium which are more popular.
MR. Lo (in English):-Mr. Chairman, that certainly is a very good point. In fact, it's the point I raised myself. I think curtain raisers damage the pitch just as much. I don't think they are so popular. It's still a point for the H.K.F.A. to consider. As far as the Council is concerned, the number of matches that can be played each month is limited. If the H.K.F.A. wishes to use the ground partly for curtain raisers and partly for big matches, it's up to them.
MRS. Ho (in English):—Mr. Chairman, could I ask, if they've mentioned the rugby matches. Anybody who saw it on TV could see the damage to the turf. Could we consider whether this could be banned outright or some other venue should be used for this. Perhaps V.C.U.C. would declare his interest on this one.
MR. Lo (in English):-Is V.C.U.C. saying anything? Mr. Chairman, I think it would be a great pity to ban this particular event. I am not a rugger player myself, but it's obviously a very popular event. It's only this year when the weather was particularly bad that we had these very muddy conditions. I think normally, there would not be such a great wear and tear on the pitch. Afterall, they only play for 2 days, is that right? or 3 days?
MR. FORSGATE (in English):-Mr. Chairman, I don't want to be drawn into this and create a debate out of the question system, but you obviously are exercising your discretion in a very liberal way, and I will be drawn into it. Rugby Union Football is, if I may make a statement, a growing game, a great deal of sport, in
Page 17 of 194