Sensational-Adelaide.com

stumpjumper wrote:JamesXander, Will and Crawf

With respect, you guys are several posts/weeks/evolutions behind the times, but in another way you're in the right place.

The concept of 'build it all in the one place to suit everyone and that place is Adelaide Oval' is simply trying to load too much onto that site. I suspect that you're really talking about $1.5 billion to set the place up properly with all the compromises resolved.

What we've never done, in my opinion, is to go back to basics and ask: 'What arena facilities do we need?'

If we could do that, then the reasoning might go like this:

Cricket seems to be well-served by the present Adelaide Oval setup, despite the grandiose dreams of Ian McLachlan and SACA's self-inflicted debt. Cricket gets tiny to small crowds most of the time, with larger and occasional sellout crowds for international and Test matches. No compelling reason to do much for cricket.

AFL/SANFL footy (SANFL at least) made a play years ago with AAMI. To an extent, AAMI is now a bed in which they must now lie. They could sell AAMI as Waverley was sold, or spend money on it. AAMI is not near the city centre. OK, I believe that was mentioned but overruled when the stadium was built. However, it does have ample parking, and with a light rail/tram extension from the city it could be a goer. Say $200 mill for the transport and $200 million on the stadium for a start. We'd have an AFL oval of national standard, and a good cricket ground. For footy to turn its back on AAMI and try to get set at Adelaide Oval would require a huge co-investment in oval facilities, transport and parking (SACA has no money, so it would be public investment).

FIA football or soccer - I'll call it soccer. The game is growing, and Hindmarsh has probably reached its limits. We might get the World Cup in 2018 or 2022.

So, the sensible course is to look at options, but wait until the FIA decision in Dec 2010 about the WC.

If we do get the WC, and decide we want to host matches (which I suggest we do) then the choice is whether to try to create FIFA compliant facilities at AO, AAMI or stand alone.

Stand alone is probably the cheapest choice, with a new rectangular stadium giving us a flexible stadium for rugby codes, hockey, athletics and general entertainment as well. A fully shaded, lit stadium would cost under $300 million (plus land).

Converting the oval AAMI to rectangular FIFA compliance is problematic. The MCC works because it is a tall, circular stadium. Whether the action inside occurs on a soccer pitch or an AFL oval doesn't make much difference to the bulk of seats. AAMI lacks the seats, the sightlines and the extent of facilities to reach FIFA compliance easily or cheaply, with poor transport exacerbating the problem.

Adelaide Oval presents expensive problems on all counts. Older but still sound buildings, limitations on parking, heritage constraints, a broke lessee, poor transport despite CBD location.

So, sport politics and political politics aside, we should spend about $300 million on a stand alone stadium.

But in SA, we usually put politics first. So, with self-interested representatives lining up from SACA, AFL, SANFL plus of course Labor and Liberal, we are now trying to ram a square peg into a round hole at Adelaide Oval.

Now, having got ourselves into a mess, we will increasingly hear the shouts from the 'just build it' brigade.

My suggestion, before we commit our future to the experts who blew out the Western Grandstand development from $50 million to $135 million, is to take a very deep breath, put the present dispute aside, forget sports politics and Labor/Liberal politics and make a rational decision about what to do.

rev wrote:

ricecrackers wrote: so rather than the state govt tip a few million dollars a year into the Crows and Power...as it seems they are already doing, you're suggesting that it makes better economic sense for our state govt to tip $535 million into Adelaide Oval, plus the same million dollars per year in compensation to those same clubs?

The Federal govt have pledged $250 million for SA to develop a FIFA compliant stadium should Australia win a world cup bid. Thats enough to build a new stadium at no cost whatsoever to the SA govt.

Firstly, the state government will continue to provide some sort of funding to both AFL teams, regardless of new stadiums or were they play.

Secondly, build me a FIFA compliant stadium for 250 million dollars, and I'll convince people you are the second coming of Jesus Christ.
Melbourne may have built a new rectangular stadium for 250 million or there abouts, but that stadium isn't FIFA compliant. Firstly, it's too small capacity wise.
Therefore they need to spend more to expand it to be FIFA compliant for a WC.

JamesXander wrote:

stumpjumper wrote:JamesXander, Will and Crawf

With respect, you guys are several posts/weeks/evolutions behind the times, but in another way you're in the right place.

The concept of 'build it all in the one place to suit everyone and that place is Adelaide Oval' is simply trying to load too much onto that site. I suspect that you're really talking about $1.5 billion to set the place up properly with all the compromises resolved.

What we've never done, in my opinion, is to go back to basics and ask: 'What arena facilities do we need?'

