AFL overtaking NRL in QLD

[Johnny Bananas]

IMO a second team in Brisbane won't work. Sure there is enough population, but apart from the corporates who really wants it?

People in Redcliffe, for one. Their team has existed for 75 years now, they're as old as Parramatta or Manly. This is something that's overlooked when people moan about the history of failing Sydney NRL clubs being lost.

I think the QRL have a point about keeping the number of teams at 16, but they're barking up the wrong tree with relocation. Relegating the least profitable Sydney club to the NSWRL and handing their licence to Redcliffe is a better idea. You don't lose heritage that way, it's just redirected to Queensland heritage. I don't know if the NRL are smart enough to consider that though, in their lust for more money.

Given how long its been since the Broncos started and the lack of comparable geographic divide like freo / south of the river or Port Adelaide like behemoth, it is almost certainly the case that this new team will struggle. There is no reason why tv ratings would increase either and you would need two extra teams to get an extra game

There is a north and south of the river divide in Brisbane. The problem is, the Broncos played on both sides of the river and then became entrenched. Rugby League had a chance to exploit the divide when the Crushers came in, since they played north of the river while the Broncos were south, but they were planned badly and Super League finished them off.

Really, the fundamental problem rugby league has had, besides its lack of long-term planning, is Murdoch. They let him rip their competition in two, take control of their biggest club, dismantle any competitors, obtain pay TV rights and gave him a second team after all that.

 

[werdna78]

I think we are forgetting one thing though, for all the great management by the AFL etc. Australian football is just a more entertaining and appealing game. Therefore, it has a big advantage over the others.

Agree, but you have to get them to watch it first.

You can ease them into it through watching their kids play Auskick and then junior club football. This is how my wife was introduced to the game and now she is quite happy to watch a game on TV. Where as before she was a RL follower.

 

[PhatBoy]

I think we are forgetting one thing though, for all the great management by the AFL etc. Australian football is just a more entertaining and appealing game. Therefore, it has a big advantage over the others.

Lol no bias there at all

 

[Gigantor]

I think we are forgetting one thing though, for all the great management by the AFL etc. Australian football is just a more entertaining and appealing game. Therefore, it has a big advantage over the others.

Well, these sorts of things are always in the eye of the beholder.
But you do remind me of one thing mentioned in that interview between Donikian and the bloke who wrote Code Wars.
When asked why the AFL is so far ahead of the other codes, the bloke mentioned better administration, as if it all comes down to that, but that's a small part of it.
First and foremost, before the game nationalised and became professional, it was an immensely popular game in four states, and had a decent folloowing in Southern NSW and the ACT.
Crowds in excess of 5,000 were already watching park games in Melbourne by the mid-1860s.
The MCG is overflowing for a grand final in 1909, captured on film for posterity.
99,900 saw a home and away game at the MCG in 1958.
In Perth, Adelaide, Hobart, and even Canberra, grand finals drew massive crowds from the earliest years.
The number following the game in general was huge long before the AFL came into existence.
That's the real natural advantage Australian Football had over the other codes.

 

[AFLQLD]

Agree, but you have to get them to watch it first.

You can ease them into it through watching their kids play Auskick and then junior club football. This is how my wife was introduced to the game and now she is quite happy to watch a game on TV. Where as before she was a RL follower.

Yes, exposure is the key to engagement. People will try new things but they want immediate reward. Get a parent to go to one free or very cheap Auskick session and they see their kid having fun and pleading to go back again. Fast forward five years and the parent is managing their kids junior team, watching games on TV. The kid gets old enough to start wanting to go to Lions or Suns (or any other) games and next thing you are a decade down the road and the family is invested in AFL as their family sport even if the kid has since quit actually playing.

it is slow but it works.

 

[PhatBoy]

It’s all down to individual taste but for me personally I couldn’t say which code I prefer as a spectator.

what I will say is this:
An NRL game at its maximum intensity played between two good sides, where the referee stays out of the game and the ball handling is decent, is as good as team sport gets anywhere in the world in my eyes. There’s no sport like it. Rugby Union will never ever shake the stop start nature of a code that has, or at the very least had, something like 106 different rules AT THE BREAKDOWN alone.

however, these games are rarer than they used to be. In a bid to make the game faster - which it didn’t need to be - the NRL has diluted the skill level and made it a game dominated by fitness and pace and little else. And those games are hard to watch because they’re predictable.

for a long time, a rugby league game that was low on handling skills and attacking flair COULD still be entertaining because of the brutality of the defence. That too has been sucked out of the game with the banning of the shoulder charge. It was a stupid move. They should have increased the penalties that come with a poor shoulder charge but made the action itself legal.

So now we are left with a game that to be as entertaining as it can possibly be, has to have two teams both playing well, both handling the ball well, and constantly being out on their feet.

