Wallaby tests in 2004

[Iverson]

So far I have heard:

Perth - will get the Springbok game for the 3Ns
Brisbane - will get the game against England
Adelaide - a possible game against a Pacific Barbarians side
Melbourne - will get a games against Scotland
Sydney - will get the All Black game plus one against Scotland

Thats a pretty good spread across the country, and it should be a pretty good year.

 

[robbieando]

Originally posted by Iverson
Melbourne - will get a games against Scotland

I'll be getting my kilt ready

I've waited for ever for this

 

[Clayton]

Sounds like it's gonna be a big year, I've heard the ARU aren't to happy about the scheduling of the England test though they were pulling for it to be played in Sydney their estimated to lose 5mil over that.

 

[littleduck]

Originally posted by Iverson
So far I have heard:

Perth - will get the Springbok game for the 3Ns
Brisbane - will get the game against England
Adelaide - a possible game against a Pacific Barbarians side
Melbourne - will get a games against Scotland
Sydney - will get the All Black game plus one against Scotland

Thats a pretty good spread across the country, and it should be a pretty good year.

terrific rugby calendar in 2004.

NSW gets all of 6 'Tahs matches and 2 Wallabies tests - and they think that constitutes a full season of rugby for nsw rugby lovers? and dont dare mention local club rugby, no1 knows about it, no1 cares.

QLD gets all of 6 Reds matches and 1 Wallaby Test - and they think that constitutes a full season of rugby for qld rugby lovers? your kidding me. and dont dare mention local club rugby, no1 knows about it, no1 cares.

Adelaide gets all of 1 test against a combined Pacific Islands team, a non-test playing nation - and they think that will satisfy the interests of south aussies who dont mind rugby? possibly, bcoz its better than the usual nothing.

VIC gets 1 Wallaby test, likely to be against Scotland - hardly the most meaningful test going around, and hardly likely to capitalise on vics interest (if there was any) in rugby from the world cup.

WA gets 1 Wallaby test - and that match constitutes the entire rugby season in perth. great matchup tho, wallabies boks!

Conclusion
- rugby is an event style sport with high class fixtures every so often
- rugby has no week in week out tribal support.
- rugby has fu ck all chance of achieving their state goal of knocknig off RL in NSW and QLD and becoming a clear #2 in the aussie rules states.

 

[Mint Condition]

Cricket's arguably Australia's number 1 or number 2 sport, as far as general interest of the public is concerned anyway, and its season and schedueling is similar.

Everyone remembers the big events anyway. League and AFL have smaller events leading up to the big ones, while Union and Cricket just basically have the big ones. And what do people remember? The big ones.

 

[Iverson]

I have no problem with the notion that the games are 'events'.

It would be great if the Super12 lasted twice as long, but the round robin style really makes the competition more interesting and exciting.

The NFL is based on an 'event' notion, thats also part of the reason why so many in America thing its so good.

 

[^Eagle^]

Re: Re: Wallaby tests in 2004

Originally posted by littleduck
knocknig off RL in QLD

Um, wasn't RU the #1 sport in QLD for a while and now AFL and RU are considered equal there(according 2 akermanis AFL is #1) with League tagging behind at a clear #3

How i see it at the moment:
Vic: AFL, RU, RL
SA: AFL, RU
WA: AFL, RU
NT: ?AFL?
Tas: AFL, ?RU?
NSW/ACT: RL, RU, AFL
Qld: AFL/RU, RL

 

[Fire Storm]

Eagle? Your very funny. You should be a comedian.

 

[LebaneseForces]

Re: Re: Re: Wallaby tests in 2004

Originally posted by ^Eagle^

Qld: AFL/RU, RL

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

[Hicham]

Um, wasn't RU the #1 sport in QLD for a while and now AFL and RU are considered equal there(according 2 akermanis AFL is #1) with League tagging behind at a clear #3

Sensational post mate. Super stuff. Gee-up or not, that one's a ripper.

Cheers,

Hicham.

 

[Hicham]

Um, wasn't RU the #1 sport in QLD for a while and now AFL and RU are considered equal there(according 2 akermanis AFL is #1) with League tagging behind at a clear #3

Yes, the same as saying....

