Double header?

[Dr Worm]

What a really really really bad idea. The best option for all would be for Swans to play early evening on saturday night say 6.30 bounce then wobbalies on sunday afternoon, that would give them enough time to reconfigure the ground and paint the lines etc.

[gilze]

Originally posted by JF_Bay22_SCG
I know the answer, watch our game. Then hide in the toilets strapped with explosives during the second.

Give in to those maggots under NO CIRCUMSTANCES. If we do, the ARU know we are a soft touch.

I have a SWANS membership. I do not want to watch the UNION. And will injure people who do in my vicinity.

JF

lol, Totally agree, Can't be bothered watching a classic one try Bledisloe match.

[Mike_B]

The scheduling problem began when the ARU changed a request for the Bledisloe/Tri-Nations match from August 6 to August 13.

This put it in conflict with the AFL, which had already requested that date.

They caused the problem....they can solve it....

[OldE]

Personally, I think the AFL should show no mercy. Threaten lawsuits if they can, do all that is within their power to show the prima donnas at the ARU that they should not mess with us. After the Johns saga, we shouldn't play nice.

It bewilders me that, after the AFL contributed to the restructuring of the stadium, we have no first-usage rights. Seems really odd to me.

[liz]

Originally posted by eirinn
to show the prima donnas at the ARU that they should not mess with us. After the Johns saga, we shouldn't play nice.

While I entirely agree with your sentiments, I'm not sure we can blame the ARU for the "Johns saga".

[peterh_oz]

There will NOT be a double header. Not a chance.

It will come down to whether Tel$tra $tadium honour the first booking made (ie US) or give way to the ARU. I hope they remember how many games a year we use the ground, and how many the ARU does!

Never piss-off a long-term customer ... That's the best way to create a short-term customer! Or an ex-customer!

[OldE]

Originally posted by liz
While I entirely agree with your sentiments, I'm not sure we can blame the ARU for the "Johns saga".

I'm a conspiracy theorist all the way. I'm convinced it was done to generate publicity and detract media attention from the Collingwood game. NSWRU and the ARU are very closely connected. I completely believe they picked that week very deliberately.

[liz]

Originally posted by eirinn
I'm a conspiracy theorist all the way. I'm convinced it was done to generate publicity and detract media attention from the Collingwood game. NSWRU and the ARU are very closely connected. I completely believe they picked that week very deliberately.

Yeah, I vaguely remembered a Johns story hogging the headlines that week, but because Johns plays League, not rubgy, I was confused as to how it could be blamed on the ARU. But my housemate has just reminded me that the story was about his possible switch to Union, so I see where you're coming from now.

My bad.

[Bas]

The rugby will draw a much bigger crowd than what our clash will. That will tip it in their favour. I imagine we will have a Sunday afternoon game there at 1.00pm start. I'd prefer a friday night if we can't have Sat night.

I'd be happy for them to move it to the SCG on the Sat night.

I have forgotten how long it takes to re-configure the ground. It's either 12 hours or 24. I think it might be 12.

A double header would be impossible. It's about 5,000 less seats that they can sell for the rugby otherwise. Mighty $ wins the argument

[Damien]

Originally posted by Bas
The rugby will draw a much bigger crowd than what our clash will. That will tip it in their favour. I imagine we will have a Sunday afternoon game there at 1.00pm start. I'd prefer a friday night if we can't have Sat night.

We booked it, we should get it....

Commercial decisions should take into account what the sport and team offer the stadium overall - and what future possibilities there are.

We generally offer more than Union can, 3 Games and a final each year (If we earn it of course), plus the reconfiguration we lobbied for allows them access to Cricket. We may also be in a position next negotiation to take 6 games out there, who knows.

(Union could probably offer the stadium more games - but most of those games would be less popular and not as suited to Telstra and would alienate QLD and developing markets.)

[monopoly19]

I think we should let the rugger take Stad de Aus only if we get compensation (I have no idea if they ever would, but it sounds nice) and then we should move the game to the SCG and beat Brisbane there like we have the last couple of times.

My pride will be hurt (Aussie Rules > Union), but my travelling time will be cut down and I will feel partly compensated!

[Beaussie]

Originally posted by Damien
We should just bloody get it.

We put in money for that reconfiguration - it annoys me that Telstra Stadium can bid for International and State Cricket because they now have a cricket ground thanks the AFL and Swans hard work, yet we have to fight it out with the other rugby code to get one of our games on.

This is exactly what upsets me the most. I for one hope the AFL does not back down on this one. We had the booking first. There should be no negotiation.

**** the ARU and Telstra Stadium.