Melbourne Fans Protest

[Yencks 8]

Nugget, its an old axiom generally attributed to politicians, when they use statistics in an attempt to back up some less than viable plan.

It was not an attmept to have a go directly at you.

Cheers

cheers, but he still said this "fatally flawed and your recall of history likewise."

[Yencks 8]

Maybe, MFC are not a fair cause

Using an interstate game is flawed as only one group of supporters travels across the Nullabor to attend either game.

But compare that when MFC plays NM or WB and its not a first round. Lucky to get 20,000. Its a terrible indictment on the support of those three clubs.

And before people go rattling about NM's financial recovery, here is a team that has had legitimate claims to a top 4 spot in the past two years and they still struggle to get a crowd.

Nugget you need to be careful with your use of stats as its causing you to miss the wood for the trees. No I am not having a go at your sight. Its another axiom!

look above...you talk about NM and WB, but if you look above, we seemed to beat you "lucky to get" number by 12,000

make sure you read the whole post

[iv'a worn smith 1,979]

Maybe, MFC are not a fair cause

Too right it is!!!!

Any institution with the history and heritage of the MFC is a fair cause in my view. Also, what cause motivates one, may not motivate others, but I don't want to die wondering, if something more could have been done and whether we used our available networks effectively and to best of our ability.

OK, we know we don't get the crowds we should, but it's chicken and egg.

Certainly you don't solve the problem by pushing down the oldest footy club in the world, while you prop up others who are in no way more deserving than we are.

Maybe a bit more equity in the fixturing is a better way than pouring money into a flawed market, simply to keep it on life support.

Cheers

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Melbourne v Essendon MCG 47849

Melbourne v Geelong MCG 51793

Melbourne v Fremantle MCG 21963

Melbourne v Adelaide MCG 39475

Melbourne v Richmond Telstra Dome 44263

Melbourne v Collingwood MCG 65347

Melbourne v West Coast MCG 35653

Melbourne v Sydney Telstra Dome 28749

Melbourne v St Kilda MCG 39584

Melbourne v Western Bulldogs MCG 32621

going by your theory, when we play teams like essendon, carlton and collingwood, it boosts the numbers

firstly, in 2005, collingwood only pipped us by 2000 and thats including the anzac day clash plus the queens birthday

in bold, are melbourne home games against clubs that are agaisnt interstate sides (i have included doggies cos they dont draw a big crowd)

secondly, we didnt play carlton at home...thirdly, our average crowd of the collingwood and essendon games equal 56,000

take these out, and our home game average (NOT including gabba home game) and our average is around 36000

still is pretty good in comparison to other clubs

and still, our home crowd average against INTERSTATE clubs is 31,000 (still not too shabby) and one of those games was a TD game

now that is still better than hawthorns home crowd average in total of around 30,000

You need to look behind the numbers not just average them.

Firstly, Geelong and Adelaide were Friday night games with Geelong a high volume supporting Club. Friday night games do get stronger support. Adelaide fans travel. Sydney (the old South Melbourne) still have a strong base of supporters in Melbourne. 4th(Swans) vs 8th (MFC) should have pulled more supporters. Only fair

Melbourne Essendon was a Friday night first round where you always get a peak of crowds. Also it was the Troy Broadridge match so numbers would be skewed.

Melbourne vs Richmond (3rd vs 4th) -Friday night. Richmond can pull 30000 members in seasons when they are playing crap football. How many of those supporters were Tigers? When the Tigers are performing their crowds do turn up.

Melb vs Bulldogs - For two clubs fighting it out for finals at the business end of season at the MCG, the crowd was ordinary. Its a slur on both Clubs.

Melb vs Collingwood - 70% of the crowd would be Collingwood.

You just cant average the figures and go there's the answer.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Too right it is. Any institution with the history and heritage of the MFC is a fair cause in my view. Also, what cause motivates one, may not motivate others, but I don't wnat to die wondering.

