Big ugly sight screens.

Remove this Banner Ad

That whole end looks way worse. It's not really a hill anymore when 70% of it is seated and there isn't enough room to get everyone on the little bit of grass above.

It's an unpopular opinion but they ****ed up Adelaide Oval. While I'm sure AAMI Stadium was a hole, and as great as new amenities and a city stadium is for attendees, it has totally lost its quaintness and class. The big stand at the end looks offensively big and they've totally failed to integrate the old feel into the whole ground. You watch it now on tele and it's not the same. Absolute shame.
 
I, and advertisers and television stations, pay a lot of money to watch cricket. Not watch some idiot move around too close. The players get paid a lot more too and so want the best possible performance conditions. After all, this is their workplace.
I think you'll find, even on the hill, cricket spectators in the Don's day had better cricket etiquette than today.

Also...have a look at the size of the sight screen for the Bodyline Test. They were that big until they were moveable. Then there were issues with them not moving. So we reapplied the KISS principle. Worth noting that some other nations have always had larger sight-screens than the one you posted.
Let us all watch cricket.
 

Attachments

  • 5352380-16x9-940x529.jpg
    5352380-16x9-940x529.jpg
    105.9 KB · Views: 50

Log in to remove this ad.

Even just if a bowler is over the wicket to one batsman and around to the other.
I can watch a screen go back and forward at home - it's called a sliding door :p
 
Silent Alarm said:
That whole end looks way worse. It's not really a hill anymore when 70% of it is seated and there isn't enough room to get everyone on the little bit of grass above.

It's an unpopular opinion but they ****** up Adelaide Oval. While I'm sure AAMI Stadium was a hole, and as great as new amenities and a city stadium is for attendees, it has totally lost its quaintness and class. The big stand at the end looks offensively big and they've totally failed to integrate the old feel into the whole ground. You watch it now on tele and it's not the same. Absolute shame.
Click to expand...


You're in the tiniest of minorities
 
Ian Dunross said:
You're in the tiniest of minorities
Click to expand...
I don't care?

It looks like s**t and lost all its quaintness, and those nice old facades behind the grandstands going is a shame.

Channel 7 said it's so amazing and great so everyone followed suit. It's just another massive stadium now, pays no homage to its history. The hill? So what.
 
Silent Alarm said:
I don't care?

It looks like s**t and lost all its quaintness, and those nice old facades behind the grandstands going is a shame.

Channel 7 said it's so amazing and great so everyone followed suit. It's just another massive stadium now, pays no homage to its history. The hill? So what.
Click to expand...

Your ignorance is off the charts
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Silent Alarm said:
Why don't you tell me why I'm wrong then instead of just hurling insults?
Click to expand...
Retaining the original players dressing rooms and the majority of the back of Western stand.
Retaining the famous Victor Richardson gates
Hosting the Sir Donald Bradman museum
Keeping the hill, figs and scoreboard
Statues of football and cricketing greats
Providing a home for the Sheffield Shield

I personally would have liked to have seen the Saca grandstand roofing resemble that of the old stand but in absence of that the people at the Adelaide oval have done a bang up job of recognising its incredible history.
 
Not to mention keeping AO as a cricket ground that hosts big-ticket Ashes and Border-Gavaskar Tests and other major cricket. This is 110% the main way heritage has been retained - by not losing this stuff to other grounds or getting a Bangladesh Test instead of an India one.
 
aCunningPlan said:
Retaining the original players dressing rooms and the majority of the back of Western stand.
Retaining the famous Victor Richardson gates
Hosting the Sir Donald Bradman museum
Keeping the hill, figs and scoreboard
Statues of football and cricketing greats
Providing a home for the Sheffield Shield

I personally would have liked to have seen the Saca grandstand roofing resemble that of the old stand but in absence of that the people at the Adelaide oval have done a bang up job of recognising its incredible history.
Click to expand...
But a lot of stadiums have this, like the MCG, and as great as the 'G is it isn't a pretty ground or aesthetically true to its old stuff. Museums? Statues? Intangible things like games still being played there? The gates are going to be kept at Subi when that's redeveloped too. To me, elements of the stands needed to be kept and they needed to keep some parts of the stadium in trueness to the old one... the red facade, even one of the old stands... to me it's just a massive stadium now and lacks any personality. So what, the hill is there? You barely notice it.
 
Silent Alarm said:
But a lot of stadiums have this, like the MCG, and as great as the 'G is it isn't a pretty ground or aesthetically true to its old stuff. Museums? Statues? Intangible things like games still being played there? The gates are going to be kept at Subi when that's redeveloped too. To me, elements of the stands needed to be kept and they needed to keep some parts of the stadium in trueness to the old one... the red facade, even one of the old stands... to me it's just a massive stadium now and lacks any personality. So what, the hill is there? You barely notice it.
Click to expand...
There is also the rebuilt facade of the old Giffen Stand (players' viewing rooms and SACA Committee Room - they tried to keep the original but wasn't in good enough condition) in the middle of the Western Stands, and the red-brick arches out the back, complete with the ivy.

Should we have kept any elements of the Bradman Stand? Hell no, it was useless for anything but media and even then it wasn't big enough.
The Chappell Stands? Again no - they did the job but again didn't have the required capacity or facilities.
 
hitthepost said:
Should we have kept any elements of the Bradman Stand? Hell no, it was useless for anything but media and even then it wasn't big enough.
The Chappell Stands? Again no - they did the job but again didn't have the required capacity or facilities.
Click to expand...

Prior to the redevelopment Adelaide Oval did have a habit of building very average stands in the 1990's/2000's.

The original Bradman Stand got outdated pretty quickly, and the Chappel stands were just so awfully designed (such as having supports for the roof at the front of the stand)
 
brucetiki said:
Prior to the redevelopment Adelaide Oval did have a habit of building very average stands in the 1990's/2000's.

The original Bradman Stand got outdated pretty quickly, and the Chappel stands were just so awfully designed (such as having supports for the roof at the front of the stand)
Click to expand...
I didn't mind that since the supports in front of the play were relatively thin. I just hated the way it was positioned relative to the light towers, it completely blocked the only replay screen at the time.
 
hitthepost said:
There is also the rebuilt facade of the old Giffen Stand (players' viewing rooms and SACA Committee Room - they tried to keep the original but wasn't in good enough condition) in the middle of the Western Stands, and the red-brick arches out the back, complete with the ivy.

Should we have kept any elements of the Bradman Stand? Hell no, it was useless for anything but media and even then it wasn't big enough.
The Chappell Stands? Again no - they did the job but again didn't have the required capacity or facilities.
Click to expand...
Exactly, walk through the Western stand and you still get a good feel of the original stand and how they have maintained it.
 
aCunningPlan said:
I didn't mind that since the supports in front of the play were relatively thin. I just hated the way it was positioned relative to the light towers, it completely blocked the only replay screen at the time.
Click to expand...

Still such an outdated method of putting up a stand. Stands built in the 50's had more modern building methods than the old Chappell Stands!

Oh yeah, once you got past about a third of the way up you couldn't see the video screen or the scoreboard.
 
brucetiki said:
Still such an outdated method of putting up a stand. Stands built in the 50's had more modern building methods than the old Chappell Stands!

Oh yeah, once you got past about a third of the way up you couldn't see the video screen or the scoreboard.
Click to expand...
We were a quaint bunch in the early 2000s hey! :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top