AFL overtaking NRL in QLD

[Aussie in exile]

...what the ****?

Fact, if it wasn't for Cricket, the most British of games Australian football wouldn't exist.
Sorry to point out that fact to you. Now move on

 

[RedV3x]

The level of alleged tragedy you seem to attach to this occurrence that happened well over a century ago

What level of tragedy is that ?

makes it very hard to take your position seriously

what position is that exactly.

when even within sport itself

Again,what position is that exactly.

should very rarely be taken seriously as it is

Why should the history of Australian Football, the indigenous code, with all it's economic and social flow-ons not be
be taken any less seriously than it happenned ?

tragedy is an extremely uncommon thing.

Well mister cryptic philosopher, the world simply abounds with tragedy.
The news services cannot survive without it or don't you take an interest in the news and life around you.

 

[RedV3x]

Fact, if it wasn't for Cricket, the most British of games Australian football wouldn't exist.

NO. if it wasn't for Australian Football, then cricket wouldn't the great facilities it has in Australia.
.

Sorry to point out that fact to you.

Your b.s. are not "facts"

Now move on

The first sensible thing you've said in a while.

 

[PhatBoy]

What level of tragedy is that ?



what position is that exactly.



Again,what position is that exactly.



Why should the history of Australian Football, the indigenous code, with all it's economic and social flow-ons not be
be taken any less seriously than it happenned ?



Well mister cryptic philosopher, the world simply abounds with tragedy.
The news services cannot survive without it or don't you take an interest in the news and life around you.

The way you speak about it, it’s tantamount to crime. People in a particular state didn’t overwhelmingly adopt the code YOU align yourself to for a variety of factors and the way your portray it, it’s a tragedy.



This is sport. I don’t have to be a philosopher to interpret the way you speak about these things that way. And you do speak about them that way. You crap on about the perceived tone in the stuff I write like it’s anti-AFL, which it has never been. Look at the tone in your own writing. The only possible conclusion to draw from the way you write about this stuff is that over a century on from the event, you have an emotional response to it. If you didn’t, you’d spend more time talking about the present day effect of it and virtually no time talking about the cause of it beyond one simple explanation.

I’m a f**king university qualified journalist by trade

Pretty sure I know how the news cycle works mate.

 

[RedV3x]

The AFL shouldn't be trying to counter every move the NRL makes.

It shouldn't and hasn't unlike the NRL.

The Giants make the finals almost every year, but how much has that raised the profile of the game in the media and got casual interest in the game to take off? I'd argue there has been success, but limited success,

Limited success in spite of the media.

and that's with the Giants doing less harm to the Swans'

Funny wording "harm".
The Swans have benefited immensely with two derbies in Sydney.
The Giants have created a tottaly new fanbase.

There'd be a lot more overlap and cannibalisation of the fanbase in the latter case.

I'd use the term convenience.
People support the Giants because it's now convenient to support them.
It is a not more convenient for G.C. fans to support their own club.
Fans on the perimeter are always going to struggle to be regular attendees.
With a S.C. AFL club it would depend on where they played.

I can quite easily imagine it,

I don't think soccer analogies in a different continent have much relevance.

So you agree this would be a kick in the guts to the Lions in terms of fanbase growth.

NO. Clubs always struggle to pull in fans on the perimeter.
The Lions might lose some and lose them slowly but that would be more than compensated
by the increased profile of AFL in Queensland.

 

[RedV3x]

The way you speak about it, it’s tantamount to crime.

I'm sure any university qualified journalist would recognize the actions of the unlawful.

People in a particular state didn’t overwhelmingly adopt the code

As a university qualified journalist surely you would recognize that there was no choice if one option was removed.
Australian Football was extremely popular and was banned over jealousy that it would crush rugby.
Australian Football did not die out because people made a free choice.

YOU align yourself to for a variety of factors and the way your portray it, it’s a tragedy.

