Stadiium Australia contract?

Remove this Banner Ad

Bomber Spirit

Norm Smith Medallist
Dec 1, 2001
5,476
11
Sydney
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Essendon
I seem to recall seeing somewhere that the AFL has a contract that states that if Sydney qualify for any home finals the first one every season has to be played at Stadium Australia.
Is that correct? If so, are we headed towards a breach of that contract in order to satisfy the MCC contract?
 
Bomber Spirit said:
I seem to recall seeing somewhere that the AFL has a contract that states that if Sydney qualify for any home finals the first one every season has to be played at Stadium Australia.
Is that correct? If so, are we headed towards a breach of that contract in order to satisfy the MCC contract?

That's a good point, although i'd suggest that it's merely an exclusivity clause for finals in Sydney, not whether the Swans earn a final.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Bomber Spirit said:
I seem to recall seeing somewhere that the AFL has a contract that states that if Sydney qualify for any home finals the first one every season has to be played at Stadium Australia.
Is that correct? If so, are we headed towards a breach of that contract in order to satisfy the MCC contract?
Good thought, but the answer is no. The MCC contract was negotiated long before the Stade de Oz contract, meaning the AFL could not have entered into an arrangement with Stade de Oz which conflicted with an existing contractual arrangement.
 
littleduck said:

Probably cause it's has been designed so that the players and umpires can hear the crowd, the Goldspinks a ********er chant will go down big time from Sat nite
 
Bomber Spirit said:
I seem to recall seeing somewhere that the AFL has a contract that states that if Sydney qualify for any home finals the first one every season has to be played at Stadium Australia.
Is that correct? If so, are we headed towards a breach of that contract in order to satisfy the MCC contract?

Wrong. Under the MCC contract they won't qualify for a home final.
 
littleduck said:
Good thought, but the answer is no. The MCC contract was negotiated long before the Stade de Oz contract, meaning the AFL could not have entered into an arrangement with Stade de Oz which conflicted with an existing contractual arrangement.
If you're suggesting that the AFL wouldn't enter into a bad conceived contract because they are too professional, then maybe you should work for the AFL
 
littleduck said:
The reality is it was designed for AFL as an afterthought thanks to AFL pitching in a few mil.

Hardly an afterthought. You dont just turn fixed stands into move-able ones by cutting a few girders. :D
Its much better as an AFL ground than as a thugby or soccer ground. But still not the best at either.

It was always going have an oval configuration. No new ground could survive in Sydney unless it can play AFL and Cricket, as well as the lesser sports.
 
grayham said:
Hardly an afterthought. You dont just turn fixed stands into move-able ones by cutting a few girders. :D
Its much better as an AFL ground than as a thugby or soccer ground. But still not the best at either.
Then why did the AFL have to pitch in to ensure the oval conversion for the ground?

It was always going have an oval configuration. No new ground could survive in Sydney unless it can play AFL and Cricket, as well as the lesser sports.
Sneakily projecting a Melbourne view of the world onto Sydney now are we.. :p
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

littleduck said:
Then why did the AFL have to pitch in to ensure the oval conversion for the ground?
The AFL likes to have an interest in all its grounds, so it can avoid a super-league type scenario, and have a greater say in scheduling.

A wise investment considering it was paid off in 2 games last year.
Sneakily projecting a Melbourne view of the world onto Sydney now are we.. :p

No, Stadium Australia said the same thing.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top