Would AFLW be better served if not every game was televised?

[enzso]

Part of the problem AFLW faces is that it's too often a poor product on television. Games with poor skills held in venues not built for TV cameras and produced by second-rate production crews.

Imagine if there were just one or two "blockbuster" AFLW games each round that were televised live and held in a venue suited to television? The remaining games could be filmed with one camera for a highlights package, much like VFL in the 80s. Only the best teams would be showcased live, with the developing teams protected from the limelight and given the time and space to improve.

Just because every game CAN be shown live, doesn't mean it should. AFLW is getting better every year, but dodgy camera work on lopsided games featuring teams in their first year or two of development does it no favours.

 

[AussieNick1999]

For a national competition where fans will frequently be unable to attend games in person it'd be rediculous not to have every game be available to watch from home. Not to mention these teams are going to have a harder time drawing attention if their games aren't being covered live. This isn't the 80s, the way people engage with entertainment and media has changed and live coverage of sport via TV broadcasts or streaming is a basic element of top-level sport these days. A highlights package uploaded to Youtube or show on Fox Footy after the game ends is going to draw sweet f***-all in terms of viewers.

Personally, the main issue I have with live coverage of the AFLW is the frequent production errors; in the season opener there were frequent glitches with the broadcast scoreboard and it would frequently swap between Fox's and Channel 7's graphics or be absent entirely. In a Brisbane game last week the time clock wasn't working for an entire quarter. I don't work in the media so I don't know the exact causes of these issues, but my guess would be it's more down to the quality and skill of the broadcast teams themselves rather than any issue with the venues.

And as we've seen tonight with the Bulldogs' performance, even the worst teams can show signs of life at times. The game is still in a growth state where the talent pool is still catching up to the expanded competition (and there's an argument to be made that it's expanded too fast) and there's a significant gulf between the best and worst players. But that'll improve with time. Having started following local women's footy in the past two years, there are some absolute guns coming up through the grassroots game and in the next few years I think we'll start to see that quality rise toward the AFLW.

But less coverage around the league isn't going to help with viewership. Live coverage is important for drawing in viewers and sponsors, and for giving the AFL a commercial reason to invest more money and resources into the women's game.

 

[jatz14]

Part of the problem AFLW faces is that it's too often a poor product on television. Games with poor skills held in venues not built for TV cameras and produced by second-rate production crews.

Imagine if there were just one or two "blockbuster" AFLW games each round that were televised live and held in a venue suited to television? The remaining games could be filmed with one camera for a highlights package, much like VFL in the 80s. Only the best teams would be showcased live, with the developing teams protected from the limelight and given the time and space to improve.

Just because every game CAN be shown live, doesn't mean it should. AFLW is getting better every year, but dodgy camera work on lopsided games featuring teams in their first year or two of development does it no favours.

Ammos and country footy is being live streamed.

And some of the metrics the AFL has set for the AFLW expansion is based on viewers.

I do understand that some of the games arent great, but most fans and potential fans understand where its doming from. I know people that pour absolute scorn on the AFLW for its quality, but realistically, these people were always going to pour scorn on it, it wouldn't particularly matter if the worst games weren't broadcast.

So, put the games out for those that want to watch, ignore the haters, most of them will hate regardless.

 

[AussieNick1999]

Ammos and country footy is being live streamed.

And some of the metrics the AFL has set for the AFLW expansion is based on viewers.

I do understand that some of the games arent great, but most fans and potential fans understand where its doming from. I know people that pour absolute scorn on the AFLW for its quality, but realistically, these people were always going to pour scorn on it, it wouldn't particularly matter if the worst games weren't broadcast.

So, put the games out for those that want to watch, ignore the haters, most of them will hate regardless.

In my experience, a lot of the people who still mock the AFLW for its skill level don't seem to have watched a game since 2017, some of them are outright sexist. Can't do much about people who are wilfully ignorant and refuse to give it a chance.

And you're right about viewership being an important metric to the AFL. At the end of the day they're a business out to make money, and they're not going to invest resources into women's footy unless they see the AFLW pulling high numbers in terms of attendance and viewership. Less games being shown means less viewers.

