|
CapitalFootball
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 39,
Visits: 0
|
IMHO...
Canberra
Wollongong
Auckland
Tasmania
|
|
|
|
|
|
HortoMagiko
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 2.6K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+xOn the question of infrastructure I prefer Lakeside over Hutt Recreational ground. However, the Phoenix home ground is Westpac Stadium. That's what the comparison should be. Saying that Lakeside is better that Hutt Recreational ground is like saying that Lakeside is better than Jubilee Oval where Sydney FC have played in the HAL. If Sydney wanted to make that their home ground they would certainly need to be improvements. As an alternate ground it is fine. Hmmm. a cavernous empty shithole with zero atmosphere is probably not the best example to be drawn. Im clearly talking apples and apples. A big part of Souths allure is their boutique stadium as opposed to playing out of aami or etihad . Thats one point. The other point is that hutt looks a hell of a lot better than cake tin on air, sure their home ground is westapc but fat lotta good that's doing them or much more importantly, fat lotta good its doing our TV product..,,,and here we are actually already utilising apparently unfinished boutique stadium, in hutt, to play and televise our games out of.... Edit. If hutt is already good enough for our product then sure as shit lakeside is. You don't have to convince me - you have to convince the FFA. They want a certain standard of infrastructure for the main games. Lakeside at the moment doesn't fit. That doesn't mean it would cost the earth to at least put in temporary seating at both ends.
"They want a certain standard of infrastructure for the main games."Yes they have set the standard with hutt. " Lakeside at the moment doesn't fit."Yes in the same way hutt doesnt fit. but it didnt stop them solving the "problem" overnight and televising games out of it. its disingemous to say one is fit and the other isnt. For the main stadium - not the alternate stadium. So by your logic a third melbourne team has to play out of etihad?? My logic is a boutique stadium is fine for a-league. And Thats smfcs point of difference. Not to mention adelaide play out of one. Your idea that everything has to be on an etihad scale isnt necesaerily viable or sustainable for any and all expansion clubs. and it not like your club exactly plays out of a westpac size arena anyway. Bit of a stretch getting that a third Melbourne team has to play out of Etihad out of what I said. No my logic is that you need to install temporary seating. Adelaide play out of a 16500 stadium with a seated capacity of 15000. CCM play out of an all seater 20059. The FFA will put up with some non-standing on the main grounds a la Adelaide and Newcastle. Their standards on alternate grounds is lower - see Hutt Recreational. If you want Lakeside to be the main stadium it needs to be a much greater ratio of seating to non-seating. GIO Stadium, WIN Stadium, Kardinia Park, Robina Stadium all fit the criteria. If SMFC put in temporary seating so will they (as well as bringing the crowds closer to the action). Agree. would be a shame to hold back aus football by way of farcical standards that tie a nix 3000 member club to a 35k seater and/or the selective implementation of temporary seating.
Is Wellington diverse? Dont know, however this is a club that has no historical or existing link to a specific migrant group - Rusty Einstein
The negative stereotypes are perpetuated by people who either have no idea or are serving a vested interest; neither viewpoint should get anywhere near running Australian football - Ange Postecoglou
|
|
|
|
HortoMagiko
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 2.6K,
Visits: 0
|
+xIMHO...CanberraWollongong Auckland Tasmania 
Is Wellington diverse? Dont know, however this is a club that has no historical or existing link to a specific migrant group - Rusty Einstein
The negative stereotypes are perpetuated by people who either have no idea or are serving a vested interest; neither viewpoint should get anywhere near running Australian football - Ange Postecoglou
|
|
|
|
|
patjennings
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.7K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xOn the question of infrastructure I prefer Lakeside over Hutt Recreational ground. However, the Phoenix home ground is Westpac Stadium. That's what the comparison should be. Saying that Lakeside is better that Hutt Recreational ground is like saying that Lakeside is better than Jubilee Oval where Sydney FC have played in the HAL. If Sydney wanted to make that their home ground they would certainly need to be improvements. As an alternate ground it is fine. Hmmm. a cavernous empty shithole with zero atmosphere is probably not the best example to be drawn. Im clearly talking apples and apples. A big part of Souths allure is their boutique stadium as opposed to playing out of aami or etihad . Thats one point. The other point is that hutt looks a hell of a lot better than cake tin on air, sure their home ground is westapc but fat lotta good that's doing them or much more importantly, fat lotta good its doing our TV product..,,,and here we are actually already utilising apparently unfinished boutique stadium, in hutt, to play and televise our games out of.... Edit. If hutt is already good enough for our product then sure as shit lakeside is. You don't have to convince me - you have to convince the FFA. They want a certain standard of infrastructure for the main games. Lakeside at the moment doesn't fit. That doesn't mean it would cost the earth to at least put in temporary seating at both ends.
