Treated better by FFA .... why
We would have won a grand final .... HHHHHHHHHHHMMMMMMM .... how got a leaguie to spear tackle some JETS or SFC players...
upper tier on the Northern Concourse .... totally lost on this one... what and why is the Northern Concourse important...
If you said someting like;- shared memberships, reduce cost of stadium hire, sell each others shirts, maybe use the RL link to get better media coverage, joint community enguagement, share medical staff to reduce running costs, use a combined buying power to reduce travel and accodomation costs, we could look at a joint venture and determine if these things may or maynot happen ... but your reasons seem a tad short on detail.....
Just as a matter of interest what more could FFA do for us....
The other reasons you listed are all quite valid ones, but I was thinking of my original statements along these lines:
1. Treated better by the FFA- some of the decisions against our club have been woeful. Who could forget Sydney's hack job that Breeze let go back in 2007, and went unquestioned by the FFA. That match derailed our finals hopes pretty much. Don't even start on our 'home' Grand Final in 2008- at the SFS! The FFA didn't expect the Mariners to do as well as they have. Like it or not, we were added because we had a bid team and nobody else was making any noise about taking the 8th license back in 2004. We were novelty value, a team from a small demographic with no NRL/ AFL/ Super Rugby team to compete for market share with. My next point explains this better:
2. We would have won a Grand Final- look at the timing of other teams' run to the Championship. In Season 1, Sydney were the glamour team with none other than Dwight Yorke playing in their midst. The FFA knew they could get great publicity in Australia's biggest city (and NRL heartland) with Sydney winning the GF first up. Now, I'm not saying the Mariners were dudded at all in this game, but you have to admit, the FFA wanted Sydney to win right from the outset. They wanted the "glamour club" to be the flavour of the month in the Harbour City.
The Victory had titles to their name soon too, sure they had great teams but the FFA knew Melbourne was a crucial market with it's large ethnic population and saturation AFL coverage. Nothing more to ad to them.
Then in the 2007-08 season, with the Knights coming off one of their worst ever seasons in the NRL amidst all the bad publicity about a player "exodus", what better time than to have the (Rugby League mad) towns' A-League team get up and win a Grand Final within the next 6 months? Just a coincidence? Do you think if the Scum had won the right to host the Grand Final the FFA would have made them move it to Sydney?
And most recently, we have the Roar. Again, the biggest team in Brisbane (NRL's Broncos) had just missed their first finals series since 1991, with internal strife that saw Ivan Henjack get the sack. The Broncos, for the first time in a long time, looked like a rabble. Then came the floods. Sure, nobody can deny the Roar played the greatest football seen since the A-League's inception, but do you really think the FFA wanted to deny the Roar a fairytale, knowing full well all the warm, fuzzy publicity and good-will it would generate?
If/ when the Bears are re-admitted, the FFA will be much kinder to us, because finally the Mariners have market competition in their own backyard. So far, the FFA has had nothing to gain from Mariners winning the League or the GF. Our league is small enough (currently) that dodgy decicions can pass without the same publicity they would get in the AFL or NRL.
As for getting an upper stand on the Northern Concourse, it will obviously mean extra capacity, thereby eliminating any chance of the Mariners winning a home GF then having the FFA trot out the "Sorry- grounds' too small!" excuse. Not to mention that having a roof over Bay 16 will add to the acoustics of the Y.A!
verhead:
