The never ending No AFL in the SANFL whinge thread

[topsywaldron]

Its not NIMBY when one side wants everything and whines when it doesn't.

And hilariously I heard Crows fans moaning about the lack of passion from their reserves team on the radio the other day.

[Booney]

98.

Each time I got this close to the 100 mark I'd go for glory. Might as well belt it out* over the fence and raise the arms triumphantly.

Or, a little nick between the legs could get it done too.*

[UK Fan]

Never any doubt this would reach the ton.

And if Port win the flag the second century will be even quicker.

[bennymacca]

Can you show me where Centrals have benefited from the entry of Crows and Port reserves?

Sorry @bennymacca, you seemed to have been distracted - thought I would ask this one again.

Really simple question that I don't think has an answer.

They get a significant amount of money do they not?

What negative impact has there been?

Does every negative thing that happens from now on automatically become the afl teams fault?

Could be a net neutral to the clubs?

[RB]

Never any doubt this would reach the ton.

And if Port win the flag the second century will be even quicker.

If I were Brian Lara, I'd be worried.

[topsywaldron]

They get a significant amount of money do they not?

What negative impact has there been?

Proof that you don't read the fact that don't agree with your viewpoint.

Any chance you could go to an AFL forum now, it's where your heart is.

[Dogwatcher]

Can you show me where Centrals have benefited from the entry of Crows and Port reserves?

Sorry @bennymacca, you seemed to have been distracted - thought I would ask this one again.

Really simple question that I don't think has an answer.

They get a significant amount of money do they not?

What negative impact has there been?

Does every negative thing that happens from now on automatically become the afl teams fault?

Could be a net neutral to the clubs?

You've been asking those who disagree with the proposal for factual responses. Where are yours?

[tipper]

not saying its automatically worse. but there are many people that have pointed out the negatives. the only positives i see would have still been there if the reserves sides went elsewhere..... why gimp the comp for benefits we would still have gotten if they took their sides to the ammos?? some possible negatives which from the looks of the crows latest plan will come about anyway?? lose lose lose situation the sanfl has put itself into

That's just pushing the problem onto somebody else. Hardly a solution, rather just a nimby situation.

it was never the sanfl's problem to begin with. the success or failure of the afl clubs has absolutely nothing to do with the sanfl. it never did.

why should it be the sanfl and its clubs responsibility to help out the crows and power to their own detriment?

might as well cost my own family a shitload of money by taking on some boarders, feeding and clothing them, for a pittance, all to help out because there is a bigger family with a massive house a couple of suburbs over yet too many kids to all have a bedroom of their own.....

[smac]

Can you show me where Centrals have benefited from the entry of Crows and Port reserves?

Sorry @bennymacca, you seemed to have been distracted - thought I would ask this one again.

Really simple question that I don't think has an answer.

They get a significant amount of money do they not?

What negative impact has there been?

Does every negative thing that happens from now on automatically become the afl teams fault?

Could be a net neutral to the clubs?

Could be. Do you think it is?

[bennymacca]

They get a significant amount of money do they not?

What negative impact has there been?

Proof that you don't read the fact that don't agree with your viewpoint.

Any chance you could go to an AFL forum now, it's where your heart is.

I have heard a lot of anecdotes. But that isn't fact. To take it as pure fact is confirmation bias, though I'm sure you don't know what that means

[bennymacca]

Can you show me where Centrals have benefited from the entry of Crows and Port reserves?

Sorry @bennymacca, you seemed to have been distracted - thought I would ask this one again.

Really simple question that I don't think has an answer.

They get a significant amount of money do they not?

What negative impact has there been?

Does every negative thing that happens from now on automatically become the afl teams fault?

Could be a net neutral to the clubs?

You've been asking those who disagree with the proposal for factual responses. Where are yours?

The only real data I have seen are crowds, which aren't down. They are either about the same or slightly up, no matter which way you want to spin it.

Membership at some clubs is down though it's not clear it's solely because of the afl clubs.

Some crowds at specific venues are down, though the link between this and the afl teams is all speculation really. Could be true but nobody had posted any actual data

[bennymacca]

Can you show me where Centrals have benefited from the entry of Crows and Port reserves?

Sorry @bennymacca, you seemed to have been distracted - thought I would ask this one again.

Really simple question that I don't think has an answer.

They get a significant amount of money do they not?

What negative impact has there been?

Does every negative thing that happens from now on automatically become the afl teams fault?

Could be a net neutral to the clubs?

Could be. Do you think it is?

I'm not sure tbh. There are some positives and some negatives. I think it is probably short term positives and long term negatives, though I just disagree as to the extent of those negatives

[smac]

What are the short term positives?

[bennymacca]

Increased crowds, coverage on commercial tv, general news reporting, bringing afl only people to the sanfl.

You might argue some of those points but just things I can think of off the top of my head

[tipper]

as i stated earlier, the commercial tv deal was not a condition of the reserves sides, so it cant be counted

general news reporting? how can more articles on the crows be of benefit to centrals, or North, or Norwood???

increased crowds and bringing afl only people, whats the benefit when they dont add to the bottom line? they get in free, and their expenditure on canteen or bar items is debatable. so far the increased crowds is only a benefit on paper and in allowing the crows to brag in their media releases...

and you were wrong, ill argue all of those points

[PhilH]

I will share some detailed crowd analysis at years end but home game averages club by club compared with last year

- West will have a drop
- North & Central need some good numbers for last 2 games to avoid a drop
- Norwood need OK turnout last 2 games to avoid a drop
- Eagles, Port & South will have an increase on 2013, they are just short of figures currently
- Sturt and Glenelg have already passed 2013 figure with games still to play

Of the 9 clubs with regular home games I think 6-7 will have an increase 2-3 will have a drop
Last year - only 3 clubs (North Port & West) had a rise, the other 6 had a drop
In 2012 - 8 clubs had a drop, only the Eagles had an increase

I have the league needing another 18,894 to match last years total minor round figure
with 15 games left that is just 1,260 per game.

They will probably just fall short of 2012 figure needing another 42,637 per game
or 2,842 per match.

[bennymacca]

I have a sample size of about 4 people but I sure spent a lot on beers when I went

I wouldn't think the bar spend would be that much less. Not at the ground anyway, they are less likely to go back to the club I'll give you that

[smac]

Increased crowds, coverage on commercial tv, general news reporting, bringing afl only people to the sanfl.

You might argue some of those points but just things I can think of off the top of my head

For Centrals, I asked.

You certain of your answer? Don't want to check anything before I respond?

[TimmiesChin]

For Centrals, I asked.

I'd say Centrals TV ad is a winner all round !!

[Dutchy]

I will share some detailed crowd analysis at years end but home game averages club by club compared with last year

- West will have a drop
- North & Central need some good numbers for last 2 games to avoid a drop
- Norwood need OK turnout last 2 games to avoid a drop
- Eagles, Port & South will have an increase on 2013, they are just short of figures currently
- Sturt and Glenelg have already passed 2013 figure with games still to play

Of the 9 clubs with regular home games I think 6-7 will have an increase 2-3 will have a drop
Last year - only 3 clubs (North Port & West) had a rise, the other 6 had a drop
In 2012 - 8 clubs had a drop, only the Eagles had an increase

I have the league needing another 18,894 to match last years total minor round figure
with 15 games left that is just 1,260 per game.

They will probably just fall short of 2012 figure needing another 42,637 per game
or 2,842 per match.

Thanks Phil

Would be interested on how crowds stack up after taking out the Crows games which are the major dynamic chucked in this year i.e. free to get in, honeymoon period etc