South Australian Premier Mike Rann has dealt an election trump card, gifting the AFL a newly redeveloped Adelaide Oval where cricket and Australian Rules football will co-habit.
Mr Rann, facing a state election on March 20 next year, on Tuesday announced the government will fund most of a planned $450 million redevelopment of the historic Adelaide Oval.
In a deal which ends a 40-year standoff between the state’s cricket and football authorities, AFL games will be played at the oval in the city’s heart. International cricket will also remain at the oval.
The agreement also effectively trumps the Liberal opposition, which last week unveiled an election pledge of a new $1 billion multi-sports stadium in the city.
The issue of whether to build or redevelop a sporting stadium had loomed large on both parties’ election radar.
Mr Rann said the redeveloped Adelaide Oval, with a capacity of 50,000 spectators, will be completed within four years – if the federal government provides $100 million and local councils agree.
The redeveloped stadium will also ensure Adelaide is not overlooked to host soccer games should Australia be successful in a bid to host the 2018 or 2022 World Cup.
Mr Rann said the agreement was a “once off, once in a lifetime opportunity”.
“This is a historic day in South Australian sport,” Mr Rann said.
“Adelaide Oval is an icon of this city and this state.
“Rather than building yet another stadium at massive cost, the South Australian government will contribute significantly to this upgrade.
“We think this is going to be a fantastic development to bring life to the city.
“We have got more work to be done over the next six months, but what we have said as a government is that the $450 million commitment is there on the table for this development and nothing else.”
Mr Rann said the government would seek a legally binding agreement for the Adelaide Oval site by July next year from the SA Cricket Association (SACA) and SA National Football League (SANFL), which owns the state’s two AFL licences.
The SANFL had played games at Adelaide Oval since 1877, four years after the oval was built.
But the football body, angered by cricket’s control of the arena, bitterly split from the oval and built its own football stadium at West Lakes, about 30km west of the city, which opened in 1974.
From then, the two bodies remained at odds and resisted any co-habitation discussions.
But AFL chief executive Andrew Demetriou played peacebroker last year, bringing the two SA organisations together and stressing a desire to play AFL games at Adelaide Oval.
The AFL boss said the announcement was a “day many believed wouldn’t happen”.
AAMI Stadium, which currently hosts all AFL games in Adelaide, will remain a venue for AFL preseason games.
The ground will also remain the headquarters and training base of the Adelaide Crows, and likely be used for AFL premiership season matches if Australia wins the right to host soccer’s World Cup, given any Cup games would be played at Adelaide Oval.
© AAP 2012Recommend this story.
- Explore:
- Adelaide Oval, AFL, Mike Rann
December 3rd 2009 @ 8:36pm
Tifosi said | December 3rd 2009 @ 8:36pm | Report comment
Whats the relationship between the WACA and Subiaco? They are the last part of the puzzle for the AFL.
December 3rd 2009 @ 9:58pm
cruyff turn said | December 3rd 2009 @ 9:58pm | Report comment
From what I understand, the Cricket Association had an offer of playing internationals at Subiaco, but declined. They would rather stay at the WACA.
The WACA is, these days, a very under-utilised facility. I remember they used to host AFL matches there – for both the Eagles and the Dockers. Because the playing area has been reduced, AFL can no longer be played there. One could also say that Subiaco doesn’t get used as much as it should – certainly compared to the MCG.
December 4th 2009 @ 5:23am
Michael C said | December 4th 2009 @ 5:23am | Report comment
the benchmarks we use in Australia for stadium/ground usage are pretty high by international standards,
the MCG and Docklands are 2 of the most used and most successful stadiums in the whole ruddy world. (AFL ground rationalisation ensures that!!!).
December 4th 2009 @ 5:58am
Crosscoder said | December 4th 2009 @ 5:58am | Report comment
MichaelC
Just for record sake and to put things into perspective..
On your cynical little comment on your “worldwide reach of rl referring to Wigan and its stadium.Rugby league has a challenge cup final at a stadium called Wembley(the new 21st century Wembley),hardly a hole in the ground.They had a test match at the old Wembley.
Tah for now.
December 4th 2009 @ 10:33am
Anthony said | December 4th 2009 @ 10:33am | Report comment
I am a Footy Park foundation member. What a joy it was to open that stadium 35 years ago & have decent facilities for we footy supporters, with a bigger capacity. Now they want us to go back to Adel Oval. I drive to Westlakes & go home afterwards. I do not want to catch a bus/train into the city & I certainly don’t want to eat in some city restaurant before or after! And if both SACA, SANFL & Crows members are catered for there will be no room for all these tourists who some think are going to flock to Adelaide Oval!
December 4th 2009 @ 10:44am
Republican said | December 4th 2009 @ 10:44am | Report comment
Freud of Football
I have to agree with you re. the re development of Adelaide Oval. A great shame indeed. This corporate culture has disenfranchised those of my persuasion from sport that’s for sure.
The AFL are so removed from the people now it’s a travesty really. Perhaps the people today get what they deserve, since most of them appear to be on the same dollar hungry page. They certainly are a souless corporate concern and all those who are employed by them hold to that ethos, that money IS the bottom line without exception.
I had an interesting conversation with one of the AFL media staff in trying to glean some committment and vision for its less populated and corporate heartlands recently, especilaly in light of the AFL backed forays into NZ by both the Hawks and Doggies. This bloke I was unfortunate enough to be put through to, sounded like a used car salesman with some dinky corporate law and commerce training thrown in. He was absolutely bombastic in his lack of tolerance in even entertaining that some balance might need to be addressed while growing the game off shore. I suggested that much of the AFL profits have to be top heavy in their distribution, given the need for offshore talent scouting ie that by the Hawks and the W B Dogs having to stoop to sell two home games to a non AFL backwater i.e. NZ. I suggested that any talent gleaned would be insignificant compared to what could be achieved with home demos ie as the ACT and Territory and that if the Doggies are that financially vulnerable this could be more to do with players earning too much, which drew some heated consternation on his part.
The clinically ruthless corporate agendas of modern day elite sporting organisations have completely compromised tribal loyalties, GR’s and historic sensibilities which I still maintain should somehow be preserved.
An example of this blokes attitude, was his audacity to say that NZ had played Aust Foot in the 1800′s, (yes I know this) before the ACT which was apparently meant in defence of the AFL’s support of the WB playing two home games in Wellington in 2011. That this would be at the expedience of Darwin and Canberra I find unacceptably mercenary and insulting. What a highly ignorant attitude from someone assuming such an important role in the organisation. The ACT did NOT even exist during that very brief window that saw the national game played in NZ. These were ex pat Aussies living their who took up the footy gauntlet, arriving during the gold rush days, which hardly constitutes a criteria to promote NZ as some sort of AFL heartland!
He was not going to be drawn into any AFL committment of home demographics over off shore ones because he claimed, the AFL is a business and it’s all about population and money as opposed to the dated sentiments that I aspire to. Why should I be suprised? I still maintain that a balance needs to be considered in this respect or the game and it’s custodians just might be cutting off their nose to spite their very ugly face.
Cheers
December 4th 2009 @ 6:49pm
Jaredsbro said | December 4th 2009 @ 6:49pm | Report comment
Very commendable Republican. We all know how awesomely passionate you are about preserving and conserving your country’s sporting assets. It does smell a bit, but as you keep saying RL and RU both neglect the ACT too, so what’s new? And also why do you live there in terms of your work etc? From what I’ve heard the ACT is not the most pleasant place to live, but because it is your place of residence it’s only right that you want what’s best for it and for the local footy scene.
I’m not sure tho if the AFL could expand to all the places it needs to, in the sense that both the ACT, TAS, NT, possibly NQ and a third WA one too all need a team as they are all heartlands of the code. But this is the thing, just like with the NFL, if you have just one competition/league to care about/look after this tends to happen. Places of real value to the league tend to be sidestepped or put in the too-hard basket a la a Los Angeles team in the NFL.
However it must be remembered that the local (grassroots) fan also seems to be happy with the stake they have in the system already, but as you say there is always the risk of rationalisation when the majority rhetoric is that of Entertainment first.
December 4th 2009 @ 7:03pm
Pippinu said | December 4th 2009 @ 7:03pm | Report comment
Jaredsbro
Why would you say the ACT is not a pleasant place to live????
It’s not as if the residents are living in bark huts atop Mount Franklin!!
December 4th 2009 @ 7:14pm
Jaredsbro said | December 4th 2009 @ 7:14pm | Report comment
Well firsty I’ve been there (not to live) but on holiday two times. Plenty of space, unnaturally so IMO…and it has the feel of a showcase capital (like P’yongyang but in a Liberal democracy). Overly-planned which for someone like me is not a turn-on.
Secondly I’ve talked to people who don’t like the fact that Canberra particularly is quite run-down in parts. I never got to see Mount Franklin or out in the burbs from the tour bus but apparently rates of crime are very high (tho of course this could just be a moral panic) and levels of dissatisfied youths are worryingly rising. So Republican’s mission cannot be over until these younguns are given sporting options than they would otherwise not have.
