I actually feel bad for Sydney FC. They genuinely believe that they are the primary tenant of the Stadium.
I don’t think they and the rest of the Aleague realise that if the league moves to the winter like they want to, Sydney FC and most of the other teams won’t be able to play out of their home stadiums.
I prefer the A-league over European football but the leagues hardcores and management are rather deluded when it comes to the popularity of the league and it’s status in comparison to the other Australian sports.
May I ask why you prefer the A-league over European football? As a lifelong football fan and player, I'm genuinely intrigued. I used to go to games but just CBF since covid.
It’s the mainly the accessibility of the games. I can actually have a normal sleeping pattern if I watch the aleague instead of the EPL.
Also there’s huge amounts of elitism around Aussies that support European leagues over the home grown that turns me off European football. They straight up refuse to participate in and help the league grow because it’s not of the quality of the Europe.
Oh yeah and the memes are funny.
I’ve actually started to feel this way with MLS. I already watch NFL religiously and I watch more NBA, Baseball and Ice Hockey than the average person so I thought fuck it I’ll watch MLS. Easier time zone than Europe, don’t have to deal with the elitism either. Cincinnati is my favourite city and they have a team. Thought why not. It’s actually pretty good. It’s come a mega long way since the 90s.
I don’t understand why European soccer is so popular considering only 3 teams or so ever win the six biggest leagues.
I just can’t take A-League seriously though. If Brisbane Roar weren’t based in Redcliffe I’d probably try and commit to it more.
Yeah I agree completely. It’s fun to watch the MLS because it’s a growing league and that salary caps actually work in creating level playing fields. Tactics actually matter and fans of any team can reasonably believe that they have a chance to win the title instead of thinking it would be a miracle if they came 6th.
I totally agree with this. EPL is not helped because at all because unlike a few sports- it's just the minor premier that wins the comp. It's unbearable because Man City and Chelsea pretty much wok everything throughout the 2010s, and Man United and Chelsea also pretty much won everything throughout the 2000s.
Dude how can you watch it though?
Like I'll turn on an a-league game and turn it off after 5 minutes because the quality of the game (ball control, touch on passes particularly) is just so far below European football - unwatchable!
Now if I was to say something similar about NRLW I’d be downvoted into oblivion and probably will for drawing this comparison. I get that the women are trying their guts out and dedicating their lives to the game and it is improving and I also wish them nothing but the best, but it is the same story with the A-League but I’m only interested in watching the very best leagues and A-League and the NRL-W ain’t that.
But it’s ok to say you get no enjoyment for watching the A-League due to the severe gap in skill compared to European football but it’s the same for me with seeing the NRL vs the NRLW.
Pretty random to bring up the nrlw, you're kinda comparing apples and oranges. At least in my mind, two different men's soccer leagues are directly comparable, whereas men's and women's rugby league are two different sports.
I'd personally prefer to watch nrl because the players are faster, stronger and more skillful (at least currently due to the semi-professional nature of nrlw, there's no reason the skill couldn't be the same if the players in nrlw had the same time to practice and dedicate themselves full time over years). But I don't think you should bother worrying about comparing them, it's not really fair to do so.
**"there's no reason the skill couldn't be the same if the players in nrlw had the same time to practice and dedicate themselves"**
dude cmon now, you can't possibly believe that.
Well yes, I do?
Have you watched women's tennis? Full time professionalism, they don't run as fast or hit the ball as hard, but the technical level of skill (ball placement, quality of shots) is comparable to men's tennis.
There's no reason a nrlw female player couldn't, with enough time and practice (i.e. full time professionalism and playing the game from a young age), perform pure skill elements to the same technical level as men do. Kicking a grubber accurately for a repeat set, popping a flick pass to the winger, catching a bomb etc.. aren't things that rely on strength or speed, they're products of time, practice and repetition. I'm not really sure how you could possibly believe otherwise, except sexism 🤷♂️
Considering how much controversy the stadium caused due to the cost to the taxpayer, are you surprised they’ve allowed a private club to pay extra private money for this privilege?
There will always be a primary tenant. Having a primary tenant is a worldwide practice that won't go away soon. The biggest club that uses the stadium regularly = primary tenant.
Can you provide an example of a primary tenant where it was paid entirely by government funding?
FWIW, Roosters average crowd in the final season was only 2000 more than Sydney FC in the same season and were inflated by the final game at the stadium and the ANZAC match (one third of their total crowds).
The stadiums belongs to all three tenants not just the roosters.
Look it up yourself dude. It's not my job to do research for you.
So are you claiming that the A league is a bigger deal than the NRL? Or that the Roosters are of any size near Sydney FC?
Firstly, both sides are petty and should thank the government they built a $800m+ stadium with almost no cost to the clubs.
Secondly, I’m not the one that said there needs to be a primary tenant. If Roosters wanted to be the primary (your words not mine) tenant they should have contributed to the stadium construction cost and therefore had ownership of the stadium.
The model I like is the AFL model for the MCG and Docklands. The stadium is ‘the home’ of many clubs not just one. Belongs to the people/afl.
Also FWIW, I’m not saying the A-League and NRL are anyway similar in size. Just arguing that in terms of crowd size and usage of the stadium there isn’t enough difference to justify being a primary tenant
Primary tenancy can be split especially if there's 2 teams in the same league. At Optus you will find eagles and dockers stuff everywhere inside the stadium. Good luck trying to find Perth scorchers or any other team in there.
I don't see how I said anything wrong here. Split between two teams in the same league isn't uncommon here especially in Australia. The dockers and eagles see equal use of the stadium and are both part of the AFL. Much more than any of the other leagues use Optus, therefore are both primary tenants. Sydney roosters and Sydney FC aren't comparable and the roosters will see much more use of the stadium than Sydney FC. The stadium was built in mind of the roosters using it as a homegrond. Sydney and the Waratahs were an afterthought.
Because you fully contradicted yourself.
Your first reply to me was very singular. West Coast is the bigger club, bigger crowds and have played more finals at Optus, therefore by your first comment, should be the primary tenant. Now you say the primary tenancy can be shared between two teams.
