$450 Million Upgrade for Adelaide Oval - will host AFL/WC

mattwinter · Post by **mattwinter** » Wed Dec 02, 2009 12:48 pm

They can do temporary stands for the World Cup, but they really should have just built stands right around and removed the hills. The historic nature of the Adelaide Oval is gone with this upgrade, keeping the hill as a 'link to the past' is just a silly idea.

They should build a second cricket oval for domestic cricket, move the old scoreboard to it - make it sort of a mini Adelaide oval.

I doubt this will have any problems being FIFA compliant if the MCG is compliant, of course they'll have to do temporary stands instead of the hill.

gyfox · Post by **gyfox** » Wed Dec 02, 2009 1:02 pm

mattwinter wrote:They can do temporary stands for the World Cup, but they really should have just built stands right around and removed the hills. The historic nature of the Adelaide Oval is gone with this upgrade, keeping the hill as a 'link to the past' is just a silly idea.

They should build a second cricket oval for domestic cricket, move the old scoreboard to it - make it sort of a mini Adelaide oval.

I doubt this will have any problems being FIFA compliant if the MCG is compliant, of course they'll have to do temporary stands instead of the hill.

You make a serious mistake citing the MCG for comparison. No large capacity venue purpose designed for football would look anything like it.

From what I have seen so far this proposal will be able to be made compliant but it will be a worse stadium than any similar capacity stadium put forward by the other serious bidding nations. The same can be said for any large format oval we include in our bid.

The issue our bid needs to face up to is that any stadium that does not adopt best practice for football stadium design will make our bid weaker.

mattwinter · Post by **mattwinter** » Wed Dec 02, 2009 1:11 pm

It looks okay IMO, but why do the two new grand stands have a completely different style of roof? They should have designed the roofs of the new stands to be a similar style to the Western stand.

It seems to me like they decided to keep the hill because they know people will complain if the 'famous old hill' is taken away, but it just looks stupid. Does leave room for expansion though, they could get capacity up towards 60,000 if they eventually decide to build a new stand over the hill as well.

Boba Fett · Post by **Boba Fett** » Wed Dec 02, 2009 1:25 pm

I think we're all in agreement that while it may turn out to be a very good venue for cricket/AFL, it will be woeful for any rectangular code of football.

mattwinter · Post by **mattwinter** » Wed Dec 02, 2009 2:25 pm

Boba Fett wrote:I think we're all in agreement that while it may turn out to be a very good venue for cricket/AFL, it will be woeful for any rectangular code of football.

Yep. The AFL have got together with SACA to make sure the 'traditional' South Australian sports are looked after.

Timbo · Post by **Timbo** » Wed Dec 02, 2009 3:10 pm

I'm almost of the thought that if this is to be the best solution for AFL, why not dig down into AAMI and create a rectangular pitch there, before blowing the joint to kingdom come?

Boba Fett · Post by **Boba Fett** » Wed Dec 02, 2009 3:44 pm

I'm almost of the thought that if this is to be the best solution for AFL, why not dig down into AAMI and create a rectangular pitch there, before blowing the joint to kingdom come?

Sounds like a very sensible solution to me. Which if course means it will never happen.

All that's needed is a nice little 25,000 seater that could be expanded to 40-45,000 for the World Cup if needed and all would be sweet.

dibo · Post by **dibo** » Wed Dec 02, 2009 4:15 pm

if westlakes is flattened, the rectangle could go in there?

mattwinter · Post by **mattwinter** » Wed Dec 02, 2009 4:23 pm

Boba Fett wrote:
I'm almost of the thought that if this is to be the best solution for AFL, why not dig down into AAMI and create a rectangular pitch there, before blowing the joint to kingdom come?
Sounds like a very sensible solution to me. Which if course means it will never happen.

All that's needed is a nice little 25,000 seater that could be expanded to 40-45,000 for the World Cup if needed and all would be sweet.

The biggest problem with AAMI stadium is it's location.

Dasher39 · Post by **Dasher39** » Wed Dec 02, 2009 4:42 pm

I see on AdelaideNow (who are hailing this as the greatest thing since sliced bread) that Demetriou is gloating that the AFL will get a new stadium in Adelaide for FREE.

He also said AAMI Stadium would be a fallback if Australia did get the World Cup as WC matches would take precedence at Adelaide Oval.

There are just so many things wrong with this it isn't funny. I seriously hope this doesn't go ahead.

Frank and KRudd shouldn't allow it to go ahead, what legacy does this leave for Football? Afterall, that is what the FIFA World Cup is for...all this does it gift wrap a brand new stadium for the AFL and the FFA and Adelaide United get absolutely nothing out of it.

RobertHeatleyStand · Post by **RobertHeatleyStand** » Wed Dec 02, 2009 4:53 pm

Is this an early render or the proposal?

I really hope its just an artist impression of what it may look like. I don't like the look of the 3 separate stands. At least make the lower tier one piece and that hill? What modern stadium can be taken seriously with a hill?

As others have said, it will be great for cricket and AFL but not ideal for rectangular codes. I'm undecided on this...

What's this about?

AdelaideNow wrote:The Government move is being seen in political circles as an attempt to derail the Opposition's $1 billion city west stadium plan announced by Opposition Leader Isobel Redmond last week.

the crow · Post by **the crow** » Wed Dec 02, 2009 6:13 pm

it would be easy enough to transform in to moveable seating, and the old chappel stand roofs could be kept to cover the hill as a bank of temporary seats to up it even further... for a possible semi final option.

all these things done to plecate AFL.....it makes me wonder who gets the real legacy out of the WC FFA or AFL.....seems to be AFL at the moment.

new bridge back to the city as well!

Simmo79 · Post by **Simmo79** » Wed Dec 02, 2009 6:24 pm

I'm going to betray my sockah bretheren.

I'm not surprised, nor do I think it is a poor decision, to try and jack the WC bid onto the re-dev of Adelaide Oval. Cricket and Aussie Rules are the big sports there. It makes the most commercial sense IMO.

gyfox · Post by **gyfox** » Wed Dec 02, 2009 6:28 pm

the crow wrote:it would be easy enough to transform in to moveable seating, and the old chappel stand roofs could be kept to cover the hill as a bank of temporary seats to up it even further... for a possible semi final option.

all these things done to plecate AFL.....it makes me wonder who gets the real legacy out of the WC FFA or AFL.....seems to be AFL at the moment.

new bridge back to the city as well!

By moveable seating I assume you mean retractable seating that stays so that the venue can be used for Socceroos and ACL matches in future. If not, the venue should not be in our bid. No legacy, no World Cup venue!

Having said that I can't believe that the FFA would accept a venue that leaves no benefit for football but a huge benefit for AFL and cricket. Surely they aren't that weak.

Egan · Post by **Egan** » Wed Dec 02, 2009 6:29 pm

Jeffles wrote:Adelaide Oval was around 124m before the redevelopment. t will be wider now. If it is used for a FIFA WC, I expect to see a massive temporary stand at the southern end. There won't be much room between the new northern stand and the tennis club but I think it will fit.

What will become of Football Park?

I don't know how true this is, because when I was in Adelaide they were pushing the stand forward to actually make the venue more intimate. So it will be less than 124m.

What I have found most interesting is the new authority. Will the WAFC accept something similar, or will they hijack any attempt to get a World Cup stadium in Perth?