Reasons to Vote "NO"

[MAY-Z]

Well they do, if you took the time to look.

When they do, you lot whinge about the money they've spent to produce it

Please get your facts straight before you post this garbage R&B.
Yes, Pipers original post did contain some inaccuracies because he hadn't read his information properly yet, I'm not excusing that, but I haven't asked any questions that there are answers for in anything we have received from the SACA.

The information booklet was full of glossy pictures and very light on detail, that's not my fault!

hear hear

[MAY-Z]

Shouldn't you know or find out these things before deciding on your vote, ecky?

It seems as if you and the other 'no' voters have made up your minds and swing from one question to another as you find the facts don't suit your original argument.

I haven't found any facts that have refuted any arguments I have put forward. Yes, plenty of people have disagreed with things, as you would expect with such an issue, but it is a very subjective topic and not one where arguments can easily be proven or disproven.

So why can't you respect our right to vote in whichever way we choose for whatever reasons we might have?

hear hear

[redandblack]

One hear hear was enough, MAY Z

I respect your right to vote, but this is a forum started by pipers for discussion and I'm exercising my right to discuss.

I hope you respect that right, too.

[McGovern]

The problem with the whole vote is the members already have their shiny new stand. If their new stand was a part of the deal they would vote yes to it because as by the "no" comments here its all me me me. They don't care what is best for the state. They don't care that the organisation that they freely chose to support want it. They don't care that it is obviously of a huge benefit for the state. They just care whats in it for them. I always thought the idea of being a member was to be able to vote for what is in the best interests of the organisation they were a member of. In this case thats obviously not going to happen.[/quote]
It is still something that they have paid for the right to have a say on. Would you like it if somebody else tried to tell you how you should design your house to suit their needs? I don't think Footy Park will die regardless, there's a lot of money at Tennyson that doesn't want to travel too far to watch the footy.

[redandblack]

MAY Z, for you to say the information provided by the SACA is 'light on detail' is just absolute nonsense. I've just looked at what they've done and it's as much detail and as thorough as possible

http://www.cricketsa.com.au/content.aspx?p=978

You just don't want to see anything that might go against your fixed position.

Finally, if it doesn't answer a question you have, there is something called an email, which you can send to the SACA for an answer, if you're that worried about it.

Or smac has offered to answer any questions you have.

I don't think you want any answers, though.

[MAY-Z]

MAY Z, for you to say the information provided by the SACA is 'light on detail' is just absolute nonsense. I've just looked at what they've done and it's as much detail and as thorough as possible

http://www.cricketsa.com.au/content.aspx?p=978

You just don't want to see anything that might go against your fixed position.

Finally, if it doesn't answer a question you have, there is something called an email, which you can send to the SACA for an answer, if you're that worried about it.

Or smac has offered to answer any questions you have.

I don't think you want any answers, though.

please check your facts before posting this garbage r&b

i have previously posted (on page 12 i think) the list of questions i have sent SACA, but you dont want to see that

i have also pm'd smac with simlar questions but he was unable to assist me any further

and for you to say that the brochure is detailed says one of 2 things 1) you havent read it, 2) the brochure contains all the fluffy details that you want

if you can find the answers to my questions in what we have received please feel free to show me

[Hondo]

Good faith means very little years down the track, I think it is quite reasonable that they could have agreed to guarantee the Shield Final if we earn it. Footy could have conceeded this one and won quite a few more votes. They have, for whatever reason not done this.

well, as I said, John Harndon said it would be held at the AO if we earned the right

What's the point of footy denying this access in the years we earn the right?

Anyway, without the 2011-12 cricket schedule it's all speculation for now anyway as to the dates of the shield final. Next year we get the 20-20 revamp at State level and possibly a shortened Shield season.

They might choose to finish the Shield season in January. Who knows yet?

[ca]

Another issue I have is whether it is fair that 5000 SANFL members will be able to purchase these ultimate AO memberships and gain admittance to the members area during cricket season
1) ahead of any people on the SACA members waiting list and
2) without paying the SACA joining fee (currently $299)

Is this fair?

Also, if someone who has both a SACA membership and an SANFL membership purchases an ultimate AO membership, will they count as one of the 5000 SACA ultimate members or one of the 5000 SANFL ultimate members?

1) Is there even a waiting list for SACA membership now days? I think I was on the list for years but now a days people seem to get almost straight on. SACA membership is not what it used to be. If this doesnt get up I'll probably throw my memership in, no value in it and no reason to hang onto it if you can virtually get straight back on.
2) Fair point but not enough to turn me of.

