Booney wrote:=))![]()
"Imagine, the new bars of the casino overlooking the torrens and AO, as the crowds swarm in over the bridge..."
It'll only be a one way bridge changing directions at half time...
by Mr Beefy » Fri May 06, 2011 10:10 pm
Booney wrote:=))![]()
"Imagine, the new bars of the casino overlooking the torrens and AO, as the crowds swarm in over the bridge..."
by 85 WAS A GOOD YEAR » Fri May 06, 2011 10:22 pm
by AFLflyer » Fri May 06, 2011 10:36 pm
Mr Beefy wrote:Booney wrote:=))![]()
"Imagine, the new bars of the casino overlooking the torrens and AO, as the crowds swarm in over the bridge..."
It'll only be a one way bridge changing directions at half time...
by Rik E Boy » Sat May 07, 2011 10:19 am
The Jack wrote:Rik E Boy wrote:Gives you a good spot to jump after your footy team has lost and you've done your dough on piss and gambling.
regards,
whufc
Could easily be a Dutchy quote too. Fair dinkum!
by Psyber » Sat May 07, 2011 12:56 pm
A quick calculation based on the figures given in the TV news suggested 49% of the SACA membership voted for this. That made up over 75% of those who voted.scoob wrote:A vote of 75% of SACA members was needed and not only achieved but exceeded... the Tribe has spoken... Disgruntled SACA members it is time to leave the island... disgruntled members of the public - vote for the other team at the next election!Gingernuts wrote:Fair Dinkum. The bloody Women's and Children's would've had less crying babies than safooty in the last few days.
I promise to log on in 5 years time so you can tell me 'I told you so'. Now will ya all shaddup??
by fish » Sat May 07, 2011 1:18 pm
by fish » Sat May 07, 2011 1:28 pm
Yep here it isfish wrote:I thought I read a few days ago that the AFL will contribute if needed...
by spell_check » Sat May 07, 2011 7:25 pm
Jim05 wrote:I am really worried we wont be able to afford it. The hospital is surely number 1 priority so if that is a billion over budget the money has to cut from something else.
Hopefully the mining at woomera can start asap.
by Psyber » Sun May 08, 2011 12:53 pm
Thanks for that, and posting the content later - I'd missed it.fish wrote:I thought I read a few days ago that the AFL will contribute if needed...
by Voice » Sun May 29, 2011 5:27 am
by Jim05 » Tue May 31, 2011 7:34 am
Voice wrote:click here Delays already?
by Barto » Tue May 31, 2011 11:13 am
Opposition Leader Isobel Redmond again has questioned the wisdom of upgrading Adelaide Oval to stage AFL games.
"I'm far from satisfied that it's the right way to spend $600 million of the money that belongs to the taxpayers of this state," she said.
"It's effectively bailing out, it appears now, cricket and football. Why would we do that if, at the end of the day especially, the business case doesn't stack up?"
by Jim05 » Tue May 31, 2011 11:23 am
Barto wrote:The rumblings have started with Port's financial crisis getting worse.Opposition Leader Isobel Redmond again has questioned the wisdom of upgrading Adelaide Oval to stage AFL games.
"I'm far from satisfied that it's the right way to spend $600 million of the money that belongs to the taxpayers of this state," she said.
"It's effectively bailing out, it appears now, cricket and football. Why would we do that if, at the end of the day especially, the business case doesn't stack up?"
She does have a point though, what if all that money is spent and Port are still getting sub 20k crowds?
by gossipgirl » Tue May 31, 2011 1:48 pm
by Hondo » Tue May 31, 2011 3:09 pm
by The Sleeping Giant » Tue May 31, 2011 4:26 pm
by Barto » Tue Jun 07, 2011 11:49 am
PORT Adelaide's off-field crisis has taken a turn for the worse with the possibility of the Adelaide Oval redevelopment being shelved.
The Age understands that the Sky City Casino group, a key investor in the development of the precinct, is about to announce from its Auckland headquarters it has scrapped plans to expand the Adelaide Casino to the bank of the River Torrens.
This upgrade, and a proposed bridge to Adelaide Oval, is a major part of the complete package, and without it the Mike Rann state government faces an even more daunting task to pass legislation on the $535 million project.
by gossipgirl » Tue Jun 07, 2011 1:10 pm
by Banker » Tue Jun 07, 2011 1:52 pm
by Jim05 » Tue Jun 07, 2011 2:07 pm
Banker wrote:Adelaide Oval currently has seating capacity for 40'000 people.
Why are Port waiting until the redevelopment to move? Do they expect more than 40k?
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |