by staritski » Wed Apr 28, 2010 10:17 pm
by bayman » Wed Apr 28, 2010 10:45 pm
by Voice » Wed Apr 28, 2010 10:53 pm
by staritski » Wed Apr 28, 2010 11:13 pm
Voice wrote:A crap Port and crap Norwood for years now and the overall crowds at the SANFL have been steadily rising over those years.
Inflating your own self worth staritski.
Don't let facts get in the way of your nonsense mate.
by am Bays » Thu Apr 29, 2010 12:00 am
by staritski » Thu Apr 29, 2010 12:27 am
by 85 WAS A GOOD YEAR » Thu Apr 29, 2010 12:57 am
by Adelaide Hawk » Thu Apr 29, 2010 6:55 am
by Adelaide Hawk » Thu Apr 29, 2010 7:01 am
85 WAS A GOOD YEAR wrote:I did some checking thru SANFL Annual Reports and found these stats for the past 2 season:
Norwood v North Hamra Homes 5,404
by am Bays » Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:48 am
staritski wrote:Sorry AM, but the SANFL have previously released average crowd attendences over the last 10 years, and show Norwood/Port occupying the top 2 positions. You are more than welcome to check this
by smac » Thu Apr 29, 2010 9:49 am
Adelaide Hawk wrote:Let's get one thing straight. The official crowd figure was far less than those who actually attended. Many kids were let in for nothing, and those weren't counted. Only people with tickets were included in that figure.
And who gives a stuff about Glenelg and Sturt, the thread is about the existance of Norwood and Port Adelaide keeping the SANFL strong. If you want to crap on about Glenelg and Sturt, start another thread.
by JK » Thu Apr 29, 2010 9:57 am
smac wrote:Adelaide Hawk wrote:Let's get one thing straight. The official crowd figure was far less than those who actually attended. Many kids were let in for nothing, and those weren't counted. Only people with tickets were included in that figure.
And who gives a stuff about Glenelg and Sturt, the thread is about the existance of Norwood and Port Adelaide keeping the SANFL strong. If you want to crap on about Glenelg and Sturt, start another thread.
Now let's get another two things straight. Every game has kids let in for nothing and if someone makes a statement someone else is more than entitled to a contrary opinion. Sorry if that harms your sense of entitlement as a Norwood supporter.
by nickname » Thu Apr 29, 2010 9:58 am
by Dirko » Thu Apr 29, 2010 10:31 am
nickname wrote:Is it any more important that Norwood and Port are 'strong and vibrant' than any other club? We need all of them to be strong don't we?
by topsywaldron » Thu Apr 29, 2010 11:22 am
Constance_Perm wrote:but from a Norwood perspective the real test comes whenever the day arrives that we're a decent side, to see what our figures are like against the other 7 clubs (IMHO)
by topsywaldron » Thu Apr 29, 2010 11:24 am
smac wrote:Sorry if that harms your sense of entitlement as a Norwood supporter.
by Dutchy » Thu Apr 29, 2010 11:31 am
am Bays wrote: Looks like i was wrong about last years 2009 Bays v Legs crowd, maybe after the 1-3 result the year before 'legs fans decided to stay home??
by devilsadvocate » Thu Apr 29, 2010 6:35 pm
SJABC wrote:nickname wrote:Is it any more important that Norwood and Port are 'strong and vibrant' than any other club? We need all of them to be strong don't we?
Correct, and the fact that Norwood & Port are currently ****, doesn't that warm the cockles.....
by SANFLnut » Thu Apr 29, 2010 6:50 pm
by dedja » Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:52 pm
Adelaide Hawk wrote:Let's get one thing straight. The official crowd figure was far less than those who actually attended. Many kids were let in for nothing, and those weren't counted. Only people with tickets were included in that figure.
And who gives a stuff about Glenelg and Sturt, the thread is about the existance of Norwood and Port Adelaide keeping the SANFL strong. If you want to crap on about Glenelg and Sturt, start another thread.
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |