Let's talk Ports! Part 3

Remove this Banner Ad

Collingwood face the possibility of the same issue with melbourne. We shouldn't fear it
Collingwood face the same issue 75% of the time and has for decades.

There's literally only one other team in the league that negates our home ground, and playing them in an 'earned' home final is an advantage to them. They get the neutral venue, without having to work for it.

Sent from my Nokia 7.2 using Tapatalk
 
I don’t think we need a specific away guernsey. We should be able to wear our black guernsey for most away matches. Home and clash plus heritage.

The white is surplus to requirements unless they don’t believe it is good enough clash guernsey against some teams, but I can’t think of a team it doesn’t work at least as good as the white and simply looks better for me.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
I like the soccer idea, your home or main kit, the away or clash, and then the third one for the rare instances the clash isn't good enough, but with the fixed nature of the AFL and the predictability of guernseys, there's really no need.

Sent from my Nokia 7.2 using Tapatalk
 
I like the soccer idea, your home or main kit, the away or clash, and then the third one for the rare instances the clash isn't good enough, but with the fixed nature of the AFL and the predictability of guernseys, there's really no need.

Sent from my Nokia 7.2 using Tapatalk

It’s just to increase revenue. I have nothing against it.

Some seasons, the club nails it; in others, it misses the mark. Mostly, it ends somewhere in between.

I think footy clubs are too conservative (indigenous guernsey notwithstanding). One can be conservative and still make different small tweaks every year.

Use the away and third to go wild.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

It’s just to increase revenue. I have nothing against it.

Some seasons, the club nails it; in others, it misses the mark. Mostly, it ends somewhere in between.

I think footy clubs are too conservative (indigenous guernsey notwithstanding). One can be conservative and still make different small tweaks every year.

Use the away and third to go wild.
I dunno, if you wear red, then yellow, and you play a team away who wears red and yellow, then you will need that third strip in purple.
 
"Bruce Weber," says former Football Times editor and South Australian football journalist Ashley Hornsey with no attachment to Port Adelaide, "is the saviour (of South Australian football), but don't expect him to ever receive the recognition he deserves.

Excellent article from Michelangelo Rucci on Bruce Weber.



You’ve just got to look at how badly the SANFL botched the terminal decline of Football Park, and its various Clouseauesque attempts to keep its hands around Port’s throat, for a hint as to how things would’ve gone had the plan held to wait until at least 1993/94.
 
You’ve just got to look at how badly the SANFL botched the terminal decline of Football Park, and its various Clouseauesque attempts to keep its hands around Port’s throat, for a hint as to how things would’ve gone had the plan held to wait until at least 1993/94.
images - 2023-07-04T091515.061.jpeg
 
‘the Sensible Solution’.

a new roof! and maybe… maybe… one rail line!
I like the added touch of it being clearly a Crows home showdown.
 
Also the roof is only on the members. At least it looks like Captain Kirk (or Picard) should be flying it.

Such an Adelaide solution - how do we make something look futuristic while being essentially the same because South Australians are afraid of change?
 
I dunno, if you wear red, then yellow, and you play a team away who wears red and yellow, then you will need that third strip in purple.

White or black works just fine for such cases.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Also the roof is only on the members. At least it looks like Captain Kirk (or Picard) should be flying it.

Such an Adelaide solution - how do we make something look futuristic while being essentially the same because South Australians are afraid of change?

Back when this was going down, I was doing some consulting work for an engineering firm that had given a report to the SANFL on the state of the Football Park infrastructure. From what I was told, the feedback was that it had significant concrete cancer and the cost to repair and maintain over the ensuing decade would have been more than the cost of building a brand new stadium. Maintenance costs would also increase exponentially each year thereafter.

The SANFL sat on this info while they waved that concept rendering around in the media knowing full well that the budget would blow out and the design would not meet the standards required. My hunch was that they were attempting to get the govt on the hook for a brand new stadium that they owned and controlled. Their subsequent behaviour re Adelaide Oval indicates that this hunch was probably correct.
 