"They want a certain standard of infrastructure for the main games."Yes they have set the standard with hutt. " Lakeside at the moment doesn't fit."Yes in the same way hutt doesnt fit. but it didnt stop them solving the "problem" overnight and televising games out of it. its disingemous to say one is fit and the other isnt. For the main stadium - not the alternate stadium. So by your logic a third melbourne team has to play out of etihad?? My logic is a boutique stadium is fine for a-league. And Thats smfcs point of difference. Not to mention adelaide play out of one. Your idea that everything has to be on an etihad scale isnt necesaerily viable or sustainable for any and all expansion clubs. and it not like your club exactly plays out of a westpac size arena anyway. Bit of a stretch getting that a third Melbourne team has to play out of Etihad out of what I said. No my logic is that you need to install temporary seating. Adelaide play out of a 16500 stadium with a seated capacity of 15000. CCM play out of an all seater 20059. The FFA will put up with some non-standing on the main grounds a la Adelaide and Newcastle. Their standards on alternate grounds is lower - see Hutt Recreational. If you want Lakeside to be the main stadium it needs to be a much greater ratio of seating to non-seating. GIO Stadium, WIN Stadium, Kardinia Park, Robina Stadium all fit the criteria. If SMFC put in temporary seating so will they (as well as bringing the crowds closer to the action). If you want Agree. would be a shame to hold back aus football by way of farcical standards that tie a nix 3000 member club to a 35k seater and/or the selective implementation of temporary seating. Yep - but the FFA make the decision. Wouldn't it be better for SMFC to help steer the decision and make it part of their submission instead of complaining when they are not selected. If SMFC want the result they would compromise - not tell the FFA they were wrong when they miss out.
|
|
|
|
|
aussie scott21
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
WP get under 6000 and rate 41k
This is acceptable for the league.
How many new clubs could match this? 6? 7?
It's a reminder the next MV or WSW is not around the corner but matching the low end of the league is possible
|
|
|
|
|
City Sam
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+xWP get under 6000 and rate 41kThis is acceptable for the league.How many new clubs could match this? 6? 7?It's a reminder the next MV or WSW is not around the corner but matching the low end of the league is possible The thing is we don't need to add more top clubs through expansion, nothing wrong with low end teams as long as they are sustainable. The first key is to get more teams into the league which will mean more matches which is always nice and more competition for the league. Which will improve more so with relegation as the bottom teams will have something to play for.
|
|
|
|
|
aufc_ole
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 7K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xWP get under 6000 and rate 41kThis is acceptable for the league.How many new clubs could match this? 6? 7?It's a reminder the next MV or WSW is not around the corner but matching the low end of the league is possible The thing is we don't need to add more top clubs through expansion, nothing wrong with low end teams as long as they are sustainable. The first key is to get more teams into the league which will mean more matches which is always nice and more competition for the league. Which will improve more so with relegation as the bottom teams will have something to play for. Big matches/teams will further drive the value of the tv deal
|
|
|
|
|
City Sam
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xWP get under 6000 and rate 41kThis is acceptable for the league.How many new clubs could match this? 6? 7?It's a reminder the next MV or WSW is not around the corner but matching the low end of the league is possible The thing is we don't need to add more top clubs through expansion, nothing wrong with low end teams as long as they are sustainable. The first key is to get more teams into the league which will mean more matches which is always nice and more competition for the league. Which will improve more so with relegation as the bottom teams will have something to play for. Big matches/teams will further drive the value of the tv deal But not every team will be big, nor should they expect to be. The 3rd Melbourne and Sydney team will create big interest in itself, the others will be solid sustainable teams who will improve once the overall Australian talent does.
|
|
|
|
|
aufc_ole
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 7K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xWP get under 6000 and rate 41kThis is acceptable for the league.How many new clubs could match this? 6? 7?It's a reminder the next MV or WSW is not around the corner but matching the low end of the league is possible The thing is we don't need to add more top clubs through expansion, nothing wrong with low end teams as long as they are sustainable. The first key is to get more teams into the league which will mean more matches which is always nice and more competition for the league. Which will improve more so with relegation as the bottom teams will have something to play for. Big matches/teams will further drive the value of the tv deal But not every team will be big, nor should they expect to be. The 3rd Melbourne and Sydney team will create big interest in itself, the others will be solid sustainable teams who will improve once the overall Australian talent does. Which is why the current model is messed up as it tries to make every team the same which is stupid. Let the big clubs get bigger and let the smaller clubs do their thing
|
|
|
|
Soft News
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 1.4K,
Visits: 0
|
+xWP get under 6000 and rate 41kThis is acceptable for the league. How many new clubs could match this? 6? 7?It's a reminder the next MV or WSW is not around the corner but matching the low end of the league is possible What planet are you on! Do you realise we piss off our host FIFA Confederation (Asia) and send $2.5M of Australian TV money across to New Zealand for your 'acceptable' figures? We get no 'football expertise' for that effort either from NZ. What dope did you smoke as you typed this, I want some?
|
|
|
|
|
City Sam
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xWP get under 6000 and rate 41kThis is acceptable for the league. How many new clubs could match this? 6? 7?It's a reminder the next MV or WSW is not around the corner but matching the low end of the league is possible What planet are you on! Do you realise we piss off our host FIFA Confederation (Asia) and send $2.5M of Australian TV money across to New Zealand for your 'acceptable' figures? We get no 'football expertise' for that effort either from NZ. What dope did you smoke as you typed this, I want some? That wasn't the point, the point was that expansion teams could easily come in and get those attendances and ratings.
|
|
|
|
Soft News
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 1.4K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xWP get under 6000 and rate 41kThis is acceptable for the league. How many new clubs could match this? 6? 7?It's a reminder the next MV or WSW is not around the corner but matching the low end of the league is possible What planet are you on! Do you realise we piss off our host FIFA Confederation (Asia) and send $2.5M of Australian TV money across to New Zealand for your 'acceptable' figures? We get no 'football expertise' for that effort either from NZ. What dope did you smoke as you typed this, I want some? That wasn't the point, the point was that expansion teams could easily come in and get those attendances and ratings. The A-League is still a development league. It is a 20 year project to grow and develop. If we sit here and say that the standard set by the Phoenix TV ratings, attendances are good enough, let alone their weak TV income and the Confederate headache they give us, then we may as well fold the league. Some here don't understand that 'Australian Soccer' is still in a development phase.
|
|
|
|
|
City Sam
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+xWP get under 6000 and rate 41kThis is acceptable for the league. How many new clubs could match this? 6? 7?It's a reminder the next MV or WSW is not around the corner but matching the low end of the league is possible What planet are you on! Do you realise we piss off our host FIFA Confederation (Asia) and send $2.5M of Australian TV money across to New Zealand for your 'acceptable' figures? We get no 'football expertise' for that effort either from NZ. What dope did you smoke as you typed this, I want some? That wasn't the point, the point was that expansion teams could easily come in and get those attendances and ratings. The A-League is still a development league. It is a 20 year project to grow and develop. If we sit here and say that the standard set by the Phoenix TV ratings, attendances are good enough, let alone their weak TV income and the Confederate headache they give us, then we may as well fold the league. Some here don't understand that 'Australian Soccer' is still in a development phase. Thus why those ratings are acceptable for a new team...
