Barely two months ago, large numbers of people voted for Labor because they believed its candidates would oppose the Macquarie Point stadium project.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Stadium opponents were similarly voting Labor in Legislative Council elections last weekend.
These voters are right to be angered at the party's about-face on the issue.
Two days after the Legislative Council poll, Labor leader Dean Winter announced his support for the development of a Hobart stadium, citing the job benefits the project would generate.
Judging by the large volume of letters received at The Examiner this week, there is substantial bitterness in the anti-stadium community.
But that does not necessarily mean that Mr Winter's decision was the wrong one.
Tasmanians want an AFL team and the league has made it clear that this can only happen if the state builds a first-class facility.
Many on the North-West Coast and in the North had thought that a refurbished York Park was the way to go.
But the fact is that Hobart is the place that will provide the Tasmanian team the greatest chance of success.
Launceston lacks the population, infrastructure and services needed.
And as much as Northerners hate to admit it, Hobart also stands a greater chance of attracting elite-level players.
Hawthorn captain James Sicily in his unfortunate comments last year said Tasmania was too boring to attract young elite football players.
He was basing his comments on Launceston, where the Hawks play some of their games under a sponsorship deal with the Tasmanian government.
Sicily admitted there was "a bit more happening in Hobart".
For the Tassie Devils to succeed, they need every advantage possible - top players, the best stadium and facilities money can buy, and a loyal fanbase that can fill the venue week in, week out.
For Labor, the question has now become whether it will back one of the two stadium projects on the table.
There is the original Macquarie Point project backed by the government and there is a rival bid by a private consortium labelled stadium 2.0.
The rival bid features not only an impressive-looking stadium, but social and affordable housing, a private hospital and a convention centre built in to its design.
There has been constant speculation that Labor would eventually back the project, given the party's focus on health and housing issues.
What's more, the rival bid's promoter is former Labor premier Paul Lennon.
That speculation went into overdrive this week, after Mr Winter's decision to change his stance.
Re-elected Clark MHA Simon Behrakis on Wednesday questioned whether Mr Lennon was the mastermind behind Mr Winter's decision.
"Tasmanians need to know who he really is representing: his constituents or a Labor lobbyist," Mr Behrakis stated.
Having come to the decision to support a stadium, Mr Winter would be wise to hold back from supporting one or another of the projects.
Backing stadium 2.0 would open Labor up for criticism for any failures or cost blow-outs if the project were built.
Even if it did come out to support the rival project, there's no guarantee that it would ever be built.
But if Mr Winter supports the more vague idea of a Hobart stadium, he would be positioned to criticise the government for any failures on the project - which are very likely.
Most pundits agree that the Liberals' plan to build the project spending no more than $375 million of Tasmanian taxpayers' money is a pipedream.
Massive cost blowouts of the project are inevitable, presenting Labor with juicy opportunities to highlight the failures to the electorate.
Most Tasmanians want an AFL team. Labor would be wise to remember that.