Thirdly the town/city doesn’t really seem to inspire people who actually live there, while enlightening thousands of touring Victorians, NSWmen, Queenslanders, South Australians, West Australians, Tasmanians, Northern Territory folk and Torres Straight islanders Their sports teams are going downward and the city itself lacks something of a unique spirit, rather than just being a site of significant neutrality away from the State capitals’ cultures
Pleasant in terms of a different scene from Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane etc but it lacks a cohesiveness which is ironic given its planned nature. Of course seeing as I’ve never lived there my opinion isn’t gospel.
By the way Pip ask Republican next time he posts whether he likes living there too?
December 4th 2009 @ 7:29pm
Pippinu said | December 4th 2009 @ 7:29pm | Report comment
I’m not actually sure whether he lives there or not.
Personally, I like the fact that I can plan to be somewhere in exactly 10 minutes, and be there in 9 minutes.
December 4th 2009 @ 7:40pm
Jaredsbro said | December 4th 2009 @ 7:40pm | Report comment
LOL!!! No traffic lights is it or no traffic? The museums are wonderful there but it’s a bit like the city itself has been underdeveloped in order to achieve such wonderful monuments to Democracy as that funky ornament atop of the Capitol! It seems to be the case in most planned Capitals: Washington, Brasilia… London (
)
December 4th 2009 @ 7:49pm
Pippinu said | December 4th 2009 @ 7:49pm | Report comment
by the way – have you been to Pyongyang?
December 4th 2009 @ 11:56am
macavity said | December 4th 2009 @ 11:56am | Report comment
Why does a re-developed OVAL “ensure” Adelaide gets WC games?
December 4th 2009 @ 11:58am
Redb said | December 4th 2009 @ 11:58am | Report comment
it doesn’t. But capacity wise it ticks the boxes.
December 4th 2009 @ 6:51pm
Freud of Football said | December 4th 2009 @ 6:51pm | Report comment
This has nothing to do with WC games, it has to do with the AFL and Demetriou and is an attempt by Rann to have some sort of positive media coverage.
December 4th 2009 @ 7:06pm
Pippinu said | December 4th 2009 @ 7:06pm | Report comment
Freud
Leading up to this announcement, the last six or so months, all I’ve heard mentioned is the SACA and SANFL – I had not seen a single mention of the AFL.
December 4th 2009 @ 7:12pm
Freud of Football said | December 4th 2009 @ 7:12pm | Report comment
“But AFL chief executive Andrew Demetriou played peacebroker last year, bringing the two SA organisations together and stressing a desire to play AFL games at Adelaide Oval.” – Well that came from the article above so he’s obviously been involved from the start, saying anything else shows an inherent lack of knowledge of the hate that exists between the SACA and the SANFL.
If they had the choice Adelaide would be split in two, one side would play cricket and have the cricket grounds and the other could have AFL.
December 4th 2009 @ 7:27pm
Pippinu said | December 4th 2009 @ 7:27pm | Report comment
Freud
I took that to mean that he came in late in the piece – I had never heard the AFL mentioned at all until the deal was done.
December 4th 2009 @ 7:48pm
Freud of Football said | December 4th 2009 @ 7:48pm | Report comment
How could he come in late in the piece if he bought them together?
December 4th 2009 @ 7:54pm
Pippinu said | December 4th 2009 @ 7:54pm | Report comment
Well – I understood they had been at each other throats until recently.
December 4th 2009 @ 7:57pm
Freud of Football said | December 4th 2009 @ 7:57pm | Report comment
Pip, do you know the first rule of holes?
December 4th 2009 @ 10:10pm
bever fever said | December 4th 2009 @ 10:10pm | Report comment
If only we can get something now for Perth, one can only hope.
I went to one AFL game last year, the stadium is generally sold out for all Eagles games and the Dockers are not too far behind.
I believe we need a 55 thou stadium but no bigger, my reasoning for this is that that for Derby’s you may need a 65K stadium but as they only happen twice ayear it would be a bit of overkill.
The Eagles could possibly sell out a 55k stadium through membership and leave us in the same position as we are now but the Dockers would have some work to do, but with a good season or 2 could get there comfotably.
AS it is now to get a Eagles membership you really have to wait untill someone dies in order to free up a membership, IMO they have a aged membership as people really hang onto the seats, i know of a couple who recently divorced who still hang onto their respctive seats as both are keen fans and would find it to hard to get new memberships, and they are not on great terms.