|
|
|
|
Soft News
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 1.4K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+xWP get under 6000 and rate 41kThis is acceptable for the league. How many new clubs could match this? 6? 7?It's a reminder the next MV or WSW is not around the corner but matching the low end of the league is possible What planet are you on! Do you realise we piss off our host FIFA Confederation (Asia) and send $2.5M of Australian TV money across to New Zealand for your 'acceptable' figures? We get no 'football expertise' for that effort either from NZ. What dope did you smoke as you typed this, I want some? That wasn't the point, the point was that expansion teams could easily come in and get those attendances and ratings. The A-League is still a development league. It is a 20 year project to grow and develop. If we sit here and say that the standard set by the Phoenix TV ratings, attendances are good enough, let alone their weak TV income and the Confederate headache they give us, then we may as well fold the league. Some here don't understand that 'Australian Soccer' is still in a development phase. Thus why those ratings are acceptable for a new team... I am not a fan of your opinion. Goodnight.
|
|
|
|
|
GDeathe
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xWP get under 6000 and rate 41kThis is acceptable for the league.How many new clubs could match this? 6? 7?It's a reminder the next MV or WSW is not around the corner but matching the low end of the league is possible The thing is we don't need to add more top clubs through expansion, nothing wrong with low end teams as long as they are sustainable. The first key is to get more teams into the league which will mean more matches which is always nice and more competition for the league. Which will improve more so with relegation as the bottom teams will have something to play for. so you're just saying this because it fits in to the P&R Circlejerk
|
|
|
|
|
aussie scott21
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
|
|
|
|
|
TheSelectFew
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 30K,
Visits: 0
|
You'd have to put in two teams. One must be South Melbourne. They tick the boxes. Reasonable sized stadium with lux. In the right TV zone. Have an existing fan base.
|
|
|
|
|
SpongeBobFC
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.3K,
Visits: 0
|
If a Tassy consortium wants to join the comp within the next 4-8 yrs then they cant possibly be playing out of an oval ground. Harry Stamoulis and Robert Belteky have apparently mentioned a stadium and with average crowds between 5-10k they couldn't go past something like the Brita-Arena.Also perfect for Matilda and youth internationals. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BRITA-Arena https://www.facebook.com/BritaArena/ 360 degree view @ http://www.brita-arena.de/| Capacity | 12 566 |
|---|
| 5600 (standing room) |
|---|
| 7066 (seats) |
|---|
| Country | Germany |
|---|
| City | Wiesbaden |
|---|
| Clubs | SV Wehen Wiesbaden |
|---|
| Inauguration | 11.10.2007 (Wehen Wiesbaden – Borussia Dortmund 1-2) |
|---|
| Cost | 14 mln € - Less than 25 mln AUD |
|---|
| Design | Albert Speer & Partner |
|---|
| Address | Berliner Str. 98-102, 65189 Wiesbaden
|
|---|
 Incredably cheap for a stadium and the design allows for cost savings 
|
|
|
|
|
paladisious
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 39K,
Visits: 0
|
+xIf a Tassy consortium wants to join the comp within the next 4-8 yrs then they cant possibly be playing out of an oval ground. Harry Stamoulis and Robert Belteky have apparently mentioned a stadium and with average crowds between 5-10k they couldn't go past something like the Brita-Arena.Also perfect for Matilda and youth internationals. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BRITA-Arena https://www.facebook.com/BritaArena/ 360 degree view @ http://www.brita-arena.de/| Capacity | 12 566 |
|---|
| 5600 (standing room) |
|---|
| 7066 (seats) |
|---|
| Country | Germany |
|---|
| City | Wiesbaden |
|---|
| Clubs | SV Wehen Wiesbaden |
|---|
| Inauguration | 11.10.2007 (Wehen Wiesbaden – Borussia Dortmund 1-2) |
|---|
| Cost | 14 mln € - Less than 25 mln AUD |
|---|
| Design | Albert Speer & Partner |
|---|
| Address | Berliner Str. 98-102, 65189 Wiesbaden
|
|---|
Incredably cheap for a stadium and the design allows for cost savings
Oh baby, yes.