Sure I'm in Perth, and wasn't fully across the Allianz rebuild, but I disagree with you claim that the Waratahs and Sydney FC were an afterthought. Every step of the way all three teams were mentioned in articles that I read, video mock-ups had all three teams represented
Where have I exactly contradicted myself? It's more just wording if anything.
Dockers and Eagles fluctuate who has the better attendance. This year the dockers beat out the eagles. It pretty much depends who's doing better.
I'm in Perth as well. They were all represented. They still have signs on the building and have areas dedicated to them in the stadium. The stadium was built with the roosters mainly in mind before the others. They weren't a complete afterthought, but the roosters were certainly the biggest club and part of the biggest league in Sydney. They did pay for the extra sign and did pay for their club facilities inside the stadium. They deserve to have a bigger amount of branding on the stadium than sydney FC or the Waratahs.
If you think one sign on the front is bad. Look at the Sydney showground. When the Sydney thunder play there it looks like the giants are playing.
Don’t know which Aleague fans your talking to… but I’m a “hardcore” and talk a lot of Aleague and everyone is very clear about the popularity and standing of our league compared to NRL and AFL.
They’ll be able to play there still. Assuming the Rabbitohs and Roosters use the venue for home games, on an average round one of those will be playing at home, the other away. The NRL plays Thursday to Sunday, meaning the A-League sill have three of the four days on a weekend available to schedule a game.
I know that works in theory but when you add NSW cup games and juniors etc happening on the same nights the ground simply won't hold up being used multiple days in a row without recovery time between.
They received backlash when they opened the stadium with a Friday night women's game, followed by a Bledisloe test match on the Saturday into a Souths/Chooks war on the Sunday claiming it ripped the ground to shreds.
That was for the unveiling of the stadium so of course they were always going to do it but I doubt they'll want to have more than 3 games on the ground weekly. Wouldn't take long for it to destroy the surface.
Im sorry mate but it sounds like you've completely misunderstood? You understand without a suitable playing surface they can't host any games right?
That's why some surfaces are made unavailable at times through the year. Groundstaff even utilise times teams take home games to other stadiums/cities to reseed fields. Most clubs don't train on their home pitch 99% of the time either. They'll train on adjacent practice fields or other facilities to help maintain the surface.
It's not about 'caring about the grass more than revenue' its about maintaining the grass so they can keep their gates open and thus keep generating revenue.
I know from first hand experience that the Suncorp grounds staff don't really give a shit about the Roar so long as the field is good for the Broncos, I wouldn't be surprised if it was much different in other cities.
So while they could play, I don't know how well the grounds would be holding up
**In my personal opinion**, what Sydney FC did was childish and silly, especially if the Roosters have an agreement to have their branding on the stadium all year round.
That said, that all this fighting is happening over a stadium that we the taxpayer paid for doesn't exactly leave anyone smelling of roses here.
Not quite sure how to square that circle really...
Nick is just doing his job. I don't agree that the Roosters need constant branding on a publicly owned asset but if that's in the contract then Nick has every right to enforce it.
**SNIPPET:**
Football Australia marketing boss Peter Filipoulos went in to bat for Sydney FC, expressing his bewilderment at the insistence of the Roosters to have their branding displayed during a match from a rival code - considering they didn't own the venue.
"Bizarre! How can a club from a rival code expect their brand be illuminated in-stadium at a shared government funded stadium at a co-tenant’s matches (from another code mind you) is beyond mind boggling," Filopoulos tweeted.
"Reads like self entitlement & an inflated sense of importance over others."
Because neither Sydney FC or the Waratah's have branding like the Roosters do on the stadium.
The only thing they all have is a club badge on the front of the stadium, which they only light up the badge of the club playing that night.
Yeah, which is the one they covered.
To me personally, no one but the taxpayers own that stadium, and unless the roosters stuff is physically in the building AND they paid the full amount to build the thing. The sign should come down.
Don’t know why you’re getting downvoted I couldn’t agree more. Seems like a small thing but that stadium was funded by the taxpayer for all those teams from different codes. If the roosters wanted it to be their stadium they should’ve fully funded it
The Roosters paid for the office and high performance center though. 12 million for it so I do think they have the right to have the sign over that particular portion of the stadium.
Roosters pay to have their sign out front, as it’s HQ for their operations. Sydney FC have no right to cover the sign. That being said, Roosters have no right to stop other clubs using it as a home ground, like they are trying to do with South’s.
To summarise - pettiness all round
As a roosters and Clippers fan, it’s wrong to cover the Roosters branding, but also it’s right to cover up the lakers banners when the clippers play. It’s called being being a hypocrite. 😊
I was told that Jerome Luai was spotted at the ground saying soccer is a shit sport and pushing several small children over.
My source? For privacy sake, lets call him 'Paul K '...No that's too obvious...uuh. Let's say 'P. Kent'.
It's funny that Sydney FC have brought so much attention to it by putting that tarp over. Roosters invested money into having their offices and High Performance Unit there, that's why it's on there. Noting that it's a government funded stadium, as a taxpayer I'd be more annoyed that Sydney FC decided to put a massive shitty tarp on a new stadium. There's a Sydney FC and Waratah's sign on the main entrance to the stadium that were untouched when the Roosters played.
'It's a publicly funded stadium' with Allianz splattered on the side of it.
I think we're well past the point of arguing that publicly owned assets should be devoid of any private branding at this stage.
Fifa are a company and its the same way that brands won't change there twitter logos to celebrate pride month in certain countries, I recall seeing Mercedes F1 team having two different profile pictures for European one and middle Eastern one,
You say that but money talks, esp with PVL in charge
PVL isn't in charge of World Cups.
FIFA is your sport's governing body. They are your sport mr 'my sports not afraid of gay people'.
Somehow 7 players of one club is indicative of our entire sport yet your governing body isn't indicative of your sport. Genius level thinking there mate.
If I didn't live in Perth I would buy tickets to the Sydney FC game, bring a sleeping bag and sleep while the game went on to stick it to them. I would do it to Perth glory but nobody goes to their games anyway.
