SA Footy

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/afl ... 6052420915

Judge for yourself

This windfall from the Adelaide Oval decision cannot be turned into a moment when the SANFL sells off the farm to underwrite its lazy league clubs.

Hard too see how this can be taken out of context.

and who was threatening whom with legal action

Senior reporter = ******

The said "Senior Reporter" has nil credability on any subject on the SANFL and very little when it comes to his home club Port Power.

I like this bit:
"This cannot happen. This will destroy the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity SA football has to turn AAMI Stadium into a monetary asset that can underwrite SANFL and community football and thereby release the Crows and Power to compete in the AFL rather than be cash cows for their SANFL owners."

So what he's saying is that money generated from the FP sale should go towards the Crows and Port owning their own licenses? So instead of selling them to the two clubs maybe Rucci thinks they should pay them to take the licenses off their hands! That would be a good use of funds!

CUTTERMAN wrote:I like this bit:
"This cannot happen. This will destroy the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity SA football has to turn AAMI Stadium into a monetary asset that can underwrite SANFL and community football and thereby release the Crows and Power to compete in the AFL rather than be cash cows for their SANFL owners."

So what he's saying is that money generated from the FP sale should go towards the Crows and Port owning their own licenses? So instead of selling them to the two clubs maybe Rucci thinks they should pay them to take the licenses off their hands! That would be a good use of funds!

Actually I think he meant the SANFL should pay themselves via giving the money to the teams then back again to pay for the liences. Still does not make sense.

Reading the ridiculous mixture of dribble this morning in the paper you'd have to hope someone's just deluded as the other options are even less attractive.

stan wrote:

CUTTERMAN wrote:I like this bit:
"This cannot happen. This will destroy the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity SA football has to turn AAMI Stadium into a monetary asset that can underwrite SANFL and community football and thereby release the Crows and Power to compete in the AFL rather than be cash cows for their SANFL owners."

So what he's saying is that money generated from the FP sale should go towards the Crows and Port owning their own licenses? So instead of selling them to the two clubs maybe Rucci thinks they should pay them to take the licenses off their hands! That would be a good use of funds!

Actually I think he meant the SANFL should pay themselves via giving the money to the teams then back again to pay for the liences. Still does not make sense.

Not making sense is becoming endemic.....

Wedgie wrote:Reading the ridiculous mixture of dribble this morning in the paper you'd have to hope someone's just deluded as the other options are even less attractive.

It is getting ridiculous the crap Rucci's writting. Again he writes that Adelaide and Port want reserves teams. We've seen Neil Craig's view in the West Australian, he ruled it out. I wonder what the ethics are for journalists that write something knowing it to be incorrect (besides pi** weak).

sjt wrote:

Wedgie wrote:Reading the ridiculous mixture of dribble this morning in the paper you'd have to hope someone's just deluded as the other options are even less attractive.

It is getting ridiculous the crap Rucci's writting. Again he writes that Adelaide and Port want reserves teams. We've seen Neil Craig's view in the West Australian, he ruled it out. I wonder what the ethics are for journalists that write something knowing it to be incorrect (besides pi** weak).

Oh I didn't mention Rucci so you're only guessing as to what I'm referring to, in my experience people at the Advertiser are a lot quicker to dish it out than receive it and aren't afraid to throw threats of legal action around at the drop of a hat, tread warily people.

The saddest part about it is the SANFL invite certain people to their annual media awards who get a free feed and drinks and are the recipient of awards.

Just a query. Did the two people who have so far voted no, vote on the basis that the author didn't accuse Port Power of being lazy?

No longer get the Craptiser after having to put up with this type of dribble put up as journalism. Would rather read Google News instead, much cheaper and a far better range of news stories.

Sojourner wrote:No longer get the Craptiser after having to put up with this type of dribble put up as journalism. Would rather read Google News instead, much cheaper and a far better range of news stories.

I would rather read The Onion; the quality of journalism there relies as much on reality as does the 'tiser, with the added advantage of being deliberately humorous.

CUTTERMAN wrote:I like this bit:
"This cannot happen. This will destroy the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity SA football has to turn AAMI Stadium into a monetary asset that can underwrite SANFL and community football and thereby release the Crows and Power to compete in the AFL rather than be cash cows for their SANFL owners."

So what he's saying is that money generated from the FP sale should go towards the Crows and Port owning their own licenses? So instead of selling them to the two clubs maybe Rucci thinks they should pay them to take the licenses off their hands! That would be a good use of funds!

err, I thought it would have been quite clear what was meant. Dont use Adelaide or Port to bankroll the SANFL/SA Footy. Use the money gained from the AAMI stadium sale. Give the two AFL clubs a light stadium deal so they can both make money and in turn reinvest that in football.

Rucci's musings remind me of the bovine excreta I used to read in The Empire Times 20 years ago on the plaza at Flinders. On further reflection/examination I'm sure it is possible he must have written those innane excuses for prose under a pseudonym given the similarities to his current ruminations.

Pseudo wrote:

Sojourner wrote:No longer get the Craptiser after having to put up with this type of dribble put up as journalism. Would rather read Google News instead, much cheaper and a far better range of news stories.

I would rather read The Onion; the quality of journalism there relies as much on reality as does the 'tiser, with the added advantage of being deliberately humorous.

I was offered a free Advertiser at Foodland yesterday .. My wry grin and mild chuckle was all that was required to get the message across.

Macca19 wrote:

CUTTERMAN wrote:I like this bit:
"This cannot happen. This will destroy the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity SA football has to turn AAMI Stadium into a monetary asset that can underwrite SANFL and community football and thereby release the Crows and Power to compete in the AFL rather than be cash cows for their SANFL owners."

So what he's saying is that money generated from the FP sale should go towards the Crows and Port owning their own licenses? So instead of selling them to the two clubs maybe Rucci thinks they should pay them to take the licenses off their hands! That would be a good use of funds!

err, I thought it would have been quite clear what was meant. Dont use Adelaide or Port to bankroll the SANFL/SA Footy. Use the money gained from the AAMI stadium sale. Give the two AFL clubs a light stadium deal so they can both make money and in turn reinvest that in football.

Isn't that what PAFC and it's supporters is complaining about? That the money "They generate" is going back into South Australian football and not in their own pockets?

Pseudo wrote:

Sojourner wrote:No longer get the Craptiser after having to put up with this type of dribble put up as journalism. Would rather read Google News instead, much cheaper and a far better range of news stories.

I would rather read The Onion; the quality of journalism there relies as much on reality as does the 'tiser, with the added advantage of being deliberately humorous.

Its funny the Advertiser is like the Herald sun. People only read that because of the size it is. Where as the AGE is bigger and a bit awkward. Its a bit like that with the Advertiser and the Australian here.