So in effect even if you build a 60k stadium here you will still have the same problems, their will not be many tickets available for walk up patrons as their is at the G.
But something need to be done, i have no great interest in becoming a member ATM but i would like the oppurtunity to just be a walk up with the family/mates etc …. ATM that is just not a reality, even with a bigger stadium it probably will not happen either.
A third team in WA is the only answer.
December 4th 2009 @ 10:35pm
Freud of Football said | December 4th 2009 @ 10:35pm | Report comment
“i know of a couple who recently divorced who still hang onto their respctive seats as both are keen fans and would find it to hard to get new memberships, and they are not on great terms.” – That’s commitment to the cause.
A third team in WA is certainly necessary, the market is there but don’t expect the AFL to get it right.
Melbourne teams will struggle financially for eternity, each and every one of them will have highs and lows. The city is footy mad but it’s supporting too many elite teams for any of them to prosper in the long run.
Expect the AFL to look at “relocation” like they did with North. This might work in America but it won’t in Australia. You can’t just tell North to head North or tell the Dogs that they belong in WA.
American teams are franchises and often have very little involvement in the local community whereas AFL teams are built on locations, they appeal to the locals and you can’t just uproot all of them and expect them to follow their club on the other side of the nation but no doubt the AFL will try this before they just found a new club in Perth.
December 5th 2009 @ 4:45pm
Pippinu said | December 5th 2009 @ 4:45pm | Report comment
Cockerill’s take on the Adelaide Oval redevelopment:
http://www.smh.com.au/sport/football/two-white-elephants-are-born-in-africa–australia-mustnt-breed-own-20091204-kb0c.html
Do I sense a more conciliatory note from a month ago?
Has someone told him to tone it down a little?
December 7th 2009 @ 8:27am
Republican said | December 7th 2009 @ 8:27am | Report comment
Jaredsbro
I do live in Canberra and certainly appreciate that it is not everyones cuppa however it has many positives that are not appreciated as a mere blow in.
Crime certainly exists, however because the appearance of this city is quite sanitised, people are a little shocked by this revelation. I wouldn’t say that the rates are exceptional however it is fairly high for such a gentrified middle class city.
Based on what seems to be your criteria for NOT basing any elite sporting team in Canberra, NZ should not have been gifted a presence in any of the Australian Leagues they are currently involved in. As to whether or not the cities of NZ are any more appealing to live in is a moot point and as far as crime goes, NZ and especially Auckland, have been identified in a recent U.N. report amongst the top most violent developed countries and city respectively in the world, especially in the area of sexual assaults, bashings and home invasions. I can say, Canberra has an unusually high rate of car theft.
Your post is a little ambiguous, i.e to say, i’m not sure if you agree or disagree with my sentiments. Are you defending the National games forays into demographics i.e NZ where the game barley exists at the mercenary expedience of a demographic i.e Canberra? It would be very interesting indeed to hear how you would justify this sort of mercenary corporate neglect or are you simply resigned to this being the way of the world? Many Kiwis criticise the growth of Union in this country at the negelct expedience of NZ’s Union pedigree and culture and as it happens I tend to agree with them.
Our game however has diddly profile in NZ compared to what Union boasts here, so I am curious to understand what exactly it is you are trying to convey. Canberra is as big as Wellington and we actually play the national game with some aplomb, so in that respect any analogy with League or any othe rcode for that matter, is slightly misplaced I think.
Cheers
December 7th 2009 @ 7:33pm
mattamkII said | December 7th 2009 @ 7:33pm | Report comment
As a proud South Australia I can say a few things.
1) Footy Park (AAMI) is a hole and near on impossible to get to.
2) Land at West Lakes is worth at least 1000-1500per Sqm….you can do the Maths
The SA government have two options.
1) sink 300mil to upgrade the transport to an oval very few people actually like (AAMI).
2) Put 450mill into an amazing ground that everyone loves and already has greater access to.
Truth is, the average punter couldnt give a stuff who owns the ground..they just want to watch it at the best place…and Adelaide Oval is a far better place than AAMI.
December 7th 2009 @ 9:54pm
mattamkII said | December 7th 2009 @ 9:54pm | Report comment
Freud – BTW you’re wrong about rugby of either code in Adelaide.
The Rams averaged 10K a week…Well above 10k in first year and about 8k in 2nd.
I saw a game between Penrith and I think Melbourne a few years back that was played on a long weekend and pulled 9,000.
There are 12ish Union Clubs in Adelaide
I have seen Adelaide Oval packed for Wallabies V 2nd string teams
The Adelaide 7′s is a huge success