insert.pause
First Grade
- Messages
- 6,461
The hype from the media went AWOL this week though, and that is when it really needed to be in action.
Yep, they have an axe to grind about player access.
The hype from the media went AWOL this week though, and that is when it really needed to be in action.
I meant that at least since the finals went to 5 teams some time in the early 70s.
I agree the final crowds in the 60s are impressive but they were 1 game a week for 4 weeks. It should also be remembered that except for the GF finals were not televised live until the early 90s. The first GF televised live was in either 66 or 67. Big Bill Buckley sold the rights for $5000 and thought he had made a fortune. The decision to telecast was delayed until all tickets at the SCG on the Thursday before the match.
Yeah I agree mate, been built up over the past few years as the ultimate and the week it's about to be played, channel 9 and their news limited partners pump a sport (afl) and a club (Sydney Swans) like there is no tomorrow yet they do not and have not had the rights to show the game for years. f**k ch 9 must have some MORONS working for them.
You should be embarrassed, you've got the mathematic abilities of a lamp post.
Last year Souths got a crowd of 44k against a club with an equivalent supporter base.
Considering my post was made before the crowd announcement your argument is invalid.
Ohh yeah that's right, you are my bitch.
Whatever it is now it will be a third of that at half time when souths fans make their exodus.
You said tonight's crowd was lower than the Swans prelim. Care to say you are wrong now since you've, well, been proven wrong?
One of your best idiot
Unless a miracle occurs tomorrow the 74k Jarryd Hayne finals record is safe for another year
Bow to the great man my minions
Swans were playing a melbourne team - and still got closeYou said tonight's crowd was lower than the Swans prelim. Care to say you are wrong now since you've, well, been proven wrong?