Forum topic

19 posts / 0 new
Last post
Saintgail
Sandy / Saints Plans - Pelchen

ST KILDA will buck the AFL trend of fielding its own reserves, revealing plans to stick with VFL partner Sandringham.

Saints head of football Chris Pelchen said repairing the turbulent alignment was one of his first key objectives since crossing from Hawthorn last year.

"It'd been well publicised there'd been some challenges in the alignment," Pelchen said.

"We respect how important the VFL competition is to the development of AFL players. And we felt at St Kilda that hadn't been maximised."

He has started a Saints player academy to enhance player progression this year, with Zebras coach Simon McPhee an integral part.

Sandringham has also enjoyed on-field benefits, with club powerbrokers embracing the support which has the one-time VFL force again a contender after four fruitless seasons.

Pelchen wants to mirror the strong affiliation he helped construct between Hawthorn and Box Hill and said providing a pathway for VFL-listed talent to AFL clubs was a key measure of success.

Zebras Adam Cockie, Myke Cook, Jackson Coleman, James Hallahan and Michael Sikora are all on early AFL draft radars.

But Pelchen admitted one challenge the alignment faced was upgrading Sandy’s Trevor Barker Oval to AFL dimensions.

"We have a strong desire for our players to play on a ground of similar (AFL size)," he said.

The Saints, Zebras and Bayside Council are in talks about increasing the surface size, but Pelchen would not rule out a return to Moorabbin in the future, where St Kilda still holds the lease.

paul

[quote=Saintgail] Pelchen wants to mirror the strong affiliation he helped construct between Hawthorn and Box Hill [/quote]

That's enough to make you shake in your boots right there, let alone talk of moving to Moorabbin.

theobserver

If I were a Sandy supporter id' be worried like hell about this. Because Box Hill is the Hawthorn reserves except by name. They even wear the Hawthorn jumper these days. It's shocking.

billythekid

Early days yet and I have confidence in the people voted to run the Sandringham Football Club in keeping Sandy only as a partner of St FC and NOT go down the Box Hill/Preston path.

The main way to keep St Kilda at bay is to stay financilly viable and not have to rely on St Kilda to stay afloat.

The leaders of the club should never lose the goal of becoming a stand alone club agian one day.

This is only one mans opinion and he has warned Sandy of what HE would like to happen.

digs

[quote=billythekid]Early days yet and I have confidence in the people voted to run the Sandringham Football Club in keeping Sandy only as a partner of St FC and NOT go down the Box Hill/Preston path.

The main way to keep St Kilda at bay is to stay financilly viable and not have to rely on St Kilda to stay afloat.

The leaders of the club should never lose the goal of becoming a stand alone club agian one day.

This is only one mans opinion and he has warned Sandy of what HE would like to happen.[/quote]

That one man has a fair bit of pull Billy..
I would be getting a little bit jittery if I were you, all of a sudden the romance is a little shaky. !!

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

vfa
vfa's picture

Pelchen wants to mirror the strong affiliation he helped construct between Hawthorn and Box Hill and said providing a pathway for VFL-listed talent to AFL clubs was a key measure of success.

That quote does not sound good if Sandy went the same way as Box Hill.

Short term with St Kilda will be ok if all games were at Sandy, the jumpers did not change and the zebras and Sandringham name were intact. Also zebras do not bow to everythhing St Kilda wants. I think McPhee has done well and on right track unlike that tool Ross Lyon. Sandy has also too much history and prestige to bow down to how Box Hill and Preston have.
Sandy still should look for a stand alone status down the track when financial enough and plans and preparation are in order.

billythekid

[quote=digs][quote=billythekid]Early days yet and I have confidence in the people voted to run the Sandringham Football Club in keeping Sandy only as a partner of St FC and NOT go down the Box Hill/Preston path.

The main way to keep St Kilda at bay is to stay financilly viable and not have to rely on St Kilda to stay afloat.

The leaders of the club should never lose the goal of becoming a stand alone club agian one day.

This is only one mans opinion and he has warned Sandy of what HE would like to happen.[/quote]

That one man has a fair bit of pull Billy..
I would be getting a little bit jittery if I were you, all of a sudden the romance is a little shaky. !![/quote]

He is only an employee Mate and could get the chop anytime!He dosent run the whole club.

NorthPort
NorthPort's picture

I hate hear off the cuff comments about just moving a club. Let's hope there is nothing in the comments, even if TBO can't be resized (and seriously how much smaller is it?)







billythekid

[quote=NorthPort]I hate hear off the cuff comments about just moving a club. Let's hope there is nothing in the comments, even if TBO can't be resized (and seriously how much smaller is it?)[/quote]

Victoria Park and TBO are the same length 160 mts and are the shortest but Vic Park is much wider at 139 mts

THe longest is Williamstown at 178 mts and Werribbe at 177 mts narrowist is Geelong at 115 mts then comes Sandy at 122 mts

It looks like in actual playing area TBO would be the smallest followed surprisingly by Kardinia Park which is longer but very narrow.

Windy hill is pretty samll at 159 mts x 130 mts

Ten grounds are over 165 mts in length and I think this is what Pelchen is talking about.

Surprisingly the MCG playing area is 160 metres x 141 metres

Docklands ST Kildas HOME ground is NOT much bigger at 159.5 metres x 128.8 metres than TBO so and is half a metre SHORTER! Pelchen and St Kilda should maybe shut the **** up!

The SCG is short at 149 metres x 136 metres

The Gabba is also not a long ground either at 156 metres x 138 metres.

I say good luck to Sandy and St Kilda in convincing the Bayside Council to lengthen the oval as at both ends it would run into the problems of the buildings. I dont see the council ever allowing the club to take more of the foreshore park.

You could just squeeze it past the old grandstand to the Sandringham end but even then the goal posts would almost be against the perimeter fence.

TBO can never be widened as the is no room each side.

zebra
zebra's picture

The TBO ground is going to be lengthened towards the Neil Bencraft Grandstand by 15 meters,in other words making the oval a little longer and some terracing behind the southern goals.

billythekid

[quote=zebra]The TBO ground is going to be lengthened towards the Neil Bencraft Grandstand by 15 meters,in other words making the oval a little longer and some terracing behind the southern goals.[/quote]

WHY FFS? To suit StKilda?

If you look at my previous post TBO at 160 mts atm dosent need 15 metres as the average length of most grounds is 165 mts not 175mts rembering both the MCG are 160 mts or less in length.

So you if you have to do what an AFL club wants you to do you would only need to take 10 metres allowing for a couple more mts between the goal posts and the boundry fence.

I dont see any huge outcry to lengthen both the major grounds in Melbourne because they are too short.

Condidering most of the AFL Finals/GFs are played at the MCG/ Docklands TBOs length is perfect as it is the SAME.

As I have stated before its not the length that is the problem at TBO but the width and that can never be fixed.

Pages