Pathetic Manly Fans

[Packy]

It was clearly everyone else's fault except for Manly fans.

 

[Beachy Eagle]

It was clearly everyone else's fault except for Manly fans.

Grow up dead shit, it is only the DT spinning that crap.
Manly fans have time and time again conceeded it was pathetic, our main concern was the 8.30 timeslot being completely un family friendly.

But as I said the crowd is an embarrasment to our club and us fans.....

 

[Phil McGrawhan]

It was clearly everyone else's fault except for Manly fans.

Yep as per usual ,Manly & their fans can do no wrong.

 

[Joker's Wild]

My family and I traveled an hour into the city for this one and they say Manly fans don't travel. We don't even live anywhere near Manly/Brookvale or even have a connection. I personally traveled to Newcastle and Wollongong this year.

There you have it. They dont call it the insular peninsula for nothing

 

[sting]

^^ that's it.

Out of all the Manly fans I know that went to the game, none were the ones from the beaches

 

[ManlyMania]

i dont see how seeing how the teams rank and then taking it from there - week 1 you deserve a home final if its manly vs dogs sure take it to SFS but titans warriors cowboys surely the NRL can see that its not going to get more than 20k? - also as mentioned above an 8:40pm kickoff is just ridiculous....

 

[Nice Beaver]

It's one of the great mysteries at that ground. I've seen sellouts range in difference of around 6-8000. I've been to a crowd of 22,100 (first game back after first round of renovations against cronulla) and likewise a crowd of around 14,000 which were both advertised as sold out.

Yeah your spot on. The NRL knew there were 20,000 at the ground but posted up 15,000 because it would be a good look:roll:
As for your photo proving what a massive crowd there was - hahahahaha wow a photo of part of the hill. Convincing case.

 

[Firey_Dragon]

Yeah your spot on. The NRL knew there were 20,000 at the ground but posted up 15,000 because it would be a good look:roll:
As for your photo proving what a massive crowd there was - hahahahaha wow a photo of part of the hill. Convincing case.

I'm not suggesting anything of the sort. I merely said the attendance counts at that ground are notoriously inconsistent, I was at the game and the ground was packed. Were you there? The official capacity at Kogarah has dropped to around 18,000 since the Cronulla game in 09 due to safety concerns

As for the picture, I actually googled for a larger shot but that is all I could find that wasn't a zoomed in shot of a player.

 

[ceagle]

Sometimes I feel like Brookie sold out, but it is only 16k. Suburban ground are hard to judge

 

[Firey_Dragon]

Sometimes I feel like Brookie sold out, but it is only 16k. Suburban ground are hard to judge

I'm not talking about 'feeling' it sold out. There have been listed sell outs with attendances ranging from 14,000 to 22,000. It is very hard to judge at suburban grounds, but Kogarah is extremely inconsistent in reporting it. Unless you get a fluctuation of 8000 people between sellouts, ie a third of the crowd, I find that hard to believe.

In any case, the reported number was just short of 2000 under the official capacity. Manly got less than a regular club game for a final just because the game was moved 20km...

 

[Nice Beaver]

In any case, the reported number was just short of 2000 under the official capacity. Manly got less than a regular club game for a final just because the game was moved 20km...

And you got 15,000 to a home semi final at Kogarah. Less than a regular season game. Moved exactly 0 km's.
What's your point? I'm sure you must be trying to make one somewhere.

 

[Bluebags1908]

Disgraceful crowd at SFS - but the NRL asked for it by being so stupid by putting Manly vs Cowboys there in the first place.

Games should only be moved to bigger venues when there is a demand for it. They would have got more people at Brookvale so why move it?

 

[BuffaloRules]

You have got to have one rule for everybody...

So if Tigers come first and Canterbury eighth, and the other home games are Manly, Penrith and the Sharks all playing interstate opposition, the Tigers should be the only game to move to a "neutral" venue ( in this case the Dogs home ground) because they will get more than 20,000?

 

[firechild]

You have got to have one rule for everybody...

