Saints to play home game in NZ on ANZAC day

[Austinnn]

Good points, Con & dragit. Still, we do need to play less at Docklands, or make it more profitable to do so. Also the Docklands ground is pretty specific and has conditions other grounds don't have, so getting used to playing there doesn't prepare us well for away games.

Remember how big the Waverley ground was comparatively, and how our late 90s teams had an athletic advantage on smaller grounds after getting used to Waverley? I wonder if all the problems we had on wetter, softer, bigger grounds than Docklands might be reduced if we had some home games on more generic grounds.

I'd like more games at MCG personally, but that won't happen.

[SainterK]

Not sure where this 4-5 games vibe is coming from.

It's once every two years at this stage.

[saintbrat]

Not sure where this 4-5 games vibe is coming from.

It's once every two years at this stage.

A reporter making an assumption that it is the " same' as deals for tassie........

[Con Gorozidis]

Not sure where this 4-5 games vibe is coming from.

It's once every two years at this stage.

A reporter making an assumption that it is the " same' as deals for tassie........

once every 2 years would be cool. id be into that.

[citywest]

I know this is a fan forum and people just post shat but I don't understand why so many people are against NZ. Our club is struggling off the field. Obviously our board have realized that if we don't do something now, we will be in trouble down the track. If only the previous board realized this, we would not have abandoned Tassie. I said at the time that we were doing Hawthorn a huge favour and that the Saints would live to regret it. That day has now come, but the dickheads who made the decision to leave Tassie have also left the Saints and have not been held accountable.

If St Kilda play 4 games a year in NZ and get an extra $3mill a year, plus new membwrs in NZ, plus KIWIS in Australia becoming members then I'm all for it.

The Saints have been a top side for nearly a decade now. Let me ask you one question.

What will happen to our club if we are a bottom side for the next 5 years?

[dragit]

What will happen to our club if we are a bottom side for the next 5 years?

We will get 5 high draft picks, then challenge again in 2020.
We've spent over a quarter of our history on the very bottom and survived ok, after spending the past ten around the top 4, we are due for some time in the bottom half...

Let me ask you a question...

Who do you barrack for & why do bother coming on here?

[citywest]

I barrack for St kilda and I come on here because I love the club and want them to survive for ever so my kids can watch them too.

[dragit]

I barrack for St kilda and I come on here because I love the club and want them to survive for ever so my kids can watch them too.

Well Helen, moving 4 of 11 home games overseas is not the answer. I would be seriously re-thinking a full membership that only gave access to 6-7 games.

[asiu]

.lol @
'Well Helen ... '

.ahhhhhh good ol ss.

[desertsaint]

Not sure where this 4-5 games vibe is coming from.

It's once every two years at this stage.

Thank god for that. I retract my pessimistic earlier rant. Go saints!

[SainterK]

Not sure where this 4-5 games vibe is coming from.

It's once every two years at this stage.

Thank god for that. I retract my pessimistic earlier rant. Go saints!

Retraction noted

[citywest]

I barrack for St kilda and I come on here because I love the club and want them to survive for ever so my kids can watch them too.

Well Helen, moving 4 of 11 home games overseas is not the answer. I would be seriously re-thinking a full membership that only gave access to 6-7 games.

Who the hell is Helen?

A full membership would still get us 11 games. There would be 4 away games that we would have access to. Just like Hawthorn.

[plugger66]

I barrack for St kilda and I come on here because I love the club and want them to survive for ever so my kids can watch them too.

Well Helen, moving 4 of 11 home games overseas is not the answer. I would be seriously re-thinking a full membership that only gave access to 6-7 games.

Who the hell is Helen?

A full membership would still get us 11 games. There would be 4 away games that we would have access to. Just like Hawthorn.

But unlike Hawthorn we are playing in a place that no one gives a stuff about AFL, you need a passport to get there and it costs a hell of a lot more to get there.

[Spinner]

I barrack for St kilda and I come on here because I love the club and want them to survive for ever so my kids can watch them too.

Well Helen, moving 4 of 11 home games overseas is not the answer. I would be seriously re-thinking a full membership that only gave access to 6-7 games.
Who the hell is Helen?

A full membership would still get us 11 games. There would be 4 away games that we would have access to. Just like Hawthorn.

But unlike Hawthorn we are playing in a place that no one gives a stuff about AFL, you need a passport to get there and it costs a hell of a lot more to get there.

Spot on!

[asiu]

.tassy is cared about .... is that what u two are inferring ?

Bless.

[The Redeemer]

Good points, Con & dragit. Still, we do need to play less at Docklands, or make it more profitable to do so. Also the Docklands ground is pretty specific and has conditions other grounds don't have, so getting used to playing there doesn't prepare us well for away games.

Remember how big the Waverley ground was comparatively, and how our late 90s teams had an athletic advantage on smaller grounds after getting used to Waverley? I wonder if all the problems we had on wetter, softer, bigger grounds than Docklands might be reduced if we had some home games on more generic grounds.

I'd like more games at MCG personally, but that won't happen.

Short answer is Etihad make it more profitable. We have some a competitive advantage there (somehow) and probably will do when we decline so why not use it?

Nettlefold and Co. must look at getting a better deal (again somehow if possible, it might not be) at Etihad as we want the best opportunity to win games of football and that stadium provides it.

[bergholt]

Nettlefold and Co. must look at getting a better deal (again somehow if possible, it might not be) at Etihad as we want the best opportunity to win games of football and that stadium provides it.

the saints don't exactly have a strong negotiating position in discussions with docklands:

saints: "give us a better deal or else!"

docklands: "or else what?"

saints: "maybe we'll move to the mcg!"

afl and mcg clubs: "no you f****** won't."

docklands: "right. now please assume the position."

saints: "..."

[No1_Saint]

Nettlefold and Co. must look at getting a better deal (again somehow if possible, it might not be) at Etihad as we want the best opportunity to win games of football and that stadium provides it.

the saints don't exactly have a strong negotiating position in discussions with docklands:

saints: "give us a better deal or else!"

docklands: "or else what?"

saints: "maybe we'll move to the mcg!"

afl and mcg clubs: "no you f****** won't."

docklands: "right. now please assume the position."

saints: "..."

So very sad as it's so very true. The club was lied to by Jackson and co over the profitability of the move to Colonial. Now look at how things are. The club has limited revenue streams and one of it's main sources is completely unprofitable. Is it any surprise the club is constantly looking to make a quick buck?

[saintbrat]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/sp ... Wellington

[bergholt]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/sp ... Wellington

i hope they're not actually banking on 10,000 aussies coming to town as the article suggests. they'll be lucky to get 2000 or 3000.

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

Do we really have 5,000 travelling to all our away games?
I'd be surprised if that was true.

Interesting to read some of the comments at the bottom of the article. Most seem positive, from what I read.

[saintspremiers]

Do we really have 5,000 travelling to all our away games?
I'd be surprised if that was true.

Interesting to read some of the comments at the bottom of the article. Most seem positive, from what I read.

Well we have 40,000 members according to the Sheep Shagger that wrote the article!

We would do well to have 10,000 going to away games in Melbourne....can't imagine anywhere near 5,000 travelling interstate to away games....maybe a couple of G, the rest would
be Vic expats.

Anyway, as long as they pay us at least a million NZ bucks (about $700,000 Aussie) for the game I'd be happy.

[wasaintsfan]

I'll go... International holiday and saints... Oh yea baby

[Enrico_Misso]

Raise a glass to the Saints

[saintspremiers]

I'll go... International holiday and saints... Oh yea baby

NZ technically is o/s but really is no different to going to Perth.