Analysis Stadium deals - what, how, when - why we need a new one and the SA footy paradigm shift happening

[tribey]

What did McLachlan achieve that wouldn't have been achieved anyway?

Port Adelaide were driving it because we were literally on our deathbed if nothing changed.
Demetriou saw flagging support for the AFL clubs in SA and knew that AAMI was an issue, and also wanted some power to be taken away from the SANFL
Rann and Foley wanted a project to revitalise the CBD and were willing to spend a lot of money to get it done.

McLachlan allowed it all to happen and handled his part of the negotiations admirably, but he was handed an $85,000,000 get out of jail free card in regards to the debt, given a shiny new $575,000,000 world class stadium, and all he had to do was give the Oval to football for 6 months of the year.

You're acting like McLachlan was some sort of genius who was the architect of the whole thing. He was in a very fortunate place at a very fortunate time and took full advantage.

I'm sure we'd all agree on one thing.

Fos Williams and Gavin Wanganeen's names should be taken off the stand immediately and replaced by those of Ian McLachlan and whoever's running the Zoo.

 

[Kwality]

What did McLachlan achieve that wouldn't have been achieved anyway?

Port Adelaide were driving it because we were literally on our deathbed if nothing changed.
Demetriou saw flagging support for the AFL clubs in SA and knew that AAMI was an issue, and also wanted some power to be taken away from the SANFL
Rann and Foley wanted a project to revitalise the CBD and were willing to spend a lot of money to get it done.

McLachlan allowed it all to happen and handled his part of the negotiations admirably, but he was handed an $85,000,000 get out of jail free card in regards to the debt, given a shiny new $575,000,000 world class stadium, and all he had to do was give the Oval to football for 6 months of the year.

You're acting like McLachlan was some sort of genius who was the architect of the whole thing. He was in a very fortunate place at a very fortunate time and took full advantage.

I dont overestimate McLachlan ran with the idea, not anyone else, nobody ... & you say he allowed it to happen - happy to leave it at that.

McLachlan started in 1996, Demetriou came to the party in 2007, it was a reality for 2014.

Living in Vic it appears the SA economy is a winner, so are footy & cricket fans.

PS your description of McLachlan cynically as a genius was not my intention, just want to see credit given where its due & I say your attempts to denigrate his efforts reflect a misunderstanding/ignorance of what happened, hung with the financial fiasco that have cast a shadow over the benefits that will hold your club in good stead for years to come.

 

[El_Scorcho]

Credit where credit is due, McLachlan didn't look a gift horse in the mouth.

 

[DSL64]

I dont overestimate McLachlan ran with the idea, not anyone else, nobody ... & you say he allowed it to happen - happy to leave it at that.

McLachlan started in 1996, Demetriou came to the party in 2007, it was a reality for 2014.

Living in Vic it appears the SA economy is a winner, so are footy & cricket fans.

PS your description of McLachlan cynically as a genius was not my intention, just want to see credit given where its due & I say your attempts to denigrate his efforts reflect a misunderstanding/ignorance of what happened, hung with the financial fiasco that have cast a shadow over the benefits that will hold your club in good stead for years to come.

Living in Vic it appears you have no ****ing idea about SA sporting politics.
I suggests you quit while you're behind and before you make yourself look like an even bigger tool...

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

What did McLachlan achieve that wouldn't have been achieved anyway?

Port Adelaide were driving it because we were literally on our deathbed if nothing changed.
Demetriou saw flagging support for the AFL clubs in SA and knew that AAMI was an issue, and also wanted some power to be taken away from the SANFL
Rann and Foley wanted a project to revitalise the CBD and were willing to spend a lot of money to get it done.

McLachlan allowed it all to happen and handled his part of the negotiations admirably, but he was handed an $85,000,000 get out of jail free card in regards to the debt, given a shiny new $575,000,000 world class stadium, and all he had to do was give the Oval to football for 6 months of the year.

You're acting like McLachlan was some sort of genius who was the architect of the whole thing. He was in a very fortunate place at a very fortunate time and took full advantage.

McLachlan convinced 80% - needed at least 75% of the old fuddy duddies to vote for change - no mean feat in Adelaide. He was working on this for a decade. He was dealing with Port. When the designs for the western stand were being finalized he organised for sketches to be drawn up and basic plans for a 50,000 seat arena. That's back in 2006-2007, well over 2 years before Rann made his big announcement in December 2009 that the parties had until August 2010 to sign off on an agreement.

