Sensational-Adelaide.com

Wayno wrote:not sure how the new ultimate membership will work.

Don't think there is a new ultimate membership. Looks like SACA will now offer memberships to everyone on the waiting list (non-transferable), while footy fans will have the option of buying Crows-only, Power-only or all-footy tickets (transferable). Essentially, the same as what currently exists, but now all at the same ground.

SACA unveils Plan B for Adelaide Oval
Jesper Fjeldstad
The Advertiser
May 27, 201310:00PM

CRICKET has reacted swiftly to the collapse of the Adelaide Oval Ultimate Membership by releasing close to 6000 additional memberships ahead of this year's Ashes Series.

It means everybody on the waiting list for a South Australian Cricket Association membership will be offered to join by late June this year.

Those who had signed up for an Ultimate Membership with the SMA will also be invited to join the SACA waiting list as negotiations continue between football and cricket over how to best serve the audience at Adelaide Oval.

Football and cricket will not have a joint product and will sell season passes separately.

continues...

claybro wrote: Sorry if this offends some here.

Its not offensive, just tiersome.

Its really quite simple. The stadium will hold more or less the same amount of people, you will have the opportunity to sit in one of the stands with ammazing facilities or stand on the hill. A footy game only goes for 2 hours, people stand for the whole day in 35+ temperatures during the ashes. If it is pissing down with rain and you want to stand on the hill get a poncho otherwise grab a seat because you will be sitting in a stand that has the best roof coverage of any in Australia. If its a beatuiful sunny day sit back and enjoy the atmosphere (as seen during the ashes or AFC games) that this unique feature will create. There will be plenty of options.

If you want to bag it after the oval is finished go nuts, until then all this overhyped negative speculation is redundant (this includes this utter ridiculous argument about a toilet bowl, when was the last time you viewed a sporting ground from google earth before deciding to attend a match). Get over it, enjoy what will be a real game changer for this state.

By the way it's the SACA not SACCA and everything you see now went through a members vote and was not designed to appease any vocal minority.

Port Adelaide Fan wrote:

Brucetiki wrote: What I noticed more in that pic was the removal of a bay of seats from level 2 of the Western Stand. Not sure why any of those seats would need to be touched.

A box for the coaches ?

Doubt they'd put the coaches boxes there, but it does pose the question of where the coaches boxes will go.

Hope they haven't forgotten about them ala Etihad.



I said a coaches box because of this picture.[/quote]

Oh, that makes more sense.

That definitely looks like a coaches box.

Maximus wrote:

Wayno wrote:not sure how the new ultimate membership will work.

Don't think there is a new ultimate membership. Looks like SACA will now offer memberships to everyone on the waiting list (non-transferable), while footy fans will have the option of buying Crows-only, Power-only or all-footy tickets (transferable). Essentially, the same as what currently exists, but now all at the same ground.

i'm still confused - if i'm a SACA member and want to attend footy matches in which stand will i sit? presumably still the western grandstand?

Wayno wrote:

Maximus wrote:

Wayno wrote:not sure how the new ultimate membership will work.

Don't think there is a new ultimate membership. Looks like SACA will now offer memberships to everyone on the waiting list (non-transferable), while footy fans will have the option of buying Crows-only, Power-only or all-footy tickets (transferable). Essentially, the same as what currently exists, but now all at the same ground.

i'm still confused - if i'm a SACA member and want to attend footy matches in which stand will i sit? presumably still the western grandstand?

as a SACA member, you will only be entitled to go to the stadium during cricket season.

So you won't be sitting anywhere unless you get a footy ticket now.

Wayno wrote:

Maximus wrote:

Wayno wrote:not sure how the new ultimate membership will work.

Don't think there is a new ultimate membership. Looks like SACA will now offer memberships to everyone on the waiting list (non-transferable), while footy fans will have the option of buying Crows-only, Power-only or all-footy tickets (transferable). Essentially, the same as what currently exists, but now all at the same ground.

i'm still confused - if i'm a SACA member and want to attend footy matches in which stand will i sit? presumably still the western grandstand?

That depends on which direction your couch faces your tv as mentioned above, the SACA tickets will be completely independent of the football, so there will be someone else sitting in your seats during football season.

I got an email from SACA yesterday saying that the Ultimate Membership proposal had been scrapped completely. Had this previously been announced in the media? I'm not surprised really, it was clearly an attempt on behalf of the SMA/SANFL/SACA to take advantage of the hype surrounding a new stadium with the heavily inflated pricing.

mattblack wrote: grab a seat because you will be sitting in a stand that has the best roof coverage of any in Australia.

Stands with the best roof coverage in Australia? your joking right. This is not anywhere near true.

mattblack wrote: If its a beatuiful sunny day sit back and enjoy the atmosphere (as seen during the ashes or AFC games) that this unique feature will create. There will be plenty of options.

Not in June July or August you wont. Those huge fig trees shade the grassy area due to the low angle of the sun particularly during the late afternoon games. The ground will be wet and shady, definitely not suitable to sit on. Great for cricket, not so for football.

mattblack wrote:By the way it's the SACA not SACCA and everything you see now went through a members vote and was not designed to appease any vocal minority.

