and more than some NRL games IN THEIR OWN HEARTLAND!!!Raiderdave wrote:Drac wrote:8k for the Wanderers last night.
so........... double some midgets crowds
& they won too
same numb of wins as the midgets had in 22 games .. in 5 games
good on em =D> =D> =D>
making those ********* in orange look very .... very ordinary
Wanderers >>>>>>>> all ova the midgets
Xman wrote:They wouldn't be worried in the slightest. They would have expected these crowds all along.
I'm not alone at all! Look at the low numbers you're blabbing about! That by itself stands as proof that the venue isn't good enough!Xman wrote:Every ground has that problem, including the MCG!Striker wrote:The only venue I've seen of those is the MCG and Waverley, and I'm not surprised they got rid of Waverley because it was bad as well! They didn't call it Arctic Park for nothing you know! The G is better than AAMI Park for cover. 10 to 15 rows my arse! The entire side is exposed on east and west to even a breeze in their faces - and add rain and there's nowhere to hide!
The Storm can afford Etihad. We just can't get in there because the AFL don't want us there!If the wind is blowing the stand facing the wind is exposed. But the other side should be totally covered. Youre alone in your hate of AAMI park. Most people love it.
Its a shocking excuse.The fact the storm averaged less fans when they played at Etihad shows youre full of shite.
The storms low numbers have been at 3 stadiums! Therefore irrespective of the stadium the following just isnt there. Making stadia as the excuse is pathetic!Striker wrote:I'm not alone at all! Look at the low numbers you're blabbing about! That by itself stands as proof that the venue isn't good enough!Xman wrote:Every ground has that problem, including the MCG!Striker wrote:The only venue I've seen of those is the MCG and Waverley, and I'm not surprised they got rid of Waverley because it was bad as well! They didn't call it Arctic Park for nothing you know! The G is better than AAMI Park for cover. 10 to 15 rows my arse! The entire side is exposed on east and west to even a breeze in their faces - and add rain and there's nowhere to hide!
The Storm can afford Etihad. We just can't get in there because the AFL don't want us there!
Its a shocking excuse.The fact the storm averaged less fans when they played at Etihad shows youre full of shite.
Really? In comparison to crowds in that city at theat time, thats utter BS!ParraEelsNRL wrote:They are where the swans were in the same time, stop with the BS.
Yeah but comparing the swans in 1995 to the Storm now is ridiculous. Both codes had lower attendances in those days. Plus you need to consider the sporting culture of melbourne with excellent attendance for all sports, and the dismal attendance culture of Sydney.ParraEelsNRL wrote:I said the storm and swans xman.
Do keep up.
Not the Storm, not FTA anyway.ParraEelsNRL wrote:But both had to start somewhere.
And both have to put up with live TV against the gates these days.
Neither does the nRL given the low attendance figures. In fact almost as many people in Melbourne watched the nRL GF as Sydney!ParraEelsNRL wrote:
well only if it was cold ..... & raining .. they may have beaten a few NRL crowdsXman wrote:and more than some NRL games IN THEIR OWN HEARTLAND!!!Raiderdave wrote:Drac wrote:8k for the Wanderers last night.
so........... double some midgets crowds
& they won too
same numb of wins as the midgets had in 22 games .. in 5 games
good on em =D> =D> =D>
making those ********* in orange look very .... very ordinary
Wanderers >>>>>>>> all ova the midgets