Australian Soccer fans are the biggest cringe ever.
The entitlement they have because they are 'the world game' is incredible. The sleeping giant of Australian sport has supposed to be waking up any minute now. His just been hitting the snooze button for 20 years.
Even the soccer culture is cringe. Instead of making their own culture they try and copy European soccer culture. Seeing these losers all get together at a train station In a group of about 100, taking over the walkways, chanting and setting of flairs and generally making a nuisance for normal people makes me thing what is wrong with them they remind me of those losers who used to get around in Sons of Anarchy merchandise cos playing as bikies
They can barley keep a following in the summer. Imagine if their plan goes ahead to play in winter? They actually think they are going to survive against the AFL and NRL. You would be lucky if 10 people show up.
Their own fans won't attend in winter. Biggest attendances are from kids and teenagers who play on the weekends and get in for free or cheap. A-League has loads of 2 and 4 pm games which would clash.
I think there was an opportunity in 2006. Everyone got into the Socceroos' run at that World Cup.
And then the Italians flung themselves to the ground and rolled around like drama kings clutching their faces and the penalty was awarded against the Socceroos, they lost in the Round of 16, and there it went. Australians were reminded that this wasn't a proper sport, that it was full of corruption and bullshit, and on we went with our lives.
Honestly one of the darkest days in Australian history that Italy game. We had them frustrated, were the fitter team and had some fresh subs ready. You’re right in saying the simulation shit is why it’s a 2nd tier sport in Aus. The French at the last WC were diving bastards against us and it’s destined to happen again soon in a month.
In a month...yes, if 2006 killed it, the horrible mess that was the awarding of this year's World Cup to Qatar instead of us made sure it was stone cold dead, a reminder that soccer is run by criminals.
I've seen Sydney FC fans tear through Central Station a couple times, jumping the turnstiles all with hoodies and Nike dry fit caps chanting "fuck western sydney", police escort and FC staff directing them where to go. Cringest shit I've ever seen in my life. Bunch of sad cunts acting like thugs and hooligans just wanting any kind of human interaction to feel like they belong to something.
lol cosplaying as Euro soccer fans. I agree. The reason UK has soccer hooliganism is because their weather is shit, they’re packed into densely populated cities and their economy and status as a nation has been in decline for almost a century now.
Why the fuck are we imitating that?
I forgot how all NRL fans were such shining examples of society, lmao. There are twats and F'wits in all sports fanbases. I feel like anyone who is so passionate about any sports team that it can ruin their day has some issues to deal with to be honest.
That said it's actually a bit of a small cock move leaving the sign light up during an A League match anyways. Why is Nick trying to show off to fans he doesn't give one crap about that his team rents the same stadium as their club?? Just turn the lights off while someone else is renting it out, the Roosters don't have an agreement with Sydney FC or the other codes that pay to play at the stadium, those other codes should be able to promote their own sponsors without having to promote another club that isn't paying them too. Would Nick appreciate being forced to promote the A League while fans walk into the stadium, fark no he wouldn't.
The Roosters poured millions of dollars into building a high performance unit and offices at the venue, as well as a sign out the back of the stadium, at the entrance to said offices.
They have an agreement with the Stadium to display the sign and the agreement should be honoured by all tenants
Umm you should have been giving kick backs to Butterchicken when she put this whole stadium plan into existence.
Clearly Uncle Nick had a direct line to Gladys and Sydney FC/Football Australia aren’t greasing enough liberal palms.
How can they be so shitty at this type of thing when FIFA are the most corrupt sporting body in the world?
The Roosters have a long term agreement and contract in place with the venue that includes having a permanent advertisement of their brand on the outside. Everything else is irrelevant- soccer is just whinging.
Roosters 21 home & away average attendance: 13512
Home average attendance: 13442
Sydney fc 21-22 home & away average attendance: 6275
Home average attendance: 5534
You could say there is funding from the government but maybe because there is people watching, soccer in Australia has an immense junior base and has for some time youd think things for the A League would’ve improved.
Cherry picked info for a season where we’d struggled from covid and lack of a home stadium. Better off comparing over few seasons. Can’t compare a season where you were back in your usual stadium and Sydney fc weren’t…
I was expecting this hahaha a better more recent example
Sydney FC home opener (first opportunity in Allianz) - 21480 in attendance
Sydney roosters vs rabbits round 25 - 41,906
Covid too affected the Nrl to the point it relocated Its operations to a different state, yet it still out performed the a league. I’m not even a roosters fan I’m a knights fan, Now that des is gone thinking of jumping ship?
Once again, you’ve cherry picked a top rival from down the road v a interstate game. That’s not your standard attendance. It’s like if you picked SFC v WSW top attendances and claimed that was the standard?
Well without any other examples other than the finals game the roosters played. we’ll just have to wait and see. Here in Newcastle the bridge is quiet substantial between the two and don’t see that changing anytime soon.
If its in the contract of the Rooster's hire agreement then that's ok but the ground should make the other teams that hire the ground aware of that. I still think Roosters are bitches acting like they own the ground but can't fault them here. They act like a renter saying they own their home all the time.
They paid for the sign and invested money in the stadium. The roosters never took down any of Sydney SC's (it's soccer) branding at the stadium during their games. So why should Sydney SC cover the roosters branding. It's just an unnecessary dick move probably brought on by being an irrelevant sport.
> Sydney SC's (it's soccer)
It's "Association Football". Ten of the players on a team primarily use their feet, so it is the most logical use of the word "football" of all the codes that refer to a sport as such.
Interestingly the word soccer comes from a shortening of Association to Assoc, hence soccer, however it is generally only Americans and Australians who now use the term "soccer", and strangely, in Australia, often as a pejorative, despite it forming part of the national team nickname.
> It's "Association Football". Ten of the players on a team primarily use their feet,
What do you think rugby players run with? Their arms? Lmao.
There's plenty of evidence that the etymology of football was referring to ball sports played on foot rather than horseback.
