Talking Footy

Rugby League is built on passion & rivalry something enhanced by local grounds.

AFL are obssesed with emotionless & passionless stadiums.

pussycat wrote:

Rugby is about passion & rivalry something enhanced by local ground local grounds -

AFL are obssesed with emotionless & passionless stadium.

Obviously never been to Coll v Ess on ANZAC day, or Rich v Carlton - VERY ignorant statement there Pussy - if there was no passion and was emotionless the RL would have more members than AFL - sitting in the freezing cold in the rain with a soggy pie is not the environment you will take your kids to - especially if you have to pay the same money as someone in a new stadium under cover! There's no a sport in the world who wouldn't claim its followers are the most passionate - again a very ignorant and pointless statement!

Cracker wrote:

NRLCrap1 wrote:

Cracker wrote:

NRLCrap1 wrote:

But how dare you claim we can't expand any further? 69 countries play our game! That's MASSIVE expansion and plenty of room to go further!

Where in the hell do you get that number from??

Sourced links that are contained on Wikipedia.

Let's see these links that Wikipedia relies upon then.

Look at them yourself!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countries_ ... s_football

pussycat wrote:

Rugby League is built on passion & rivalry something enhanced by local grounds.

AFL are obssesed with emotionless & passionless stadiums.

very ignorant comment.
the AFL teams where Suburban teams playing out of local grounds nearly all of the , but they out grew them years ago, the bigger clubs would have sell out all the time & regularly average 30k plus twice as much as the NRL average.

they have now moved to large stadiums due to the cheer number of people that go to the games.

NRLCrap1 wrote:

Cracker wrote:

NRLCrap1 wrote:

Cracker wrote:

NRLCrap1 wrote:

But how dare you claim we can't expand any further? 69 countries play our game! That's MASSIVE expansion and plenty of room to go further!

Where in the hell do you get that number from??

Sourced links that are contained on Wikipedia.

Let's see these links that Wikipedia relies upon then.

Look at them yourself!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countries_ ... s_football

:_<> :_<> :_<> :_<> :_<> :_<> :_<> :_<> :_<> :_<> :_<> :_<> :_<>

pussycat wrote:

Rugby League is built on passion & rivalry something enhanced by local grounds.

AFL are obssesed with emotionless & passionless stadiums.

I used to go to windy hill with 15000 other people to watch the Bombers play at their home in the early 80's. Give me a full etihad or MCG any day! Nothing more passionate than 90,000 screaming supporters

pussycat wrote:

Rugby League is built on passion & rivalry something enhanced by local grounds.

AFL are obssesed with emotionless & passionless stadiums.

I wouldn't call the MCG passionless at all. However you are correct about the role local grounds play in rugby league.

Meanwhile, did you look at my link and go through it all?

Cracker wrote:

pussycat wrote:

Rugby League is built on passion & rivalry something enhanced by local grounds.

AFL are obssesed with emotionless & passionless stadiums.

I wouldn't call the MCG passionless at all. However you are correct about the role local grounds play in rugby league.

But if they don't rationalise how will they get to 35k fans average?

NRLCrap1 wrote:

Meanwhile, did you look at my link and go through it all?

I will type slowly so you can try to understand.

WIKI is not accepted as a credible source.
Info can be changed by anyone & the AFL pages are written by fumblers like cos who tell whoppers .& sad saps like you believe it.

In NRLCrap1's defence, AFLcrap1, he's trying to get me to look at the sources on which Wikipedia relies and not Wikipedia itself. But it should not be an issue to provide some direct links to these sources instead of just leaving it as Wikipedia.

That is what I require from you, NRLCrap1. Not all 69 at once of course, but let's see something.

Swans, it has been well established that several clubs in Sydney have fans who will not travel. Manly in particular have a reputation for this. Ground rationalisation in the NRL will cause crowds to DROP, not rise. If Manly don't play their home games at Brookvale, the club will all but collapse in terms of fan support. I was afraid the same thing would happen to Canterbury when we moved our home games to ANZ. Luckily it worked, only because it's not that far away. Penrith are in the same boat and so are St George. Parramatta not so much. It's hard to gauge West Tigers given their two bases, and of course Souths are fine at Allianz as are the Roosters for similar reasons to us at ANZ.

I read that Manly were calling on their council to improve Brookvale and raise it's capacity for this reason.

Cracker wrote:

In NRLCrap1's defence, AFLcrap1, he's trying to get me to look at the sources on which Wikipedia relies and not Wikipedia itself. But it should not be an issue to provide some direct links to these sources instead of just leaving it as Wikipedia.

That is what I require from you, NRLCrap1. Not all 69 at once of course, but let's see something.

Swans, it has been well established that several clubs in Sydney have fans who will not travel. Manly in particular have a reputation for this. Ground rationalisation in the NRL will cause crowds to DROP, not rise. If Manly don't play their home games at Brookvale, the club will all but collapse in terms of fan support. I was afraid the same thing would happen to Canterbury when we moved our home games to ANZ. Luckily it worked, only because it's not that far away. Penrith are in the same boat and so are St George. Parramatta not so much. It's hard to gauge West Tigers given their two bases, and of course Souths are fine at Allianz as are the Roosters for similar reasons to us at ANZ.

I read that Manly were calling on their council to improve Brookvale and raise it's capacity for this reason.

