-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Richmond is a G team
- Thread starter Rosy
- Start date
rosy said:
Rosy,
The Saints and Cats play a majority of their matches at this ground, and have done for a number of years now....and they seem to have adapted and play quite well there.
I would have thought if the Saints/Cats/Bombers play more games there than us, then their injury list would be worse than ours too then.
If Terry is blaming the surface of the Dome for injury concerns, past or present, than thats just an excuse I think.
Personally, from a 'watching the match and facilities' point of view, I quite like it at the Dome.
From a 'Playing a "home" game there against a team whose home ground is the Dome' point of view....its rubbish, and they should have played that game later in the year, at the 'G.
Our home games should be at the 'G....rain, hail, or shine...Melbourne team or interstate team....end of story!
I have to agree, it's a good game to watch the footy at, but not to play at. I have no problems with getting into and out of the place, it's well served by public transport.Digglers Ghost said:Dome is a good ground to watch footy from but the surface is as Big Rex would say, "scheizenhousen".
Plus getting to and into the ground is a huge pain in the @rse.
It is a fantastic ground to watch footy at. Yet I am sick to death of watching players falling arse over turkey when they go to change direction. It's a great ground for the doggies, who like to play tight & use their pace & excellent skill, unfortunately we lack in both of these areas at the moment.
cam said:Also its a joke building a whole new stadium to feel a whopping 50,000 people in.. but hey its got a roof woopdy-doo everything else is excused.. :
This I think is the only legit complaint about the Dome.
I dread the day that we have to play Carlton there when we are both top 4 sides again (Yes I beleive it will happen before I die
)The view is fantastic and the facilities sensational.
Just wish they had listened to McGuire of all people and built it with a larger capacity
Speaking to a player that has played there, the trouble with slipping at the Dome is more about the inconsistency of the overall surface caused by the rotational replacement of sections. Some sections are firm (well rooted ) while others are a tad loose under foot. Some sections are well suited to certain types of boots and other sections require different boots.
Now I'm not saying this of itself is the only problem, cos if you've played suburban footy you'd know what it's like to run with long stops on the cricket pitch area after a dry spell (just an anology to put it in perspective). Teams inspect the ground and make boot choices accordingly - some will assess the ground and go one way hoping to get an overall advantage, while the opposition may go another way in its selection (me I was lucky just have one set of boots ;D).
On injuries, I think Geelong and StKilda have had more injuries than most - whether it's the Dome (Tomb)???
The MCG surface is outstanding most of the time. It is logical to make this our advantage. Personally I hate the sterile Dome as a venue overall (even after getting infor nothing) and never look forward to going there.
The G is for me!
) while others are a tad loose under foot. Some sections are well suited to certain types of boots and other sections require different boots.Now I'm not saying this of itself is the only problem, cos if you've played suburban footy you'd know what it's like to run with long stops on the cricket pitch area after a dry spell (just an anology to put it in perspective). Teams inspect the ground and make boot choices accordingly - some will assess the ground and go one way hoping to get an overall advantage, while the opposition may go another way in its selection (me I was lucky just have one set of boots ;D).
On injuries, I think Geelong and StKilda have had more injuries than most - whether it's the Dome (Tomb)???
The MCG surface is outstanding most of the time. It is logical to make this our advantage. Personally I hate the sterile Dome as a venue overall (even after getting infor nothing) and never look forward to going there.
The G is for me!
CarnTheTiges said:
You're very lucky then Carn. After the round 1 game it took us well over half an hour to shuffle acoss the bridge and it was that crowded you could hardly breathe. There were some pretty strained tempers, there was a person so drunk he couldn't walk unaided and ended up falling over and his mate couldn't get him up again. There was no Bourke St tram and we walked up to Swanson St before one even went past.
People, my family included, have missed the start of the games because of the ridiculously slow ticket system. Someone mentioed in the H/S that they missed their train to Werribee because of the delays.
I find it a massive hassle I can do without when we have a 3 hour trip home after a game.
There's a bemusing comment in realtion to the Dump in today's HeraldSun Telstra Dome spokeswoman Michelle Stamper said the exit may have been "slowed down somewhat" by most of Friday night's crowd staying until the last minute.
It was bad enough in round 1 when a lot left early. I can't imagine what it was like this week when everyone stayed till the end, but the fact is people pay their money to stay for the entire game and should be able to leave the venue both safely and in a reasonable time, after it.
rosy said:
Has Ms Stamper got the hardest job in the AFL - justifying the Dome.