Cheers

I wish Lyon felt that like Brayshaw does.

[Yencks 8]

You need to look behind the numbers not just average them.

Firstly, Geelong and Adelaide were Friday night games with Geelong a high volume supporting Club. Friday night games do get stronger support. Adelaide fans travel. Sydney (the old South Melbourne) still have a strong base of supporters in Melbourne. 4th(Swans) vs 8th (MFC) should have pulled more supporters. Only fair

Melbourne Essendon was a Friday night first round where you always get a peak of crowds. Also it was the Troy Broadridge match so numbers would be skewed.

Melbourne vs Richmond (3rd vs 4th) -Friday night. Richmond can pull 30000 members in seasons when they are playing crap football. How many of those supporters were Tigers? When the Tigers are performing their crowds do turn up.

Melb vs Bulldogs - For two clubs fighting it out for finals at the business end of season at the MCG, the crowd was ordinary. Its a slur on both Clubs.

Melb vs Collingwood - 70% of the crowd would be Collingwood.

You just cant average the figures and go there's the answer.

u are also skipping over things

-the melbourne west coast crowd of 35,000?...was that a bad effort?

-it was the troy broadbridge memorial match and hence, u cant say that there would have been a heavy skew of essendon supporters...there were lots of melbourne supporters

-"richmond can pull 30000 members in a bad season" thats not anything special

we pulled 29000 members this year...whats ur point?

-sydney do have the south melbourne factor however,

look at some of their other away mebourne crowds...

-Carlton v Sydney Telstra Dome 30973 (only 2K more than us...dont forget it was at TD)

-Hawthorn v Sydney MCG 31891 (only 2K more than us at the G)

-You say geelong a high volume supporting club...we got 51,000 verses geelong...

-geelong dont do that well when it comes to crowds

look at some of their other away MCG crowds in that same year

-Richmond v Geelong MCG 48251 ...less than us

-Collingwood v Geelong Telstra Dome 48261...less than us

-Western Bulldogs v Geelong Telstra Dome 29351 ...less than us

-Essendon v Geelong Telstra Dome 47122 ...less than us

-St Kilda v Geelong Telstra Dome 46848 ...less than us

you say we get 20,000 against the doggies, yet we got 32,000 (nothing special but you were wrong)

-adelaide travel but in comparison to some of their other away crowds at the G in the last couple of years, it was a pretty good crowd

-there are heaps of article bitching about our 19,000 crowd this year against freo, yet the hawks and blues have got much worse crowds that than that in the last 4 years and doesnt cop nearly as much attention

--the point i am trying to argue was that we did well in terms of crowds in 2005, i still dont think that u can deny that

[iv'a worn smith 1,979]

Nugget,

I have to agree with you mate.

Up until recently, it is a matter of fact that we were the 3rd largest crowd drawing team playing at the 'G.

Is does not matter what percentage of supporters were following which team, as long as we were getting the gate.

Not all that long ago, that is what was happening when we played at the 'G, particularly on Saturdays.

And I have to say, I never had the sense, given the crowd noise, that we were hopelessly outnumbered by opposition supporters.

They were good times to be at the footy and guess what............it was Saturday afternoon at the 'G.

Cheers

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

u are also skipping over things

-the melbourne west coast crowd of 35,000?...was that a bad effort?

-it was the troy broadbridge memorial match and hence, u cant say that there would have been a heavy skew of essendon supporters...there were lots of melbourne supporters

-"richmond can pull 30000 members in a bad season" thats not anything special

we pulled 29000 members this year...whats ur point?

-sydney do have the south melbourne factor however,

look at some of their other away mebourne crowds...

-Carlton v Sydney Telstra Dome 30973 (only 2K more than us...dont forget it was at TD)

-Hawthorn v Sydney MCG 31891 (only 2K more than us at the G)

-You say geelong a high volume supporting club...we got 51,000 verses geelong...

-geelong dont do that well when it comes to crowds

look at some of their other away MCG crowds in that same year

-Richmond v Geelong MCG 48251 ...less than us

-Collingwood v Geelong Telstra Dome 48261...less than us

-Western Bulldogs v Geelong Telstra Dome 29351 ...less than us

-Essendon v Geelong Telstra Dome 47122 ...less than us

-St Kilda v Geelong Telstra Dome 46848 ...less than us

you say we get 20,000 against the doggies, yet we got 32,000 (nothing special but you were wrong)

-adelaide travel but in comparison to some of their other away crowds at the G in the last couple of years, it was a pretty good crowd

-there are heaps of article bitching about our 19,000 crowd this year against freo, yet the hawks and blues have got much worse crowds that than that in the last 4 years and doesnt cop nearly as much attention

--the point i am trying to argue was that we did well in terms of crowds in 2005, i still dont think that u can deny that

Firstly, the Troy Broadbridge issue is a one off matter and not sustainable.

Richmond gets 30,000 members rain or shine. Its a sustainable number. We just get to 29,000 after seasons in the mid to low 20,000s. Get the point.

Hawthorn and Carlton finished 14th and 16th respectively in 2005 after consecutive prior poor seasons. They still outdraw us for a match even in the dumps and we were riding high... Go figure... So much for MFC being a crowd pulling club.

Secondly, Melb vs Geelong was at the MCG unlike most of the other games and where MFC has a traditional rivalry with Geelong that does not exist with Richmond and Geelong. And Richmond vs Geelong was a Sunday game as opposed to a Friday night for MFC vs Geelong.

I note you did not address my point about the paltry size of the MFC vs WB game given the status and importance of the match for both clubs. Its a disgrace. My 20k number was in reference to the crowds in 2007 and 2008. Now where were all the MFC supporters?

For all the complaining you make about the Hawks and Carlton when they had there lean years, they have the capacity to deliver very strong and above crowd numbers. When MFC goes badly the crowd numbers crater. When MFC goes well, the numbers barely break the league average and there is some distortion from the proportion of non MFC supporters.

I think your point is flawed because of non sustainable and one off issues. There is more to attendances than just crowd numbers on their own. Furthermore as a dedicated MFC supporter and match attendee for 40 years, I know when MFC supporters turn up and dont. When they turn up its in average numbers, when the slightest downer is there they disappear in droves.

At the least the Club recognises the scale and complexity of the problem even if some supporters dont.

[45HG 1,539]

Nugget, I love the enthusiasm and I generally agree that our numbers aren't as bad as the media would have you believe, but we must face they are nonetheless pretty poor. You make interesting points, but the fact they're largely based off 3 year old statistic when we were pretty much flying on the field, and comparing them to struggling clubs, probably does more to hurt it.

Rhino, I'm not sure what you mean about it being "unsustainable"? Because the Cats and Crows games of that year happened on Friday night? If we had more Friday night games, would that give us sustainable crowd numbers? A fair draw would obviously help to build our numbers, I don't think a decent crowd number should be ignored because it's played in prime time, we should be demanding a bigger slice of the action.

Mind you, I'm not sure why anyone would be talking about our crowd numbers this year after the disgraceful "performance" the Port fans put in

[Yencks 8]

Firstly, the Troy Broadbridge issue is a one off matter and not sustainable.

Richmond gets 30,000 members rain or shine. Its a sustainable number. We just get to 29,000 after seasons in the mid to low 20,000s. Get the point.

Hawthorn and Carlton finished 14th and 16th respectively in 2005 after consecutive prior poor seasons. They still outdraw us for a match even in the dumps and we were riding high... Go figure... So much for MFC being a crowd pulling club.

Secondly, Melb vs Geelong was at the MCG unlike most of the other games and where MFC has a traditional rivalry with Geelong that does not exist with Richmond and Geelong. And Richmond vs Geelong was a Sunday game as opposed to a Friday night for MFC vs Geelong.

