Federal Government throws $25m at Swans home ground.

[Big Al]

I think the new renovations will be terrific. The 2 video screens will mean every patron has access to a screen.

As well the SCG doesn't need to be much bigger than it is especially with Homebush available.

[j s]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
Ah... not quite! Telstra Dome cost $450m and Telstra Stadium $650m, and they were built more than 6 years ago.

And what did Wembley cost to build?

(Glad I didn't have shares in Multiplex. My Qantas shares are looking quite good though.)

[Sanecow]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
I don't understand why anyone is even questioning why they didn't try to make capacity larger - it's not like it's a constraint on most of our attendances.

Three "not"s and one full-stop. 8 /10

Can you get the government to pitch in for a pool in the back yard?

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by Sanecow
Three "not"s and one full-stop. 8 /10

I'm not sure if it actually makes sense as written!

[Justice]

If the new stand does nothing else but make access out of the SCG from the O'Reilly side easier, then it will be a massive improvement.

At the moment about a third of the crowd all have to try and exit via the bottleneck behind the Randwick end goals.

You have to wonder why the Federal Government is committing any funds? Oh that's right, 2007 is an election year!

Cheers

Justice

[Dave]

Originally posted by Justice

You have to wonder why the Federal Government is committing any funds? Oh that's right, 2007 is an election year!

Howard could but Jason Recliners in every seat position but I still wouldn't vote for the pr*ck.

It baffles me why they dont extend the ground whilst they are doing all this, but then again the SCG trust are ars*holes too I guess.

Stupid collared-shirt enforcing traditionalist wankers...

[Claret]

Originally posted by Dave
It baffles me why they dont extend the ground whilst they are doing all this, but then again the SCG trust are ars*holes too I guess.

Stupid collared-shirt enforcing traditionalist wankers...

Extend as in lengthen or widen the actual playing surface? Simple answer - it's already the perfectly sized cricket ground. Not to mention the exorbitant financial costs (yes, even relative to the $75m).

In any case, the current dimensions help us to clog up the midfield!

[AnnieH]

Originally posted by Dave
Howard could but Jason Recliners in every seat position but I still wouldn't vote for the pr*ck.

It baffles me why they dont extend the ground whilst they are doing all this, but then again the SCG trust are ars*holes too I guess.

Stupid collared-shirt enforcing traditionalist wankers...

The Fed Gov are kicking in because Howard's a cricket tragic. Anything for his beloved SCG.

Where will they get the land to extend it further? As far as I know, the thugby league stadium is butted up on one side, the showground on the other, and if my memory serves me correctly (it's been a long, long, long time) - I think there could possibly be a lane behind the O'Reilly. (Don't quote me on this folks.)

I will agree about the SCG trust. They're a pack of tossers ... imagine trying to stop the mexican wave at the cricket. No wonder they get boo'd every time it goes around.

[DST]

The MCC spent $450 million on the "G" to effectively reduce the seating capacity by 3,000.

Coming from Melbourne where we have two stand out stadiums with easy access to the ground via public transport or walking from the city centre, great viewing from all levels and easy movement inside the stadium and fantastic facilities for corporate and general fans you don't have to be a genius to work out that any money spent on the SCG to revive it is a good thing.

DST

[GoBloods]

firstly - the swans had been making noises and talking about moving all games from the scg to homebush.claiming the scg dosent have enough coporate facilities( private boxes , dining rooms , lounges etc ) to cater for the swans needs.
so the scg trust ( trying to keep their major hirer happy) decided to built a new grandstand.
the swans and r.colless have known about this for a fair while , as this grandstand has been a few years in the planning.
In late 2006 , an article appeared in newspapers about how this will effect the swans crowds and revenue in 2007 ,as the scg will only hold 34000 for 2007 season. The swans then cried poor but the swans average crowd for season 2006 was only 31000 anyway.
The new scoreboard , will be built as an extention to the messenger stand. The messenger will not be torn down.
and finally , i have always sat in the scg members area and have always find it amazing that people whinge about the dress code.
like randwick racecourse , city tatts , The MCG and most nightclubs , the scg has a dress code if you wish to sit in their members area.
Males are required to wear a collared shirt...this is printed on the back of match day tickets , on the website and in all media given to members.
if you wish to sit in the scg members wear a collared shirt , if you wish to wear a singlet , footy jumper or t-shirt go sit in the outer..this isnt to hard to work out.....but this is always the scg's fault not the bloke you cant dress himself properly faults

[hammo]

Originally posted by Annie Haddad
The Fed Gov are kicking in because Howard's a cricket tragic. Anything for his beloved SCG.

And I suppose his financial support for the Whitten Oval redevelopment is due to his love of AFL and the Bulldogs

[Captain]

Originally posted by GoBloods
if you wish to sit in the scg members wear a collared shirt , if you wish to wear a singlet , footy jumper or t-shirt go sit in the outer..this isnt to hard to work out.....but this is always the scg's fault not the bloke you cant dress himself properly faults

Actually you are allowed to wear a Swans guernsey in there which has no collar, go figure

The stupid thing is that shirt collars are allowed, jacked collars aren't. In my book a collar is a collar.

[ROK Lobster]

Originally posted by Dave
Howard could but Jason Recliners in every seat position but I still wouldn't vote for the pr*ck.

Still, it is a grand idea.

[goswannie14]

Originally posted by Captain
Actually you are allowed to wear a Swans guernsey in there which has no collar, go figure

The stupid thing is that shirt collars are allowed, jacked collars aren't. In my book a collar is a collar.

I used to collect for the Salvos at the MCG members gate, I saw a guy refused entry one day (in the eighties) for having a skivvy on. Before you ask, I think he was a Melbourne supporter.

[AnnieH]

Originally posted by goswannie14
I used to collect for the Salvos at the MCG members gate, I saw a guy refused entry one day (in the eighties) for having a skivvy on. Before you ask, I think he was a Melbourne supporter.

Was it a white or a beige skivvy?