Adelaide Oval Review

Jello_B

Premiership Player
Joined
Mar 2, 2014
Posts
3,793
Likes
2,524
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
You think, I am sure the SA government when suggested should change legislation to change the SMA set up, it was questioned on what compensation or litigation the SANFL could take if this occurred and would win! As I said they were definetly enticed to move, it has been stated, who offered what to get them to move, maybe its taken 6 months as there is no legal leg to stand on to force a review to take place and its a delicate situation that needs a lot of goodwill from the SANFL!
Sorry Marty I do not understand your post except for the last bit.
In one sense it is delicate, everyone would like a win win. In this scenario SANFL and AFL teams all have enough money to have the greatest likelihood to achieve there objective. PAFC and Crows to have enough money to be in the top tier of footy department spends for winning premierships. SANFL to run a successful local league. In this scenario there does not really need a profit for any party and any excess is invested for the future of all 3. Agree?
In reality there is greed, and all 3 parties will have this, it's natural. I agree that even after this deal, there will likely be a continuing fight for the pot. I can't see the SANFL winning this fight, even with a contract. They should and will succumb, it is in their best interest. They lost, this is not the 50s anymore, times have changed. The SANFL is becoming increasingly irrelevant.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Jello_B

Premiership Player
Joined
Mar 2, 2014
Posts
3,793
Likes
2,524
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
^
That can't seriously be your solution
No not at all, this would be a terrible thing to happen.
I'm just countering an argument that because there is a current contract in place that's it, the SANFL get what they want.
Please don't take the above post as anything other than just describing an extreme (and almost impossible) scenario.
 

*PAF

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Feb 17, 2005
Posts
21,576
Likes
9,399
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
No not at all, this would be a terrible thing to happen.
I'm just countering an argument that because there is a current contract in place that's it, the SANFL get what they want.
Please don't take the above post as anything other than just describing an extreme (and almost impossible) scenario.
Yep, had understood the picture you were trying to paint. Basically stating that there are many possibilities open including ridiculously radical ones. To say there is only one option available is not correct as there are many ways to skin a cat if one needs to.

Anyway I'm with Kane regarding what will probably be the most likely outcome.
 
Joined
Nov 11, 2003
Posts
1,022
Likes
766
Location
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
West Adelaide
Does not necessarily need to be a win in the courts:

Set up media campaigns that discredit the SANFL
Tie up SANFL resources for years in court cases
Discontinue any State/AFL/PAFC/Crows support outside of the Contract
Delay and prevent as much as possible any money going to the SANFL

You can see where I am going, even if the SANFL contract is tight there are other ways to **** them

The overwhelming power is not with the SANFL, the contract may be in their favour but that's not everything. It's time for the SANFL to concede I think. There is nothing wrong with being a servant, and being a secondary local league this is the natural order.

I appreciate your gusto in sticking up for something you believe in, hats off. But the SANFL is a cockroach in the scheme of things.
That shows no understanding of the relationships that need to be maintained between all bodies in Australian football.

As for calling the SANFL a cockroach, I appreciate your loyalty to name-calling without facts, hats off.
 
Joined
Nov 11, 2003
Posts
1,022
Likes
766
Location
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
West Adelaide
Yep, had understood the picture you were trying to paint. Basically stating that there are many possibilities open including ridiculously radical ones. To say there is only one option available is not correct as there are many ways to skin a cat if one needs to.

Anyway I'm with Kane regarding what will probably be the most likely outcome.
I agree, I've said all along the SANFL would have to agree to give the AFL clubs more than is fair to them, not for contractual reasons, but because of AFL and Government pressure.

I also suspect the amounts involved are nowhere near the amounts which would show greed by any party.
 

Jello_B

Premiership Player
Joined
Mar 2, 2014
Posts
3,793
Likes
2,524
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
That shows no understanding of the relationships that need to be maintained between all bodies in Australian football.

As for calling the SANFL a cockroach, I appreciate your loyalty to name-calling without facts, hats off.
Please read the following posts.
There is nothing wrong with a cockroach, they are unfairly maligned. This was not name calling.
I agree, relationships need to be maintained, that's why the SANFL should and will concede. I simply listed one example of how the State/AFL/PAFC/Crows collective could counter if the SANFL choose not to act in good faith and revert to contractual terms, that's all.
 

