Always had a bad feeling about this place.

53 minutes ago, Demonstone said:

We're in for a bumper year if we're training the house down before we even get there.

We are so fired up we are burning the places down around us too!

 

i would imagine this is all now an investigation and insurance process

With overlays of heritage requirements cant see this as causing anything but delay.

The MFC project is not directly affected or even on that side of the site so may not be too disastrous.

Police investigate suspicious fire in stands at Caulfield Racecourse in Melbourne's south-east

I can't see it having any real impact on MFC's plans on the Glen Huntly side of the precinct.

On 23/12/2024 at 12:02, DistrACTION Jackson said:

The land isn’t owned by the MRC, so other than providing input they won’t have a say on the final decision.

Who owns it then?? Also, Im warming to the Waverley solution!

Edited January 7Jan 7 by picket fence

25 minutes ago, picket fence said:

Who owns it then?? Also, Im warming to the Waverley solution!

It is owned by the people of Glen Eira with a Trust providing governance.

What element are you warming to? Taking the sloppy seconds of Hawthorn? If it were up to scratch for redevelopment, they would have done it themselves.

I'm warming to sitting tight at AAMI Park where the players love coming to work, with an elite backup facility at Casey until the right piece of land to set us up for the next 50 years is available to the MFC. 

Edited January 7Jan 7 by Dannyz

17 minutes ago, Dannyz said:

It is owned by the people of Glen Eira with a Trust providing governance.

Wouldn't it be owned by the State of Victoria as Crown Land (and goverened by the Racecourse Reserve Trust)?

Agreed on Waverley, if it was any good as a training facility in 2025 the Hawks would not be ditching it. 

If Caulfield was to fall through, staying put at Gosch's/AAMI would make sense.

 

1 hour ago, picket fence said:

Who owns it then?? Also, Im warming to the Waverley solution!

Waverley is one oval.  The Hawks cannot use lights there due to the residential buildings right up the the fence.  It is still a concrete grandstand and does not have the facilities inside which are needed today.

Finally, it has been inhabited by snakes for the past 30 years.  So probably not suitable for you, in case there have been some left behind.....

1 hour ago, george_on_the_outer said:

Finally, it has been inhabited by snakes for the past 30 years. 

Known in my neck of the woods as "Danger Noodles".

7 minutes ago, Demonstone said:

Known in my neck of the woods as "Danger Noodles".

I always liked "Nope Ropes"

10 hours ago, Dannyz said:

It is owned by the people of Glen Eira with a Trust providing governance.

What element are you warming to? Taking the sloppy seconds of Hawthorn? If it were up to scratch for redevelopment, they would have done it themselves.

I'm warming to sitting tight at AAMI Park where the players love coming to work, with an elite backup facility at Casey until the right piece of land to set us up for the next 50 years is available to the MFC. 

It is available at Caulfield so you can stop warming your seat at AAMI Park which is not the solution as you know. 

PF astounds me for such a MFC person being misled by the Waverley Park discontents following one article in the paper. No one has even visited there in 30 years other than Hawks fans and why would they be moving out of there spending more than a million $$$AUD at Dingley if it could be bought up to anything near a satisfactory base for the.next 50/100 years.   
And DP harping on Fishermen’s Bend. Perry has already advised about all other possibilities that they have been examined and considered and unfortunately further discontents still persist with previously discarded training base possibilities. 

Onwards and upwards at Caulfield. 

Suspicious Fires 🔥 in the Grandstands 

It’s all going to plan…..

 

39 minutes ago, 58er said:

It is available at Caulfield so you can stop warming your seat at AAMI Park which is not the solution as you know. 

PF astounds me for such a MFC person being misled by the Waverley Park discontents following one article in the paper. No one has even visited there in 30 years other than Hawks fans and why would they be moving out of there spending more than a million $$$AUD at Dingley if it could be bought up to anything near a satisfactory base for the.next 50/100 years.   
And DP harping on Fishermen’s Bend. Perry has already advised about all other possibilities that they have been examined and considered and unfortunately further discontents still persist with previously discarded training base possibilities. 

