Jump to content

Featured Replies

14 hours ago, Dannyz said:

I could list 100 reasons why not but I won't waste yours or my time.
From everything I hear the Gosch's paddock area of the AAMI Park precinct is a viable option that's being explored. 

They must have explored every blade of grass by now. How long does it take? 

The problem is that area is controlled by a number of competing groups many of which do not want the loss of public  parkland space.  Which is not difficult to understand.

 
36 minutes ago, old dee said:

They must have explored every blade of grass by now. How long does it take? 

The problem is that area is controlled by a number of competing groups many of which do not want the loss of public  parkland space.  Which is not difficult to understand.

There is something keeping the project alive and you have to think that with Kate's background, her appointment is to move this forward. It's telling that she has only spoken in her regular ABC spot since her appointment as this will be the first question asked OD.

Edited by Dannyz

I understand the government are still a key stakeholder in the project which suggests the MGC precinct is the most likely site.

I, like others, am losing patience. Just confirm a site somewhere centrally whether it be Port Melbourne, Caulfield wherever, just as long as it doesn't end up being Casey. Get on with it. This has the appearance of too many cooks in the kitchen.

 
17 minutes ago, Better days ahead said:

I understand the government are still a key stakeholder in the project which suggests the MGC precinct is the most likely site.

I, like others, am losing patience. Just confirm a site somewhere centrally whether it be Port Melbourne, Caulfield wherever, just as long as it doesn't end up being Casey. Get on with it. This has the appearance of too many cooks in the kitchen.

I almost agreed with you Bda.

4 minutes ago, Better days ahead said:

I understand the government are still a key stakeholder in the project which suggests the MGC precinct is the most likely site.

I, like others, am losing patience. Just confirm a site somewhere centrally whether it be Port Melbourne, Caulfield wherever, just as long as it doesn't end up being Casey. Get on with it. This has the appearance of too many cooks in the kitchen.

It is not going to be confirmed until all stakeholders agree. My gut feel is that some/all co-tenants at AAMI Park & surrounds will be moving to Caulfield and we will take over more/all of the area.


All this talk on Kate Roffey’s credentials driving this issue foward - she has been on our board for 7/8 years with exactly the same credentials over that timeframe. Whilst I’m hopeful, I’m not sure her appointment from Vice President to President will dramatically accelerate an outcome here. In fact, it could be argued she had more time to focus on this issue without the broader responsibilities of President.

1 hour ago, Mach5 said:

Can confirm, although there are options nearby.

I’m quite partial to the Caulfield Racecourse idea, but whichever option we go for, it has to be an actual legitimate option that we proceed with in earnest and haste, not another bloody non-starter.

Tease

2 hours ago, Mach5 said:

Can confirm, although there are options nearby.

I’m quite partial to the Caulfield Racecourse idea, but whichever option we go for, it has to be an actual legitimate option that we proceed with in earnest and haste, not another bloody non-starter.

If they haven't even identified one specific site that they are looking at developing after all these years then what the bloody hell is going on?? Not saying that is the case as we haven't heard anything but surely they have at the very least the location bedded down by now!

 
49 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Tease

I’m not convinced they are GOOD options though 

10 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

If they haven't even identified one specific site that they are looking at developing after all these years then what the bloody hell is going on?? Not saying that is the case as we haven't heard anything but surely they have at the very least the location bedded down by now!

What happened to ‘car park F’? That seemed a relatively straightforward option and adequate.

The option @AC/DeeCposted was more the ambition I expect they’re still pursuing.

On the other side of the MCG, building over the train-lines to connect Melbourne Pk / MCG has tons of potential. Add a high-line style platform all the way to Fed Sq... I see something more integrated than a standalone development coming.

Edited by No10


1 hour ago, In Harmes Way said:

All this talk on Kate Roffey’s credentials driving this issue foward - she has been on our board for 7/8 years with exactly the same credentials over that timeframe. Whilst I’m hopeful, I’m not sure her appointment from Vice President to President will dramatically accelerate an outcome here. In fact, it could be argued she had more time to focus on this issue without the broader responsibilities of President.

Or it could be that there was an obstacle during that time and now that obstacle has been removed...

9 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

Or it could be that there was an obstacle during that time and now that obstacle has been removed...

Let me guess - the initials of the obstacle are GB?

