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

[Macca19]

If the Crows are building it with their own money then I agree Port should have nothing to do with it. If it is the SANFL building it then it is more than fair that the question be asked that it be a joint bar/pub/whatever. If Port wish to have something on the same premises then there is no reason why the SANFL should knock it back. Fair is fair.

Personally Im not keen on the idea of a joint one. I assume profits would go straight to the SANFL and not the clubs. Id rather Port fans go back to the Port club. What would happen after Showdowns? Cant imagine it being too friendly an atmosphere, especially after a spiteful clash on field.

It also isnt 'suddenly everyone at Port wants in on it'. Its one article written by a journalist with no quotes from anyone at Port Adelaide saying they want a part of it. So some of the 'typical port' garbage is just plain overboard. He also isnt suggesting Port hold after match functions at the Crows premises.

As for the Port dobbing on Gibbs thing. I think its funny when people on Bigfooty make up something and then it gets turned to gospel.

 

[Jumbo]

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.

We are also looking for a nice car park to train on too! (do you know any?)

 

[Crowked]

My understanding is that the AFC is going to fund the project fully. If this is correct, then they have absolutely no obligation to include anyone else. If the SANFL or Port or Rucci want a place for all SA footy fans to go after the game, then they should fund it.

Just another example of Rucci's pathetic obsession with the AFC. He can see the club is finally going to fill the void of having no official clubrooms for their fans and he doesnt like it because thats the only thing Port have that we dont exceed by miles.

 

[Macca19]

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.

Jesus. Thats probably the worst post ive ever read from you. Would have expected you to be one of the people not to jump up and down at an article which doesnt at all suggest Port or Port supporters want in on the Shed.

 

[*PAF]

I do not know the details and quite frankly wouldn't care very much even if I lived in Adelaide again.

However IMO if the Crows are going to spend a heap of money to build a clubroom, then you'd think it would be in their best interest to buy land, or better still ask a local council somewhere to donate land, and build it on that rather than on land that will always belong to someone else.



And now for the compulsory dig in these type of threads: Should really be old enough to stop hanging on to mother's skirt by now.

 

[Malibu#27]

If the Crows are building it with their own money then I agree Port should have nothing to do with it. If it is the SANFL building it then it is more than fair that the question be asked that it be a joint bar/pub/whatever. If Port wish to have something on the same premises then there is no reason why the SANFL should knock it back. Fair is fair.

Personally Im not keen on the idea of a joint one. I assume profits would go straight to the SANFL and not the clubs. Id rather Port fans go back to the Port club. What would happen after Showdowns? Cant imagine it being too friendly an atmosphere, especially after a spiteful clash on field.

It also isnt 'suddenly everyone at Port wants in on it'. Its one article written by a journalist with no quotes from anyone at Port Adelaide saying they want a part of it. So some of the 'typical port' garbage is just plain overboard. He also isnt suggesting Port hold after match functions at the Crows premises.

As for the Port dobbing on Gibbs thing. I think its funny when people on Bigfooty make up something and then it gets turned to gospel.

Expressed my opinions well Macca.

 

[Ford Fairlane]

Jesus. Thats probably the worst post ive ever read from you. Would have expected you to be one of the people not to jump up and down at an article which doesnt at all suggest Port or Port supporters want in on the Shed.

Rucci-damus predicted this

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

 

[AJ_No.4]

If the Crows are building it with their own money then I agree Port should have nothing to do with it. If it is the SANFL building it then it is more than fair that the question be asked that it be a joint bar/pub/whatever. If Port wish to have something on the same premises then there is no reason why the SANFL should knock it back. Fair is fair.

Personally Im not keen on the idea of a joint one. I assume profits would go straight to the SANFL and not the clubs. Id rather Port fans go back to the Port club. What would happen after Showdowns? Cant imagine it being too friendly an atmosphere, especially after a spiteful clash on field.

It also isnt 'suddenly everyone at Port wants in on it'. Its one article written by a journalist with no quotes from anyone at Port Adelaide saying they want a part of it. So some of the 'typical port' garbage is just plain overboard. He also isnt suggesting Port hold after match functions at the Crows premises.

Good post

 

[Malibu#27]

.
However IMO if the Crows are going to spend a heap of money to build a clubroom, then you'd think it would be in their best interest to buy land, or better still ask a local council somewhere to donate land, and build it on that rather than on land that will always belong to someone else.

Not only 'best interest' - but from the SANFL's perspective it should be essential that they get componsated fairly.

 

[*PAF]

Not only 'best interest' - but from the SANFL's perspective it should be essential that they get componsated fairly.

Lost me on that one.
Who should be compensated fairly the SANFL or the Crows?
There is no question that the SANFL see the Crows as their very own cash cow, no pun intented of course, and because of that will probably do everything in their power to keep them at AAMI in a way where they can get their hands on any income generated by the club.