Onwards and upwards at Caulfield. 

Sorry didnt realise I was "harping on". Assume you mean Perty not Perry.

I thought I have held back  from commenting and indeed indicated my support for Caulfield while  indicating my reservations. Perhaps I would have protested less had I received response to my questions from Perty. I  sought questions  "about all other possibilities that they have been examined and considered" and received no responses.  I indicated that my intention was to ensure that I did not want to prejudice any negotiations and again received no responses to my questions. Nor was I afforded any acknowledgement or communication from the board to meet and discuss any of my thoughts. 

I appreciated that I was just one member (although I did receive many comments of support from random member contacts) and that the board were busy with their own issues. I should add that I also received  comments  along the lines that the board needed to concentrate on its issues and not be distracted by answering the questions I raised. That was the reason I held back. I have not raised the issue with the club and again appreciate that many of the "possibilities" they examined,  the "examinations" they may have conducted and "considerations" they had undertaken  may have been subject to commercial in confidence or similar restraints. Because of the lack of information I did not and have not proceeded. 

I look forward to a total club Training and admin facility at Caulfield and hope that the new board will  engage with members in an improved fashion. I have seen some evidence of that and hope that this continues. Perhaps I may redraft my questions to Perty to the new board amending Fishermans Bend to Caulfield, although on reflection much of the preamble which related to expanding population demographics do not apply to the Caulfield project and again may distract Pert from his aims and may be considered to be just harping on.

I apologise for any offense or for wasting anyones time. I am happy to discuss any matters with anyone and perhaps harp on too much.

I hope to hear you all barracking for the Dees as I will be whenever I can get to games, or training.  

On 07/01/2025 at 14:21, Dannyz said:

It is owned by the people of Glen Eira with a Trust providing governance.

What element are you warming to? Taking the sloppy seconds of Hawthorn? If it were up to scratch for redevelopment, they would have done it themselves.

I'm warming to sitting tight at AAMI Park where the players love coming to work, with an elite backup facility at Casey until the right piece of land to set us up for the next 50 years is available to the MFC. 

Maybe if we wait 100 years something right will turn up. In the meantime we can continue sharing sun standard facilities with storm, victory and melb city. 

26 minutes ago, Oxdee said:

Maybe if we wait 100 years something right will turn up. In the meantime we can continue sharing sun standard facilities with storm, victory and melb city. 

Oh FFS. 

 

The current situation is evidently good enough to produce athletes and for them to perform at the highest level. 

Supporters seeing a co-joined heartland training and admin base are placing their own emphasis and bias into what it is ‘solving’… I have heard everything from your whining screed above about shared [censored] facilities, to the ‘club being brought together’, to some nuffies on here thinking they will go and have a drink there every second Thursday in retirement like they did in 1976.

Give me a break - I can be indifferent to this, but not when you get all whiny and annoying.

@rpfc To be fair to @Oxdee, sharing facilities with numerous others is far from ideal, otherwise everyone else would be doing it. 

Our current facilities whilst adequate, no doubt would be at the bottom in terms of quality amongst other clubs, that ain’t going to attract players to the club. Nor will it see the club thrive, merely hanging around.

Theres no point waiting for the ‘perfect’ or ‘best’ opportunity, as it may not present itself for years, if at all. I’d prefer the club have the fortitude to pounce on this opportunity, rather than fail to act due to fear of something ‘better’ being forthcoming in the future.

11 hours ago, rpfc said:

Oh FFS. 
The current situation is evidently good enough to produce athletes and for them to perform at the highest level.

 

No it's not. Yes we won a flag, but it was during a covid season when clubs were hubbing etc so the benefit or otherwise of our facilities was significantly reduced. Yes a kg is a kg but looking at our history and the comments from past players it is clear having substandard/shared facilities is not how a modern professional organisation should be run.

