Why is this ground deemed as suitable for AFL? It's dimensions are totally wrong. It's cosmetically marked to look in proportion but it is not even to a standard. With ANZ and now a GWS ground available why is the SCG thought of as even option.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
AFLW 2024 - Round 9 - Indigenous Round - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Why is this ground deemed as suitable for AFL? It's dimensions are totally wrong. It's cosmetically marked to look in proportion but it is not even to a standard. With ANZ and now a GWS ground available why is the SCG thought of as even option.
Why is this ground deemed as suitable for AFL? It's dimensions are totally wrong. It's cosmetically marked to look in proportion but it is not even to a standard. With ANZ and now a GWS ground available why is the SCG thought of as even option.
SCG - 161 by 146 (fence to fence)Why is this ground deemed as suitable for AFL? It's dimensions are totally wrong. It's cosmetically marked to look in proportion but it is not even to a standard. With ANZ and now a GWS ground available why is the SCG thought of as even option.
You cannot be seriousWhy is this ground deemed as suitable for AFL? It's dimensions are totally wrong. It's cosmetically marked to look in proportion but it is not even to a standard. With ANZ and now a GWS ground available why is the SCG thought of as even option.
Why is this ground deemed as suitable for AFL? It's dimensions are totally wrong. It's cosmetically marked to look in proportion but it is not even to a standard. With ANZ and now a GWS ground available why is the SCG thought of as even option.
It will also be extended again, when the Noble and Bradman Stands behind the city goals are replaced in the next round of development.
Stupid thread but...
Is that official?
That would ruin a grand old sporting venue.
Why didn't they make it MCG size when they built the new stand?They gained an extra 5 meters when the new stand was built, which now means they are legimate 50 meter arc's.
The SCG is now less than 10 meters shorter than Etihad. Hardly a big issue.
It will also be extended again, when the Noble and Bradman Stands behind the city goals are replaced in the next round of development.
We have to play on Subi when we come to Perth and don't complain so neither should you.
DST
WHY?
it'd be like knocking down Subi. wouldn't lose much and the improvement would be more than worth it.
Why is this ground deemed as suitable for AFL? It's dimensions are totally wrong. It's cosmetically marked to look in proportion but it is not even to a standard. With ANZ and now a GWS ground available why is the SCG thought of as even option.
Aren't they the old style stands from yesteryear?
Happy to be wrong.
They can and should knock down Subi tomorrow.
Disgraceful venue.
Aren't they the old style stands from yesteryear?
Happy to be wrong.
They can and should knock down Subi tomorrow.
Disgraceful venue.
Oh yeah..they even have listening devices in there in case someone even jokes about it. One of the national trusts favorites.
These aren't going anywhere. I think they might be protected.
It seems you are several years behind the news out west. The SCG was redeveloped more than 2 years ago, and the playing surface was significantly increased. The 50m arc is genuine (google earth it if you don't believe).To help you out:
Playing surface 161m long 146.2m wide.
Etihad: 159.5m long 128.8m wide.
That makes the SCG 15% larger than Etihad.
Nice troll fail. :diamond:
http://majorprojects.planning.nsw.gov.au/files/25538/Noble_Bradman - Environmental Assessment .pdf
"....with an increase in maximum patron capacity to 48,000."
"...lengthen the playing field by three metres at its northern end to achieve a field length for AFL of 156 metres"
A magnificent venue and to become an even better one