Chearleaders

Also I have to say its quite strange I've seen posts referring to 'pooftas' and '[This word has been automatically removed]s' on this site, and yet you can't drop an F bomb
 
What a ridiculous topic. Geez some people must be bored in life. Last time I looked, they didn't hurt anyone, in fact they certainly improve my experience. Please….... There are far more important issues!

_Posted using RoarFEED 2013_
 
@Peaches said:
I can't find a reason to move cheerleaders on. They go and do their thing each match and as far as I know, they haven't had any issues. I know of a couple of girls who have done it. They enjoy it. Taking them away serves no purpose for me.

_Posted using RoarFEED 2013_

next they will want to switch to a round ball…

(sorry if my comment offended anyone)

_Posted using RoarFEED 2013_
 
@innsaneink said:
LOL

fair dinkum….

maybe we can have gay marriages at half time instead

people get offended over the slightest thing today...you cant fart

Spoilt your fun have they Ink :smiling_imp:
What a shame …..
 
@Fraze23 said:
If it means the club is able to save a bit of money then I have no issues with it, if they are in fact paid by the club. I find it hard to imagine that anyone would stop attending games due to the lack of a "dance team."

Well my daughter (3 years old) would probably lose a lot of her interest in the game. I took her to her first game (Benji's 200th) last year. You should have seen her eyes light up when she saw the girls dancing on the field. She was begging me to take her down to the sideline so she could be closer to where they were sitting.

She is asking me to take her again, so she can:
1\. See the girls dancing
2\. Get a balloon animal
3\. See the big bunny (the bloody Souths mascot may have turned her into a Souths fan!!!)

I still need to do some work to get her to notice the players on the field…
 
The reason to get rid of them is because they add no value.

Don't they get paid something like $150 per game??? (don't quote me)
Get a band on or do something that appeals to more people.

I don't find them offensive and I doubt anyone else does either, I just think they are a thing of a past.
 
The main reason to get rid of them is cost. They're not overly relevant these days but I don't think women get turned off NRL because of cheerleaders. Some partners of more hard-core fans, and those with families like Juro, possibly appreciate the dancing skills of cheerleaders more than footy skills of players.

You go to any dance championship and the girls (of all ages) will all be wearing skimpy outfits, leotards, tights, glitter etc. The only difference here is it's on the field in front of thousands of people.

If cost is the main concern then maybe we should focus on a younger dance squad. From memory last season we had about 60-80 odd dancers in our dance squad, ranging from ages of about 6-35 I'd say. Perhaps giving young aspiring dancers the chance to perform in public isn't such a bad thing, and wouldn't cost anywhere near as much as adult women. They might do it for fun/promotion.

If not cheerleaders, what do those of you who oppose them propose to replace them with before the match and at half time, that would provide equal or greater entertainment at equal or lower costs?
 
@Balmain Boy said:
The main reason to get rid of them is cost. They're not overly relevant these days but I don't think women get turned off NRL because of cheerleaders. Some partners of more hard-core fans, and those with families like Juro, possibly appreciate the dancing skills of cheerleaders more than footy skills of players.

You go to any dance championship and the girls (of all ages) will all be wearing skimpy outfits, leotards, tights, glitter etc. The only difference here is it's on the field in front of thousands of people.

If cost is the main concern then maybe we should focus on a younger dance squad. From memory last season we had about 60-80 odd dancers in our dance squad, ranging from ages of about 6-35 I'd say. Perhaps giving young aspiring dancers the chance to perform in public isn't such a bad thing, and wouldn't cost anywhere near as much as adult women. They might do it for fun/promotion.

If not cheerleaders, what do those of you who oppose them propose to replace them with before the match and at half time, that would provide equal or greater entertainment at equal or lower costs?

We could go old school and let the kids run around on their field of dreams like we did in the past and kick the footy around

Used to love grab the old leather Steeden and kick the ball around Purtell Park emulating my heroes like Greg Oliphant ,Greg McCarthy , Norm and Wayne Carr
 
@Knuckles said:
@innsaneink said:
LOL

fair dinkum….

maybe we can have gay marriages at half time instead

people get offended over the slightest thing today...you cant fart

Spoilt your fun have they Ink :smiling_imp:
What a shame …..

Try and post on the topic….forget about me for once
 
A cheer squad of young kids would be far more relevant and entertaining.
Local dance school or something? Yep, I'd appreciate that and cheer them on too.

What do they have in the EPL?
 
@Kul said:
A cheer squad of young kids would be far more relevant and entertaining.
Local dance school or something? Yep, I'd appreciate that and cheer them on too.

What do they have in the EPL?

Nothing usually Kul

Young fella leads the team on

Lots of crowd singing Liverpool "You'll never walk alone " ,West Ham "Bubbles ", Man U "We've bought another premiership "
 
@innsaneink said:
Probably too cold for Darnce Groups in the EPL

That and you would have to wake them all up at half time. By the time you got them all ready the players would be back out there.
 
@happy tiger said:
@Balmain Boy said:
The main reason to get rid of them is cost. They're not overly relevant these days but I don't think women get turned off NRL because of cheerleaders. Some partners of more hard-core fans, and those with families like Juro, possibly appreciate the dancing skills of cheerleaders more than footy skills of players.

You go to any dance championship and the girls (of all ages) will all be wearing skimpy outfits, leotards, tights, glitter etc. The only difference here is it's on the field in front of thousands of people.

If cost is the main concern then maybe we should focus on a younger dance squad. From memory last season we had about 60-80 odd dancers in our dance squad, ranging from ages of about 6-35 I'd say. Perhaps giving young aspiring dancers the chance to perform in public isn't such a bad thing, and wouldn't cost anywhere near as much as adult women. They might do it for fun/promotion.

If not cheerleaders, what do those of you who oppose them propose to replace them with before the match and at half time, that would provide equal or greater entertainment at equal or lower costs?

We could go old school and let the kids run around on their field of dreams like we did in the past and kick the footy around

Used to love grab the old leather Steeden and kick the ball around Purtell Park emulating my heroes like Greg Oliphant ,Greg McCarthy , Norm and Wayne Carr

We do have that at half time, as does pretty much every sporting team in the country I think. I know NRL, A League, AFL and cricket do at least. Usually a combination of five dock, Balmain pcyc, Leichhardt, Burwood etc for Leichhardt Oval games and I imagine there would be equivalent teams for matches at Campbelltown.

Cheerleaders/dance squads are in addition to them.
 
@Balmain Boy said:
@happy tiger said:
@Balmain Boy said:
The main reason to get rid of them is cost. They're not overly relevant these days but I don't think women get turned off NRL because of cheerleaders. Some partners of more hard-core fans, and those with families like Juro, possibly appreciate the dancing skills of cheerleaders more than footy skills of players.

You go to any dance championship and the girls (of all ages) will all be wearing skimpy outfits, leotards, tights, glitter etc. The only difference here is it's on the field in front of thousands of people.

If cost is the main concern then maybe we should focus on a younger dance squad. From memory last season we had about 60-80 odd dancers in our dance squad, ranging from ages of about 6-35 I'd say. Perhaps giving young aspiring dancers the chance to perform in public isn't such a bad thing, and wouldn't cost anywhere near as much as adult women. They might do it for fun/promotion.

If not cheerleaders, what do those of you who oppose them propose to replace them with before the match and at half time, that would provide equal or greater entertainment at equal or lower costs?

We could go old school and let the kids run around on their field of dreams like we did in the past and kick the footy around

Used to love grab the old leather Steeden and kick the ball around Purtell Park emulating my heroes like Greg Oliphant ,Greg McCarthy , Norm and Wayne Carr

We do have that at half time, as does pretty much every sporting team in the country I think. I know NRL, A League, AFL and cricket do at least. Usually a combination of five dock, Balmain pcyc, Leichhardt, Burwood etc for Leichhardt Oval games and I imagine there would be equivalent teams for matches at Campbelltown.

Cheerleaders/dance squads are in addition to them.

I don't mean junior games , but crowd members just going out and kicking a ball around
 
like others i think this is just pc gone all sanctimonious on us all yet again. you think there arent women who go to watch rugby because it is a field full of fit young men in shorts and skin tight jerseys?

this issue just makes me roll my eyes and say "ffs"…. there is nothing i find more beautiful than attractive women. so sue me but thats the way i was made.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top