 

[AJ_No.4]

Not only 'best interest' - but from the SANFL's perspective it should be essential that they get componsated fairly.

Are you trying to say that the Crows would be getting this for free?


History will prove that the SANFL will make a tidy little profit again of the Crows.

 

[Ford Fairlane]

If the Crows are building it with their own money then I agree Port should have nothing to do with it. If it is the SANFL building it then it is more than fair that the question be asked that it be a joint bar/pub/whatever. If Port wish to have something on the same premises then there is no reason why the SANFL should knock it back. Fair is fair.

Personally Im not keen on the idea of a joint one. I assume profits would go straight to the SANFL and not the clubs. Id rather Port fans go back to the Port club. What would happen after Showdowns? Cant imagine it being too friendly an atmosphere, especially after a spiteful clash on field.

It also isnt 'suddenly everyone at Port wants in on it'. Its one article written by a journalist with no quotes from anyone at Port Adelaide saying they want a part of it. So some of the 'typical port' garbage is just plain overboard. He also isnt suggesting Port hold after match functions at the Crows premises.

Well said Macca. JJ raised this topic a few weeks back, and the general concept is for Port to have some sort of on-site facility for Port supporters to go to right after a game. It's a good idea, but it's hard to see it fly within any sort of 'time-share' arrangement as has been put forward in the article.

 

[Malibu#27]

Well said Macca. JJ raised this topic a few weeks back, and the general concept is for Port to have some sort of on-site facility for Port supporters to go to right after a game. It's a good idea, but it's hard to see it fly within any sort of 'time-share' arrangement as has been put forward in the article.

Maybe if the Crows are building a clubrooms as such at AAMI - the SANFL could take back the Crows bar and that could become the timeshare facility (or perhaps we take it over)

 

[noddy]

s.

As for the Port dobbing on Gibbs thing. I think its funny when people on Bigfooty make up something and then it gets turned to gospel.

FF has a lot of clout down Alberton way & when he says jump JJ says how far.

 

[Malibu#27]

Are you trying to say that the Crows would be getting this for free?


History will prove that the SANFL will make a tidy little profit again of the Crows.

No - just saying I've never seen any transactions by which Adelaide has purchased land for this facility. I dont think they should be "given" the land - but think it should be purchased by them (even if the purchase is only on paper [and already paid for] by prior dividiends over and above their requirement)

... (I also think that every cent AFC makes over their required divididend should be maintained by the club)

 

[WhyAlwaysMe]

The Crows' membership is at capacity, we have a waiting list for crying out loud! Does that not suggest that we should look into a new higher-capacity stadium for the Crows? The one big issue with this is the number of no-shows from members at the games, but gee whiz we've got 50000 members and imo a 51000-person stadium doesn't cut it anymore. We could get a lot more general admission people if a larger ground was put together. AAMI could become Port Adelaide's home ground (their membership will never reach the heights Adelaide's has) and the Crows could have a larger stadium, complete with an even bigger crows shed out back

It almost certainly won't happen but I don't think it's necessarily a bad idea, especially given all the debate over the number of quality high-capacity grounds SA has for big international sporting events (a future Australia-based World Cup for instance).

Yes I'm sure it would be really feasible for the government to have two 50,000+ seat stadiums in the one state . While they’re at it they should build another soccer stadium, another cricket stadium and an athletics stadium just to be safe.

As far as this proposal is concerned, I'm dead against it. I would much rather go down to Alberton after a game than some concrete jungle we have to share with one and other each week. That's my $0.02.

 

[AJ_No.4]

No - just saying I've never seen any transactions by which Adelaide has purchased land for this facility. I dont think they should be "given" the land - but think it should be purchased by them (even if the purchase is only on paper [and already paid for] by prior dividiends over and above their requirement)

... (I also think that every cent AFC makes over their required divididend should be maintained by the club)

Fair points

 

[noddy]

I find it bloody amusing after all these years of ridicule from the Port faithful concerning our shed that they now want to gate crash our new one all in the name of it's "good for the game"

What next!!!!! will they also beg to train in our car park ??

 

[*PAF]

I find it bloody amusing after all these years of ridicule from the Port faithful concerning our shed that they now want to gate crash our new one all in the name of it's "good for the game"

...

Who said that? You stirrer you.

 

[relapse]

The Crows' membership is at capacity, we have a waiting list for crying out loud! Does that not suggest that we should look into a new higher-capacity stadium for the Crows? The one big issue with this is the number of no-shows from members at the games, but gee whiz we've got 50000 members and imo a 51000-person stadium doesn't cut it anymore. We could get a lot more general admission people if a larger ground was put together. AAMI could become Port Adelaide's home ground (their membership will never reach the heights Adelaide's has) and the Crows could have a larger stadium, complete with an even bigger crows shed out back

It almost certainly won't happen but I don't think it's necessarily a bad idea, especially given all the debate over the number of quality high-capacity grounds SA has for big international sporting events (a future Australia-based World Cup for instance).

