AFL

[Sports Prophet]

2 minutes ago, unapologetic pedant said:

Not by much.

I'll wait for someone to mention free tickets.

It’s a standard paranoid and unsubstantiated defence. I’m sure we’ll hear of it soon enough

Edited September 15, 2024 by Sports Prophet

[unapologetic pedant]

3 minutes ago, Sports Prophet said:

No Melbourne clubs left in the competition at all. Some might say that demonstrates a good national game.

If Fitzroy eliminate Geelong, GF TV ratings will be interesting.

[Sports Prophet]

1 minute ago, unapologetic pedant said:

If Fitzroy eliminate Geelong, GF TV ratings will be interesting.

It doesn’t look like it will be one of the most viewed finals. NRL GF may even be higher for a change.

[The Future is League]

1 hour ago, unapologetic pedant said:

@Sports Prophet appears to be sulkily incommunicado on the subject of Fumbles.

Hence, I can only ask rhetorically what he makes of the two PFs. No Melbourne clubs.

Suspect even the keenest of Western Sydney expansionists were relieved Fitzroy beat the Giants.

He was outed on League unlimited as a fumbleball troll

Look our reacts when people post facts about fumbleball that don't suit his pro fumbleball agenda.

[unapologetic pedant]

3 hours ago, The Future is League said:

He was outed on League unlimited as a fumbleball troll

Look our reacts when people post facts about fumbleball that don't suit his pro fumbleball agenda.

My theory is that creative tension and rivalry between NRL and AFL is mutually beneficial. The concurrently vigorous health of the two comps would seem to prove the point.

I have another theory that NRL has more scope for inward demographic expansion within NSW and QLD. Alongside more viable and lucrative outward expansion options. Making NRL increasingly popular and rich. 

Which, looping back to my first theory, probably won't do AFL any harm.

Hence, I reckon fans of either or both codes can afford to relax and enjoy the ride. 

[unapologetic pedant]

South Melbourne v Fitzroy GF 2024.

Great to see two of the smaller Vic clubs enjoy a moment of glory.

 

[unapologetic pedant]

Worth clarifying that the figure of 23k FTA average Sydney viewership for Fumbles relates to all AFL games. Swans games rate better, but not that much better.

The evidence that over the past 20 years or so the Waratahs and Reds crowds have shifted across to Swans and Lions continues to firm up.

The two NRL clubs in most obvious competition with AFL have seen no adverse effects. Roosters and Broncos have both substantially grown their fanbases through this period.

[EggFace]

On 15/09/2024 at 23:14, unapologetic pedant said:

My theory is that creative tension and rivalry between NRL and AFL is mutually beneficial. The concurrently vigorous health of the two comps would seem to prove the point.

I have another theory that NRL has more scope for inward demographic expansion within NSW and QLD. Alongside more viable and lucrative outward expansion options. Making NRL increasingly popular and rich. 

Which, looping back to my first theory, probably won't do AFL any harm.

Hence, I reckon fans of either or both codes can afford to relax and enjoy the ride. 

It's good and healthy to have 2 Codes of Football at the top like NRL and AFL but doesn't help either them saying stupid comments like the AFL guy saying AFL will take over NSW and QLD.

[unapologetic pedant]

5 hours ago, EggFace said:

It's good and healthy to have 2 Codes of Football at the top like NRL and AFL but doesn't help either them saying stupid comments like the AFL guy saying AFL will take over NSW and QLD.

Fine line between aspiration and hubris.

Fact is, AFL now have two major clubs in RL States. Probably bitten off more than they can chew with Giants and Suns.

NRL are unlikely to make similar mistakes. Inconceivable there will ever be more than one NRL franchise in any of Vic, WA, SA. Firstly, there are several better options elsewhere. Secondly, the deep-rooted RL inferiority complex, born of the historical relation to RU, makes them less inclined to imagine becoming the dominant code outside their heartlands.

The NRL expansion venture that could turn into a millstone is PNG. Could say "Albotross". Somebody must have used that already.

[The Future is League]

8 hours ago, unapologetic pedant said:

Fine line between aspiration and hubris.

Fact is, AFL now have two major clubs in RL States. Probably bitten off more than they can chew with Giants and Suns.

NRL are unlikely to make similar mistakes. Inconceivable there will ever be more than one NRL franchise in any of Vic, WA, SA. Firstly, there are several better options elsewhere. Secondly, the deep-rooted RL inferiority complex, born of the historical relation to RU, makes them less inclined to imagine becoming the dominant code outside their heartlands.

The NRL expansion venture that could turn into a millstone is PNG. Could say "Albotross". Somebody must have used that already.

The PNG team IF it happens wont cost the NRL a penny. It's the Oz government who will bankroll it.

[The Future is League]

13 hours ago, EggFace said:

It's good and healthy to have 2 Codes of Football at the top like NRL and AFL but doesn't help either them saying stupid comments like the AFL guy saying AFL will take over NSW and QLD.