13 hours ago, Rusty Nails said:

 

No mention of a football oval or anything football related in that article.  Appears as if they are looking to cater for almost every recreational pastime bar footy.

Photo from the Age article.

Screen Shot 2021-04-15 at 1.25.17 pm.png

1 hour ago, I'va Worn Smith said:

Photo from the Age article.

Screen Shot 2021-04-15 at 1.25.17 pm.png

I think the artist must have put that in as a hint to the developers to go with footy instead of cricket IWS.  He's obviously a keen footy fan.

Wait...is that OD's signature in the bottom right corner i see!!??

4 hours ago, Rusty Nails said:

I think the artist must have put that in as a hint to the developers to go with footy instead of cricket IWS.  He's obviously a keen footy fan.

Wait...is that OD's signature in the bottom right corner i see!!??

Oh hell I have been discovered.


On 4/15/2021 at 8:08 AM, Dannyz said:

Sadly, I believe a passionte group of Jolimont locals who use the parklands were powerful enough to cease the feasability test on this one in 2019. 

There was also issues re: the rail line.

What is your source for this info?

On 4/15/2021 at 9:40 AM, old dee said:

Yes it is as dead as Ned Kelly!

What is your source for this? (Also asked Danny Z the same...)

On 4/15/2021 at 9:47 AM, Mach5 said:

Can confirm, although there are options nearby.

I’m quite partial to the Caulfield Racecourse idea, but whichever option we go for, it has to be an actual legitimate option that we proceed with in earnest and haste, not another bloody non-starter.

What is the source of your confirmation? (Have asked Danny Z and old d the same question)

5 minutes ago, AC/DeeC said:

What is the source of your confirmation? (Have asked Danny Z and old d the same question)

It was in the press at the time, I’m sure you could find an old age article

On 4/15/2021 at 12:20 AM, Youngwilliam said:

The fact that Collingwood is in our territory pisses me off and I am sure it pisses off alot of you as well. MCG is or home and further away than the Westpac Centre is basically handing the keys to them. 

Just make Jolimont happen. Tell the Yarra Park snobs to sod off.

Well said Youngwilliam. I honestly don't see how a group of East Melbourne residents can have any significant influence. Sure they might make some noise but I'd think we simply drive the Jolimont proposition and work with the State Government and City of Melbourne to make sure it happens. Send Mark Williams around there to sort them out.


On 4/15/2021 at 1:08 PM, Lord Nev said:

Or it could be that there was an obstacle during that time and now that obstacle has been removed...

Dave Misson?

49 minutes ago, In Harmes Way said:

It was in the press at the time, I’m sure you could find an old age article

Thanks IHW. Is this the article from the Age to which you refer? Its from 2018: https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/concept-to-build-new-melbourne-headquarters-in-early-stages-20180620-p4zmnj.html

Still no confirmation that Jolimont has been ruled out as a home for the MFC.

I still think Jolimont is by far the best option.

 

Edited by AC/DeeC

 
33 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Think he meant GB.

Is GB an East Melbourne resident who likes to walk his dogs around the park too?

It all makes sense now, he and Misson working from the inside to thrawt the proposals from inside the club to keep their precious green space to wall their designer poodles. I bet Perty boy is in on it too.

Edited by chookrat

6 minutes ago, chookrat said:

Is GB an East Melbourne resident who likes to walk his dogs around the park too?

It all makes sense now, he and Misson working from the inside to thrawt the proposals from inside the club to keep their precious green space to wall their designer poodles. I bet Perty boy is in on it too.

That's a conspiracy theory at best. But my question remains: where is the proof that Jolimont has been ruled out as a home for the MFC? 


Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

Featured Content

  • GAMEDAY: Collingwood

    It's Game Day and the Demons face a monumental task as they take on the top-of-the-table Magpies in one of the biggest games on the Dees calendar: the King's Birthday Big Freeze MND match. Can the Demons defy the odds and claim a massive scalp to keep their finals hopes alive?

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 61 replies
  • CASEY: Collingwood

    It was freezing cold at Mission Whitten Stadium where only the brave came out in the rain to watch a game that turned out to be as miserable as the weather.
    The Casey Demons secured their third consecutive victory, earning the four premiership points and credit for defeating a highly regarded Collingwood side, but achieved little else. Apart perhaps from setting the scene for Monday’s big game at the MCG and the Ice Challenge that precedes it.
    Neither team showcased significant skill in the bleak and greasy conditions, at a location that was far from either’s home territory. Even the field umpires forgot where they were and experienced a challenging evening, but no further comment is necessary.