Personally I just don't think the SACA can afford to turn this down.

[Ecky]

1) Is there even a waiting list for SACA membership now days? I think I was on the list for years but now a days people seem to get almost straight on. SACA membership is not what it used to be. If this doesnt get up I'll probably throw my memership in, no value in it and no reason to hang onto it if you can virtually get straight back on.
2) Fair point but not enough to turn me of.

Personally I just don't think the SACA can afford to turn this down.

Naughty naughty ca - you asked a question where the answer is in the information booklet! But I guess since you said you will vote yes you will be forgiven by redandblack.

With more than 7,000 new Members and thousands more still on the waiting list, higher attendances are expected for major cricket matches in future years.

[smithy]

Apologies if there is already a thread on this, but I can't find it...

I am a SACA member of more than 10 years and have been attending as an Associate Member prior to that from as far back as 1986.

Indeed you are !

[White Line Fever]

Page 11 advertiser today

To anyone who doesn't understand the big picture

Well done rob chapman

Don't destroy Adelaide SACA members by voting no

[MAY-Z]

Page 11 advertiser today

To anyone who doesn't understand the big picture

Well done rob chapman

Don't destroy Adelaide SACA members by voting no

more extremism "dont destory adelaide" what do you think will happen if no suceeds?

read some of the comments on the online version

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/oval-will ... 45010?pg=2

[AFLflyer]

Exactly,
we are a joke and it shames me to say it, but its true.
who would pass at 1.2Billion worth of new infrastructure for future generations to grow up with.. people will continue to leave this state if nonsense like this continues to get debated and chucked out time and time again. we need to change our thinking!
our city skyline was used in a movie, which is set in Perth back in the early 80's, because Adelaide hasnt changed since then and could pass for that era.

[Ecky]

But many of us would prefer our kids to grow up in a quieter city that isn't full of skyscrapers and attend footy at suburban ovals and cricket at the picturesque Adelaide Oval, and not at an ugly concrete stadium. Bigger isn't always better. If you really don't appreciate what Adelaide has to offer and feel ashamed by it, why don't you move elsewhere?

[smac]

There's a couple of issues sorted

Ecky, whilst I agree with your sentiment, Adelaide Oval will still be picturesque (did the Western Grandstand detract from the feel of the oval?), there is no intention to build skyscrapers in this proposal and I want my kids to grow up in a sporting culture that isn't built around club mergers and closures.

[AFLflyer]

But many of us would prefer our kids to grow up in a quieter city that isn't full of skyscrapers and attend footy at suburban ovals and cricket at the picturesque Adelaide Oval, and not at an ugly concrete stadium. Bigger isn't always better. If you really don't appreciate what Adelaide has to offer and feel ashamed by it, why don't you move elsewhere?

i do love adelaide for what it it is and i agree huge skyscrapers are not the answer, but exiting river developments and new stadims would only add to our charm and charactor and everyone's enjoyment.
Simple.

[Dirko]

our city skyline was used in a movie, which is set in Perth back in the early 80's, because Adelaide hasnt changed since then and could pass for that era.

The city skyline will stay the same unless Adelaide Airport moves. The Westpac Building is as high as it can go due to the flightpath....

As for Adelaide Oval. I'd prefer a new stadium that can cater for all. Football Pk is fine for when I go there.....

[White Line Fever]

But many of us would prefer our kids to grow up in a quieter city that isn't full of skyscrapers and attend footy at suburban ovals and cricket at the picturesque Adelaide Oval, and not at an ugly concrete stadium. Bigger isn't always better. If you really don't appreciate what Adelaide has to offer and feel ashamed by it, why don't you move elsewhere?

Then move to the country if it's too 'loud' for you!

This is a capital city.
Get over this small country town attitude.

[White Line Fever]

our city skyline was used in a movie, which is set in Perth back in the early 80's, because Adelaide hasnt changed since then and could pass for that era.

The city skyline will stay the same unless Adelaide Airport moves. The Westpac Building is as high as it can go due to the flightpath....

As for Adelaide Oval. I'd prefer a new stadium that can cater for all. Football Pk is fine for when I go there.....

Change the flight paths to come in over sea.

[whufc]

our city skyline was used in a movie, which is set in Perth back in the early 80's, because Adelaide hasnt changed since then and could pass for that era.

The city skyline will stay the same unless Adelaide Airport moves. The Westpac Building is as high as it can go due to the flightpath....

As for Adelaide Oval. I'd prefer a new stadium that can cater for all. Football Pk is fine for when I go there.....

Change the flight paths to come in over sea.

No worries mate, ill see what i can do