I know 2 IFS, but if the PNG NRL team gets the go ahead and they are based in North Queensland, and if there is another NRL club in SE Queensland that will kill off any further of AFL expansion in Queensland. In fact if could retract AFL in Queensland, and as for overtaking Rugby League in NSW look how well the midgets are doing in NSW, not, and Dave Matthews the CEO of the midgets has admitted that things are getting harder for the midgets.

[unapologetic pedant]

6 hours ago, The Future is League said:

The PNG team IF it happens wont cost the NRL a penny. It's the Oz government who will bankroll it.

For 10 years. What then?

The economy and society of PNG will need to undergo enormous change for the venture to be independently viable thereafter.

[The Future is League]

1 hour ago, unapologetic pedant said:

For 10 years. What then?

The economy and society of PNG will need to undergo enormous change for the venture to be independently viable thereafter.

Well see if first they get in and then take it from there

In my many years i can't recall Rugby League ever having a 10 year plan before.

[unapologetic pedant]

18 minutes ago, The Future is League said:

Well see if first they get in and then take it from there

In my many years i can't recall Rugby League ever having a 10 year plan before.

This is a fair point. Hard for any new franchise to plan too far ahead.

The concern over PNG is that there are many more factors beyond the control or influence of the NRL. Not just in PNG. Dependence on continued goodwill from transient politicians in Canberra is fraught with risk.

WA, NZ 2, and Brisbane 3 are all gilt-edged expansion options which take NRL to a 20-team comp. AFL already have 2 failing money pits in an 18-team comp. The advantage is with NRL. Why jeopardize it?

[The Future is League]

1 minute ago, unapologetic pedant said:

This is a fair point. Hard for any new franchise to plan too far ahead.

The concern over PNG is that there are many more factors beyond the control or influence of the NRL. Not just in PNG. Dependence on continued goodwill from transient politicians in Canberra is fraught with risk.

WA, NZ 2, and Brisbane 3 are all gilt-edged expansion options which take NRL to a 20-team comp. AFL already have 2 failing money pits in an 18-team comp. The advantage is with NRL. Why jeopardize it?

We all know the idea behind the PNG team is political, and makes sense to a lot of even non sporting people in Australia, and Rugby League is the number sport in PNG by 2 country miles. Its about getting the whole country behind a team that the whole country can support.

We all know as well that its just a matter of time before WA, NZ 2, and Brisbane 3 will be NRL clubs

[unapologetic pedant]

Bit of a blowout in the Fumbles GF. I made it 107-34 by the start of the 4th quarter.

Only point of significance and comparison worth noting is that the team finishing 5th on the ladder are the premiers. Whereas there's been a slight air of inevitability in the NRL that the top 2 would meet in the GF. Moot point which of these scenarios is preferable.

[The Future is League]

11 hours ago, unapologetic pedant said:

Bit of a blowout in the Fumbles GF. I made it 107-34 by the start of the 4th quarter.

Only point of significance and comparison worth noting is that the team finishing 5th on the ladder are the premiers. Whereas there's been a slight air of inevitability in the NRL that the top 2 would meet in the GF. Moot point which of these scenarios is preferable.

That blow out score will be huge body blow to AFL in Sydney and NSW.

People don't want to be associated with a team that loses like that in a grand final and people don't want to be associated with a club that loses by that score in garnd final.

[unapologetic pedant]

7 hours ago, The Future is League said:

That blow out score will be huge body blow to AFL in Sydney and NSW.

People don't want to be associated with a team that loses like that in a grand final and people don't want to be associated with a club that loses by that score in garnd final.

2019 GF was even better.

Richmond 114 GWS 25 (3 goals, 7 misses).

[The Future is League]

15 hours ago, unapologetic pedant said:

2019 GF was even better.

Richmond 114 GWS 25 (3 goals, 7 misses).

Little wonder that the midgets are making next to no impression in Sydney depite the BS coming out Vicky Kicky house and the 1,000's of tickets they give out for the Midgets home games.

[Father Gascoigne]

On 29/09/2024 at 17:03, The Future is League said:

That blow out score will be huge body blow to AFL in Sydney and NSW.

People don't want to be associated with a team that loses like that in a grand final and people don't want to be associated with a club that loses by that score in garnd final.

I'm Victorian. 

For all the insults and barbs traded between rugby league and Aussie rules, fandom levels in the heartland states haven't changed since I first became aware of any 'code wars' 20 years ago. 

The more things change, the more they stay the same. 

[unapologetic pedant]

AFLW GF tomorrow. North Melbourne v Brisbane in a repeat of last year's decider. Saturday evening kick-off, which seems a sensible choice. Stadium apparently sold-out. According to Wiki, capacity at Princes Park is currently 13k. Game will be broadcast live on Seven.