*PAF

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Feb 17, 2005
Posts
21,576
Likes
9,399
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
I agree, I've said all along the SANFL would have to agree to give the AFL clubs more than is fair to them, not for contractual reasons, but because of AFL and Government pressure.

I also suspect the amounts involved are nowhere near the amounts which would show greed by any party.
Yeah nah on the last part for mine. Too hard to say one way or the other atm.

There are a couple of things that can lead one to think the SANFL is trying too hard to get as much as possible, such as an increased income when they do not pay for stadium maintenance like they would have at AAMI, and the clubs already allow the SMA to take money out for that, plus a number of other concessions built into the total package, but at the end of the day we only have enough knowledge, know enough details, to be dangerous.

It will all come out in the wash after the review. Well, hopefully it will be transparent.

EDIT: Afaik the SANFL have never come out and said why they need more than originally planned. Unless they do that people will see them doing it just because they can, and that will not end up being a good look to say the least.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Nov 11, 2003
Posts
1,022
Likes
766
Location
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
West Adelaide
On the other hand, it could be that the combined weight of the AFL clubs, supported by the Government and a supine media only interested in the AFL, has meant that the SANFL is too easily painted as the villian.

We're a one paper town and their football writer is a Port tragic who isn't interested in anything other than spruiking for those he gets his stories from.

We're also talking of a period of high attendances. It will be interesting to see who bears the major risk if attendances drop.
 

marty36

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 17, 2009
Posts
20,948
Likes
7,401
Location
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Please read the following posts.
There is nothing wrong with a cockroach, they are unfairly maligned. This was not name calling.
I agree, relationships need to be maintained, that's why the SANFL should and will concede. I simply listed one example of how the State/AFL/PAFC/Crows collective could counter if the SANFL choose not to act in good faith and revert to contractual terms, that's all.

So how do you think Foley and the Big D convinced or enticed the SANFL to be part of AO?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

*PAF

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Feb 17, 2005
Posts
21,576
Likes
9,399
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
On the other hand, it could be that the combined weight of the AFL clubs, supported by the Government and a supine media only interested in the AFL, has meant that the SANFL is too easily painted as the villian.

We're a one paper town and their football writer is a Port tragic who isn't interested in anything other than spruiking for those he gets his stories from.

We're also talking of a period of high attendances. It will be interesting to see who bears the major risk if attendances drop.
They are all fair points of view one can have.

The last bit is the interesting one as the deal appears to be overcomplicated, and I do like the fact that in WA all parties seem to have the ability to work together to maximise sponsorship whereas I am not sure that is the case in SA.
 

Malibu#27

Premium Platinum
Joined
Feb 25, 2002
Posts
13,565
Likes
7,942
Location
Barossa Valley
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Port Magpies, Redbacks
So how do you think Foley and the Big D convinced or enticed the SANFL to be part of AO?
Losing 300m of funding to upgrade the tram line and oval probably helps a bit.

Interesting quote from the states favourite ex treasurer below as well
In a bombshell, Foley says the AFL would have shifted the Power to the city regardless of SANFL support to ensure the financially stricken club’s survival.

“Andrew Demetriou took the primary role in getting the SANFL to see sense,” recalled Foley.

“I remember meeting with Mike Fitzpatrick and Andrew a couple of times in Melbourne who revealed to me if the SANFL didn’t come on board they would move Port Adelaide to a semi-developed Adelaide oval"
 
Last edited:

RonSon

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jun 4, 2009
Posts
9,708
Likes
9,095
Location
Ahoy me arteries
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Chelsea, Bluejays, 36'ers, Pistons
So how do you think Foley and the Big D convinced or enticed the SANFL to be part of AO?

By telling them they would be guaranteed funds from AO and be able to sell their land at football park to service their extremely large debt.
 

Jello_B

Premiership Player
Joined
Mar 2, 2014
Posts
3,793
Likes
2,524
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
On the other hand, it could be that the combined weight of the AFL clubs, supported by the Government and a supine media only interested in the AFL, has meant that the SANFL is too easily painted as the villian.

We're a one paper town and their football writer is a Port tragic who isn't interested in anything other than spruiking for those he gets his stories from.

