Away games at Adelaide Oval?

[PrideOf]

http://www.theage.com.au/news/Sport/AFL-scraps-AAMI-Stadium-agreement/2005/07/18/1121538903804.html

So the AFL has pulled the plug on the arrangement. Should we now get mobilised to score an away game early next year and beat the rush?

 

[jo172]

YES

Is there any idea over whether Adelaide Oval members will be able to get into these matches for free a la SANFL or if we have to buy tickets with a discount a la Rugby internationals.

Personally I think it would be a good revenue raiser for a club like the Bulldogs if they played Adelaide or Port because you could guarantee 20,000 - 30, 000 ppl there which is more than their Melbourne attendances and at Adelaide Oval they wouldnt be losing ticketing money due to AFL members going. Hopefully this can be put in to the fixture ASAP

 

[PrideOf]

Is there any idea over whether Adelaide Oval members will be able to get into these matches for free a la SANFL or if we have to buy tickets with a discount a la Rugby internationals.

If the figures being bandied about ($400k-$500k) are true, you can guarantee that you'll end up paying for your ticket (unless, of course, you are a good friend of Ian McLachlan). The SACA will need to recoup every cent it can.

Personally I think it would be a good revenue raiser for a club like the Bulldogs if they played Adelaide or Port because you could guarantee 20,000 - 30, 000 ppl there which is more than their Melbourne attendances and at Adelaide Oval they wouldnt be losing ticketing money due to AFL members going. Hopefully this can be put in to the fixture ASAP

Plus they're guaranteed a huge gate regardless of the turnout.

 

[Alex99]

Good idea and great for the Crows and Power fans to see an away game in there own backyard but why would the Bulldogs or Dees (unless it purely for cash) do it? Yesterday the dogs got smashed and proved beyond reasonable doubt that they cannot play in SA and the Dees are yet should show any skill at AAMI; how will travelling 45 mins into the city change anything.

From a fans point of view it a great move and from a financial incentive it a good move as well but looking from Neil Danaher’s position he would be spitting chips knowing he will have to climb over more hurdles to get them exclusive 4 points that would much needed this season.

 

[Crowked]

The AFL will not program any games there anyway, the agreement is gone but the sentiment remains and AFL will not be played at Adelaide Oval.

As South Australians we should be against the idea anyway. Why would we want football $ leaving SA to prop up the struggling Vic teams? If there is room in the football market here in Adelaide for more AFL football, then bugger the Bulldogs, Kangaroos or who ever, lets have a third Adelaide team and keep the money here in our back yard.

This is a serious matter. If Victorian clubs cant survive on their own merits, they shouldnt be in the bloody comp to start with. They will not get one cent from this little black duck, I'm not giving financial assistance to clubs that arent worthy of existance in the AFL.

 

[Stinger...]

The AFL will not program any games there anyway, the agreement is gone but the sentiment remains and AFL will not be played at Adelaide Oval.

As South Australians we should be against the idea anyway. Why would we want football $ leaving SA to prop up the struggling Vic teams? If there is room in the football market here in Adelaide for more AFL football, then bugger the Bulldogs, Kangaroos or who ever, lets have a third Adelaide team and keep the money here in our back yard.

This is a serious matter. If Victorian clubs cant survive on their own merits, they shouldnt be in the bloody comp to start with. They will not get one cent from this little black duck, I'm not giving financial assistance to clubs that arent worthy of existance in the AFL.

What he said!

I wonder if Leigh Whicker and Co have given Cricket Australia a phone call over the past week or so...??

 

[PrideOf]

Good idea and great for the Crows and Power fans to see an away game in there own backyard but why would the Bulldogs or Dees (unless it purely for cash) do it?

Question and answer in the same sentence.

The AFL will not program any games there anyway, the agreement is gone but the sentiment remains and AFL will not be played at Adelaide Oval.

Once the AFL hears the ker-ching of the money on offer, they'll play a game anywhere. Dubai anyone?

