Sensational-Adelaide.com

Thread cleaned up. This is not the place for personal attacks.

Jaymz wrote: ↑

Sat Jul 31, 2021 3:10 pm

gnrc_louis wrote: ↑

Sat Jul 31, 2021 1:54 pm

SRJ wrote: ↑

Sat Jul 31, 2021 12:10 pm

Citywatcher are you saying i am uneducated? That is a bit shit of you to say. It is my opinion and I am entitled to free speech. Yes it was a turd before but now they are upgrading it to make it less of a turd. Can’t we at least see how it turns out before we say what it is like. I remember people on this page insulting the Adelaide oval redevelopment, now it is the best stadium in the country.

I’d prefer this if it didn’t feel like such a half assed approach. Optus stadium is better than Adelaide oval also.

Interesting comment. Optus Stadium is probably a better "stadium", but other than having more seating, what else does it have in its favour? Does it have any character or history? Has it changed Perth for the better, or been a catalyst for further investment in the city? Probably not. There's a lot more involved in building a successful stadium than capacity.

Mostly all comes down to personal opinion.
For me, the exterior design and overall surrounding area of Optus Stadium is better.
Location wise, Adelaide Oval is better.
History wise, considering how often we tear them down and rebuild them, they aren't going to ever be in the same league as the Colosseum in Rome or ancient Olympic stadium in Olympia.




A complete, uniform design compared to...



Not only are facades different, not only are the stand heights not uniform, the roofs even look different.
Even lighting up the roofs was an afterthought here.


Something like Optus Stadium (not the design it self but the overall finished product) is what we should have had here.
What we have instead, is a make it up as you go along final outcome as typical in this state.
SACA redeveloped the western stand, wanting to keep the heritage parts.
Then if it wasn't for the Port Adelaide push, backed by the AFL to move to Adelaide Oval, the rest wouldn't have been redeveloped any time soon, certainly at least not to the capacity it has been.
Whereas over in Perth, they built a new arena from scratch, no half measures or compromises like here, where we "needed to keep the arches and the dressing room facade", or the nonsense about a scoreboard and some trees that are dying anyway.
Perth did it on a clean canvas, here we had to have our cake and eat it too. And that's why, in many peoples opinions we have a subpar outcome.
That's not to say the oval is bad, but that the final outcome could have been much better.
At the very least what should have been done here, is one 'stand' that wrapped around 3/4 of the oval, if it was necessary to keep the morton bay figs and old scoreboard. That could have also kept the dressing room facade and arches at the back of the western stand. If the southern end had to have an extra tier at the top, the roof could have curved/flowed over it and back down over the eastern side. At least there would have been uniformity, instead of what's basically now a fancy dogs breakfast.

A new Memorial Drive stadium, again, half arsed approach, make it up as they go along. No master plan to it.
Well, there was a vision for something like that, but the usual South Australian way has prevailed. Again. Because the current government wants to build a legacy project across the river, because Marshall pitched a stadium over the railyards years ago.

There's no master plan for anything to do with the Riverbank precinct. It's all going to end up a bigger mess then it already is. And we will have to live with it for decades to come.
The tennis stadium should be moved further out from Adelaide Oval, closer to the river/Morphett street bridge.
They should both stand in their own right, not one overshadowed by the other.

rev wrote:

Jaymz wrote: ↑

Sat Jul 31, 2021 3:10 pm

gnrc_louis wrote: ↑

Sat Jul 31, 2021 1:54 pm

I’d prefer this if it didn’t feel like such a half assed approach. Optus stadium is better than Adelaide oval also.

Interesting comment. Optus Stadium is probably a better "stadium", but other than having more seating, what else does it have in its favour? Does it have any character or history? Has it changed Perth for the better, or been a catalyst for further investment in the city? Probably not. There's a lot more involved in building a successful stadium than capacity.

Mostly all comes down to personal opinion.
For me, the exterior design and overall surrounding area of Optus Stadium is better.
Location wise, Adelaide Oval is better.
History wise, considering how often we tear them down and rebuild them, they aren't going to ever be in the same league as the Colosseum in Rome or ancient Olympic stadium in Olympia.




A complete, uniform design compared to...



Not only are facades different, not only are the stand heights not uniform, the roofs even look different.
Even lighting up the roofs was an afterthought here.


Something like Optus Stadium (not the design it self but the overall finished product) is what we should have had here.
What we have instead, is a make it up as you go along final outcome as typical in this state.
SACA redeveloped the western stand, wanting to keep the heritage parts.
Then if it wasn't for the Port Adelaide push, backed by the AFL to move to Adelaide Oval, the rest wouldn't have been redeveloped any time soon, certainly at least not to the capacity it has been.
Whereas over in Perth, they built a new arena from scratch, no half measures or compromises like here, where we "needed to keep the arches and the dressing room facade", or the nonsense about a scoreboard and some trees that are dying anyway.
Perth did it on a clean canvas, here we had to have our cake and eat it too. And that's why, in many peoples opinions we have a subpar outcome.
That's not to say the oval is bad, but that the final outcome could have been much better.
At the very least what should have been done here, is one 'stand' that wrapped around 3/4 of the oval, if it was necessary to keep the morton bay figs and old scoreboard. That could have also kept the dressing room facade and arches at the back of the western stand. If the southern end had to have an extra tier at the top, the roof could have curved/flowed over it and back down over the eastern side. At least there would have been uniformity, instead of what's basically now a fancy dogs breakfast.