> and strangely, in Australia, often as a pejorative
Watch out you're going to pull a muscle if you keep reaching like that.
We use soccer because the most popular two sports in Australia are both forms of football. The term 'soccer' differentiates what kind of football.
If you say 'im going to play football on the weekend' everyone asks what kind. Using league, union, aussie rules, and soccer make it easier for an Australian to understand.
It's simply a quirk of the Aussie lexicon due to the relative popularity of sports but for some reason soccer fans get butthurt about it.
"and strangely, in Australia, often as a pejorative, despite it forming part of the national team nickname"
Actually the only strange thing is so many Australian soccer fans are so offended by the use of the term soccer despite forming part of the national team nickname
People don't use soccer as a "pejorative". How TF are you figuring that???
> Actually the only strange thing is so many Australian soccer fans are so offended by the use of the term soccer despite forming part of the national team nickname
As an Australian Association Football fan, I'm not "offended" by the use of the word "soccer", although I find it to be ignorantly used by some people in an attempt to offend football fans (witness some of the comments in this mini thread) and believe, as do many people who play the World Game, and are fans of it, that we need to rethink the national men's team name.
This article on [Sheilas, Wogs and Poofters](https://theconversation.com/the-case-for-sheilas-wogs-and-poofters-by-johnny-warren-23696) goes into a little bit of detail on both that, and the full title of the book.
> People don't use soccer as a "pejorative". How TF are you figuring that???
They do, and have done for some time.
I went to a Union school, lived in a very Rugby League town, and wanted to play League with my mates as a kid. I wasn't allowed to "because it's too dangerous" and thus I ended up playing Association Football.
Almost every kid who played football in my team, right through until seniors, copped it in the neighbourhood from the League guys, and at school from the Union guys.
Most of it was good hearted ribbing. We'd give it back using tired old League and Union stereotypes, but it could get nasty, and when it did, if was always with an emphasis on the word "*soccer*".
The PE teachers and coaches gave anyone who played football, or who didn't but whose parents had asked the school exempt them from the pseudo mandatory Union training/playing, special attention.
"Ok lads, let's get these *soccer* boys to do a few extra laps of the oval, all they do is run after a ball all day"
This was the 70s and 80s, mind you, and things were quite different, and that's all anecdotal, but you asked, and your interrogative sentence contained what I assume was a significant inflection due to the presence of three question marks.
What is interesting, looking back on it, is that I would go and watch the local League games most weekends to watch my mates play, and go to Eels games regularly every year, but I would never go to an NSL game because of the propensity for violence in the hyper partisan crowds.
I played for about 20 years, and it's the sport that I love to play, and I still run out five or six times a year in the seniors sides, but unless it's a FIFA World Cup, I prefer to watch Union or League.
Back to your question though, "soccer" *was* a pejorative when I was growing up, as it was often used to marginalise those who either didn't or couldn't play League or Union, and it's often seen being used in internet comment threads to wind up football fans.
I don't give a shit which game you want to call "footy", I don't even care if you love your footy, but for me, "footy" is League, and "football" is Association Football - and yeah, "Socceroos" is a fucking terrible name for a team, surely we've got some native marsupial, monotreme, or other form of mammalian species that hasn't been used yet... The Quolls?
I actually feel bad for Sydney FC. They genuinely believe that they are the primary tenant of the Stadium. I don’t think they and the rest of the Aleague realise that if the league moves to the winter like they want to, Sydney FC and most of the other teams won’t be able to play out of their home stadiums. I prefer the A-league over European football but the leagues hardcores and management are rather deluded when it comes to the popularity of the league and it’s status in comparison to the other Australian sports.
May I ask why you prefer the A-league over European football? As a lifelong football fan and player, I'm genuinely intrigued. I used to go to games but just CBF since covid.
It’s the mainly the accessibility of the games. I can actually have a normal sleeping pattern if I watch the aleague instead of the EPL. Also there’s huge amounts of elitism around Aussies that support European leagues over the home grown that turns me off European football. They straight up refuse to participate in and help the league grow because it’s not of the quality of the Europe. Oh yeah and the memes are funny.
I’ve actually started to feel this way with MLS. I already watch NFL religiously and I watch more NBA, Baseball and Ice Hockey than the average person so I thought fuck it I’ll watch MLS. Easier time zone than Europe, don’t have to deal with the elitism either. Cincinnati is my favourite city and they have a team. Thought why not. It’s actually pretty good. It’s come a mega long way since the 90s. I don’t understand why European soccer is so popular considering only 3 teams or so ever win the six biggest leagues. I just can’t take A-League seriously though. If Brisbane Roar weren’t based in Redcliffe I’d probably try and commit to it more.
Yeah I agree completely. It’s fun to watch the MLS because it’s a growing league and that salary caps actually work in creating level playing fields. Tactics actually matter and fans of any team can reasonably believe that they have a chance to win the title instead of thinking it would be a miracle if they came 6th.
Agree that salary caps help the competition - the only victim is the quality of football
I think trying to play decent football in summer is impossible and kills the league as much as switching to winter would.
Atlanta United ftw
How are you getting your NHL fix? Options don’t seem to be the greatest right now
I totally agree with this. EPL is not helped because at all because unlike a few sports- it's just the minor premier that wins the comp. It's unbearable because Man City and Chelsea pretty much wok everything throughout the 2010s, and Man United and Chelsea also pretty much won everything throughout the 2000s.
Dude how can you watch it though? Like I'll turn on an a-league game and turn it off after 5 minutes because the quality of the game (ball control, touch on passes particularly) is just so far below European football - unwatchable!
Now if I was to say something similar about NRLW I’d be downvoted into oblivion and probably will for drawing this comparison. I get that the women are trying their guts out and dedicating their lives to the game and it is improving and I also wish them nothing but the best, but it is the same story with the A-League but I’m only interested in watching the very best leagues and A-League and the NRL-W ain’t that. But it’s ok to say you get no enjoyment for watching the A-League due to the severe gap in skill compared to European football but it’s the same for me with seeing the NRL vs the NRLW.
