Reasons to Vote "NO"

[Brucetiki]

By the time this redevelopment has been completed it will not be the same. Watching Sheffield Shield matches on the hill on dollar day will be nothing but a memory, but when we take our children and grandchildren along we will still get that special feeling as we walk down Montefiore Hill of a place where we've seen the best of the best at battle

I think that's more for the 'You know you're nearing 40 thread' - when they used to charge admission into the Sheffield Shield

[Aerie]

By the time this redevelopment has been completed it will not be the same. Watching Sheffield Shield matches on the hill on dollar day will be nothing but a memory, but when we take our children and grandchildren along we will still get that special feeling as we walk down Montefiore Hill of a place where we've seen the best of the best at battle

I think that's more for the 'You know you're nearing 40 thread' - when they used to charge admission into the Sheffield Shield

Not quite there yet! Dad use to pay the dollar, fall asleep on the hill and I'd watch the cricket!

[Dutchy]

Dutchy, I can't believe you've missed the biggest story to come out of this ... the possibility of sheffield shield matches at the Bay ... hooray

Will be good to still watch shield cricket on the hill, something we wont be able to do in the future at AO, hey why not send the scoreboard to the Bay and put it on Snouts Hill!

[smac]

Dutchy, if this is your way of accepting the vote and supportin the proposal, I am glad you don't support Centrals as well!

[The Sleeping Giant]

Dutchy, I can't believe you've missed the biggest story to come out of this ... the possibility of sheffield shield matches at the Bay ... hooray

Will be good to still watch shield cricket on the hill, something we wont be able to do in the future at AO, hey why not send the scoreboard to the Bay and put it on Snouts Hill!

There will still be hill in front of the scoreboard won't there?

[heater31]

Dutchy, I can't believe you've missed the biggest story to come out of this ... the possibility of sheffield shield matches at the Bay ... hooray

Will be good to still watch shield cricket on the hill, something we wont be able to do in the future at AO, hey why not send the scoreboard to the Bay and put it on Snouts Hill!

There will still be hill in front of the scoreboard won't there?

For the short term yes. In 15 or 20 years time who knows.....

[The Sleeping Giant]

Poor Dutchy. Even after all the information that has been available, he still gets it wrong. Are you sure you voted against the changes?

[The Sleeping Giant]

At least we know 80% of saca members are both cricket and football lovers. Stuck up cricket only lovers.

[heater31]

The Sale of public assets begins.....

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/05/03/3206595.htm



The Yes camp better have braced themselves for a horror State Budget and also this uncannily is announced the day after the vote.......

[The Sleeping Giant]

LOL. Like it wasn't going to be a "horror" budget anyway.

It's straw time again dedja.

[heater31]

LOL. Like it wasn't going to be a "horror" budget anyway.

It's straw time again dedja.

yes granted but this morning they had to find 500 million plus extra than they did last week. This probably won't be the only thing sold off and tax hikes would have been likely less than now...

[Dutchy]

Poor Dutchy. Even after all the information that has been available, he still gets it wrong. Are you sure you voted against the changes?

Got what wrong?

[smac]

Poor Dutchy. Even after all the information that has been available, he still gets it wrong. Are you sure you voted against the changes?

Got what wrong?

I agree with you Dutchy - no one was wrong in their vote.

[Grahaml]

Glad the No movement got shown up to be a few paranoid naysayers in the clear minority. Was clearly the correct decision. It was a valiant effort though to try to bring in issues irrelevant to the SACA and try to blow them up into something bigger, but apparently you can't fool all the people all the time, just around 20%.

[heater31]

Glad the No movement got shown up to be a few paranoid naysayers in the clear minority. Was clearly the correct decision. It was a valiant effort though to try to bring in issues irrelevant to the SACA and try to blow them up into something bigger, but apparently you can't fool all the people all the time, just around 20%.

No it just means that 80% were not able to see past the spin and $$$$$ signs.


This by no means solves the underlying issue of getting bums on seats to watch Football, given the new TV deal announced I'm not sure how it is going to attract more people to watch it live at the ground when clearly there is a much easier and cheaper alternative to stay at home at watch it on that shiny new Flat screen TV that they probably can't afford either

[AFLflyer]

LOL. Like it wasn't going to be a "horror" budget anyway.

It's straw time again dedja.

yes granted but this morning they had to find 500 million plus extra than they did last week. This probably won't be the only thing sold off and tax hikes would have been likely less than now...

YAWN at ALL your posts Heater. Correct me if i am wrong, but hasn't this 500mil always been in Labors budget, we voted them in knowing this!! You really need to look on the bright side mate, i'm beginning to get worried about your depressive state !
Do you see any positives in this move, it's clear many of the NO voters do?

[heater31]

LOL. Like it wasn't going to be a "horror" budget anyway.

It's straw time again dedja.

yes granted but this morning they had to find 500 million plus extra than they did last week. This probably won't be the only thing sold off and tax hikes would have been likely less than now...

YAWN at ALL your posts Heater. Correct me if i am wrong, but hasn't this 500mil always been in Labors budget, we voted them in knowing this!! You really need to look on the bright side mate, i'm beginning to get worried about your depressive state !
Do you see any positives in this move, it's clear many of the NO voters do?

yep I get my building levy back from SACA!!

That was only an election promise as you know plenty of those have been broken over the years. This project will just be another drain on the state bank accounts forcing Future governments to slash services in other areas, not support regional South Australians because the toss bags from the city wanted a new football stadium

[The Sleeping Giant]

A fair majority of the no vote wanted a 2nd stadium built, that would of cost a hell of a lot more. So redeveloping AO makes more financial sense.

[Hondo]

Ian Mc on 5AA tonight said that of the 2300 that turned up about 1000 had already voted. So only 1300 voted on the night. These details are posted for interest's sake only.

A caller to 5AA said he changed from a NO to a YES vote on the night and he suggested quite a few did the same. He suggested when everyone was in the same room (footy and cricket people) there was a sense united desire to see this deal done for the sake of footy and cricket and the mood was very much pro the development by the end.

I thought the NO voters would be a noisy obstruction to proceedings but it sounds like they were the opposite and credit to them for that.

Credit too to the 8000 SACA members who voted yes when a lot of us pro-YES vote people were making rough and in hindsight unfair negative generalisations about SACA members. What I have learned from this is that a noisy minority can be VERY noisy. Even on talkback radio shows today most callers were against the decision. I can only assume YES voters or supporters don't listen to the radio or can't be bothered even entering the debate.

[Ecky]

Glad the No movement got shown up to be a few paranoid naysayers in the clear minority. Was clearly the correct decision. It was a valiant effort though to try to bring in issues irrelevant to the SACA and try to blow them up into something bigger, but apparently you can't fool all the people all the time, just around 20%.

These are the sort of condescending ill-informed posts that will be "unarchived" in a few years time if some serious issues are found with the development. Anyone who bothered to research the issues properly would realise that there were some valid points on both sides of the debate.