Adelaide Oval - Discussion

Remove this Banner Ad

seanoff said:
REALLY? the design is quite spectacular and is also ultra modern. stadiums do not have to be nondescript boxes any more. Braga stadium would never have been built if stadiums could have no life. It only has 2 stands, not at all connected, one end is open, the other a rock wall. considered a masterpiece of stadium design. AO will have character, it won't be anodyne. it doesn't need to be the MCG, the MCG is like that because it needs to hold 100k, AO will be fine at 55k and the architects can leave an end open, disconnect the stands etc.

the old scoreboard is there, that end is left open. easier not to move it both physically and from a legal pov. probably only half the ground will be able to see it anyway, those in the western stand and maybe half the southern stand and it is unlikely to be used during AFL games. and it ties the new AO to the old. there will also be 3 (that's right 3) large video screens, not to mention the 4 billions or so LCDs that will be in every nook and cranny. So it's not as if they are just completely ignoring modern tech and leaving you with nothing.
Click to expand...

Braga stadium HAD to be built for the Euro, they could afford to not have 4 stands because the domestic game in Portugal doesn't reach capacity, it was built mainly for the Euro so they could try something different. I'm not asking for it to be the MCG, as the MCG is not state of the art, it's just a stadium with huge capacity. I'm asking for a state of the art stadium like the Etihad Stadium and if they wanted to improve that, they could put the video screens on cables in the middle like the NBA or Veltins Arena.
 
NIMBYs and BANANAs comment on Adelaide Now. People who believe the rape parks that surround the CBD like a noose must be maintained, and that sporting stadiums should be museums/time capsules.

Adelaide is a city of 1million people. It's simply not sensible or feasable to have 2 oval city stadiums. I think the new AO looks great.

The Ultimate memberships are a disgrace, and guarentee that crowds won't be maximised, which is the whole f'n point of taxpayers funding it; to get people into the city.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

RodneyMaynard said:
NIMBYs and BANANAs comment on Adelaide Now. People who believe the rape parks that surround the CBD like a noose must be maintained, and that sporting stadiums should be museums/time capsules.

Adelaide is a city of 1million people. It's simply not sensible or feasable to have 2 oval city stadiums. I think the new AO looks great.

The Ultimate memberships are a disgrace, and guarentee that crowds won't be maximised, which is the whole f'n point of taxpayers funding it; to get people into the city.
Click to expand...

I can't agree enough with your last sentence. Silly me for not realising that a "limited number of Ultimate memberships" as stated in the pre-vote information for SACA members translates to 25% of the stadium capacity! :mad:
 
WBD11 said:
Braga stadium HAD to be built for the Euro, they could afford to not have 4 stands because the domestic game in Portugal doesn't reach capacity, it was built mainly for the Euro so they could try something different. I'm not asking for it to be the MCG, as the MCG is not state of the art, it's just a stadium with huge capacity. I'm asking for a state of the art stadium like the Etihad Stadium and if they wanted to improve that, they could put the video screens on cables in the middle like the NBA or Veltins Arena.
Click to expand...

you clearly have nfi what you are talking about. The MCG is absolutely state of the art, esp the Northern side of the ground, more modern than Etihad. the facilities and services in the MCG are as good as pretty much anywhere. seriously what is not state of the art? the surface (bzzzt, yes it is), the facilities (bzzt, yep they are), access (absolutely). the design, (populous didn't decide that $500M at the MCG got you less than $500M elsewhere, it's one of their signature projects ffs)

going by your rantings Metlife in New Jersey isn't state of the art either, no roof at all, no suspended video screens, must be awful. in fact most NFL stadia wouldn't meet your criteria for state of the art. believe me most of them are absolutely state of the art.

with Braga, they didn't have to build it there, but the location is spectacular and what they built fits the location perfectly.

suspended video screens have their own problems, the one in Dallas is a bit of a nightmare for NFL punters and returners with the ball hitting it, flying through the structure etc. with cricket it could be a nightmare with shadows etc.

you don't want to put a cookie cutter stadium in that location in Adelaide. they've actually had a bit of a think about it. it didn't need an etihad clone, forsyth barr type of thing wouldn't work, don't need the MCG size, a university of phoenix setup wouldn't work within a budget of less than $3B. what fits with the location, and history, capacity needs and what they've popped up with really works well

you want what you think makes a modern stadium without really thinking about anything.
 
