Guess who now claims it's in the best interests of footy to let Port use the shed

[relapse]

KEVIN Sheedy says those in Australian football should go to war at each other on Saturdays.

"And then spend the other six days of the week working with each other to make the game bigger," adds the Essendon master coach.

This theme needs to be quickly and fully embraced in South Australia.

It is a policy that must be taken to heart by the SA Football Commission to unite SA football for its common good.

And it should begin with the so-called Crows' Shed outside AAMI Stadium at West Lakes.

In 1974, when AAMI Stadium was still Football Park, the SANFL ruled that its new headquarters was never to be a home ground to any club but solely the home of SA league football.

This all changed in 1991 with the arrival of the AFL with the Crows (who some suggest should have made their home at the vacated Thebarton Oval).

It's time to correct this.

Soon, the Crows' Shed will be knocked down and cleared, removing the asbestos-clad building that began as a government warehouse. The Adelaide Football Club will build a new administration block on the corner of West Lakes Boulevard and Frederick Road. Its current headquarters will become the SANFL offices.

But when The Shed is rebuilt is must become The Footy Shed. Certainly not the Crows' Shed.

Why spend millions of dollars to build a facility used to the maximum only when Adelaide plays its 12 home-and-away games - and occasional finals - at AAMI Stadium?

The Shed should be at AAMI Stadium for use by every football fan at the West Lakes arena after every game - be it AFL or SANFL - during a season - just as Telstra Dome in Melbourne has its outstanding facilities opened to all its tenant clubs not just its major tenant Essendon.

Why?

Refer back to the Sheedy quote. It is in the best interests of SA football.

Just as it was in the best interest of SA to have two AFL teams and AAMI Stadium in use for every week of the 22-round home-and-away series, so it is to have The Footy Shed in operation every weekend.

Over to you commission chairman, Rod Payze. After all, you and your commission command both AFL licences.

You are charged with making decisions that are in the best interests of SA football, not one club ahead of another.

The Footy Shed meets that agenda far more than a new, exclusive Crows Shed.

Why won't this happen?

As Adelaide Review colleague John Kingsmill notes, SA football is split along an infantile divide between Crows and Power fans.

This divide clouds decisions that effect SA football, making the commission a much-needed body of review and sanity.

Immediately, Crows members will protest. They do not want The Shed to be "invaded by those #$@* from Port Adelaide".

They can go back to Alberton, the Adelaide supporters say.

These are the same people who do not mind Power fans using the Crows Tavern at AAMI Stadium during Port games and leaving their money at the bar for the Adelaide Football Club.

If the Crows Tavern is good enough for everyone, The Shed must be open to all as well. For footy's sake.


I find this a bit rich coming from the guy that dobbed in Burton and his club (Port) orchestrated the Bryce Gibbs saga, now trying to say that all clubs should be unified off the field.

Another prime example of Rucci's hypocrisy.

 

[Malibu#27]

I find this a bit rich coming from the guy that dobbed in Burton and his club (Port) orchestrated the Bryce Gibbs saga, now trying to say that all clubs should be unified off the field.

Another prime example of Rucci's hypocrisy.

Do you think that if you keep saying this it will become true ?

 

[relapse]

Do you think that if you keep saying this it will become true ?

so are you trying to claim that Port didnt question his eligability with the AFL ?

The main point of the thread is that we have been told by all the Port supporters the "shed" was a blight on football in SA, so why now do we have people like Rucci having a grizzle and claiming that Port should be able to use it? Port have Alberton to go back to if they wish, so i dont see the issue with the shed because I thought all Port supporters thought the shed facilities was a big joke, but now it seems like Port Adelaide and people like Rucci are secretly jealous of it and the other part is that I cant believe that Rucci is trying to claim that all clubs should work together when he has a blatantly obvious adgenda against Adelaide.

 

[bighawk1961]

so are you trying to claim that Port didnt question his eligability with the AFL ?