AFL on the other hand - I think it’s a more steady game. I don’t think at its peak it’s as good because quite simply it doesn’t generally have the brutality that the best league games have, and the intensity. The ball goes out of play a lot, play stops a lot, there is more room for official interpretation etc.

but even the very worst games skill wise can still regularly be entertaining if the sides are evenly matched.

 

[NoobPie]

An NRL game at its maximum intensity played between two good sides, where the referee stays out of the game and the ball handling is decent, is as good as team sport gets anywhere in the world in my eyes. .

Lol no bias there at all

 

[RUNVS]

however, these games are rarer than they used to be. In a bid to make the game faster - which it didn’t need to be - the NRL has diluted the skill level and made it a game dominated by fitness and pace and little else. And those games are hard to watch because they’re predictable.

Haven't the new rules in the NRL just highlighted which teams have more skill rather than dilluting it?

It is like how on their lucky day an amateur soccer team can beat a professional one because the game is low scoring and it is possible the amateur team could get a lucky goal or two. However it is impossible for an amateur Australian Football team to beat a professional AFL team.

Create more scoring and it is harder for the lesser teams to have unexpected slightly lucky wins.

 

[PhatBoy]

Haven't the new rules in the NRL just highlighted which teams have more skill rather than dilluting it?

It is like how on their lucky day an amateur soccer team can beat a professional one because the game is low scoring and it is possible the amateur team could get a lucky goal or two. However it is impossible for an amateur Australian Football team to beat a professional AFL team.

Create more scoring and it is harder for the lesser teams to have unexpected slightly lucky wins.

They accentuate a skill gap IF a team gets on top. However the most obvious fallout is simply that whoever is the first team to gain some momentum whether they’re notionally then superior team or not, retains that momentum.

it IS possible to break it - look at the roosters titans match for example.
The roosters went out to a 34-6 lead or thereabouts. Half time arrives, the titans get a foot in the door and in 20 minutes they’re in front. It was bizarre.

With the poor teams against the good teams it just means the extent of the damage when they have that momentum is greater.
In previous eras you could combat a slick, ball moving broken play attacking side, by sticking either a couple of brutes in the middle to get physical, or some defensive weapons like a Luke ricketson or Allan tongue or Gary Larson to just make a thousand tackles and hold the middle of the field. You can’t do that now because you have to let the ball runner go basically as soon as you put them to ground.

And I agree totally the lower scoring the game the lesser the chances of an undeserved upset win

 

[PhatBoy]

Where was my bias NoobPie

I literally follow both sports exactly the same and explained that one, to me as a neutral, at its absolute best, is better, but in general is inferior

 

[Johnny Bananas]

AFL on the other hand - I think it’s a more steady game. I don’t think at its peak it’s as good because quite simply it doesn’t generally have the brutality that the best league games have, and the intensity. The ball goes out of play a lot, play stops a lot, there is more room for official interpretation etc.

To each their own, but you'll find many people enjoy a game that is physical but not brutal. Injuries and thuggery are rarely looked upon well.

 

[PhatBoy]

To each their own, but you'll find many people enjoy a game that is physical but not brutal. Injuries and thuggery are rarely looked upon well.

Sigh.

jorge Taufua snapping someone in half isn’t thuggery it’s a perfectly executed tackle.

my version of brutality isn’t people getting clotheslined or dumped on their head.

 

[Bjo187]

Lol no bias there at all

Why bias it's personal opinion. If anything you showed your bias by being triggered by it and then telling us all why nrl is the greatest game on earth.

 

[PhatBoy]

Why bias it's personal opinion. If anything you showed your bias by being triggered by it and then telling us all why nrl is the greatest game on earth.

Lolllllllll can anyone in here actually read?

this will be literally the third post on this actual thread page alone in which I’ve said I follow both games identically and have no preference for one over the other

 

[NoobPie]

Why bias it's personal opinion. If anything you showed your bias by being triggered by it and then telling us all why nrl is the greatest game on earth.

Exactly....self awareness levels are particularly low in this one

 

[PhatBoy]

Exactly....self awareness levels are particularly low in this one

WHAT BIAS?????

I literally have said multiple times ‘I love both games equally.’
F***ing hell you can’t script this inability to use basic comprehension

 

[NoobPie]

WHAT BIAS?????

I literally have said multiple times ‘I love both games equally.’
F***ing hell you can’t script this inability to use basic comprehension

You can literally say whatever you like dude, it doesn't somehow absolve you of bias

I'd recommend not accusing others of bias if you are going to get so triggered when they hold up a mirror

My experience is the most biased are those that delude themselves they don't have bias.

 

[beema limapep]

One of the key differences between AFL and League, is that AFL is a 360 degree sport, whereas League is very linear and 180 degrees. Even Union is more watchable as an afl fan.

Stating the obvious, it (along with longer ball movement) adds a large degree of unpredictability and chance to contests. But also a higher degree of skill.

