Fans abandon Force

[Nines]

Force have surveyed members on why they have lost their membership and most of the reasons are because of Subiaco Oval.

I know three groups of suppoters who have relinquished their memberships and seating was never an issue .
The farce may have lost a lot of members because of the seating issue but it is now not an issue with the current crowd levels .

.

[Egan]

Ok Nines, we will trust your studies of three people you know, over an independent survey.

The world of Nines makes so much sense

[Nines]

Ok Nines, we will trust your studies of three people

May attention - three groups of people .

Ok Nines, we will trust your studies of three people you know, over an independent survey.

An independent survey ? A survey done by the farce ?

You are so sloppy Egan .

No when was this survey done .
No need to post a link I trust you .

.

[Egan]

It happened prior to the last few seasons when they where wondering why memberships had dropped. And also it has been reported in the media, but obviously you tune out if the Weagles latest new hair cut is not put on tellie or Lachy Read sucking up to druggies such as Daniel Chick etc etc. Similarly Glory crowds dropped in finals when people became sick of how sh*t Subiaco Oval is...

But it is pointless having any sort of conversation with you about this, because you want to lay the daggers into everything that isn't Aussie Rules. And lay the daggers into anyone who doesn't praise it to the hilt.

[Nines]

It happened prior to the last few seasons when they where wondering why memberships had dropped.

Well the farce's crowds were much larger then .
I agree that seating would be an issue then .
I don't agree that seating is an issue now with the low level of crowds .
There are plenty of good seats available .
Don't you agree ?
Do you want to hear my take on the drop off ?

.

.

[Egan]

Up to you Nines.

But I don't think you are alone in the critique of the Force, again when you sprouted I have had a rugby agenda in the past, I have done exactly the opposite and suggested to Tom Baddeley the then media officer to accept the 25,000 seat stadium. I have also been highly critical of the long term planning of the Force done by O'Meara, Season ticket prices and the fact the reason they are still at Subiaco is entirely the Force's fault. But that like the present caimpaign you are on, made no difference what I said. Your aim was to discredit, misinform and state how great the WAFC and Football are...

I also wrote an article saying "Force not to blame for MES Delay - WARL". The Force are squarely to blame for the redevelopment not taking place, the WARU rejected this as this website revealed first. So myself or the website can not be considered in anyway a prop for a particular code.

I think unless you start to debate people on the points they bring up against your one-sided and often inaccurate information for the point of pursuing a particular agenda, people will not give a sh*t what you say.

But again, if you feel you need to lay the boots into another code while you fail to acknowledge any faults in your arguments or agendas you have led while posting on this forum, feel free...

You seem to have a particular inaccurate view on the importance my views have in the wider sporting community.

You can choose to talk about what you like, you continue the way you are going and the respect you get on this forum will go downhill. But unlike other forums trolls won't get banned, because we have no moderation.

Its left to others to have real debates, not ones based on the pleas a certain member has to propagandise a sports positive image...

[Egan]

It happened prior to the last few seasons when they where wondering why memberships had dropped.

Well the farce's crowds were much larger then .
I agree that seating would be an issue then .
I don't agree that seating is an issue now with the low level of crowds .
There are plenty of good seats available .
Don't you agree ?
Do you want to hear my take on the drop off ?

.

.

I think you are over-estimating what is considered good in Union. And the price these so called good seats cost. The crowds are comparable to Lang Park, the best rectangular stadium in the country and that is a Rugby State.

So even at 15,000 I don't think you can suggest the crowds for an expansionist state is necessarily atrocious. While it is dissapointing, the Swans and Bears had crowds far less in their first 5 years of existence...

[Nines]

Up to you Nines.

I believe there are now other issues other Subiaco seating that are now evident causing the farce's dropoff .

I asked you if you agree . If you agree I can give my input .
If you don't agree you'll find some reason to abuse me .

.

[Egan]

I believe there are now other issues other Subiaco seating that are now evident causing the farce's dropoff .

I asked you if you agree . If you agree I can give my input .
If you don't agree you'll find some reason to abuse me .

.

Forgetting that you are the one that has sworn at me numerous times in the last month...



You are the one that decides to post mate, not up to me. If I believe it is inaccuarate I will critique. If I agree I will support it. If you can't handle the heat in the kitchen don't post. Rob, Paul, Jeffles, Cam, Dibo, everyone on this forum accepts when they post they are open to critique.

This forum is not about cliques or how much drugs I can take that will make me have an epiphany moment...join the blingers forum, that is what its all about.

I won't accept a point of view that has an agenda surrounding it and unfortunately the evidence stacks up when you are the only one on this forum who fails to post in threads other than Aussie Rules and denigrates all other sports in the process.

Suggest you are interested in being more respected, debate people's points when they critique you, not make up new points.

And grow a thicker skin if you can't handle the critique don't post.

[Nines]

I think you are over-estimating what is considered good in Union. And the price these so called good seats cost.

Quite clearly you still see seating as an issue .
That's your perogative .

So even at 15,000 I don't think you can suggest the crowds ... is necessarily atrocious.

Can you point to where I suggest the farce's crowds are atrocious ?

.

[Nines]

And grow a thicker skin if you can't handle the critique don't post.

I love posting here . You're a blast .

[Egan]

[quote="Nines]

So even at 15,000 I don't think you can suggest the crowds ... is necessarily atrocious.

Can you point to where I suggest the farce's crowds are atrocious ?

.[/quote]

I see you are a journalist at the Daily Telegraph. Altering what I actually said...

I love posting here . You're a blast .

And you have a serious problem, or employed by the WAFC

You still have not answered my question on whether I saw you on the Al Jazeera Channel last year sprouting Australian Rules in South Africa.
Rightio, I will

[Nines]

Can you point to where I suggest the farce's crowds are atrocious ?

I see you are a journalist at the Daily Telegraph. ....

A real blast !

[AndrewM]

There have been numerous studies that show the distance from the pitch is impacting on attendance.

But at least 20k seats would have better viewing than the SCG .

.

Have you ever watched any game (AFL, soccer or Rugby)at Subi nines?? what do you mean by better viewing - would being no more than 30 metres from the playing field boundary?

[Nines]

There have been numerous studies that show the distance from the pitch is impacting on attendance.

But at least 20k seats would have better viewing than the SCG .

.

Have you ever watched any game (AFL, soccer or Rugby)at Subi nines?? what do you mean by better viewing - would being no more than 30 metres from the playing field boundary?

I have watched AFL , WAFL , IR and S14 at Subiaco .
But at least 20k seats would have better viewing than the SCG
because on average 20k seats would be closer to the action as
the wings at Subiaco are 11.5m closer to the action as
Subiaco is 23m narrower than the SCG .
That's the only reference being made .

.
.