A Third Team In Sydney - It's Only a Matter Of Time !!

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
I agree to an extent, but i reckon that a third team will eventually be on the cards, the big drawback is unlike Melbourne the third team will need its own stadium within its own demographic area.

That would mean another partnership with cricket perhaps.

Its a big stretch but the population and participation rates will eventually demand one.

Look I'm not immediately dismissing a 3rd syd team at some point, but on face value right now and all the forecasting it does seem unlikely. It's more likely and more viable anywhere else in the country bar syd and qld. That's just my opinion.
 
How many of these regular season games drew over 50000?
I remember in the first couple seasons
An interesting article on the decline of soccer in the U.S.A.


Not Australia, but it shows you have to be careful with your predictions and use of "potential".

but also





back in Australia


An interesting article on the decline of soccer in the U.S.A.


Not Australia, but it shows you have to be careful with your predictions and use of "potential".

but also





back in Australia


havent you used the word potential a lot when referring to gws ?
 
Look I'm not immediately dismissing a 3rd syd team at some point, but on face value right now and all the forecasting it does seem unlikely. It's more likely and more viable anywhere else in the country bar syd and qld. That's just my opinion.
While I agree right now, there is 1 is issue. Sydney's population is large, so small increases in population in percentage terms, and more importantly small increases in engagement in terms of fans in percentage terms, adds up to a lot of people quite quickly.

It could overtake other regions quite quickly.

Of course that depends on an uptick in interest, which isn't guaranteed.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I recently read (or more correctly, re-read) "My World of Football" by former Collingwood champion full-forward, Peter McKenna. In it, he described his playing soccer for Heidelberg Juniors from aged 8 to 13 on Saturday mornings, playing his first game of football for his school at aged 10 and finally playing club football on Saturdays (and hence ditching soccer) at age 13.

What really caught my attention was near the end of the book, musing about the future of Australian Football, he wrote - (quotes from page 167) "... Australian Football is about to enter the most critical period since the game was invented in 1858. The game is at the crossroads. ... I believe there are ominous signs which should worry every Australian Rules follower and certainly should be giving our administrators the utmost anxiety. ...

I believe that the main challenge to Australian Football will not come from rugby league ... but from ... soccer. Here is a ... game with an international flavour and overseas professionalism to spur it on. For followers of Australian Rules, the advances soccer has made ... should be amazing and alarming ... and it will not be too long before it is a very important part of Australian sport."

The thing is, this was published in 1973 - 47 years ago! This was before the Socceroos first qualified for the WC in 1974. Me (and Peter McKenna) are still waiting for this "challenge".
My father played a season of soccer in the late 60s. He said it was because everyone was saying how soccer was going to take over soon, so he wanted to see what the fuss was about.

He found it boring and went back to footy.

It's probably further away from taking over now than it was then.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk
 
While I agree right now, there is 1 is issue. Sydney's population is large, so small increases in population in percentage terms, and more importantly small increases in engagement in terms of fans in percentage terms, adds up to a lot of people quite quickly.

It could overtake other regions quite quickly.

Of course that depends on an uptick in interest, which isn't guaranteed.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

I don't think population is an issue, the uptick in interest the key on whether or not a 3rd syd team. As you rightly point out it's not guaranteed but also that interest cannot be immediately dismissed as never.
 
Which has what to do with goddamn crowd reporting? This is AFL Canada for a start, not the AFL - an affiliate body independent of it. Not to mention you have for some reason linked us to 1 team in Alberta - when the longest and largest competition in Canada is in Ontario.

I await any - ANY - meaningful link.
What it shows it that you can't believe all the BS that comes from sites that want to ingratiate themselves with certain sports.
Have you yourself in the past questioned some of the crowd figures put out by GWS?
 
That statement makes sense.



it's the constant re-posting of your other opinions that makes no sense what-so-ever and becomes tiresome.

As are everyone else's unwarranted need to defend themselves against me ad nauseum. There is no need, it's hysterical. Just because I'm of the opinion a 3rd syd team is not and may not be viable everyone gets in defence mode. Why? It's nothing personal, yet everyone gets their nickers in a knot.

  • I'm not against it if it's viable, in fact it hope it happens one day
  • It's not viable NOW and MAY never be.
That's all I'm saying, nothing more nothing less.

Hope that's not tiresome for you.
 
Is English your first language or are you just poorly educated?
I'll take it from your reversion to insults that you still haven't found a source for independent crowd figures. I'll also assume from that response that you didn't actually look at the list at all.

If you just linked your unbiased, independently sourced crowd figures, then we would have something to work with here. It's not like they're hard to find, after all, you can't believe no-one else can find them.
 
What it shows it that you can't believe all the BS that comes from sites that want to ingratiate themselves with certain sports.
Have you yourself in the past questioned some of the crowd figures put out by GWS?
So, have a I got this right?

Every site that says something positive about the AFL, or reports a figure that looks good for the AFL, is trying to `ingratiate` themselves. Figures cannot be believed if they are presented by someone that actually has access to the crowd numbers.

We can only believe figures presented by overseas websites that dont report on the afL at all.

I am wondering if you have this obsession with reports about the A league?
 
What it shows it that you can't believe all the BS that comes from sites that want to ingratiate themselves with certain sports.
Have you yourself in the past questioned some of the crowd figures put out by GWS?

It doesnt show anything of the sort for a start.

And yes Ive queried crowds, but always stated that I dont really know as Im not there counting
 
1. Daily Telegraph 10.6.19

I have just seen this Article. I was aware GR AF has had significant growth in the ACT since GWS started in 2012.

It claims that, in 2018, ACT female GR AF regd. nos. are now greater than male regd. nos.! Amazing, if correct ( I have doubts, as this sensation should have had more publicity)
The biggest female growth, from 2016 to 2018, has been in the U10 & U12 female teams.

In 2016, there were 484 ACT female Club players; in 2018, 1,304 female Club players
From 2016 - 2018, female club nos. had increased by 169%, whilst male club nos. had increased by only 16.5% (Female Auskick would have been greater).



2. In 2019, I suspect that GR AF club player nos. are at a record high in the ACT.

I counted the 2019 ACT male & female (jnr & adult) team nos. These teams do not include Club Auskick, for 5y.o - 8 y.o.
(Also, they do not include the new, small Lake George League- all teams outside the ACT).

ACT Female Club Jnr teams-
U10 -7
U12- 9
U14- 7
U16- 8

Adult Women's teams- 22


ACT Male Club Jnr teams
U15- 8
U17- 8

Adult Men's teams -39

ACT Mixed Club teams
U10- 10
U11- 13
U12- 12
U13- 13
U14- 9*

I assume a big majority are male players in the mixed teams- so club male players would be in the overall majority in the ACT in 2019.
Club Auskick nos. 5 y.o. -8 y.o. would be 1,000+.

(then click on Fixtures & Results, go to "2019")


3. SMH C. Helmers 30.11.17

Re ACT AF Regd. Official Participant Nos. in the ACT in 2017

"AFL boss Gillon McLachlan's grand 5 year plan to make Australian Rules the most dominant sport in Canberra has been boosted by soaring participation numbers".

(The AFL could easily become the undisputed no.1 sport in the competitive ACT market by 2022- but it, probably, will struggle to overtake soccer club comp. GR. nos. by 2022)

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/afl-bo...by-participation-figures-20171130-gzvr3m.html

*AF also has strong school AF competition nos. in the ACT. There are high-level secondary private school AF comps. in Canberra also. Some private schools & players don't want to play Club AF also.

Contact RU & RL Regd. club male competition nos. are in long term decline in the ACT. In the ACT, GR AF club regd. nos. have overtaken RL, & RU.
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

"AFL boss Gillon McLachlan's grand 5 year plan to make Australian Rules the most dominant sport in Canberra has been boosted by soaring participation numbers".
(The AFL could easily become the undisputed no. 1 sport in the competitive ACT market by 2022- but it, probably, will struggle to overtake soccer club comp. GR. nos. by 2022)

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/afl-bo...by-participation-figures-20171130-gzvr3m.html

AF has also strong school AF competition nos. in the ACT.
Contact RU & RL Regd. club male competition nos. are in long term decline in contact in the ACT. In the ACT, GR AF club regd. nos. have overtaken RL & RU.

So Tasmania and Canberra?
 
So Tasmania and Canberra?
No.

Yes, Tasmania as the 19th team, c.2025. The AFL should remain as a 19-team competition indefinately, probably for 10-15 years. And observe GWS progress.

Maybe 2030 - 2035 establish a South Sydney Canberra combined team (SSCFC "Burra's", or Kookaburras). Home games split 6 in its base at Campbelltown (?), 5 at Manuka. But only after 2030-35, if GWS is regularly having then 25,000+ lockouts at Giants stadium, & is financially stable.

GWS will thereafter only represent Sydney's NW, WS, inner west.
Central West NSW, New England & north of Gosford to Qld. border in Giants' Zone. Probably Wagga & SW NSW also in GWS Zone?
Giants will also play 3 Away games pa in Newcastle- 2 games in Easter period.
(Melb. club may sell 3 home games pa- assuming Newcastle builds a 15,000+ AFL/BBL oval).

SSCFC will also play 3 Away games pa at Wollongong.
(Melb. Clubs may sell 3 home games pa, to be played at Wollongong- assuming it builds a 15,000+ AF/BBL oval).
Illawarra, South Coast, & part of Riverina will be SSCFC Zone.

GC & Tasmania would also have to be financially stable & competitive before establishing a 20 th team; & no other "basketcases" in the AFL.
 
