Adelaide Oval Review

[footy4ever]

Now now. That us an exaggeration if I've ever heard one.
Whilst there might be a few who think otherwise not many BF posters would think that Danger wouldn't make the Magpies starting team. Argh argh.

You need to spend more time on the port board.

 

[*PAF]

You need to spend more time on the port board.

I did use a smilie.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

You need to spend more time on the port board.

But his home is here

 

[*PAF]

But his home is here

 

[Concussion]

More than I could say Cam but Grand Final 2014 drew about 38,000.

Would SANFL games work as curtain raisers to AFL games at AO?

They could, but how much do teams, SANFL make from them. That is a whole can of worms that would need to be opened.....arrrgh

 

[1970crow]

One of the key happenings is that right in the middle of its most important negotiation for 20 years, the SMA had one of its SANFL representative board members replaced. It doesn't matter that the replacement is an ex AFC director, but it is a clear sign that a different outcome than where they were headed was required.

 

[marty36]

One of the key happenings is that right in the middle of its most important negotiation for 20 years, the SMA had one of its SANFL representative board members replaced. It doesn't matter that the replacement is an ex AFC director, but it is a clear sign that a different outcome than where they were headed was required.

Could have come with idea's probably but one will not out vote or influence 7, especially when looking at who the other 7 are!

 

[1970crow]

Could have come with idea's probably but one will not out vote or influence 7, especially when looking at who the other 7 are!

4 of them are saca reps. Although, if your implication is correct, then what's the point of the change. Just a political ploy to be seen doing something?

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Could have come with idea's probably but one will not out vote or influence 7, especially when looking at who the other 7 are!

Bit like some suggested roo as 1 wouldn't have much influence on the crows' board

 

[1970crow]

Bit like some suggested roo as 1 wouldn't have much influence on the crows' board

Marty may not be aware that Roo is on our board mate .

 

[marty36]

Bit like some suggested roo as 1 wouldn't have much influence on the crows' board

No, but both the SACA and SANFL are a pretty stubborn organisations with some very experienced and knowledgable people in charge!!!!! They wont be railroaded into anything if history tells us anything!

 

[redandblack]

One of the key happenings is that right in the middle of its most important negotiation for 20 years, the SMA had one of its SANFL representative board members replaced. It doesn't matter that the replacement is an ex AFC director, but it is a clear sign that a different outcome than where they were headed was required.

Love it. Another conspiracy theory.

I presume you mean Leigh Whicker, whose retirement was known months ago.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

No, but both the SACA and SANFL are a pretty stubborn organisations with some very experienced and knowledgable people in charge!!!!! They wont be railroaded into anything if history tells us anything!

Bit like neither would be railroaded into joining forces at Adelaide oval...

Anything is possible!

 

[marty36]

Bit like neither would be railroaded into joining forces at Adelaide oval...

Anything is possible!

Too many financial benefits with the fact the SA Government and AFL offered them the world, in which they had a lot of non negotiables to agree to the move. Wandering how many of the non negotiables will be discussed no doubt one would have been an increase on the existing return of $12 million for them to move!

 

[1970crow]

Love it. Another conspiracy theory.

I presume you mean Leigh Whicker, whose retirement was known months ago.

Fair enough, you're probably right. Would be nothing in it. You can rest assured that it is 100% not related to the review itself. As you say, everyone knew his time was up month's ago.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Too many financial benefits with the fact the SA Government and AFL offered them the world, in which they had a lot of non negotiables to agree to the move. Wandering how many of the non negotiables will be discussed no doubt one would have been an increase on the existing return of $12 million for them to move!

Before it became public, most would never have thought that the saca & Sanfl would come back together. It took 3rd parties to make it happen. Don't kid yourself by rewriting history like it was a given...

 

[marty36]

Before it became public, most would never have thought that the saca & Sanfl would come back together. It took 3rd parties to make it happen. Don't kid yourself by rewriting history like it was a given...

How did those third parties make it happen, is probably the most important question of all, what was guaranteed for it to bring the whole deal together, and to not think financial gain wasn't at the forefront is ignorant

 

[redandblack]

Fair enough, you're probably right. Would be nothing in it. You can rest assured that it is 100% not related to the review itself. As you say, everyone knew his time was up month's ago.

Fair enough. Whicker's departure was known ages ago.

His replacement, though, is almost certainly with an eye on the relationship with the AFL clubs, agreed.