So if Tigers come first and Canterbury eighth, and the other home games are Manly, Penrith and the Sharks all playing interstate opposition, the Tigers should be the only game to move to a "neutral" venue ( in this case the Dogs home ground) because they will get more than 20,000?

No, it should be moved to the SFS, one of the Tigers' home grounds.

 

[BuffaloRules]

No, it should be moved to the SFS, one of the Tigers' home grounds.

But what if the NRL thinks they will sell more than 40,000 tickets and they need a bigger ground?

What if Manly came 2nd and Tigers 7th.. would it be Ok then to move the game to Homebush and have the other three teams playing at their home grounds??

You think Des would be doing much whinging?

 

[CliffyIsGod]

You have got to have one rule for everybody...

So if Tigers come first and Canterbury eighth, and the other home games are Manly, Penrith and the Sharks all playing interstate opposition, the Tigers should be the only game to move to a "neutral" venue ( in this case the Dogs home ground) because they will get more than 20,000?

No, it should be moved to the SFS, one of the Tigers' home grounds.

Some people have no idea.

 

[BuffaloRules]

But what if the NRL thinks they will sell more than 40,000 tickets and they need a bigger ground?

What if Manly came 2nd and Tigers 7th.. would it be Ok then to move the game to Homebush and have the other three teams playing at their home grounds??

You think Des would be doing much whinging?

Cliffy??

Can you enlighten me?

 

[firechild]

But what if the NRL thinks they will sell more than 40,000 tickets and they need a bigger ground?

What if Manly came 2nd and Tigers 7th.. would it be Ok then to move the game to Homebush and have the other three teams playing at their home grounds??

You think Des would be doing much whinging?

At the end of the day they are suggesting this is a fair and equitable system when clearly there is no fair and equitable system. The Broncos, Storm and other teams get a home final in week 1, 2 and 3 (depending how it all pansd out in a given year) yet some get no home games, even if they are minor premiers. Some Sydney teams get home games simply by virtue of abandoning their supporters and moving to larger stadia. The Bulldogs and Souths get home grand finals and there is no way around that. In essence, striving for equity is futile and the NRL should make the logical decision of having a system where teams play at home grounds but the NRL can use their discretion to move games away from those venues if the need arises. The fact that the crowd at ANZ on friday night would not have sold out the SFS shows that even when the most supported teams in Sydney face off in week 1 of the finals, the crowds are not as good as the NRL predicts.

 

[M2D2]

The NRL will move ANY Sydney teams game to ANZ or SFS depending on who they are playing. If its two Sydney teams it will get moved to ANZ. If not, Prob SFS.
Sydney teams with their old derelict Suburban stadiums now have NO rights as they dont have the capacity to hold enough numbers and/or their stadiums are so shit they dont have enough dressing room/facilities for 4 teams.

Sydney teams dont have any rights at the HOME game in round 1 to ensure the greater good of the game.
Manly doesnt believe in the greater good. They believe in whining when something doesnt go their way.

ANZ/SFS will be the home of Sydney Finals for years to come.

 

[Bluebags1908]

But what if the NRL thinks they will sell more than 40,000 tickets and they need a bigger ground?

What if Manly came 2nd and Tigers 7th.. would it be Ok then to move the game to Homebush and have the other three teams playing at their home grounds??

You think Des would be doing much whinging?

You have got to have one rule for everybody...

So if Tigers come first and Canterbury eighth, and the other home games are Manly, Penrith and the Sharks all playing interstate opposition, the Tigers should be the only game to move to a "neutral" venue ( in this case the Dogs home ground) because they will get more than 20,000?

But as it stands right now, there isn't one rule for everybody anyway - Newcastle and all the interstate teams automatically get to play at their home ground in week 1 regardless.

If the Tigers, Eels, Penrith, Cronulla or any other Sydney team were playing an interstate team they should have it at their home ground - so this rule will still be the same for every Sydney team. It's only when 2 Sydney teams play each other that the games should be at SFS or ANZ.