Sorry to miss spell SACA, but last I checked, the SACA members are definitely a minority group and during this whole process, definitely vocal and had a HUGE say in this development.

this nonsense that the hill will be a mud hill during the winter is rubbish! the SANFL has been playing games on Friday nights for years at Adelaide Oval and when its wet people just sit undercover. when its wet crowd figures normally drop by 5,000 -10,000 people anyway at AMMI, so there will be plenty of seats undercover to sit in when wet. wait till the development is complete before passing judgement how the oval will operate on game days.

Waewick wrote:as a SACA member, you will only be entitled to go to the stadium during cricket season.

So you won't be sitting anywhere unless you get a footy ticket now.

So I presume someone (the SANFL perhaps?) is already, or will soon be offering extra footy tickets because of the Ultimate Membership system collapse? Anyone know details?

Can't believe people are saying that viewers will be impressed by 'unique' Adelaide Oval with the missing northern end. If they didn't want to make the stadium look like its missing a stand they should have employed a design which actually incorporates the hill somehow with the rest of the stadium like a sloping roof or something from before the western stand was built. We should have been clever about it.
Now rather than this


We have this 'unique' look - the look of a cheap regional stadium that can be found on the tacky Gold Coast.



Oh well, I still like this development and think it is much better than the ill-conceived liberal plan.

I was one of the folk who applied for the Adelaide Oval Ultimate package and paid the $75 (X2) deposit last year.
The non transferability of the ticket did not bother me. The new footy only option will probably mirror my current AAMI Premium package. Waiting for the details.

Now that the deal has been cancelled, I will put the deposit to buying the footy package to attend Crows, Port and SANFL games.

I love the unique configuration of the new Adelaide Oval with the Hill, heritage scoreboard and Moreton Bays at the northern end. There is considerable interest already, interstate and overseas, as well as local.
Celebrate the unique. It's not just another oval or stadium.

arki wrote:
Can't believe people are saying that viewers will be impressed by 'unique' Adelaide Oval with the missing northern end. If they didn't want to make the stadium look like its missing a stand they should have employed a design which actually incorporates the hill somehow with the rest of the stadium like a sloping roof or something from before the western stand was built. We should have been clever about it.
Now rather than this


We have this 'unique' look - the look of a cheap regional stadium that can be found on the tacky Gold Coast.



Oh well, I still like this development and think it is much better than the ill-conceived liberal plan.

That cheap regional stadium will be holding a commonwealth games in five years time.

The stadium in that first picture, though looking flash wouldn't have suited the character of the area, not to mention the fact that it leaves little ability to expand without having to butcher what would already exists.

Adelaide Oval will sooner or later have a northern stand, who knows what it will look like; whether it's just like the Southern Stand, a centrepiece of all the stands or something entirely different, who knows. It's possible without losing it's charm, whether the ground holds 20,000, 50,000 or 70,000 it'll still be the Adelaide Oval we love in some form. If they were to build a northern stand, there are plenty of options for the gems that sit there: The score-board could be de-constructed and re-constructed in the surrounding grounds and be used as a feature for the museum at the grounds or an exterior scoreboard and bar for the members area, the bay-fig trees could be moved; a big, undoubtedly expensive task, but it is possible, that leaving only the mound to be removed. But still better than losing all that remains precious about that hill.

I have one point for all the mild-naysayers on this topic; if we were to have left Adelaide Oval, and built another ground for AFL on the rail-yards, we'd have two facilities being used for only half of the year each. If we were to bulldoze the entire ground and re-build it'd no doubt look like another Gabba or MCG, and yes the MCG is spectacular in facilitating sport, but it's also horrendous looking for all angles not usually shot by media. The oldest stadia at those grounds was build in the early 90's and it already looks ridiculously tatty.

claybro wrote:

mattblack wrote: grab a seat because you will be sitting in a stand that has the best roof coverage of any in Australia.

Stands with the best roof coverage in Australia? your [sic] joking right. This is not anywhere near true.

Actually, it pretty much is true (obviously not including stadia that are fully-enclosed!). Gabba 78% of seats undercover, new AO 77%, MCG 75% and SCG 68%.

This link also has some other interesting details, including a bit of info about ticketing: http://19thman.com.au/adelaide-oval/faq

claybro wrote:

mattblack wrote: grab a seat because you will be sitting in a stand that has the best roof coverage of any in Australia.

Stands with the best roof coverage in Australia? your joking right. This is not anywhere near true.

Not joking. See above post. If you have information other than this you might want to show us so we can all be better informed.

mattblack wrote:By the way it's the SACA not SACCA and everything you see now went through a members vote and was not designed to appease any vocal minority.

Sorry to miss spell SACA, but last I checked, the SACA members are definitely a minority group and during this whole process, definitely vocal and had a HUGE say in this development.

Dont know what or with who you checked but this statment is completely untrue and you might want to check your sources more carefully in the future. SACA members had a vote held at the Adelaide showgounds to either vote for the redevelopment or against it. It was essentially a veto vote, if the vote had been no then there would have been no redevelopment at all and the money the State had put forward would have been withdrawn. There was a total o 5 or 6 members meetings in the lead-up to this vote outlying plans and options on the table where all members were invited and all had a chance to voice their concerns, lobby other members or even to voice their support development. The development as it stands was all passed by the members by a overwhelming majority. People that weren't members had NO vote on this proposal. Period.