Sick of Rucci

[Apachebulldog]

Of course it will be refuted by PAFC, whats this there third plan to keep the club solvent however you are in luck now you have got the fat AFL CASH COW to keep PAFC afloat !!!

[Apachebulldog]

I agree Tigerpie it should not be MILLIONS of dollars becvause of their incompetence its always blame someone else with some of the PAFC people the sooner the SANFL get rid of this noose around their neck( PAFC) the better this comp will be !!!

[Apachebulldog]

Sunday mail today 12/06/2011 page 94 " AFL to chip in 12 million dollars" so Macca 19 my figure of 24 million dollars that i have gleaned out of the the Adelaide rag is now pretty close is it not, PAFC was a basket case my friend but now you can also thank the AFL CASH COW for its saviour end of story maybe or will this be all repeated again in 2014 ????

[Sky Pilot]

I agree the AFL's problem child PAFC should be shut down and its short history hidden from view.

[Barto]

The latest "article"

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/afl ... 6073298006

And AFL chief executive Andrew Demetriou - seething at the destructive tone of the SANFL league directors towards the AFL presence in Adelaide - has demanded SA football ends its in-fighting that he blames for falling interest, attendances, memberships and television ratings in a traditional Australian football state.

Omg, there is so much wrong with deleterious statement it's not funny!!!!!

"seething" LMAO.. nothing of the sort happened. Dan Brown is a better fiction writer than Rucci.

[on the rails]

I have sat on this info until tonight for a variety of reasons however from a very reliable source the SANFL "Hierarchy" were told 3 weeks ago that the real Port debt by time they got to AO would not be what they projected at the time of the last bail out and "one port" vote. So off the mark were they that it appeared a number of PAFC people could be considered as deliberately lying or not disclosing. Hence the SANFL putting their foot down and stopping the "handouts". A minimum 15 million debt by time AO is ready for AFL Football.

Interestingly - apparently 31,000 will be the break even mark at AO according to the SMA analysis to date? Hard to see how the AO will be the "great white saviour" as being touted and reported.

Apparently Rucci is aware of this but funny how that is not coming through any of his biaised reporting. Funny he is going on about leaks from SANFL Clubs. If he had his way he would silence all that disagree with him.

A massive current problem for SANFL Clubs is that even though behind closed doors Whicker and co support the 8 clubs view - he is too scared to come out publically and take Rucci to task with fact about all his anti-SANFL club bullshit and how and where the money the clubs get each year as their dividend.

[whufc]

Great Post OTR!!

[redandblack]

Yes, otr, it would be nice to have all the facts before us, rather than only the part that some choose to tell us if it supports their argument.

[CUTTERMAN]

OTR, if I'd known this this morning I would've taken the opportunity to ring 5AA and press him on these figures, I've for some time wanted to ask him just what the break even crowd figure is for either WC or Freo for a home game at Subiaco, as yet I haven't had the chance. If anyone does then please take up that opportunity. If he balks at it then someone else take it up etc etc. The point is that we need real answers and real figures, not egos and agendas.

So a challenge to you Michaelangelo Rucci, come up with these figures by the next weekend you are on 5AA and present them with undeniable evidence for all to access or face numerous phone calls to the radio station you are employed by. Let your facts and research back up your articles, be open and apparent and give your readers a chance to understand all that you are privy to.
I await a reply.

[oldfella]

Went to shops today with radio on --- Rucci classic comment or two showed his bias ( probably misquote but basically) -- speaking in reference to North/West game reports "Ïf I must use the term the SANFL commission" and bit later "The SANFL claims to be worried about South Australian footy but only talks for the SANFL clubs, I speak/write?? for the entire South Australian footy that includes AFL Clubs, SANFL clubs and associated leagues".

Given he has started the war it might be a good start if the SANFL showed some balls and withdrew his journalist accreditation at all SAFL managed games & conferences (this includes AFL games) --- no hope of course

Man must have many mirrors in his house -- main reason I do not buy the Advertiser anymore to get my football information,

[Macca19]

Interestingly - apparently 31,000 will be the break even mark at AO according to the SMA analysis to date? Hard to see how the AO will be the "great white saviour" as being touted and reported.

