SA Footy

Lightning McQueen wrote:

valleys07 wrote:

MW wrote:My left nuts in danger!

Unless you were referring to quantity..

Barney Stinson theory, two 4's is as good as an 8.

Something tells me Mods would have pulled a 16.

valleys07 wrote:Something tells me Mods would have pulled a 16.

I doubt he would have pulled anything from '91 'til about '96.

valleys07 wrote:
Something tells me Mods would have pulled a 16.

Riley Knight apparently has signed a 1 year deal

am Bays wrote:

valleys07 wrote:
Something tells me Mods would have pulled a 16.

I see what you did there

valleys07 wrote:

am Bays wrote:

valleys07 wrote:
Something tells me Mods would have pulled a 16.

I see what you did there

Lied?

Booney wrote:

valleys07 wrote:

am Bays wrote:

valleys07 wrote:
Something tells me Mods would have pulled a 16.

I see what you did there

Lied?

mots02 wrote:

Booney wrote:Adelaide FC new head of football will be......(wrong answers only)

Bennymacca

well i have accepted a new job recently...

cennals05 wrote:

amber_fluid wrote:What is the story Cennals?
I’ve head several but not this one.

Anyone care to post about it.
‘Allegedly’ or course.

This comes from a good source who got it from the father of one ex-player and another ex-player himself and two other people I work with have been told the same story by 2 senior soon to be ex-players.

Allegedly they were trying to teach the 1-4 year players to not always take orders and see if they could think for themselves. So they had them all in a room and they were giving them orders like, drop and give me 10 push ups, just simple things like that. Then they said drop your pants and stick your finger up your bum. One of the players actually did it. They didn’t think anyone would. I mean honestly who would follow through with that if asked? That player was obviously highly embarrassed and so the cover up began.

This is hilarious!

Please dont tell me this is what happened to the alleged "talking stick"

A proposed overhaul of Parklands planning rules opens the door to the Adelaide Crows’ controversial bid to build a $65 million headquarters, critics say.

Opponents of the Crows’ mooted relocation to the Adelaide Aquatic Centre site claim the State Government has drafted new planning controls that would remove any obstacles to the project.

But the criticism has been rejected by the head of the commission overseeing statewide planning reforms.

The Crows have developed secret plans to build a multi-storey building on the Adelaide City Council-owned site, raising concerns the council is about to gift public space for commercial enterprise.

The angst has been heightened by provisions in the recently released draft statewide Planning and Design Code, governing future development in the Parklands and specifically the aquatic centre site.

The draft code, out for public consultation, permits development at the aquatic centre site to “consolidate and replace existing buildings with recreational sporting clubrooms, facilities and associated administrative functions”.

Adelaide Park Lands Preservation Association president Shane Sody said that was significant departure from previous more restrictive council planning policies and was a “massive opening of the doors” to development in the Parklands.

“This is the first apparent intervention of the State Government in clearing any obstacles to what the Crows want,” he said.

Former councillor and deputy lord mayor David Plumridge said the planning and design code had been written to suit a “fait accompli” for the club.

“If you read (the code) it is quite clear that they have written in language almost purpose-made for what the Crows would want to establish and which would allow the council to redevelop its ailing aquatic centre,” he said.

“It is untenable for the planning codes to be changed in such a radical way as to give almost unassailable permission for the alienation of these precious Parklands for a major commercial development.”

He said this was particularly the case in the face of “strong and justified public opposition” to proposals to “rob the public of access to Park 2” – site of the aquatic centre.

The Federal Government has pledged $15 million to help the club move from West Lakes to the Parklands.

Lord Mayor Sandy Verschoor and a dominant faction of the council are supportive of the Crows’ aquatic centre bid.

In June, the council gave the Crows permission to start developing formal plans for its headquarters at the aquatic centre site. Plans for the training and administration complex have not yet been made public.

Former councillor Ralph Clarke said his interpretation of the code was that it had been “drawn up expressly to fit the Crows’ agenda”.

In March, The Advertiser revealed that the aquatic centre, which costs the council at least $700,000 to operate, needs up to $15 million to be brought up to modern standards.

In a statement, Michael Lennon, head of the State Planning Commission, said the commission gave its “absolute assurance” the Parklands policy had not been written with “any development application in mind”.

He did not answer if an AFL club’s HQ would fit the draft code’s description of “recreational clubrooms, facilities and associated administrative functions”.

The City of Adelaide has not yet reviewed the P&D code for the Park Lands, and consequently it is premature for us to make comment on this proposal.

Council did not have any input to or prior knowledge of the content of the draft Code before it was released for consultation on the 1 October. The City of Adelaide will provide its submission on the Code to the State Planning Commission during the consultation period.

While no formal detailed proposal has been received from the Adelaide Football Club, we will keep the community informed as the unsolicited proposal process moves forward. There would be comprehensive community consultation if a formal proposal was lodged. No timeline has been set for this yet.

The council’s planning, design and development associate director Shanti Ditter said in an emailed statement that the council had no input to or prior knowledge of the draft code’s content prior to its release on October 1.

“The City of Adelaide has not yet reviewed the code for the Park Lands, and consequently it is premature for us to make comment on this proposal,” she said.

She said the Crows have not lodged a formal proposal for the site.

“There would be comprehensive community consultation if a formal proposal was lodged. No timeline has been set for this yet,” she said.

Compare the rules:

Current Adelaide City Council Development Plan

Extensions to or new buildings at the Adelaide Aquatic Centre should be restricted unless they consolidate and replace existing buildings with structures more appropriate to the Parklands environment and with no increase in total floor area. Other than this, no additional buildings should be permitted.

Development at the Adelaide Aquatic Centre site to consolidate and replace existing buildings with recreational sporting clubrooms, facilities and associated administrative functions.

*The code has no definition of recreational sporting clubrooms

Well without the assistance of the state government to help push this through the Park Lands Preservation Society will put a stop to it.

If you look at projects in the Parklands if the Nimby's from the PPS oppose it and there's is no state government influence to push it through then they'll kill it off. However if the state government intervene then the project has a better success rate.

After being involved with some projects that failed to get through throughout the city I find this fascinating as to how this plays out.

I have no objection to the crows customer service HQ proposal, so I'll watch this space with popcorn in hand.

Fascinating.

Certainly an interesting political pawn as much as it is to do with the AFC.

Booney wrote:Certainly an interesting political pawn as much as it is to do with the AFC.

Very much so, at the end of the day the Adelaide City Council are keen on the idea of the Adelaide Aquatic centre taken of there hands but terrified of the Parklands group.

If the state government comes in over the top then it's happy says for them.

Leave the Parklands alone, make the SAAFL an offer they can't refuse and redevelop Thebarton.

I would like to see racing back at Vic Park though, Friday night meets in summer

I despise local community whingers and Parklands groups

Brodlach wrote:I despise local community whingers and Parklands groups

Heritage list the parklands for mine. Make sure they stay as they are forever, something unique about them that should be preserved.

The Parklands group need the help of the SA Footy community to protect the parklands.
The community certainly shouldn't allow the Crows to destroy the area. Imagine the impact it will have on climate change!
Won't someone think of the kids!

Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk

Booney wrote:

Brodlach wrote:I despise local community whingers and Parklands groups

Heritage list the parklands for mine. Make sure they stay as they are forever, something unique about them that should be preserved.

CLG heritage trust are just fabulous

Brodlach wrote:I despise local community whingers and Parklands groups

They have their place, just not on every development or cause.

LMA wrote:I would like to see racing back at Vic Park though, Friday night meets in summer

Aw yeah. Only need 3-4 meets per year, food vans, pop up bars, a bit of live music on the lawns.
Imagine the crowds, the money generated, good for the economy - people having a good time..,