I note you did not address my point about the paltry size of the MFC vs WB game given the status and importance of the match for both clubs. Its a disgrace. My 20k number was in reference to the crowds in 2007 and 2008. Now where were all the MFC supporters?

For all the complaining you make about the Hawks and Carlton when they had there lean years, they have the capacity to deliver very strong and above crowd numbers. When MFC goes badly the crowd numbers crater. When MFC goes well, the numbers barely break the league average and there is some distortion from the proportion of non MFC supporters.

I think your point is flawed because of non sustainable and one off issues. There is more to attendances than just crowd numbers on their own. Furthermore as a dedicated MFC supporter and match attendee for 40 years, I know when MFC supporters turn up and dont. When they turn up its in average numbers, when the slightest downer is there they disappear in droves.

At the least the Club recognises the scale and complexity of the problem even if some supporters dont.

-again, are u saying that 35,000 is a bad crowd against West Coast?

the Troy Broadbridge issue is a one off matter and not sustainable.

-The Troy Broadbridge match was in 2005, which is what I am talking about

I am not talking about sustainability and saying that our crowds are always good...im saying that in 2005, our crowds were good and i dont think you can deny that.

Richmond gets 30,000 members rain or shine. Its a sustainable number. We just get to 29,000 after seasons in the mid to low 20,000s. Get the point.

-You are talking about Richmonds membership base...good on them

Again, I have been trying to say that our crowd sizes in 2005 were good...not a direct relationship

Hawthorn and Carlton finished 14th and 16th respectively in 2005 after consecutive prior poor seasons. They still outdraw us for a match even in the dumps and we were riding high... Go figure... So much for MFC being a crowd pulling club.

Again, the point that I have been trying to make is that in 2005, we did better than them and they got some absolutely shocking crowds, yet when we get 19,000 to melb vs freo this year, everyone gives us a flack for it

-and again, when you say, "so much for MFC being a crowd pulling club" i have been referring to 2005, when i think our crowds were good

Secondly, Melb vs Geelong was at the MCG unlike most of the other games and where MFC has a traditional rivalry with Geelong that does not exist with Richmond and Geelong. And Richmond vs Geelong was a Sunday game as opposed to a Friday night for MFC vs Geelong.

-again, my point is that i thought that we got a good crowd (in 2005)

I note you did not address my point about the paltry size of the MFC vs WB game given the status and importance of the match for both clubs. Its a disgrace. My 20k number was in reference to the crowds in 2007 and 2008. Now where were all the MFC supporters?

-again, i am not talking about the last couple of years where our crowd sizes have been fairly poor...the point i was making, was that we got 32,000 to the game that year...yes, i suppose thats not a huge crowd, but that was 7000 below our average in 2005, so maybe 2005 was a pretty good year

"For all the complaining you make about the Hawks and Carlton when they had there lean years, they have the capacity to deliver very strong and above crowd numbers. When MFC goes badly the crowd numbers crater. When MFC goes well, the numbers barely break the league average and there is some distortion from the proportion of non MFC supporters."

-yes they do, but i think our crowd sizes were pretty good in 2005

-the point i am making is that, i think our crowds were pretty good in 2005

-we did play some nice friday nice games and got to play clubs like essendon at home and adelaide and geelong...however, thats my point

the AFL handed us a good fixture, and with our success also, we got some nice crowds...

the AFL hand us a bad fixture and we suck

"There is more to attendances than just crowd numbers on their own."

i think we have a different definition of attendances...i have been talking purely of crowd sizes when using this word

[Yencks 8]

Nugget, I love the enthusiasm and I generally agree that our numbers aren't as bad as the media would have you believe, but we must face they are nonetheless pretty poor. You make interesting points, but the fact they're largely based off 3 year old statistic when we were pretty much flying on the field, and comparing them to struggling clubs, probably does more to hurt it.

