SA Footy

24laceup wrote:Ok, so 4 pages in and I still have no idea how the game panned out.... Any chance of a run down??

Port beat the Redbacks?

Crowd 3,337

Gozu wrote:Crowd 3,337

3000k of them would have been dogs fans

Was good to see heaps of ammo boys at the footy, lots of eastern park, central united and salisbury guys there

heater31 wrote:Again Kickinit heads off on the completely wrong tangent


Get it back to the thread topic or it will be locked.....

And how many other posts have been about the game on this topic or any of the past 2 post game topics for Adelaide

whufc wrote:

Gozu wrote:Crowd 3,337

3000k of them would have been dogs fans

So three thousand thousand central supporters were there!

Listened to the match on rph. Ravens dominance appeared to start in the centre square, and the doggies lacked the key defenders to go with the likes of McKernan and Johnston. Grigg and Lyons did as they pleased, and Otten is a top notch SANFL defender.

Dogs with only one player over 20 touches. McIntyre seemed to be their only forward who had some presence.

Wasn't particularly enjoyable listening to it, and hearing the ravens song on rph after the game seemed very very wrong.

mickey wrote:

whufc wrote:

Gozu wrote:Crowd 3,337

3000k of them would have been dogs fans

So three thousand thousand central supporters were there!

Yep !!

But I doubt they'll be in any rush to go back for the next game against Crows or Power Reserves. When the novelty factor wears off & people get sick of being flogged by the professionals, just watch the crowd numbers tumble.

It's the start of the end.

Well, it was a rather interesting game. Crows dominated in the middle, our ruckmen seemed to be totally uncompetitive in the centre bounces with Graham dominating. Even at ground level, our first unit barely touched the ball. Some of those takeaways just left our defense fighting an uphill battle to make a contest with some pretty classy forwards floating around. In the general contests it felt very much like the dogs got the better of the situation time and time again but without the leg speed or clean ball use the forward line got clogged up very quickly. No really dominant key forward meant even when we did dominate we couldn't get good shots on goal. But then once the ball started to come out, the speed of the Crows (especially across half forward) just opened up the game and they carved us up. Pretty disappointing showing all in all. There was a pretty strong opposition which won't always be the case, but you can't allow such a dominance in the middle and the skills just simply have to be better. Glenn had a rotten start, but then showed some fight later on to at least take the game on.

On the crowd, I'm amazed by that crowd stat. I would have thought there would be quite a few more than that, certainly the queues were longer than usual. It was also noteworthy, despite some pretty parochial comments otherwise, that a lot of crows fans came out. There were quite a few at the game who had either never been to an SANFL game or not been to one for a very long time around. Long term, I think it's still a big mistake, but at least we can take some solace from the fact that there are a lot of new people getting along.

heater31 wrote:Again Kickinit heads off on the completely wrong tangent


Get it back to the thread topic or it will be locked.....

Maybe you should try deleting his posts if you feel he is constantly taking threads off topic.

What's the point of having rules if all you want to do is lock a thread when a habitual troll is only interested in ...... Trolling
Hey guess what... That's another rule of the site isn't it, no trolling.

Come on Mods, do the right thing and get these idiots off the boards

Quite obvious that the AFL reserves teams performances are going to be dictated solely by the length of their injury lists, no surprise that the first time the Crows list is looking fairly short they put on a performance like this.

johntheclaret wrote:

heater31 wrote:Again Kickinit heads off on the completely wrong tangent


Get it back to the thread topic or it will be locked.....

Maybe you should try deleting his posts if you feel he is constantly taking threads off topic.

What's the point of having rules if all you want to do is lock a thread when a habitual troll is only interested in ...... Trolling
Hey guess what... That's another rule of the site isn't it, no trolling.

Come on Mods, do the right thing and get these idiots off the boards

Half the threads will be locked if they did that and that many posts would be deleted threads wouldn't make sense.

It's only a page or two ago that some ass clown said anyone who barracks for Port isn't a true SA football fan. Not sure if thats Pure troll or some mentally challenged muppet on a keyboard but at the end of the day I think you just have to laugh it off.

I find it hilarious the amount of people on the site who feel they have the right to tell people who, how and what they should support and how specific supporting can validate your legitimacy and right to be qualified to class yourself as a true supporter. IMO people are entitled to barrack for whoever they want, whenever they want.

I have a couple of mates who actually tell me "you are not allowed to barrack for the Crows"and get genuinely upset . So if Port aren't playing and they play a Vic/WA team I can't barrack for the Crows? I have gold Adelaide oval passes, my fiancé loves the Crows (she's not that bright) and we go to 8-10 games a year. I think that means I show more support to the Crows than I do to a lot of my over opinionated mates do their own band of beloved.

Sorry for getting off topic Mods but I just wanted to make a point and every time someone gets on here and talks up the Crows/Power reserves they don't deserve to have their integrity challenged.

A sad day for SA footy. Even more unfortunate was that it was against a team who voted, "No".

Mic wrote:A sad day for SA footy. Even more unfortunate was that it was against a team who voted, "No".

Not sad at all. Dogs not good enough... Sturt and north both knocked the crows off!!!

woodublieve12 wrote:

Mic wrote:A sad day for SA footy. Even more unfortunate was that it was against a team who voted, "No".

Not sad at all. Dogs not good enough... Sturt and north both knocked the crows off!!!

Like I have posted I reckon you will see a clear pattern of better results on the larger oval where the games are more reliant on speed, fitness and skills. Also no suprise that Crows first win came when they have their shortest injury list.

Also it correct that the crane at the Northern end of the ground is a requirement for the Crows to have.