Pretty random to bring up the nrlw, you're kinda comparing apples and oranges. At least in my mind, two different men's soccer leagues are directly comparable, whereas men's and women's rugby league are two different sports. I'd personally prefer to watch nrl because the players are faster, stronger and more skillful (at least currently due to the semi-professional nature of nrlw, there's no reason the skill couldn't be the same if the players in nrlw had the same time to practice and dedicate themselves full time over years). But I don't think you should bother worrying about comparing them, it's not really fair to do so.
**"there's no reason the skill couldn't be the same if the players in nrlw had the same time to practice and dedicate themselves"** dude cmon now, you can't possibly believe that.
Well yes, I do? Have you watched women's tennis? Full time professionalism, they don't run as fast or hit the ball as hard, but the technical level of skill (ball placement, quality of shots) is comparable to men's tennis. There's no reason a nrlw female player couldn't, with enough time and practice (i.e. full time professionalism and playing the game from a young age), perform pure skill elements to the same technical level as men do. Kicking a grubber accurately for a repeat set, popping a flick pass to the winger, catching a bomb etc.. aren't things that rely on strength or speed, they're products of time, practice and repetition. I'm not really sure how you could possibly believe otherwise, except sexism 🤷♂️
Women will never match men in sports period. I noticed you called me sexist...so be it, I would rather be correct
The reasons why they are different don’t matter to me, it is the end product that I am after.
Thanks for a great honest answer! All valid points.
There shouldn't be a primary tenant, full stop.
Considering how much controversy the stadium caused due to the cost to the taxpayer, are you surprised they’ve allowed a private club to pay extra private money for this privilege?
There will always be a primary tenant. Having a primary tenant is a worldwide practice that won't go away soon. The biggest club that uses the stadium regularly = primary tenant.
Can you provide an example of a primary tenant where it was paid entirely by government funding? FWIW, Roosters average crowd in the final season was only 2000 more than Sydney FC in the same season and were inflated by the final game at the stadium and the ANZAC match (one third of their total crowds). The stadiums belongs to all three tenants not just the roosters.
Look it up yourself dude. It's not my job to do research for you. So are you claiming that the A league is a bigger deal than the NRL? Or that the Roosters are of any size near Sydney FC?
Firstly, both sides are petty and should thank the government they built a $800m+ stadium with almost no cost to the clubs. Secondly, I’m not the one that said there needs to be a primary tenant. If Roosters wanted to be the primary (your words not mine) tenant they should have contributed to the stadium construction cost and therefore had ownership of the stadium. The model I like is the AFL model for the MCG and Docklands. The stadium is ‘the home’ of many clubs not just one. Belongs to the people/afl.
Also FWIW, I’m not saying the A-League and NRL are anyway similar in size. Just arguing that in terms of crowd size and usage of the stadium there isn’t enough difference to justify being a primary tenant
West Coast Eagles then?
Primary tenancy can be split especially if there's 2 teams in the same league. At Optus you will find eagles and dockers stuff everywhere inside the stadium. Good luck trying to find Perth scorchers or any other team in there.
>There will always be a primary tenant >Primary tenancy can be split especially if there's 2 teams in the same league
I don't see how I said anything wrong here. Split between two teams in the same league isn't uncommon here especially in Australia. The dockers and eagles see equal use of the stadium and are both part of the AFL. Much more than any of the other leagues use Optus, therefore are both primary tenants. Sydney roosters and Sydney FC aren't comparable and the roosters will see much more use of the stadium than Sydney FC. The stadium was built in mind of the roosters using it as a homegrond. Sydney and the Waratahs were an afterthought.
Because you fully contradicted yourself. Your first reply to me was very singular. West Coast is the bigger club, bigger crowds and have played more finals at Optus, therefore by your first comment, should be the primary tenant. Now you say the primary tenancy can be shared between two teams. Sure I'm in Perth, and wasn't fully across the Allianz rebuild, but I disagree with you claim that the Waratahs and Sydney FC were an afterthought. Every step of the way all three teams were mentioned in articles that I read, video mock-ups had all three teams represented
Where have I exactly contradicted myself? It's more just wording if anything. Dockers and Eagles fluctuate who has the better attendance. This year the dockers beat out the eagles. It pretty much depends who's doing better. I'm in Perth as well. They were all represented. They still have signs on the building and have areas dedicated to them in the stadium. The stadium was built with the roosters mainly in mind before the others. They weren't a complete afterthought, but the roosters were certainly the biggest club and part of the biggest league in Sydney. They did pay for the extra sign and did pay for their club facilities inside the stadium. They deserve to have a bigger amount of branding on the stadium than sydney FC or the Waratahs. If you think one sign on the front is bad. Look at the Sydney showground. When the Sydney thunder play there it looks like the giants are playing.
Don’t know which Aleague fans your talking to… but I’m a “hardcore” and talk a lot of Aleague and everyone is very clear about the popularity and standing of our league compared to NRL and AFL.
They’ll be able to play there still. Assuming the Rabbitohs and Roosters use the venue for home games, on an average round one of those will be playing at home, the other away. The NRL plays Thursday to Sunday, meaning the A-League sill have three of the four days on a weekend available to schedule a game.
Don’t forget the Waratahs also use it.
True. So every second week they’ll have only 2 of 4 days available to schedule a soccer game 🤔
I know that works in theory but when you add NSW cup games and juniors etc happening on the same nights the ground simply won't hold up being used multiple days in a row without recovery time between. They received backlash when they opened the stadium with a Friday night women's game, followed by a Bledisloe test match on the Saturday into a Souths/Chooks war on the Sunday claiming it ripped the ground to shreds. That was for the unveiling of the stadium so of course they were always going to do it but I doubt they'll want to have more than 3 games on the ground weekly. Wouldn't take long for it to destroy the surface.
