SA Footy

JK wrote: Lets face it, can't blame Port or Crows supporters for not turning up to watch their clubs reserves .. How many of us would go regularly to watch only our reserves (ie, with no main game following)?

Using Friday nights figure at the Parade should make the SANFL more concerned about WTF Glenelg's support is at .. 200 more to their game in MUCH better weather does bode well.

True, you can't blame them. Common sense tells you they were never going to come and watch. Funny, that boosted crowds was put up as a reason for the reserves to precede.

Agreed on your second point.

Sadly common sense is in short supply these days

JK wrote:Sadly common sense is in short supply these days

Common sense aint so common.

Dogwatcher wrote:

JK wrote: Lets face it, can't blame Port or Crows supporters for not turning up to watch their clubs reserves .. How many of us would go regularly to watch only our reserves (ie, with no main game following)?

Using Friday nights figure at the Parade should make the SANFL more concerned about WTF Glenelg's support is at .. 200 more to their game in MUCH better weather does bode well.

True, you can't blame them. Common sense tells you they were never going to come and watch. Funny, that boosted crowds was put up as a reason for the reserves to precede.

Agreed on your second point.

True, unfortunately those supporters who warned the club this would happen were treated as anti progression nuffies.
All the figures from other states showed this would be the case but the clubs were blinded by the bullshit coming from West Lakes

Jim05 wrote:

Dogwatcher wrote:

JK wrote: Lets face it, can't blame Port or Crows supporters for not turning up to watch their clubs reserves .. How many of us would go regularly to watch only our reserves (ie, with no main game following)?

Using Friday nights figure at the Parade should make the SANFL more concerned about WTF Glenelg's support is at .. 200 more to their game in MUCH better weather does bode well.

True, you can't blame them. Common sense tells you they were never going to come and watch. Funny, that boosted crowds was put up as a reason for the reserves to precede.

Agreed on your second point.

True, unfortunately those supporters who warned the club this would happen were treated as anti progression nuffies.
All the figures from other states showed this would be the case but the clubs were blinded by the bullshit coming from West Lakes

Surely the Crows and SANFL knew exactly how it would play out, and surely even the "Yes" clubs knew it too. Most must have needed that $50k a year (or whatever other inducements were included) pretty effin badly.

but $50k aint gonna save clubs in the long term

Dogwatcher wrote:

JK wrote: Lets face it, can't blame Port or Crows supporters for not turning up to watch their clubs reserves .. How many of us would go regularly to watch only our reserves (ie, with no main game following)?

Using Friday nights figure at the Parade should make the SANFL more concerned about WTF Glenelg's support is at .. 200 more to their game in MUCH better weather does bode well.

True, you can't blame them. Common sense tells you they were never going to come and watch. Funny, that boosted crowds was put up as a reason for the reserves to precede.

Yes, "Common Sense" made this an ongoing point throughout the whole anti-reserves "whinge", continually countered with the one line brush off about new audiences and crowd increases.

JK wrote:Surely the Crows and SANFL knew exactly how it would play out, and surely even the "Yes" clubs knew it too.

Yep.

As has already been mentioned there sure wasn't a whole lot of support for Glenelg at Norwood the week before; was also at that game. Same for at Woodville last weekend. Would be interested to know if there was much if any support for North at Richmond. Unfortunately in the case of Glenelg and North there's two pretty well supported clubs doing extremely badly so you are going to get next to no away support for them, it'll be hard enough getting people to home games. For me the surprise was Port Sturt; admittedly the weather on Saturday morning was very ordinary, but given they got 2,571 against the Eagles I'm surprised they got a lower crowd against Sturt. A couple of losses in a row and they jump off?

North traditionally still have great support away from home even when performing poorly, we usually still flock to some select grounds like Richmond, Norwood, Woodville and Alberton but aren't this season and to a degree last. Every diehard I know that is missing games (includking myself) are purely because of the AFL clubs being in the SANFL and ruining its integrity. The games are starting to get a very similar feel to what VFL games are like. We could see it happening. I can see myself going to many away games this year unless extremely bored.

How are the tv ratings this season in comparison to last?

I saw two Unley games vs West and then North.
Watching from the playground side, so I had a good view of the crowd bunched up on the western side, there was very little red and black, and red and white the following week. I'd put the support for west and north at most likely about a quarter to (optimistically) a third of the crowd.

I'm not missing North's games because they are crap. I'm used to them being crap and still went every week despite this for years, but have only been to 2-3 games since Round 1 last year.

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:How are the tv ratings this season in comparison to last?

Not sure about last season but Phil Herden and Foot-e-Times Daily had this year's, to date:-

http://footetimes.com/foot-e-times-daily-tues-may-12th/

(Thanks to Big Phil for the link.)

I don't know if this is possible but could we look at corresponding games Sturt v Port @ Alberton, Centrals v South @ Elizabeth, West v North @ Richmond from 30 - 20 -10 years ago to see the impact of the AFL on SANFL footy.
It might be beneficial to include ladder positions so as to get a clearer picture.

Update after this round, all are to the 2nd week of May:

1997: 3957 (24 matches, to Rd 7)
1998: 4132 (27, Rd 7)
1999: 3711 (27, Rd 7)
2000: 3296 (39, Rd 10)
2001: 4005 (27, Rd 7)
2002: 3761 (27, Rd 7)
2003: 3306 (27, Rd 7)
2004: 3589 (23, Rd 6)
2005: 3241 (27, Rd 7)
2006: 3256 (27, Rd 7)
2007: 3262 (23, Rd 6)
2008: 3672 (28, Rd 7)
2009: 3173 (28, Rd 7)
2010: 3580 (28, Rd 7)
2011: 3639 (23, Rd 6)
2012: 3286 (30, Rd 8)
2013: 3407 (24, Rd 6)
2014: 3357 (25, Rd 6)
2015: 2637 (27, Rd 6)

FootyFanatic wrote:I don't know if this is possible but could we look at corresponding games Sturt v Port @ Alberton, Centrals v South @ Elizabeth, West v North @ Richmond from 30 - 20 -10 years ago to see the impact of the AFL on SANFL footy.
It might be beneficial to include ladder positions so as to get a clearer picture.

Also looking at a few matches like that could see that there was appalling weather during one of those days and may not be indicative of the support at the time

Link to tonights Ch9 story on the news -> https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=85 ... tif_t=like

Dutchy wrote:Link to tonights Ch9 story on the news -> https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=85 ... tif_t=like

I don't have Facebook

johntheclaret wrote:

Dutchy wrote:Link to tonights Ch9 story on the news -> https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=85 ... tif_t=like

I don't have Facebook

I would click the 'like' button but that would be too ironic...

johntheclaret wrote:

Dutchy wrote:Link to tonights Ch9 story on the news -> https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=85 ... tif_t=like

I don't have Facebook

Don;t think you need it to view it.