Talking Footy

adamj1300 wrote:

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"

AFLcrap1 wrote:

adamj1300 wrote:

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"

deflection yet again..
Its all you have ..

Care to comment about WIKI as a credible source...
I'll wait,,

Cracker wrote:

All the more reason to go directly to those sources, NRLCrap1, instead of via a way station.

NRLCrap1 wrote:

Bet you didn't know that eh?

Swans4ever wrote:

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?

Cracker wrote:

Swans4ever wrote:

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?

The number of fans that will travel are so small it's not even workable.

Cracker wrote:

Melbourne sports fans aren't as fickle as Sydney fans. You're right though - Manly won't grow, and neither will St George or Penrith. In the case of Penrith that's a big problem as that is the GWS Giants territory.

AFLcrap1 wrote:

They never helped themselves by sending a geriatric racist old ******* up to alienate RL fans & the Ethnic population they are trying to win over as fans.

pHyR3 wrote:

i'm loving this new management, fiscally strong, marketing and management solid too. Hopefully they work on the on field stuff slowly as well. damn, i'm even more jealous of you fumblers, you've had this for decades....