|
|
|
|
|
azzaMVFC
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.3K,
Visits: 0
|
+xIf a Tassy consortium wants to join the comp within the next 4-8 yrs then they cant possibly be playing out of an oval ground. Harry Stamoulis and Robert Belteky have apparently mentioned a stadium and with average crowds between 5-10k they couldn't go past something like the Brita-Arena.Also perfect for Matilda and youth internationals. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BRITA-Arena https://www.facebook.com/BritaArena/ 360 degree view @ http://www.brita-arena.de/| Capacity | 12 566 |
|---|
| 5600 (standing room) |
|---|
| 7066 (seats) |
|---|
| Country | Germany |
|---|
| City | Wiesbaden |
|---|
| Clubs | SV Wehen Wiesbaden |
|---|
| Inauguration | 11.10.2007 (Wehen Wiesbaden – Borussia Dortmund 1-2) |
|---|
| Cost | 14 mln € - Less than 25 mln AUD |
|---|
| Design | Albert Speer & Partner |
|---|
| Address | Berliner Str. 98-102, 65189 Wiesbaden
|
|---|
Incredably cheap for a stadium and the design allows for cost savings
Love the idea. Something about those little stadiums I really like. Even if the funds were tight, two grandstands on either wing, elevated standing area/terrace behind the goals. Something like this, found it online.  Small boutique stadium is exactly what is needed, along with the HAL side of course to boost the game in Tas. There is untapped potential there.
|
|
|
|
|
bigpoppa
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.6K,
Visits: 0
|
Aurora Stadium in Launceston is pretty much 50% that temporary/scaffolding type stand fixed to the ground like that one above in germany. Thats what came to my mind when the premier mentioned putting temporary stands in North Hobart Oval.
|
|
|
|
|
bigpoppa
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.6K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xIf a Tassy consortium wants to join the comp within the next 4-8 yrs then they cant possibly be playing out of an oval ground. Harry Stamoulis and Robert Belteky have apparently mentioned a stadium and with average crowds between 5-10k they couldn't go past something like the Brita-Arena.Also perfect for Matilda and youth internationals. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BRITA-Arena https://www.facebook.com/BritaArena/ 360 degree view @ http://www.brita-arena.de/| Capacity | 12 566 |
|---|
| 5600 (standing room) |
|---|
| 7066 (seats) |
|---|
| Country | Germany |
|---|
| City | Wiesbaden |
|---|
| Clubs | SV Wehen Wiesbaden |
|---|
| Inauguration | 11.10.2007 (Wehen Wiesbaden – Borussia Dortmund 1-2) |
|---|
| Cost | 14 mln € - Less than 25 mln AUD |
|---|
| Design | Albert Speer & Partner |
|---|
| Address | Berliner Str. 98-102, 65189 Wiesbaden
|
|---|
Incredably cheap for a stadium and the design allows for cost savings
Love the idea. Something about those little stadiums I really like. Even if the funds were tight, two grandstands on either wing, elevated standing area/terrace behind the goals. Something like this, found it online. Small boutique stadium is exactly what is needed, along with the HAL side of course to boost the game in Tas. There is untapped potential there. North Hobart Ovals dimensions are 154 by 112 so if they ran the pitch north/south as opposed to east/west it could look something like this.  free image hostOnly issue is the southern end goalie would have the sun directly in their eyes for an afternoon game so that probably wouldn't work out :hehe:
|
|
|
|
|
paladisious
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 39K,
Visits: 0
|
+xthe premier mentioned putting temporary stands in North Hobart Oval. When did the Premier mention this? Exciting news if so.
