Training Ground?

[Pipefitter 2,168]

Very much looking forward to seeing the Melbourne Demons Learnings Centre built. 

[The Great Pretender 476]

On 17/12/2024 at 13:50, Redleg said:

He achieved his aim, clickbait and people discussing it.

Move on, it is an irrelevant article. 

Who wants a training base in the middle of a rain belt?

[Roost it far 8,582]

Personally I find the need for 2 ovals completely ridiculous. Just give me one good reason why a team needs 2? They train for about 9-10 hours a week on an oval. The rest in a gym. 

[Neil Crompton 5,618]

3 minutes ago, Roost it far said:

Personally I find the need for 2 ovals completely ridiculous. Just give me one good reason why a team needs 2? They train for about 9-10 hours a week on an oval. The rest in a gym. 

Are you OK Roost? You seem a bit grumpy this morning. Unlike you to have posted a couple of negative posts in a row so a little concerned. Big xmas party last night?

[Roost it far 8,582]

3 minutes ago, Neil Crompton said:

Are you OK Roost? You seem a bit grumpy this morning. Unlike you to have posted a couple of negative posts in a row so a little concerned. Big xmas party last night?

Hahaha....maybe....just been mowing 2 foot high grass and the ride on threw a belt leaving me an acre and a half of tall grass and no mower till early January.  

Edited yesterday at 00:17 by Roost it far

[whatwhat say what 22,939]

18 minutes ago, Roost it far said:

Personally I find the need for 2 ovals completely ridiculous. Just give me one good reason why a team needs 2? They train for about 9-10 hours a week on an oval. The rest in a gym. 

four teams use them

[daisycutter 29,737]

30 minutes ago, Roost it far said:

Personally I find the need for 2 ovals completely ridiculous. Just give me one good reason why a team needs 2? They train for about 9-10 hours a week on an oval. The rest in a gym. 

when i was a young we were happy to train in a pot hole and when it rained we just moved to a shoe box

but you try telling that to the young people nowadays

[No. 31 1,309]

2 hours ago, whatwhat say what said:

four teams use them

Gone are the days when 1 oval is sufficient, now it is minimum 2 ovals. Each club has two male teams (AFL & VFL) and two female teams (AFLW and VFLW).

Ideally one oval has the dimensions of the MCG.

 

Edited yesterday at 02:57 by No. 31

[Roost it far 8,582]

AFLW can train and play at Casey, the VFL can train and play at Casey. The AFL can train on one oval in Caulfield. Tell me how that doesn’t work 

[DistrACTION Jackson 9,225]

3 minutes ago, Roost it far said:

AFLW can train and play at Casey, the VFL can train and play at Casey. The AFL can train on one oval in Caulfield. Tell me how that doesn’t work 

I think the idea is that during the winter months the ground can suffer from too much use. Being able to switch to a different oval would give them time to recover, meaning training conditions won’t be effected.

[binman 43,757]

24 minutes ago, DistrACTION Jackson said:

I think the idea is that during the winter months the ground can suffer from too much use. Being able to switch to a different oval would give them time to recover, meaning training conditions won’t be effected.

Not just that. Two grounds means one can be the exact dimensions of the G and the other configurable to other grounds and/or permanently marked with things that assists others training drills, eg lanes or grids.

[Oxdee 438]

5 hours ago, Roost it far said:

Personally I find the need for 2 ovals completely ridiculous. Just give me one good reason why a team needs 2? They train for about 9-10 hours a week on an oval. The rest in a gym. 

Two benefits:

1. For teams that play both marvel and mcg equally. We played marvel 1-2 per year. So no need.

2. Tho other is to rotate activity on ovals so the grass can grow properly 

[Rab D Nesbitt 8,490]

Perhaps the second oval will have Kardinia Park's dimensions and that's also why we could easily fit both inside the racetrack. 

[whatwhat say what 22,939]

3 hours ago, Roost it far said:

AFLW can train and play at Casey, the VFL can train and play at Casey. The AFL can train on one oval in Caulfield. Tell me how that doesn’t work 

that doesn't work

multiple training ovals and top tier facilities at two locations is best in class

i want us to be best in class

[Demon Disciple 12,273]

4 hours ago, Roost it far said:

AFLW can train and play at Casey, the VFL can train and play at Casey. The AFL can train on one oval in Caulfield. Tell me how that doesn’t work 

Try and get funding when the AFLW/VFLW won’t have facilities in the new project.

[No. 31 1,309]

4 hours ago, Demon Disciple said:

Try and get funding when the AFLW/VFLW won’t have facilities in the new project.

If you want government funding, you need the AFLW angle. Also using it for NGA purposes might be an idea.

As for the second oval, I think Freo has a digital line marking machine. They can select the dimension of say Marvel Stadium and it will set out the dimensions for Marvel so in the lead up to an away game there, they can practice on it. A good idea. Something the Dees should consider.

[Madz 11]

9 hours ago, Roost it far said:

AFLW can train and play at Casey, the VFL can train and play at Casey. The AFL can train on one oval in Caulfield. Tell me how that doesn’t work 

Wasnt the whole idea of a new home base to get everything under the same roof... The club isnt just AFL

[Roost it far 8,582]

10 hours ago, Madz said:

Wasnt the whole idea of a new home base to get everything under the same roof... The club isnt just AFL

I was being belligerent…..I think you’re correct. Although I thought we signed a long term deal at Casey?

[dpositive 1,683]

At the AGM there was an emphasis on the two oval model. Pert stated needed 16 acres to consolidate all club functions. Also stated a number of times that 16 hours of training time for players. Maybe just fixated on number 16.

Im still ambivalent on Caulfield, it still seems to have quite a few issues relying on cooperation with other parties that do not have the MFC as their primary focus. There will be compromises that may degrade the outcomes desired.

In a number of random informal conversations at the AGM it was mentioned that the club had invested a large sum on Goschs and leaving the site to another club was not ideal. That that club appears to be the Pies was even worse. MFC would be abandoning its status as the founding club at the MCG site if relocated to the recognised race track. Our history was acknowledged by Brad and recognised as a significant identity factor for the club. I see it will be difficult to establish that at a site that is so strongly identified as a racing site. it was also recognised that there is an identified population demographic that is not as diverse as an expanding and progressive club needs to grow.

[daisycutter 29,737]

8 minutes ago, dpositive said:

At the AGM there was an emphasis on the two oval model. Pert stated needed 16 acres to consolidate all club functions. Also stated a number of times that 16 hours of training time for players. Maybe just fixated on number 16.

Im still ambivalent on Caulfield, it still seems to have quite a few issues relying on cooperation with other parties that do not have the MFC as their primary focus. There will be compromises that may degrade the outcomes desired.

In a number of random informal conversations at the AGM it was mentioned that the club had invested a large sum on Goschs and leaving the site to another club was not ideal. That that club appears to be the Pies was even worse. MFC would be abandoning its status as the founding club at the MCG site if relocated to the recognised race track. Our history was acknowledged by Brad and recognised as a significant identity factor for the club. I see it will be difficult to establish that at a site that is so strongly identified as a racing site. it was also recognised that there is an identified population demographic that is not as diverse as an expanding and progressive club needs to grow.

you're sounding more like dnegative today 😮  life is a compromise  😁

[Neil Crompton 5,618]

23 minutes ago, dpositive said:

At the AGM there was an emphasis on the two oval model. Pert stated needed 16 acres to consolidate all club functions. Also stated a number of times that 16 hours of training time for players. Maybe just fixated on number 16.

Im still ambivalent on Caulfield, it still seems to have quite a few issues relying on cooperation with other parties that do not have the MFC as their primary focus. There will be compromises that may degrade the outcomes desired.