Nothing much to do with the review. though, as he wouldn't have been involved in that, except as 1 vote of 4 at the end.

 

[marty36]

Fair enough. Whicker's departure was known ages ago.

His replacement, though, is almost certainly with an eye on the relationship with the AFL clubs, agreed.

Nothing much to do with the review. though, as he wouldn't have been involved in that, except as 1 vote of 4 at the end.

Its actually one in eight regardless that there are SACA delegates each vote counts equally

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

How did those third parties make it happen, is probably the most important question of all, what was guaranteed for it to bring the whole deal together, and to not think financial gain wasn't at the forefront is ignorant

Google Adelaide oval & you will soon find out the influence of both Foley & ex-fat controller to make it happen.

If left to the sanfl to negotiate with the saca, we would still be playing afl at footy park!

Ps. Happy for you to run a poll as to whom of us is ignorant

 

[marty36]

Google Adelaide oval & you will soon find out the influence of both Foley & ex-fat controller to make it happen.

If left to the sanfl to negotiate with the saca, we would still be playing afl at footy park!

Agreed

But what was offered and guaranteed by Foley and the Ex Fat Controller to get the SANFL and SACA to agree, it appears the SACA had $89 Million reasons to jump, the SANFL on the other hand were earning $12 mill a year from AAMI do you think the sweetener was to replace that and gain some uplift which would have been offered by the SA Government and AFL?

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Agreed

But what was offered and guaranteed by Foley and the Ex Fat Controller to get the SANFL and SACA to agree, it appears the SACA had $89 Million reasons to jump, the SANFL on the other hand were earning $12 mill a year from AAMI do you think the sweetener was to replace that and gain some uplift which would have been offered by the SA Government and AFL?

Surely you don't want me to repeat what I & others have already posted on this thread numerous times?

Guaranteed rezoning of west lakes.
higher returns at Adelaide oval.
No need to invest in footy park upgrade needed as sa government paid for new stadium.

 

[marty36]

Surely you don't want me to repeat what I & others have already posted on this thread numerous times?

Guaranteed rezoning of west lakes.
higher returns at Adelaide oval.
No need to invest in footy park upgrade needed as sa government paid for new stadium.

Love the second one and most important, if we can believe what we here the SANFL received an increase of $2.9 Million which you would have to consider the higher return, wouldn't you. How much is a fair higher return to receive that was obviously offered to them by the State Government and AFL. If they have received one million maybe 1.5 more than was expected I am all for the big stick coming out and sharing that between the two clubs. But going on most posters they want either no increase or infact a decrease. Yet you called it they would have been guaranteed this increase by the two major players the AFL and SA Government to get them to agree to the move!

 

[*PAF]

Love the second one and most important, if we can believe what we here the SANFL received an increase of $2.9 Million which you would have to consider the higher return, wouldn't you. How much is a fair higher return to receive that was obviously offered to them by the State Government and AFL. If they have received one million maybe 1.5 more than was expected I am all for the big stick coming out and sharing that between the two clubs. But going on most posters they want either no increase or infact a decrease. Yet you called it they would have been guaranteed this increase by the two major players the AFL and SA Government to get them to agree to the move!

No marty.
For the 16.5 millionth time , what most posters want is for all parties to get an increase.

What they do not want to see is one or the other parties to only receive what was estimated using lower figures and the other to keep the rest, no matter which way around it goes.

Most posters probably think that the clubs deserve a greater share of the increase above and beyond the estimates, but that is way different to what you posted.

 

[marty36]

No marty.
For the 16.5 millionth time , what most posters want is for all parties to get an increase.

What they do not want to see is one or the other parties to only receive what was estimated using lower figures and the other to keep the rest, no matter which way around it goes.

Most probably think that the clubs deserve a greater share of the increase above and beyond the estimates, but that is way different to what you posted.

What

The SANFL was receiving $12 Million at AAMI, as Kane McGoodwin agreed, to get the SANFL to even sit at the same table as the SACA the SA government and AFL had to guarantee a few non negotiables, and not to think an increase on their existing return was a non negotiable is ignorant. So it has been reported they received $14.9 Million an uplift of $2.9 Million on their current position.

I have said all along if they budgeted for say an increase of $1.5 Million give back the $1.4 Million.

Share the $1.4 Million between the parties and all will be happy say $750 to the crows and $650K to the power based on percentages, how would you feel about that?

After all the SA government and AFL obviously offered then some sort of increase or benefit in return for them to move.