If we could do that, then the reasoning might go like this:

Cricket seems to be well-served by the present Adelaide Oval setup, despite the grandiose dreams of Ian McLachlan and SACA's self-inflicted debt. Cricket gets tiny to small crowds most of the time, with larger and occasional sellout crowds for international and Test matches. No compelling reason to do much for cricket.

AFL/SANFL footy (SANFL at least) made a play years ago with AAMI. To an extent, AAMI is now a bed in which they must now lie. They could sell AAMI as Waverley was sold, or spend money on it. AAMI is not near the city centre. OK, I believe that was mentioned but overruled when the stadium was built. However, it does have ample parking, and with a light rail/tram extension from the city it could be a goer. Say $200 mill for the transport and $200 million on the stadium for a start. We'd have an AFL oval of national standard, and a good cricket ground. For footy to turn its back on AAMI and try to get set at Adelaide Oval would require a huge co-investment in oval facilities, transport and parking (SACA has no money, so it would be public investment).

FIA football or soccer - I'll call it soccer. The game is growing, and Hindmarsh has probably reached its limits. We might get the World Cup in 2018 or 2022.

So, the sensible course is to look at options, but wait until the FIA decision in Dec 2010 about the WC.

If we do get the WC, and decide we want to host matches (which I suggest we do) then the choice is whether to try to create FIFA compliant facilities at AO, AAMI or stand alone.

Stand alone is probably the cheapest choice, with a new rectangular stadium giving us a flexible stadium for rugby codes, hockey, athletics and general entertainment as well. A fully shaded, lit stadium would cost under $300 million (plus land).

Converting the oval AAMI to rectangular FIFA compliance is problematic. The MCC works because it is a tall, circular stadium. Whether the action inside occurs on a soccer pitch or an AFL oval doesn't make much difference to the bulk of seats. AAMI lacks the seats, the sightlines and the extent of facilities to reach FIFA compliance easily or cheaply, with poor transport exacerbating the problem.

Adelaide Oval presents expensive problems on all counts. Older but still sound buildings, limitations on parking, heritage constraints, a broke lessee, poor transport despite CBD location.

So, sport politics and political politics aside, we should spend about $300 million on a stand alone stadium.

But in SA, we usually put politics first. So, with self-interested representatives lining up from SACA, AFL, SANFL plus of course Labor and Liberal, we are now trying to ram a square peg into a round hole at Adelaide Oval.

Now, having got ourselves into a mess, we will increasingly hear the shouts from the 'just build it' brigade.

My suggestion, before we commit our future to the experts who blew out the Western Grandstand development from $50 million to $135 million, is to take a very deep breath, put the present dispute aside, forget sports politics and Labor/Liberal politics and make a rational decision about what to do.

So your option is to create another UNSUSTAINABLE stadium, for a short term event. You solve none of the existing problems (SANFL, AFC & PAFC) & the AAMI question. Not only that you make the Hindmarsh investment redundant.

Epic Fail.

ricecrackers wrote:
in any case we should stop comparing Adelaide to Melbourne and rather compare it to something more comparable, like Canberra

guess what, Canberra is getting a new stadium and they dont even have a team in the A-league
Super 14 is only about 14 rounds and NRL is 26....so 40 rounds in total

the A-league will be 30 rounds next season and possibly 33 the following

compare those apples

Kal El wrote:The feds won't pay the total bill for a new retangular stadium in Adelaide nor anywhere else as it is a dollar for dollar spend state and federal.

Labor has chosen AO as its place to spend its side therefore fed money will go into AO to make it FIFA compliant..... that is how it will play out! get over this pie in the sky of a RS that is not need at this point in Adelaide simple as that seriously!

I couldn't care less about what other cities in this country have, will have etc it is what is best for Adelaide. AFL is the most attended game in this state and the world game has a lot of catching up to do.

ricecrackers wrote:
indeed it is Adelaide that has a lot of catching up to do

Hooligan wrote:

ricecrackers wrote:
indeed it is Adelaide that has a lot of catching up to do

Seeing as soccer supporters (like yourself) like to talk the talk, When are you going to start walking the walk?

When Adelaide United starts getting crowds that fill out Hindmarsh (and on a regular basis, not once a year) We'll talk about a new Retangular stadium. Until then just sit down and shut up.

ricecrackers wrote:

Hooligan wrote:

ricecrackers wrote:
indeed it is Adelaide that has a lot of catching up to do

Seeing as soccer supporters (like yourself) like to talk the talk, When are you going to start walking the walk?

When Adelaide United starts getting crowds that fill out Hindmarsh (and on a regular basis, not once a year) We'll talk about a new Retangular stadium. Until then just sit down and shut up.

such class

how often is AAMI stadium sold out?

Hooligan wrote:

ricecrackers wrote:

Hooligan wrote:
such class

how often is AAMI stadium sold out?

