Melbourne beats Sydney

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

This shouldn't bother me but it does 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-65261720

Anyone got any reassuring additions ? Sure I heard Sydney was due to grow to be much bigger than the Fumble ball capital 

[Balmainboy]

They just changed the boundaries, hence Melbourne overtakes Sydney. Population of NSW however is still much much bigger than Victoria. 

Melbourne has been growing faster (and predicted to continue), for two decades now. Cost of living being less than Sydney a major driver. 

Long story short - nothing has changed really. 0 impact on NRL's ambition of overtaking AFL as the county's biggest sport. 

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

1 hour ago, Balmainboy said:

They just changed the boundaries, hence Melbourne overtakes Sydney. Population of NSW however is still much much bigger than Victoria. 

Melbourne has been growing faster (and predicted to continue), for two decades now. Cost of living being less than Sydney a major driver. 

Long story short - nothing has changed really. 0 impact on NRL's ambition of overtaking AFL as the county's biggest sport. 

Relief.....what's the current score in the battle of the codes in your opinion?

[Balmainboy]

1 hour ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

Relief.....what's the current score in the battle of the codes in your opinion?

Hmm tricky that one. Probably bang on 50/50 at the moment tbh. More people watch rugby league on TV, but AFL has better participation rates and is popular in more areas...

If NRL could get up to 20 teams (sustainably) and had a bigger international footprint, I'd say you'd watch rugby league swing that ledger to more like 60/40. That broadly seems to be the plan at the moment so hopefully they stick with it and deliver it. 

Personally, not 100% sure where those additional 3 teams should be. I'd love to see 1 in either PNG or Pacific which would help with the international game but would do less to overtake AFL within Aus. The other two, I'd pick the best bids out of NZ, Perth and an extra QLD team. 

[Futtocks]

3 hours ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

This shouldn't bother me but it does 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-65261720

Anyone got any reassuring additions ? Sure I heard Sydney was due to grow to be much bigger than the Fumble ball capital 

Melbourne's become more popular since they started an NRL club there.

Sydney's got less popular since the AFL's expansion into NSW.

That's what happens when you let the riff-raff in. 

Edited April 17, 2023 by Futtocks

[hw88]

3 hours ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

This shouldn't bother me but it does 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-65261720

Anyone got any reassuring additions ? Sure I heard Sydney was due to grow to be much bigger than the Fumble ball capital 

Me too.

Classifying cities by population is a minefield of delineation problems - urban area?, metropolitain area?, conurbation?, city limits?, etc, etc.

[The Hallucinating Goose]

28 minutes ago, hw88 said:

Me too.

Classifying cities by population is a minefield of delineation problems - urban area?, metropolitain area?, conurbation?, city limits?, etc, etc.

Human demography is a fascinating area of study, probably my favourite subject.

Britain especially is a minefield when it comes to population because of the country's density and how so many cities merge into single conurbations and due to the close proximity of other large towns to many of these conurbations the populations can swell massively.

If you take Manchester as an example you can have a population of anywhere between approximately 500,000 for the city proper to approximately 2.5 million for the metro area and it starts getting confusing when different sources use these different figures but do not differentiate between them and just use it as the population of the main settlement within these conurbations. If we take the metro figure for Greater Manchester there, that actually includes the separate city of Salford as well as large towns such as Oldham and Rochdale amongst others but so often you will just see this referred to as Manchester. 

I'm a real nerd for this sort of thing! Very interesting!

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

10 minutes ago, The Hallucinating Goose said:

Human demography is a fascinating area of study, probably my favourite subject.

Britain especially is a minefield when it comes to population because of the country's density and how so many cities merge into single conurbations and due to the close proximity of other large towns to many of these conurbations the populations can swell massively.

If you take Manchester as an example you can have a population of anywhere between approximately 500,000 for the city proper to approximately 2.5 million for the metro area and it starts getting confusing when different sources use these different figures but do not differentiate between them and just use it as the population of the main settlement within these conurbations. If we take the metro figure for Greater Manchester there, that actually includes the separate city of Salford as well as large towns such as Oldham and Rochdale amongst others but so often you will just see this referred to as Manchester. 

I'm a real nerd for this sort of thing! Very interesting!

You could just fly over the area and see where the city starts and ends couldn't you HG?

[The Hallucinating Goose]

2 hours ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

You could just fly over the area and see where the city starts and ends couldn't you HG?

This is part of the problem though because it can be unclear where the edge of a city is. The urban area is the built up conurbation but the metropolitan city can include less built up areas such as farmland because the definition of the metro area is the area which the city serves, so this includes satellite towns which may be miles from the urban area as serves means towns that are supplied with goods and jobs that are based in the urban area, essentially towns that rely on the urban area for their smooth running. 

To take my city of Hull as an example. The City of Hull has a population of approx. 250,000. However, attached to the city proper are the towns of Anlaby, Willerby, Cottingham, Hessle and a few others and together these make up the built up urban area which has a population of approx. 400,000. This urban area provides jobs, shopping and other amenities to other towns in the East Riding that are not attached to the urban area, such as Beverley, Brough, North Ferriby and many other towns and villages, and so this makes up the metropolitan area which has an approx. population of 500,000.

However these boundaries start to get confusing because it can be debated as to just how far a reach the city's amenities have. There are probably people in towns such as Hornsea and Selby, 15-20 miles away that work and shop in Hull and probably even people south of the river that commute across the Humber Bridge every day but should these towns be included as well? 

It's a very interesting area of study that can lead you down some rather inescapable rabbits holes.

Plus I wouldn't want to fly over some of the cities anyway with some of the hooligan seagull gangs that like to get up in your beak if you flap into their patch!

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

12 hours ago, The Hallucinating Goose said:

This is part of the problem though because it can be unclear where the edge of a city is. The urban area is the built up conurbation but the metropolitan city can include less built up areas such as farmland because the definition of the metro area is the area which the city serves, so this includes satellite towns which may be miles from the urban area as serves means towns that are supplied with goods and jobs that are based in the urban area, essentially towns that rely on the urban area for their smooth running. 

To take my city of Hull as an example. The City of Hull has a population of approx. 250,000. However, attached to the city proper are the towns of Anlaby, Willerby, Cottingham, Hessle and a few others and together these make up the built up urban area which has a population of approx. 400,000. This urban area provides jobs, shopping and other amenities to other towns in the East Riding that are not attached to the urban area, such as Beverley, Brough, North Ferriby and many other towns and villages, and so this makes up the metropolitan area which has an approx. population of 500,000.

However these boundaries start to get confusing because it can be debated as to just how far a reach the city's amenities have. There are probably people in towns such as Hornsea and Selby, 15-20 miles away that work and shop in Hull and probably even people south of the river that commute across the Humber Bridge every day but should these towns be included as well? 

It's a very interesting area of study that can lead you down some rather inescapable rabbits holes.

Plus I wouldn't want to fly over some of the cities anyway with some of the hooligan seagull gangs that like to get up in your beak if you flap into their patch!

London can be confusing too..places like St. Alban's I think will eventually get swallowed up as it spreads 

Don't think I could ever live in London or a big city again having done so when I was young 

Funnily enough between York and your neck of the woods is where we plan to retire one day....a nice quiet Yorkshire Village/town  near enough to a league, cricket and union club to cling to 

 

 

Edited April 18, 2023 by Bedfordshire Bronco