[COM] Adelaide Oval Redevelopment

[citywatcher]

Totally agree. Rich people and their corporate bucks eventually leads to the detriment of the sport itself . Where were telstra when the thing was being built or funds sort ? As for the sma , their feeding off the core of the football teams and supporters and just what is it that they exist for ?

[cruel_world00]

The only thing that is sacrosanct is the Oval's name itself. That is enshrined in legislation. And to be fair, the name of the Oval is worth more than any rebrand ever would be. The rest can be sold as far as I'm concerned. Would I care if the bridge was renamed the Santos Bridge? Not at all. The Telstra Plaza will probably be called that by official types only. Maybe it will seep in, maybe it won't. But it's hardly sacred ground. I think people need to get over the commercial elements of the ground and embrace it because it's 2014.

[pushbutton]

A stadium was built in my home town of Bolton (UK) in 1997, and was named Reebok Stadium (after the sportwear company). Initially there was outrage from the fans that "their"stadium had been sacrificed to corporate greed.

However the name quickly became fully accepted by the vast majority of people and everyone called it "the Reebok".

Well just very recently that sponsorship deal has expired, and the signage on the stadium has been changed from "Reebok" to "Macron" (I'm not even sure what Macron do as I've never heard of the company before). So now fans are complaining about the change and saying they will always call it the Reebok no matter what the signs might say!

That's how it goes. I have no doubt in next to no time the old name will be pretty much gone from peoples minds and it will be just as affectionately known as the Macron, or just Macron Stadium.

This works with other structures too, not just stadiums. Who still calls Adelaides tallest building the State Bank building? Not many!

[Matt]

Docklands Stadium... Colonial Stadium... Telstra Dome... Etihad...

It's life.
Adelaide Oval stays Adelaide Oval - this is a good thing.
As well as tradition continuing, instead of some corporate outfit getting free promo every time it's mentioned, it's Adelaide itself that reaps the benefit. As well it should, considering the people of Adelaide and SA have paid for it. Great that there is legislation to keep this as the case. (similarly with the Riverbank stand - great initiative and free promo to the precinct that will hopefully continue to grow as a destination).

As for the plaza - is it a big deal? I don't think so.
If Telstra are prepared to chip in some cash to upgrade a few bits that didn't squeak into the stadium budget (and make facilities more appealing to the public), good for them. If a small sign saying "Telstra Plaza" is the cost of patrons having vastly improved signal, it seems a small price to pay.

Would rather the bridge stay as 'Riverbank Bridge' though.

[[Shuz]]

Well it's like Football Park before it got changed to AAMI Stadium. Everyone still called it Footy Park anyway.

[monotonehell]

Oh c'mon, mnotonehell. This thread is always breaking off into the politics of sporting organisations, just because you don't like what is being said, you don't have to pull out the authority.

It's true that this (and other threads) keep being derailed by non-development talk. This should not happen.

Don't think for a moment that I care either way about what's been said and that I'm "pulling out my authority". I am wearing my completely partisan moderator's hat when I ask that off topic chat be taken to the pub, or more appropriate forum.

This forum is split into two distinct areas; "development discussion" and "topical discussion" by design. We are all guilty of wandering off topic from time to time, please at least try to respect the forum's rule. Cleaning up threads is a difficult chore. We would rather not have to.

[[Shuz]]

Sure you're not just getting cranky with old age, Mono?

Sent from my computer via fibre-optic underwater sea cables.

[spiller]

Cannot believe (or maybe I can) the amount of complaining in here about the naming of a bit of paving outside of a stadium. The signage is so small that most people either won't even think to look at it or realise that its actually associated with the ground upon which they're standing. Get over it move on.

In other news AO hosted 50,000 spectators for the 5th time this season. Its getting close to the MCG for having done that in 2014.

[[Shuz]]

In other news AO hosted 50,000 spectators for the 5th time this season. Its getting close to the MCG for having done that in 2014.

On a serious note though - is anyone here supportive of the idea of building a new Northern Grandstand to expand capacity again? For example if it was exactly the same as the Riverbank Stand - 14,000 seats - taking the total to 64-67,000. I think we should. As for the 'hill' and the scoreboard... some things just have to move on. The great moments of sporting history at Adelaide Oval took place on the field - not off the field.

[Nathan]

In other news AO hosted 50,000 spectators for the 5th time this season. Its getting close to the MCG for having done that in 2014.

On a serious note though - is anyone here supportive of the idea of building a new Northern Grandstand to expand capacity again? For example if it was exactly the same as the Riverbank Stand - 14,000 seats - taking the total to 64-67,000. I think we should. As for the 'hill' and the scoreboard... some things just have to move on. The great moments of sporting history at Adelaide Oval took place on the field - not off the field.

Nope. The hill & scoreboard are part and parcel of Adelaide Oval.

[spiller]

Shuz, I think the oval needs to be enjoyed in its current form for a little while before that idea is entertained. Even so, the demand for 67,000 seats wont be there for quite a while. Although I think its realistic to expect that eventually a northern upgrade will be carried out, perhaps to cater for an event larger than AFL football *ahem* comm. games

[muzzamo]

I dislike both the hill and the scoreboard. The fact that they are both still there to me represents how deeply conservative this state is and is a victory for those who want to hold back progress.

When the time comes, concrete over the thing, build a new Northern Grandstand. Either move the scoreboard to a museum where it belongs, *or* I wonder if you could build a museum in place around the scoreboard, under the new grandstand....

[Nathan]

The fact that they are both still there to me represents how deeply conservative this state is and is a victory for those who want to hold back progress.

You've got to be joking. The entire oval was redeveloped, as has much of the surrounding precinct. Keeping a nod to the oval's past is not a show of conservatism. I certainly don't care for blanket heritage protection, but bulldozing every last inch isn't "progress".

[Nowlistencarefully]

There are things that can be done elsewhere around the ground before destroying the hill.

The western stand could:
-add another tier, matching at least the height of the eastern stand by using arch aqua-duct type structure at the back hence keeping part of the current brick back structure open yet filled at the top to accommodate new upper concourse with egress to top tier of riverbank stand. This could incorporate extensive windowed bars both facing ground (where the back/top of the Chappell and Edwin Smith stands are now and behind facing west whilst keeping most of the lawn area near the Gillespie and Lehmann statues open for village green facilities. This would also improve weatherproofing of this stand. My guess you could get another 3000-5000 capacity increase in seated/standing areas. Not all of the top-tier would necessarily have to be members either with proper egress to top tier of the riverbank stand.

On the hill:
-the NW light tower needs to be moved or knocked down and rebuilt back behind trees to free up area around there and some sort of moveable seating/standing platform near the member fence area here
-the area to the east of the scoreboard could support some standing/seating structure
-the gradient of the slope needs improving even if that means adding 0.5m of height at the back.

Between stands elsewhere they can put small seating/standing platforms on the first ring of tiers

All this done to aesthetically match the current arrangements

If capacity could get up to and above 55,555 say at least 56,789 would put us above Docklands capacity but behind the new Perth stadium to open in 2018.

Of course even these changes (to the western stand and light towers) take money normally attached to events that require government funding, public support and political will.

[Will]

I dislike both the hill and the scoreboard. The fact that they are both still there to me represents how deeply conservative this state is and is a victory for those who want to hold back progress.

....

Wow. Are you serious?!

Adelaide Oval got redeveloped, despite the odds, despite the hysteria and the negativity, and you are still whinging?

The only thing holding our state back is this mentality - this mentality where despite how hard we try, it will never be good enough.....