 

[ok.crows]

The AFL will not program any games there anyway, the agreement is gone but the sentiment remains and AFL will not be played at Adelaide Oval.

As South Australians we should be against the idea anyway. Why would we want football $ leaving SA to prop up the struggling Vic teams? If there is room in the football market here in Adelaide for more AFL football, then bugger the Bulldogs, Kangaroos or who ever, lets have a third Adelaide team and keep the money here in our back yard.

This is a serious matter. If Victorian clubs cant survive on their own merits, they shouldnt be in the bloody comp to start with. They will not get one cent from this little black duck, I'm not giving financial assistance to clubs that arent worthy of existance in the AFL.

IMO, the one and only problem with there being so many Victorian clubs is that as a result there are so many games in Melbourne.

If this turns out to be a way of getting games out of Melbourne AND keeping the existing teams with existing supporters viable, then I see nothing wrong with it.

The bonus for Adelaide and Port is that it reduces travel.

It could turn out to be a win-win.

 

[Crowked]

Once the AFL hears the ker-ching of the money on offer, they'll play a game anywhere. Dubai anyone?

The money wont be huge anyway, what can you get at Adelaide Oval? 25,000?, maybe 30,000 if you take the sardine can option. Besides with Dubai we're talking multi millions and international exposure, this is pocket change in comparison and no real gain for the game.

The SANFL will vehemently oppose the move too and if the AFL screws them, all hell will break loose. My mail suggests both the AFC and PAFC are very much against the idea as well, after all why would you hand over some of your market to outsiders? As it is Port struggle to get good crowds, how do you think they will go when there is a Crows away game happening later that night or the next day? Its about as likely as playing international cricket at AAMI, IMO. The AFL will stand by its existing partners in the SANFL, AFC and PAFC as they have much more to lose than gain.

 

[Alex99]

If the SACA have done a feasibility study to have confidence in making more then the reported $400,000- $500,000 offered to the WBFC or the MFC why wouldn’t the SANFL try and match it, depending on the agreement between the SACA and the Victorian AFL sides in question; is the $500,000 simply a one of figure and that’s it? Or are they going to take a percentage of the gate recepts and catering?

The question that has to be asked? Why wouldn’t the SANFL try and match these figures and have an extra game on 1,2 or 3 weeks ends a year.

25,000 Adults @ $19.50 (average adult price) = $487 500
10,000 kids and pensioners @ $12.00 (standard price)= $120,000

35,000 people would generate (at less than average prices) $577 500




Any product or service that would be marketed to a consumer in any market place must have one of two things; a wants and a need, SA footy fans may want and need more football action but do we want to sacrifice our own clubs financial position for the benefit of a few extra games (SANFL as well). The Crows would sell out but match day ticket sales may drop, as there is that extra chance to see them play. Adelaide Oval (SACA) would make it a profitable exercise but I very much doubt that the money would find it way back into the SANFL local competition, if there is a need for this to be done I would be ask they question as to why they don’t try and buy some home games instead.

 

[PrideOf]

The money wont be huge anyway, what can you get at Adelaide Oval? 25,000?, maybe 30,000 if you take the sardine can option.

I don't know that the crowd figures matter. If the SACA guarantees $400k, then the Bullies or North or Melbourne would get $400k.

My mail suggests both the AFC and PAFC are very much against the idea as well, after all why would you hand over some of your market to outsiders? As it is Port struggle to get good crowds, how do you think they will go when there is a Crows away game happening later that night or the next day? Its about as likely as playing international cricket at AAMI, IMO. The AFL will stand by its existing partners in the SANFL, AFC and PAFC as they have much more to lose than gain.

I can see how Port Power would be worried about it - having about 20% of the market tops - rather than us. But I think we'd be confident enough in the state rivalry to suggest that the 3-4% of market share we'd potentially lose (to a non-descript Vic side) would be compensated by the possibility of an easier 4 points.