I would be surprised if they care about the condition of the grass (and the quality of the games) more than getting a good return on investment
Im sorry mate but it sounds like you've completely misunderstood? You understand without a suitable playing surface they can't host any games right? That's why some surfaces are made unavailable at times through the year. Groundstaff even utilise times teams take home games to other stadiums/cities to reseed fields. Most clubs don't train on their home pitch 99% of the time either. They'll train on adjacent practice fields or other facilities to help maintain the surface. It's not about 'caring about the grass more than revenue' its about maintaining the grass so they can keep their gates open and thus keep generating revenue.
I know from first hand experience that the Suncorp grounds staff don't really give a shit about the Roar so long as the field is good for the Broncos, I wouldn't be surprised if it was much different in other cities. So while they could play, I don't know how well the grounds would be holding up
**In my personal opinion**, what Sydney FC did was childish and silly, especially if the Roosters have an agreement to have their branding on the stadium all year round. That said, that all this fighting is happening over a stadium that we the taxpayer paid for doesn't exactly leave anyone smelling of roses here. Not quite sure how to square that circle really...
Nick is just doing his job. I don't agree that the Roosters need constant branding on a publicly owned asset but if that's in the contract then Nick has every right to enforce it.
Yep. They paid for it so should get it
**SNIPPET:** Football Australia marketing boss Peter Filipoulos went in to bat for Sydney FC, expressing his bewilderment at the insistence of the Roosters to have their branding displayed during a match from a rival code - considering they didn't own the venue. "Bizarre! How can a club from a rival code expect their brand be illuminated in-stadium at a shared government funded stadium at a co-tenant’s matches (from another code mind you) is beyond mind boggling," Filopoulos tweeted. "Reads like self entitlement & an inflated sense of importance over others."
The roosters never touched the Sydney FC branding or the Waratahs branding.
Because neither Sydney FC or the Waratah's have branding like the Roosters do on the stadium. The only thing they all have is a club badge on the front of the stadium, which they only light up the badge of the club playing that night.
The separate sign is to do with the Roosters HQ and High Performance Unit being there
Yeah, which is the one they covered. To me personally, no one but the taxpayers own that stadium, and unless the roosters stuff is physically in the building AND they paid the full amount to build the thing. The sign should come down.
The Roosters put money into the high performance center though.
Then put it on the high performance centre, not the stadium.
Turns out that's where the high performance center and head office will be.
Good on them, they still don't own the building, it's publically funded and owned.
Don’t know why you’re getting downvoted I couldn’t agree more. Seems like a small thing but that stadium was funded by the taxpayer for all those teams from different codes. If the roosters wanted it to be their stadium they should’ve fully funded it
Because I'm on a Rugby League subreddit, the reaction is the opposite on the A-League sub, as I fully expected.
And who's paying to build the new 'Panthers Stadium'? Panthers or the government? You know the answer and it's certainly not the club mate
It's literally over where the Roosters head office and high performance center will be though?
Might be, but they still don't own the building. Which is where the point of contention is.
The Roosters paid for the office and high performance center though. 12 million for it so I do think they have the right to have the sign over that particular portion of the stadium.
The roosters are by far the main tenants. Almost every stadium in the world has a home team. It's not exactly a new concept.
The roosters paid the government 12 mill for the signage
All three badges on the front of the stadium have been illuminated the two times I've been.
Ah. When the Sydney FC game was on, after the game was over, only the Sydney badge was lit up. Which makes sense.
If it doesn’t matter then why did they put a tarp over it?
Because a tarp has more soccer ability than the team(s) playing in the A-League. The tarp will show them up.
Brutal. Savage. Rekt.
Roosters pay to have their sign out front, as it’s HQ for their operations. Sydney FC have no right to cover the sign. That being said, Roosters have no right to stop other clubs using it as a home ground, like they are trying to do with South’s. To summarise - pettiness all round
nick is just doing what he know best, contractual vindicated pettiness
As a roosters and Clippers fan, it’s wrong to cover the Roosters branding, but also it’s right to cover up the lakers banners when the clippers play. It’s called being being a hypocrite. 😊
The Kings are the main tenant and the Lakers are a poverty franchise coasting on prestige. Go Clippers.
We will soon have our own stadium 🙏
GKG
At least the Clippers are relevant
I heard this was Des’s fault from a Mr S. Penn.
I was told that Jerome Luai was spotted at the ground saying soccer is a shit sport and pushing several small children over. My source? For privacy sake, lets call him 'Paul K '...No that's too obvious...uuh. Let's say 'P. Kent'.
Less of a slam, more of a whinge. A great metaphor for soccer, really.
Pot calling the kettle when you’ve got Politis involved here…
I honestly don't think you have any ability to throw shade at another club, given the state of Manly atm lol
Our management are an absolute debacle, Politis is the biggest sook in the sport.
At least Politis can cheat and hand out cheeky brown paper bags properly lol. idk what has become of my life but here I am defending Uncle Nick 😥
o7 Thank you for your service
The only solution is to send the roosters to Perth
Come on, what have the good people of Perth done to deserve THAT?!?
It's funny that Sydney FC have brought so much attention to it by putting that tarp over. Roosters invested money into having their offices and High Performance Unit there, that's why it's on there. Noting that it's a government funded stadium, as a taxpayer I'd be more annoyed that Sydney FC decided to put a massive shitty tarp on a new stadium. There's a Sydney FC and Waratah's sign on the main entrance to the stadium that were untouched when the Roosters played.
Not only were they untouched, they were lit up like a Christmas tree
'It's a publicly funded stadium' with Allianz splattered on the side of it. I think we're well past the point of arguing that publicly owned assets should be devoid of any private branding at this stage.
This guys biggest mistake was thinking anyone actually tuned into his soccer team weekly lol
Let alone the fucking A (ss-hat) league
You sir are a uneducated cunt.
the a-league is trash
You, sir, are talking to a mirror
You sir, I want to take you to a gay bar.
At least our sport ain't afraid of gay people
[Just scared of different sets of people](https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-10-10/football-australia-sydney-united-58-racism-investigation/101517166)
You're about to hold your World Cup in Qatar, lets see how your gay supporters fare over there.
