Will the Adelaide Oval Redevelopment go ahead?

[Magpiespower]

It's going to be interesting on Saturday how they manage the NRL game between the Storm and Dogs. I'm going and I can't wait to see how there going to manage the crowd even if there's not many there.

Be thankful Doggies fans don't travel over.

They're 'interesting'...

[gossipgirl]

Why should the state and tax payers fund something that is used by such a small percentage of the population? [Maybe 40 thousand in 1.5 million each weekend.]
Just because the Murdoch press and their commercial friends think it will look better on the pay TV they are invested in, and are whipping up the idea that we need it?

So the government should only spend money on something everyone will use? That item surely doesn't exist.
The benefits go beyond the stadium - local business, construction and related industries, the sports themselves will benefit at grassroots level which has untold benefits in the community.

Less than 2.6% attend matches on the average.
More people would use local sports fields and most people would benefit from better health and education facilities.
The effects on "construction and related industries" are temporary, and some local business may suffer from the congestion more than they benefit from the extra crowds in the area - restaurants and good cafe's for example.

Agree completely, If the state was rich and could afford it then great go ahead but it isnt and there are so many higher priorities for the govt to spend money. In some ways it would have been quite funny if the Libs had got in too see where they were going to get the money from .... perhaps they were going to use one of Pauline Hansons policies of just printing extra money

[ca]

It's going to be interesting on Saturday how they manage the NRL game between the Storm and Dogs. I'm going and I can't wait to see how there going to manage the crowd even if there's not many there.

Be thankful Doggies fans don't travel over.

They're 'interesting'...

What would be considered a good crowd for Saturday night?

[smac]

Why should the state and tax payers fund something that is used by such a small percentage of the population? [Maybe 40 thousand in 1.5 million each weekend.]
Just because the Murdoch press and their commercial friends think it will look better on the pay TV they are invested in, and are whipping up the idea that we need it?

So the government should only spend money on something everyone will use? That item surely doesn't exist.
The benefits go beyond the stadium - local business, construction and related industries, the sports themselves will benefit at grassroots level which has untold benefits in the community.

Less than 2.6% attend matches on the average.
More people would use local sports fields and most people would benefit from better health and education facilities.
The effects on "construction and related industries" are temporary, and some local business may suffer from the congestion more than they benefit from the extra crowds in the area - restaurants and good cafe's for example.

Yes, most restaurants hate it when it's busy.

So Psyber, we spend every dollar on health because most will use it at some point? Baffling. And if we are extrapolating benefits, what about the benefit of little Johnny not stealing your car because he is too busy playing sport? Communities as a whole benefit from grassroots sport participation which is why Governments spend money on it (beside the obvious vote grab it does have real benefit).

[Booney]

With average attendances at Footy Park slowly falling, for whatever reason that may be and it may not be the stadium itself, how many of the say 35,000 people will want to "wine and dine" before or after a game in the city precinct?

Many people are pushed to the limit affording Memberships, Season Tickets and add the cost of city parking or the time factor in using public transport and how many of those 35,000 will stay in and around the city before or after a game?

I think using the peripheral issues of cafe's / restaurants to convince people the redevelopment is worthwhile is not a good argument IMO.

[Dirko]

I think using the peripheral issues of cafe's / restaurants to convince people the redevelopment is worthwhile is not a good argument IMO.

I agree. The only time I've ever been to a pub in North Adelaide before or after attending something at Adelaide Oval, with a crowd over 30 000, was the AC/DC concert.

Otherwise, get in / get out.

[Wedgie]

Most people I know would definately wine and dine before and after games if it was in a central spot, already currently do it in Melbourne too.
North Terrace and Hindley St would be rocking if there was an oval in the trainyards.
I wouldn't be spending thousands this coming weekend ifthe Cats game was at Kardinia or Waverley or even Princess Park.
I'm not even going the week after when they play in Adelaide!

[Booney]

Most people I know would definately wine and dine before and after games if it was in a central spot, already currently do it in Melbourne too.
North Terrace and Hindley St would be rocking if there was an oval in the trainyards.
I wouldn't be spending thousands this coming weekend ifthe Cats game was at Kardinia or Waverley or even Princess Park.