      • Thanks
    • 4 replies
  • NON-MFC: Round 13

    Follow all the action from every Round 13 clash excluding the Dees as the 2025 AFL Premiership Season rolls on. With Melbourne playing in the final match of the round on King's Birthday, all eyes turn to the rest of the competition. Who are you tipping to win? And more importantly, which results best serve the Demons’ finals aspirations? Join the discussion and keep track of the matches that could shape the ladder and impact our run to September.

      • Thanks
    • 216 replies
  • PREVIEW: Collingwood

    Having convincingly defeated last year’s premier and decisively outplayed the runner-up with 8.2 in the final quarter, nothing epitomized the Melbourne Football Club’s performance more than its 1.12 final half, particularly the eight consecutive behinds in the last term, against a struggling St Kilda team in the midst of a dismal losing streak. Just when stability and consistency were anticipated within the Demon ranks, they delivered a quintessential performance marked by instability and ill-conceived decisions, with the most striking aspect being their inaccuracy in kicking for goal, which suggested a lack of preparation (instead of sleeping in their hotel in Alice, were they having a night on the turps) rather than a well-rested team. Let’s face it - this kicking disease that makes them look like raw amateurs is becoming a millstone around the team’s neck.

      • Thanks
    • 1 reply
  • CASEY: Sydney

    The Casey Demons were always expected to emerge victorious in their matchup against the lowly-ranked Sydney Swans at picturesque Tramway Oval, situated in the shadows of the SCG in Moore Park. They dominated the proceedings in the opening two and a half quarters of the game but had little to show for it. This was primarily due to their own sloppy errors in a low-standard game that produced a number of crowded mauls reminiscent of the rugby game popular in old Sydney Town. However, when the Swans tired, as teams often do when they turn games into ugly defensive contests, Casey lifted the standard of its own play and … it was off to the races. Not to nearby Randwick but to a different race with an objective of piling on goal after goal on the way to a mammoth victory. At the 25-minute mark of the third quarter, the Demons held a slender 14-point lead over the Swans, who are ahead on the ladder of only the previous week's opposition, the ailing Bullants. Forty minutes later, they had more than fully compensated for the sloppiness of their earlier play with a decisive 94-point victory, that culminated in a rousing finish which yielded thirteen unanswered goals. Kicks hit their targets, the ball found itself going through the middle and every player made a contribution.

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 1 reply
  • REPORT: St. Kilda

    Hands up if you thought, like me, at half-time in yesterday’s game at TIO Traeger Park, Alice Springs that Melbourne’s disposal around the ground and, in particular, its kicking inaccuracy in front of the goals couldn’t get any worse. Well, it did. And what’s even more damning for the Melbourne Football Club is that the game against St Kilda and its resurgence from the bottomless pit of its miserable start to the season wasn’t just lost through poor conversion for goal but rather in the 15 minutes when the entire team went into a slumber and was mugged by the out-of-form Saints. Their six goals two behinds (one goal less than the Demons managed for the whole game) weaved a path of destruction from which they were unable to recover. Ross Lyon’s astute use of pressure to contain the situation once they had asserted their grip on the game, and Melbourne’s self-destructive wastefulness, assured that outcome. The old adage about the insanity of repeatedly doing something and expecting a different result, was out there. Two years ago, the score line in Melbourne’s loss to the Giants at this same ground was 5 goals 15 behinds - a ratio of one goal per four scoring shots - was perfectly replicated with yesterday’s 7 goals 21 behinds. 
    This has been going on for a while and opens up a number of questions. I’ll put forward a few that come to mind from this performance. The obvious first question is whether the club can find a suitable coach to instruct players on proper kicking techniques or is this a skill that can no longer be developed at this stage of the development of our playing group? Another concern is the team's ability to counter an opponent's dominance during a run on as exemplified by the Saints in the first quarter. Did the Demons underestimate their opponents, considering St Kilda's goals during this period were scored by relatively unknown forwards? Furthermore, given the modest attendance of 6,721 at TIO Traeger Park and the team's poor past performances at this venue, is it prudent to prioritize financial gain over potentially sacrificing valuable premiership points by relinquishing home ground advantage, notwithstanding the cultural significance of the team's connection to the Red Centre? 

      • Thanks
    • 4 replies