 

[Dory_77]

Picking which games will and won't be 'blockbusters' is also fraught. Melb v North would've looked a good game based on last year's ladder but was a blowout. Hawks in men's and women's were bottom 4 last year, but have been among the best to watch this season in each league.

Silly to limit exposure for developing teams and a developing comp as a whole.

 

[Fadge]

In my experience, a lot of the people who still mock the AFLW for its skill level don't seem to have watched a game since 2017, some of them are outright sexist. Can't do much about people who are wilfully ignorant and refuse to give it a chance.

You may be right.

But the majority are people who understand and watch a lot of footy at a lot of levels, and assess the AFLW level to be many tiers below most levels of most of the male local and under-age competitions.

 

[AussieNick1999]

You may be right.

But the majority are people who understand and watch a lot of footy at a lot of levels, and assess the AFLW level to be many tiers below most levels of most of the male local and under-age competitions.

And I get where those people are coming from. Compare games of men's and women's footy at any level and the two won't look the same.

Personally, I just think it's a flawed way of looking at women's footy. I know it's probably difficult for anyone who's used to watching and analysing top level footy, but I think it's better to judge the AFLW (and women's footy in general) on its own rather than comparing it to the men's. I think actively following the AFLW (to the point of watching neutral games) as well as a local/state league women's team helps since you end up watching a lot of games and the way you judge standards shifts.

I watch AFLW games this year and only notice the improvements in skill compared to last year. I think the more you watch women's footy, the easier it gets to stop comparing it to the men's game. The hardest part is getting people to give it a chance in the first place.

 

[Fadge]

And I get where those people are coming from. Compare games of men's and women's footy at any level and the two won't look the same.

Personally, I just think it's a flawed way of looking at women's footy. I know it's probably difficult for anyone who's used to watching and analysing top level footy, but I think it's better to judge the AFLW (and women's footy in general) on its own rather than comparing it to the men's. I think actively following the AFLW (to the point of watching neutral games) as well as a local/state league women's team helps since you end up watching a lot of games and the way you judge standards shifts.

I watch AFLW games this year and only notice the improvements in skill compared to last year. I think the more you watch women's footy, the easier it gets to stop comparing it to the men's game. The hardest part is getting people to give it a chance in the first place.

That's an unrealistic expectation.

The market for AFLW is football lovers. Of course people who watch different levels of football will either consciously or subconsciously compare those different levels.

And whilst the standard of the highest level of women's football continues to be tiers below an average local under 17 team, how can anyone possibly expect support for and interest in AFLW to flourish?

 

[Cdog71]

That's an unrealistic expectation.

The market for AFLW is football lovers. Of course people who watch different levels of football will either consciously or subconsciously compare those different levels.

And whilst the standard of the highest level of women's football continues to be tiers below an average local under 17 team, how can anyone possibly expect support for and interest in AFLW to flourish?

Here you are spouting absolutes.
Again from the premise, your view is the most important opinion.
You really need to get out of your house mate and give the social media a spell.

 

[Fadge]

Here you are spouting absolutes.
Again from the premise, your view is the most important opinion.
You really need to get out of your house mate and give the social media a spell.

Do you disagree with what I posted?

 

[Cdog71]

Do you disagree with what I posted?

Which point?
Only the existing football watchers will watch the AFLW?

You comparing the physical attributes of 17 year old males with women and that because women aren’t capable to compete against them that’s a valid point in dismissing the AFLW?
So ibso facto the AFLW can’t expect support?

Everything you said is drivel.

Are you going to tell me to continue to support a poor product.

Sh.t comment

 

[Fadge]

Which point?
Only the existing football watchers will watch the AFLW?

No. Because I didn't make that point.

My question was - who is going to watch AFLW whilst is continues to be a mediocre product?

I just looked at the historical crowd figures, and the trend does not look terribly positive.

Average crowds in the formative years were in the vicinity of 5000 to 6000. Novelty factor and free entry?

This year's average crowd figures now under 3000.

You comparing the physical attributes of 17 year old males with women and that because women aren’t capable to compete against them that’s a valid point in dismissing the AFLW?
So ibso facto the AFLW can’t expect support?

