SA Footy

i dont mind listening to the show each monday/wednesday morning but was there any need to have a crack at your listeners that have complaints about your show. Yes i understand the adage if you dont like you dont need to listen or read the advertisers. And yes we understand you to are passionate about SANFL but please remember we are the listeners. without us you have no show.

But there was probably no need to critize the few that do . We as a group are only trying to improve your show and are also very passionate about SANFL footy .

Can you expand on this is a bit more dinglinga? Whowas saying what, and what was the catalyst/context for these comments?

when warren partland came on .. he and the host had a dig at people that critise about the lack of coverage the advertiser gives, the fact people are quick to point out mistakes in the press etc . i just felt it was not needed . if their not happy about certain comments on forums like this then bad luck .

fair enough if u dont like u wont listen but u dont need to harp on it

Oh the irony. The Advertiser don't like being critical of anyone themselves, do they?

Get it right and no one has any reason to complain. Simple.

Stevie_K wrote:Get it right and no one has any reason to complain. Simple.

you are kidding arent ya?????

thats just commonsense - journo's dont have that.

since when is Rucci an SANFL journo???? - how many articles has he written on the SANFL in the past 10 years?? and he writes up an article for saturdays advertiser, should have been someone who has actually been following the competition on a week by week basis imo.

The point by Warren Partland was that no other state would have had a two page spread on their second tier competition after the GF. He mentioned he hadn't been to an AFL game for a couple of years and like the other SANFL journos loved the local comp. I still would argue two pages is inadequate. Barely any coverage of the Reserves, 19s, 17s is inadequte. No scores besides the league scores after the second semi is also inadequate. The fact other states don't give appropriate coverage to their leagues doesn't mean we should. The extra exposure is probably proportional to the growth in interest in local footy in SA. I think they underestimate the real interest that is present. I acually didn't mind Ruccis articles they related more to the history of the clubs as opposed to game day events. I must admit, i really appreciate 5rphs coverage of the SANFL, 10 times better than the crappy commercial television stations obsolete coverage. Good interviews.

The coverage this year has been much improved. Journalists such as Warren have to fight to get space and I've got a bit of sympathy for his argument, as I've pointed out previously.

It's easy to sit back and criticise and sure, they make mistakes, but they love their SANFL and do a pretty good job, IMO.

To expect more coverage than we've had this year is unrealistic. We should be pleased that the 'Tiser is waking up to the growing popularity of our League and starting to cover it more.

redandblack wrote:The coverage this year has been much improved. Journalists such as Warren have to fight to get space and I've got a bit of sympathy for his argument, as I've pointed out previously.

It's easy to sit back and criticise and sure, they make mistakes, but they love their SANFL and do a pretty good job, IMO.

To expect more coverage than we've had this year is unrealistic. We should be pleased that the 'Tiser is waking up to the growing popularity of our League and starting to cover it more.

I reakon there should be a hell of a lot more articles about Ferguson and his stranglehold on the mantle of best CHB ever!!!

At least the Advertiser reports on the SANFL, and did a pretty good job during the finals IMO.

I still remember when I went to Melbourne last year reading a Sunday Herald to see what their VFL coverage is like in comparison, and was shocked to see there was zero coverage, not even the scores were in there.

Yes in fairness, red and black he did say they try to get more "space" but can't get it. I'm definitely not blaming the Journos.

TigerBoss wrote:

redandblack wrote:The coverage this year has been much improved. Journalists such as Warren have to fight to get space and I've got a bit of sympathy for his argument, as I've pointed out previously.

It's easy to sit back and criticise and sure, they make mistakes, but they love their SANFL and do a pretty good job, IMO.

To expect more coverage than we've had this year is unrealistic. We should be pleased that the 'Tiser is waking up to the growing popularity of our League and starting to cover it more.

I reakon there should be a hell of a lot more articles about Ferguson and his stranglehold on the mantle of best CHB ever!!!

Do you? I totally agree. Good to see someone so astute

Stevie_K wrote:Get it right and no one has any reason to complain. Simple.

