SANFL Ground Sharing

[Sojourner]

Clearly in the AFL most clubs share either Docklands or the MCG as their home ground, the AFL are currently looking into the possibility of Princes Park being used by North Melbourne and other AFL sides, the Western Bulldogs are making some noises about playing matches at Kardinia Park and so on.

In the WAFL people may not be aware but some of the clubs do share grounds in a similar fashion, to do so makes a substantial cut to the operating budget of a club and in the current climate where we are facing a situation of losing one of the nine SANFL clubs, it may be worth at least investagating.

Port Adelaide Magpies and Woodville West Torrens both have had their share of financial problems in the past, if both were to be Tenants of Woodville Oval that would have to represent a significant cost savings for each club.

Thoughts?

[Barto]

In the WAFL people may not be aware but some of the clubs do share grounds in a similar fashion, to do so makes a substantial cut to the operating budget of a club and in the current climate where we are facing a situation of losing one of the nine SANFL clubs, it may be worth at least investagating.

Only two clubs, not 'some', East Perth and Subi. The only reason that came about is because the AFL clubs have pretty much taken over Subiaco Oval and it was silly to keep playing to small crowds there, so Subi were moved to Leederville.

[csbowes]

In the WAFL people may not be aware but some of the clubs do share grounds in a similar fashion, to do so makes a substantial cut to the operating budget of a club and in the current climate where we are facing a situation of losing one of the nine SANFL clubs, it may be worth at least investagating.

Thoughts?

I'm against it. One simple reason, I'm a Sturt supporter. We were screwed about when this was done back in the mid-1980's when the league went about bleating about how 10 sides couldn't survive on 10 home grounds and that we should all look at consolidating to reduce costs. Sturt went to Adelaide Oval with South I think, Torrens and maybe Port went to Football Park, everyone buggered of with in a year or two except my club.

We were locked out of Unley by the knobs over there and it took us a lifetime to get back home. The SANFL never mandated it and so it died a neglected death and Sturt was one club that was left reeling from it for years. We had a 66% or thereabouts win/loss record at Unley and that dropped to under 40% at Adelaide Oval, we were more dangerous at home than the Magpies were at the Devil's Playground!

Anyway, all in all, I don't think it solves much of anything. Clubs can survive now as they are with the money they're bringing in, if anything SANFL clubs need to work out how to live within their means. There may be a bit too much hope and tea leave reading in the way accounts are run at times, maybe clubs need to be more cautious and maybe the SANFL, if anything, can look at having a football operations cap to limit the money clubs blow on this or that.

Just a thought...

[Dirko]

Glenelg moved for one year to Footy Pk and it sucked dogs balls.

Never again.

[FlyingHigh]

Maybe a different scenario, but each country club has its own ground, in many cases two or three that need to be maintained, etc (I understand often through community, local council, volunteer contributions), so for SANFL clubs not to be able to afford playing on their one home ground, well, I think csbowes is right - there is likely to be other areas of expenditure that could be looked at first, or generating more revenue.

Anyway, how f*cken boring is it watching the AFL teams go around on the same few grounds week after week. At least with different SANFL grounds, it adds to the culture of our comp.

But I will agree re Princess Park. Many dollars were spent doing it up, and then Carlton only used it for another season. What a waste. Why didn't the AFL get these poorer drawing Melbourne clubs to play a lot of their games against interstate clubs at Princess Park, with a capacity of probably 30,000. Who knows, may have also attracted more neutral supporters too ie Carlton members wanting to see a game of footy.

[The Sleeping Giant]

Wait for Adelaide Oval redevelopment to be completed. Then you will see at least two teams play home games there. Sturt almost certainly, North almost as certain.

[Dogwatcher]

Elizabeth Oval's big enough. We could divide it in two and have two games played concurrently!

[Brucetiki]

I don't think it's necessary in the SANFL. Once Adelaide Oval has been upgraded, then we'll probably go back to a 9 home/9 away/2 Adelaide Oval neutral game format we had pre-2007, which I think is good enough.

Whilst the VFL/AFL has evolved from a suburban competition to an elite, professional competition, the SANFL has very much remained a suburban competition, meaning there has been no need to ground rationalise.

[Sojourner]

Going back through SANFL History, Port Adelaide and West Torrens who were called the Port Natives at the time shared Alberton Oval, so clearly it is not a concept foreign to the SANFL.