Tigers intentionally excluding Sharks supporters

since1967

Oceanic Whitetip Shark
Joined
Jul 3, 2010
Messages
781
Reaction score
20
Location
Illawong
They are hardly shutting the doors on sharks supporters. If they can sell that many tickets to a game to tigers supporters good for them. By reading that there are still 8,00 left (thats if every tigers member went to the game). A percentage of tigers members will be from Campbelltown and not even bother going. There will be plenty of room for our supporters!
 

SF

Mako Shark
Joined
Dec 16, 2005
Messages
9,857
Reaction score
1,348
Location
Monty Porter Stand
You guys serious? No wonder we have the reputation as soft stay-at-home supporters.

The only way you can get into this game at this point in time is to spend $60+ to become a Tigers member.

Not only does this make it unaffordable, but it also gives the Tigers extra annual membership numbers for what is actually just a one-game ticket.

And the only reason it is possible is because they have chosen to play it at a ground they fits far below what would be standard "criteria" for an NRL team.

Even the Sydney Morning Herald can see the unfairness of what the Tigers are doing, and put it on their front (web) page.
 

A.Snowden

Jaws
Joined
Jun 17, 2009
Messages
15,838
Reaction score
156
Location
Mac Fields Represent
its not about shutting other supporters out, its about looking after your clubs members.if they have a 20,000 capacity stadium, and 20,000 members, and they all want to show up, then unfortunately oher supporters cant gain entry, its **** but your supporters are more important than anyone elses
 

grozzy

Hammerhead
Joined
Aug 7, 2009
Messages
270
Reaction score
9
If a ground can not accommodate opposition supporters, then it should not be used for the NRL.
 

Garbs

Hammerhead
Joined
Mar 2, 2007
Messages
463
Reaction score
5
Location
Jannali
It's a joke.

These $65 'memberships' aren't memberships. They're a cynical way to bleed more cash from a sold out crowd attending a football game that should have been scheduled at a bigger stadium. Even ignoring Sharks fans at the moment - I can imagine how excited you'd be if you were a loyal Tigers fan with a wife and three kids who were planning to go to this game... and now finding out it'll cost you $260 for the privelege.
 

slide rule

Jaws
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
20,479
Reaction score
460
Location
General Admission
They might have trouble trying to sellout if they are trying to sell them @ $65 each. I wont be paying it. Im not sure if Tigers fans will rush in either. If there are tickets left after, I will then buy tickets. Will be interesting to see if theytry this on wth other clubs.
 

SharkShocked

Bull Shark
Joined
Sep 30, 2010
Messages
2,304
Reaction score
41
Take that further then A.Snowden - so what would you do if you had 30K members and only 15K seats?

Would you have 0 away supporters able to attend in seating???

Just look at what the EPL does in relation to stadia, they have reserved sections of their stands for the away crowd, albeit generally quite a small percentage, but it's certainly better than 0.

NRL will have to move to this style of crowd planning eventually, particularly if they want to encourage clubs to compete in terms of ticketed membership numbers of the AFL. If they wish to keep the so called "tribalism" that exists between Sydney sides you must have away fans able to attend games.

SF has a good point.... Yes they are looking after their members which is the right thing to do, but a one game membership certainly does make it difficult for away team supporters. Would you really want to sign up to another clubs membership just to ensure you were able to get reserved seated tickets for an away game???

I was going to travel to this game with 4 of my friends, now that i know reserved seating is not an option. Looks like I'll be going down to the leagues club to watch it instead. Certainly not paying $65 for a Tigers membership just so i could get reserved seating.

Sort of makes the whole 'membership count' a bit of a joke doesn't it?
 

A.Snowden

Jaws
Joined
Jun 17, 2009
Messages
15,838
Reaction score
156
Location
Mac Fields Represent
Take that further then A.Snowden -
so what would you do if you had 30K members and only 15K seats?

If your club had twice as many members than seats you would look after your members by moving to another ground.

Would you have 0 away supporters able to attend in seating???

Just look at what the EPL does in relation to stadia, they have reserved sections of their stands for the away crowd, albeit generally quite a small percentage, but it's certainly better than 0.

NRL will have to move to this style of crowd planning eventually, particularly if they want to encourage clubs to compete in terms of ticketed membership numbers of the AFL. If they wish to keep the so called "tribalism" that exists between Sydney sides you must have away fans able to attend games.

SF has a good point.... Yes they are looking after their members which is the right thing to do, but a one game membership certainly does make it difficult for away team supporters. Would you really want to sign up to another clubs membership just to ensure you were able to get reserved seated tickets for an away game???

hell no i wouldn't. I would stay home and watch it there. Wait for our first home game of the season

I was going to travel to this game with 4 of my friends, now that i know reserved seating is not an option. Looks like I'll be going down to the leagues club to watch it instead. Certainly not paying $65 for a Tigers membership just so i could get reserved seating.

Sort of makes the whole 'membership count' a bit of a joke doesn't it?
 