Rann, Foley and Conlon deserve the most praise. Rann told Andy D that if he could get those people to talk - Saca and Sanfl - then come back and we can talk money, Foley found the money and kicked some heads along the way for people to see the light and Conlon made sure the thing was designed and built properly and on budget and on time, after getting the legislation finally thru the upper house. Rod Hook head of the DPTI deserves a fair bit of praise as well. Andy D deserves his share along with Fitzpatrick who threatened to move Port to the 2010 AO design if the SANFL didnt see the light about Footy Park. Plus a few of Port's board and execs deserve some praise.

But in the end there was and is Glory Enough For All - the name of the great doco drama I saw in Canada 25 years ago about the discovery of Insulin in the 1920's by Dr Fred Banting, who at 32 years of age when given the Noble Prize, to this day is still the youngest recipient ever of the Medicine prize. But he needed his assistant Charles Best who wasnt given the prize, he needed the tough hard, head of medical department JJR MacLeod to raise money, who sold it like he knew everything that was going on, despite never doing any lab work on it, but MacLeod was given half the Noble prize and when he found out Banting had shared his Noble prize monies with Best - he shared his half with Collip the biochemist he told Banting to work with on the project to help extract and produce enough quantity of the insulin from the pancreas. In the end they deserved to all share the spoils, despite only 2 officially getting the Noble prize. Same story here. I dont think McLachlan was Banting but he was one of the others who deserved to share the glory - because without him it wouldnt have been achieved.

 

[raptalia]

REH is right...
No one group can lay claim to the credit for the introduction of AFL Football to Adelaide Oval. Sure the PAFC was a driving force and the work of Brett Duncanson and Mark Haysman, to name two, cannot be underestimated and they deserve credit for their initiatives. However, to contend that the SACA and the SANFL did not play any meaningful part in the Adelaide Oval's re development and the introduction of AFL football to Adelaide Oval is fanciful claptrap. Well before Duncanson and Haysman were pushing for us to play at Adelaide Oval the likes of Rob Gerard and Ian McLachlan were pushing publically for the AFL to play at Adelaide Oval. True, their version did not involve the SANFL or the PAFC and AFC but a concept was there none the less and the AFL was made aware of the advantages for the game and the Oval's future. To follow on from REH's previous post, do any of us honestly believe that the PAFC could have got the job done without the SACA and SANFL supporting the idea? I am no fan of the SANFL or the SACA but let's not go overboard, we need to give some credit where it is due.

Some of our supporters who consistently want to turn the Adelaide Oval into a 'we' and 'them' argument are as bad as those they criticise. It is just the sort of mentality used by the SANFL clubs every time AFL is mentioned. If the SANFL and the SACA want to bask in the limelight let them, just as long as the PAFC gets a fair return for it's efforts. The Port Adelaide Football Club is playing at one of the best stadiums in Australia. Sit back and enjoy it!

 

[Kwality]

Living in Vic it appears you have no ******* idea about SA sporting politics.
I suggests you quit while you're behind and before you make yourself look like an even bigger tool...

For your information its not about politics, its historical fact - lived in SA , barracked for Port ... check out what your more learned brethren have posted.

 

[Andre]

REH is right...
No one group can lay claim to the credit for the introduction of AFL Football to Adelaide Oval. Sure the PAFC was a driving force and the work of Brett Duncanson and Mark Haysman, to name two, cannot be underestimated and they deserve credit for their initiatives. However, to contend that the SACA and the SANFL did not play any meaningful part in the Adelaide Oval's re development and the introduction of AFL football to Adelaide Oval is fanciful claptrap. Well before Duncanson and Haysman were pushing for us to play at Adelaide Oval the likes of Rob Gerard and Ian McLachlan were pushing publically for the AFL to play at Adelaide Oval. True, their version did not involve the SANFL or the PAFC and AFC but a concept was there none the less and the AFL was made aware of the advantages for the game and the Oval's future. To follow on from REH's previous post, do any of us honestly believe that the PAFC could have got the job done without the SACA and SANFL supporting the idea? I am no fan of the SANFL or the SACA but let's not go overboard, we need to give some credit where it is due.