Last edited:
Yes, Tasmania as the 19th team, c.2025. The AFL should remain as a 19-team competition indefinately, probably for 10-15 years.

No. Unfortunately 19 teams is a major negative. Same games and television with 5% less dispersion to clubs with lower attendances and ratings.

GWS didn't happen by observing. GWS happened because the AFL took a calculated risk. I wouldn't be just waiting.
You want some action - then try the NEAFL. Insert a Tasmanian side and bump the Swans to Newcastle and Giants to Wollongong.
Give Canberra an AFLW side if they're travelling so good and Tasmania.
 
No. Unfortunately 19 teams is a major negative. Same games and television with 5% less dispersion to clubs with lower attendances and ratings.
This is incorrect- a 19 team AFL comp. has 11 extra games pa ie from 198 H & A games - 209. Every team still plays 22 H & A games.

These extra 11 games would be worth, probably, an extra approx. $20 m. pa for the AFL in broadcast rights' $ (assuming ratings, advertising rates etc. c.2025 have the same parameters as when the last broadcast deal was entered into).

I expect there will be an extra 11 Thur. night timeslots, all at DS- which will become the very valuable Prime Time marquee game of the week.
Also a Final 9, & an extra Final? (Tas. to play all its 11 home games on weekends, during the day- not concurrently with other games, which move to Thur. nights).

Also, a Final 9, & an extra Final? (Makes the season more interesting for longer, & extra Final delivers more broadcast $)

GWS CEO D. Matthews said, in Sept.2019, the 9th game pw was worth an extra $60m pa for the AFL (ie due to GC & GWS creation).
The Age award-winning journalist & author Chip Le Grand (described by The Age as their "Chief Reporter") said the 9th game was worth an extra $54m pa; as did AFR journalist P. Durkin (both in Sept.2019, & both citing AFL sources. This is the first time, AFAIK, these claims were made as to the value of the 9th game).

Although Matthews, Le Grand & Durkin did not say these figures of $54m- $60 m pa included specifically "indirect" benefits for the AFL, I think the $54m - $60m pa figures include indirect benefits.

For a detailed explanation of the indirect benefits etc., see my posts #725, 874, 937, 1250, 1351, & 1372 in BF Thread "Tasmania To Join AFL c.2025" link below.



GWS didn't happen by observing. GWS happened because the AFL took a calculated risk. I wouldn't be just waiting
I disagree. It would be very expensive & risky for the AFL to expand to 20 teams, with SSCFC (notwithstanding the extra Broadcast $). It must be prudent, & see how GWS develops, & how successful it will become.

You want some action - then try the NEAFL. Insert a Tasmanian side and bump the Swans to Newcastle and Giants to Wollongong.
Give Canberra an AFLW side if they're travelling so good and Tasmania.
I don't understand these comments.
 
Last edited:
The way I understand it, Australian football was always the dominant code in Canberra until RL took a punt and formed the raiders.
Australian football is a natural fit for Canberra... it’s close to AFL heartland in southern NSW, it’s the most educated, highest socioeconomic status city in Australia and filled with relatively sophisticated people many of whom actually went to uni. In other words, it’s the polar opposite of a typical RL demographic.
Added to this, it has strong influx of public servants from football-playing states.
If the AFL got their sh*t together, in the long run, surely RL reverts to fringe status...
 
Seriously, invest in Australian football in relatively socioeconomically advantaged regions north of the Murray and it pays dividends. look at the eastern suburbs and north shore of Sydney. AFL may not be dominant, but it’s arguably surpassed RL.
Those people just naturally shudder at RL culture..
 
This is incorrect- a 19 team AFL comp. would produce 11 extra home games

That is just scheduling. You could do that now with 18 teams.
However there are still only a maximum of 9 games a round.
You loose on disbursement, derbies, attendance, ratings and infrastructure..
 
I don't understand these comments.

I'm saying don't sit around waiting for things to happen. Do something for example and this is just a suggestion
"You want some action - then try the NEAFL. Insert a Tasmanian side and bump the Swans to Newcastle and Giants to Wollongong.
Give Canberra an AFLW side if they're travelling so good and Tasmania."

For too long Tasmanians have been accepting - demand an AFLW side and a NEAFL side.
Hopefully the response to any Tasmanian inclusions would prompt quicker action at elite level.
Canberra have a NEAFL side. With that article of women's participation I'd push for a Canberra AFLW if you want a Canberra side.
Swans and Giants should play their reserves out of Newcastle and Wollongong respectfully to raise the profile of AFL in NSW.
At least it would be good advertising and maybe flow on better ratings and better representative teams.
 
But if you could move the Wanderers out? They don’t seem to be tracking well.

or the whole league. Aldi, Caltex, Hyundai and NAB going and gone!


 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top