2014 Non-Crows AFL Discussion

[radiojake]

Anyone ever told you you're a knob?

well you just did, not that I see how it's relevant at all..


if you wanna keep playing the victim card and make it seem like SA Footy is more persecuted than it actually is, be my guest. But it's pathetic.

There is actually plenty of other legitimate issues to take grievance against in regards to Vic-centrism within the league. But this isn't one of them. MCG has 100,000 seats - only a number of times a season is it actually filled to capacity. Who gives a flying * if minors gets in for free to sit in the nosebleeds purely because there is an average of 40,000 to 50,000 spare seats at each game?


But kudos for playing the ball, Mike. Good work. Hope you feel good about that [/sarcasm]

 

[Elite Crow]

well you just did, not that I see how it's relevant at all..


if you wanna keep playing the victim card and make it seem like SA Footy is more persecuted than it actually is, be my guest. But it's pathetic.

There is actually plenty of other legitimate issues to take grievance against in regards to Vic-centrism within the league. But this isn't one of them. MCG has 100,000 seats - only a number of times a season is it actually filled to capacity. Who gives a flying **** if minors gets in for free to sit in the nosebleeds purely because there is an average of 40,000 to 50,000 spare seats at each game?


But kudos for playing the ball, Mike. Good work. Hope you feel good about that [/sarcasm]

Do you think the Vic clubs are being compensated for loss of revenue?

 

[radiojake]

what loss in revenue?

I honestly have no idea, but I assume it's a 'afl giving away extra tickets' to get more people to the ground...

are you suggesting that the afl are 'paying' for the free tickets, and giving them away, affectively giving these Melbourne clubs a leg up? Is that your conjecture..... if it is, you certainly haven't actually made that point yet.

If this is the case, do you have proof for this?

also, how exactly would Adelaide be able to pull this kind of caper of when Adelaide Oval is otherwise SELLING OUT each week?

 

[radiojake]

persecution sydrome in all its glory..

oh boo hoo adelaide gets a raw deal

 

[Elite Crow]

what loss in revenue?

I honestly have no idea, but I assume it's a 'afl giving away extra tickets' to get more people to the ground...

are you suggesting that the afl are 'paying' for the free tickets, and giving them away, affectively giving these Melbourne clubs a leg up? Is that your conjecture..... if it is, you certainly haven't actually made that point yet.

If this is the case, do you have proof for this?

also, how exactly would Adelaide be able to pull this kind of caper of when Adelaide Oval is otherwise SELLING OUT each week?

Not that hard to work out if the clubs are currently selling tickets to 14 year olds and in the future these will be free, that the clubs would be losing revenue. Can you imagine Eddie wearing that? Do you think Eddie has agreed to this without compensation?

This ties in to your AO is a sellout we don't need it line, our kids could also get in for free and we will still have a sell out if the AFL also reimbursed our clubs.

I am curious though, which state do you live in and do you have kids and if so do you pay for them to go to the footy?

 

[Elite Crow]

persecution sydrome in all its glory..

oh boo hoo adelaide gets a raw deal

Posts such as these lead to opinions such as Mykes.

 

[mattymac]

Kind of funny.

Hilarious. Surprising how few of them know they ripped it off lock, stock and scarf from Newcastle yet they praise it like the greatest tradition sport in this country has ever seen. They just copied the Red Army march down the mall and the anthem from the Jets. Basically just raided soccer for some instant traditions yet their fans prefer to think KT or Koch magically farted these ideas or something

 

[cmndstab]

I am curious though, which state do you live in and do you have kids and if so do you pay for them to go to the footy?

Again, you keep insisting on viewing this argument through the eyes of the average punter.

It's been made for the clubs, not the fans.

As for whether the clubs are being compensated, I don't know - but I doubt it. Certainly not 100 cents on the dollar. When kids are able to come for free, their parents will usually accompany them. Then if you are able to capture them as fans they'll turn into paying customers down the line. It's not like the AFL is expecting to get the exact same crowds as before, just with fewer paying customers. The idea is to generate larger crowds by adding people who will almost certainly be accompanied by additional paying customers.

Of course, this is only something clubs need if they're not able to fill stadiums already. Hence why it's not being done for our clubs who are able to sell all of their seats to paying customers almost every week.

 

[Elite Crow]

Again, you keep insisting on viewing this argument through the eyes of the average punter.

It's been made for the clubs, not the fans.

As for whether the clubs are being compensated, I don't know - but I doubt it. Certainly not 100 cents on the dollar. When kids are able to come for free, their parents will usually accompany them. Then if you are able to capture them as fans they'll turn into paying customers down the line. It's not like the AFL is expecting to get the exact same crowds as before, just with fewer paying customers. The idea is to generate larger crowds by adding people who will almost certainly be accompanied by additional paying customers.

Of course, this is only something clubs need if they're not able to fill stadiums already. Hence why it's not being done for our clubs who are able to sell all of their seats to paying customers almost every week.

You've just pointed out how unfair it is, it doesn't matter if the average punter is being treated unfairly, it's for the clubs. And when you talk clubs, you mean VIC clubs only, again unfair in a national competition.

As for compensation, what we do know is, if the rule is applied to all under 15 year olds, is there is an immediate loss of income to the clubs. No one knows what the additional paying patronage is, do you honestly think Eddie would have agreed to a deal without assurances he wouldn't be worse off?

 

[WaynesWorld19]

2014 Toyota AFL Premiership Season Ticket Prices
Adult - $22.00
Concession - $13.00
Junior U15 - $3.00
Family - $44.00

So the AFL forfeits $3 per U15 child .........how much is a bucket of chips ?
The kids will spend more than the cost of entry .....leading to an increase in revenue ....simple economics

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Anyone seeing AFL clubs in the press outraged at the FREE U15 ticketing .......nope

So only impacts clubs that haven't sold memberships relating to reserved seats .......and only on Sundays ....great move

Other states don't provide free public transport ........SA does ...so fans getting a better deal in SA IMO

 

[Elite Crow]

So the AFL forfeits $3 per U15 child .........how much is a bucket of chips ?
The kids will spend more than the cost of entry .....leading to an increase in revenue ....simple economics

$3? s**t my kids must be going to see 100 games for the season then. Yep we've got it real good in SA.

 

[Paladin]

Anyone seeing AFL clubs in the press outraged at the FREE U15 ticketing .......nope

So only impacts clubs that haven't sold memberships relating to reserved seats .......and only on Sundays ....great move

Other states don't provide free public transport ........SA does ...so fans getting a better deal in SA IMO

Have you been living under a rock? The public transport isn't free it's included as a surcharge in the price of the ticket. I pay for it even though I drive or walk.

 

[cmndstab]

You've just pointed out how unfair it is, it doesn't matter if the average punter is being treated unfairly, it's for the clubs. And when you talk clubs, you mean VIC clubs only, again unfair in a national competition.

As for compensation, what we do know is, if the rule is applied to all under 15 year olds, is there is an immediate loss of income to the clubs. No one knows what the additional paying patronage is, do you honestly think Eddie would have agreed to a deal without assurances he wouldn't be worse off?

Eddie's not an idiot. He recognises that short term pain is usually necessary for long term gain.

When I talk clubs, I mean those clubs that have difficulty filling a stadium, during the time periods they have that difficulty.

You'll notice we're not one of them.

 

[icrow32]

Hilarious. Surprising how few of them know they ripped it off lock, stock and scarf from Newcastle yet they praise it like the greatest tradition sport in this country has ever seen. They just copied the Red Army march down the mall and the anthem from the Jets. Basically just raided soccer for some instant traditions yet their fans prefer to think KT or Koch magically farted these ideas or something

Despite the clear rip off of the Newcastle jets theme, the Power posters still think its theirs, hilarious Board is the PAFC BF.

 

[cmndstab]

Look, this really isn't that hard. If you want to argue that the AFL should have done this years ago when non-Victorian clubs (such as the SA clubs) were having this problem, then that's fair enough. They should have. Unfortunately the AFL has a bad habit of being slow to act and only really recognising problems once they're on their doorstep. No question there.