The thing is that AAMI should be sold and the money invested with the government into a new larger stadium 70k+ seat stadium at the rail yards. It is rediculous to have 2 football stadiums.

The problem is always that the SANFL's reluctance to get with the times and their belief that football park is some sort of monument to their legacy.

They are doing exactly what we need to do in Perth, but as usual we will be stuck with our Waverley-esque stadium for the rest of time and the AFC will be stuck in netural until things change.

 

[Alex99]

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.

Adelaide Football Club to stay put
1 hours, 18 minutes ago | Back

http://afc.com.au/Season2007/News/NewsArticle/tabid/4417/Default.aspx?newsId=40563

Crows chief executive Steven Trigg says the Adelaide Football Club is not moving.

Contrary to a report in The Advertiser this morning, Trigg said the Adelaide Football Club will not build a new administration block on the corner of Frederick Road and West Lakes Boulevard; the SANFL will not take over the current AFC offices; and the current Crows Shed will remain in place for some time to come.

“The Club is assessing its future facility needs for football and for members but there is no plan as yet,” Trigg said.

“If our organisation builds any new facility, at our cost, it will be for our members and fans.

“The Adelaide Football Club spent $1 million five years ago upgrading the Crows Shed and continues to pay for maintenance of this facility, which would not be available for public use if not for our significant commitment and the support of the SANFL.”

Views: 62

 

[relapse]

No - just saying I've never seen any transactions by which Adelaide has purchased land for this facility. I dont think they should be "given" the land - but think it should be purchased by them (even if the purchase is only on paper [and already paid for] by prior dividiends over and above their requirement)

... (I also think that every cent AFC makes over their required divididend should be maintained by the club)

It's not just a case that selling or leasing the land, there are alot of legal ramifications for doing this, first you would have to pay the subdivide the actual land before it could be sold. At the end of the day what happens if the AFC then decide that they want to move elsewhere, the SANFL will then have to buy that land back or have it owned by someone else. They are obviously protecting their own interests by doing that.

If it was actually leased there are restrictions etc because the land is zoned as a sporting ground.

All the SANFL cares about is getting that money, so if Adelaide want an after match function centre then the SANFL would be silly for preventing it.

 

[AC07]

Adelaide Football Club to stay put
1 hours, 18 minutes ago | Back

http://afc.com.au/Season2007/News/NewsArticle/tabid/4417/Default.aspx?newsId=40563

Crows chief executive Steven Trigg says the Adelaide Football Club is not moving.

Contrary to a report in The Advertiser this morning, Trigg said the Adelaide Football Club will not build a new administration block on the corner of Frederick Road and West Lakes Boulevard; the SANFL will not take over the current AFC offices; and the current Crows Shed will remain in place for some time to come.

“The Club is assessing its future facility needs for football and for members but there is no plan as yet,” Trigg said.

“If our organisation builds any new facility, at our cost, it will be for our members and fans.

“The Adelaide Football Club spent $1 million five years ago upgrading the Crows Shed and continues to pay for maintenance of this facility, which would not be available for public use if not for our significant commitment and the support of the SANFL.”

Views: 62

Rucci at his best, again! Hahahaha what a loser.

 

[Alex99]

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.

IMO if any after match hospitality venue should be altered to accommodate both sets of supporters it should be the tavern. The SANFL should re name to suit all parties.

The Power have Alberton and we have the shed, re name the tavern and the profits go back to the SANFL. Thats a win/win.

 

[Crowked]

Adelaide Football Club to stay put
1 hours, 18 minutes ago | Back

http://afc.com.au/Season2007/News/NewsArticle/tabid/4417/Default.aspx?newsId=40563

Crows chief executive Steven Trigg says the Adelaide Football Club is not moving.

Contrary to a report in The Advertiser this morning, Trigg said the Adelaide Football Club will not build a new administration block on the corner of Frederick Road and West Lakes Boulevard; the SANFL will not take over the current AFC offices; and the current Crows Shed will remain in place for some time to come.

“The Club is assessing its future facility needs for football and for members but there is no plan as yet,” Trigg said.

“If our organisation builds any new facility, at our cost, it will be for our members and fans.

“The Adelaide Football Club spent $1 million five years ago upgrading the Crows Shed and continues to pay for maintenance of this facility, which would not be available for public use if not for our significant commitment and the support of the SANFL.”

Views: 62

What, Rucci making up stories again? Could a member of the media have less cred? I seriously doubt it.

Maybe Rucci should book himself a suite next to Ben Cousins, that substance abuse is clearly getting on top of him.