Agreed. Not sure the same can be said for a stadium in it's current location. It isn't far away from North Tce and Hindley St's but if you park near the oval not many would then either drive into the city from there or walk back to the car after a meal.

People whinge that a trip to the footy for a family is the best part of, if not over $100 now so I cant see too many adding meals and drinks to it. Sure, there are some who would but I think the vast majority wouldn't.

[Q.]

Plenty of people kick on after the cricket, can't see why people wouldn't do it after the footy either.

[Booney]

True, but the footy will have you ( depending upon your team ) there every second week. Not once or twice a year.

[smac]

Part of the whole idea is to use public transport more, rather than drive. A walk across the bridge to the train station and home you go, or a walk into town for a drink and feed. We shouldn't try to pick up footy park and put it in the city, with all its crowd behaviours; we should be trying to create an entertainment precinct that makes Adelaide a place that people want to go to.

[Q.]

True, but the footy will have you ( depending upon your team ) there every second week. Not once or twice a year.

Not if I'm an opposition supporter or neutral supporter.

I think having it in the city is more likely to attract neutral supporters to a game.

[Booney]

Part of the whole idea is to use public transport more, rather than drive. A walk across the bridge to the train station and home you go, or a walk into town for a drink and feed. We shouldn't try to pick up footy park and put it in the city, with all its crowd behaviours; we should be trying to create an entertainment precinct that makes Adelaide a place that people want to go to.

True. As I stated earlier in another thread. How many people will use the public transport system? Think of all those Nanna's with blankies and thermos' full of tea heading to Crows games. How will they carry it all?

[am Bays]

True. As I stated earlier in another thread. How many people will use the public transport system? Think of all those Nanna's with blankies and thermos' full of tea heading to Crows games. How will they carry it all?

Not to mention the Port fans with their wheel braces, portable jacks and jimmy bars, just not practicable on a train.....

[Booney]

True. As I stated earlier in another thread. How many people will use the public transport system? Think of all those Nanna's with blankies and thermos' full of tea heading to Crows games. How will they carry it all?

Not to mention the Port fans with their wheel braces, portable jacks and jimmy bars, just not practicable on a train.....

I didn't realise you knew about this board? F*** the AFL and all that.

[am Bays]

I didn't realise you knew about this board? F*** the AFL and all that.

One does need to remind oneself why one takes the higher moral ground....

[CUTTERMAN]

Great article by Geoff Roach in the paper today. It's a pity he's retiring, he always puts forward a well thought and unbias point of view, unlike some at the 'Tiser

Got a link or a scan for those of us who dont have access to the Tiser?

Tried to find it today Barto but I can't seem to find anything on Adelaide Now, will see if I can find the paper and scan it for you, it was Geoff Roach's opinion piece in the back of the sports section with Cornes'

[Booney]

I heard this morning that if the SACA Members do not vote in favour of the proposal the board will honour that vote and it wont go ahead?

So what about SANFL members?

[Barto]

Most people I know would definately wine and dine before and after games if it was in a central spot, already currently do it in Melbourne too.
North Terrace and Hindley St would be rocking if there was an oval in the trainyards.
I wouldn't be spending thousands this coming weekend ifthe Cats game was at Kardinia or Waverley or even Princess Park.
I'm not even going the week after when they play in Adelaide!

And if the naysayers hadn't poo-pooed the MATS plan 40 years ago, you could have a freeway exit into the thing.

[ca]

I heard this morning that if the SACA Members do not vote in favour of the proposal the board will honour that vote and it wont go ahead?

So what about SANFL members?

I may well be proved wrong but I just can't see how the SACA members won't vote for it. I'm unsure of the voting arrangements but if it's a simple majority it would surely get up. I'm a member and I know about 10 others at least and all would vote 'yes' without a second thought. I admit that they are all younger members and it could be different in the older age groups. The important thing will be that everyone votes as I for one and the people I am talking about would not normally go to a SACA meeting or vote.