Some of our supporters who consistently want to turn the Adelaide Oval into a 'we' and 'them' argument are as bad as those they criticise. It is just the sort of mentality used by the SANFL clubs every time AFL is mentioned. If the SANFL and the SACA want to bask in the limelight let them, just as long as the PAFC gets a fair return for it's efforts. The Port Adelaide Football Club is playing at one of the best stadiums in Australia. Sit back and enjoy it!

No one group can claim credit, but there's a difference between agreeing to the move under duress (the SANFL and Crows), seeing it as a solution to you're inflicted problem (SACA and their debt) and seeing it as a means to simultaneously re-engage with your supporters and get out from under a parasitic hand (Port). Whilst all parties needed to be on board, on a continuum of who deserves praise for getting it done it's:
Port / SA government / AFL > SACA > Adelaide > SANFL.

 

[raptalia]

No one group can claim credit, but there's a difference between agreeing to the move under duress (the SANFL and Crows), seeing it as a solution to you're inflicted problem (SACA and their debt) and seeing it as a means to simultaneously re-engage with your supporters and get out from under a parasitic hand (Port). Whilst all parties needed to be on board, on a continuum of who deserves praise for getting it done it's:
Port / SA government / AFL > SACA > Adelaide > SANFL.

You said in the first six words Andre then it was all downhill. We need to remember that we had a few debts of our own and it was the SANFL who bailed us out, we should not forget that and we must resolve not to let that happen again. At the risk of sounding like a Coach at half time we can do that by turning up to every game regardless of the opposition and the timing. This schoolboy pissing contest is becoming tiresome and it is time for us to move on and leave the SANFL and the feeder clubs like Norwood, North and Centrals where they belong - in the feeder league.

If you think the PAFC, AFC and the AFL carry more weight than the the SA Government, SACA and the SANFL you have misread the situation. Whether we like it or not the SACA and the SANFL have control of the Adelaide Oval via the SMA and we have to live with that. Living with it is where people like Keith Thomas and David Koch come into play. It may make us feel better to shitcan the SANFL but it does not change the fact that we have to work with them.

 

[*PAF]

Whilst they are valid points the question that also needs to be asked is: if Haysman had been a SANFL yes man, would've one club plus the move to AO happened?
IMO probably not.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Whilst they are valid points the question that also needs to be asked is: if Haysman had been a SANFL yes man, would've one club plus the move to AO happened?
IMO probably not.

If Haysman had been a SANFL yes man - I think the AFL would have stepped in like they did with Swans and Bears in the early 1990's because we would have been on the verge of going under long before the June 2011 financial rescue package.

 

[*PAF]

And the result could have been the creation of a Crows lite and not necessarily Port.

 

[El_Scorcho]

You said in the first six words Andre then it was all downhill. We need to remember that we had a few debts of our own and it was the SANFL who bailed us out, we should not forget that and we must resolve not to let that happen again. At the risk of sounding like a Coach at half time we can do that by turning up to every game regardless of the opposition and the timing.

The #carn to end all #carns mate.

We had debts because they were thrust upon us by conditions that didn't allow us to bank money when we were at the top and didn't allow us any leeway in the worst stadium deal in the league when we were at the bottom.

 

[Andre]

The #carn to end all #carns mate.

We had debts because they were thrust upon us by conditions that didn't allow us to bank money when we were at the top and didn't allow us any leeway in the worst stadium deal in the league when we were at the bottom.

This by 200%. Paying our debts. Taking money we generated, then handing back scraps. And then denigrating us for it.

 

[raptalia]

The #carn to end all #carns mate.

We had debts because they were thrust upon us by conditions that didn't allow us to bank money when we were at the top and didn't allow us any leeway in the worst stadium deal in the league when we were at the bottom.

Unbelievable, talk about externalising your problems.

Why we had a debt is not the point. Whatever the reason we incurred the debts and without the SANFL we would have been history, we have to live with it. The Crows had the same stadium deal but they got the crowds and had no significant debt. I was at AAMI to see us beat Sydney in 2012 as were 14,000 others. That crowd is not the sole reason for our debt but it is a good example and we only have ourselves to blame.

I have no time for the SANFL's but it is not their fault alone that we were at the bottom we have to accept some of the responsibility.