The panic about the possibility of playing the crows in a final around here is sadly undignified. If we can't beat that modestly talented shower of fart smellers when it matters, we're not winning s**t. If they knock us off in the first week of finals they'd be doing us a favour, saving us from embarrassing ourselves on an even bigger stage

I'm comfortable that this group is better than that now. If not, sack hinkley
Agreed, whether it's a minor round Showdown or a final Port should be able to put a much stronger line up on the park than the tingles and win any game against them.

I can concur though with those who have noted the vast improvement in the crom this season, particularly when compared to the rabble they were not that long ago.

Their easy draw would have a fair bit to do with it as they have obviously had a number of big wins at Adelaide oval against easy beats and they can bury weaker oppo oppo at home when they smell blood in the water, but their form away with the exception of the recent game v the wobblers at the mcg has been poor.
It's a toss of the coin as to whether they are genuine finals material, but if they do remain in the 8 and have to play in another state I suspect they would be a strong chance of getting the sayonara in the first round.
 
haven’t you seen anything different since round 2 or 3? Carn.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
I've seen better selections on selection night, I've seen plan Bs and even Cs being implemented during the game, and I've seen a desire to not stop and confidence to win even if a few goals down heading into the final qtr.

But I can't see us putting teams to the sword, or controlling games for the majority of the time (I understand you can't have momentum throughout the whoel game, but good teams control the game for at least 65% of the time).
 
I've seen better selections on selection night, I've seen plan Bs and even Cs being implemented during the game, and I've seen a desire to not stop and confidence to win even if a few goals down heading into the final qtr.

But I can't see us putting teams to the sword, or controlling games for the majority of the time (I understand you can't have momentum throughout the whoel game, but good teams control the game for at least 65% of the time).
I've seen us win 12 games in a row, whilst the crows have yo-yo'd there way through the season. To say you cannot see us beating them is ridiculous.

And we have put plenty of teams to the sword. The game before last we piled on 7 goals in a row in a hurry in the 3rd quarter to bury Geelong. there have been other examples too.

what have the crows done, put West Coast and north to the sword?
 
Back when this was going down, I was doing some consulting work for an engineering firm that had given a report to the SANFL on the state of the Football Park infrastructure. From what I was told, the feedback was that it had significant concrete cancer and the cost to repair and maintain over the ensuing decade would have been more than the cost of building a brand new stadium. Maintenance costs would also increase exponentially each year thereafter.

The SANFL sat on this info while they waved that concept rendering around in the media knowing full well that the budget would blow out and the design would not meet the standards required. My hunch was that they were attempting to get the govt on the hook for a brand new stadium that they owned and controlled. Their subsequent behaviour re Adelaide Oval indicates that this hunch was probably correct.

BriskPessimisticGossamerwingedbutterfly-size_restricted.gif


No Problem Np GIF by MOODMAN
 
Back when this was going down, I was doing some consulting work for an engineering firm that had given a report to the SANFL on the state of the Football Park infrastructure. From what I was told, the feedback was that it had significant concrete cancer and the cost to repair and maintain over the ensuing decade would have been more than the cost of building a brand new stadium. Maintenance costs would also increase exponentially each year thereafter.

The SANFL sat on this info while they waved that concept rendering around in the media knowing full well that the budget would blow out and the design would not meet the standards required. My hunch was that they were attempting to get the govt on the hook for a brand new stadium that they owned and controlled. Their subsequent behaviour re Adelaide Oval indicates that this hunch was probably correct.
Something built on a swamp had concrete cancer? well I never
 
Something built on a swamp had concrete cancer? well I never

Some of the last games ever played there, that Northern stand looked like something out of a warzone.
 
Bakhmut Thunderdome

I seriously have a memory of a fire in a 44 gallon drum at the northern end where they'd already started the demolition.
It was the most apocalyptic setting for a football game ever.
 
I seriously have a memory of a fire in a 44 gallon drum at the northern end where they'd already started the demolition.
It was the most apocalyptic setting for a football game ever.
Escape from New York
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Let's talk Ports! Part 3

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top