SA Footy

Not sure if anyone had brought up subject before,i thought first round footy budget was very light on for amount of pages and disappointing overall for value.Hope it improves next week.

One glaring mistake I found was on page 30. The fixture says "2009 SANFL MATCH FIXTURE". They certainly need better proof readers that's for sure. Last time I checked this was 2010.

The content in the footy budget and the quality has declined significantly over the years. Unfortunately I wouldn't waste my money on it now

I agree, it's a feeble effort. I thought the cover photo was pathetic. It lacks any dynamism at all, particularly with Paul Thomas just standing there up front holding a rope looking like he doesn't understand what's going on. And I don't blame him. A tug of war for the premiership cup but they're all pulling in the same direction...it hasn't been thought through terribly well.

Mr Fuller wrote:The content in the footy budget and the quality has declined significantly over the years. Unfortunately I wouldn't waste my money on it now

Worth $1

Cheers to see 'The Phantom' back.

Jeers to the lame-arsed, AFL-pandering, knob-jockey he has become.

If you missed it, the centerpiece of his lily-livered 'tirade' was his demand that SANFL games be 'elevated' once more to AFL curtain-raiser status and that moronic football supporters would be able to recognise players only if they had numbers plastered on the fronts of guernseys.

"I strongly believe that we must eventually have an SANFL game on as a curtain raiser to an AFL night game. There has been strong discussion about these sorts of issues in the past and I believe it is time to bite the bullet.

Crowds are let into the ground two hours before and they sit and watch the grass grow. They deserve better!! What is wrong with some pre match entertainment that has some meaning? The SANFL and the SA AFL team playing the match would have to work out the financial issues BUT nothing is impossible. Whilst they are at it how about putting the numbers on the front of the players’ jumpers. Surely that would not be difficult and that would make it even easier for the supporters to spot the player."

Almost as gut-wrenchingly cringeworthy as the clearly disinterested players having a tug-o-war with the Thomas Seymour Hill on the cover - LOL



No, your tribe is laughing

NO-MERCY wrote:

Mr Fuller wrote:The content in the footy budget and the quality has declined significantly over the years. Unfortunately I wouldn't waste my money on it now

Worth $1

agree, but is it even worth that?

Sadly I agre with these comments. The cover was probably the worst Rd.1 cover I can recall. 6-7 years ago the Budget was very, vety good and at $2.50. Don't think it's anywhere near worth the $3 they charge now, don't know if I'll be bothering from now on.

The AFL record is overprices at $5 but at least it's a pretty decent publication, plenty of stats, keeps you 'entertained' pre-match at at half time. More often than not I'll buy it.

Came in handy on Saturday with so many new faces wearing the blue and white, but it’s not something I buy very often. Just has no weight to it.

Btw Hottie..couldn’t help but notice the clubs you support. Last season would have fun Either that or you're taking the p*ss.

saintal wrote:Came in handy on Saturday with so many new faces wearing the blue and white, but it’s not something I buy very often.

Likewise in recent years I have bought the budget for the first few rounds, until I can commit my mob's guernsey numbers to memory. After then I don't bother with it.

And they airbrushed out the "SOLO" logo on Ben Warrens jumper

I can't believe the page devoted to "the phantom". It's basically just someones' diary to a typical match. Like an advertisement.

"The Phantom is back?" Well, I plucked a Budget from those I have stored away. It is Round 13 1999.

It talks about the following in brief:
-Mike Nunan being reportedly in discussion with two league clubs who will consider their coaching options at the end of the year
-A little bit about Matthew Twomey impressing the Phantom by his display for West against North the previous week
-The Australian "unusually covering an SANFL matter" regarding the now famous Queensland club Southports' considerations on joining the SANFL.
-An article which the Phantom considered good in light of the media being criticised; about two South players who had run-ins with umpires were being made to umpire junior footy matches
-And why the figure of 1,632 fans attending North and West on Friday night in the last round may have been so low - people staying up to watch the Cricket World Cup semi-final between Australia and South Africa the night before.

And that, my fellow readers is what the Phantom should be like.

If you are a devoted SANFL fan, it is paramount to have a Footy Budget in your hip pocket.

$3.00....

Big deal. It's someones oppinion of the game.

Get it. Read it. Keep it for reference.

Stop Complaining about everything.

Although I would agree that 'The Budget' is not what is used to be, I am surprised @ the criticism

I always buy the budget - if for no other reason than to find out the opposition players.

On the cost ($3) anyone who has anything to do with 'Fanzines' overseas (i.e. TOOFIF), knows that it is NOT an inexpesive exercise to print a WEEKLY magazine, no matter how 'thin' on content. Out of interest, does any SANFL club have it's own 'fanzine'?

On a positive - I like the 'new' size, it's almost back to the original size of 'The Budget' in the '70's

Dog_ger wrote:If you are a devoted SANFL fan, it is paramount to have a Footy Budget in your hip pocket.

$3.00....

Big deal. It's someones oppinion of the game.

Get it. Read it. Keep it for reference.

Stop Complaining about everything.

Agreed. If you don't want it, don't buy it. For me, it's a valuabe point of reference. $3 doesn't even buy you a pie these days.

LoudEagleHooligan wrote:On a positive - I like the 'new' size, it's almost back to the original size of 'The Budget' in the '70's

Not quite, it's about a half size in between, but like yourself, I am happy with a smaller Budget.

That "Phantom" page is the worst read I've ever seen in a budget.
The mini league lineups was more interesting.

Adelaide Hawk wrote:
Not quite, it's about a half size in between, but like yourself, I am happy with a smaller Budget.

I don't mind the size at all, it is the lack of content that is disappointing at the moment

They should include the best bits of the week from SAFooty,

Wedgie wrote:That "Phantom" page is the worst read I've ever seen in a budget.
The mini league lineups was more interesting.

I'm sure there are others who quite enjoy it (not me) but its not a big worry.

I quite enjoy reading the mini league line ups for some reason. Seeing if my old school was out there.