Get on with life mate, enjoy the Adelaide Oval. What does it matter if the SANFL big wigs want to name stands after themselves or run laps before the game as long as we win the ****ing game?

 

[Papa G]

Battered Wife Syndrome.

 

[El_Scorcho]

Without the SANFL since 1997 we would now be swimming in our giant vault of money like Scrooge McDuck.

 

[tribey]

The same SANFL that created a rival club that took the state colours, the city name and a derivative of the state mascot.

The same SANFL that allowed that club to cover the supposedly 'neutral' Football Park with its facilities and branding.

The same SANFL that forced us to divorce the Magpies operations and exile them to Ethelton at massive financial and cultural cost.

The same SANFL that demanded 80% of our net profits to 2001.

The same SANFL that handed back a minuscule percentage of the revenues we'd generated for it from 1997-2009, let alone 1877-1996, and called it "handouts" and "reinvestment" while blaming us for all their unrelated debt.

I could go on.

 

[TeeKray]

There is no defence to the SANFL's bleeding dry of our accounts at Football Park from '97-'13. They were nothing more than a completely unnecessary middle man. We could've run a more profitable football club off our own bat playing games at Alberton.

 

[El_Scorcho]

I could probably get over the long term SANFL drain on us to the point of us almost falling over as a club if it wasn't actively still occurring.

Wait a few years until we're back down the ladder and we'll see whether the SANFL is still an issue or not.

 

[Pedro59]

The same SANFL that created a rival club that took the state colours, the city name and a derivative of the state mascot.

The same SANFL that allowed that club to cover the supposedly 'neutral' Football Park with its facilities and branding.

The same SANFL that forced us to divorce the Magpies operations and exile them to Ethelton at massive financial and cultural cost.

The same SANFL that demanded 80% of our net profits to 2001.

The same SANFL that handed back a minuscule percentage of the revenues we'd generated for it from 1997-2009, let alone 1877-1996, and called it "handouts" and "reinvestment" while blaming us for all their unrelated debt.

I could go on.

The same SANFL that stopped us getting in first and actively encouraged if not initiated a lot of media hate
Which alone friggen kept our crowds down

One question

If the crows has constantly had an advertiser and a 5AA cough Cornes Rowie etc constantly usurping them everyday in a state wide media platform AND were sucking up to Port daily

That fact alone I firmly believe would have changed dramatically the crowd ratio meaning profit ration between the two clubs

Can't believe a Port supporter is only starting his conversation with Oh we were in debt and by golly we are lucky the good ol SANFL bailed us ( with our own friggen money by the way !!!!!)

 

[finbarr]

Graham Cornes and Ken Cunningham precipitated the decline in Showdown crowds. It was their on-air hysteria over "bad behaviour" and the "unsafe" environment for Crows fans that began the massive downward spiral in crowds. Years later Cornes would openly point the finger at our club for "Constantly trashing Footy Park" as the reason for the stadium's fall from grace, but he was as culpable as any. Dick head.

 

[Andre]

Graham Cornes and Ken Cunningham precipitated the decline in Showdown crowds. It was their on-air hysteria over "bad behaviour" and the "unsafe" environment for Crows fans that began the massive downward spiral in crowds. Years later Cornes would openly point the finger at our club for "Constantly trashing Footy Park" as the reason for the stadium's fall from grace, but he was as culpable as any. Dick head.

And yet they are silent on that per 1000 supporters the bovines got more evicted then we do.

 

[RonSon]

And yet they are silent on that per 1000 supporters the bovines got more evicted then we do.

My girlfriend has worked for the SMA from day one and it is roundly accepted by the service staff that the crow home crowds are the worst to deal with.

The supporters at the recent world cup games were the loudest and most boisterous, but were still polite and good natured to deal with, unlike crow fans.

 

[CharlieKelly]

My girlfriend has worked for the SMA from day one and it is roundly accepted by the service staff that the crow home crowds are the worst to deal with.

The supporters at the recent world cup games were the loudest and most boisterous, but were still polite and good natured to deal with, unlike crow fans.

oh yeah, definitely most demanding, tell you how to do your job (I know how to make a portagaff, **** off! I don't come into your workplace and knock the sailors ***** out your mouth), loads of them treat it like a social occasion, whereas Port supporters are there to watch the game