SA Footy

Posted: **Mon Aug 20, 2007 6:28 pm**

I find it interesting how different clubs use their website and the content they display. I'm talking about official websites here.

For example, some have public forums attached - Norwood and Central are an example.

What I find more interesting is public comment made. Most have match reports, injury updates, upcoming game news etc. All fairly non-controversial. Except for North.

I'm not having a go here. The North website is the most interesting and professional looking website out of all the clubs. The players blogs, player info, footy tipping etc. is fantastic. It is also great to see Barrie Robran using the official website to communicate to his members frequently.

But, I must say the content sometimes does surprise me. Examples include the way North have used their website to vent their thoughts on the tribunal, AFL player inclusions and even snide remarks at other clubs using sponsorship for their home ground name.

Also there was this comment by Barrie Robran today which surely can't sit well with an AFL player coming back into the side. Remembering these AFL players don the guernsey and are part of the 21 who you hope guides the club to the ultimate.
"Had Michael Wundke’s replacement in the League side kicked as half as many goals as Michael did in the Reserves, we would have won the match. Sometimes some of these AFL players coming back just unbalance our structure I am afraid."

Will we see more of these honest type reports on club websites? Or is there a line that shouldn't be crossed on an official website? What are some of the positives and negatives with how all clubs use their websites to promote their club and the game?

Posted: **Mon Aug 20, 2007 6:31 pm**

Im sure if the AFL player was playing SANFL reserves, he probably would have kicked more goals than Wundke did.

Posted: **Mon Aug 20, 2007 6:44 pm**

Aerie......

You seem to have it all wrong.....

It's about communication......

It's about having a say...!

Right or wrong....

Let us know your qualifications for Right...?

1694 posts....

Have they all been right...?

Posted: **Mon Aug 20, 2007 6:54 pm**

pafc1870 wrote:Im sure if the AFL player was playing SANFL reserves, he probably would have kicked more goals than Wundke did.

You think the AFL listed player would have kicked 7 or more?

Posted: **Mon Aug 20, 2007 7:18 pm**

rod_rooster wrote:
pafc1870 wrote:Im sure if the AFL player was playing SANFL reserves, he probably would have kicked more goals than Wundke did.

You think the AFL listed player would have kicked 7 or more?

No, but do you think Wundke would have kicked 6 in the league team? Its like saying someone who scored 100 playing for Tea Tree Gully CC did better than someone who scored 60 for the Redbacks. You cant compare players in different matches. Its too hypothetical.

Posted: **Mon Aug 20, 2007 7:27 pm**

pafc1870 wrote:
rod_rooster wrote:
pafc1870 wrote:Im sure if the AFL player was playing SANFL reserves, he probably would have kicked more goals than Wundke did.

You think the AFL listed player would have kicked 7 or more?

No, but do you think Wundke would have kicked 6 in the league team? Its like saying someone who scored 100 playing for Tea Tree Gully CC did better than someone who scored 60 for the Redbacks. You cant compare players in different matches. Its too hypothetical.

But you did.

Posted: **Mon Aug 20, 2007 7:53 pm**

I did, but so did Barrie, so I was just using the opposite of what he said to counter his argument.

Posted: **Mon Aug 20, 2007 8:45 pm**

Am i wrong but did north chase Perrie from south adelaide with a Jars coffee???

I like the north website, it causes controversy until it gets changed.

I cant believe comments on footy sa, now nafc website saying that the three Massive AFL inclusions, did not perform, unbalanced the side, displaced players into reserves.

FACTS are that the three players Lonie, Perrie, White kicked 7 of their teams 8 goals to half time, and 7 out of 8 goals to three quarter time.

Lonie & White were also named in best players in both print media outlets.

Posted: **Mon Aug 20, 2007 8:45 pm**

pafc1870 wrote:I did, but so did Barrie, so I was just using the opposite of what he said to counter his argument.

Posted: **Mon Aug 20, 2007 8:55 pm**

eddie-eagle wrote:Lonie & White were also named in best players in both print media outlets.

lol, we have Eagles supporters telling us that the paper was wrong as they picked McGregor as the Eagles best and now I have an Eagles supporter telling me that the paper is right in picking North's AFL players in the best?

On the subject though, I think its great when a website is constantly updated with interesting articles and blogs to read not to mention competitions, live scoreboards, photos, etc.
Some still leave a lot to be desired IMHO.
Barrie does his articles as a great service to the members, his views aren't necessarily those of the clubs and we all understand that. Christ, if you think his articles are controversial I certainly wont tell you what he said in 2 emails to me today! :lol:

I went to the Norwood site the other day to follow up some further info on one of their players, went to the players page and am confronted by 53 missing photos, I think to myself, fair enough, unprofessional but I'll click on the link to the player I want, then I get the message "Not Found
The requested URL /profiles/profile_4**.htm was not found on this server."
Its nearly the end of August!!!!
This is quite simply pathetic, it wouldn't be hard to find a volunteer if they're not prepared to update it themselves, christ, they have 5 million dollars in the bank, they could hire a team of IT people.
Just not good enough in this day and age Im afraid and does reflect poorly on the entire club IMHO.

PS the North website does have a public forum attached to it too, not well used and only frequented by kids but there none the less.

PPS How about a comparison of unofficial club websites? :wink:

Posted: **Mon Aug 20, 2007 9:05 pm**

Dog_ger wrote:Aerie......

You seem to have it all wrong.....

It's about communication......

It's about having a say...!

Right or wrong....

Let us know your qualifications for Right...?

1694 posts....

Have they all been right...?

I'm not sure exactly what you're saying. Yes, it is great to communicate via a website. I guess what I'm saying is how far should an official website go. For instance, being critical of your own players. I would have thought there is enough of that from the terraces and in the newspapers etc. I would think this would have a negative effect on the club.

Secondly, being critical of the league with regards to the tribunal and AFL players. Is the website the right way to go about it? Ron Fuller used his Coaches Comments earlier in the year to be critical of a Messenger Newspaper journalist. I'm not saying whether they should or shouldn't do this. This is a fairly new medium and the boundaries are being tested.

Posted: **Mon Aug 20, 2007 9:12 pm**

Wedgie wrote:Barrie does his articles as a great service to the members, his views aren't necessarily those of the clubs and we all understand that.

Yeah, that is great. I guess we all (or me at least) don't understand they are not official views from the club because not many other clubs have anything like that. I reckon it would boost membership numbers outside of Adelaide by a considerable margin having a website and a club that is transparent like that.

Posted: **Mon Aug 20, 2007 9:23 pm**

pafc1870 wrote:I did, but so did Barrie, so I was just using the opposite of what he said to counter his argument.

Barrie mentioned facts. Wundke kicked 6. Had the AFL listed player kicked half as meny goals (3) we would have won. Barrie did not say Wundke was a better player. He commented that he believes that having AFL listed players coming back can unsettle the side.

Making 3 changes to a winning side is not normally in the best interest of a side and given the fact that between them the 3 players have played a total of 4 games for the season (that includes White playing 10 minutes against West before hobbling off with a knee injury) suggests that Barrie might be onto something.

Posted: **Mon Aug 20, 2007 9:34 pm**

Whilst a little off topic
The roosters had 3 AFL inclusions into their winning side from the week before on saturday.
WWTFC had 2 in Kenny McGregor and Bernie Vince from our winning side of the week before.

It effects all at some stage but possibly about the same for the two teams that played on Saturday.
Certainly though most who come back to us at the moment are WWTFC players in the first instance in that we either recruited to Oval Ave and then they were picked up or they have come through our junior program - not sure if that makes a difference though as i'm sure all players have pride in their own performance.

Re websites - we have tried to make ours easier to navigate and with our 3 weekly emails to members and supporters believe we are able to keep members reasonably up to date.
(Plus you have to put up with me on here!)

Posted: **Mon Aug 20, 2007 9:57 pm**

cd wrote:Certainly though most who come back to us at the moment are WWTFC players in the first instance in that we either recruited to Oval Ave and then they were picked up or they have come through our junior program - not sure if that makes a difference though as i'm sure all players have pride in their own performance.

I think in most cases it does

Posted: **Mon Aug 20, 2007 10:26 pm**

Some of you people who criticise the North website for public comment should get the chance to sit with your club CEO's and you might find out that many of the views North are publically expressing are the same views / opinions / criticisms other clubs have behind closed doors but sadly other clubs just won't come out and say it. I wonder why that is?

Posted: **Mon Aug 20, 2007 10:38 pm**

eddie-eagle wrote:Lonie & White were also named in best players in both print media outlets.

As we know, a very unreliable source that is. :lol:

Posted: **Mon Aug 20, 2007 10:47 pm**

I wish more SANFL clubs had the balls to say exactly what they think and show some passion and pride for their colours instead of allowing their guernsey and club in general to be the doormat of any AFL club that wishes it.

The SANFL have willingly handed over Football Park to the VFL and the efforts of the SANFL at promoting the competition is pitiful at best. If clubs like North dont stand up and say something it will continue to be so.

Maybe it might be a better thing if the clubs voted in Barrie Robran as President of the SANFL, where he could make some changes that might actually benefit the SANFL rather than the AFL for a change.....

Posted: **Mon Aug 20, 2007 10:53 pm**

Sojourner have you heard of "Play to your crowd?"
It's unfortunate but it's true.
It would be great if every AFL returnee put in 100%, but do they?
Anyhow I don't want to get off track here. Barrie Robran gets my vote!

Posted: **Mon Aug 20, 2007 11:08 pm**

BPBRB wrote:Some of you people who criticise the North website for public comment should get the chance to sit with your club CEO's and you might find out that many of the views North are publically expressing are the same views / opinions / criticisms other clubs have behind closed doors but sadly other clubs just won't come out and say it. I wonder why that is?

Because they know they can't say it as succinctly, or with the same levels of intelligence and wit, as the posters on the Roost? :lol:

SA Footy

The Positives vs The Negatives of websites on SANFL clubs

The Positives vs The Negatives of websites on SANFL clubs

Re: The Positives vs The Negatives of websites on SANFL clubs

Re: The Positives vs The Negatives of websites on SANFL clubs

Re: The Positives vs The Negatives of websites on SANFL clubs

Re: The Positives vs The Negatives of websites on SANFL clubs

Re: The Positives vs The Negatives of websites on SANFL clubs

Re: The Positives vs The Negatives of websites on SANFL clubs

Re: The Positives vs The Negatives of websites on SANFL clubs

Re: The Positives vs The Negatives of websites on SANFL clubs

Re: The Positives vs The Negatives of websites on SANFL clubs

Re: The Positives vs The Negatives of websites on SANFL clubs

Re: The Positives vs The Negatives of websites on SANFL clubs

Re: The Positives vs The Negatives of websites on SANFL clubs

Re: The Positives vs The Negatives of websites on SANFL clubs

Re: The Positives vs The Negatives of websites on SANFL clubs

Re: The Positives vs The Negatives of websites on SANFL clubs

Re: The Positives vs The Negatives of websites on SANFL clubs

Re: The Positives vs The Negatives of websites on SANFL clubs

Re: The Positives vs The Negatives of websites on SANFL clubs

Re: The Positives vs The Negatives of websites on SANFL clubs