Roast Media Shakes Head, Part 7

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Papa G

Working in my physical workplace there is one person (me) and I'm obviously a Port supporter.

My home is my workplace and I have a Port daughter and a Norwood/Sydney wife (who watches about 10 minutes of football a year).

In my remote project team of 5:
- one other lives in Adelaide and doesn't follow football
- one is in Sydney and ditto
- one is in New York and
- one is in Brazil and isn't Gremio

No Crows supporters, 1 Port supporter.
 
Last edited:
In the last place I worked, government office, there was really only one other serious football follower, a crows supporter. He was a great guy, great workmate, and the best crows supporter I ever met. He went to games and knew his football. There was lots of banter and lots of sh*t stirring, but all in the very best of spirits.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Genuine question. In your work places, what is the mix of Crows fans to Port fans?

I find the militant bias perplexing sometimes. I get the amongst the older generation that reads the Advertiser, watches Ch 7 news and listens to 5AA that there is probably a significant weighting in their favour, but just in general life amongst the living, I don't see it as much.

My work place, and associated businesses, based in North Adelaide and with people from all over Adelaide (albeit a lot of Southern European heritage), it's at worst 50/50, but probably more weighted towards Port. These on the whole are professionals as well.

Is the Crows have the overwhelming majority of supporters in the state and therefore the ridiculous media bias an outdated concept?

Late to the party here but there are more Vicco club supporters at my work than Crows. Mostly legacy SANFL/VFL alliances e.g. Sturt/Carlton, West/Essendon. None of them “second team” it with one of the locals either.

Quite a few don’t even follow footy though. Basketball (NBA specifically) is definitely on the rise especially with late Gen Y and Gen Z.
 
One guy at work out of 100 who has heard of the sport of AFL - me.

Does attract a crowd when I chromecast it onto the lunchroom TV (night games start ~ 11am here). Fair to say any reputation I ever had for professionalism is no more since my colleagues observed me cracking tantrums at another missed shot 20m in front of goal or yelling what happen Port.
 
One guy at work out of 100 who has heard of the sport of AFL - me.

Does attract a crowd when I chromecast it onto the lunchroom TV (night games start ~ 11am here). Fair to say any reputation I ever had for professionalism is no more since my colleagues observed me cracking tantrums at another missed shot 20m in front of goal or yelling what happen Port.

I can relate to that.
The Filipino technicians see a whole different side to me when there’s a game on.
Normally can watch a bit during work if we’re not too busy.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
Myself and my boss are Port supporters. A couple of casual crows supporters and 2 Richmond supporters. It is a predominantly female work place so unfortunately not many really care. The previous hospital I worked at I as the only Port supporter. I am used to being outnumbered 🤣
 
Barring a few notable exceptions, most of the Crows supporters I meet through work are what you would call 'establishment'. They follow the team that best represents the old school tie network that they belong to (or aspire to belong to). One interesting thing I've noticed with the Port supporters I know from within this social set, they are almost always, mavericks. Non-conformists, rebellious, and 'black sheep' types. Explains the two clubs' brands quite well, I thought.

I do have several mates/colleagues who are plain old football supporters who just happened to make the choice to follow Crows and stuck with it. For the most part, they are good with banter but I'd never go to the football with them. (nor would they want to go with me, to be fair)
 
Barring a few notable exceptions, most of the Crows supporters I meet through work are what you would call 'establishment'. They follow the team that best represents the old school tie network that they belong to (or aspire to belong to). One interesting thing I've noticed with the Port supporters I know from within this social set, they are almost always, mavericks. Non-conformists, rebellious, and 'black sheep' types. Explains the two clubs' brands quite well, I thought.

I do have several mates/colleagues who are plain old football supporters who just happened to make the choice to follow Crows and stuck with it. For the most part, they are good with banter but I'd never go to the football with them. (nor would they want to go with me, to be fair)
The split of self made entrepreneurs to employees between Crows and Port would be an interesting study.

On SM-G960F using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
Myself and my boss are Port supporters. A couple of casual crows supporters and 2 Richmond supporters. It is a predominantly female work place so unfortunately not many really care. The previous hospital I worked at I as the only Port supporter. I am used to being outnumbered 🤣
Outnumbered, but not outclassed 😉
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Apart from their annoying sub-par commentary of Monday's game with BT and Bruce, Channel 7 is in trouble with Port Adelaide and the AFL for showing Ken's post match address to the players with audio still on, a clear breach of the AFL broadcast agreement. Those addresses are meant to be kept private and personal.

Parts of Ken's address were clearly audible above the post match commentary and despite BT pointing out several times that they were not supposed to be broadcasting the address it was shown in entirety on the 7 telecast.

And they wonder why coaches don't trust the media.



 
Smitho's been Dumpster Diving and Elspeth Dibber Dobbing again

Take a listen to the full press conference, as previously posted in the Port covid-19 thread:




One of the reporters in the press conference asked Dr Spurier if PAFC were aware of the request for an exemption and she said she didn't think so.

That reporter also asked if the SA Health employee who provided the exemptions had a 'vested interest' in the exemptions. Spurier said NO, the employee had no 'vested interest' that she was aware of. Reporter then asked why that employee wasn't sacked for breaching SA Health rules.

The reporter isn't identified and it's not clear from which media outlet they are from.

But it is quite clear where our grubby SA media want this to go and the link they are trying to make.


The campaigners on the Crows Board are already in a lather:

"Will the AFL investigate? It's completely suss. Why would 11 family members of multiple Port families all get the same approval. There has to some sort of collusion. This is smelly smelly smelly."

"Problem is, all the dirty filthy gutter journalists in the AFL media in SA are Port supporters......"nothing to see here"

"Get Elspeth onto it."

"So SA Health gave travel exemptions for family of Port players to travel from Victoria. I don't want to hear from those nuffs nuffs about being hard done by and the Crows getting special treatment ever again. What a joke. Hang your head in shame."
 
Last edited:
Take a listen to the full press conference, as previously posted in the Port covid-19 thread:




One of the reporters in the press conference asked Dr Spurier if PAFC were aware of the request for an exemption and she said she didn't think so.

That reporter also asked if the SA Health employee who provided the exemptions had a 'vested interest' in the exemptions. Spurier said NO, the employee had no 'vested interest' that she was aware of. Reporter then asked why that employee wasn't sacked for breaching SA Health rules.

The reporter isn't identified and it's not clear from which media outlet they are from.

But it is quite clear where our grubby SA media want this to go and the link they are trying to make.


The campaigners on the Crows Board are already in a lather:

"Will the AFL investigate? It's completely suss. Why would 11 family members of multiple Port families all get the same approval. There has to some sort of collusion. This is smelly smelly smelly."

"Problem is, all the dirty filthy gutter journalists in the AFL media in SA are Port supporters......"nothing to see here"

"Get Elspeth onto it."

"So SA Health gave travel exemptions for family of Port players to travel from Victoria. I don't want to hear from those nuffs nuffs about being hard done by and the Crows getting special treatment ever again. What a joke. Hang your head in shame."

A reporter thinks someone should be sacked for making a mistake.

Why do I suddenly have visions of pots and kettles and glass houses?
 
Take a listen to the full press conference, as previously posted in the Port covid-19 thread:




One of the reporters in the press conference asked Dr Spurier if PAFC were aware of the request for an exemption and she said she didn't think so.

That reporter also asked if the SA Health employee who provided the exemptions had a 'vested interest' in the exemptions. Spurier said NO, the employee had no 'vested interest' that she was aware of. Reporter then asked why that employee wasn't sacked for breaching SA Health rules.

The reporter isn't identified and it's not clear from which media outlet they are from.

But it is quite clear where our grubby SA media want this to go and the link they are trying to make.


The campaigners on the Crows Board are already in a lather:

"Will the AFL investigate? It's completely suss. Why would 11 family members of multiple Port families all get the same approval. There has to some sort of collusion. This is smelly smelly smelly."

"Problem is, all the dirty filthy gutter journalists in the AFL media in SA are Port supporters......"nothing to see here"

"Get Elspeth onto it."

"So SA Health gave travel exemptions for family of Port players to travel from Victoria. I don't want to hear from those nuffs nuffs about being hard done by and the Crows getting special treatment ever again. What a joke. Hang your head in shame."



Meh, we'd all be carrying on the same way here if it was theadelaidefootballclub in the same position.
 
This has nothing to do with the Port Adelaide Football Club. Simple as that.
That is correct but I wonder why such an astonishing "mistake" occurred?

How in heaven's name did a "nobody", an underling give the go ahead when everybody in the Health Department knows that stuff like this is passed onto middle management and then onto top management?

I just wonder if he or she didn't make a mistake and if it wasn't a mistake, why did it occur? The other question is, who leaked this to the press? mmmmm, maybe it was the same he or she that made the "mistake", after all, what better way to try and get Port Adelaide player's minds off football than to worry about family?

Conspiracy theory? Probably, but then again, it is Adelaide where the old boys network is all pervasive and they go to extraordinary lengths to undermine that which threatens their status and authority.
 
Were they saying the same about when the crows players all got exemptions to train at the barossa golf course?

crickets
The thing is, they never had exemptions for that. They had exemptions to leave their current quarantine place and move to the Barossa Resort to complete their quarantine. As could be clearly understood by the Chief of Police's following comments they never had exemptions to leave their rooms at the Resort for training.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top