Well it is a tragedy that Australian Football didn't reach it's full potential in Australia and around the world.
As an university qualified journalist you surely would recognize the economic, cultural and social benefits of
Australian Football reaching it's full potential

This is sport.

As a university qualified journalist surely you would know that sport, especially professional sport is big business, with economic,cultural, social and political implications. Australian Football arguably has been the strongest in all of that.

You crap on about the perceived tone in the stuff I write like it’s anti-AFL,

As a university qualified journalist couldn't you express yourself better ?

Look at the tone in your own writing.

i do.

The only possible conclusion to draw from the way you write about this stuff is that over a century on from the event, you have an emotional response to it.

Your personal conclusion to draw from the way I write about this Australian Football history is that over a century on from the event, you have an emotional response to it.
Well IMO it is indeed a tragedy that Australian Football didn't reach it's full potential in Australia and around the world
and Australia did not receive the full economic benefits from this.

If you didn’t, you’d spend more time talking about the present day effect of it and virtually no time talking about the cause of it beyond one simple explanation.

I'd spend more time talking about the present day effect of it and virtually no time talking about the cause of it beyond one simple explanation if people would understand that simple explanation.
The simple explanation is that Australian Football didn't reach it's full potential in Australia and around the world, due to a number of negative actions and Australia did not receive the full economic benefits from this.

 

[Macca180]

Fact, if it wasn't for Cricket, the most British of games Australian football wouldn't exist.
Sorry to point out that fact to you. Now move on

**** you are an annoying campaigner.

But at least you have stopped with you fkng taxpayer broken record bullshit.

 

[Fire]

Fact, if it wasn't for Cricket, the most British of games Australian football wouldn't exist.
Sorry to point out that fact to you. Now move on

The world is full of facts. It's just that the vast majority of them are wildly irrelevant for any given topic, and their seemingly random evocation can cause extreme confusion.
For example;

Fact, Victoria and Tasmania share a land border. Sorry to point out that fact to you. Now move on.

 

[PhatBoy]

I'm sure any university qualified journalist would recognize the actions of the unlawful.




As a university qualified journalist surely you would recognize that there was no choice if one option was removed.
Australian Football was extremely popular and was banned over jealousy that it would crush rugby.
Australian Football did not die out because people made a free choice.



Well it is a tragedy that Australian Football didn't reach it's full potential in Australia and around the world.
As an university qualified journalist you surely would recognize the economic, cultural and social benefits of
Australian Football reaching it's full potential



As a university qualified journalist surely you would know that sport, especially professional sport is big business, with economic,cultural, social and political implications. Australian Football arguably has been the strongest in all of that.



As a university qualified journalist couldn't you express yourself better ?



i do.



Your personal conclusion to draw from the way I write about this Australian Football history is that over a century on from the event, you have an emotional response to it.
Well IMO it is indeed a tragedy that Australian Football didn't reach it's full potential in Australia and around the world
and Australia did not receive the full economic benefits from this.



I'd spend more time talking about the present day effect of it and virtually no time talking about the cause of it beyond one simple explanation if people would understand that simple explanation.
The simple explanation is that Australian Football didn't reach it's full potential in Australia and around the world, due to a number of negative actions and Australia did not receive the full economic benefits from this.

Sorry mate but this isn’t the Sydney Morning Herald it’s an opinion based sports forum. I can express that using whatever language I choose to do so.

But it wasn’t removed.

The option has been there for over a century. Just because there were no enclosed grounds doesn’t mean the option hasn’t been there.

Cancellation of the sport by rugby union 130-140 years ago has no relevance to people not choosing it as a main option further on in time. Nothing stopped people from deciding to make more of it than was already there later on. Nothing has stopped people from creating a greater demand for it or going professional or causing such a groundswell of need for greater facilities or a northern professionalism like the one seen in rugby league.

What’s to say the economic benefit you speak of would have been any better than the economic impact that rugby league has provided?

 

[RedV3x]

I can express that using whatever language I choose to do so.

Just doesn't sound like something an university qualified journalist would say.