NSW: (*Cricket) League, Others

Qld: (*Cricket) League, Others

WA: (*Cricket) Australian Rules, Others

SA: (*Cricket) Australian Rules, Others

Vic: (*Cricket) League/Union, Athletics, Squash, Lawn Bowls, Croquet, La Cross, Basketball, Draughts, 'Ere we go 'ere we go-ball, Chess, Darts, Backyard Cricket, Gumboot throwing, Envolope opening, Bobsledding, Tennis, Oz Tag, Hurling, Gymnastics, Bocca, Super G Slalom, Australian Rules (get the point now? Might wanna go rethink)

{ (*) Up for argument depending opinion}

Cheers,

Hicham

 

[littleduck]

to answer an obvious tongue in cheek post seriously.

RU provides 7 matches in qld per year --> 6 x Reds, 1 x Wallabies --> PLUS Reds Finals.

only 1 gets FTA coverage, the wallabies.

RL provides 27/28 matches in qld per year --> 13 x Broncos, 13 x Cowboys, 1 or 2 x Maroons --> PLUS Broncos/Cowboys Finals.

every single broncos match always gets FTA coverage, i assume the cowboys also get local FTA coverage.

cf AFL provides 12 matches --> 12 x Lions --> PLUS Finals.

recently, every single match gets FTA coverage.

can RU even claim to be ahead of AFL in qld? arguaby not. it must have been a sad day for RU ppl when a foreign sport like AFL can blow into town and become bigger than you.

 

[Hicham]

PLUS Broncos/Cowboys Finals.

Sadly Finals dont apply to the Cowboys as yet as they do for the Broncos. Hopefully they'll get there in 04.

every single broncos match always gets FTA coverage, i assume the cowboys also get local FTA coverage.

If the Broncos/Cowboys matches are not a sheduled Ch 9 Telecast in Sydney, then Qld viewers get the Brisbane/Nth Qld games instead. Same applies with with the Knights. If its not a sheduled Sunday game they usually show it live, then the 4pm coverage. Newcastle games at any other time mostly get shown at 8:30 Sat nights.

Cheers.

 

[Mint Condition]

Originally posted by littleduck
to answer an obvious tongue in cheek post seriously.

RU provides 7 matches in qld per year --> 6 x Reds, 1 x Wallabies --> PLUS Reds Finals.

only 1 gets FTA coverage, the wallabies.

RL provides 27/28 matches in qld per year --> 13 x Broncos, 13 x Cowboys, 1 or 2 x Maroons --> PLUS Broncos/Cowboys Finals.

every single broncos match always gets FTA coverage, i assume the cowboys also get local FTA coverage.

cf AFL provides 12 matches --> 12 x Lions --> PLUS Finals.

recently, every single match gets FTA coverage.

can RU even claim to be ahead of AFL in qld? arguaby not. it must have been a sad day for RU ppl when a foreign sport like AFL can blow into town and become bigger than you.

Did a rugby union player drop you on your head as a baby or something?


Geez, there was a point in time when Rugby Union wasn't played in QLD at all...20 years earlier it was easily the number 1 sport (during WWI Rugby Union basically stopped, encouraging its players etc to fight, while the league continued running). To be at the point where it is now is an excellent accomplishment. AFL in some seasons has probably been more popular than league in QLD because of the Lions success - depends which figures you use...last year Rugby Union could be argued to have been the most popular sport in QLD depending on what figures you use.

Lies, damn lies and statistics.

 

[Kapow!!!]

Re: Re: Re: Wallaby tests in 2004

Originally posted by ^Eagle^
Qld: AFL/RU, RL

Obviously you've never set foot in Queensland!

 

[littleduck]

Originally posted by Mint Condition
Geez, there was a point in time when Rugby Union wasn't played in QLD at all...20 years earlier it was easily the number 1 sport (during WWI Rugby Union basically stopped, encouraging its players etc to fight, while the league continued running). To be at the point where it is now is an excellent accomplishment.

well this nonsense came out of left field. trying to paint RU as a victim.

AFL in some seasons has probably been more popular than league in QLD because of the Lions success - depends which figures you use...last year Rugby Union could be argued to have been the most popular sport in QLD depending on what figures you use.

the reality is that no1 can doubt the growth of AFL in qld in recent years as a result of the lions onfield success. however AFL has never ever remotely challenged RL for #1 status in Qld. i dont care what figures you use, theyll lead to the same conclusion.

the reality also is that RU is growing around the country, especially as a result of increased professionalism in the mid 90s and the recent world cup. and RU been #1 anywhere for almost 100 years.

the reality is that all 3 major football codes are growing and will continue to prosper and live in harmony for the indefinite future.

Lies, damn lies and statistics.

exactly.

 

[Mint Condition]

Originally posted by littleduck
well this nonsense came out of left field. trying to paint RU as a victim.