If Norwood wanted extra cameras at Elizabeth Oval would we have gave it to them. Also what's to say the Crows won't use it to scout the SANFL teams for next time they play them giving them another extra advantage that the SAnFL clubs don't have

wristwatcher wrote:

johntheclaret wrote:

heater31 wrote:Again Kickinit heads off on the completely wrong tangent


Get it back to the thread topic or it will be locked.....

Maybe you should try deleting his posts if you feel he is constantly taking threads off topic.

What's the point of having rules if all you want to do is lock a thread when a habitual troll is only interested in ...... Trolling
Hey guess what... That's another rule of the site isn't it, no trolling.

Come on Mods, do the right thing and get these idiots off the boards

Half the threads will be locked if they did that and that many posts would be deleted threads wouldn't make sense.

It's only a page or two ago that some ass clown said anyone who barracks for Port isn't a true SA football fan. Not sure if thats Pure troll or some mentally challenged muppet on a keyboard but at the end of the day I think you just have to laugh it off.

I find it hilarious the amount of people on the site who feel they have the right to tell people who, how and what they should support and how specific supporting can validate your legitimacy and right to be qualified to class yourself as a true supporter. IMO people are entitled to barrack for whoever they want, whenever they want.

I have a couple of mates who actually tell me "you are not allowed to barrack for the Crows"and get genuinely upset . So if Port aren't playing and they play a Vic/WA team I can't barrack for the Crows? I have gold Adelaide oval passes, my fiancé loves the Crows (she's not that bright) and we go to 8-10 games a year. I think that means I show more support to the Crows than I do to a lot of my over opinionated mates do their own band of beloved.

Sorry for getting off topic Mods but I just wanted to make a point and every time someone gets on here and talks up the Crows/Power reserves they don't deserve to have their integrity challenged.

The points you raise are fair.

However, one of the few unwritten rules of footy supporters is that you can never, ever, change your team. While I am not accusing anyone of this, someone who has barracked for an SANFL team, who suddenly starts barracking for the Crows reserves this year, even if they still support their traditional SANFL team, can surely see why their integrity is being challenged by others?

Though I think that having a bob each way is, in these particular circumstances, not quite worthy of 'invalidating their legitimacy' as a supporter, I think the fact that this question arises is an indictment of the new set up.

No AFL in the SANFL.

whufc wrote:
If Norwood wanted extra cameras at Elizabeth Oval would we have gave it to them. Also what's to say the Crows won't use it to scout the SANFL teams for next time they play them giving them another extra advantage that the SAnFL clubs don't have

The team and the club are allowed access to the vision if they wish. It's not just for the AFL whores....

heater31 wrote:

whufc wrote:
If Norwood wanted extra cameras at Elizabeth Oval would we have gave it to them. Also what's to say the Crows won't use it to scout the SANFL teams for next time they play them giving them another extra advantage that the SAnFL clubs don't have

The team and the club are allowed access to the vision if they wish. It's not just for the AFL whores....

Fair enough.

wristwatcher wrote:

johntheclaret wrote:

heater31 wrote:Again Kickinit heads off on the completely wrong tangent


Get it back to the thread topic or it will be locked.....

Maybe you should try deleting his posts if you feel he is constantly taking threads off topic.

What's the point of having rules if all you want to do is lock a thread when a habitual troll is only interested in ...... Trolling
Hey guess what... That's another rule of the site isn't it, no trolling.

Come on Mods, do the right thing and get these idiots off the boards

Half the threads will be locked if they did that and that many posts would be deleted threads wouldn't make sense.

It's only a page or two ago that some ass clown said anyone who barracks for Port isn't a true SA football fan. Not sure if thats Pure troll or some mentally challenged muppet on a keyboard but at the end of the day I think you just have to laugh it off.

I find it hilarious the amount of people on the site who feel they have the right to tell people who, how and what they should support and how specific supporting can validate your legitimacy and right to be qualified to class yourself as a true supporter. IMO people are entitled to barrack for whoever they want, whenever they want.

I have a couple of mates who actually tell me "you are not allowed to barrack for the Crows"and get genuinely upset . So if Port aren't playing and they play a Vic/WA team I can't barrack for the Crows? I have gold Adelaide oval passes, my fiancé loves the Crows (she's not that bright) and we go to 8-10 games a year. I think that means I show more support to the Crows than I do to a lot of my over opinionated mates do their own band of beloved.

Sorry for getting off topic Mods but I just wanted to make a point and every time someone gets on here and talks up the Crows/Power reserves they don't deserve to have their integrity challenged.

I can guarantee you i am not a troll and nor am i mentally challenged. If you think that port should have the right to call themselves south australian after the amount of times they have shitted on this state, then iwould suggest that it is you who are mentally challenged!!


I can guarantee

passionatelegsfan wrote:If you think that port should have the right to call themselves south australian after the amount of times they have shit on this state, then I would suggest that it is you who are mentally challenged!!

Firstly, no none is mentally challenged for having an opinion (that was hard to write considering some things posted on here).
Whichever way you look at it, port are South Australian. Numerous actions of theirs in the past however can only be described as "un South Australian".
Yes, they have shit on the SANFL, the other clubs, the SA footy public and even to a degree themselves more than any other club.
IMHO it is simply the lies, the unwillingness to accept any blame, the delusional arrogance and the sick and twisted penchant to point the finger at everyone else (when a mirror would suffice) that leaves everyone in disbelief regarding the PAFC and most of their supporters.

100% agree but since Kochie and Hinckley has come into the club they have defiantly become more professional off field including finally getting a true identity.