There is a possibility that if the expected crowd is less than a certain quota the issue may not be relevant.Originally Posted by Premy
Bad mistake on Olympics behalf, in my honest opinion. They have a great facility, for what it is worth, tidy, clean, though not to the standard of Magic / Edgeworth, which they basically have care and control of and yet they want to play on No. 2 because they want to get a foot in the door to challenge Magic / Edgeworth for the grand final. Just my opinion based on what i have heard! A really bad tactical position for Olympic to hold and i cannot understand what the advantage to Olympic or the State League will be by them playing there, nor do i understand why the Fed is allowing it? Why have a criteria for a home venue and then transfer your club to another venue? We carry on about clubs building and advancing their facilities and yet we have this sort of rubbish going on. As you can see i am passionate about clubs building their facilities.
Questions need to be asked:
1. Why transfer the game to No. 2?
2. What is the tangible benefit from this transfer?
3. What is the advantage for the Fed to move this game?
4. What costs are involved with playing on No. 2?
5. Who will benefit from the costs of playing at No. 2?
6. Will No. 2 be available for future football use?
7. Will No. 2 be a regular venue for Olympic?
8. Will No. 2 have a sufficiently suitable surface for playing football during the season?
9. Who will be playing at Darling St while Olympic are at No. 2?