I posted 100% truth. You obviously just don't know what you don't know. Don't worry, all arrogant people have the same problem.

It's a little hipocritical to say that I'm trying to paint RU as a victim when for so long union fans have to put up with things like 'Rugby Union destroyed league in France,' 'Rugby Union is evil,' 'Rugby Union controls the sports media,' etc etc. What is it next? 'Rugby Union made the world 7's lose money?'

I agree with the rest of your post, but I could still find stats that are heavily biased that would in a sense 'prove' that in particular seasons AFL has been more popular than league in QLD by simply saying the Lions have been more popular than the Broncos.

Of course all the codes are growing, and will continue to prosper...I'm just personally starting to get sick of these pointless my dicks bigger than your **** arguments. It's always an argument where there are several different angles to come from and each angle will come up with a new code as being the most popular. But really, who cares?

 

[Aucklander]

Originally posted by Mint Condition


It's always an argument where there are several different angles to come from and each angle will come up with a new code as being the most popular. But really, who cares?

Lots of people. That's why we have these passionate debates.

 

[Mint Condition]

Originally posted by AuckMel
Lots of people. That's why we have these passionate debates.

IMO the best cross code debates are always the ones when you argue the actual sports, not the popularity of the sports. Everyone knows deep down how popular their sports are in comparison, so the arguments are crap. Also, I find the future of the codes arguments interesting, but really, the arguments on current popularity are just dull.

 

[littleduck]

Originally posted by Mint Condition
... I could still find stats that are heavily biased that would in a sense 'prove' that in particular seasons AFL has been more popular than league in QLD by simply saying the Lions have been more popular than the Broncos.

the reality is RL still rules Qld and the Broncos are the most popular football team. i dont care what stats you use, you cannot possibly 'prove' that in any given season AFL has been more popular than RL in QLD.

media interest? the broncos, cowboys and maroons miles ahead of the column inches given to the lions. CourierMail coverage of the NRL in general by far exceeds CM coverage of AFL in general. therefore the only logical unbiased conclusion is that AFL doesnt remotely challenge RL for media interest in qld. the best you can argue from an AFL POV is that media interest in the lions and AFL is growing enormously in recent years as a result of the lions threepeat. however, media coverage of the lions does not get anywhere near the level of coverage for the broncos.

crowds? broncos and cowboys crowds constitute NRL attendances in qld, whereas the lions crowds constitute AFL attendances. therefore the only logicial unbiased conclusion is that AFL doesnt remotely challenge NRL crowds in qld. the best you can argue from an AFL POV is that lions crowds have exceeded broncos crowds by a few thousand in brisbane in recent years.

tv ratings?...
participation?...
juniors?...

.. need i go on mate? there is no stat that shows AFL is ahead of RL in qld. however, nearly all stats show interest in AFL is increasingly rapidly.

 

[littleduck]

Originally posted by Mint Condition
I posted 100% truth. You obviously just don't know what you don't know. Don't worry, all arrogant people have the same problem.

oh really. i always thought arrogant ppl thought they knew the "100% truth".

It's a little hipocritical to say that I'm trying to paint RU as a victim when for so long union fans have to put up with things like 'Rugby Union destroyed league in France,' 'Rugby Union is evil,' 'Rugby Union controls the sports media,' etc etc. What is it next? 'Rugby Union made the world 7's lose money?'

the reality is all codes have there successes and failures thruout their history, including union and league and rules and all others. Re France: well RU did destroy RL. as for the other quotes there well not worth responding to.

I agree with the rest of your post...

cheers.

Of course all the codes are growing, and will continue to prosper...I'm just personally starting to get sick of these pointless my dicks bigger than your **** arguments. It's always an argument where there are several different angles to come from and each angle will come up with a new code as being the most popular. But really, who cares?

yeah, who cares. the reality is RL is still undisputed king in QLD and NSW, and AR in VIC SA WA TAS. the only variable is the respective market share of each codes within those states. but the traditional king of each state is under challenge nowhere.

about the 'angle' argument. of course you can always find narrow arguments to suit your argument about which code is more popular where. but overall, nothing changes does it.

i dont mind ppl being biased and quoting selective figures, thats great, i only object and reply when they draw the wrong conclusions from those figures.

 

[Mint Condition]

Originally posted by littleduck
oh really. i always thought arrogant ppl thought they knew the "100% truth".

I never said I wasn't arrogant. But I know in this instance that I'm right at the same time.

Originally posted by littleduck
the reality is all codes have there successes and failures thruout their history, including union and league and rules and all others. Re France: well RU did destroy RL. as for the other quotes there well not worth responding to.