In a number of random informal conversations at the AGM it was mentioned that the club had invested a large sum on Goschs and leaving the site to another club was not ideal. That that club appears to be the Pies was even worse. MFC would be abandoning its status as the founding club at the MCG site if relocated to the recognised race track. Our history was acknowledged by Brad and recognised as a significant identity factor for the club. I see it will be difficult to establish that at a site that is so strongly identified as a racing site. it was also recognised that there is an identified population demographic that is not as diverse as an expanding and progressive club needs to grow.

Well DP, maybe we could hang onto the lease we have on Goschs and in turn sub lease it to the Pies for a kings ransom until we at least get the money back that has been spent on Gischs. 😀

[dpositive 1,683]

14 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

you're sounding more like dnegative today 😮  life is a compromise  😁

Sorry. Didnt want to be so negative. I am still very positive with the squad and prospects for the flag.

Just as stated ambivalent on the Caulfield project. It will require a lot of management.

I was also extremely pleased with Brad Green at the AGM. He presented and responded well. I particularly liked his comment that the club would communicate clearly and consistently. 

[Farmer 887]

On 17/12/2024 at 08:36, DemonWheels said:

A few of my favorite snippets:

Re: Waverley: “The ground is pristine, players don’t complain about being there..”

“ the region was going to be the centre of Melbourne by now, so you could argue, on that basis, the club would be, eventually, home.”

“the Demons would need to swallow their ego to approach the Hawks, as it might initially look as though they are getting a hand-me-down, however it wasn’t a problem when Jordan Lewis arrived.”

Is this guy serious? Haha honestly his arguments sound like he’s trying to convince himself that this was an article worth writing. Probably his last piece for the year and he’s just phoned it in!

I think the article raises many issues worthy of thought.

Gosch’s Paddock we share with Storm and Victory. Quite unsatisfactory, we must have our own space and facility. 
Waverley apparently available pre season 2026

Caulfield available when? Likely next decade. Ever heard of VCAT? Even if we have broad support, any local individual or sporting association can issue proceedings in VCAT which takes 2 years .

none of our present top line players will get to use the facilities at Caulfield. 

Hawks are leaving W because, like all AFL teams, they need 2 ovals so they are going to Dingley— further from the CBD. They are NOT leaving because of poor facilities. The facilities have enabled them to win 4 flags !
Whether we go to Caulfield or Waverley we will keep Casey ( upon which we have spent a lot ). A combination of Waverley/ Casey works fine. Surface conditions at W are apparently first rate .

Lighting? AFL players train during the daytime , not at night. Lights are needed for matches at night. There won’t be matches at night at Waverley ( or Caulfield)

when we all struggled to get to and from Waverley it was due to the fact that 20,00 to 40,000 others were trying to do likewise. Waverley is very close to the freeway, in fact easier for  most MFC supporters to get to than will be Caulfield . Admittedly there will be public transport access to C .

Ryan’s piece mentioned 2 options, buying Waverley or leasing it . I’m concerned that putting all eggs into the C  basket makes us vulnerable to pressure from anyone wanting to make the most of the situation. If my suggestions as to the drawn out timetable are accurate, why not lease Waverley for, say 3/4 years . Suck it and see. If Caulfield becomes just too hard we are not bound to it .

And finally cost! Do we really need to spend $100m for training facilities ? I suspect that the Waverley option would cost less than one third of that 

 

 

 

[picket fence 17,498]

On 17/12/2024 at 08:40, BDA said:

You forgot to mention it’s 20 mins closer to Casey than goschs. A real game changer 

20 minutes?? TRY 30+ THE MONASH Carpark is a nightmare on most occasions

[Demonstone 22,815]

2 hours ago, dpositive said:

Pert stated needed 16 acres to consolidate all club functions. Also stated a number of times that 16 hours of training time for players. Maybe just fixated on number 16.

That might explain why he was wearing an eye patch at the time.