Sharky Pete

Great White
Joined
Jan 18, 2010
Messages
3,586
Reaction score
77
Location
Adelaide (originally from The Shire)
Take that further then A.Snowden - so what would you do if you had 30K members and only 15K seats?

Would you have 0 away supporters able to attend in seating???

Just look at what the EPL does in relation to stadia, they have reserved sections of their stands for the away crowd, albeit generally quite a small percentage, but it's certainly better than 0.

NRL will have to move to this style of crowd planning eventually, particularly if they want to encourage clubs to compete in terms of ticketed membership numbers of the AFL. If they wish to keep the so called "tribalism" that exists between Sydney sides you must have away fans able to attend games.

SF has a good point.... Yes they are looking after their members which is the right thing to do, but a one game membership certainly does make it difficult for away team supporters. Would you really want to sign up to another clubs membership just to ensure you were able to get reserved seated tickets for an away game???

I was going to travel to this game with 4 of my friends, now that i know reserved seating is not an option. Looks like I'll be going down to the leagues club to watch it instead. Certainly not paying $65 for a Tigers membership just so i could get reserved seating.

Sort of makes the whole 'membership count' a bit of a joke doesn't it?

Well said mate.
 

SF

Mako Shark
Joined
Dec 16, 2005
Messages
9,857
Reaction score
1,348
Location
Monty Porter Stand
I'll add to this:

- From what I've seen Wests Tigers have no online facility for buying tickets to any game. Perhaps I'm wrong here, and it's not obvious... but clubs like the Sharks would be paying good money to Ticketek or TicketMaster to ensure that NRL games have a professional ticketing system. Tigers have nothing. If the Sharks were equally poor in offering services there'd be massive criticism.

- There's been a lot of criticism of the NRL for not scheduling the full season in advance, which means that fans can't plan to travel to games. The Tigers have not even announced a date for when tickets may go on sale. We've had supporters here in this forum say they're planning to travel up from Melbourne and other places. It's simply not possible to do that with what the Tigers are doing.

- A ticketed membership should only be considered a ticketed membership in NRL figures if it is for at least half the games of the season
 

SharkShocked

Bull Shark
Joined
Sep 30, 2010
Messages
2,304
Reaction score
41

That's perfectly fine for yourself, what about those people that want to travel to the game and watch it live? Many people actually enjoying traveling to opposition grounds.

What they've done is purely and simply to artificially increase the cost of tickets for round 1... and in doing so, attempt to win their battle membership....effectively making it more difficult for traveling sharks fans.

You want our club to be more respected - then our fans need to travel as well as turn out at home.... now we can't.
 

slide rule

Jaws
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
20,479
Reaction score
460
Location
General Admission
I have no problem with them playing at Leichhardt oval. I'd rather a sold out Leichardt than a half full sfs. Better atmosphere by far.

Take that further then A.Snowden - so what would you do if you had 30K members and only 15K seats?

Would you have 0 away supporters able to attend in seating???

Just look at what the EPL does in relation to stadia, they have reserved sections of their stands for the away crowd, albeit generally quite a small percentage, but it's certainly better than 0.

NRL will have to move to this style of crowd planning eventually, particularly if they want to encourage clubs to compete in terms of ticketed membership numbers of the AFL. If they wish to keep the so called "tribalism" that exists between Sydney sides you must have away fans able to attend games.

SF has a good point.... Yes they are looking after their members which is the right thing to do, but a one game membership certainly does make it difficult for away team supporters. Would you really want to sign up to another clubs membership just to ensure you were able to get reserved seated tickets for an away game???

I was going to travel to this game with 4 of my friends, now that i know reserved seating is not an option. Looks like I'll be going down to the leagues club to watch it instead. Certainly not paying $65 for a Tigers membership just so i could get reserved seating.

Sort of makes the whole 'membership count' a bit of a joke doesn't it?

In reality, this is probably a better outcome for the Sharks.


I'll add to this:

- From what I've seen Wests Tigers have no online facility for buying tickets to any game. Perhaps I'm wrong here, and it's not obvious... but clubs like the Sharks would be paying good money to Ticketek or TicketMaster to ensure that NRL games have a professional ticketing system. Tigers have nothing. If the Sharks were equally poor in offering services there'd be massive criticism.

- There's been a lot of criticism of the NRL for not scheduling the full season in advance, which means that fans can't plan to travel to games. The Tigers have not even announced a date for when tickets may go on sale. We've had supporters here in this forum say they're planning to travel up from Melbourne and other places. It's simply not possible to do that with what the Tigers are doing.

- A ticketed membership should only be considered a ticketed membership in NRL figures if it is for at least half the games of the season

:Yes:
 

A.Snowden

Jaws
Joined
Jun 17, 2009
Messages
15,838
Reaction score
156
Location
Mac Fields Represent
I do travel to games, in fact the only way for me to go to a game is to travel, so i know. But if the shoe was on the other foot and we had a packed house full of members, which forced no available GA tickets, meaning no opposition supporters, we would be stoked, a packed stadium full of only sharkies supporters would be a dream come true!
 
Top