Soft BH, I'm with you.

When I was young I was never happier than standing in the pouring rain in front of the old press box at PP watching our third quarter goal feasts, which we knew would always win us the game. And standing three feet back from the then longest urinal in the world watching a river flow past my feet.

As I got older I loved sitting in the social club at PP having a drink in the bar before, during and after the game, with no opposition supporters in sight, hearing mad Carlton supporters scream as loud as me at every outrageous umpiring decision and in raptures at our stars. Never any disagreement about anything in the George Harris stand.

As an MCC member I like nothing more now than a big game at the G, especially if I've arranged a meal in the Members Dining Room with friends, a few drinks at the bar (or in the Long Room) a balcony seat, and the quaint scones and jam and cream and sandwiches and coffee at half time. Only way to go as one gets older and softer.

I might feel differently if I was in the Medallion Club, but sitting up the top at Etihad with the haze just doesnt do it for me, especially since the games are often cramped, we havent been a great side since we've been there, and the narrow ground doesnt suit our game style.

My feelings for the various grounds are emotive and linked to the above, just like most things in football. This is quite apart from the raw financial benefits or otherwise of playing at various stadiums.

I guess I'll feel differently about Etihad if we start to play better there. A beer in a glass not a plastic cup (at outrageous cost) would probably help as well.

Yeah I'm getting soft, but there's no cure like having your team play great football and win consistently. I think I'd even be happy to stand in the rain again if we can return to something like the glory days on the field.

Not far away. We are nearly there.

[youtube]sFBOQzSk14c[/youtube]

_________________
"Hence you will not say that Greeks fight like heroes but that heroes fight like Greeks"?

Winston Churchill

Ha ha. Those terraces look very familiar Agro. Probably about the same vintage.

The worlds longest urinal was just over the back.

Enjoy .. etihad supporters ..

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/e ... 6170142737

Surrey love your passion mate and there arent many who prefer the had to the mighty G but please understand that the reason we are at etihad is the AFL - THEY ARE THE ONES THAT FORCED US TO HAVE HOME GAMES THERE -They said at the time we left PP that even if we stitched up a deal with the MCG to play all our games there they would schedule us at etihad AND FORCE US TO PLAY AT ETIHAD -at the time given our parlous financial state and being clinically dependent on the AFL we had no choice

I know this to absolutely be the case -

Ed has a point. Improve getting in and out of the ground, maybe knock off a couple of three of four rows of seats at the front, raise the fences and the level of the soil (not hard when you have drop in turf), maybe lay in some under-soil heating when you do to (possibly - unsure on this) compensate for the lack of exposure and you're on your way.

Besides, there probably needs to be more of a gap between the boundary and the fence in some sections anyway.

Lose 500 seats, maybe 30 million, gain a stadium that doesn't piss off entire sets of club supporters and starts to rake in some of the originally projected returns.

Instead we have a stadium with turf that moves around on the under-soil, is too hard due to an overall lack of soil on-site, and an overpass bridge that seems to have been purpose built to create a halt in foot traffic post-game. It's the new Waverley; same problems, repackaged in delightful new forms.

_________________
29 different attributes,
And only 7 that you like;
20 ways to see the world,
Or 20 ways to start a fight.

I think you misread the article Jim. Ed is not critical of the stadium itself. Only the deals that have been struck.

I like Etihad and make no apologies for it, but financially it has been a disaster for all clubs bar Essendon*.

_________________
The measure of a life is a measure of love and respect
So hard to earn, so easily burned
In the fullness of time
A garden to nurture and protect

#DopeThenStash

Etihad stadium is a metaphor for the whole docklands precinct.

Sterile and without soul.

It has no stories to tell, no sense of occasion, just a purely functional stadium.

Sure, you need to have history to build up stories and an affinity with the area, so that takes time. But there is nothing we as melburnians want to hang our hats on in the whole docklands precinct.

I went down to docklands twice last week - once for work, and the other for dinner - and that place has no energy about it whatsoever. The stadium is the same. On match days, save for the games like v Geelong and v Hawthorn, the DMZ of level 2, which is typically half empty, saps the life out of the place.

It has a roof - the noise should be deafening and the atmosphere electric - but it's like a morgue. You can hear every word the person 3 rows behind you says, even after a goal.

It's symptomatic of the part of melbourne it's in. No one is ever travelling through docklands. It's the end of the line, a jungle of sterile apartments, megamart shopping malls and overpriced sub-par restaurants. It has some great open spaces, like the waterfront plaza or whatever it's called, that no one goes to.

No energy, no life. Just a space to build.

Hopefully over time it gets some stories.

I only like it when it rains.

_________________
Congratulations CK95

The blame for this farcical situation should be sheeted straight back at those in control of the AFL at the time Ron Evans, Graeme Samuel, Wayne Jackson et al - who couldnt wait to sell off Waverley.

They then proceeded to tell all the clubs how much better off they would be at the new Docklands Stadium, that was clearly a lie. Then they said fans would be better off as well.

They tried to underpin the financing of the stadium by launching a premium membership package of the stadium called the “Medallion Club” which they couldn't sell any memberships to until they packaged up 5000 seats to the AFL Grand Final – screwing AFL Members in the process. Pretty farcical offering access to an event at another ground to try and make membership to Dockland Stadium more attractive.

Pretty stupid selling off an 80000 seat stadium and replacing it with a 55,000 seat stadium which you cant even use the last few thousands seats because they are restricted viewing – and pretty stupid that the break even point to make some money out of a game day event is around 30,000.

Sure the AFL are going to take ownership of it in 15 years or so – but by then it will be obsolete and for the wrecking ball - they will have to sell the land off anyway and build another stadium (who is going to finance the $1billion they will need to build another stadium in 2025 and the few hundred million dollars they will need to acquire land to do it).

Etihad Stadium is Ron Evan’s leagacy of shame and like the over priced warm watered down beer and cold pies which he ripped us all off for years to make his fortune, this stadium will also leave a pretty foul taste in the mouths of football fans for a long time to come.

_________________
"Hence you will not say that Greeks fight like heroes but that heroes fight like Greeks"?

Winston Churchill

I got the article, I was just thinking of ways to improve the revenue. A lot of clubs do not like the surface, and with good reason.

_________________
29 different attributes,
And only 7 that you like;
20 ways to see the world,
Or 20 ways to start a fight.

Deep, man. Deep.

SAKC DOKCLANDS

_________________
Congratulations CK95

Now that's what TCers understand

Frankie - question - if a contract is signed between us and the MCG (as all clubs), how can the AFL force us to play our home games elsewhere without law suits? Sorry don't see it or buy it. Collo crap.

Are you serious?? The AFL controls all fixturing. The AFL holds our licence. The AFL contractually holds the whip-hand in all but purely internal club decisions. No club can sign a contract that over-rides the AFL. It's absolute folly to believe otherwise. If that was the case, a cashed-up West Coast Eagles could sign a contract with Patterson Stadium for 22 games there a year, and the AFL would be 'forced' to schedule that accordingly.

In order to play in the AFL, each club agrees to be governed by the AFL. If you think the CFC could just sign a contract with the MCC and wave that at Andrew Demetriou, you're nuts.

I'm not nuts. Collo & Demefroot had an agreement - hook, line & sinker.
We needed to be tough and didn't / couldn't. I would have rather folded than watched my club become "just another" like Kangaroos/Bulldogs. That is what I will never, ever forgive or forget for as long as I and Collo/Demefroot live!
We are so far behind the WC, Crows, Magpies, & Cats - it's not funny and will never more forward as long as we are stuck under the AFL's control and Collo's Etihad! Unfortunately PRATT couldn't move us on - that says it all!

It appears that the reasons that those TC'ers who have stated for liking Etihad are:

1. Just accept it, where not going back to Princes Park.
2. I like the view
3. I like the roof when it rains
4. I like the car parking
5. The AFL said so, so accept it...

These reasons are with respect not sufficiently cogent, persuasive and more importantly, not in our Clubs interest (including our interest from a football performance, Premiership and financial perspective).

In addition, football Clubs are more than just putting a team on the park for 3 hrs on a weekend. There are broader social purposes, which Carlton is presently missing through a lack of a dedicated social club, which other Clubs have. A home ground like Princes Park would cater for this. A social Club that runs for 1 hr before and after the game at Etihad, is never going to fly....

Its clear to me that we need a more powerful Board than can commercially and politically influence change for the long term betterment of the Club.

A good working social club is an entirely different kettle of fish than the delusional belief that continuing to play home games at Princes Park would (from 2005 onwards) would have benefited us entirely in the long term.

As I understand the Social CLub in the old George Harris Stand was not making much of a positive financial contribution to the club (even with pokies).

The fact of the matter was the AFL were not going to fixture us advantageously if we continued to play at Princes Park, they were definitely not going to fixture us advantageously if we elected to play our home games at the MCG.

The simple fact of the matter was in order for us to be able to move from Princes Park we needed the cash that the AFL were going to provide us to extracate ourselves out of our catering contracts at Princes Park - we were not going to get that cash if we chose soley to play our home games at the MCG.

Yes we were unscrupulously held over a barrel and flowered mercileslly without the benefit of any lubricant by the AFL - but unfortunately we were financially bereft of any options.

Like I said previously when the time comes for re-negotiations for where we play our home games ( I think its in 2015) then the whingers and delusionals better speak up then.

_________________
"Hence you will not say that Greeks fight like heroes but that heroes fight like Greeks"?

Winston Churchill

Surrey - John M is correct

Surrey we also had a loan from the AFL at that time of $1m plus and whilst other clubs got grants(ie they didnt have to pay them back) the AFL gave us a loan and if they called in loan -good night Irene no more club -they in a veiled way threatened to pull the loan

Surrey -Collo has a lot of critics but on this one he had absolutely no choice and whilst Mr Pratt gets a lot of kudos here -without Collo and to a lesser extent the boys from the spirit of carlton the club would not have survived -Collo should be applauded for how he made us survive after the excesses of Elliott and the carnage of black friday when the AFL tried to destroy us not lambasted for a matter he couldnt and didnt control

As for Demetriou as Agro sugggests we should never forget his duplicity about the salary cap infringements - he was trying to show the commission how tough he could be and auditioned for the top job by effectively bringing us to our knees

I think this may be the most futile thread on TC.
And that's saying something