SA Footy

Posted: **Thu Apr 17, 2014 9:25 am**

according to Rucci, the crows never promised 4,000 fans

so where did that come from???

who made it up if Chapman/trigg didn't say it????

Posted: **Thu Apr 17, 2014 10:12 am**

read that article today, quite interesting.

although there was talk on this forum of crowds being well down, i also found it interesting that the average crowds are actually up on last years average so far. obviously remains to be seen whether that continues

Posted: **Thu Apr 17, 2014 10:39 am**

As i said before, Crows support on a perfect autumn day at Unley was bloody lamentable. The omen's aren't good.

Having said that it's all a bit academic now, and, as usual, we can only hope for the best. They're in, and Trigg has met his KPI, in regards to getting a team into the SANFL. That's all that matters, his KPI has been met. This is all background noise, at least as far as the Adelaide Crows would be concerned.
I doubt, apart from their communications team who put out silly tweets about wanting more to attend, they'd be remotely concerned.

Posted: **Thu Apr 17, 2014 10:42 am**

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:according to Rucci, the crows never promised 4,000 fans

so where did that come from???

who made it up if Chapman/trigg didn't say it????

Once again Rucci being very very selectitive with what words he uses to push his own agenda

A quick google search will bring up this article

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/a ... 6696575928

While the Crows might not have 'promised' the 4000k figure they certainly threw it out there as a possibility or else Chapman wouldn't be admitting the 4000K figure was an estimate.

Posted: **Thu Apr 17, 2014 10:44 am**

bennymacca wrote:read that article today, quite interesting.

although there was talk on this forum of crowds being well down, i also found it interesting that the average crowds are actually up on last years average so far. obviously remains to be seen whether that continues

Once again very selective information.

Off course the crowds are up on last years averages, we have barely had a drop of rain and all teams hopes are high.

History shows once we hit the winter months the drop off is fairly large and we start to get crowds of just over 1k.

Also there is no bye now, which teams had the bye in round 1 and 2 last year.

Posted: **Thu Apr 17, 2014 10:45 am**

Well a bye doesn't affect the average crowd, but point taken about the weather.

Posted: **Thu Apr 17, 2014 11:02 am**

bennymacca wrote:Well a bye doesn't affect the average crowd, but point taken about the weather.

If you have North having the bye in round 1 it will affect the average compared to them having a home game round 1 which will guarentee 3k plus crowd

Also we have already had west v south, west v eagles which are traditionally low attending crowds

Posted: **Thu Apr 17, 2014 11:05 am**

whufc wrote:
bennymacca wrote:Well a bye doesn't affect the average crowd, but point taken about the weather.

If you have North having the bye in round 1 it will affect the average compared to them having a home game round 1 which will guarentee 3k plus crowd

Also we have already had west v south, west v eagles which are traditionally low attending crowds

not sure i follow. He is comparing the average crowd from this year with last year. There are no byes this year so that doesnt come into play. And saying that there are some low drawing games played already, and the average still being high, supports rucci's argument not yours

Posted: **Thu Apr 17, 2014 12:12 pm**

mighty_tiger_79 wrote:according to Rucci, the crows never promised 4,000 fans

so where did that come from???

who made it up if Chapman/trigg didn't say it????

Chapman admitted to saying it in August last year
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/adelaide-crows8217-push-for-sanfl-entry-does-hurt-established-clubs8217-bottom-line/story-fni5f22o-1226696575928

In Adelaide, Crows chairman Rob Chapman admits his much-quoted figure of 4000 fans filing through turnstiles around suburbia to watch the "Ravens" in the SANFL ius a guesstimate.

Rucci is just being Rucci - spinning stories around to sell more papers and create more drama out of nothing

Posted: **Thu Apr 17, 2014 12:22 pm**

bennymacca wrote:
whufc wrote:
bennymacca wrote:Well a bye doesn't affect the average crowd, but point taken about the weather.

If you have North having the bye in round 1 it will affect the average compared to them having a home game round 1 which will guarentee 3k plus crowd

Also we have already had west v south, west v eagles which are traditionally low attending crowds

not sure i follow. He is comparing the average crowd from this year with last year. There are no byes this year so that doesnt come into play. And saying that there are some low drawing games played already, and the average still being high, supports rucci's argument not yours

It is ridiculous to compare the average crowd from the entire 2013 season with this years which is just a small sample from 2 rounds.
- crowds are on average much higher in the first few rounds of every season (for the obvious reasons of weather, optimism that the start of each season brings etc etc)
- the novelty factor of the AFL reserves teams (which surely everyone agrees will wear off quite a lot)
- the obvious biases from having played two rounds only - some teams are luckier/unluckier crowd wise with who they have played so far, one off events such as the early Centrals-Norwood start, etc...

