Forum topic

54 posts / 0 new
Last post
zebraman
zebraman's picture

[quote=digs]You would hardly call the TBO Buckingham palace.
For all the squillion years that you have been in a premier competition, you would think that you would have something a little better.[/quote]

No..It's Trevor Barker Beach Oval. Buckingham Palace is in London or at least it was the last time I was there...the 2 places are actually quite different...there is no beach near Buckingham Palace

Sandy joined the VFA in 1929...if you look at the maths, that equates to 80 years...somewhat less than your quoted "squillion"

We would have "something better" but we don't have the pokie revenue that your club enjoys

So for a club that has obviously in your view got nothing going for it, I think we've done reasonably well over the years

If we had North Ballarats money goodness knows how much success we would have had...we may have even got our playing surface right...funny how we have been able to unfurl our premiership flags at our FIRST home game the following season

Sandy. The most successful club in the past 30 years

caseyscorp

80 years - it should be as good as Buckingham Palace by now shouldn't it?

Where's footyman when you need him? He decries Casey's facilities only 4 years after establishment. Imagine his expectations if he knew you'd been there for 80 years.

I went to Sandy on Saturday. I had to park a few hundred metres further from the ground than I had to park at Casey Fields on Sunday. I had to park in a residential street and inconvenience the locals. I had to walk across a busy road to get to the ground, and walk through a tiny crushed rock carpark with puddles in it to get to the gate.

While that's all quite acceptable to footyman, Casey Fields has to be perfect from the outset. It's a bit hard to figure, except that his status says it all (anti-Casey Fields).

Double standards methinks.

lum
lum's picture

I thought installing seating around the fence on the Beach Road side at Sandy might entice a better spread of spectators around the ground.
Some terracing over there would help too.

The toilet block smaelt as though it had not been cleaned for 80 years, although a sign said cleaned twice weekly. Guess that's Council's responsibility.

lum

digs

[quote=zebraman][quote=digs]You would hardly call the TBO Buckingham palace.
For all the squillion years that you have been in a premier competition, you would think that you would have something a little better.[/quote]

No..It's Trevor Barker Beach Oval. Buckingham Palace is in London or at least it was the last time I was there...the 2 places are actually quite different...there is no beach near Buckingham Palace

Sandy joined the VFA in 1929...if you look at the maths, that equates to 80 years...somewhat less than your quoted "squillion"

We would have "something better" but we don't have the pokie revenue that your club enjoys

So for a club that has obviously in your view got nothing going for it, I think we've done reasonably well over the years

If we had North Ballarats money goodness knows how much success we would have had...we may have even got our playing surface right...funny how we have been able to unfurl our premiership flags at our FIRST home game the following season[/quote]

Zebraman, The Roosters do NOT have any money.
All money received is spent on improving the facilities. Assets of 9 million dollars as per last years financial report and that did not come out of a wheatie packet. Sound financial management over a long period of time not sitting on our arses counting our premiership cups and watching the sun go down over port philip bay.
Clubs like Casey & the Roosters should be commended for having a go trying to improve the quality of the competition instead of living in the past.

We might be from the bush. but we ain't green

zebraman
zebraman's picture

Well knock me down with a feather...I thought then whole idea of playing in the VFL was to try and win the premiership

I'm quite happy to count the premierships we've won...even whilst watching the sun set over Port Phillip Bay...you should try that sometime...you can sit there and have that glorious outlook of the factory across the road...

Sandy does not sit on its arse...the Club has sound administration that works its arse off just to make ends meet...

I've said many times before that North Ballarat most probably have the best facilites of any VFL club...but I'll go out on a limb here and say that I'm sure that winning premierships is the aim of the competition...why bother playing in it if you're not aiming for that...

What an odd outlook you have..

Still..

Might head down and have a look at the sunset over the bay...

Sandy. The most successful club in the past 30 years

footyman

[quote=caseyscorp]
Where's footyman when you need him? He decries Casey's facilities only 4 years after establishment. Imagine his expectations if he knew you'd been there for 80 years.