And don't forget - those thousands on the waiting list would get the chance to see a match live - further increasing our stronghold.

 

[GrandfinalGurus]

The AFL will not program any games there anyway, the agreement is gone but the sentiment remains and AFL will not be played at Adelaide Oval.

As South Australians we should be against the idea anyway. Why would we want football $ leaving SA to prop up the struggling Vic teams? If there is room in the football market here in Adelaide for more AFL football, then bugger the Bulldogs, Kangaroos or who ever, lets have a third Adelaide team and keep the money here in our back yard.

This is a serious matter. If Victorian clubs cant survive on their own merits, they shouldnt be in the bloody comp to start with. They will not get one cent from this little black duck, I'm not giving financial assistance to clubs that arent worthy of existance in the AFL.

Amen to that brother! Thankfully Big Billy Sanders put a stop to the spin coming from the SACA, that this is good for SA footy. Lining the pockets of some other clubs?!?! I think not!!!

 

[Crowked]

IMO, the one and only problem with there being so many Victorian clubs is that as a result there are so many games in Melbourne.

If this turns out to be a way of getting games out of Melbourne AND keeping the existing teams with existing supporters viable, then I see nothing wrong with it.

The bonus for Adelaide and Port is that it reduces travel.

It could turn out to be a win-win.

Sorry mate I disagree. The thing wrong with having so many Victorian teams is it means we have to prop them up all the time. There should never have been so many and times like when Melbourne play home games away in Brisbane, this proposal and the massive bail outs every year proves it.

To get less games in Victoria, teams from Victoria have to be flicked. Just think about the sacrifices SA and WA have made due to the AFL formation, then try and justify why the likes of the Bulldogs, Kangaroos, Saints, ect. still exist.

It would be a win/win OK, Victoria wins twice. They get to keep all their clubs and football hertitage intact, while we pay for it twice, once with our histroy and again with our money going accross the border and into the struggling clubs coffers.

 

[Crowked]

I don't know that the crowd figures matter. If the SACA guarantees $400k, then the Bullies or North or Melbourne would get $400k.



I can see how Port Power would be worried about it - having about 20% of the market tops - rather than us. But I think we'd be confident enough in the state rivalry to suggest that the 3-4% of market share we'd potentially lose (to a non-descript Vic side) would be compensated by the possibility of an easier 4 points.

And don't forget - those thousands on the waiting list would get the chance to see a match live - further increasing our stronghold.

Thats $400,000 South Australian dollars going over to Melbourne to support a club that shouldnt exist in a national competition, at the expense of a potential 3rd team in Adelaide. Why would you want to give money to Victorians? If there is market room, lets have a third team. ******** the Victorians.

 

[PrideOf]

Thats $400,000 South Australian dollars going over to Melbourne to support a club that shouldnt exist in a national competition, at the expense of a potential 3rd team in Adelaide. Why would you want to give money to Victorians? If there is market room, lets have a third team. ******** the Victorians.

Firstly, let me state that I think there are too many Victorian teams. Let me also say that this will not change in the near future IMHO. We're stuck with what we have, so we might as well milk the system for our own advantage. That was the reason for the original post.

Secondly, there is NOT room in Adelaide for a third team. One match at the Oval does not equal enough support for a Norwood/Sturt or a South/Glenelg team for a season. Look at Port Power. Half a billion years of tradition (until they start losing ) and yet they can only half fill Footy Park when they're at the height of their powers.

Thirdly, the rationale behind the SACA going for a match like this is to get better usage out of their facilities and make some money. They won't be making a huge loss here. Plus, if it's a Bullies v Victorian club match, it will attract people who won't be putting money into our club anyway.

 

[Cap]

a 3rd team is a possiblity IMO eventually saying that we would want to scrap over a population of 2million before its even considered


I would say Nothern Suburbds or southern suburbs would be keen (what would stop the Wetern Bulldogs relocating to Elizabeth ?