Each of the "traditional" clubs plays the same number of home games (10) this year as before so once the season is over we can get a good answer to this question. Anyone who is making strong conclusions from 2 rounds only is deluded.

Posted: **Thu Apr 17, 2014 12:36 pm**

who is making strong conclusions about anything? of course you are right, but i dont think anyone is suggesting otherwise

Posted: **Thu Apr 17, 2014 12:56 pm**

bennymacca wrote:who is making strong conclusions about anything? of course you are right, but i dont think anyone is suggesting otherwise

Rucci is... isn't he?

Sent from my XT925 using Tapatalk

Posted: **Thu Apr 17, 2014 12:57 pm**

Nah he was more just asking the question about where the figure of 4000 came from and suggested that the crows said more like 3000. Also mentioned crowds were up but he wasn't saying that it was some sort of massive achievement or anything

Posted: **Thu Apr 17, 2014 1:02 pm**

bennymacca wrote:Nah he was more just asking the question about where the figure of 4000 came from and suggested that the crows said more like 3000. Also mentioned crowds were up but he wasn't saying that it was some sort of massive achievement or anything

As has been pointed out the Crows did mention the 4k figure to the point they had to admit it was a 'guesstimate'

Lucky for Rucci in the paper world he can make up any thing he likes and there is no rebuttal.

Posted: **Thu Apr 17, 2014 1:52 pm**

Refer FOOT-e TIMES Daily from Tuesday & it shows Round 2 Crowds for recent years going back to 2009.

Last weekend's 5 game TOTAL was lower than all of the previous 4 game TOTAL.
http://footetimes.com/foot-e-times-daily-tues-april-15/

There is the possibility of some high drawing games this Easter round and next week with ANZAC Day so hopefully things will improve.

Posted: **Thu Apr 17, 2014 2:15 pm**

Wedgie wrote:In all seriousness though, when a Rugby League team started here I didn't even consider going for the Adelaide Rams, I remained loyal to the Canberra Raiders. I follow Central Coast Mariners in the A-League as they had more of an affinity with my previous side (Adelaide City) than any other club did. If a Super 15s side started here I would continue to follow the NSW Warratahs. If an EPL side started here I would remain a Tottenham fan. If a NFL side started here I would remain a Bengals fan, if a NBA side started here I would remain a Philadelphia 76ers fan. And up until the last 6 months I've never lived anywhere near Prospect but certainly didn't consider following closer sides like Glenelg, West or South.

And when the LFL starts here you'll go for the team with the biggest tits

Posted: **Thu Apr 17, 2014 3:46 pm**

I'm more if a legs man actually Tazz but my son would!

Posted: **Thu Apr 17, 2014 4:37 pm**

"Those 4000 are supposed to generate $40,000 in revenue at the gates, bars and concession stands."

C'mon Rucci - this is what they 'sold' to the CEOs.
Lies, Lies, Lies - what is astounding is that the CEOs actually bought it!

As for Legs vs Tits?
I would suggest that BOTH are equal 2nd - "Tassie" wins

Posted: **Thu Apr 17, 2014 7:36 pm**

LPH wrote:As for Legs vs Tits?
I would suggest that BOTH are equal 2nd - "Tassie" wins

http://youtu.be/o2RPmQXT7CY

Posted: **Sat Apr 19, 2014 8:37 pm**

went to watch the game vs centrals today. did feel weird, as i didnt really know who to barrack for. But given I have seen a lot more of the crows players over the past few years I found myself hoping they would do well, as opposed to some of the brand new centrals faces that i didnt know. I still didnt feel like I wanted either team to win though to be honest, which was a weird feeling. There wasnt much atmosphere either, though the crowd didnt look to bad, not sure what the actual number were.

to be honest though, the more people whinge like little girls on this forum, the more i am finding myself barracking for the crows to do well.

GO STATE TEAM CROWS!

SA Footy

Crows reserves supporters

Re: Crows reserves supporters

Re: Crows reserves supporters

Re: Crows reserves supporters

Re: Crows reserves supporters

Re: Crows reserves supporters

Re: Crows reserves supporters

Re: Crows reserves supporters

Re: Crows reserves supporters

Re: Crows reserves supporters

Re: Crows reserves supporters

Re: Crows reserves supporters

Re: Crows reserves supporters

Re: Crows reserves supporters

Re: Crows reserves supporters

Re: Crows reserves supporters

Re: Crows reserves supporters

Re: Crows reserves supporters

Re: Crows reserves supporters

Re: Crows reserves supporters

Re: Crows reserves supporters