That from an entertainment perspective for most people is a no contest and a key pillar of why Nrl inroads beyond NSW and QLD have been minimal.

Imagine 2 NRL teams in Vic, Sa and WA. If you can't there lies the problem.

Brisbane with only one team is an indictment on the league heartland.

 

[werdna78]

One of the key differences between AFL and League, is that AFL is a 360 degree sport, whereas League is very linear and 180 degrees. Even Union is more watchable as an afl fan.

Stating the obvious, it (along with longer ball movement) adds a large degree of unpredictability and chance to contests. But also a higher degree of skill.

That from an entertainment perspective for most people is a no contest and a key pillar of why Nrl inroads beyond NSW and QLD have been minimal.

Imagine 2 NRL teams in Vic, Sa and WA. If you can't there lies the problem.

Brisbane with only one team is an indictment on the league heartland.

VICBIAS has nothing on NSWBIAS

 

[PhatBoy]

You can literally say whatever you like dude, it doesn't somehow absolve you of bias

I'd recommend not accusing others of bias if you are going to get so triggered when they hold up a mirror

My experience is the most biased are those that delude themselves they don't have bias.

What bias!!!!

I have said, expressly in THIS THREAD, that a) I like both equally
B) the BEST game of rugby league possible is, I believe, a slightly better game to watch but that MOST AFL games are better to watch because the non-best presentation of it is a BETTER product than the average game of rugby league.

you can hold up whatever you want. You can’t hold bias when you hold the same level of feeling towards two products

 

[PhatBoy]

One of the key differences between AFL and League, is that AFL is a 360 degree sport, whereas League is very linear and 180 degrees. Even Union is more watchable as an afl fan.

Stating the obvious, it (along with longer ball movement) adds a large degree of unpredictability and chance to contests. But also a higher degree of skill.

That from an entertainment perspective for most people is a no contest and a key pillar of why Nrl inroads beyond NSW and QLD have been minimal.

Imagine 2 NRL teams in Vic, Sa and WA. If you can't there lies the problem.

Brisbane with only one team is an indictment on the league heartland.

I would say the range of skill in AFL is bigger - much bigger - the kicking alone requires half a dozen different skill sets - goal kicking, kicking for distance, kicking to a pack, kicking to a stationary target, kicking for someone to run onto the ball for starters is a bigger skill set, let alone marking, rucking, hand passing through traffic etc.

I would say the hardest skill to master in either game is the timing of a league pass to a teammate simply because of the amount of traffic coming the other way, and tackling obviously as it’s a much more relied upon skill in rugby league is the other one league utilises more but overall yes I’d agree comfortably there’s more skill relied upon in afl

 

[Goomba1973]

News Limited has a significant amount of shares in the Broncos and run the only two papers easily available in Brisbane (Courier Mail and The Australian), so it's not in their best interest to pump up the Lions continually over the Broncos.

If the public wants it the media will give it, that is how they make money. It would make zero sense from a business perspective to talk up AFL when the people want to hear about league. If arguable the greatest single team ever to grace a footy oval 01-03 Lions could barely increase the casual supporters, let alone the membership numbers then nothing will. There is around 45-50K combined members for X2 AFL clubs in QLD, and around 50-55K combined for Rugby league memberships X 3 clubs . Very similar memberships #s in total, however where the difference occurs, is the Monday morning conversations between fans. From my time living in QLD, nearly no one talked about AFL on Monday mornings but nearly everyone talked about league be in the Broncos and the Titans to Storm and Parramatta supporters ect.... The casual supporter (non membership) for league in QLD is HUGE where as the AFL casual supporter #s are tiny in comparison.

 

[Sector 7G]

Where was my bias NoobPie

I literally follow both sports exactly the same and explained that one, to me as a neutral, at its absolute best, is better, but in general is inferior

No you are not allowed to have an opinion. There is only one right answer on you are allowed to like.

I find most soccer really boring (that Ronaldo was OK when I saw him at the G) but I don't begrudge other people loving it.

 

[RUNVS]

No you are not allowed to have an opinion. There is only one right answer on you are allowed to like.

I find most soccer really boring (that Ronaldo was OK when I saw him at the G) but I don't begrudge other people loving it.

I am of the opinion that who cares what other people like. I don't understand how Collingwood supporters can support Collingwood but I am fine with them doing so, just like I am fine with people supporting any sport. As long as it makes them happy then more power to them.

The only exception to that are sports were animals get injured, as I would love for **** fighting, horse racing and greyhound racing to die very quickly as those sports don't deserve to exist.

 

[PhatBoy]

No you are not allowed to have an opinion. There is only one right answer on you are allowed to like.

I find most soccer really boring (that Ronaldo was OK when I saw him at the G) but I don't begrudge other people loving it.

I absolutely despise soccer (even played it for 7 years and could just not cope with the culture of it at all) but the fandom of it - the poms getting on board Football Coming Home style - fascinates me