Sensational-Adelaide.com

Roo wants a roof!!!!

Mark Ricciuto calls for roof over new stadium Staff Writer From: The Advertiser May 31, 2010 2:27PM

CROWS legend Mark Ricciuto has again weighed into the stadium debate, saying the conditions at AAMI Stadium on Saturday proved why South Australia needs a stadium with a roof.

In his weekly video segment with AdeladieNow, Ricciuto described the plan to redevelop Adelaide Oval as "half baked" and said more people would be willing to attend games if they were not subject to the weather.

A record-low crowd of 16,694 huddled under grandstand roofs at AAMI Stadium to watch Port Adelaide lose to Richmond by 47 points in the wind and rain.

"That was the wettest occasion I have ever seen at AAMI stadium, there was so much water on the ground," he said.

"We need a roof over a stadium.

"We could have had 30,000 people there on the weekend instead of 16,000.

"Perhaps they need to factor all the lost attendances and the money that could be made out of having more people there every week into the equation.
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/mar ... 5873581869

I think somethings are getting added into this "Chinese Whisper"

The Bradman stand will go along with all current stands except the new western one.

the SANFL if it sells land from AAMI will go into the SANFL coffers. The SANFL will still have an asset it can control and get some revenue from with SANFL games played at AAMI.

the SMO will be independant so the SANFL/SACA will not own the SMA if fact the SMA will control tose two bodies by my way of understanding.

Roflcopter wrote:Question is? Do you think most people would actually 'forgive' Labor for backflipping on the issue and going with the the idea of building a new multipurpose stadium close to the city?

I would.

Just make it happen. I don't care about backflips. It's years until the next election and all the point scoring this brings.

'Roo' has come out in favour (again) today.
The blowouts, and potential for even more, in the current re-development would suggest that a new, purpose-built covered stadium is a better option and would not end up costing that much more in the scheme of things. And it would save a lot of wrangling between the potential partners in the current - yet to be sealed deal? - and future management.

If it doesn't happen (and sooner than later), will we be able to continue to support 2 AFL teams in SA?

Seriously how many times a year do we see conditions like this?

We don't need a roof over the oval, what we need is better spectator facilities

crawf wrote:Seriously how many times a year do we see conditions like this?

We don't need a roof over the oval, what we need is better spectator facilities

Crawf, it really isn't about the weather. Supporters of the roof want one because Melbourne has one....

True.

crawf wrote:Seriously how many times a year do we see conditions like this?

We don't need a roof over the oval, what we need is better spectator facilities

agree Mr Crawf

The new AO proposal has about 70% of spectators under cover which is perfect IMO. Theres really not many full enclosed, undercover football stadiums in the world, so its not as if we're 'behind the times' and I dont think we really need one with our dryish climate

Besides Docklands Stadium, Would your average punter be able to name another stadium in the world with a retractable roof?

I'm sure you guys will just run to google find a link to a couple and say "See! heres a few and i knew them all because i'm a stadium nerd"

Just admit it, you want a roofed stadium because you all secretly masturbate over everything in Melbourne.

Ian McLachlan on radio ABC891 this morning:

Following the full rebuild of Adelaide Oval, the new facility, with 34 years to run on the lease, will become the joint property of SACA and SANFL.

SACA brings to the ‘marriage’ the new 14,000 seat Western Grandstand, and is demanding payment for that asset – not from SANFL but from the SA public.

To date, in relation to the Western Grandstand, SACA has been given $50 million - $25 million from the SA government and $25 million from the federal government.

So SACA builds the 14,000 seat western grandstand, and on completion of the stand, if the larger development goes ahead, SACA will receive $85 million ‘payment’ for the structure, representing the balance over the original $50 million subsidy of the replacement value of the stand as decreed by SACA.

SACA assesses the value of a new grandstand seat in November 2010 at $10,000.

SACA makes the point that they are tossing in for nothing the $65 million they have invested in Adelaide Oval over the years. Most of this investment – the 19 year old Bradman Stand and the 7 year old Chappell Stand – will be demolished, but the lights will remain.

Therefore, using Ian McLachlan’s figures, allowing a notional $140,000,000 for the 14,000 seats SACA has built in the Western Grandstand, the sum of $450,000,000 plus the federal $250,000,000 that will be available for further construction (ie $700,000,000) is enough for another 70,000 seats, although only 45,000 will be built. The fate of the ‘unused’ $250,000,000 is uncertain.

So at the end of it all, according to Ian McLachlan this morning, we should have an oval with 54,000 new seats, owned 50/50 by SANFL and SACA.

SANFL will retain full ownership of its assets at West Lakes.

So it looks as though it will all happen, whether or not we get the World Cup. Soccer, rugby, hockey and other rectangular game players will just have to get themselves accommodated.

That seems to leave as the only questions things like whose pictures go on the walls of the members’ bar, whose logo goes on the plates, will the AFL sanction the picket fence, and as 50/50 owners, will there be two ideally fitted out commentary positions, one at the river end for cricket and one at the wing for football.

Treasurer Kevin Foley knew of Adelaide Oval blowout From: AdelaideNow June 02, 2010 3:47PM

TREASURER Kevin Foley has admitted he was aware before the March election that the cost to redevelop the Adelaide Oval would exceed the $450 million the State Government had previously offered to the Stadium Management Authority.

Mr Foley last week told parliament he had not been made aware of any cost blow-outs in the run up to the March election.

"I was not made aware in any way, shape or form prior to the election that the 450 would not be sufficient," Mr Foley told Parliament on May 26.

Today Mr Foley told a press conference he now recalled a meeting with SMA chief executive Leigh Whicker on February 19 that $450 million would not be enough to deliver a new Adelaide Oval.

I never expected him to admit what we all suspected, but here it is....

Stubbo wrote:

Treasurer Kevin Foley knew of Adelaide Oval blowout From: AdelaideNow June 02, 2010 3:47PM

TREASURER Kevin Foley has admitted he was aware before the March election that the cost to redevelop the Adelaide Oval would exceed the $450 million the State Government had previously offered to the Stadium Management Authority.

Mr Foley last week told parliament he had not been made aware of any cost blow-outs in the run up to the March election.

"I was not made aware in any way, shape or form prior to the election that the 450 would not be sufficient," Mr Foley told Parliament on May 26.

Today Mr Foley told a press conference he now recalled a meeting with SMA chief executive Leigh Whicker on February 19 that $450 million would not be enough to deliver a new Adelaide Oval.

I never expected him to admit what we all suspected, but here it is....

Completely slipped his mind during the election campaign.

Are we really surprised though??

Xaragmata wrote:TREASURER Kevin Foley has admitted he was aware before the March election that the cost to redevelop the Adelaide Oval would exceed the $450 million the State Government had previously offered to the Stadium Management Authority.

Just goes to show this project was flawed from the very beginning... What a joke.

Pathetic.

From 'I'm in charge' Foley is now saying: 'It's not a government project, it's not my project, I don't see the plans I don't know what they're building.'

Foley is the state's bookkeeper - his offence is sackable.

He is only now forced to admit his lie because the Opposition put in a freedom of information act request for information and a staff member has come up with a diary entry they couldn't shred.

cant believe how Labor have managed to cock this up

they had a sound enough plan with their hospital and thought they'd lose an election over a half baked copy and paste stadium plan by the Libs such that they came up with another half baked plan for Adelaide Oval.

its no wonder this state is going nowhere with such talent in our major political parties.