$100m from Government to be spent on Football Park

[Crow-mo]

Oh, I WISH we could just redevelop Adelaide Oval into an international standard stadium instead of a museum ground.

and that is the heart of the problem.

But further to your other points - Madison Square Garden is in the dead center of Manhattan, and the other international cities are hardly fair comparison to Adelaide.

you know very well MSG is an indoor complex, not a stadium on anything like the scale we're talking about here. the NY Giants do not play at MSG. MSG is the (infinitely superior) version of the entertainment centre, not Adelaide Oval or a large multi-purpose outdoor sports stadium.

You're right, the other international cities may not be fair comparison, but I believe you wanted to play that card. What it does show however, is that not having another major stadium in the centre of town is NOT something that world class cities have to have. It is also not something that is evidence of being out of touch, lacking vision, or being a backwater. Which you'll have noted some of the cranks claiming.

The Meadowlands is the same distance as Footy Park, and just as hard to get to - alnost certainly more so.

Closer in size are other one or two sport towns like Baltimore (Orioles downtown, Ravens within a few minutes) or San Diego.

you make it sound like we need a stadium downtown, just like these other cities of comparable size. Ignoring that we do.

We do have a downtown sports complex, 2 of them.

The issue is that we do not need ANOTHER one.

 

[Crow-mo]

you what is disappointing

the kind of passion for Adealide seen on this thread never seems to make it through to our leaders. Why don't you guys get more involved in running the place ? its not like we are overflowing with passionate people

for ____s sake we have Kevin Foley and Mike Rann

I keep saying this. There is no reason not to politicise this, if you think it will fly.

 

[Crow-mo]

I would suggest that if you read the letters to the editor to our daily rag you will find for every letter of support for a stadium in the CBD there are at least three opposing even spending the paltry $100mil on FP let alone the much larger amount needed to spend to build a new one.

and this is the flipside of the political process.

those damned people who don't agree!

 

[Crow-mo]

A very common sense approach to the whole debate there Johnny.

Plus if KC want to believe everything a politician sprouts then I have some very attractive mangrove land I want to sell him.

hands off, he's already agreed to look over my proposal for investing in chocolate teapots for the miners at roxbury downs.

 

[Crow-mo]

sorry but that’s just a bullshit KG and Cornes argument.

The overlapping of season isn’t a problem in Brisbane (with the lions and the Bulls), Sydney (swans and the blues) or at the MCG with cricket and football. This is able to occur because the organizations are willing to have a little bit of brilliance rather than a lot of crap. The sporting organizations and government know that to have something fantastic they have to compromise, not one sporting organization in South Australia has any idea about compromising.

indeed. which should tell you how hard it will be to get them all onboard for a new stadium.

Where as if the state government simply said – with the historical element to Adelaide oval, that venue can stay and we will preserve the history and heritage associated with that for the next 100 years. The Adelaide oval is an important part of South Australia and Australia sporting landscape. However AAMI Stadium and Hindmarsh Stadium should be bulldozed and we will find a strategy to make one super stadium in the heart of the city – FFS show some leadership and tell both organizations if they don’t take this option they will never get any more funding ever. Even if it take 15 years, devise a strategy and head in that direction.

2 problems with that.

1. the supporters of these elements vote.
2. they could well be sued.

There would be no where else in the world that anyone would find a state with only 1 million people and have some many stadiums that turn into white elephants.

Sporting organizations have to compromise for the betterment of the sporting public. It can and does happen in every other state but Adelaide.

perhaps true. at least rationalising the existing makes sense as an aspirational goal, rather than just adding to the mass. However, the issue of how much power the government has in influencing these organisations is very much up in the air.

 

[KingsCrow]

Where on god's earth is anywhere within that area that would have enough space to build a hospital complex..

Well thats just it. Look how big the area of the proposed hospital is. Condense it, make it multi storey. And finally, I think put it on Wakefield. Many low storey building around the place, along with the SAPOL, Fire Service, Wakefield Hospital, Ambos. Could work. Or we could raise a whole block and put the proposed hospital there.

eh just an idea...

Your really astound me with you reasoning sometimes. There is now where except other, and I repeat again, other park-lands.

____en hell. Have a look at that picture of Adelaide I put up. There is no more areas close to North Terrace, close to the Torrens which can be developed. Its not that hard to understand.

Comprehension is not one of your strengths is is? I said the river bank as the back drop for a South Bank. That is near the Festival Theatre not some backward out the way joint.


Everything you write you think is great. It just is not.

It's plain to see you only read what you what you agree with apparently.

Mark, I don't care what you say. Honestly. You can't even see the fact that placing a huge hospital on such a great potential site is wrong. (Which apart from crow-mo (doesn't even live in Adelaide) you are the only one)

 

[Mego Red]

I would suggest that if you read the letters to the editor to our daily rag you will find for every letter of support for a stadium in the CBD there are at least three opposing even spending the paltry $100mil on FP let alone the much larger amount needed to spend to build a new one.

People in Adelaide complaining about change?? Shocking!

Obviously, this is for two reasons.

1. People thinking spending $100m on an old stadium is a waste of money.
2. People thinking $1m is a lot of money, like it's still 1978 ...

 

[Geoffa32]

People in Adelaide complaining about change?? Shocking!

Obviously, this is for two reasons.

1. People thinking spending $100m on an old stadium is a waste of money.
2. People thinking $1m is a lot of money, like it's still 1978 ...

$100m in a state budget is quite minimal

 

[Mego Red]

I doubt that would work either as both football and cricket seasons now over-lap.

Please google "MCG" for reasons why this is a silly point.

 

[KingsCrow]

hands off, he's already agreed to look over my proposal for investing in chocolate teapots for the miners at roxbury downs.

Roxbury Downs. If its anything like Roxby I think it might be worth a punt.

 

[Mego Red]

only an arts wonk would call into question the relevance of a financial background, on a discussion entitled "$100 M from government to be spent..."

Only an accountant would think a discussion about a future vision for a city should only be discussed in terms of nickels and dimes ...

Leave it to those folks who can actually be innovative and creative and we'll give you a buzz when we need someone to check our sums.

Which, admittedly, WILL need to be checked ...

 

[KingsCrow]

Please google "MCG" for reasons why this is a silly point.

Don't tell me you made Mark look like a dick of himself

 

[Crow-mo]

People in Adelaide complaining about change?? Shocking!

Obviously, this is for two reasons.

1. People thinking spending $100m on an old stadium is a waste of money.
2. People thinking $1m is a lot of money, like it's still 1978 ...

Ok I did laugh, and there is probably a fair amount of truth.

but that's the problem with democracy, its that the majority rules.

Which is why arguing what the people should want, is a different beast to arguing what they do want.

 

[Crow-mo]

Well thats just it. Look how big the area of the proposed hospital is. Condense it, make it multi storey. And finally, I think put it on Wakefield. Many low storey building around the place, along with the SAPOL, Fire Service, Wakefield Hospital, Ambos. Could work. Or we could raise a whole block and put the proposed hospital there.

eh just an idea...



____en hell. Have a look at that picture of Adelaide I put up. There is no more areas close to North Terrace, close to the Torrens which can be developed. Its not that hard to understand.






Mark, I don't care what you say. Honestly. You can't even see the fact that placing a huge hospital on such a great potential site is wrong. (Which apart from crow-mo (doesn't even live in Adelaide) you are the only one)

you should be nicer to Mark, he's about the only one who hasn't tuned you out.

 

[Crow-mo]

Only an accountant would think a discussion about a future vision for a city should only be discussed in terms of nickels and dimes ...

Leave it to those folks who can actually be innovative and creative and we'll give you a buzz when we need someone to check our sums.

Which, admittedly, WILL need to be checked ...

ah but it's not a discussion about a future vision, that's an alleyway the naysayers are trying to steer towards and away from the matter in hand.

 

[KingsCrow]

you should be nicer to Mark, he's about the only one who hasn't tuned you out.

I am beginning to suspect Mark is actually you under alias.

 

[Mego Red]

well how come you can't define it in less than the broadest conceptual terms then? or do you think colloquialisms actually have hard currency? is there any reference to such things in the planning and strategy documentations? any particular priority assigned by the development commission? any zoning?

C'mon - we're on an INTERNET FORUM. The fact that I'm five minutes late for work because I'm engaging in a conversation about a city I don't live in and the place of a hospital/sporting ground - both of which I'll probably never visit - well, surely that should be effort enough ...

And we're talking about a cultural precinct. Not a red light district. Probably not something that needs an act of parliament to write it into law ...

but this ignores that Hospitals are often PART of universities. Or are you now trying to suggest that only certain faculties of a university should be included?

Universities often have Security Offices too. And public toilets. But that doesn't mean every security office, toilet or hospital is part of a university.

Or is it that you are you saying universities should now be excluded from your cultural utopia?

No, they can stay.

 

[Mego Red]

ah but it's not a discussion about a future vision, that's an alleyway the naysayers are trying to steer towards and away from the matter in hand.

You're the only one steering folks into an alley.

And we know what matter you have in your hand ...

 

[Crow-mo]

I am beginning to suspect Mark is actually you under alias.

you're not the sharpest knife in the draw admittedly.

 

[Mego Red]

Everything you write you think is great. It just is not.

C'mon - Kings Crow is pretty great.

No, seriously. I think I would rather have his energy and enthusiam for a better future than the same old Adelaide conservatives sitting round discussing what should be on the Le Cornu's site for another 20 years.

 

[Mego Red]

2 problems with that.

1. the supporters of these elements vote.
2. they could well be sued.

The thing is- when you actually get a leader who has some balls [cough]kennett[cough], these kinds of organizations end up falling enthusiastically into line. People like being led, if they feel the leader actually has something resembling a plan ...

 

[Crow-mo]

C'mon - we're on an INTERNET FORUM. The fact that I'm five minutes late for work because I'm engaging in a conversation about a city I don't live in and the place of a hospital/sporting ground - both of which I'll probably never visit - well, surely that should be effort enough ...

ah look, potato pohtato. I'll give you that.

And we're talking about a cultural precinct. Not a red light district. Probably not something that needs an act of parliament to write it into law ...

that's actually my point. though if you want to legislate about what goes in or out, it needs to be more concrete than that though.

Universities often have Security Offices too. And public toilets. But that doesn't mean every security office, toilet or hospital is part of a university.

No but that doesn't mean we let in the university, but exclude their security office and public toilets from the precinct.

* are we really going that off track and esoteric?

No, they can stay.

but not their toilets.

 

[Crow-mo]

You're the only one steering folks into an alley.

And we know what matter you have in your hand ...

says the guy playing the cultural precinct card

 

[KingsCrow]

you're not the sharpest knife in the draw admittedly.

lol you should do stand up

 

[Crow-mo]

The thing is- when you actually get a leader who has some balls [cough]kennett[cough], these kinds of organizations end up falling enthusiastically into line. People like being led, if they feel the leader actually has something resembling a plan ...

If you try and force the hand of the SACA or SANFL you'll end up in court and lose. badly. almost as badly as when Simon came up with his Duff beer idea.

Building consensus and articulating a vision is absolutely good leadership, not convinced striking up a battle you can't win with the AFL contingent is good leadership.

you'll lose badly in the courts, which will convince the centre/right voters that your not up to it; and the largest community based organisation in the state will be lobbying hard against you. the media will jump on you for wasting time and money.

guaranteed way into opposition.