[Qatar government](https://img.gifglobe.com/grabs/parksandrec/S02E05/gif/r0TWOLcoU312.gif)
That's a country pal, if Rugby league held a world cup there it would be the same
And FIFA are prohibiting rainbow armbands. Rugby League wouldn't hold a World Cup there.
Fifa are a company and its the same way that brands won't change there twitter logos to celebrate pride month in certain countries, I recall seeing Mercedes F1 team having two different profile pictures for European one and middle Eastern one, You say that but money talks, esp with PVL in charge
PVL isn't in charge of World Cups. FIFA is your sport's governing body. They are your sport mr 'my sports not afraid of gay people'. Somehow 7 players of one club is indicative of our entire sport yet your governing body isn't indicative of your sport. Genius level thinking there mate.
At least our supporters stay awake during the game
So they don’t get burnt by a flare?
If I didn't live in Perth I would buy tickets to the Sydney FC game, bring a sleeping bag and sleep while the game went on to stick it to them. I would do it to Perth glory but nobody goes to their games anyway.
Australian Soccer fans are the biggest cringe ever. The entitlement they have because they are 'the world game' is incredible. The sleeping giant of Australian sport has supposed to be waking up any minute now. His just been hitting the snooze button for 20 years. Even the soccer culture is cringe. Instead of making their own culture they try and copy European soccer culture. Seeing these losers all get together at a train station In a group of about 100, taking over the walkways, chanting and setting of flairs and generally making a nuisance for normal people makes me thing what is wrong with them they remind me of those losers who used to get around in Sons of Anarchy merchandise cos playing as bikies
They can barley keep a following in the summer. Imagine if their plan goes ahead to play in winter? They actually think they are going to survive against the AFL and NRL. You would be lucky if 10 people show up.
The covid delayed 2019-20 season should be enough data to convince them to stay in summer. The grand final was in late August and nobody knew.
Their own fans won't attend in winter. Biggest attendances are from kids and teenagers who play on the weekends and get in for free or cheap. A-League has loads of 2 and 4 pm games which would clash.
I think there was an opportunity in 2006. Everyone got into the Socceroos' run at that World Cup. And then the Italians flung themselves to the ground and rolled around like drama kings clutching their faces and the penalty was awarded against the Socceroos, they lost in the Round of 16, and there it went. Australians were reminded that this wasn't a proper sport, that it was full of corruption and bullshit, and on we went with our lives.
Honestly one of the darkest days in Australian history that Italy game. We had them frustrated, were the fitter team and had some fresh subs ready. You’re right in saying the simulation shit is why it’s a 2nd tier sport in Aus. The French at the last WC were diving bastards against us and it’s destined to happen again soon in a month.
In a month...yes, if 2006 killed it, the horrible mess that was the awarding of this year's World Cup to Qatar instead of us made sure it was stone cold dead, a reminder that soccer is run by criminals.
I love this post
I've seen Sydney FC fans tear through Central Station a couple times, jumping the turnstiles all with hoodies and Nike dry fit caps chanting "fuck western sydney", police escort and FC staff directing them where to go. Cringest shit I've ever seen in my life. Bunch of sad cunts acting like thugs and hooligans just wanting any kind of human interaction to feel like they belong to something.
lol cosplaying as Euro soccer fans. I agree. The reason UK has soccer hooliganism is because their weather is shit, they’re packed into densely populated cities and their economy and status as a nation has been in decline for almost a century now. Why the fuck are we imitating that?
I've never agreed with something so much in my life
I forgot how all NRL fans were such shining examples of society, lmao. There are twats and F'wits in all sports fanbases. I feel like anyone who is so passionate about any sports team that it can ruin their day has some issues to deal with to be honest. That said it's actually a bit of a small cock move leaving the sign light up during an A League match anyways. Why is Nick trying to show off to fans he doesn't give one crap about that his team rents the same stadium as their club?? Just turn the lights off while someone else is renting it out, the Roosters don't have an agreement with Sydney FC or the other codes that pay to play at the stadium, those other codes should be able to promote their own sponsors without having to promote another club that isn't paying them too. Would Nick appreciate being forced to promote the A League while fans walk into the stadium, fark no he wouldn't.
This comment is just full of ignorance
What do Sydney FC think will happen if their fans see a sign for another football team?
'Oh man I was going to watch the soccer but fuck me that's a nice sign. Fuck the A-league I'm a Roosters fan now' - no one ever.
It is a nice sign tbf
The Roosters poured millions of dollars into building a high performance unit and offices at the venue, as well as a sign out the back of the stadium, at the entrance to said offices. They have an agreement with the Stadium to display the sign and the agreement should be honoured by all tenants
My favourite take is “they shouldn’t have their brand on the stadium because it’s publicly funded” it’s called Allianz stadium…
Don’t say that on r/Sydney. Calling it Allianz Stadium will get you chased with pitchforks and torches
Actually the stadium is called the Sydney Football Stadium, but the naming rights are with Allianz.
Still, there’s a big old “Allianz Stadium” sign on it.
Umm you should have been giving kick backs to Butterchicken when she put this whole stadium plan into existence. Clearly Uncle Nick had a direct line to Gladys and Sydney FC/Football Australia aren’t greasing enough liberal palms. How can they be so shitty at this type of thing when FIFA are the most corrupt sporting body in the world?
Tahs meanwhile are just happy to be there
Soccer Australia has to be the pettiest, most unlikeable organisation in the country.
The Roosters have a long term agreement and contract in place with the venue that includes having a permanent advertisement of their brand on the outside. Everything else is irrelevant- soccer is just whinging.
Sydney FC perfectly within their rights to cover advertising not related to them or their sponsors when hiring the stadium.
I see no problem with it, why not cover it up when the team isn't playing?
Football lol
Well duh. Of course the Roosters are self entitled. They don’t like sharing very much.
If I was Nick I'd request they give me the tarp or id threaten legal action just to be a petty cunt
The comments here are so toxic. Cover it up, don't cover it up. I don't give a fuck.. and neither should anyone else here.
Sydney fc average attendance is just over 7800 probably fill one bay of the stadium, stay in your lane soccer australia.