 

[Crowked]

Firstly, let me state that I think there are too many Victorian teams. Let me also say that this will not change in the near future IMHO. We're stuck with what we have, so we might as well milk the system for our own advantage. That was the reason for the original post.

Secondly, there is NOT room in Adelaide for a third team. One match at the Oval does not equal enough support for a Norwood/Sturt or a South/Glenelg team for a season. Look at Port Power. Half a billion years of tradition (until they start losing ) and yet they can only half fill Footy Park when they're at the height of their powers.

Thirdly, the rationale behind the SACA going for a match like this is to get better usage out of their facilities and make some money. They won't be making a huge loss here. Plus, if it's a Bullies v Victorian club match, it will attract people who won't be putting money into our club anyway.

Firstly I think your right, it wont change soon. However we shouldnt support it, we should make it as difficult as possible for the AFL to justify propping them up. In the long run it will have to change. It might not be a third SA team but maybe a Tassie or NT team. Either has more merit than keeping 10 Victorian teams.

Secondly, I dont really agree. I think a third team in Adelaide would be much more likely to be self sufficient than the 9th and 10th teams in Melbourne.

Thirdly, If it isnt a game that includes either Adelaide or Port, would anyone go? They would have to have one or the other to generate any interest. What would be the point in having the Bulldogs play Melbourne in front of 1326 people?

 

[PrideOf]

a 3rd team is a possiblity IMO eventually saying that we would want to scrap over a population of 2million before its even considered


I would say Nothern Suburbds or southern suburbs would be keen (what would stop the Wetern Bulldogs relocating to Elizabeth ?

I think out of those options, the most feasible from a football POV would be Centrals and Footscray merging or co-locating. Unlikely, but most feasible.

I think the most feasible option from an economic POV would be a southern Adelaide team based out of Noarlunga. It takes 50 mins to get to West Lakes, it's a growing area and a region with its own identity. But this is also unlikely, because when they built Noarlunga Oval in the first place, they did such a bad job of it.

 

[PrideOf]

I think a third team in Adelaide would be much more likely to be self sufficient than the 9th and 10th teams in Melbourne.

Do you think so? A third team would have to either be club-based or a merger. If Norwood (or whoever) went it alone, they'd struggle to fill Norwood Oval let alone AAMI. If there was a merger (the old Norwood-Sturt model for example), they'd be under the same financial pressures as Port Power. There would be a number of old Norwood-Sturt people who would stay with us rather than follow the new entity.

Thirdly, If it isnt a game that includes either Adelaide or Port, would anyone go? They would have to have one or the other to generate any interest. What would be the point in having the Bulldogs play Melbourne in front of 1326 people?

Fair enough, so they'd have to hold it against a big club like Collingwood or Essendon in order to generate some patronage. Then they'd have to attract some of their Victorian supporters to come across for the match - in turn bringing back that money into our economy. I just don't think that the AFL (having its puppet strings pulled by the big victorian clubs) would consent to either us or Port Power being given an 'extra' home game.

 

[Markthirtytwo]

As this was discussed when the SACA first made their move, it's going over old ground.
First the AFL & SANFL have just torn up their agreement that stipulates no football will not be played anywhere else but FP. They would have a fallback position just to tear it up like that. What that is only they know, but they would have some plan B.

Secondly, just think about it people about just one factor in mid winter, and thats car parking.

Your comments would be most interesting.

And no I dont support it either of having AFL games at AO.

 

[Macca19]

I would absolutely LOVE to see an AFL game at Adelaide Oval. Packed crowd, under lights. Would be awesome.

Only problem with Adelaide Oval is that both teams come out the same player race. Doesnt seem to matter the SANFL but the AFL might not like that.

 

[Markthirtytwo]

Just another fact to thow in that the AFL stipulates that the dressing rooms must be a certain dimension and condition. The AO rooms are no where near these and would have to undergo major reconstruction for it to happen.