TOPIC:

agreed Baz...fifth playing finals is a joke although from memory FART won it from 4th last year so who knows?

Senior Seagull wrote:

swan42 wrote:

Bazza wrote: Yeah there was nothing like those piss weak Ch 2 graphics, fark it was retro stuff, like the cameras and OB gear they used, sfa investment in new technology since 1977.

And the goal .,and mark of the year give away prizes were outstanding, so much so they never existed...lol

Please explain why there were such great discrepancies in the number of times each club was broadcast. Aso, please explain explain why the South Freo vs Swans final wasn't broadcast.

Back a few years when it was just the final 4 the 1st and 2nd semi were both played on the same day so ABC would always cover the cut throat 1st semi. Now we have this final 5 and seems Ch 7 have spread the coverage so all teams get a broadcast in the early finals. SD v WP and SF v Peel were both broadcast being on different days, the next week both finals on the same day so they chose to broadcast the game involving a team that hadn't had finals coverage so far ie the SU v Peel game. That would have been their reasoning. IMHO it should always be the cut throat final that gets the coverage. I expect if the Ch7 sponsored east eagles were in finals they would have had all their games covered, just as they had the most home and away broadcasts.

SS the obvious would dictate that you would broadcast the elimination final. Maybe we should rename Bazza Ba77a!!!

Time For a Flag wrote: 17928 Peel v Subi
20517 Peel v South

I went pretty close.

Time For a Flag wrote:

Time For a Flag wrote: 17928 Peel v Subi
20517 Peel v South

I went pretty close.

TFAF you got a hell of a lot closer than Gavin Taylor et al at the WAFC. What was their minimum crowd EXPECTATION? Oh, that's right: 30,000

Time For a Flag wrote:

Time For a Flag wrote: 17928 Peel v Subi
20517 Peel v South

I went pretty close.

yep , well done.

I think the weather forecast kept about 5k away from the game, weather eventually turned out not too bad for the league at least, so I reckon would have got 23 - 24k with a good forecast, still well short of the fantasy land 30k

swan42 wrote:

Senior Seagull wrote:

swan42 wrote:

Bazza wrote: Yeah there was nothing like those piss weak Ch 2 graphics, fark it was retro stuff, like the cameras and OB gear they used, sfa investment in new technology since 1977.

And the goal .,and mark of the year give away prizes were outstanding, so much so they never existed...lol

Please explain why there were such great discrepancies in the number of times each club was broadcast. Aso, please explain explain why the South Freo vs Swans final wasn't broadcast.

Back a few years when it was just the final 4 the 1st and 2nd semi were both played on the same day so ABC would always cover the cut throat 1st semi. Now we have this final 5 and seems Ch 7 have spread the coverage so all teams get a broadcast in the early finals. SD v WP and SF v Peel were both broadcast being on different days, the next week both finals on the same day so they chose to broadcast the game involving a team that hadn't had finals coverage so far ie the SU v Peel game. That would have been their reasoning. IMHO it should always be the cut throat final that gets the coverage. I expect if the Ch7 sponsored east eagles were in finals they would have had all their games covered, just as they had the most home and away broadcasts.

SS the obvious would dictate that you would broadcast the elimination final. Maybe we should rename Bazza Ba77a!!!

Everyone on here wants things equalized and fair then surely the coverage of finals would demand equality and fairness where all finals teams get some coverage, cant have it both ways.

swan42 wrote:

Time For a Flag wrote:

Time For a Flag wrote: 17928 Peel v Subi
20517 Peel v South

I went pretty close.

TFAF you got a hell of a lot closer than Gavin Taylor et al at the WAFC. What was their minimum crowd EXPECTATION? Oh, that's right: 30,000

That statement was made BEFORE Peel qualified which killed any hope of that.

18k was a good turnout in the circumstance tbh.

swan42 wrote:

Senior Seagull wrote:

swan42 wrote:

Bazza wrote: Yeah there was nothing like those piss weak Ch 2 graphics, fark it was retro stuff, like the cameras and OB gear they used, sfa investment in new technology since 1977.

And the goal .,and mark of the year give away prizes were outstanding, so much so they never existed...lol

Please explain why there were such great discrepancies in the number of times each club was broadcast. Aso, please explain explain why the South Freo vs Swans final wasn't broadcast.

Back a few years when it was just the final 4 the 1st and 2nd semi were both played on the same day so ABC would always cover the cut throat 1st semi. Now we have this final 5 and seems Ch 7 have spread the coverage so all teams get a broadcast in the early finals. SD v WP and SF v Peel were both broadcast being on different days, the next week both finals on the same day so they chose to broadcast the game involving a team that hadn't had finals coverage so far ie the SU v Peel game. That would have been their reasoning. IMHO it should always be the cut throat final that gets the coverage. I expect if the Ch7 sponsored east eagles were in finals they would have had all their games covered, just as they had the most home and away broadcasts.

SS the obvious would dictate that you would broadcast the elimination final. Maybe we should rename Bazza Ba77a!!!

I've got SFA to do with Ch 7 , in fact one of parents worked for the ABC for decades, nothings perfect but I have pointed the positives, i.e prize money for clubs and players that ABC could never do.
This nostalgic obsession with the ABC really has to end they are NEVER coming back to WAFL.

Bazza wrote:

swan42 wrote:

Time For a Flag wrote:

Time For a Flag wrote: 17928 Peel v Subi
20517 Peel v South

I went pretty close.

TFAF you got a hell of a lot closer than Gavin Taylor et al at the WAFC. What was their minimum crowd EXPECTATION? Oh, that's right: 30,000

That statement was made BEFORE Peel qualified which killed any hope of that.

18k was a good turnout in the circumstance tbh.

Pure unadulterated crap. The GF was cheaper than the home and away games. Kids were free. The WAFC said 30,000 was their lowest attendance figure. Under 5 mm of rain from 9 am on the Sunday until after the GF finished. Last game at Subiaco. The figure was like everything the WAFC touches complete and utter FAILURE.