But it wasn’t removed.

The option of playing Australian Football was largely removed because the professional pathway was removed and
the option of playing Australian Football at school was removed.

The option has been there for over a century.

The option of playing Australian Football was largely removed because the professional pathway was removed and
the option of playing Australian Football at school was removed and still is unavailable at some schools.

Just because there were no enclosed grounds doesn’t mean the option hasn’t been there.

That's like saying a person has the option of playing American Football in Australia.
It has to be a realistic option.

Cancellation of the sport by rugby union 130-140 years ago has no relevance to people not choosing it as a main option further on in time.

It still has major and many repercussions today as in grounds, schools, facilities, stadiums and pathways.

Nothing stopped people from deciding to make more of it than was already there later on.

Except as in grounds, schools, facilities, stadiums and pathways.

Nothing has stopped people from creating a greater demand for it

There was a demand. It was overlooked.

What’s to say the economic benefit you speak of would have been any better than the economic impact that rugby league has provided?

The economic benefit of Australian Football is easily seen in the synergy with cricket.
Australian Football has underwritten the great stadiums in Australia.
The great attendances of Australian Football and interest in Australian Football generate much more wealth.

Rugby league has demanded it's own stadiums in parallel.
Rugby league has derailed Australia's rugby union strength.
Rugby league has depended on social negatives like pokies.
Rugby league has championed social negatives like gambling.
.

 

[PhatBoy]

Just doesn't sound like something an university qualified journalist would say.



The option of playing Australian Football was largely removed because the professional pathway was removed and
the option of playing Australian Football at school was removed.


The option of playing Australian Football was largely removed because the professional pathway was removed and
the option of playing Australian Football at school was removed and still is unavailable at some schools.


That's like saying a person has the option of playing American Football in Australia.
It has to be a realistic option.



It still has major and many repercussions today as in grounds, schools, facilities, stadiums and pathways.




Except as in grounds, schools, facilities, stadiums and pathways.


There was a demand. It was overlooked.



The economic benefit of Australian Football is easily seen in the synergy with cricket.
Australian Football has underwritten the great stadiums in Australia.
The great attendances of Australian Football and interest Australian Football in generate much more wealth.

Rugby league has demanded it's own stadiums in parallel.
Rugby league has derailed Australia' rugby union strength.
Rugby league has depended on social negatives like pokies.
Rugby league has championed social negatives like gambling.
.

AFL has underwritten the great stadiums in Australia? That’s a very subjective view.

RL has demanded its own grounds? The SCG Trust built the original SFS which housed both inner city RL sides and the Waratahs. The ‘Tahs still play there now, not that anyone cares.

Prior to that they played at the same ground as the Swans, while the Waratahs played at Concorde Oval if memory serves me correctly. The Sharks own their ground.
There are various existing tenancy arrangements with local governments and other teams. The Olympic stadium was built for a slightly different reason than housing the Bunnies and Bulldogs as well from memory….

At any rate, how is that any different to the spending that went into a venue like Optus Stadium that was something approaching $2 billion or whatever it was? But that’s for AFL and cricket right, so it’s ok? If it’s for rugby league, and soccer, and costs less, it’s a stain.


Here‘s thing you don’t seem willing to accept even when you remove yourself from the AFL only mentality and start sympathising with another code altogether. If RU had done anything to protect, maintain, and market or improve its product? It would still have one. It hasn’t. It hasn’t tried to open its game up beyond its traditional market. It hasn’t made it accessible. My two publicly educated children in a combined 22 years of school have never once been visited by a rugby team or skill-and-drill unit etc.

Every year when an NRL match is staged here the clubs send some sort of representation to their schools to conduct something even if it’s just a PR exercise. Rugby dropped the metaphorical ball a long time ago and is struggling to regather it.

Blaming that on some perceived slight dealt to it a century and a quarter ago is irrational and just reeks of bitterness.

 

[RedV3x]

AFL has underwritten the great stadiums in Australia?