|
|
|
|
|
paladisious
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 39K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xIf a Tassy consortium wants to join the comp within the next 4-8 yrs then they cant possibly be playing out of an oval ground. Harry Stamoulis and Robert Belteky have apparently mentioned a stadium and with average crowds between 5-10k they couldn't go past something like the Brita-Arena.Also perfect for Matilda and youth internationals. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BRITA-Arena https://www.facebook.com/BritaArena/ 360 degree view @ http://www.brita-arena.de/| Capacity | 12 566 |
|---|
| 5600 (standing room) |
|---|
| 7066 (seats) |
|---|
| Country | Germany |
|---|
| City | Wiesbaden |
|---|
| Clubs | SV Wehen Wiesbaden |
|---|
| Inauguration | 11.10.2007 (Wehen Wiesbaden – Borussia Dortmund 1-2) |
|---|
| Cost | 14 mln € - Less than 25 mln AUD |
|---|
| Design | Albert Speer & Partner |
|---|
| Address | Berliner Str. 98-102, 65189 Wiesbaden
|
|---|
Incredably cheap for a stadium and the design allows for cost savings
Love the idea. Something about those little stadiums I really like. Even if the funds were tight, two grandstands on either wing, elevated standing area/terrace behind the goals. Something like this, found it online. Small boutique stadium is exactly what is needed, along with the HAL side of course to boost the game in Tas. There is untapped potential there. North Hobart Ovals dimensions are 154 by 112 so if they ran the pitch north/south as opposed to east/west it could look something like this. free image hostOnly issue is the southern end goalie would have the sun directly in their eyes for an afternoon game so that probably wouldn't work out :hehe: Interesting, but it'd be a big waste of the nice old grandstand and the terracing in the corner, surely working within the topography, with the terracing on the north side taking advantage of being uphill, it would be better.
|
|
|
|
|
SpongeBobFC
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.3K,
Visits: 0
|
I just love the Modular aspect to it. You could start with the 2 side grandstands with 1 having a roof on the TV commentary side then as time goes by and money becomes available add the ends,roofs,offices,corperate and other add ons. Keeping costs down and control by the club means rent and match day costs aren't or shouldn't be entirely in somebody else's hands.Wellington could really use something like this. the 360 view on http://www.brita-arena.de/ shows how nice the finished product could be from change rooms to corporate box's more picks     
|
|
|
|
|
aussie pride
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xthe premier mentioned putting temporary stands in North Hobart Oval. When did the Premier mention this? Exciting news if so. Mike Cockerill quoted something along the lines of this in his recent article.
|
|
|
|
|
bigpoppa
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.6K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xthe premier mentioned putting temporary stands in North Hobart Oval. When did the Premier mention this? Exciting news if so. Its the Cockerill article posted on page 5 of the FFA set for Tasmania meeting thread. But it's MP Andrew Wilkie not the premier. Got abit excited myself. No quotes but it says in the article he's said he'll find $12million dollars to install seating and upgrade lights/coporate/media facilites to standard. I also saw your previous photoshop on page 5 in the same thread and really liked how you incorporated the stands and terracing. Only issue I see it that they just spent a fortune rebuiling/replicating the original 1920s little old heritage grandstand (at the southern end of my photoshop) that got burnt down so I couldnt imagine them wanting to get rid of that.  
|
|
|
|
|
aufc_ole
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 7K,
Visits: 0
|
+xYou'd have to put in two teams. One must be South Melbourne. They tick the boxes. Reasonable sized stadium with lux. In the right TV zone. Have an existing fan base. But effniks doe
|
|
|
|
|
Glory Recruit
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
So we have two serious bids, Brisbane Strikers and Tasmania. I can't remember how far Southern Sydney went, was that backed by Cronulla sharks?
|
|
|
|
|
Glory Recruit
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+xYou'd have to put in two teams. One must be South Melbourne. They tick the boxes. Reasonable sized stadium with lux. In the right TV zone. Have an existing fan base. But effniks doe Pretty sure South Melbourne said they'd play in red and white (south melbourne colours).
|
|
|
|