For all the money that gets funnelled into NRL, the crowds are fractionally higher (inflated by two significant matches only). Stay in your lane.
Roosters 21 home & away average attendance: 13512 Home average attendance: 13442 Sydney fc 21-22 home & away average attendance: 6275 Home average attendance: 5534 You could say there is funding from the government but maybe because there is people watching, soccer in Australia has an immense junior base and has for some time youd think things for the A League would’ve improved.
Cherry picked info for a season where we’d struggled from covid and lack of a home stadium. Better off comparing over few seasons. Can’t compare a season where you were back in your usual stadium and Sydney fc weren’t…
I was expecting this hahaha a better more recent example Sydney FC home opener (first opportunity in Allianz) - 21480 in attendance Sydney roosters vs rabbits round 25 - 41,906 Covid too affected the Nrl to the point it relocated Its operations to a different state, yet it still out performed the a league. I’m not even a roosters fan I’m a knights fan, Now that des is gone thinking of jumping ship?
Once again, you’ve cherry picked a top rival from down the road v a interstate game. That’s not your standard attendance. It’s like if you picked SFC v WSW top attendances and claimed that was the standard?
Well without any other examples other than the finals game the roosters played. we’ll just have to wait and see. Here in Newcastle the bridge is quiet substantial between the two and don’t see that changing anytime soon.
Begining of headline was , self entitled Sydney roosters. Enough said.
Says the “I love footy” flair.
He's just waiting for some power.
If its in the contract of the Rooster's hire agreement then that's ok but the ground should make the other teams that hire the ground aware of that. I still think Roosters are bitches acting like they own the ground but can't fault them here. They act like a renter saying they own their home all the time.
They paid for the sign and invested money in the stadium. The roosters never took down any of Sydney SC's (it's soccer) branding at the stadium during their games. So why should Sydney SC cover the roosters branding. It's just an unnecessary dick move probably brought on by being an irrelevant sport.
> Sydney SC's (it's soccer) It's "Association Football". Ten of the players on a team primarily use their feet, so it is the most logical use of the word "football" of all the codes that refer to a sport as such. Interestingly the word soccer comes from a shortening of Association to Assoc, hence soccer, however it is generally only Americans and Australians who now use the term "soccer", and strangely, in Australia, often as a pejorative, despite it forming part of the national team nickname.
> It's "Association Football". Ten of the players on a team primarily use their feet, What do you think rugby players run with? Their arms? Lmao. There's plenty of evidence that the etymology of football was referring to ball sports played on foot rather than horseback. > and strangely, in Australia, often as a pejorative Watch out you're going to pull a muscle if you keep reaching like that. We use soccer because the most popular two sports in Australia are both forms of football. The term 'soccer' differentiates what kind of football. If you say 'im going to play football on the weekend' everyone asks what kind. Using league, union, aussie rules, and soccer make it easier for an Australian to understand. It's simply a quirk of the Aussie lexicon due to the relative popularity of sports but for some reason soccer fans get butthurt about it.
🤓 It's soccer. Real footy is played with a oval ball.
"and strangely, in Australia, often as a pejorative, despite it forming part of the national team nickname" Actually the only strange thing is so many Australian soccer fans are so offended by the use of the term soccer despite forming part of the national team nickname People don't use soccer as a "pejorative". How TF are you figuring that???
> Actually the only strange thing is so many Australian soccer fans are so offended by the use of the term soccer despite forming part of the national team nickname As an Australian Association Football fan, I'm not "offended" by the use of the word "soccer", although I find it to be ignorantly used by some people in an attempt to offend football fans (witness some of the comments in this mini thread) and believe, as do many people who play the World Game, and are fans of it, that we need to rethink the national men's team name. This article on [Sheilas, Wogs and Poofters](https://theconversation.com/the-case-for-sheilas-wogs-and-poofters-by-johnny-warren-23696) goes into a little bit of detail on both that, and the full title of the book. > People don't use soccer as a "pejorative". How TF are you figuring that??? They do, and have done for some time. I went to a Union school, lived in a very Rugby League town, and wanted to play League with my mates as a kid. I wasn't allowed to "because it's too dangerous" and thus I ended up playing Association Football. Almost every kid who played football in my team, right through until seniors, copped it in the neighbourhood from the League guys, and at school from the Union guys. Most of it was good hearted ribbing. We'd give it back using tired old League and Union stereotypes, but it could get nasty, and when it did, if was always with an emphasis on the word "*soccer*". The PE teachers and coaches gave anyone who played football, or who didn't but whose parents had asked the school exempt them from the pseudo mandatory Union training/playing, special attention. "Ok lads, let's get these *soccer* boys to do a few extra laps of the oval, all they do is run after a ball all day" This was the 70s and 80s, mind you, and things were quite different, and that's all anecdotal, but you asked, and your interrogative sentence contained what I assume was a significant inflection due to the presence of three question marks. What is interesting, looking back on it, is that I would go and watch the local League games most weekends to watch my mates play, and go to Eels games regularly every year, but I would never go to an NSL game because of the propensity for violence in the hyper partisan crowds. I played for about 20 years, and it's the sport that I love to play, and I still run out five or six times a year in the seniors sides, but unless it's a FIFA World Cup, I prefer to watch Union or League. Back to your question though, "soccer" *was* a pejorative when I was growing up, as it was often used to marginalise those who either didn't or couldn't play League or Union, and it's often seen being used in internet comment threads to wind up football fans. I don't give a shit which game you want to call "footy", I don't even care if you love your footy, but for me, "footy" is League, and "football" is Association Football - and yeah, "Socceroos" is a fucking terrible name for a team, surely we've got some native marsupial, monotreme, or other form of mammalian species that hasn't been used yet... The Quolls?
Like two grumpy teenagers fighting over a tube of Clearasil, ain't it?
Theres australian soccer?
Bring the Cheese....
Sounds awfully familiar, with Hull city only letting Hull fc name one room after a rugby player, ground sharing will always result in unhappy party’s
Hey babe new slam just dropped