Do you regret home games moved

[Suitman]

Actually the last game I went to before that was in Melbourne in 2011. We got belted then too.

Yeh, I know you were there.
You spied me.

Suity

 

[Suitman]

The first and only time I have been to Parramatta Stadium was in 1986, when we played the Dogs.

A massive day with a massive crowd

The Dogs got up if I recall

Huh? 1986.

C'mon Chippy.
You gotta do better than that man!!!!!

Suity

 

[Parra]

It's a shame we won.


f**kwits.

 

[Chipmunk]

Huh? 1986.

C'mon Chippy.
You gotta do better than that man!!!!!

Suity

I live in the berra...

I've been to some finals games, both GF losses too.

The previous owner of the NRL preferred I sat at home and watched the game on their Sports Channel, so I basically obliged and bought a lifetime Foxtel package...

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Yeh, I know you were there.
You spied me.

Suity

I only found that out later. I was expecting a man in a suit.

 

[B-Tron 3000]

If we kicked better we could have won those games. I don't think the venue is what caused our poor goal kicking.

A goalkicker feeling comfortable at a ground, including getting used to the winds, the positioning of the stands, etc, is a massive part of home ground advantage.




I have gone on record as saying that I think moving games to Homebush is a short-term solution, which only serves to further ingrain the lazy attitude of Eels fans. That is: "why bother becoming a member and going every week when I can just buy a ticket to the biggest games when they move them to Homebush".

The Wanderers have this right - make membership a meaningful thing that people need to fight for, use that as leverage to get the ground capacity increased, get a bigger ground and keep the home-ground advantage as well as the money - best of both worlds.

Not to mention the money that comes from winning more games, qualifying for finals etc.

Anyone saying we are as good at Homebush as we are at Parra is delusional.

 

[B-Tron 3000]

Homebush is our home ground.

Lol that depends how you classify "home ground".

If you mean that the club chooses to play there and therefore it is officially the home ground, then yeah, it is. (and I know that you like to support the club as you believe that the people in the jobs have more info then you in order to make decisions, so that is probably the side you are taking).

BUT

if you mean that a "home ground" means it represents us, it is the place that we are used to playing at, it creates a problem for opposition teams, then Homebush is quite obviously NOT our home ground.

Souths and the Dogs play all their games there. Last week we had to play an important game at the place that the Dogs are used to playing. Does that sound like a "home ground" to you?

 

[Parra]

"Homebush is our home ground" = " winning does not matter".


As long as some bell-end makes cash the muppets are supposed to cheer.



f**k that. Play at parra. Win matches. The rent-a-crowds can go to shitville every weekend and they will not be missed.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Anyone saying we are as good at Homebush as we are at Parra is delusional.

We're not better, but we are richer, which makes us better in the long run.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

The rent-a-crowds can go to shitville every weekend and they will not be missed.

The rent-a-crowds pay the bills.

 

[B-Tron 3000]

We're not better, but we are richer, which makes us better in the long run.

I don't agree. See above.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Mate, without money we'd struggle to produce our own players, we'd be unable to upgrade the training facilities, and we'd lose Arthur to a richer club.

We need f**ken cash merkin!!!!

 

[souths_pride]

Mate, without money we'd struggle to produce our own players, we'd be unable to upgrade the training facilities, and we'd lose Arthur to a richer club.

We need f**ken cash merkin!!!!

Your 100% correct! Its unfortunate for all clubs concerned that have to play at half-empty stadiums like ANZ, but it pays the bills! The economic nature of rugby league is that most clubs struggle to make a profit each year, so they need all the money they can get!

Also I've always felt that the NRL has a thing against the old suburban grounds and views them as outdated and unprofessional; it sort of gives the game a semi-professional look compared with the state of the art complexes used by other Australian sporting codes. Its not so much an issue with Parra stadium as it is with the likes of Leicharddt Oval, Brookvale etc. Subsequently, I feel teams are encouraged to take games to Homebush, the SFS, Lang Park etc. Also, don't forget the NRL is also encouraging teams to take games to the bush! I'm a bit undecided on that but in a way I feel that fans in rural areas deserve to see their team just as much as fans in the cities. Also, it hard to build up a case not to take games out to those areas when you've got situations like the Panthers do where fans in rugby league heartland are simply not turning up to games!

The other thing that the NRL hates is fans being locked out of NRL games. That is more to do with the first week of finals when teams get to play at their 'home' grounds. A good example was a few years ago when St George refused to move their home game from Kogarah and heaps of fans had to miss out! As a result, whenever a suburban/home ground is sold out, the NRL 'encourages' the home team to move it to ground like the SFS or Homebush. Its good in theory but lets just say Parra get 2 thousand more fans than capacity, moving the game to one of those two stadiums will kill the atmosphere at home ground advantage that a team like Parra would have!

 

[B-Tron 3000]

Haha I know we need cash. I'm not saying we don't need cash, I'm saying that I think the strategy of moving big games to Homebush is short-term thinking, and that there are other, better long-term options to get more money in the long run.

Obviously the best way to have more money is to increase income. To do this I see a number of ways:

1. Get more members and involve them more. Importantly this requires a strategy which goes beyond winning and losing - what the club means to the people in the area, what the club does in the community. As an example - sorry to use them again - the Wanderers have an easy sell: the western sydney team vs east Sydey and the rest of Australia. The team that represents all those people who were disenfranchised in the past about not being able to watch a local soccer team they were proud of. What do the Eels stand for these days? Essentially the WSW are the 1970 and 80s Eels. Oh, and of course they have the crowd which sells just as many tickets as the team.

2. Win more games - money from finals games, money from more people wanting to watch the team, buying memberships, merchandise etc

3. Both 1 and 2 lead to more sponsors, which leads to more money

4. Lobby for Parra Stadium upgrade, meaning more money each week for the club


These are all long-term (well, besides winning more games). And, in fact, in a salary cap world, the only thing we can spend any extra money on is infrastructure and coaching, so we should be thinking very long-term.

If we are so cash-strapped that we need to take the Homebush bribes now, then - and here is my biggest issue with the club - TELL US!! And not in the Fitzgerald scaremongering way - "we might not be here in 5 years" - but in a sensible, articulated membership and club strategy.

I've said it before, when this topic comes up, we're all grasping at straws because the club never articulates its vision to us. I lived in the Parra area most of my life (don't now) and I never once heard from the club. I'm a member of the Leagues Club and was a non-ticketed member a couple of years ago (but not a ticketed member even though I go to about 8-10 games per year as well as a few away ones) and yet the club never contacted me to explain its vision, its goals, how I fit in. And we're supposed to be a membership-based organisation??

I think we should have a long-term strategy based on Parra as our home ground and increasing the membership base through supply-demand, community involvement and making Parra feel like a club that people want to belong to. There are other ways for the club to be successful, but until I hear the club articulate them, I'll argue for the above, which means staying at Parra.

 

[Chipmunk]

Your 100% correct! Its unfortunate for all clubs concerned that have to play at half-empty stadiums like ANZ, but it pays the bills! The economic nature of rugby league is that most clubs struggle to make a profit each year, so they need all the money they can get!

Also I've always felt that the NRL has a thing against the old suburban grounds and views them as outdated and unprofessional; it sort of gives the game a semi-professional look compared with the state of the art complexes used by other Australian sporting codes. Its not so much an issue with Parra stadium as it is with the likes of Leicharddt Oval, Brookvale etc. Subsequently, I feel teams are encouraged to take games to Homebush, the SFS, Lang Park etc. Also, don't forget the NRL is also encouraging teams to take games to the bush! I'm a bit undecided on that but in a way I feel that fans in rural areas deserve to see their team just as much as fans in the cities. Also, it hard to build up a case not to take games out to those areas when you've got situations like the Panthers do where fans in rugby league heartland are simply not turning up to games!

The other thing that the NRL hates is fans being locked out of NRL games. That is more to do with the first week of finals when teams get to play at their 'home' grounds. A good example was a few years ago when St George refused to move their home game from Kogarah and heaps of fans had to miss out! As a result, whenever a suburban/home ground is sold out, the NRL 'encourages' the home team to move it to ground like the SFS or Homebush. Its good in theory but lets just say Parra get 2 thousand more fans than capacity, moving the game to one of those two stadiums will kill the atmosphere at home ground advantage that a team like Parra would have!

Go and ask Manly how they feel about their first week "Home Final" at the SFS against the Roosters in 3 weeks time...

There is going to be an outcry beyond belief...

On another note, I cannot believe the NRL wants to try and match the AFL because "the AFL plays at big stadiums".

Well...

If you your two big stadiums that are in the middle of the city and are easily accessible by public transport and all your teams that play there are geographically located within about 10km's of that ground and your known as a city that if you open up the gates of the biggest stadium in the city on a Saturday afternoon that 50,000 people turn up just to see what's on, then a Big Stadium policy is great.

But if neither of your big stadiums are anywhere near each other and neither of them are on a main line train stop from every suburb within the city without changing and if all the clubs in your city are geographically located more than 1 hour away by car and up to 2 hours by public transport, then perhaps a Big Stadium policy is going to do f**k all for your particular code.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

The geography of Sydney is very different to that of Melbourne.

 

[souths_pride]

Go and ask Manly how they feel about their first week "Home Final" at the SFS against the Roosters in 3 weeks time...

There is going to be an outcry beyond belief...

On another note, I cannot believe the NRL wants to try and match the AFL because "the AFL plays at big stadiums".

Well...

If you your two big stadiums that are in the middle of the city and are easily accessible by public transport and all your teams that play there are geographically located within about 10km's of that ground and your known as a city that if you open up the gates of the biggest stadium in the city on a Saturday afternoon that 50,000 people turn up just to see what's on, then a Big Stadium policy is great.

But if neither of your big stadiums are anywhere near each other and neither of them are on a main line train stop from every suburb within the city without changing and if all the clubs in your city are geographically located more than 1 hour away by car and up to 2 hours by public transport, then perhaps a Big Stadium policy is going to do f**k all for your particular code.

With regards to the NRL trying to match the AFL - I think the stadium thing is only part of it. The way the NRL see it is that it is their job to try and sell rugby league football. The way the Australian sporting landscape is setup is that the NRL, AFL, Rugby Union and the A-League are all competing to get you to attend their games EVERY week and become a follower. Since the Western Sydney Wanderers came into the A-League and GWS for admitted into the AFL, the NRL has sort of freaked out and is worried about losing support to rival codes. Subsequently, marketing has gone into overdrive and the NRL is trying everything it can to keep its supporters and attract new supports - e.g. women through women in league round. Part of that extends into giving the game a good cosmetic look and unfortunately, the NRL views those old suburban grounds as being impractical, outdated etc. Like you'd hardly see AFL, Rugby and A-League teams playing at grounds like that on a regular basis! Thus, the NRL doesn't want to look behind the times and tries to follow! It stinks I know!

As for your second point I agree with you. First of all has Manly's home final game actually being moved from Brookvale? I wasn't aware the NRL had the right to do that? I thought it was still up to the clubs to decide?

Secondly, what you say is true but heres the dilemma it has to be one or the other. You can't have a big stadium policy and then enforce it whenever you feel like it. The rules need to be black and white for that to work otherwise it will probably end up in the courts. As I said before, I think the big stadium policy can backfire badly if a team's home ground is sold out by like a couple of thousand and you move the game to ANZ, SFS etc; the whole atmosphere gets ruined and your playing in front of a half empty stadium again.

 

[Chipmunk]

The geography of Sydney is very different to that of Melbourne.

Absolutely

 

[Chipmunk]

With regards to the NRL trying to match the AFL - I think the stadium thing is only part of it. The way the NRL see it is that it is their job to try and sell rugby league football. The way the Australian sporting landscape is setup is that the NRL, AFL, Rugby Union and the A-League are all competing to get you to attend their games EVERY week and become a follower. Since the Western Sydney Wanderers came into the A-League and GWS for admitted into the AFL, the NRL has sort of freaked out and is worried about losing support to rival codes. Subsequently, marketing has gone into overdrive and the NRL is trying everything it can to keep its supporters and attract new supports - e.g. women through women in league round. Part of that extends into giving the game a good cosmetic look and unfortunately, the NRL views those old suburban grounds as being impractical, outdated etc. Like you'd hardly see AFL, Rugby and A-League teams playing at grounds like that on a regular basis! Thus, the NRL doesn't want to look behind the times and tries to follow! It stinks I know!

As for your second point I agree with you. First of all has Manly's home final game actually being moved from Brookvale? I wasn't aware the NRL had the right to do that? I thought it was still up to the clubs to decide?

Secondly, what you say is true but heres the dilemma it has to be one or the other. You can't have a big stadium policy and then enforce it whenever you feel like it. The rules need to be black and white for that to work otherwise it will probably end up in the courts. As I said before, I think the big stadium policy can backfire badly if a team's home ground is sold out by like a couple of thousand and you move the game to ANZ, SFS etc; the whole atmosphere gets ruined and your playing in front of a half empty stadium again.

Let me say one thing... If Parra, the Dogs, Penrith and the Tigers are all in the top 4, we will soon see how much support there is for the other codes in Western Sydney... The GWS would virtually disappear...

I actually think now that the A League is a summer sport, that it isn't really direct competition and in alot of ways the Western Sydney Wanderers are complementary to Parra as they provide full use of Pirtek all year round...

On the other issue, I had the same question about a week ago, apparently all Sydney teams in Week 1 of the NRL finals will play their HOME game at either Allianz or ANZ.

 

[Rabbits20]

On the other issue, I had the same question about a week ago, apparently all Sydney teams in Week 1 of the NRL finals will play their HOME game at either Allianz or ANZ.

I have been wondering about this as well. I thought Sydney teams had to play at Allianz or ANZ for week 1 but about a week ago someone told me that isn't the case.

For example if Penrith finish 2nd apparently they have the right to play at Penrith as it is a qualifying final same goes with elimination finals. Week 2 of finals I think is home region semi finals and has to be played at a major stadium.

There may though be a double header that the NRL want to push for at Allianz or ANZ in
Week 1.

The person who told me this may be wrong though! Anyone know?