Sensational-Adelaide.com

Pants wrote:

jimmy_2486 wrote:

Pants wrote:
They really have to be careful not to f**k the Oval up, it's one of Adelaide's very few global icons.

How many global icons in the world have been f**ked up by improving its usability?? I cant really think of any...

I meant aesthetically mate. I'm all for redeveloping it, they just have to do a very good, sensitive job.

Fair enough Pants, I dont think it shouldnt be CHANGED, but just have things added to it.

I mean all the International Cricket games are always sold out cos we have bugger all seats. Having 40 thousand probably might in the long term still have the same effect. But we are always adding to AO seating capacity anyways so in the end it might end up with 50-60 thousand...who knows?

However the idea should only really be done IF SANFL and SACA decide to both make their homes at AO. That way everybody will win off it.

Pants wrote:Can someone PLEASE scan the Advertiser renders in? The only place I know where to get the 'tiser up here is the Airport and I can't make it today.

Cheers.

Maybe try the State Library up there, if no one posts it on here

urban wrote:I would love to see AFL played here but unfortunately the agreement between the AFL & SANFL won't let that happen for many years.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I was under the impression that the SANFL only owned the 2 AFL licences in SA and had and that they were obliged to play their home games at Football Park. I cant see how playing at the Adelaide oval in SA, Cararra stadium in Qld or Manaka oval in Canberra in any way effects the SANFL. Already we see the Kangaroos playing a few games on the Gold Coast, and Hawthorn playing games in Tasmania.

Any decison would ultimatly come down to the SACA, AFL and the Football Club...

What could the SANFL do if for example the Western Bulldogs played the Adelaide Crows at the Adelaide Oval if technically the match was a Bulldogs home game? I believe the answer is, nothing.......

I think the only thing thats currantly holding the SACA and AFL back from pursuing this option is the grounds currant capacity. When the new grand stands complete and the capacity slightly increases with better facilities, I believe this issue will surely resurface and there isn't a thing the SANFL can do.

Maybe just then the stuck up SANFL will pull their head out of their arse's and realise that a ground close the city is a far better option??????

Pants wrote:Can someone PLEASE scan the Advertiser renders in? The only place I know where to get the 'tiser up here is the Airport and I can't make it today.

Cheers.

I was going to do that tonight, but I left my copy on my work desk. I'll try to remember to grab it tomorrow.

Cheers Adam, much appreciated.

Thanks for the idea too crawf.

UrbanSG wrote:...The sail roof is better than the original proposal. Tradtional solid roofs our out now in new stadiums just look at the MCG and other upgrades around the country and the world. The idea is to create shade but to not to completely black out areas of the ground in shade. It matches the eastern grandstand and adds the open feel of this ground. The southern stand should also get this type of roof.

I agree, the sail roof is perfect.

Of coure AAMI keeps adding solid roofs to their poor excuse for a stadium making it look more and more out-dated.

I also agree it is outdated, but I think because it's built so close to the coast it has to follow certain building regulations, and they have found that sail roofs were not ideal.

Cheers

I don't like the Bradman Stand, big and hideous, and short of demolishing it, I would accept it if the roof were to be the same as the proposed Western Stand, though, I do have reservations in that roof design. I know several of you don't like the 'carnevalesque' Eastern Stand roofs, but wouldn't it be better to continue with that design right around? As for building any stand on the north side, forget it. No one will touch those Moreton Bay figs.

Cheers

Agree with all of that.

Paulns, the SANFL have an agreement with the AFL that ALL AFL matches played in Adelaide will be at AAMI Stadium regardless of whose playing.

pffft well considering how loose agreements usually are between bodies such as these. If AO were to eventually get more and more seating such that it has enough to host a decent AFL game on, the agreement will be lost in the ages.

The agreement is about protecting the SANFL's investment in AAMI Stadium. They will hang onto that agreement any way they can.

Well if they were smart they would try and sell off AAMI and invest the money in upgrading the AO with more stands etc.

It would be in their best interests.

But then again I don't think they are that smart, hence why they hang on to that eyesore at west lakes.

There is a new development planned for the SW corner of Hutt and Angas street. The signs went up yesterday for a 4-level apartment complex called East Apartments. It would be nice to get rid of the open carpark there with its old iron fence. That wasteland has been there since they shamefully demolished (in the middle of the night) the original House of Chow heritage building.

Professor wrote:There is a new development planned for the SW corner of Hutt and Angas street. The signs went up yesterday for a 4-level apartment complex called East Apartments. It would be nice to get rid of the open carpark there with its old iron fence. That wasteland has been there since they shamefully demolished (in the middle of the night) the original House of Chow heritage building.

Thank goodness there is finally some action on the site. Does any have any photos of the House of Chow building? It's been so long, I can't remember what it looked like.

jimmy_2486 wrote:Well if they were smart they would try and sell off AAMI and invest the money in upgrading the AO with more stands etc.

It would be in their best interests.

But then again I don't think they are that smart, hence why they hang on to that eyesore at west lakes.

But the reason why the SANFL built Football Park is precisely because they wanted their own stadium, nothing to do with the SACA. Its like the MCG - the moronic MCC (cricket) own the stadium, but 80% of income for the MCG comes from football. This was similar to when there was no Football Park and big football games were played at the Oval.
So it would be 'over their dead bodies' that the SANFL would pump money into SACA's Adelaide Oval, and quite rightly so

By the way, there is absolutely nothing wrong with the stadium of Football Park, but just its location and no rail link is the problem