Thats not what was said at all. It said to get the full benefits of the move (the $2.5 mill better off etc) then you'd need to average 31,000+. Completely different.

I have sat on this info until tonight for a variety of reasons however from a very reliable source the SANFL "Hierarchy" were told 3 weeks ago that the real Port debt by time they got to AO would not be what they projected at the time of the last bail out and "one port" vote. So off the mark were they that it appeared a number of PAFC people could be considered as deliberately lying or not disclosing. Hence the SANFL putting their foot down and stopping the "handouts". A minimum 15 million debt by time AO is ready for AFL Football.

Funny though that the independent SANFL accountant sitting on the board had full support of what the club was doing and said they were well on the right track etc.

[areaman]

Maybe apache because what you wrote was a steaming pile of bull ****? Just because you repeat the $24 million figure doesnt make it any less a figure you pulled out your arse.

To use your strawman figures from the other thread:

10 mil in the last 3 years, another 5 mil for this year, another 9 mil for the next 3 years wow whats that now 24 MILLION DOLLARS

- 10 million in the last 3 years was actually $5.80 million - $3.75 million in 2009 and $2.05 million in 2010. Another $1.95 was due to be delivered this year from the SANFL as part of the $4 million total promised. Ive hard varying reports whether this was actually given or not.

- 5 million this year....a media figure which was quickly refuted by Port management and which you seem to have double counted. Sick of Rucci yet happy to spout a bullshit figure when it suits your argument

- 9 million over 3 years....which includes your supposed $5 million which youve happily now triple counted.

So if you use the base $9 million figure quoted from the media that will be needed in the next 3 years, then its a maximum of $16.75 million (possibly only $14.8 million).

And you wonder why it wouldnt be read out?

PAFC financials show the following grants from SANFL & AFL:

2010 - $2.2m from SANFL and $1m from AFL

2009 - $3.75m from SANFL and $1m from AFL

Total of $7.95m in the last 2 years prior to the events this year

[Mr Irate]

So an average crowd of 31,000 = $2.5mil benefit, what average crowd equals zero benefit ?

Do we have another Port plan based on best case scenarios.....which haven't been met in the past....

How much would Port save by getting rid of the Magpies ?

[on the rails]

Interestingly - apparently 31,000 will be the break even mark at AO according to the SMA analysis to date? Hard to see how the AO will be the "great white saviour" as being touted and reported.

Thats not what was said at all. It said to get the full benefits of the move (the $2.5 mill better off etc) then you'd need to average 31,000+. Completely different.

Really - you were present when this information was told to me which came directly from a paper that has not been released to the public or the press so how would you know if the above is correct or not - hang on, you believe Rucci so whatever he writes must be correct and factual!

My whole point in my post is that the full truth about alot of "happenings" in the SANFL / AFL circles are not occurring yet Rucci is allowed to print half truths, blatant lies and just stir up trouble without ever telling the complete story.

I have sat on this info until tonight for a variety of reasons however from a very reliable source the SANFL "Hierarchy" were told 3 weeks ago that the real Port debt by time they got to AO would not be what they projected at the time of the last bail out and "one port" vote. So off the mark were they that it appeared a number of PAFC people could be considered as deliberately lying or not disclosing. Hence the SANFL putting their foot down and stopping the "handouts". A minimum 15 million debt by time AO is ready for AFL Football.

Funny though that the independent SANFL accountant sitting on the board had full support of what the club was doing and said they were well on the right track etc.

Until the real figures were revealed to him! He was the main person "hoodwinked" in all this! Why do you think he resigned and don't be so gullible to think that "public figures" always disclose why they quit, resign or get terminated!

[CENTURION]

simple solution, grab the doe, go to The Cass & put the lot on black. If it comes up, they can stay!

[Macca19]

Interestingly - apparently 31,000 will be the break even mark at AO according to the SMA analysis to date? Hard to see how the AO will be the "great white saviour" as being touted and reported.

Thats not what was said at all. It said to get the full benefits of the move (the $2.5 mill better off etc) then you'd need to average 31,000+. Completely different.