Rhino, I'm not sure what you mean about it being "unsustainable"? Because the Cats and Crows games of that year happened on Friday night? If we had more Friday night games, would that give us sustainable crowd numbers? A fair draw would obviously help to build our numbers, I don't think a decent crowd number should be ignored because it's played in prime time, we should be demanding a bigger slice of the action.

Mind you, I'm not sure why anyone would be talking about our crowd numbers this year after the disgraceful "performance" the Port fans put in

i agree with you...we havent done very well, however,

i think with all of this argument, everyone has missed the origingal point i was trying to make

this is it:

IMO, we got good crowds in 2005, but nobody noticed...

High Tower raised the notion about us making a point by getting big crowds... but that didnt work in 2005

---thats why i suggest and agree with people that it would be good to maybe try something a little different to prove to the AFL that there are some passionate supporters and there are people that are upset with the draw

[45HG 1,539]

I'd suggest it's because in 2005, these were pretty avergae crowds man.

Save for the Cats, Pies, and the 35,000 attained for a 1 v 2 clash with WC, these are crowds any team sitting second after round 12 should get

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

I'd suggest it's because in 2005, these were pretty avergae crowds man.

Save for the Cats, Pies, and the 35,000 attained for a 1 v 2 clash with WC, these are crowds any team sitting second after round 12 should get

Correct. And one year of average crowds does not facilitate a basis to get a better cut of the draw.

To gain a better draw you are going to need to show a sustainable and reliable increase in crowd numbers that can verifiably tied to MFC's influence over a number of years.

Unfortunately the last 10 years of MFC home crowds reflects a sorry tale and in some cases the complete opposite to what Nugget is suggesting.

[Oxxx 0]

Unless you do something like these guys, I doubt it will have any impact.

[Yencks 8]

I'd suggest it's because in 2005, these were pretty avergae crowds man.

Save for the Cats, Pies, and the 35,000 attained for a 1 v 2 clash with WC, these are crowds any team sitting second after round 12 should get

-but they were still respectable crowds

-this proves that when we have a good draw and are doing well, we can get people to come and watch us play

not a huge amount...but a respectable amount IMO

[Little Goffy 14,087]

Those wacky Fitzroy supporters.

Anyhow, don't lose sight of the fact that we still got better home game crowds this year (even adjusted for away-home games) than the Dogs and Kangaroos. Melbourne are a solid asset for the AFL, and given a bit of oxygen we would quickly reinvigorate. It's dissapointing that the AFL's strategic agenda makes us more useful as a 'holding club' ready to merge with Gold Coast or Sydney, but I guess they'll get their own share of dissapointment when we say NO.

[45HG 1,539]

This would be better

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

-this proves that when we have a good draw and are doing well, we can get people to come and watch us play

What it proves is that at best with a good draw and being near the top of the table we draw average crowds where some of the impetus is provided by larger drawing clubs.

Those wacky Fitzroy supporters.

Nice :D

Anyhow, don't lose sight of the fact that we still got better home game crowds this year (even adjusted for away-home games) than the Dogs and Kangaroos.

....sort of like moving deckchairs on the Titanic

Melbourne are a solid asset for the AFL, and given a bit of oxygen we would quickly reinvigorate.

We are financially poor, asset poor, low membership, no facilities, no regional reference. The AFL have asked what we stand for. There is little evidence to suggest that MFC would quickly reinvigorate.

It's dissapointing that the AFL's strategic agenda makes us more useful as a 'holding club' ready to merge with Gold Coast or Sydney, but I guess they'll get their own share of dissapointment when we say NO.

The AFL will not arrange a merger between one or more existing AFL clubs unless it is clear that is what the members want. 1996 was an embarrassment for the AFL and they will either relocate or pull the licence.

But you are right in our current position, we could easily become expendable unless there is massive change in the structure and fortune of the Club.

