|
Glory Recruit
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
^agreed
Au and Perth also got crowds through the "hard times", Northern Spirit did for a short time but then all hell broke loose with that club, Newcastle im unsure about but they did get 6k regarly i think, which was more then a lot of other clubs at the time.
I think what is interesting is that there hasnt really been any growth at AU and Perth since. AU highest average attendance is still there first season and Glorys is there 2nd season.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jak
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 110,
Visits: 0
|
sydneyfc1987 wrote:jak wrote:lardface wrote:jak wrote:lardface wrote:jak wrote:lardface wrote:jak wrote:sydneyfc1987 wrote:
Sure,
European immigration in the 50's and 60's led to the establishment of ethnically-based clubs which facilitated unprecedented development of the game itself (i.e.: players, coaches, facilities), yet at the same time restricted the potential of football to these communities.
Thought it was obvious...
Fair enough, but you seem to attribute most of the blame for the demise of the NSL to the so-called "Mono-ethnic" clubs. There were many factors at play. whaaat? He didn't mention the demise of the nsl. :? They restricted the game taking off willingly in most cases. *rolls eyes* Okay, let me rephrase: ...you seem to attribute most of the blame for "holding the game back" to the so-called "Mono-ethnic" clubs. There were many factors at play. You're rolling your eyes when they're not even similar comments?:d The NSL's demise correctly had many factors, but mono-ethnicity playing a role in "restricting the game taking off" which was the comment, how is that debatable?:d The only way you could debate it is to put all the a-league success down to marketing but then you would have to ignore the success broad based clubs had in the NSL in engaging supporters who have grown to support the game interdependently from mono-ethnic clubs. If not engaging them for many years is not restricting the games growth idk what is? :d They are very similar comments; you are just trying to score a point. Speaking of points, you miss mine. I'm not saying it wasn't a factor, but that it was one of many factors. sydneyfc1987 only talks about "mono-ethnic clubs" as if it was THE factor. Get it? The original comment was not suggesting there was a single factor that held the game back but that "mono-ethnic" clubs were a factor that held it back. There will always be multiple factors that are holding the game back isn't that obvious? It is obvious to me, but perhaps not to sydneyfc1987. It still sounded like he/she made out that the "mono-ethnic" issue was the main reason for "stalled growth". I am happy to be corrected by him/her. Anyway, we can just agree to disagree because there are better things to discuss. Of course there were a multitude of factors. Poor administration at national level, negative media, relatively poor government funding just to name a few... Yet I look at things through my personal experience of being a football fan who's local support of the game couldn't extend beyond the Socceroos. Hell I even went to a couple of Sydney Olympic games during the time they played at Toyota Stadium in Cronulla but was never going to develop a connection to a club that basically represented the Sydney Greek community. In my opinion this restricted further potential growth which we can see now... fair enough
|
|
|
|
|
chris
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.6K,
Visits: 0
|
Can the mods please lock this thread - the last few pages has been too intelligent for a thread with smfc on the title#-o
|
|
|
|
|
Gerrygee
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 259,
Visits: 0
|
chris wrote:Can the mods please lock this thread - the last few pages has been too intelligent for a thread with smfc on the title#-o Fuck off you butthurt flog. You started this thread and need to expect what is coming from it.
|
|
|
|
|
jak
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 110,
Visits: 0
|
Gerrygee wrote:chris wrote:Can the mods please lock this thread - the last few pages has been too intelligent for a thread with smfc on the title#-o Fuck off you butthurt flog. You started this thread and need to expect what is coming from it. Who took the jam out of your doughnut?
|
|
|
|
|
Brisbane Ro
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.3K,
Visits: 0
|
84 pages :lol:
|
|
|
|
|
lardface
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 162,
Visits: 0
|
jak wrote:lardface wrote:jak wrote:lardface wrote:jak wrote:lardface wrote:jak wrote:sydneyfc1987 wrote:
Sure,
European immigration in the 50's and 60's led to the establishment of ethnically-based clubs which facilitated unprecedented development of the game itself (i.e.: players, coaches, facilities), yet at the same time restricted the potential of football to these communities.
Thought it was obvious...
Fair enough, but you seem to attribute most of the blame for the demise of the NSL to the so-called "Mono-ethnic" clubs. There were many factors at play. whaaat? He didn't mention the demise of the nsl. :? They restricted the game taking off willingly in most cases. *rolls eyes* Okay, let me rephrase: ...you seem to attribute most of the blame for "holding the game back" to the so-called "Mono-ethnic" clubs. There were many factors at play. You're rolling your eyes when they're not even similar comments?:d The NSL's demise correctly had many factors, but mono-ethnicity playing a role in "restricting the game taking off" which was the comment, how is that debatable?:d The only way you could debate it is to put all the a-league success down to marketing but then you would have to ignore the success broad based clubs had in the NSL in engaging supporters who have grown to support the game interdependently from mono-ethnic clubs. If not engaging them for many years is not restricting the games growth idk what is? :d They are very similar comments; you are just trying to score a point. Speaking of points, you miss mine. I'm not saying it wasn't a factor, but that it was one of many factors. sydneyfc1987 only talks about "mono-ethnic clubs" as if it was THE factor. Get it? The original comment was not suggesting there was a single factor that held the game back but that "mono-ethnic" clubs were a factor that held it back. There will always be multiple factors that are holding the game back isn't that obvious? It is obvious to me, but perhaps not to sydneyfc1987. It still sounded like he/she made out that the "mono-ethnic" issue was the main reason for "stalled growth". I am happy to be corrected by him/her. Anyway, we can just agree to disagree because there are better things to discuss. It was a main reason, but he/she didn't say it was the only reason that was what you added. I don't think we had anything else to disagree on. :)
|
|
|
|
|
lardface
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 162,
Visits: 0
|
Benjamin wrote:lardface wrote:Benjamin wrote:lardface wrote:You're rolling your eyes when they're not even similar comments?:d The NSL's demise correctly had many factors, but mono-ethnicity playing a role in "restricting the game taking off" which was the comment, how is that debatable?:d The only way you could debate it is to put all the a-league success down to marketing but then you would have to ignore the success broad based clubs had in the NSL in engaging supporters who have grown to support the game interdependently from mono-ethnic clubs. If not engaging them for many years is not restricting the games growth idk what is? :d And what do we blame the first 100 years of failure on? It went from very small in the 'pre-ethnic' era, to small in the 'ethnic era', to reasonably sized in the 'post-ethnic' era. Progress = good. However, to blame ethnics for holding the game back, when they clearly played a huge part in taking it from almost-non-existent to having a national league, is folly. It's folly to suggest there was continual progress, growth slowed then declined with the inability/unwillingness of mono-ethnic clubs to expand being a major factor. The decline decade or more was "holding the game back". Didn't suggest continual progress - made it quite clear that things have been better post-ethnic era than during the ethnic-era. My suggestion is that the same lack of interest from the 'mainstream'/Aussie market that killed the game for 100 years, continued during the ethnic-era. Isn't the obvious things have been better? Unfortunately the game was held back or didn't progress within the ethnic era for a number of years with mono-ethnicity being a major factor.
|
|
|
|
|
GGfortythree
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.2K,
Visits: 0
|
Brisbane Ro wrote:84 pages :lol: This thread will never die (unless it gets locked).
|
|
|
|
|
Benjamin
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 23K,
Visits: 0
|
lardface wrote:Benjamin wrote:lardface wrote:Benjamin wrote:lardface wrote:You're rolling your eyes when they're not even similar comments?:d The NSL's demise correctly had many factors, but mono-ethnicity playing a role in "restricting the game taking off" which was the comment, how is that debatable?:d The only way you could debate it is to put all the a-league success down to marketing but then you would have to ignore the success broad based clubs had in the NSL in engaging supporters who have grown to support the game interdependently from mono-ethnic clubs. If not engaging them for many years is not restricting the games growth idk what is? :d And what do we blame the first 100 years of failure on? It went from very small in the 'pre-ethnic' era, to small in the 'ethnic era', to reasonably sized in the 'post-ethnic' era. Progress = good. However, to blame ethnics for holding the game back, when they clearly played a huge part in taking it from almost-non-existent to having a national league, is folly. It's folly to suggest there was continual progress, growth slowed then declined with the inability/unwillingness of mono-ethnic clubs to expand being a major factor. The decline decade or more was "holding the game back". Didn't suggest continual progress - made it quite clear that things have been better post-ethnic era than during the ethnic-era. My suggestion is that the same lack of interest from the 'mainstream'/Aussie market that killed the game for 100 years, continued during the ethnic-era. Isn't the obvious things have been better? Unfortunately the game was held back or didn't progress within the ethnic era for a number of years with mono-ethnicity being a major factor. So I ask one more time... If ethnics are to blame for holding the game back from the late 40s to the turn of the century... Who is to blame for holding the game back from the mid 19th century to the end of WWII when it was booming in South America and Europe?
|
|
|
|
rusty
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
Benjamin wrote:So I ask one more time... If ethnics are to blame for holding the game back from the late 40s to the turn of the century... Who is to blame for holding the game back from the mid 19th century to the end of WWII when it was booming in South America and Europe? There obvioulsy wasn't any demand back then. Demand didn't peak until the late 90's/2000's, but the NSL clubs were too slow to catch on, there was a reluctance to change and many wished the mainstream would piss off because they thought their ethnic clubs and league had a divine right to exist without catering to the masses. Even today there are many who can't stand the fact soccer has gone mainstream and long for the days when it was a symbol of ethnic pride.
|
|
|
|
|
clockwork orange
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8.3K,
Visits: 0
|
Benjamin wrote:
So I ask one more time... If ethnics are to blame for holding the game back from the late 40s to the turn of the century... Who is to blame for holding the game back from the mid 19th century to the end of WWII when it was booming in South America and Europe?
ALP press release just announced that it's Tony Abbott.
|
|
|
|
|
Brisbane Ro
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.3K,
Visits: 0
|
gabgabgab39 wrote:Brisbane Ro wrote:84 pages :lol: This thread will never die (unless it gets locked). It's the thread that just keeps on giving :lol:
|
|
|
|
|
lardface
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 162,
Visits: 0
|
Benjamin wrote:lardface wrote:Benjamin wrote:lardface wrote:Benjamin wrote:lardface wrote:You're rolling your eyes when they're not even similar comments?:d The NSL's demise correctly had many factors, but mono-ethnicity playing a role in "restricting the game taking off" which was the comment, how is that debatable?:d The only way you could debate it is to put all the a-league success down to marketing but then you would have to ignore the success broad based clubs had in the NSL in engaging supporters who have grown to support the game interdependently from mono-ethnic clubs. If not engaging them for many years is not restricting the games growth idk what is? :d And what do we blame the first 100 years of failure on? It went from very small in the 'pre-ethnic' era, to small in the 'ethnic era', to reasonably sized in the 'post-ethnic' era. Progress = good. However, to blame ethnics for holding the game back, when they clearly played a huge part in taking it from almost-non-existent to having a national league, is folly. It's folly to suggest there was continual progress, growth slowed then declined with the inability/unwillingness of mono-ethnic clubs to expand being a major factor. The decline decade or more was "holding the game back". Didn't suggest continual progress - made it quite clear that things have been better post-ethnic era than during the ethnic-era. My suggestion is that the same lack of interest from the 'mainstream'/Aussie market that killed the game for 100 years, continued during the ethnic-era. Isn't the obvious things have been better? Unfortunately the game was held back or didn't progress within the ethnic era for a number of years with mono-ethnicity being a major factor. So I ask one more time... If ethnics are to blame for holding the game back from the late 40s to the turn of the century... Who is to blame for holding the game back from the mid 19th century to the end of WWII when it was booming in South America and Europe? Who said that? I've explained already that there was not a continual progression, there was progression and regression, the regression held the game back, i can't add anymore.
|
|
|
|
|
lardface
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 162,
Visits: 0
|
rusty wrote:Benjamin wrote:So I ask one more time... If ethnics are to blame for holding the game back from the late 40s to the turn of the century... Who is to blame for holding the game back from the mid 19th century to the end of WWII when it was booming in South America and Europe? There obvioulsy wasn't any demand back then. Demand didn't peak until the late 90's/2000's, but the NSL clubs were too slow to catch on, there was a reluctance to change and many wished the mainstream would piss off because they thought their ethnic clubs and league had a divine right to exist without catering to the masses. Even today there are many who can't stand the fact soccer has gone mainstream and long for the days when it was a symbol of ethnic pride. It wasn't slowness it was resistance.
|
|
|
|
|
chris
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.6K,
Visits: 0
|
jak wrote:Gerrygee wrote:chris wrote:Can the mods please lock this thread - the last few pages has been too intelligent for a thread with smfc on the title#-o Fuck off you butthurt flog. You started this thread and need to expect what is coming from it. Who took the jam out of your doughnut? Actually I think he was a hollow donught from the start
|
|
|
|
|
chris
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.6K,
Visits: 0
|
lardface wrote:rusty wrote:Benjamin wrote:So I ask one more time... If ethnics are to blame for holding the game back from the late 40s to the turn of the century... Who is to blame for holding the game back from the mid 19th century to the end of WWII when it was booming in South America and Europe? There obvioulsy wasn't any demand back then. Demand didn't peak until the late 90's/2000's, but the NSL clubs were too slow to catch on, there was a reluctance to change and many wished the mainstream would piss off because they thought their ethnic clubs and league had a divine right to exist without catering to the masses. Even today there are many who can't stand the fact soccer has gone mainstream and long for the days when it was a symbol of ethnic pride. It wasn't slowness it was resistance. Careful when we use the word mainstream Football is still a minority at spectator level compared to other commercial sports
|
|
|
|
|
lardface
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 162,
Visits: 0
|
chris wrote:jak wrote:Gerrygee wrote:chris wrote:Can the mods please lock this thread - the last few pages has been too intelligent for a thread with smfc on the title#-o Fuck off you butthurt flog. You started this thread and need to expect what is coming from it. Who took the jam out of your doughnut? Actually I think he was a hollow donught from the start And you're not?:d
|
|
|
|
|
lardface
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 162,
Visits: 0
|
chris wrote:lardface wrote:rusty wrote:Benjamin wrote:So I ask one more time... If ethnics are to blame for holding the game back from the late 40s to the turn of the century... Who is to blame for holding the game back from the mid 19th century to the end of WWII when it was booming in South America and Europe? There obvioulsy wasn't any demand back then. Demand didn't peak until the late 90's/2000's, but the NSL clubs were too slow to catch on, there was a reluctance to change and many wished the mainstream would piss off because they thought their ethnic clubs and league had a divine right to exist without catering to the masses. Even today there are many who can't stand the fact soccer has gone mainstream and long for the days when it was a symbol of ethnic pride. It wasn't slowness it was resistance. Careful when we use the word mainstream Football is still a minority at spectator level compared to other commercial sports I didn't use it.:?
|
|
|
|
|
jak
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 110,
Visits: 0
|
Okay, seeing as everyone loves to bandy around the expression "mono-ethnic", let me throw this into the mix.
Most Aussie Rules and Rugby League clubs are mono-ethnic. Discuss.
|
|
|
|
rusty
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
chris wrote:
Careful when we use the word mainstream
Football is still a minority at spectator level compared to other commercial sports
So Rubgy isn't mainstream? :?
|
|
|
|
|
chris
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.6K,
Visits: 0
|
Is it on commercial TV?
|
|
|
|
rusty
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
chris wrote:Is it on commercial TV? Isn't football? :?
|
|
|
|
|
chris
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.6K,
Visits: 0
|
no atm football is on subscription tv
|
|
|
|
rusty
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
So is rugby
|
|
|
|
|
paulc
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
To the mono ethnic bitters....................Happy Australia Day.
In a resort somewhere
|
|
|
|
|
GGfortythree
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.2K,
Visits: 0
|
jak wrote:Okay, seeing as everyone loves to bandy around the expression "mono-ethnic", let me throw this into the mix.
Most Aussie Rules and Rugby League clubs are mono-ethnic. Discuss.
SMFC has ethnic exclusivity, with most AFL and NRL clubs there are just no non-anglos dumb enough to go to games.
|
|
|
|
|
GGfortythree
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.2K,
Visits: 0
|
paulc wrote:To the mono ethnic bitters....................Happy Australia Day.
|
|
|
|
|
Glory Recruit
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
To Mods, as this thread lacks any article cant it be locked and be discussed in The Expansion Thread?
In the index the description says this "Expansion Thread - Discussion of A-League expansion including market share, potential franchises, viability of existing franchises, history of previous franchises, etc."
|
|
|
|
|
T-UNIT
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.2K,
Visits: 0
|
chris wrote:no atm football is on subscription tv Next season brah!! :d
|
|
|
|