Agree 100% with highlighted comment - but at least they got in by full-time
. Coodabeens had a suggestion some years ago to solve the woes of Telstra Tomb and people not getting in 'til after Qtr time - let everyone in for free and charge them to leave - love their look on life!
rosy said:
its just poor design, thats it. when you have the vast majority of public transport accessable only by one walkway, there's surely gonna be mass games of sardines on your way out of the ground. Of course, it doesnt help that half the walkway is fenced off at the moment. I dont know if its a complaint for the Dome or for Spencer st station, but you'd think that someone somewhere must've thought of putting in an alternate walkway for people who are tramming or want to go to the city. Thats what causes the major blockage, all the people wanting to get on the trains at the closest platforms to the Dome.
Carn's right, it is well served, its just a bit of a hassle to get to it, thats all. It'd probably be more sucky for people coming from out of melbourne, than people who live in the city.
Fortunately, I wasn't catching the train last Friday, but I heard about the crush. I'd got there early enough to park in Dudley Street, so it was a quick drive home.
I know when I do catch the train, that it's easy to get there, straight to Spencer Street, but going home, I've had to go to Flinders Street to change trains.
I know when I do catch the train, that it's easy to get there, straight to Spencer Street, but going home, I've had to go to Flinders Street to change trains.
pharace said:Speaking to a player that has played there, the trouble with slipping at the Dome is more about the inconsistency of the overall surface caused by the rotational replacement of sections. Some sections are firm (well rooted
Now I'm not saying this of itself is the only problem, cos if you've played suburban footy you'd know what it's like to run with long stops on the cricket pitch area after a dry spell (just an anology to put it in perspective). Teams inspect the ground and make boot choices accordingly - some will assess the ground and go one way hoping to get an overall advantage, while the opposition may go another way in its selection (me I was lucky just have one set of boots ;D).
On injuries, I think Geelong and StKilda have had more injuries than most - whether it's the Dome (Tomb)???
The MCG surface is outstanding most of the time. It is logical to make this our advantage. Personally I hate the sterile Dome as a venue overall (even after getting infor nothing) and never look forward to going there.
The G is for me!
Just watching the Sydney match, and the commentators were talking about the surface there. The cricket pitch in the ground is quite hard still, and one of the Sydney players (Saddington I think) fell on it at training and hurt his shoulder, fortunately not too seriously. Be interesting to see if it causes any problems today.
Jools said:pharace said:Speaking to a player that has played there, the trouble with slipping at the Dome is more about the inconsistency of the overall surface caused by the rotational replacement of sections. Some sections are firm (well rooted
Now I'm not saying this of itself is the only problem, cos if you've played suburban footy you'd know what it's like to run with long stops on the cricket pitch area after a dry spell (just an anology to put it in perspective). Teams inspect the ground and make boot choices accordingly - some will assess the ground and go one way hoping to get an overall advantage, while the opposition may go another way in its selection (me I was lucky just have one set of boots ;D).
On injuries, I think Geelong and StKilda have had more injuries than most - whether it's the Dome (Tomb)???
The MCG surface is outstanding most of the time. It is logical to make this our advantage. Personally I hate the sterile Dome as a venue overall (even after getting infor nothing) and never look forward to going there.
The G is for me!
Just watching the Sydney match, and the commentators were talking about the surface there. The cricket pitch in the ground is quite hard still, and one of the Sydney players (Saddington I think) fell on it at training and hurt his shoulder, fortunately not too seriously. Be interesting to see if it causes any problems today.
Thought Saddington was at the Blues now?
But grounds, including the MCG, have always had cricket pitches in the middle....so if people start going on about that now, then its just getting out of hand! :
Wonder how some players of today would go at Moorabbin circa 1985 or something.....probably go on strike cause of a bit of mud in the eye! :hihi
Liverpool said:Thought Saddington was at the Blues now?
But grounds, including the MCG, have always had cricket pitches in the middle....so if people start going on about that now, then its just getting out of hand! :
Wonder how some players of today would go at Moorabbin circa 1985 or something.....probably go on strike cause of a bit of mud in the eye! :hihi
I knew I didn't hear it right! ;D
The G has a drop in pitch though, it doesn't look like the SCG has.
the claw said:
i agree. to be a good team you need to win everywhere
cam said:Also its a joke building a whole new stadium to feel a whopping 50,000 people in.. but hey its got a roof woopdy-doo everything else is excused.. :
i agree. the capacity is about 10,000 too small for something that cost $460 million
Liverpool said:
i agree. lots of players still do their knees at subiaco but you don't hear people complain about that as they do about the dome
Tigermad2005 said:
i agree. but my new MCG seats are pretty damn good!!
CarnTheTiges said:
i agree. i've never had a problem getting in and out of the place. if people line up at gate 2 (bourke st) 15 minutes before the game and expect to see the first bounce. dream on! but it's no different to gate 6 at the G. instead of going to gate 2 15 minutes before game time, go to a different gate. or arrive earlier. it's not rocket science. personally i'm always there at least an hour prior to gametime to utilise the great facilities the dome has to offer. :beer