I went to Sandy on Saturday. I had to park a few hundred metres further from the ground than I had to park at Casey Fields on Sunday. I had to park in a residential street and inconvenience the locals. I had to walk across a busy road to get to the ground, and walk through a tiny crushed rock carpark with puddles in it to get to the gate.

While that's all quite acceptable to footyman, Casey Fields has to be perfect from the outset. It's a bit hard to figure, except that his status says it all (anti-Casey Fields).

Double standards methinks.[/quote]
I'm here!!!

Casey Fields HAS NO CHARM. It has NO CHARACTER. It has NOT ENOUGH SHELTERED SEATING. If you're going to build something, you do it properly. That Grandstand is an embarrassment to whoever designed it and even more of a joke that some twit at the council signed off and said it was acceptable.

I'll cop the "shortcomings" with TBO and Cramer St because that is what they are. They've got their own unique charm. They are historically significant. Further they don't have flogs coming on the internet and promoting their venue as an A grade facility, nor do they expect to host AFL Preseason games and the like.

billythekid

Clubs like Casey & the Roosters should be commended for having a go trying to improve the quality of the competition instead of living in the past.[/quote]

I say to you enjoy it while it lasts, the current VFL/AFL reserves comp will be dead and buried in less than 10 years the way it is going.
So all those great shiny new facilities will be just a huge waste of money for a couple of local teams.

BTW Sandringham FC for most of its 80 years in the VFA/VFL has had to put up with a fairly disinterestd council who were very reluctant to spend any money on a ground that they didnt own.
Even the Social club had to have a bill passed in the State parliament to get it built and had massive restrictions put on its location and size.

caseyscorp

[quote=footyman]Casey Fields HAS NO CHARM. It has NO CHARACTER. It has NOT ENOUGH SHELTERED SEATING. If you're going to build something, you do it properly. That Grandstand is an embarrassment to whoever designed it and even more of a joke that some twit at the council signed off and said it was acceptable.[/quote]

Unfortunately, there just isn't enough money to build everything at once. So what do you build first? So so facilities for the teams and great facilities for spectators, or the other way around. I'd suggest it is the facilities for the clubs which come first, otherwise they won't come. No point having flash facilities for spectators, but no match for the crowd to watch.

[quote=footyman]I'll cop the "shortcomings" with TBO and Cramer St because that is what they are. They've got their own unique charm. They are historically significant. Further they don't have flogs coming on the internet and promoting their venue as an A grade facility, nor do they expect to host AFL Preseason games and the like.[/quote]

Confirmation of double standards, justified as "unique charm" and historic significance. Sorry, but that hardly justifies sinking the boots into Casey Fields not being built to a totally finished standard to your exacting requirements (for some facilities only) from the date of establishment.

As far as promoting the venue and expecting to host AFL pre-season matches, the venue has hosted AFL pre-season matches for the past 3 years:

2007
Richmond intraclub
Essendon v Hawthorn

2008
Essendon intraclub
Melbourne v North Melbourne

2009
Melbourne intraclub
Western Bulldogs v Melbourne

Other venues would have to be to a standard that would meet requirements. If they are, then no doubt they will be in the running as well.

vfa
vfa's picture

In the late 80s and early 90s there were afl practice matches at grounds like Bayswater, Boronia and Skinner Reserve Sunshine was used quite frequently.
Practice matches where they played and who against were decided by the clubs. These days Demetriou would order you where to play and against who.
Typical arrogant afl.

footyman

Unfortunately most other grounds are also home to cricket clubs Caseyscorp, that restricts the availability of them for practice matches in February.

I can assure you most clubs would love an option closer to town, but there aren't any so they have to head to a little Country town called Cranbourne.

I still believe the City of Casey pay the AFL a fee of some sort to host a practice match and the U18s...its well known the AFL want to start tendering out more 'events' to the highest bidder.

Pages