A new Memorial Drive stadium, again, half arsed approach, make it up as they go along. No master plan to it.
Well, there was a vision for something like that, but the usual South Australian way has prevailed. Again. Because the current government wants to build a legacy project across the river, because Marshall pitched a stadium over the railyards years ago.

There's no master plan for anything to do with the Riverbank precinct. It's all going to end up a bigger mess then it already is. And we will have to live with it for decades to come.
The tennis stadium should be moved further out from Adelaide Oval, closer to the river/Morphett street bridge.
They should both stand in their own right, not one overshadowed by the other.

That's right . Adelaide oval wouldn't have happened without Port , the team that has lost $26m. Inside 10 years.

Sent from my SM-A515F using Tapatalk

citywatcher wrote: ↑

Sun Aug 01, 2021 11:29 am

That's right . Adelaide oval wouldn't have happened without Port , the team that has lost $26m. Inside 10 years.
Sent from my SM-A515F using Tapatalk

Not sure what a clubs profit/loss has to do with it, but it was Port Adelaide who first flagged a move to Adelaide Oval away from AAMI.
The AFL backed the move. The SA government did too because they saw the sense in moving AFL games to the city and out of the suburbs. Port had their own motivation for wanting to move which is irrelevant to this discussion as is their finances.

And here we are today, with AFL being played at Adelaide Oval with both Port & Crows using it as their home ground, in a disjointed mess of a Riverbank precinct once flagged as the next Southbank.

The Crows did not want to move. Port did. This is a fact.

And it only happened cos the Crows came on board

Sent from my SM-A515F using Tapatalk

At some stage the Western Stand should rebuilt to a 3 tier stand same as Eastern Stand and when the NIMBY group has gotten too old to protest any longer maybe we can build a Northern Stand that matches the Southern Stand - this is probably the best we can achieve.

ozisnowman wrote:At some stage the Western Stand should rebuilt to a 3 tier stand same as Eastern Stand and when the NIMBY group has gotten too old to protest any longer maybe we can build a Northern Stand that matches the Southern Stand - this is probably the best we can achieve.

There was never any protest against a Northern stand. It was left as is due to A: cost , and B: to retain the unique charm of one of the best grounds in the world.

Sent from my SM-A515F using Tapatalk

ozisnowman wrote: ↑

Mon Aug 02, 2021 8:35 am

At some stage the Western Stand should rebuilt to a 3 tier stand same as Eastern Stand and when the NIMBY group has gotten too old to protest any longer maybe we can build a Northern Stand that matches the Southern Stand - this is probably the best we can achieve.

It was the NIMBY SACA members that voted for the development. That is a fact. I was one of the ones that voted at a general meeting of all members held at the showgrounds. Without that vote the government money was off the table. The members stand was already completed more than a year previously with SACA money and at the time that AFL move to the oval was not even on the table.

The mix of old and new at the oval is unique. Like it or not, not all stadiums have to be soulless monoliths. The Hill has a fantastic atmosphere. People that go there and players all love it. Not sure what your issue is? Doesn't look the same as every other stadium?

Integrating and keeping heritage is difficult. Adelaide definitely does not always get the balance right, it this case however I think we actually do have a world class stadium with certain elements still in place.

rev wrote: ↑

Sun Aug 01, 2021 11:25 am

Not only are facades different, not only are the stand heights not uniform, the roofs even look different.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

From today;








Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The Memorial Drive Tennis Centre redevelopment has hit a new milestone.
Stage two is underway and on track to be finished by January in time for the Adelaide International.
https://fb.watch/7Vwu4kUvzP/

I didn't realise that the show court was getting a makeover as well until I drove past the site today. What looks like a mini version of the centre court roof has been erected and the court has been sunken to allow for more seating. I know there are a lot of detractors here but I honestly think MD is becoming quite a decent 'boutique' tennis centre.


Source

arki wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 02, 2021 11:11 pm

I didn't realise that the show court was getting a makeover as well until I drove past the site today. What looks like a mini version of the centre court roof has been erected and the court has been sunken to allow for more seating. I know there are a lot of detractors here but I honestly think MD is becoming quite a decent 'boutique' tennis centre.


Source

I was one of those detractors but I must say, I'm pleasantly surprised at how this project is coming along. Once the MD upgrade has been completed and if the new Arena gets built, we could be in the running to host a real annual tennis tournament in the lead up to the Australian Open.

The getting on with it. I like how they’re tying in the same red brick to match the Adelaide Oval.