SCG to get a makeover

[swantastic]

i disagree i would much prefer to play big games at scg .now concerning the flood everbody is in the same position at the scg it dosent get bigger just for the opposition.same problems occure for both teams

[hammo]

Because of its size, the SCG is easier to get numbers back than at Telstra. An irrefutable fact.

Sydney's record at Telstra is recent years is far better than the SCG.

It may be 'perception' only, but Sydney plays better at Telstra.

[Wardy]

From what I have seen in the last few years, and I'm sure that my fellow Chardonnay swillers will back me on this - it appears that THE SWANNIES are having greater success on the bigger grounds. Of course there used to be a time when the smaller SCG was to our advantage - but not anymore. I was never previously fond of Telstra - but in the last year or so I have changed my mind (women are allowed to do that). They always get bigger crowds at Telstra and to be honest the last game out there against Geelong, the atmosphere was fantastic. The bigger ground is the way to go.

On a risk management level - particularly the MA Noble that is an accident waiting to happen. Its just by pure luck that none of the elderly (or people of any age for that matter) haven't gone head first down the stairs of the top deck and sustained really bad injuries because there are no hand rails, the exits are appalling, it really needs an extensive upgrade - or total demolition.

[Bart]

Originally posted by swantastic
what is it with all u tossas up in chardonnay land calling them the swannies that is crap you wont hear the real south supporters calling them that,its the swans or the bloods

Or Sydney

[desredandwhite]

Originally posted by swantastic
cruiser mayb you should pull your head out of your own beach BUM the only reason swans have better record at ts is they have played bugger all games there compared to scg think about .of course % are going to be different they have played 200 odd games at scg compared to mayb 10 or so at ts.

swantastic, it may be wise to keep the personal insults out of your posts. Argue the point if you like, but there's no need to resort to name calling.

On a more mathematical note, the percentage of games at each venue does not affect the weighting of the percentage of wins at said venues. When you compare the two venues in recent years, the winning record really is not that different. However, my opinion on your logic still stands.

All years:
SCG - 146/271 = 53%
TS - 11/15 = 77%

Since TS became an AFL venue (2002-2006)
SCG - 28/41 = 68%
TS - 11/15 = 77%

Roos Era (2003-2006)
SCG - 23/31 = 74%
TS - 9/12 = 75%

[GB85]

After seeing the Roos era figures provided by Des, i go by the theory anywhere, anytime, bring it on!!!

[wheels27]

The other problem with this argument is that TS always hosts the potentially big drawing (and usually more successful) opposition, so should really be harder games to win, based purely on quality of opposition.

Eg. Collingwood each of their grand final years, Brisbane the best team in recent years etc. etc. Plus all the big finals of the last few years, so the raw statistics being so even, still show a better record at TS.

(Stats can prove anyone's point can't they?)

[goswannie14]

Originally posted by desredandwhite
swantastic, it may be wise to keep the personal insults out of your posts. Argue the point if you like, but there's no need to resort to name calling.

On a more mathematical note, the percentage of games at each venue does not affect the weighting of the percentage of wins at said venues. When you compare the two venues in recent years, the winning record really is not that different. However, my opinion on your logic still stands.

All years:
SCG - 146/271 = 53%
TS - 11/15 = 77%

Since TS became an AFL venue (2002-2006)
SCG - 28/41 = 68%
TS - 11/15 = 77%

Roos Era (2003-2006)
SCG - 23/31 = 74%
TS - 9/12 = 75%

That compares very favourably with Roos overall winning ratio of 63%.

[Norris Lurker]

While the work's being done next season, there'd be no general admission area at the SCG and a much reduced capacity. I've got a reserved seat, but anyone who hasn't and normally goes on the hill would be locked out next year. It would probably make sense to move all the games to Homebush next season before returning to the SCG in 2008.

As for the new stand, with cricket and the rugby codes already being featured in grandstand names at the SCG & SFS, it's time for an AFL name. For his role in getting the Swans to where they are today, I'd like to see the new stand named the Paul Kelly Stand.

[garethb83]

Originally posted by Norris Lurker
While the work's being done next season, there'd be no general admission area at the SCG and a much reduced capacity. I've got a reserved seat, but anyone who hasn't and normally goes on the hill would be locked out next year. It would probably make sense to move all the games to Homebush next season before returning to the SCG in 2008.

As for the new stand, with cricket and the rugby codes already being featured in grandstand names at the SCG & SFS, it's time for an AFL name. For his role in getting the Swans to where they are today, I'd like to see the new stand named the Paul Kelly Stand.

I don't like the chances of that happening considering that the Doug Walters Stand is being demolished. Surely they will take him into consideration before giving it an AFL name?

I, like you, would love to see that happen, but i seriously doubt it.

[goswannie14]

Originally posted by swantastic
what is it with all u tossas up in chardonnay land calling them the swannies that is crap you wont hear the real south supporters calling them that,its the swans or the bloods

Get your facts right, or at least get into the 1990's, because you appear to be stuck way back before that. My Dad grew up in South Melbourne, I have barracked for them all of my life and I call them Sydney, The Swans, occasionally the Bloods, and also the Swannies at varying times.

If you were a "REAL" South supporter as you claim you would still call them South wouldn't you?

It's up to us each to support them and call them as we see fit, it's not for people like you to come on here and tell us what we can and can't call our team.

You have also shown, with some of your comments on here that you have no idea about the people that you are talking with. Get to know them, then you may earn the right to say a few of the things that you have so far said in the short time you have been a part of this forum.

[iigrover]

Originally posted by goswannie14
You have also shown, with some of your comments on here that you have no idea about the people that you are talking with.

Here here!

[i'm-uninformed2]

Originally posted by Wardy

On a risk management level - particularly the MA Noble that is an accident waiting to happen. Its just by pure luck that none of the elderly (or people of any age for that matter) haven't gone head first down the stairs of the top deck and sustained really bad injuries because there are no hand rails, the exits are appalling, it really needs an extensive upgrade - or total demolition.

I did, p*&%ed as a parrot one night, come tumbling down the back stairs to the Ladies Stand, but due to my comfortably numb state, finished with a beautiful little roll and woke up the next day without a bruise on me.

If old people are worried about being stupid and getting hurt, they should drink more.

[Mike_B]

Originally posted by Norris Lurker
As for the new stand, with cricket and the rugby codes already being featured in grandstand names at the SCG & SFS, it's time for an AFL name. For his role in getting the Swans to where they are today, I'd like to see the new stand named the Paul Kelly Stand.

Who will they name the players race after then???

[Lucky Knickers]

First Coach to take us to a premiership in 72 years!

Gotta be the ROOS Stand for mine. Best thing to come to the club for 72 years ever really IMHO.

Kel's got a race, Locketts' got an end, Luffys' got the pine!

Or "The Bloods Stand"