Maybe Melb has a greater advantage over Sydney with public transport - when Waverley was there they used to call it Arctic Park and joke that it would be a lock in to keep the crowd there - now with Edihad and the MCG being on the door step of train stations they are very accessible - I live 40 min by train and would happily train it in to see footy as I can have a few beers and enjoy the game - if I had to catch a bus and a train or drive for over an hour I would think twice. Why doesn't Manly look at Nth Sydney for some games to get their fans used to travelling? Lastly it's been a long time since I lived in Sydney but Melb traditional suburbs only following the one team is really a thing of the past - people have moved so much from their traditional areas that you see kids at Auskick with a wide variety of club jumpers. Maybe if NRL rationalised to four stadiums Nth, Sth, East and West that may help change? (Build a New stadium say Chatswood) What do you think?

AFLcrap1 wrote:

NRLCrap1 wrote:

Meanwhile, did you look at my link and go through it all?

I will type slowly so you can try to understand.

WIKI is not accepted as a credible source.
Info can be changed by anyone & the AFL pages are written by fumblers like cos who tell whoppers .& sad saps like you believe it.

no basement dwelling virgin you never will. take off the headphones, tell mummy that you are a grown man and can cope with the outside world!. it will be the best thing that ever happen to you, this thing called "reality"

Swans4ever wrote:

Cracker wrote:

In NRLCrap1's defence, AFLcrap1, he's trying to get me to look at the sources on which Wikipedia relies and not Wikipedia itself. But it should not be an issue to provide some direct links to these sources instead of just leaving it as Wikipedia.

That is what I require from you, NRLCrap1. Not all 69 at once of course, but let's see something.

Swans, it has been well established that several clubs in Sydney have fans who will not travel. Manly in particular have a reputation for this. Ground rationalisation in the NRL will cause crowds to DROP, not rise. If Manly don't play their home games at Brookvale, the club will all but collapse in terms of fan support. I was afraid the same thing would happen to Canterbury when we moved our home games to ANZ. Luckily it worked, only because it's not that far away. Penrith are in the same boat and so are St George. Parramatta not so much. It's hard to gauge West Tigers given their two bases, and of course Souths are fine at Allianz as are the Roosters for similar reasons to us at ANZ.

I read that Manly were calling on their council to improve Brookvale and raise it's capacity for this reason.

Maybe Melb has a greater advantage over Sydney with public transport - when Waverley was there they used to call it Arctic Park and joke that it would be a lock in to keep the crowd there - now with Edihad and the MCG being on the door step of train stations they are very accessible - I live 40 min by train and would happily train it in to see footy as I can have a few beers and enjoy the game - if I had to catch a bus and a train or drive for over an hour I would think twice. Why doesn't Manly look at Nth Sydney for some games to get their fans used to travelling? Lastly it's been a long time since I lived in Sydney but Melb traditional suburbs only following the one team is really a thing of the past - people have moved so much from their traditional areas that you see kids at Auskick with a wide variety of club jumpers. Maybe if NRL rationalised to four stadiums Nth, Sth, East and West that may help change? (Build a New stadium say Chatswood) What do you think?

Manly fans will never leave Brookvale, even for Chatswood. They are that fanatical. Even North Sydney would be a chore and it's not a popular venue anyway in general. The same applies for Penrith and St George. In the case of the Dragons it's why they are considering playing no more games in Wollongong and concentrating on Kogarah, at least when I last looked in detail.

Waverley had other problems besides public transport access. It was too open and not popular on wet and cold days hence it's name Arctic Park. Sydney's public transport system in some ways is better than Melbourne's but your point about the locations of Etihad and the MCG is correct.

Cracker wrote:

Swans4ever wrote:

Cracker wrote:

In NRLCrap1's defence, AFLcrap1, he's trying to get me to look at the sources on which Wikipedia relies and not Wikipedia itself. But it should not be an issue to provide some direct links to these sources instead of just leaving it as Wikipedia.

That is what I require from you, NRLCrap1. Not all 69 at once of course, but let's see something.

Swans, it has been well established that several clubs in Sydney have fans who will not travel. Manly in particular have a reputation for this. Ground rationalisation in the NRL will cause crowds to DROP, not rise. If Manly don't play their home games at Brookvale, the club will all but collapse in terms of fan support. I was afraid the same thing would happen to Canterbury when we moved our home games to ANZ. Luckily it worked, only because it's not that far away. Penrith are in the same boat and so are St George. Parramatta not so much. It's hard to gauge West Tigers given their two bases, and of course Souths are fine at Allianz as are the Roosters for similar reasons to us at ANZ.

I read that Manly were calling on their council to improve Brookvale and raise it's capacity for this reason.

Maybe Melb has a greater advantage over Sydney with public transport - when Waverley was there they used to call it Arctic Park and joke that it would be a lock in to keep the crowd there - now with Edihad and the MCG being on the door step of train stations they are very accessible - I live 40 min by train and would happily train it in to see footy as I can have a few beers and enjoy the game - if I had to catch a bus and a train or drive for over an hour I would think twice. Why doesn't Manly look at Nth Sydney for some games to get their fans used to travelling? Lastly it's been a long time since I lived in Sydney but Melb traditional suburbs only following the one team is really a thing of the past - people have moved so much from their traditional areas that you see kids at Auskick with a wide variety of club jumpers. Maybe if NRL rationalised to four stadiums Nth, Sth, East and West that may help change? (Build a New stadium say Chatswood) What do you think?

Manly fans will never leave Brookvale, even for Chatswood. They are that fanatical. Even North Sydney would be a chore and it's not a popular venue anyway in general. The same applies for Penrith and St George. In the case of the Dragons it's why they are considering playing no more games in Wollongong and concentrating on Kogarah, at least when I last looked in detail.

Waverley had other problems besides public transport access. It was too open and not popular on wet and cold days hence it's name Arctic Park. Sydney's public transport system in some ways is better than Melbourne's but your point about the locations of Etihad and the MCG is correct.

Maybe they need to work on broadening their appeal to fans that will travel?