[Roost It 1,434]

we could easily become expendable unless there is massive change in the structure and fortune of the Club.

Jimmy's got some work to do

[dee-luded 2,959]

Given their obvious networks within the media, G Lyon and the Ox should be the "mouthpieces" for such a "protest"

Brayshaw did for North, what 2 of our former greats could do for us now.

Now your starting to lose the point that carries the most weight with the AFL.

It's the grass roots supporters.

Any incumbent power based organisation that feeds off the people fear an uprising of the people more than anything.

[dee-luded 2,959]

Unless you do something like these guys, I doubt it will have any impact.

Or a grandstand full of this @ Demitriwho, > http://www.wikihow.com/Moon-Someone

[do it 4 robbie 1]

Could someone with the required skills please super-impose a Melb flag over that sign.

[grant 10]

We are financially poor, asset poor, low membership, no facilities, no regional reference. The AFL have asked what we stand for. There is little evidence to suggest that MFC would quickly reinvigorate.

But you are right in our current position, we could easily become expendable unless there is massive change in the structure and fortune of the Club.

M8 I think your being overly harsh there. If you consider MFC members including the fact that about 23% of MCC members support MFC, the club is well placed and has one of the largest supporter bases in the AFL. MFCs highly discounted memberships for MCC members is the reason the club had record membership numbers this year and this is expected to continue in 2009.

You say the AFL looks at us with contempt (which is true for the time being), but you forget two things:

1) The pride, respectibility and passion on display by the players and supporters in 2005 as the team advanced to the semi-finals

2) In 2004-2005 Carltons consistently poor performances and low crowd numbers brought about contempt from the AFL and even lead to speculation over the clubs collapse. How quickly the winds of fortune can change!

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

M8 I think your being overly harsh there. If you consider MFC members including the fact that about 23% of MCC members support MFC, the club is well placed and has one of the largest supporter bases in the AFL. MFCs highly discounted memberships for MCC members is the reason the club had record membership numbers this year and this is expected to continue in 2009.

You say the AFL looks at us with contempt (which is true for the time being), but you forget two things:

1) The pride, respectibility and passion on display by the players and supporters in 2005 as the team advanced to the semi-finals

2) In 2004-2005 Carltons consistently poor performances and low crowd numbers brought about contempt from the AFL and even lead to speculation over the clubs collapse. How quickly the winds of fortune can change!

You need a dose of reality

The concentration of MFC supporters in the MCC is a financial millstone around the Clubs neck.

The actual take up of MFC/MCC membership is low and was not a key driver for recorded membership. At the end of the day its only $40 per person and the Club enjoys very little leverage off MFC/MCC members in the form of sale of functions, memorabilia and raffles.

And the AFL has extensive surverys on club support and who people follow. Melbourne is one of the lowest supported clubs. Vickick registrations have Melbourne down as the least suppported club amongst kids. Its generational and its a problem at the grass roots level. Get the drift.......

AFL has had us in contempt for years now. FFS they tried to engineer a merger with Hawthorn in 1996.

In regard to your points:

1. We collapsed out of the EF in 2005 with barely a whimper. It was embarrassing. I think you mean 2006. BTW, NM made the PF in 2007. Big deal there still financial rooted and will go the same way as MFC at this rate.

2. Carlton have facilities, a huge membership and supporter base, strong corporate support, Dick Pratt. Aside from Board incompetency which nearly destroyed them 5-6 years ago, they have the wherewithall to be a marque club in the AFL quickly. MFC in its current guise will take 10-15 years of solid on field success and strong administration to approach that position.

[Guest fatty]

The concentration of MFC supporters in the MCC is a financial millstone around the Clubs neck.

I'd agree with most of that other than the "millstone" comment. Surely, that should be seen as an opportunity on which the club seems unable to capitalise. I don't understand why you would consider it a dead-weight.