The main point of the thread is that we have been told by all the Port supporters the "shed" was a blight on football in SA, so why now do we have people like Rucci having a grizzle and claiming that Port should be able to use it? Port have Alberton to go back to if they wish, so i dont see the issue with the shed because I thought all Port supporters thought the shed facilities was a big joke, but now it seems like Port Adelaide and people like Rucci are secretly jealous of it and the other part is that I cant believe that Rucci is trying to claim that all clubs should work together when he has a blatantly obvious adgenda against Adelaide.

relapse, your efforts to suggest you are not rucci are pathetic

 

[relapse]

relapse, your efforts to suggest you are not rucci are pathetic

Welcome to the Adelaide board, Rucci !!!

 

[PrideOf]

relapse, your efforts to suggest you are not rucci are pathetic

You've got this working really well Rooch. Write something that might inflame the AFC then scoot over to BigFooty to see what people are saying.

 

[kimirocks]

Won't and shouldn't happen. Seriously think they are going to a do a reno job every week to remove our flags, and all the other memorabilia et al that is inside. I think not. Simple, Port have Alberton (oh noes that's what Rucci said) but it's true, they have a full setup down there, wouldn't wanna break with tradition now would we?

 

[Malibu#27]

so are you trying to claim that Port didnt question his eligability with the AFL ?

I'm claiming I have never seen a shred of evidence indicating this (other than BigFooty rumour mongering). I think the original article suggesting he may not be eligible was penned by Andrew Capel or Geoff Roach - Cant remember who. Adelaide even indicated they had contacted the AFL to seek confirmation - source Trigg interview on 5AA back soon after the suggestion he wasn't eligible broke.

The main point of the thread is that we have been told by all the Port supporters the "shed" was a blight on football in SA, so why now do we have people like Rucci having a grizzle and claiming that Port should be able to use it? Port have Alberton to go back to if they wish, so i dont see the issue with the shed because I thought all Port supporters thought the shed facilities was a big joke, but now it seems like Port Adelaide and people like Rucci are secretly jealous of it and the other part is that I cant believe that Rucci is trying to claim that all clubs should work together when he has a blatantly obvious adgenda against Adelaide.

Dont know about the shed - but I'd suggest if the Power wanted a facility within the AAMI stadium precent that it should be allowed given the precedence set allowing the Crows one. Lets face it- of a crowd of 30.000, a lot more would hang around AAMI after the game if we had facilities - than hop in their cars and drive back to Alberton.... its a fact of life.

You can say its their home/training facility ... but its a fact that this was originally owned by the SANFL not the AFC.

 

[Malibu#27]

Won't and shouldn't happen. Seriously think they are going to a do a reno job every week to remove our flags, and all the other memorabilia et al that is inside. I think not. Simple, Port have Alberton (oh noes that's what Rucci said) but it's true, they have a full setup down there, wouldn't wanna break with tradition now would we?

If port wanted to build something - or come to some arrangement with the SANFL, they would have as much right as Adelaide does to have some sort of facility at AAMI.
Adelaide doesnt own the area- SANFL does.

 

[Crow Envy]

Rucci and Port fans have finally conceded Alberton is not a safe place to be a night.

 

[- PC -]

If the Crows Tavern is good enough for everyone, The Shed must be open to all as well. For footy's sake

I have no problem with his comments as there is a correctness in his logic. But I wonder if his logic applies both ways

Should the Allan Scott centre be open for Crows fans the weekends that Port play away? Will Port Adelaide allow the ASC to lie idle?

Its all well and good Rucci stirring the pot, but he must relaise the effect if the SANFL take up his call...and I dont think he has thought it through

 

[Redline]

I won't be popular on here for saying this but I do think he has a point. It works interstate and really makes sense. As I have said before they should bulldoze AAMI stadium but thanks to the tunnel vision of the SANFL we are left with it now, and because of that we need to make it more multipurpose for sport and for fans.

I don't see it as a big deal, while the AFC and the Power are a footy club they are not the same as the footy clubs we grew up with and don't need the tradionial clubrooms.

 

[Malibu#27]

I won't be popular on here for saying this but I do think he has a point. It works interstate and really makes sense. As I have said before they should bulldoze AAMI stadium but thanks to the tunnel vision of the SANFL we are left with it now, and because of that we need to make it more multipurpose for sport and for fans.