Additionally, relying on facilities in the boondocks of Casey significantly hampers our ability to recruit in players. All things being equal, if a player has a choice between us, Collingwood, Carlton, Richmond or even Footscray, Essendon, St Kilda or North we are at a disadvantage when looking solely at the training facilities and the commute that would be required. It is ridiculous this situation has been allowed to continue for so long. I think Caulfield is less than ideal but far more preferable than what we have now (should it come to fruition).

Edited January 8Jan 8 by Dr. Gonzo

27 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

No it's not. Yes we won a flag, but it was during a covid season when clubs were hubbing etc so the benefit or otherwise of our facilities was significantly reduced. Yes a kg is a kg but looking at our history and the comments from past players it is clear having substandard/shared facilities is not how a modern professional organisation should be run.

Additionally, relying on facilities in the boondocks of Casey significantly hampers our ability to recruit in players. All things being equal, if a player has a choice between us, Collingwood, Carlton, Richmond or even Footscray, Essendon, St Kilda or North we are at a disadvantage when looking solely at the training facilities and the commute that would be required. It is ridiculous this situation has been allowed to continue for so long. I think Caulfield is less than ideal but far more preferable than what we have now (should it come to fruition).

Why do you think Caulfield is less than ideal?

18 hours ago, Demon Disciple said:

@rpfc To be fair to @Oxdee, sharing facilities with numerous others is far from ideal, otherwise everyone else would be doing it. 

Our current facilities whilst adequate, no doubt would be at the bottom in terms of quality amongst other clubs, that ain’t going to attract players to the club. Nor will it see the club thrive, merely hanging around.

Theres no point waiting for the ‘perfect’ or ‘best’ opportunity, as it may not present itself for years, if at all. I’d prefer the club have the fortitude to pounce on this opportunity, rather than fail to act due to fear of something ‘better’ being forthcoming in the future.

That is not the feeling I have or  that most Caulfield proponents are approaching the bade there.  If that’s your opinion fine but this is not a throw at the stumps project, but a well constructed case for a major Club base facility in an ideally located locality containing the necessary training and administrative requirements for major portion of this 21st century. 

9 hours ago, DistrACTION Jackson said:

Why do you think Caulfield is less than ideal?

It's in the middle of a horse track and it's outside the MCG precinct.

7 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

It's in the middle of a horse track and it's outside the MCG precinct.

The MCG precinct is never going to happen. Understand the middle of a race track thoughts, however it is really only used as a race track on weekends and a few weekdays in racing season….

3 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

it's outside the MCG precinct.

Priority number 41A

23 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

No it's not. Yes we won a flag, but it was during a covid season when clubs were hubbing etc so the benefit or otherwise of our facilities was significantly reduced. Yes a kg is a kg but looking at our history and the comments from past players it is clear having substandard/shared facilities is not how a modern professional organisation should be run.

Additionally, relying on facilities in the boondocks of Casey significantly hampers our ability to recruit in players. All things being equal, if a player has a choice between us, Collingwood, Carlton, Richmond or even Footscray, Essendon, St Kilda or North we are at a disadvantage when looking solely at the training facilities and the commute that would be required. It is ridiculous this situation has been allowed to continue for so long. I think Caulfield is less than ideal but far more preferable than what we have now (should it come to fruition).

Boo hoo. Living on that side of the bay is a nice life.

People and AFL players choose to go and live in Geelong. 

8 minutes ago, rpfc said:

Boo hoo. Living on that side of the bay is a nice life.

People and AFL players choose to go and live in Geelong. 

I'm sure that's the kind of winning pitch Tim Lamb uses when speaking to prospective recruits.

13 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

It's in the middle of a horse track and it's outside the MCG precinct.

Agree 100% By the way, The timelords are offering Gallifrey as an alternative, and why not, it takes no time to get there!