But arguing that the AFL is biased because they're offering other clubs a solution to a problem that we're not faced with is nonsense.

 

[dav3]

Hilarious. Surprising how few of them know they ripped it off lock, stock and scarf from Newcastle yet they praise it like the greatest tradition sport in this country has ever seen. They just copied the Red Army march down the mall and the anthem from the Jets. Basically just raided soccer for some instant traditions yet their fans prefer to think KT or Koch magically farted these ideas or something

Plenty of your fellow supporters think the same thing about the 19th man concept, there are plenty of clueless people out there and it's unfortunate that they're the ones who use social media the most.

 

[Elite Crow]

Look, this really isn't that hard. If you want to argue that the AFL should have done this years ago when non-Victorian clubs (such as the SA clubs) were having this problem, then that's fair enough. They should have. Unfortunately the AFL has a bad habit of being slow to act and only really recognising problems once they're on their doorstep. No question there.

But arguing that the AFL is biased because they're offering other clubs a solution to a problem that we're not faced with is nonsense.

They act when there is a problem on their doorstep, yep no bias there.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Have you been living under a rock? The public transport isn't free it's included as a surcharge in the price of the ticket. I pay for it even though I drive or walk.

And the membership surcharge is?? ......how many home games, finals .....let me know what the cost is per game ....will be an interesting figure

 

[Glenno23]

They act when there is a problem on their doorstep, yep no bias there.

Or maybe, the old administration didn't think of doing it......

 

[Deaneus!]

there are plenty of clueless people out there and it's unfortunate that they're the ones who use social media the most.

True dat

 

[cmndstab]

They act when there is a problem on their doorstep, yep no bias there.

It's a pity you didn't choose to make this argument, rather than the stuff you've been posting over the last few pages.

 

[baldandbroke]

They act when there is a problem on their doorstep, yep no bias there.

Surely the fact that there are available seats, and the low entrance fee if they paid is the answer to why.

As far as compensation goes - how many games will it effect?

MCG Sunday Games
Essendon vs Hawthorn (April 12)
Melbourne vs Freo (May 3)
Richmond vs Collingwood (May 17)
Melbourne vs Bulldogs (May 24)
Collingwood vs North (May 31)
Collingwood vs GWS (June 14)
Melbourne vs Brisbane (July 19)
Melbourne vs St Kilda (July 26)
Melbourne vs North (Aug 9)
Richmond vs Gold Coast (Aug 16)
Carlton vs Melbourne (Aug 23)

Etihad Sunday Games
St Kilda vs GWS (April 5)
North v Brisbane (April 12)
Western Bulldogs v Adelaide (April 26)
St Kilda v Essendon (May 3)
Carlton v Brisbane (May 10)
Western Bulldogs v Fremantle (May 17)
Essendon v Brisbane (May 24)
St Kilda v Hawthorn (June 7)
St Kilda v Melbourne (June 14)
Carlton v Gold Coast Suns (June 28)
Essendon v St Kilda (July 5)
St Kilda v Richmond (July 19)
Western Bulldogs v Collingwood (July 26)
Essendon v Western Bulldogs (Aug 2)
St Kilda v Fremantle (Aug 9)
Western Bulldogs v Melbourne (Aug 16)
North Melbourne v Fremantle (Aug 23)
St Kilda v Sydney Swans (Aug 30)

Not what I'd call any block-busters that have a chance of being sold out aside from maybe the Richmond v Collingwood game at the G. Most of the games will be low-attendance, they are just trying to make it more attractive for people who maybe wouldn't go - neutral supporters probably.

Even if the AFL fully compensated the home team for these free entries, it would be chicken feed.

I don't see what it has to do with AFC at all. Such a different market and stadium situation.

 

[Elite Crow]

It's a pity you didn't choose to make this argument, rather than the stuff you've been posting over the last few pages.

I've made it, it's just that some of you don't have an issue with two sets of rules.

 

[Golumless]

I've made it, it's just that some of you don't have an issue with two sets of rules.

Why would we, it'd punish us if they made that a whole league thing and potentially gets more kids/people to games which is only a good thing.

It's a mountain out of a molehill making an issue out of it.