Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
It all seems to be going pear shaped and being run in a Keystone Cops fashion.St Fidelius wrote:Can you please enlighten me and others on just why you think soSENsaintsational wrote:
I was very sure that the club hadn't farked it up.
Bernard Shakey wrote:Tassie within 5 years. Mark my words.
Club has stuffed up badly and will find itself in severe financial strife before long.
The only way out will be to relocate. Tassie will have it's AFL team and I will be devastated.
plugger66 wrote:casey scorp wrote:Except that there would be a chorus of disapproval from those who are opposed to Casey Fields, I would suggest that the Saints make a call to Casey to see whether the MFC deal is fully and irrevocably locked away (there doesn't seem to have been any official announcement, and if MFC is as quick to make redevelopment/relocation announcements as St KFC is without having all of the i's dotted and the t's crossed, then perhaps it isn't as finalised as I thought).
Casey is dead and buried. You need to get over it and support wherever we end up.
Not according to the Council - it's a 30 year arrangement:Otiman wrote:Just remember, the MFC arrangement is only temporary until they get their new facilities built.
Training sessions bring in no money, except maybe some merchandise sales.ausfatcat wrote:Bernard Shakey wrote:Tassie within 5 years. Mark my words.
Club has stuffed up badly and will find itself in severe financial strife before long.
The only way out will be to relocate. Tassie will have it's AFL team and I will be devastated.
Damn I didn't relise training session brought in so much money.
Yes, of course it would be, but with all that money being spent it is incumbent on the Club to ensure that it is spent in the best location - and Belvedere Park is not only not the best location; it is so far from being anywhere near an acceptable location that it will be the legacy of a process that went horribly wrong if it ever happens there.ausfatcat wrote:Nothing training facility?????? WTF would be a marked improvement on what we already have.
No, we're not spending a lot of our own money on it.ausfatcat wrote:And we are not spending a lot of our own money on it. Agree thou I wish there was property being handed over as part of the deal.
Who cares. It will be sorted out and the only thing certain is we are not at Casey. If Belverdere Park is out of the way what is Casey?casey scorp wrote:The win was fantastic, but the rest of the world hasn't stopped like us to savour it.
Not just another update - tonight the Council considers the matter!!
The vote will determine whether:
* we are saved from ourselves because the Council votes not to put in the extra money
* we become committed to a dingy backwater at Belvedere Park if the Council votes to put the money in
However, more likely than either - the Council doesn't make a decision tonight.
The board should be fair dinkum kicked out on their arses, if they persist with this Belvedere Park nonsense, FAIR DINKUMcasey scorp wrote:The win was fantastic, but the rest of the world hasn't stopped like us to savour it.
Not just another update - tonight the Council considers the matter!!
The vote will determine whether:
* we are saved from ourselves because the Council votes not to put in the extra money
* we become committed to a dingy backwater at Belvedere Park if the Council votes to put the money in
However, more likely than either - the Council doesn't make a decision tonight.
We all should. This is a key decision for the future of the club. Those who don’t care will have little to grizzle about if the future of the club is in the balance in a few years.plugger66 wrote:Who cares.
Are you confident in its sorting so far? Your confidence that its on-going “sortingâ€plugger66 wrote: It will be sorted out
Couldnt be bothered as I dont think I will be picked up in the draft next year so doesnt matter where it is to me. So the players will get in their cars and drive 10 minutes to get their lunch and go to the beach. Who cares. They would have to drive at Casey as well. The main attraction though is we now play our games at Sandy which is better for probably 60% to 70% of Saints supporters. I still dont understand why it matters to us where they train as half the sessions are closed and when open about 100 people go so what is the difference apart from being much closer to where the players live at the moment.casey scorp wrote:Just take a drive to the site, and you will see what backwater means.
You will be driving along residential streets, saying to yourself "Where the hell am I?"
Not everyting to do with "location, location, location" is based on distance to the CBD.
Sure Belvedere Park is closer to Melbourne, and may be closer to the freeway.
However, Frankston Park's trumpeted advantages were that it was close to the hustle and bustle of the Frankston activity centre (including cafes), it was close to the beach, it was close to the future aquatic complex, it was close to the station.
Frankston Park was a high profile site in close proximity to a lot of the Frankston "action".
Belvedere Park, on the other hand, is a backwater.
Just take a drive to the site if you don't believe me.
Exactly my point...plugger66 wrote:Couldnt be bothered as I dont think I will be picked up in the draft next year so doesnt matter where it is to me. So the players will get in their cars and drive 10 minutes to get their lunch and go to the beach. Who cares. They would have to drive at Casey as well. The main attraction though is we now play our games at Sandy which is better for probably 60% to 70% of Saints supporters. I still dont understand why it matters to us where they train as half the sessions are closed and when open about 100 people go so what is the difference apart from being much closer to where the players live at the moment.casey scorp wrote:Just take a drive to the site, and you will see what backwater means.
You will be driving along residential streets, saying to yourself "Where the hell am I?"
Not everyting to do with "location, location, location" is based on distance to the CBD.
Sure Belvedere Park is closer to Melbourne, and may be closer to the freeway.
However, Frankston Park's trumpeted advantages were that it was close to the hustle and bustle of the Frankston activity centre (including cafes), it was close to the beach, it was close to the future aquatic complex, it was close to the station.
Frankston Park was a high profile site in close proximity to a lot of the Frankston "action".
Belvedere Park, on the other hand, is a backwater.
Just take a drive to the site if you don't believe me.
Don't wait for the light at the end of the tunnel to appear, run down there and light the bloody thing yourself!
casey scorp wrote:Just take a drive to the site, and you will see what backwater means.
You will be driving along residential streets, saying to yourself "Where the hell am I?"
Not everyting to do with "location, location, location" is based on distance to the CBD.
Sure Belvedere Park is closer to Melbourne, and may be closer to the freeway.
However, Frankston Park's trumpeted advantages were that it was close to the hustle and bustle of the Frankston activity centre (including cafes), it was close to the beach, it was close to the future aquatic complex, it was close to the station.
Frankston Park was a high profile site in close proximity to a lot of the Frankston "action".
Belvedere Park, on the other hand, is a backwater.
Just take a drive to the site if you don't believe me.
I wasn't talking about the Junction Oval, there are three football grounds within a 100 metres of Fitzroy street for starters.St Fidelius wrote:
The constant rants from b4e about St Kilda moving to our spiritual home in St Kilda is laughable....we would have trouble training there because of the cricket commitments.
There is about 500 metres of bushland behind the wing at the Trevor Barker Oval, just knock down a few trees and there 's your room.The Sandringham idea is also laughable little room and far too expensive for development.
Yep that all worked well for Melbourne. Thats why they have gone to Casey. Can you provide details of the Bayside council selling us beach land.barks4eva wrote:I wasn't talking about the Junction Oval, there are three football grounds within a 100 metres of Fitzroy street for starters.St Fidelius wrote:
The constant rants from b4e about St Kilda moving to our spiritual home in St Kilda is laughable....we would have trouble training there because of the cricket commitments.
AND if we did build the training facility there we could also train at the Junction in winter and one of the adjacent ovals in summer.
A bit too laterally challenged for the nuffies on here and the board of the St.Kilda football club it would seem.
I'll start talks with the St.kilda Council and get the ball rolling, myself.
This is where our club truly belongs, we are not called St.kilda for nothing!
There is about 500 metres of bushland behind the wing at the Trevor Barker Oval, just knock down a few trees and there 's your room.The Sandringham idea is also laughable little room and far too expensive for development.
How is this more expensive than any other option, please provide details?