The SCG Trust built the original SFS

The SCG was controlled by RL at that time.
They built a large stadium right next to a large stadium - it makes no sense what-so-ever.
They also refused the Sydney Swans from building clubrooms on SCG land.

At any rate, how is that any different to the spending that went into a venue like Optus Stadium

The new Perth Stadium was built to be multi-purpose and to accomodate as many sports as possible.

But that’s for AFL and cricket right,

No. the AFL wanted to stay at Subiaco because they had a peppercorn lease.
Cricket wanted nothing to do with the stadium.

If it’s for rugby league, and soccer, and costs less, it’s a stain.

You could have aPperth Stadium and cater for all the codes with optimum capacity.

If RU had done anything to protect, maintain, and market or improve its product?

I believe RU did make changes to make it more competitive against the greater attraction of Colonial football.

It would still have one.

One what ?

It hasn’t. It hasn’t tried to open its game up beyond its traditional market. It hasn’t made it accessible. My two publicly educated children in a combined 22 years of school have never once been visited by a rugby team or skill-and-drill unit etc.

Well that is commentary on RU. Rugby had the head-start being pushed by the upper echelon of the British Empire
yet it was quickly overtaken by soccer and overtaken by domestic football in a number of countries.
RU had it's head in the sand over professionalism and quickly lost to professionalism.
Australian Football was prevented from playing at enclosed grounds and charging a fee.
The biggest country where RU dominates is N.Z. That's a statement on the lack of drive by RU.
Imagine if the Empire had taken Colonial Football on board. In all probability things would be mightily different.

Rugby dropped the metaphorical ball a long time ago and is struggling to regather it.

Totally agree. That's why it's a tragedy that Australian Football didn't replace it.

Blaming that on some perceived slight dealt to it a century and a quarter ago is irrational and just reeks of bitterness.

You are still hell bent on down-playing historical consequences.
If Australian Football had been free to develop as in did in all other parts of Australia
then in all probability Australian Football would be as popular in N.S.W. and Queensland as it is around the rest of
Australia because as Australians we are very homogeneous as a people.
The rest of Australia is free to make a choice and they have largely chosen Australian Football.

 

[PhatBoy]

How does it make no sense whatsoever to stop playing a rectangle field game in the middle of an almost circular field and create what was - and even in its remade form still is - easily the best rugby league, soccer and rugby union stadium in the country? The notion of using any venue for that many codes is silly to begin with. That league was played there was as long as it was was remarkable. I watched a handful of games there for retro rounds and during the redevelopment and while it had some sentimental appeal it was awful from a spectator perspective, let alone what it would always have been for a team playing on a cricket pitch - something that has only been removed in recent years.



At any rate I’m not hell bent on anything.

If people want something badly enough and if it’s managed well enough during the ensuing one and a quarter century, it plays out differently. The fact is, it didn’t.


You are saying that it was unfair 120 years ago for one code to not be given its own enclosed grounds.

Well using that logic wouldn’t it be unfair for another code all these years later to suffer the same treatment?

 

[010203]

This thread has become an absolute doozy.

 

[RedV3x]

The notion of using any venue for that many codes is silly to begin with.

OK, the West Australian government is silly for making as much return as possible on it's investment.

At any rate I’m not hell bent on anything.

Really ?
You seem hell bent on down-playing historical consequences.
You seem hell bent on down-playing the use of mult-sport stadiums.
You seem hell bent on rambling on about some irrelevant stadium.

If people want something badly enough

"But it's only sport" you said.
Which is it ?

You are saying that it was unfair 120 years ago for one code to not be given its own enclosed grounds.

NO.
I am saying that it was a lot more than just "unfair" 120 years ago for one code to be banned from enclosed grounds
and to be continued to be banned from enclosed grounds for a very long time.
I am saying that it was a lot more than just "unfair" that schools were directed not to allow Australian Football in their grounds.
I am saying that it was a lot more than just "unfair" that the NSWRL dominated SCG Trust built a stadium so close to the SCG as to purposely inconvenience attending Sydney swans games.
I am saying that it was a lot more than just "unfair" that the NSWRL dominated SCG Trust charged the Sydney Swans $500.000 for 11 games at the SCG whilst charging the NSWRL $100,000 for a whole season plus finals.
I am saying that it was a lot more than just "unfair" that Australian Football is affected directly and indirectly by the legacy of unjust decisions.

Well using that logic wouldn’t it be unfair for another code all these years later to suffer the same treatment?

What did you have in mind ?

 

[PhatBoy]

OK, the West Australian government is silly for making as much return as possible on it's investment.



Really ?
You seem hell bent on down-playing historical consequences.
You seem hell bent on down-playing the use of mult-sport stadiums.
You seem hell bent on rambling on about some irrelevant stadium.



"But it's only sport" you said.
Which is it ?



NO.
I am saying that it was a lot more than just "unfair" 120 years ago for one code to be banned from enclosed grounds
and to be continued to be banned from enclosed grounds for a very long time.
I am saying that it was a lot more than just "unfair" that schools were directed not to allow Australian Football in their grounds.
I am saying that it was a lot more than just "unfair" that the NSWRL dominated SCG Trust built a stadium so close to the SCG as to purposely inconvenience attending Sydney swans games.
I am saying that it was a lot more than just "unfair" that the NSWRL dominated SCG Trust charged the Sydney Swans $500.000 for 11 games at the SCG whilst charging the NSWRL $100,000 for a whole season plus finals.
I am saying that it was a lot more than just "unfair" that Australian Football is affected directly and indirectly by the legacy of unjust decisions.




What did you have in mind ?

I was assuming you were referring to the stadia that were being built recently for rectangular codes.

Yes it is only sport. So I’m not sure why you’re making out like it’s a tragedy. Which you still are. Wanting something badly enough to work hard for it, and making out like it’s a tragedy that a code of football didn’t take off in a particular city aren’t both level on the scale of seriousness as far as I’m concerned.

I wouldn’t see someone working really hard to drum up support for AFL in a new territory and think ‘geez it’s only sport.’ I would be encouraged and think good on you mate.

If it failed and they made out like it was the end of the world, then I would have that exact thought. It’s only sport.


What has proximity got to do with it?

The Moore Park precinct was the obvious place to build a purpose built footy stadium all the way along. It’s one of the most heavily built up areas in the nation, you want to build a new stadium and here is a precinct right in the middle of it that actually has the space you’re looking for? Why wouldn’t you build it there?

Not every move ever made by every figure in the sport of rugby league has been made with an eye to pissing off or thwarting other codes. I recognise some of their business de visions particularly in more recent times are made that way but the idea that all of them are, is paranoia in the extreme.

 

[RedV3x]

So I’m not sure why you’re making out like it’s a tragedy.

Really ?
Well IMO it is indeed a tragedy that Australian Football didn't reach it's full potential in Australia and around the world
and Australia did not receive the full economic benefits from this.
You obviously disagree so move on.

The Moore Park precinct was the obvious place to build a purpose built footy stadium all the way along.

In you opinion.
The congestion is well documented.

 

[Bjo187]

OK, the West Australian government is silly for making as much return as possible on it's investment.



Really ?
You seem hell bent on down-playing historical consequences.
You seem hell bent on down-playing the use of mult-sport stadiums.
You seem hell bent on rambling on about some irrelevant stadium.



"But it's only sport" you said.
Which is it ?



NO.
I am saying that it was a lot more than just "unfair" 120 years ago for one code to be banned from enclosed grounds
and to be continued to be banned from enclosed grounds for a very long time.
I am saying that it was a lot more than just "unfair" that schools were directed not to allow Australian Football in their grounds.
I am saying that it was a lot more than just "unfair" that the NSWRL dominated SCG Trust built a stadium so close to the SCG as to purposely inconvenience attending Sydney swans games.
I am saying that it was a lot more than just "unfair" that the NSWRL dominated SCG Trust charged the Sydney Swans $500.000 for 11 games at the SCG whilst charging the NSWRL $100,000 for a whole season plus finals.
I am saying that it was a lot more than just "unfair" that Australian Football is affected directly and indirectly by the legacy of unjust decisions.