I don't see it as a big deal, while the AFC and the Power are a footy club they are not the same as the footy clubs we grew up with and don't need the tradionial clubrooms.

Its important to underatand the difference between facilities that are part of AFC - admin centre/clubrooms (in whatever form)..... and facilities provided at AAMI for both clubs - I suspect these will get confused as this topic is discussed.

 

[Ford Fairlane]

I have no problem with his comments as there is a correctness in his logic. But I wonder if his logic applies both ways

Should the Allan Scott centre be open for Crows fans the weekends that Port play away? Will Port Adelaide allow the ASC to lie idle?

Its all well and good Rucci stirring the pot, but he must relaise the effect if the SANFL take up his call...and I dont think he has thought it through

The Allan Scott headquarters is our training and rehab facility. I'm not sure it would hold much interest for crows fans looking for a place to commiserate/celebrate. You're all welcome to come to the Port Club tho. We'll take your money ... and wheels, car seats, CD/radios ...

 

[Ford Fairlane]

I'm claiming I have never seen a shred of evidence indicating this (other than BigFooty rumour mongering). I think the original article suggesting he may not be eligible was penned by Andrew Capel or Geoff Roach - Cant remember who. Adelaide even indicated they had contacted the AFL to seek confirmation - source Trigg interview on 5AA back soon after the suggestion he wasn't eligible broke.

Gibbs's eligibility was discussed on BF well before Capel wrote about it in the Advertiser (some might even suggest this is where he got the idea). As you can see from this thread, it was indicated a few clubs (including Adelaide) were checking out his eligibility.

http://bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=182377&highlight=gibbs

 

[Markthirtytwo]

So the AFC builds a facility with both administration and after match functions with THEIR hard earned mullar, and this clown wants it to be shared by our cross town rivals. Get real. Can you imagine the damage during or after a few dozen pyssed power supporters would get upto if that was allowed.

Then what about at Showdowns? If it's a home game for the PAPFC then what happens to the building we built?


You are seriously devoid of more than just hair you irriot.

 

[Malibu#27]

Gibbs's eligibility was discussed on BF well before Capel wrote about it in the Advertiser (some might even suggest this is where he got the idea). As you can see from this thread, it was indicated a few clubs (including Adelaide) were checking out his eligibility.

http://bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=182377&highlight=gibbs

Yeah I realised BF (and you) uncovered it first

But get annoyed that Port is constantly blamed without evidence.
Lets not forget Bryce also could have been a Port father son until rules were changed.

 

[Malibu#27]

So the AFC builds a facility with both administration and after match functions with THEIR hard earned mullar, and this clown wants it to be shared by our cross town rivals. Get real. Can you imagine the damage during or after a few dozen pyssed power supporters would get upto if that was allowed.

Then what about at Showdowns? If it's a home game for the PAPFC then what happens to the building we built?


You are seriously devoid of more than just hair you irriot.

I dont think the "clowns" (1 game 1 win in 2007) have asked for anything as yet.

From the article - it sounds like Adelaide is building their own Admin facilities. While the SANFL is knocking down the shed (asbestos and all). I think the thought is that maybe a shared facility replace it.

Alternativly Port should be able to construct (and fund) their own post game facility - if they desire.

 

[Macca19]

Should the Allan Scott centre be open for Crows fans the weekends that Port play away? Will Port Adelaide allow the ASC to lie idle?

Not really the same though. The Scott Centre is just Admin and training facilities. Its not a bar/pub/clubroom. The Port Club is open to everyone and with plenty of tv screens around, if Crows supporters wanted to go there and watch the game then they would be able to.

 

[relapse]

I dont think the "clowns" (1 game 1 win in 2007) have asked for anything as yet.

From the article - it sounds like Adelaide is building their own Admin facilities. While the SANFL is knocking down the shed (asbestos and all). I think the thought is that maybe a shared facility replace it.

Alternativly Port should be able to construct (and fund) their own post game facility - if they desire.

They thing I dont get is that for years we have heard jibes about the shed from Port supporters, now suddenly they want one and they are all now doing a 180 in relation to what they said before. Hypocrisy at its finest.

