Canberra stadium uncertainty sparks venom, but what does it mean for the plan?

Did I pack my gloves? Where's my beanie gone? I think I put on two pairs of socks, but if I didn't do I have any clean ones stashed in a bag in the boot? Should I activate my service station-bought hand warmers now or once I find a seat?

I'm guessing many ask themselves the same questions when they're on the way to Canberra Stadium, unless you're like my nine-year-old nephew who doesn't want to cover up his Raiders jersey so insists "I don't feel the cold".

Most of us embrace the cold because we have done for many years. Others tolerate it, some despise it. If you're Brumbies assistant Laurie Fisher, you wear shorts to show a Canberra winter who the real boss is.

Canberra Raiders and ACT Brumbies fans don't mind the chill. That's what they signed up for when they pledged their life to bleeding green or being proud to have a Brumby on their chest.

But it's the not knowing that really frustrates them. Not knowing if they'll get rained on, how long they'll be stuck in the parking line, why the mobile phone service has failed or whether the female players will have appropriate facilities to simply get changed.

Which brings us to this week and the latest turn in the stadium debate this week, edition No. 1043 since 2009.

They're going mad in Tasmania, with two Liberal members quitting the party to sit as independents partially over concerns about a $715 million stadium precinct in Hobart.

MORE CANBERRA SPORT

"For a lot of Tasmanians, and a lot of our constituents, the question is if we all started to support the [AFL] team and the further along the line it became a package with the stadium," Lara Alexander said.

"A number of questions are unanswered - questions that have created this big anxiety and split in our community - and people deserve to get an answer to all these genuine questions."

It would've set off the latest round of alarm bells in the ACT government offices. Stadium wise, they've heard it before after the controversial NSW fight over Moore Park, Homebush and suburban grounds. Now, as the ACT nears its own stadium deal, there are still plenty of questions to be answered.

Like: Has ACT Chief Minister Andrew Barr raised the prospect of a convention centre and stadium precinct in the city in his conversations with the federal government given he says it's the best location, but too expensive to proceed with?

Or: What's the timeline? How much will a Bruce redevelopment cost? Will the ACT government own a new stadium, or just be putting money into a federal government asset? Why have the Raiders and Brumbies been shut out of discussions? When did cheaper and easier become better?

It is hoped answers will come in the next handful of weeks, with Barr planning to outline his vision for a precinct renewal at Bruce. Presumably once he gets on top of the $1 billion takeover of Calvary Hospital.

But the Tasmania stadium issue and the lack of funding for Canberra in the federal government has kicked the hornet's nest again this week.

The venom that has followed has been quite extraordinary - Barr describing the stadium as a "10^th order issue" and then the NRL waging war on the chief minister and the decaying state of Canberra Stadium.

Ricky Stuart didn't miss on Friday when he said "elite sport in Canberra will die" without a resolution.

The well-worn government line that health, education, transport and housing come before sport is getting tired. No one, to my recollection, has ever argued otherwise. But how long can a stadium saga drag on?

The vacuum of information has put the entire issue on the edge of an all out war.

The sentiment at the moment is perhaps the most tense it's been over the past 14 years, which suggests one of two things. We're getting close to the answer, or we're further away than we were all those years ago.

You could sense the frustration in Barr's voice when he faced questions about the stadium issue this week when he was trying to focus on the hospital and announcing the designers for a new Canberra theatre.

As it stands, the divide between Barr and the football codes is wider than it's ever been. The football codes - teams and organisations - feel they're being shut out of a conversation about their future.

Barr's view is that unless they - the teams or organisations - are willing to put up cash for a stadium, they should remain silent until his plan is finalised.

The NRL certainly swung for the fence when they unleashed about the state of Canberra Stadium, the poor fan and athlete experience and that rebuilding at Bruce would fix only some of the venue's deficiencies.

What did they have to lose? We've been in the same holding pattern since 2009 and it's got the feel of one of those "worldwide searches" for a coach or chief executive that ends in the same place you started.

Key stakeholders have been left in the dark as Barr negotiates with the Australian Sports Commission, and while Barr says Bruce is easier, it's not clear what the cost of easy is.

That's why uncertainty is at the heart of all the frustration spilling over this week. When, where, how, why? We still don't know, but you'll have to double check if you've got your gloves for a little while yet.

We've made it a whole lot easier for you to have your say. Our new comment platform requires only one log-in to access articles and to join the discussion on The Canberra Times website. Find out how to register so you can enjoy civil, friendly and engaging discussions. See our moderation policy here.