When God made man, he saw his need to have a whinge, and therefore he invented the media to ensure man had something to complain about. It's been a thriving love/hate relationship ever since. In view of this, the media will NEVER "get it right".

If they started getting things right, nobody would pay attention to them, and then they would cease to be.

Warren, Zac and Candice do an excellent job.

I hold them in the highest esteem.

sjt wrote:The point by Warren Partland was that no other state would have had a two page spread on their second tier competition after the GF.

He's comparing apples with oranges, the SANFL is the 2nd best league in the state and going on total interest, monies turned over, etc should have more coverage in the Advertiser than the Power.
No other "second tier competition" has their GF the week after the AFL grand final either.
I wouldnt even begin to compare the VFL which has so many Victorian AFL clubs to compete with, it would be moronic.

My inside mail tells me the journos push for more coverage of the SANFL themselves.
So they're criticising fans for having the same opinion as themselves?
Stick to talking footy mate.
The only decent listen on Wednesday mornings is the weather buruea guy, the Monday morning show is 50 times better.
Ive turned off the Wednesday show, the people on it tend to mistakingly think we're more interested in them (or the otter) than the footy and its get boring after a while.
Full marks to John Nankerville, Chris Kendall, etc on Mondays though, always a must listen, great job lads.

It depends on what kind of mistakes are made.

If it's a cut and paste job like this in the Grand Final Budget:

Eagles Most Games: 241 - A.Rogers (1993-01) - WWT did not even play 241 games in this time, including night matches. 241 is Rogers' career total
Most Years Coached: 5 - B.Winter (1993-97). Hasn't Ron Fuller been there for 8 seasons?

Then whoever does it should expect comments.

If it's a minor error like typing 2002 instead of 2003, ok, maybe that's fair enough, but whatever happened to proofreading and fact checking?

those guys (& girl) are doing their best to get as much on as possible, however it is a business & if the coverage doesn't justify the cost we wont get what we want, furthermore if & when either port or adelaide play deep into the afl finals our coverage will be limited until after they have finished unless either one of them went top which then would go on for most of the week preceeding the game & we'll get a match day coverage of our grand final (maybe)

With the Internet and websites like these, I wonder why people still read the Advertiser for coverage of the SANFL.

Brucetiki wrote:At least the Advertiser reports on the SANFL, and did a pretty good job during the finals IMO.

I still remember when I went to Melbourne last year reading a Sunday Herald to see what their VFL coverage is like in comparison, and was shocked to see there was zero coverage, not even the scores were in there.

That may be so Bruce but you have to remember that the Victorian footy punter hasn't given up much in the advent of the AFL, a letter change from V to A and one or two teams, what you're comparing it to is the Vic amateur league. So compare that to what we've given up for the AFL and the changes to the standing of the SANFL. From an historical and traditional perspective we've given up a shitload and still managed to hold onto alot of the grass roots feel of our comp while keeping a strong standard. So what I'm trying to say in short is that while we've given up alot more than the Vics and put more on the line we have kept a strong foundation of tradition, so when the AFL season is over it's easy for the media to revert to those traditions that we all still follow and turn it into double page spreads etc. I think the media in general have done a great job in promoting the SANFL this season as has the SANFL in promoting itself. I think we're pretty lucky to have the Tiser dedicate a few journo's to the SANFL.
In one of the last Footy Confidential shows at the end of the show they had their segment "what's in the papers", when it came to the Advertiser the back page was SANFL, Gary Lyon couldn't believe it and was dumb-founded why it wasn't the AFL, if he had an outward perspective of footy in Australia he would have commented just how strong the SANFL is, how well supported it is and how fantastic it is that it's happening, but no, as always there is absolutely no idea what goes on outside Victoria for the football supporters of those states. Be it at their own loss.

Brucetiki wrote:I still remember when I went to Melbourne last year reading a Sunday Herald to see what their VFL coverage is like in comparison, and was shocked to see there was zero coverage, not even the scores were in there.

Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't the VFL play mostly on Sundays?

Bit hard to have results in a Sunday paper when the games haven't yet been played...