 

[- PC -]

Not really the same though. The Scott Centre is just Admin and training facilities. Its not a bar/pub/clubroom. The Port Club is open to everyone and with plenty of tv screens around, if Crows supporters wanted to go there and watch the game then they would be able to.

Hey its been 7 years, I wasnt sure what other facilities you had apart from Ethelton

 

[relapse]

Not really the same though. The Scott Centre is just Admin and training facilities. Its not a bar/pub/clubroom. The Port Club is open to everyone and with plenty of tv screens around, if Crows supporters wanted to go there and watch the game then they would be able to.

Seriously though if Graham Cornes came out and said that they should be allowed to hold the AFC home match fuctions at the Port club he could get crucified.

Port want in on the action even though they have claimed for years that we have no home and inadequate social facilities.

I am guessing that with the plans for Adelaide to build a large admin base and social facilities that Rucci is worried that the AFC will get too big so he wants to try and throw a spanner in the works before it happens.

Why would Port invest money into something when they already have Alberton. The AFC appear to be going to spend money to build something for the use of their supporters, they arent going to build something using their own money and just let Port waltz in and use it when they feel like it. Our club isnt a charity organisation.

If the SANFL paid to build it then that would be one thing, but this will be something I would assume that the AFC will be paying for so there is no chance of that happening.

 

[Markthirtytwo]

I dont think the "clowns" (1 game 1 win in 2007) have asked for anything as yet.

From the article - it sounds like Adelaide is building their own Admin facilities. While the SANFL is knocking down the shed (asbestos and all). I think the thought is that maybe a shared facility replace it.

Alternativly Port should be able to construct (and fund) their own post game facility - if they desire.

Don't be so defenSive. I didn't call your mob clowns, I called the hypocrite who wrot the article a clown.

Firstly if the AFC decide to build Adminstration Offices, etc. on the corner there, and then their one and only reasonable building that can hold a large amount of fans after a match is torn down, wouldn't you think that the AFC would want to build their own building to replace the one that they initially bought upto standards that fans could go back there and rejoice or drown their sorrows.

If the SANFL build the building fair enough but no where in the article does it mention that.

If another building was built to house the power fans, how much room would be lost for car parking.

I don't think a lot of people have seriously thought this through.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Let me put it this way. Those precious Port fans have taken every single chance they can get to have a little dig at the shed. Now when we want to build the new complex they want the piece of the action. Well I say go and get ****ed!

They have their own little rooms where they can go and get together and we have ours and will continue to have ours.

As for teh Crows Tavern, who really gives a **** if they want to drop by its a freaking pub. Its no different to Crows supporter going to Hyde Park Tavern rather than the Alma. Their choice. No one is forcing them to go there.

On the occasions that I do go to the shed before or after the showdown, I sure as hell don't want to see those nuff nuffs hanging around there.

Oh and what would happen to the memorabilia thats already there.

 

[Malibu#27]

Let me put it this way. Those precious Port fans have taken every single chance they can get to have a little dig at the shed. Now when we want to build the new complex they want the piece of the action. Well I say go and get ****ed!

They have their own little rooms where they can go and get together and we have ours and will continue to have ours.

As for teh Crows Tavern, who really gives a **** if they want to drop by its a freaking pub. Its no different to Crows supporter going to Hyde Park Tavern rather than the Alma. Their choice. No one is forcing them to go there.

On the occasions that I do go to the shed before or after the showdown, I sure as hell don't want to see those nuff nuffs hanging around there.

Oh and what would happen to the memorabilia thats already there.

Its a pub that makes a fair penny of Port Adelaide supporters due to its location at AAMI.

I dont know that I want a shed, but I'm arguing more the point that AAMI is a venue for footy in SA - not a venue for Adelaide football Club - as such if port wanted to establish some form of presence - for match day crowds I cannot see why they should not be permitted to.

Id argue that the SANFL could add a facility for post mach functions etc that could be used by all clubs.

The MCG has been set up to cater for all tennant clubs - as has the Dome - I shouldnt have to be contributing funds to Adelaide Football club if I want to drink out of a glass at AAMI stadium.

It may be time that Port got a leg up at AAMI, as Adelaide have over the years.