TOPIC:

Bazza wrote:

Roman wrote: There's no point talking about attendances to which club has better over the other. Attendances started to decline way back in 1987 and have been going down ever since. People are just not interested in WAFL footy, simple as that. They have other things to do on a Sat arvo. I popped into Lakeside Joondalup on the way to the game on Sat and it was like Christmas. Hard to find parking and people everywhere. I bet if I did a survey to how many people have ever attended a WAFL match there wouldn't be too many.

That's the sad fact, and the WP move to Joodny hasn't captured the local populations imagination as they thought it would.

The situation down South is even worse. You ask the nupties in the media and they'll say that population in the Mandurah/Peel district is booming. They're not going to watch Peel play let me tell you. It's booming with crabs not WAFL attendees.

Yep the original clubs just draw on their pre AFL status, with memories of when WAFL was the biggest show in town, there is no way a new entrant will ever get the same status now, Peel should of been around long enough now to have a solid following , its never going to happen. The entire scene is dominated by the two local AFL sides.

Bazza wrote: Yep the original clubs just draw on their pre AFL status, with memories of when WAFL was the biggest show in town, there is no way a new entrant will ever get the same status now, Peel should of been around long enough now to have a solid following , its never going to happen. The entire scene is dominated by the two local AFL sides.

Always has been Bazza. The Eagles killed the WAFL.

Bazza wrote:

swan42 wrote:

Bazza wrote:

swan42 wrote: Perhaps we may get a beter indicator by aopting the Olympic style scoring practice of dropping the biggest and smallest attendances to get a more indicative and representative average.

Anymore contortions to try and boast the swans myth hey buddy??? perhaps you could try it with free kicks as well, the whole worlds against swans aren't they..lol

I fully understand that logic doesn't necessarily have to be involved in a person's post. However, in my post where did I suggest that Swans' attendance figures would result in a higher place in the "attendances table"? Methinks you are extrapolating your own concerns on that matter; certainly they are not my concerns.

I knew it would have something to do with putting swans higher on the ladder that's the only reason you'd post it, of course if they were sitting on top, which they are not, then you wouldn't bother with coming up with obtuse calculations to improve a lacklustre look.

Bazza a very simple question how do you know that Swans would move up if your dropped the highest and lowest attendance for each club? Rest assured I have no idea whether that is correct. What I think it would do is provide a more indicative level of attendances for all the clubs.

Are we talking per capita again ....farken hell get enough of it over here with the kiwis....what is it with folk and lumps of wood genetically attached to their deltoids

Freezin wrote: Are we talking per capita again ....farken hell get enough of it over here with the kiwis....what is it with folk and lumps of wood genetically attached to their deltoids

Apparently there is a move for the AFL to discount the attendances on ANZAC Day and Queens Birthday as they are played on Public Holidays.