by woodublieve12 » Mon Jul 28, 2014 11:35 pm
by matt35 » Mon Jul 28, 2014 11:41 pm
by matt35 » Mon Jul 28, 2014 11:45 pm
by robranisgod » Tue Jul 29, 2014 6:56 am
dedja wrote:I was one of those idiots at Prospect. Not sure if there was 100, depends on whether we are counting heads or legs.
by Booney » Tue Jul 29, 2014 9:20 am
prowling panther wrote:Rising Power wrote:johntheclaret wrote:Booney wrote:Not really, DW. Very few Adelaide fans attend their SANFL games and it was no different on Saturday. No surprise to see hardly any there.
6100, would have been lucky to be 400 Adelaide fans.
Anyway, it doesn't prove, disprove or otherwise the "success" of this years SANFL changes.
Does the SANFL get a cut of the gate money or does it to to Port Adeliade?
Happy to be corrected but my understanding is the SANFL takes all monies from tickets purchased at the gates and it's then redistributed evenly. Only monies from season tickets go direct the club.
As a side note, Port would have made an absolute killing on Saturday, especially with the 1914 guernsey on sale (more people wearing those than Crows fans). Bars packed, dining areas packed, merchandise store packed. I myself spent about $200 on all of the above.
More fool you.
by Booney » Tue Jul 29, 2014 9:20 am
woodublieve12 wrote:Any actual facts that back up the claim there was only 400 crow supporters?
by Rising Power » Tue Jul 29, 2014 11:15 am
by Rising Power » Tue Jul 29, 2014 11:23 am
sjt wrote:Rising Power wrote:twosheds wrote:
So 400 AFC fans means there was only 5700 Port fans there, that is a joke too. Where are the rest of them ?
At home watching the game on Ch 7 and being exposed to adverts, which in turn helps your club.
How?
Is the sanfl going to make $1mill from it, and distribute amongst the clubs? Or are the professional clubs that dominate the telecasts going to contribute more to the financial cost? Did the sponsors that were going to pay for the commercial broadcast ever materialise?
by mickey » Tue Jul 29, 2014 11:52 am
Rising Power wrote:
On the Crows supporter numbers...do they have to present their membership card at the ticket box (ie. and get given a ticket) or do they just wave it to the attendant as they walk through the gate? Surely there could be some system to count them?
by bennymacca » Tue Jul 29, 2014 12:40 pm
mickey wrote:Rising Power wrote:
On the Crows supporter numbers...do they have to present their membership card at the ticket box (ie. and get given a ticket) or do they just wave it to the attendant as they walk through the gate? Surely there could be some system to count them?
I'm 99% sure the gate I went in had a separate counter thing for crows members
by RustyCage » Tue Jul 29, 2014 2:15 pm
by Hazydog » Tue Jul 29, 2014 2:22 pm
Rising Power wrote:sjt wrote:Rising Power wrote:twosheds wrote:
So 400 AFC fans means there was only 5700 Port fans there, that is a joke too. Where are the rest of them ?
At home watching the game on Ch 7 and being exposed to adverts, which in turn helps your club.
How?
Is the sanfl going to make $1mill from it, and distribute amongst the clubs? Or are the professional clubs that dominate the telecasts going to contribute more to the financial cost? Did the sponsors that were going to pay for the commercial broadcast ever materialise?
I'm assuming there is an even distribution to each of the SANFL clubs, plus clubs and their sponsors taking it upon themselves to buy spots during their telecasts. Otherwise what's the point of having it on TV at all? I've noticed Centrals have been plugging away on late night TV, maybe they should've saved their pennies and bought only one or two spots during the SANFL games? I don't know what these things cost, but it's a just an idea.
by Hazydog » Tue Jul 29, 2014 2:31 pm
SimonH wrote:In case anyone had any doubt about the impact that the 'arrangements' (I hesitate to say 'rules') have had on the fact that Port Adelaide are 1st and Adelaide are 9th, last weekend confirmed it. By my count, Port had 15 AFL-listed players playing on the weekend (the above 5 plus Biemans are from the SANFL list), and Adelaide had 16. Port's 'seconds' AFL players may be a little bit further along in their development than Adelaide's—but the biggest difference between the two sides is how the above list of players compares with Will Paynter, Matt Thompson, Addison Burns and Sam Tharaldsen plus Ian Callinan.SANFLnut wrote:No surprise to read above that Summerton, Bruggeman, Krakouer, Slattery, Haren had an impact on the result.
by twosheds » Tue Jul 29, 2014 2:36 pm
woodublieve12 wrote:you people be happy if 10k showed up??? would that be a acceptable number or what a bout 50k???? Alberton packed to the rafters!!! people unable to get in...
by twosheds » Tue Jul 29, 2014 2:38 pm
by bennymacca » Tue Jul 29, 2014 2:50 pm
twosheds wrote:what's the crowd been like this year at elizabeth??? anywhere near 6k?
by SANFLnut » Tue Jul 29, 2014 2:56 pm
Hazydog wrote:SimonH wrote:In case anyone had any doubt about the impact that the 'arrangements' (I hesitate to say 'rules') have had on the fact that Port Adelaide are 1st and Adelaide are 9th, last weekend confirmed it. By my count, Port had 15 AFL-listed players playing on the weekend (the above 5 plus Biemans are from the SANFL list), and Adelaide had 16. Port's 'seconds' AFL players may be a little bit further along in their development than Adelaide's—but the biggest difference between the two sides is how the above list of players compares with Will Paynter, Matt Thompson, Addison Burns and Sam Tharaldsen plus Ian Callinan.SANFLnut wrote:No surprise to read above that Summerton, Bruggeman, Krakouer, Slattery, Haren had an impact on the result.
Fair comment - and the effect is magnified as the amount of AFL players available on any given week are reduced.
As much as I'd like to - I cant really blame Port for taking the maximum advantage of the conditions they were offered, that issue needs to be lumped fairly and squarely at the SANFL & Directors involved who allegedly allowed it to occur.
Question to Port supporters - Do you feel the structure you have been given to work with is fair? Particularly in view of the fact that a Team who consistently couldnt make finals is now the raging Premiership Favourite.
And for those who think the conditions give Port a leg up - what further restrictions should be imposed on the compilation of the non AFL listed squad?
by Rising Power » Tue Jul 29, 2014 3:05 pm
Hazydog wrote:
Fair comment - and the effect is magnified as the amount of AFL players available on any given week are reduced.
As much as I'd like to - I cant really blame Port for taking the maximum advantage of the conditions they were offered, that issue needs to be lumped fairly and squarely at the SANFL & Directors involved who allegedly allowed it to occur.
Question to Port supporters - Do you feel the structure you have been given to work with is fair? Particularly in view of the fact that a Team who consistently couldnt make finals is now the raging Premiership Favourite.
And for those who think the conditions give Port a leg up - what further restrictions should be imposed on the compilation of the non AFL listed squad?
by cennals05 » Tue Jul 29, 2014 3:09 pm
bennymacca wrote:
so are you saying that norwood and sturt dont have more than 3k (or whatever it is) members between them???
by Booney » Tue Jul 29, 2014 3:31 pm
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |