SANFL Focus Group - Participants Sought

[Rushby Hinds]

Pity


Otherwise the survey results would have read

100% of all Port Supporters are well educated and have a good paying job
100% of all Sturt supporters are deluded.

[Dogwatcher]

Family commitment....I thought Sturt was your family

[mighty_tiger_79]

Family commitment....I thought Sturt was your family

good call

some family sturt is then

[Dogwatcher]

Can't even commit to the club....I dunno.

[Punk Rooster]

Lol, No I have a Family Commitment. Sorry!

[Dogwatcher]

That joke's been done today PR...

[eddie eagle]

I'm taking part in a session on Monday night. Starts at 6.15 so it is after work hours.

Nice work Fatal, It is gold that you will be the ethelton fan.
Both the old man & I were too slow to respond, as the lady told us that she "already had too many eagles supporters booked in". It was for the same time, 6-15, I was first emergency but did not receive a call. Turned out phone messages was all that she returned.

Well done to CD for forwarding this on to eagles members anyway.

[bulldogproud]

I would have been there but they rejected my application. Believe it or not, they said on the phone that I was too connected to football as I go to more than ten games a year and sometimes do the stats for a club. They only wanted people who are kept 'at least arm distance away' from the SANFL in not going to matches etc.
Cheers

[drebin]

I would have been there but they rejected my application. Believe it or not, they said on the phone that I was too connected to football as I go to more than ten games a year and sometimes do the stats for a club. They only wanted people who are kept 'at least arm distance away' from the SANFL in not going to matches etc.
Cheers

Surely that can't be right??? Some survey if they are not connecting with diehards or regulars or maybe they are just trying to work out how to attract new supporters or those who go every now and then?

[Squawk]

I would have been there but they rejected my application. Believe it or not, they said on the phone that I was too connected to football as I go to more than ten games a year and sometimes do the stats for a club. They only wanted people who are kept 'at least arm distance away' from the SANFL in not going to matches etc.
Cheers

Surely that can't be right??? Some survey if they are not connecting with diehards or regulars or maybe they are just trying to work out how to attract new supporters or those who go every now and then?

Even worse - volunteers are being vetted - names checked with clubs to ensure they have who they want when it comes to getting one member from each club.

These days, if you're a member it pretty much means you go to the games. You had to be a member to get in - fine - but then you have to be 'cleared' to play? dear oh dear .

[Peterxtc]

Phone call not returned. No response to e-mail.

[pipers]

Even worse - volunteers are being vetted - names checked with clubs to ensure they have who they want when it comes to getting one member from each club.

Don't think I was vetted. <checks downstairs> No, all still attached and in working order... Also not sure about the "arm's length" factor that drebin alluded to. The Centrals representative was the leader of their cheer squad... Also, the bloke running the session suggested there were going to be a few groups, so keep eyes and ears open... And yes there will be some surveys...

[pipers]

Here's my recollection of the session...

Discussion focussed primarily on our perceptions of the SANFL brand. Basically the group came to the conclusion that the SANFL brand was actually of little consequence and it was the clubs that we had the connection/relationship with. The dominant view was that the SANFL's role should be to act as the custodian of the game in SA with a responsibility to nuture football at all levels and age groups. The discussions suggested that this role gets diluted when they are also required to perform a governance function over the management of the two AFL licencees, which the group had previously ear-marked as the No.1 competitor (specifically in regard to saturation TV coverage) to the SANFL brand. In essence an untenable position of conflict - but I digress...

Other "competitors" to the brand were seen to be extended shopping hours and the age-old concerns of conflicts with work/sport committments from its main demographic.

There was also some discussion about the relevance of the current name (why is there an N in SANFL anyway?), whether or not the logo needs a revamp, and the merits (or otherwise) of recent advertising/marketing approaches.

What was most pleasing is that by-and-large the group felt that the SANFL should not attempt to market itself against the AFL, but should instead focus on fixing the little things to achieve gradual growth in attendances (eg making it more accessible and appealing to younger people, giving more consideration to scheduling to maximise attendances, driving for greater media exposure rather than expensive ad campaigns and improving the general performance of its PR/Marketing arm and those of its nine member clubs).

Kudos was given to the SANFL for generally effective administration of the league and protection of the SA footy culture in the face of the insidious AFL machinery, and it was felt that more of that and fixing the little niggles would serve to strengthen the brand and in turn the competition far more than anything a new logo or name change could ever achieve.