We're also talking of a period of high attendances. It will be interesting to see who bears the major risk if attendances drop.
I agree with your first part. That's where the SANFL being the cockroach becomes a disadvantage.
 

marty36

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 17, 2009
Posts
20,948
Likes
7,401
Location
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
By telling them they would be guaranteed funds from AO and be able to sell their land at football park to service their extremely large debt.

So do you think they would have been advised by the state government and AFL in attempt to ensure they moved that they would receive more than their current $12 million return that they were receiving at AAMI and then signed a deal confirming this?
 
Joined
May 21, 2001
Posts
49,522
Likes
38,516
Location
Floating around the Universe
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Adelaide Crows
On the other hand, it could be that the combined weight of the AFL clubs, supported by the Government and a supine media only interested in the AFL, has meant that the SANFL is too easily painted as the villian.

We're a one paper town and their football writer is a Port tragic who isn't interested in anything other than spruiking for those he gets his stories from.

We're also talking of a period of high attendances. It will be interesting to see who bears the major risk if attendances drop.
No the sanfl has got greedy with the current deal.

If it truly thinks it is a victim, why doesn't it come clean with how much it has made?

Don't kid yourself, as there is a good reason the agreement will be rebalanced.
 

marty36

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 17, 2009
Posts
20,948
Likes
7,401
Location
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Losing 300m of funding to upgrade the tram line and oval probably helps a bit.

Interesting quote from the states favourite ex treasurer below as well

The same article advises that the SANFL needed to be influenced to bring them to the table, wonder what was offered to ensure they came? You obviously don't like trying to answer this because it is so blatantly obvious how the AFL and SA Gov enticed them!
 

Malibu#27

Premium Platinum
Joined
Feb 25, 2002
Posts
13,565
Likes
7,942
Location
Barossa Valley
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Port Magpies, Redbacks
The same article advises that the SANFL needed to be influenced to bring them to the table, wonder what was offered to ensure they came? You obviously don't like trying to answer this because it is so blatantly obvious how the AFL and SA Gov enticed them!
You miss the first part of my post hey

No government funding, no way for sanfl to upgrade the lame duck shit hole.
 

marty36

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 17, 2009
Posts
20,948
Likes
7,401
Location
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
You miss the first part of my post hey

No government funding, no way for sanfl to upgrade the lame duck shit hole.

No correct

But do you think the AFL and SA Government played the card that the SANFL will receive a greater return than the $12 Million that they received at AAMI? In an effort to make sure they came to the table, Foley said it was difficult in just getting to talk?
 

Malibu#27

Premium Platinum
Joined
Feb 25, 2002
Posts
13,565
Likes
7,942
Location
Barossa Valley
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Port Magpies, Redbacks
No correct

But do you think the AFL and SA Government played the card that the SANFL will receive a greater return than the $12 Million that they received at AAMI? In an effort to make sure they came to the table, Foley said it was difficult in just getting to talk?
Given the SANFL themselves said they only wanted status quo - either the answer is no or the SANFL has been lying.

But I'd think knowing you can't upgrade your stadium, are carrying debt and dropping crowds status quo is a good thing - especially when you get to keep the land and sell as needed
 

RonSon

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jun 4, 2009
Posts
9,708
Likes
9,095
Location
Ahoy me arteries
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Chelsea, Bluejays, 36'ers, Pistons
So do you think they would have been advised by the state government and AFL in attempt to ensure they moved that they would receive more than their current $12 million return that they were receiving at AAMI and then signed a deal confirming this?

We know the SANFL jumped at the chance of reducing their huge debt by freeing up the land at West Lakes for sale by moving AFL games to the city, debt which they would not have been able to reduce otherwise.


We are led to believe that what happens with the rest of the deal is still being worked out at the moment until the announcement is made.
 
Joined
Nov 11, 2003
Posts
1,022
Likes
766
Location
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
West Adelaide
No the sanfl has got greedy with the current deal.

If it truly thinks it is a victim, why doesn't it come clean with how much it has made?

Don't kid yourself, as there is a good reason the agreement will be rebalanced.
You keep regurgitating this 'greedy SANFL' with no evidence whatsoever.

I said long before you that the split will be changed.

Due to pressure. nothing to do with your silly 'greed' call.
 
Top Bottom