What did you have in mind ?

I think the argument has been done to death and phatboy is entering into trolling territory now. He already said he doesn't want footy to be the biggest code in nsw and qld, which is fine, but it generates these ridiculous arguments that footy got a fair go (despite some scumbags voting against it up there) and the good people of nsw just simply chose the other sports outta love.

Not only all you mentioned above, but the absolute and intentional blackout of any Australian football coverage in Sydney when tv came out in the 50s and radio and newspapers gave it near zero chance to survive. It's amazing it did at all actually. Back when these sports were growing, you basically had your state news and that was it, they fed you what they wanted and people had no other options or choice in the matter.

WW1 damaged Australian football significantly in nsw and qld, coz inter colonial games, states being more cut off from each other, with full focus on the war effort didn't help. In addition to all the sabotaging of the code from the rugby's you mentioned above. Something that continues now in tree Sydney media, but the advantage the game has got now is the internet, so people can over time choose what they prefer, not what old geezers like Roy Masters and Phil Gould tell people they need to like.

 

[PhatBoy]

I think the argument has been done to death and phatboy is entering into trolling territory now. He already said he doesn't want footy to be the biggest code in nsw and qld, which is fine, but it generates these ridiculous arguments that footy got a fair go (despite some scumbags voting against it up there) and the good people of nsw just simply chose the other sports outta love.

Not only all you mentioned above, but the absolute and intentional blackout of any Australian football coverage in Sydney when tv came out in the 50s and radio and newspapers gave it near zero chance to survive. It's amazing it did at all actually. Back when these sports were growing, you basically had your state news and that was it, they fed you what they wanted.


WW1 damaged Australian football significantly in nsw and qld, coz inter colonial games, states being more cut off from each other, with full focus on the war effort didn't help. In addition to all the sabotaging of the code from the rugby's you mentioned above. Something that continues now to a smaller degree, the advantage the game has got now is the internet, so people can over time choose what they prefer, not what old geezers like Roy Masters and Phil Gould tell people they need to like.

How is it trolling mate? F**ken hell. The other discussion/argument/whatever you want to call it, that’s fine, but leave the trolling stuff out of it. And I stand by what I said. I don’t see anything wrong with having that viewpoint as a follower of both codes. To put it as simply as possible I would never want league for example to take over the Caribbean. Why? Because cricket is, not by a lot, the dominant sport there and I like it that way as a cricket fan and a fan of the West Indies. Cricket needs that dynamic. It doesn’t lessen my love of league.

What I just won’t be able to get is the idea that it’s some sort of great tragedy that in what is a fairly rich sporting tapestry, a couple of states didn’t end up falling into line with some of the others and the reasons for that? I’m not not going to start caring about.

 

[RedV3x]

How is it trolling mate?

By continually repeating the following

What I just won’t be able to get is the idea that it’s some sort of great tragedy

And completely ignoring the articulated responses..

 

[RedV3x]

I would never want league for example to take over the Caribbean.

Maybe you could start your own thread on your irrelevant thoughts.

 

[PhatBoy]

Maybe you could start your own thread on your irrelevant thoughts.

The history of rugby union’s interaction with AFL in Sydney in the 1800s in NSW seems incredibly relevant to AFL overtaking NRL in Queensland in the 2020s

 

[PhatBoy]

By continually repeating the following



And completely ignoring the articulated responses..

I haven’t ignored anything.

 

[RedV3x]

The history of rugby union’s interaction with AFL in Sydney in the 1800s in NSW seems incredibly relevant to AFL overtaking NRL in Queensland in the 2020s

I'm glad you agree.
Now we can move on