Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by sue

  1. Sponsorship Problem?

    So how do supporters stop giving so much slack? Are you suggesting we should have boycotted buying memberships in the last 10 years? Would that achieve better on-field performance? A few posts on this forum giving the club an easy ride has bugger-all effect on what actually happens.
  2. Sponsorship Problem?

    Of course that is right. I'm only saying the inept R23 performance was not the be-all and end-all of the sponsorship (now non) problem. That in response to some who said no sponsor would ever touch us because of that.
  3. Sponsorship Problem?

    Being in the 2017 finals gives no exposure to the sponsor signing in 2018. If missing out on the finals gave us a worse draw in 2018 publicity-wise, then it is one of the many factors that would influence a sponsor's decision, but not R23 per se. Once 2017 is over, the situation is as it is and the sponsor makes a decision looking forward, not backward like some MFCSS obsessives do.
  4. Sponsorship Problem?

    Just supports the argument that R23 would only be a very minor consideration in the minds of sponsors, however hard it was to bear as a supporter.
  5. re game plans I wonder if the game plan includes the players behind the player doing the accurate short pass getting into an appropriate position in case the foot pass is a disaster? (Not being facetious, just hoping such things are planned for).
  6. AFLX is coming (the X makes it sound cool)

    There are 2 issues here. One is whether AFLX an appropriate way to expand Aussie rules (assuming that is a higher priority than other issues related to AFL). The other is the effect on existing teams on their pre-season preparation. As I've posted I have strong reservations about the latter. If there was a way of running something like AFLX without involving AFL listed players I'd be more relaxed.
  7. Outrageous after R23. They should toughen up like at a boot camp. (Is there an emoji for being ironic?)
  8. Sponsorship Problem?

    The proposition I disagreed with was that the lack of spirit etc which supposedly caused the R23 debacle in itself would scare away sponsors. The point I have been making is that compared to all the other factors, that would not in itself weigh heavily with sponsors. If you can't see the distinction I'm not going to try to explain it further.
  9. Sponsorship Problem?

    You miss the point. Of course if we had got into the finals (or won the flag!) we'd be in a better position with sponsors. But we were discussing the impact of the R23 debacle itself on potential sponsors as things stand now. I maintain the method of our failing to get into the finals now carries little weight with potential sponsors.
  10. Sponsorship Problem?

    Even if we were after a sponsor whose decision makers were AFL fans, I rather suspect that selling a potential sponsor that we are a team on the rise which only missed the finals by a tiny percentage would carry more weight than the tackle count in Q1. Factors like the draw, TV etc would weigh far more heavily than supporters' dismay about that last game.
  11. Gawn on SEN 16/11

    You'd still be happily working a 56 hour week with no holidays with that supine attitude. Earlier you said you were surprised the boss hasn't resigned. Now your'e saying if the players were employees in your workplace, the players would have been sacked for going to their union. So it sounds like there should be no one left at the club - neither resigning coach nor sacked players.
  12. AFLX is coming (the X makes it sound cool)

    100%?? You must be joking. While I'm happy to concede AFLX is more relevant preparation than playing ice-hockey, soccer and even farnarkaling, since it will have elements of what happens in a footy match, by the nature of the field size etc it is far less relevant than a practice match, JLT or internal, or simulations in training which are under control of the coach to learn a game plan. So I'd say much less than 100%. And so the injury risk does not warrant the preparation for the season that AFLX offer.
  13. AFLX is coming (the X makes it sound cool)

    The difference is that a normal pre-season match is practice at doing what teams do during the regular season. Therefore it is worth taking the risk of injuries, as it is in training. But an injury doing something else which doesn't help the players prepare for the season causes much gnashing of teeth and tearing of hair, eg Petracca's off-season basketball.
  14. Gawn on SEN 16/11

    The finals issue is not relevant (except in making you a bit bitter about the players). As for sledging, if they can't handle that there is no hope for the team anyway. Think of sledging as a boot camp without the sleep deprivation. I'm also not worried about us supporters being sledged by other supporters.
  15. Gawn on SEN 16/11

    In that case I don't think you need be too concerned. I assume you refer to the AFLPA as the 'higher' body. Nothing wrong with finding out what your rights are before talking to the boss - pretty sensible in fact.
  16. AFLX is coming (the X makes it sound cool)

    That's a heavy price for you to pay for ballroom dancing being tarnished by association with the Olympics.
  17. AFLX is coming (the X makes it sound cool)

    Sounds like a cunning scheme of the AFL marketing department to keep footy before the public as much as possible. I'd be ropeable if any player is injured playing this. We have to wear that possibility at training or in a proper practise match, but this is neither of those. The penalty for a deliberate rushed behind is interesting (leaving aside the details of 40m and 10 points). Seems to me the current home&away penalty which is basically an automatic goal is too high a penalty, especially as the decision is necessarily often uncertain and controversial. Something like the free is taken from 40-50m out (and the point also scored perhaps) might make sense.
  18. 2018's 'breakout' player

    Just hoping the whole team breaks out from the rut of recent years,
  19. I don't think picking a team to win the flag is the point. Rather it is picking teams which are in a strong position to do so. After that random factors like run with injury (and when) etc. play a big part.
  20. Maroochydore training session

    I've 'moved on', but the value of boot camps is still an interesting topic. Seems to me they may build mental resilience in the face of exhaustion etc, but I suspect there are better ways of building it in the face of taunting by opponents.

  22. may be true. But if so, yet again the AFL's motivation is to protect its own reputation rather than be fair to the complainant (by dragging things out) or the players involved (including those which might be the alleged perpetrator).
  23. Another reason why these matters should be left entirely to the police. I cannot see why the AFL should have any role in this sort of thing. For a start their prime motivation will be protecting the image of the AFL. Fairness to the parties involved will be secondary. And even if they were fair, I don't see why the AFL should poke its nose in until the court process is finished. Edit to add:. And if there is no court process, what possible role has the AFL got other than getting involved in a libel action. (Of course they could threaten an 'employee' in some way but that is also objectionable. If mediation is required, once again I don't see a role for AFL house which has a major conflict of interest. )
  24. Boot Camp 2017 cancelled by Players

    Wasn't this the time the MFC were scheduled to do it? If so, either this guy double books or the Storm don't plan too far ahead.
  25. Likelihood does not make a fact. In an earlier post I indicated where I thought the probabilities lay. But that is 'in general'. For this specific case we know nothing and should say as much.