Oh it did did it? And how do you know that? Did someone on a message board tell you this? well they must be right eh? I'm a rugby union fan, does that make me somehow part of this evil entity called 'rugby union' that somehow uses great influence to destroy other sports? And why, if Rugby Union supposedly crippled rugby league 50 years ago, is it still a nothing sport in france? Surely it should be well past union now after its hiccup. After all I hear from rugby league fans on message boards that rugby league was surging in France with popularity and that everyone who saw it much preferred it to rugby union. Surely after the war finished rugby league could have just swept right through again but the fact is RL is less popular in France now than it was immediately after world war 2. The rugby league lossed a lot of its assets because an evil man didn't like the idea of professional sports, and a handful of French rugby union administrators 50 years ago, who I as a 'Rugby Union' fan (and all like me) must quite obviously relate to, took advantage of that. Destroyed by rugby union...pfft, absolute tripe, and there was an excellent debate on this forum a while ago on the exact subject.

 

[littleduck]

Originally posted by Mint Condition
I never said I wasn't arrogant. But I know in this instance that I'm right at the same time.

well you said i was..

Oh it did did it? And how do you know that? Did someone on a message board tell you this? well they must be right eh?

do you make a habit of talking down to ppl? smarta ss.

I'm a rugby union fan, does that make me somehow part of this evil entity called 'rugby union' that somehow uses great influence to destroy other sports?

im a rugby union fan too mate. RU doesnt go around destroying other sports. some unfortunate things happened in france many years ago to the detriment of league, but so be it.

And why, if Rugby Union supposedly crippled rugby league 50 years ago, is it still a nothing sport in france? Surely it should be well past union now after its hiccup.

no idea mate. perhaps its bcoz RL administrators are perpetual incompetents.

After all I hear from rugby league fans on message boards that rugby league was surging in France with popularity and that everyone who saw it much preferred it to rugby union.

i wouldnt know mate. i understand that RL was once going strong in france, they even won a RL world cup (i think), and circumstances conspired against french RL. its all history now, IMO not worth crying over lost opportunities.

Surely after the war finished rugby league could have just swept right through again but the fact is RL is less popular in France now than it was immediately after world war 2. The rugby league lossed a lot of its assets because an evil man didn't like the idea of professional sports, and a handful of French rugby union administrators 50 years ago, who I as a 'Rugby Union' fan (and all like me) must quite obviously relate to, took advantage of that.

if RU had a hand to play in RLs demise in france then so be it, all is fair in love and war. its normal to take advantage of opportunities to defeat your competitors.

Destroyed by rugby union...pfft, absolute tripe, and there was an excellent debate on this forum a while ago on the exact subject.

a debate i wouldnt enter, bcoz its not a big deal to me. if RU had a hand to play, so be it.

in fact, i like both codes, but prefer league.

 

[Mint Condition]

Originally posted by littleduck
well you said i was..

Because you are. Surely you must know this about yourself?

Originally posted by littleduck
do you make a habit of talking down to ppl? smarta ss.

Mate, don't throw stones if you live in a glass house. The fact that you replied, bit by bit to my mostly hypothetical rant proves that you yourself are a smartass.

I won't keep up with this because it's obvious you don't know much about, or care too much about the France thing (and I don't either - my point is that no one on these or any other message boards knows much about it, and that the way in which things are written are extremely exaggerated and biased, for example the line 'Rugby Union destroyed Rugby League in France to this day' - it's all crap)

BTW, France to my knowledge never won a WC in league. They hosted one though - the first one I think.

Originally posted by littleduck
in fact, i like both codes, but prefer league.

Yeah, it's obvious. Don't worry too much about it though...everyone has their faults

 

[littleduck]

Originally posted by Mint Condition
Because you are. Surely you must know this about yourself?

actually, i often point out spin from both sides of the fence, and try to come up with a true state of affairs for all codes (matters not which code/s i prefer). i think thats pretty fair and balanced. being a league fan mostly, its a greater challenge to discuss things on a non-league forum. the alternative is to post amongst like-minded ppl who believe each others b/s without question (eg. as many on BF do).

Mate ... I won't keep up with this because it's obvious you don't know much about, or care too much about the France thing (and I don't either - my point is that no one on these or any other message boards knows much about it, and that the way in which things are written are extremely exaggerated and biased, for example the line 'Rugby Union destroyed Rugby League in France to this day' - it's all crap)

couldnt agree more. its value is only historical anyway.