Really - you were present when this information was told to me which came directly from a paer that has not been releaes to the public or the press so how would you know if the above is correct or not - hang on, you believe Rucci so whatever he writes must be correct and factual!

My whole point in my post is that the full truth about alot of "happenings" in the SANFL / AFL circles are not occurring yet Rucci is allowed to print half truths, blatant lies and just stir up trouble without ever telling the complete story.

Unless its completely changed, they had the guy doing the independent analysis of the figures on ABC mornings about 3 weeks ago and that is what he said. For Port they are predicting a 27% or so increase in attendance and that to get the full benefit of the move they would need to get 31,000. No mention of to break even it would need to be 31,000. And yes, at this point, im happy to trust what an independent forensic analyst has said, on radio, with his name attached over someone I dont know on an internet forum with an anonymous quote. Dont know where you got Rucci from or why you think I would believe everything (or anything) that he writes. The only articles I ever read from the Tiser are those that cause a big fuss, otherwise I couldnt care less what gets written in there.

Funny though that the independent SANFL accountant sitting on the board had full support of what the club was doing and said they were well on the right track etc.

Until the real figures were revealed to him! He was the main person "hoodwinked" in all this! Why do you think he resigned and don't be so gullible to think that "public figures" always disclose why they quit, resign or get terminated![/quote]

You might be wrong, you might be right. This is a guy that was put onto the board by the SANFL to overlook the finances in minute detail - the same SANFL who elected half the board and elected the President of the club. I dont know but to me, suggesting that the SANFL dont know whats happening or have been 'hoodwinked' is disingenious when they have half their own people running the club including the President and reporting directly back to the SANFL directors, and have had a forensic accountant on the board overlooking everything who then came out and said that 'I have full faith in what those running the club are doing and the strategies they have in place, they just need time to come to fruition'. Sorry, but it sounds like bull shit to me unless you believe that the club is running 2 sets of books and that the SANFL elected members of the club are "in on it" as well.

[sjt]

I've tried something different. It's got so frustrating, that Rucci is getting away with halve-truths and misleading statements. He can write something, and say he heard from AFL house or some source, without quoting it.
In his last drivel, he writes, "Western Bulldogs president David Smorgan always raises his eyebrows at the thought the Crows and Power cannot make serious coin at AAMI Stadium, a venue owned by SA football - as compared to a cricket trust or a corporation as happens in Melbourne". It's always inference, or selective quoting. Is this the same David Smorgan that presides over a club that in October had over $5million in debt. This is despite having the least foot department spend of any club, a supposed great stadium deal, a reserves team and a corporate structure SA clubs are supposed to emulate. They've also finished top four in the last three years with the least footy dept. spend - but that's another debate.

Anyway I posted on Localfooty the following

"Jai, I was wondering if people were aware the WA league has rejected the submission to have AFL reserves sides in their local league (it took them a week to decide, rather than four). The reason for the posting here, is despite numerous articles posted by a "journalist" advocating the merit of AFL teams having a reserves team in the SANFL, this WA decision has not yet been mentioned. Nor was Neil Craig's (negative) view on a reserves team, or any contrary attempted postings.
I'm hoping as this is pertinent to local footy, it may get past the censors on the localfooty site. Maybe here we'll see a balanced view?
The agenda here should be (in my opinion), what's best for SA football (all encompassing). A balanced debate would be refreshing.
PROTECT OUR SANFL

[sjt]

It worked! Thanks Jai or whoever the editor is . One posting there (local footy), straight up. Numerous attempted responses to Rucci, censored out. Pretty disgraceful, in my opinion.

[Apachebulldog]

My argument exactly Roochie shoud do quite a bit of investigative reporting by obtaining the financials for the last 5 years that will show where every cent of the millions given to PAFC has disappeared to the reason i am pissed off is because if it is true that the SANFL is in financial strife then PAFC should be sold pronto and again Roochie should obtain these financials as well instead of publishing garbage i think all footy fans in this state want to know where the money has gone ?????

[Macca19]

Im pretty sure we had up around the $6-7 million debt a few years back. Now its at $2 mill. Id say thats where a lot of the money has gone.