How often is Hindmarsh sold out? You're the one advocating the building of a retangular stadium with a ridiculously large seating capacity that will serve 1 team.

You're right, Football park is rarely sold out which is why a redeveloped Adelaide Oval will not see an increase in seating capacity.
Infact, it will see a slight decrease.

ricecrackers wrote:
27000 is a ridiculously large seating capacity?

ricecrackers wrote: it is FIFA compliant, but not World Cup compliant
it meets requirements to host Asian Cup qualifiers, World Cup qualifiers and Asian Cup finals games

ricecrackers wrote: another unsustainable stadium? whats the other one?

and what Hindmarsh investment? that stadium cost about $20 million and its now reaching end of life...c'est la vie

a new rectangular stadium paid for by the Federal govt would cost our state nothing and it would be used by our national league soccer team as a legacy for hosting the World Cup...which is the whole point of hosting a World Cup, to grow the game and leave a legacy, which there is sure to be

you only have to look at other host countries with similar histories of relative indifference to the sport, to see the effect that has had on the game there

this is not the $#%$^#^ Commonwealth Games or the Rugby 7's we're talking about here, this is a proper world event. the biggest there is. the pissants in this state cant get that into their heads. this is not something that comes and goes and is forgotten in a couple of weeks.

in any case we should stop comparing Adelaide to Melbourne and rather compare it to something more comparable, like Canberra

guess what, Canberra is getting a new stadium and they dont even have a team in the A-league
Super 14 is only about 14 rounds and NRL is 26....so 40 rounds in total

the A-league will be 30 rounds next season and possibly 33 the following

compare those apples

rev wrote:

ricecrackers wrote: it is FIFA compliant, but not World Cup compliant
it meets requirements to host Asian Cup qualifiers, World Cup qualifiers and Asian Cup finals games

Sorry I thought we were on the same page re world cup standard.
My point was that for the money they spent, you can't get a stadium for the world cup. So using AAMI Park as I believe the rectangular stadium in Melbourne is called as an example is misguided.

ricecrackers wrote: another unsustainable stadium? whats the other one?

and what Hindmarsh investment? that stadium cost about $20 million and its now reaching end of life...c'est la vie

a new rectangular stadium paid for by the Federal govt would cost our state nothing and it would be used by our national league soccer team as a legacy for hosting the World Cup...which is the whole point of hosting a World Cup, to grow the game and leave a legacy, which there is sure to be

you only have to look at other host countries with similar histories of relative indifference to the sport, to see the effect that has had on the game there

this is not the $#%$^#^ Commonwealth Games or the Rugby 7's we're talking about here, this is a proper world event. the biggest there is. the pissants in this state cant get that into their heads. this is not something that comes and goes and is forgotten in a couple of weeks.

in any case we should stop comparing Adelaide to Melbourne and rather compare it to something more comparable, like Canberra

guess what, Canberra is getting a new stadium and they dont even have a team in the A-league
Super 14 is only about 14 rounds and NRL is 26....so 40 rounds in total

the A-league will be 30 rounds next season and possibly 33 the following

compare those apples

The other unsustainable stadium would be AAMI. The first obviously Adelaide Oval.

So you expect the federal government to build a 50,000 seat rectangular stadium for the sole purpose of the world cup?
Sure it will be a legacy and used by Adelaide United.

And you think the A League, which has smaller crowd numbers then the AFL will be able to fill a 50,000 seat stadium?
I tell you now, Adelaide United will not even be able to get an average of 30,000 per season.
And if you think they have financial problems now...

Adding another stadium is just adding to the problem we have.
What needs to happen is some consolidation of our sporting codes into less stadiums.
This way the operating costs are reduced because they are shared, which will leave all our major sporting teams in better financial positions.
The solution isn't to build everyone their own stadium. That's been done already, it's the situation we are in now, and it's not working.

You guys need to get over this "build us a xx,xxx seat soccer stadium" just as much as the others need to get over saving some damn trees, a patch of grass and a crappy old scoreboard. You keep bringing up pissants, well your mentality of a soccer only stadium is the exact sort of pissant mentality we can do without.

As for the effect it will have, well, it wont be as big as you think. Don't bother looking at the other non-traditional footballing nations which have hosted the World Cup.
Because they don't have a massive national sport like AFL, nor a media which is one-sport-centric like Australian media mostly is(AFL-centric).
If we get the World Cup, it will be in the media for as long as the event lasts. That's it. It will then be back to AFL.
And unless the game becomes more exciting here and the quality improves, I think the excitement and interest the World Cup will create will be short lived for the A League.
And that's really what you should be concerned about, not whether Adelaide United is left with a shiny new 50,000 seat stadium to play in.