THE blame game following Saturday night's crowd debacle at ANZ Stadium has, with its subtle overtones, been almost as intriguing as Sydney's performance that turned the first-half murmurs of 19,127 fans to unlikely second-half roars.
For the first time since AFL chairman Mike Fitzpatrick made it clear that a second team was coming - ready or not - to Sydney, the Swans temporarily abandoned their tacit public support for the franchise's accelerated entry (from 2015 to 2012).
While they might have talked specifically about the poor promotion of the game and "worrying trends" in the Sydney market, the trenchant remarks by chairman Richard Colless and coach Paul Roos revealed the Swans' thinking - that there is more chance of developing real estate on Pluto by 2012 than of settling a team in Sydney's west.
It was the first small crack in what is a vital relationship. Both for the AFL, which knows the Swans are capable of torpedoing the second team concept, and for the Swans who hope to extract a good price for their coalescence, perhaps by having their drooping bottom line underwritten during the establishment period.
After a period in which the relationship between the Swans and the league had been strained - not least by AFL chief executive Andrew Demetriou's criticism of Sydney's playing style - the new detente had been evident at Saturday night's pre-game dinner. So lavish was Demetriou in his praise of Colless that the Swans chairman was last seen double-checking his CV to see if he had also invented penicillin and won a Grammy for an album of banjo solos.
However, for all the mutual tummy-scratching, after heads were raised from cheese platters and embarrassing banks of empty seats revealed, it became evident there is one significant limit to the Swans' support of the West Sydney Whatevers - it will not last if the Swans believe the benefits of 27 years of hard slog are being threatened.
What remains unclear is whether Saturday night's crowd can fairly be considered a warning sign that support for AFL in Sydney is wavering, or merely the inevitable result of a series of circumstances - poor weather, an unexpected home final, a (once) struggling Swans team and a low-profile opponent.
The Swans singled out the AFL's promotion for heavy criticism - reasonably so given the 150th anniversary "game that made Australia" campaign is as uninspiring to Sydneysiders as Thomas Keneally's "blow that whistle" NRL campaign was to, well, even Thomas Keneally.
However, if the poor crowd joins stalled membership and failing sponsorship sales on the Swans' list of warning signs about the AFL's future here, then they must accept their own considerable share of the blame for failing to fully capitalise on the media and promotional opportunities created by their recent success.
Specifically, rather than pushing their respected and articulate players into the media marketplace - obliging them to talk about controversial issues or, simply, to front a microphone at an awkward moment - the Swans believe their players' insular "Bloods" culture will create the type of on-field success that commands headlines.
In 2005 and 2006 they were vindicated with great campaigns and massive exposure. However, even with credible performances in the past two years, Sydney's media profile has faded so much that you wonder if they can afford to have players refuse to engage with the local media on anything but the most favourable terms - and, as a result, for the club to turn down prominent exposure as it constantly does.
Regardless of Saturday's night crowd, it remains almost certain the Swans won't have Sydney to themselves for much longer.
The AFL's view is clear-cut: competition between the Swans and the West Sydney Whatevers will create a rivalry and produce the sort of controversies and talking points that drive interest in the NRL - and the AFL south of the Murray - on a daily basis.
More games. More players. But more fans? There could hardly be less.
Email a friend
Favourites
Del.icio.us
Facebook
Digg
StumbleUpon
MySpace
Reddit
Newsvine
LinkedIn
Kwoff