seanoff said:
you clearly have nfi what you are talking about. The MCG is absolutely state of the art, esp the Northern side of the ground, more modern than Etihad. the facilities and services in the MCG are as good as pretty much anywhere. seriously what is not state of the art? the surface (bzzzt, yes it is), the facilities (bzzt, yep they are), access (absolutely). the design, (populous didn't decide that $500M at the MCG got you less than $500M elsewhere, it's one of their signature projects ffs)

going by your rantings Metlife in New Jersey isn't state of the art either, no roof at all, no suspended video screens, must be awful. in fact most NFL stadia wouldn't meet your criteria for state of the art. believe me most of them are absolutely state of the art.

with Braga, they didn't have to build it there, but the location is spectacular and what they built fits the location perfectly.

suspended video screens have their own problems, the one in Dallas is a bit of a nightmare for NFL punters and returners with the ball hitting it, flying through the structure etc. with cricket it could be a nightmare with shadows etc.

you don't want to put a cookie cutter stadium in that location in Adelaide. they've actually had a bit of a think about it. it didn't need an etihad clone, forsyth barr type of thing wouldn't work, don't need the MCG size, a university of phoenix setup wouldn't work within a budget of less than $3B. what fits with the location, and history, capacity needs and what they've popped up with really works well

you want what you think makes a modern stadium without really thinking about anything.
Click to expand...
I'm taking about a new stadium for footy and leaving AO as it was, obviously you can't have those video screens and cricket. The agreement and having to deal with SACA does not benefit footy, cricket is dying and we're the dominant code yet we're playing second fiddle.
 
WBD11 said:
I'm taking about a new stadium for footy and leaving AO as it was, obviously you can't have those video screens and cricket. The agreement and having to deal with SACA does not benefit footy, cricket is dying and we're the dominant code yet we're playing second fiddle.
Click to expand...
there is no need to two oval stadiums in Adelaide. having one makes the best economic sense, there is really bugger all overlap between football and cricket, that way the stadium is used year round.

Melbourne shares, Sydney shares, Brisbane shares, Perth should once they get the new one. So what makes Adelaide so special?
please don't argue melbourne has etihad. there are 9 teams in melbourne 5 at Etihad, 4 at the MCG + the MCG is used for major games.

cricket isn't dying, but it is transforming, lets face it, most cricket from here on out will be 20/20.
 
[quote="WBD11, post: 26290724, member: 125244", obviously you can't have those video screens and cricket. [/quote]
If the architects had any brains at all they'd be put in places where they won't distract the batsmen. Even the current one is ok. Every ball they blank it to a still image, but that happens at all cricket venues. The 2 new screens will be either side of the southern stand - this puts them at wider angles from the batsmen watching the bowler than the one on the hill anyway.
 
seanoff said:
there is no need to two oval stadiums in Adelaide. having one makes the best economic sense, there is really bugger all overlap between football and cricket, that way the stadium is used year round.

Melbourne shares, Sydney shares, Brisbane shares, Perth should once they get the new one. So what makes Adelaide so special?
please don't argue melbourne has etihad. there are 9 teams in melbourne 5 at Etihad, 4 at the MCG + the MCG is used for major games.

cricket isn't dying, but it is transforming, lets face it, most cricket from here on out will be 20/20.
Click to expand...
You have valid point, but what you're forgetting is that Adelaide already has two oval stadiums. The capacity of AAMI is the same as the new AO will be. That's why footy should of got it's own central venue in the city if playing at West Lakes was that much of an issue. What I don't agree with is the old AO being close to 40k, AAMI being over 50 and now we will just have one venue that holds over 50. You could have even divided the two stadiums up between the clubs, giving the 40k holding AO to Port and new 55k Etihad like stadium to the crows. That would of increased the local rivalry and been great for the game here, giving both teams a central ground to call home.
 
WBD11 said:
You have valid point, but what you're forgetting is that Adelaide already has two oval stadiums. The capacity of AAMI is the same as the new AO will be. That's why footy should of got it's own central venue in the city if playing at West Lakes was that much of an issue. What I don't agree with is the old AO being close to 40k, AAMI being over 50 and now we will just have one venue that holds over 50. You could have even divided the two stadiums up between the clubs, giving the 40k holding AO to Port and new 55k Etihad like stadium to the crows. That would of increased the local rivalry and been great for the game here, giving both teams a central ground to call home.
Click to expand...

AAMI is EOL, the only possibility of improving AAMI is to nuke it from orbit and start again, from scratch, the playing surface, stands, facilities etc need to be replaced. + it's in an out of the way place that is hard to access.

The old AO wasn't going to pass muster as an AFL ground. too much standing room on the mounds, poor facilities for the people in the outer etc etc.

so you want to rebuild AO, and build another stadium worth way more than $1B for 2 clubs on the basis of rivalry.

WHO PAYS?

and if you go to a crows game at the AO, you'll only know Port play there because next week a Port game is on there in the fixture. Branding a modern stadium takes almost no time at all with all the LCD tech, put up some flags, hang some signage, wheel out the Adelaide stuff into the merch stores. a couple of hrs at most.
 
seanoff said:
AAMI is EOL, the only possibility of improving AAMI is to nuke it from orbit and start again, from scratch, the playing surface, stands, facilities etc need to be replaced. + it's in an out of the way place that is hard to access.

The old AO wasn't going to pass muster as an AFL ground. too much standing room on the mounds, poor facilities for the people in the outer etc etc.

so you want to rebuild AO, and build another stadium worth way more than $1B for 2 clubs on the basis of rivalry.

WHO PAYS?

and if you go to a crows game at the AO, you'll only know Port play there because next week a Port game is on there in the fixture. Branding a modern stadium takes almost no time at all with all the LCD tech, put up some flags, hang some signage, wheel out the Adelaide stuff into the merch stores. a couple of hrs at most.
Click to expand...

This. The SANFL was already holding its hands out for Government funds for upgrades and the SACA was in massive debt. This way instead of funding two sets of stadium upgrades - that are really only used at opposite ends of the year - the Government funds one, and should severely think about the future of Hindmarsh stadium while its at it.
 
The_Wookie said:
the Government ... should severely think about the future of Hindmarsh stadium while its at it.
Click to expand...
The only reason Hindmarsh has some form of future is that most of the soccer played in Adelaide is October-March when there are cricket pitches in the middle of the Oval. Once-off games are ok but the players aren't massive fans of the playing surface because, although they have the same name, pitches of the cricket variety aren't friends with pitches of the Football variety.
 
hitthepost said:
The only reason Hindmarsh has some form of future is that most of the soccer played in Adelaide is October-March when there are cricket pitches in the middle of the Oval. Once-off games are ok but the players aren't massive fans of the playing surface because, although they have the same name, pitches of the cricket variety aren't friends with pitches of the Football variety.
Click to expand...

yeah I understand that. had to play on more than one over the years in footy season.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

The_Wookie said:
yeah I understand that. had to play on more than one over the years in footy season.
Click to expand...
Yeah, can't say I have...I don't mind watching state/amateur footy having to play in the mud...but imagine playing soccer with a cricket pitch affecting the ball!
 
So, dropped into AO yesterday for a gander, last look before the Test most likely
The Southern Stand is beginning to look like it will be a stand:
southerngrandstand.jpg


Also, I'd been wondering what they would do in the Western to weather-proof the grandstand built for cricket to turn it into an all-year-round grandstand. Found these in the roof...this is the south-west end:
southwesternroof.jpg

Guess especially if they close in the gaps at the back that let the air flow through nicely, these will be quite useful come long hot days of cricket :) and they look pretty good too, but hardly noticeable. Quite impressed.
 
Dirty Bird said:
God am I ******ed.
I thought they were some power generator at first.
Then click, they're fans. :oops:
Click to expand...

******ed?!?!

Then I'm blind! I didn't even notice them LOL. Great idea tho.
 
Jakko said:
That southern stand is going to be huge.

I wonder how much whineing we will get from the cricket commentators about the upgrade.
Click to expand...
Going by previous summers talking about (sometimes during) upgrades, they'll be pretty positive. Though also anticipating a fair bit of "loss of charm" "massive change *insert sounds of negative connotations*"
Probably will get some views of what it should look like on channel 9 and thus international coverage though.
 
This on the cricketsa.com.au website - temporary members' entry for the Test and the ODI this summer, out on Oval #2 - be useful from parking on Pinky Flat/north of the ground, not bad to walk here along Festival drive from the back of the railway station either. Gotta say SACA do a good job with this kind of signage on their marquees and stuff every year now.
tempmembsentry.png
 
Sad news...no SpiderCam for the Test match because they can't install the hardware in the building site...needs 4 anchor points (easy enough, 4 light towers) which have cables coming from massive reels on the ground (problem because 2 of the light towers are in the construction zone). So no SpiderCam in Adelaide. I was really hoping to watch it fly around! Haha. Oh well.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Adelaide Oval - Discussion

Similar threads

C
Thebarton oval development
Replies
3
Views
935
JPetro83
JPetro83

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top