Personally, always slightly torn re AFLW. On one side, I'm generally happy poking fun at Fumbles. On the other, I enjoy watching women's sport, deem it socially and culturally important, complementary to men's sport.

Should be a good final with form pointing to Kangaroos as favourites. The regular-season fixture in Round 1 finished Lions 34 Kangaroos 78. Seldom does an AFLW game record over a hundred points.

[unapologetic pedant]

North Melbourne 39 Brisbane 9.

Hmm, hard to know what to say. 

For the viewer, AFLW does appear to accentuate the defects and absurdities of Aussie Rules.

As distinct from NRLW, which regularly brings out the best of RL.

Ditto Women's Soccer. Critics might grumble about the defending in England v Germany, but the game was highly entertaining.

If, some time soon, Fumble fans find themselves watching an International Rules fixture, might the thought of a round ball for AFLW cross their minds?

[Father Gascoigne]

On 01/12/2024 at 01:21, unapologetic pedant said:

North Melbourne 39 Brisbane 9.

Hmm, hard to know what to say. 

For the viewer, AFLW does appear to accentuate the defects and absurdities of Aussie Rules.

As distinct from NRLW, which regularly brings out the best of RL.

Ditto Women's Soccer. Critics might grumble about the defending in England v Germany, but the game was highly entertaining.

If, some time soon, Fumble fans find themselves watching an International Rules fixture, might the thought of a round ball for AFLW cross their minds?

Women's professional club sport is niche as is. If you start changing fundamental aspects of it, that's not going to help draw interest, even if it results in a marginally better 'product'. 

The women that play Aussie Rules do so presumably because they like the sport, and it's what they want to emulate. This applies to the arguments made in football about goal sizes and in basketball with rim heights.  

The only reason I've ever watched women's sport is because it's the same as the men's. If you change something as fundamental as the ball shape, I'm not sure how that's meant to appeal to your target market--which in this case is the average AFL fan. 

[unapologetic pedant]

11 hours ago, Father Gascoigne said:

Women's professional club sport is niche as is. If you start changing fundamental aspects of it, that's not going to help draw interest, even if it results in a marginally better 'product'. 

The women that play Aussie Rules do so presumably because they like the sport, and it's what they want to emulate. This applies to the arguments made in football about goal sizes and in basketball with rim heights.  

The only reason I've ever watched women's sport is because it's the same as the men's. If you change something as fundamental as the ball shape, I'm not sure how that's meant to appeal to your target market--which in this case is the average AFL fan. 

The "round ball" suggestion for AFLW was tongue-in-cheek. AFL and GAA must be the only governing bodies of football codes who, when arranging international fixtures, have to argue over the shape of the ball.

NRLW has bespoke adaptations. No 6-agains, 40-30 and 20-50 kicks, 35-minute halves. Of these, the 40-30 kick is the most meaningful, taking into account the physiological differences between men and women. 

There has also been debate on reducing the size of the ball and, at the behest of commentators like Allana Ferguson, NRL were intending to trial a smaller football for women's RL. 

With the exception of Soccer in the USA, women's domestic team comps compete for attention with long-established men's comps which saturate the market and set the parameters.

AFLW either have to amend their rules or make a virtue out of considerably lower scoring. The latter entails no less material change, in terms of presentation and perception, than the former.

Pragmatism is the watchword. A "same but different" strategy is more engaging and credible. Striving to deliver an identical product militates against prosperity.

[Father Gascoigne]

On 03/12/2024 at 04:57, unapologetic pedant said:

The "round ball" suggestion for AFLW was tongue-in-cheek. AFL and GAA must be the only governing bodies of football codes who, when arranging international fixtures, have to argue over the shape of the ball.

NRLW has bespoke adaptations. No 6-agains, 40-30 and 20-50 kicks, 35-minute halves. Of these, the 40-30 kick is the most meaningful, taking into account the physiological differences between men and women. 

There has also been debate on reducing the size of the ball and, at the behest of commentators like Allana Ferguson, NRL were intending to trial a smaller football for women's RL. 

With the exception of Soccer in the USA, women's domestic team comps compete for attention with long-established men's comps which saturate the market and set the parameters.

AFLW either have to amend their rules or make a virtue out of considerably lower scoring. The latter entails no less material change, in terms of presentation and perception, than the former.

Pragmatism is the watchword. A "same but different" strategy is more engaging and credible. Striving to deliver an identical product militates against prosperity.

There's a very hard ceiling for women's professional club sport. If the means to prosperity is changing fundamental aspects of the sport, the ceiling is lowered by another foot at least. 

Who would the rule changes be for then: the players, or an audience that doesn't exist?

If it's the players, I suspect they'd prefer to partake in the 'real thing', which is what they've grown up with. If it's for a latent audience, expect to see AFLW go the way of AFLX.