You're the one who has mentioned 'physical attributes'.

I used the term 'product'.

So instead of twisting my words, why don't you respond to my earlier post?

'How do you expect support for and interest in AFLW to flourish when the standard is tiers below a local under 17 team?'

 

[Teen Wolf]

Come on to a women's football forum and make any variation of the "u17 boys" argument. You instantly give yourself away as a knob, a creep, somebody who doesn't know shit about sport, and the biggest unco dud on your high school team 50 years ago.

Btw, for the 3rd season in a row, AFLW crowds are up on the same time as the previous year (in both aggregate and average)... meaning revenue is way up, given the ticket price increase. Ha ha.

 

[Cdog71]

The market for AFLW is football lovers.

Which point?
Only the existing football watchers will watch the AFLW?

No. Because I didn't make that point.

Rubbish.

My question was - who is going to watch AFLW whilst is continues to be a mediocre product?

And whilst the standard of the highest level of women's football continues to be tiers below an average local under 17 team, how can anyone possibly expect support for and interest in AFLW to flourish?

Spouting absolutes based on the comparison to 17 yr old males.
A good male 17 yr old sprinter is thereabouts 11 sec. Not an unusual athlete a good athlete.
For women to qualify for the Olympics, the time in most countries is 11.07 sec. An unusual athlete.
Sport is an athletic pursuit and to be surprised that the athletic development of adolescent boys is greater than that of a mature female is ignorant. The more athletically conditioned and developed you are the more you can train at high level and therefore the more likelihood of advancing all facets of physical preformance. Single skills, physical attributes, technical and tactical skills from learned experience.

I’m involved in junior footy and I can see the impact of aflw at grassroots with the money coming into grassroots football.
Can you?

Aflw is 8 years in
I can see the impact of Academy’s and the development of the pathway for all footballers with a more “Preform now” focus on young athletes.
Can you?

I support Aussie Rules Football.
Do you?

Or is it only what pleases you that is important?

Get outve your house mate and give the social media a spell.

 

[Fadge]

Come on to a women's football forum and make any variation of the "u17 boys" argument. You instantly give yourself away as a knob, a creep, somebody who doesn't know shit about sport, and the biggest unco dud on your high school team 50 years ago.

Btw, for the 3rd season in a row, AFLW crowds are up on the same time as the previous year (in both aggregate and average)... meaning revenue is way up, given the ticket price increase. Ha ha.

Tell me more about all this revenue AFLW is generating...

 

[Walshawk]

Saturday double headers at Marvel is the answer. Schedule two games 5.05 (7 mate) and 7.15pm (7). Put the one that promises to be of a higher standard on 7. Strong teams only. Games in the suburbs are averaging 2k so two games with big clubs playing the opening games and top 4 teams playing 7pm should generate crowds of 8k - 10k in a familiar, central venue. Put the all opposite the camera side, lower level only.

 

[Fadge]

I’m involved in junior footy and I can see the impact of aflw at grassroots with the money coming into grassroots football.
Can you?

I have also been involved with junior footy for the past decade, though I fail to understand your point with this comment.

Are you suggesting more females are playing junior football as they see a pathway through to the AFLW, so therefore more registration fees, etc., more teams, bigger clubs, etc.?

The bottom line is that if more kids stay actively involved in sport for longer, it is a positive.

But it doesn't answer my question.

Aflw is 8 years in
I can see the impact of Academy’s and the development of the pathway for all footballers with a more “Preform now” focus on young athletes.
Can you?

I don't understand your point here.

Are you saying the introduction of AFLW has benefited all footballers (including males) with better talent pathways?

If so, no I don't see that being as a result of the introduction of AFLW.

I support Aussie Rules Football.
Do you?

Or is it only what pleases you that is important?

I do support Aussie Rules Football.

I watched approximately 60 non AFL level games this year.

However, with the people watching non-AFL level games, why are they watching them?

Would it be because they have kids or friends playing, or they know someone who have kids or family members play?

You get a crowd of about 100 people watching under-age football - primarily family members of the kids playing.

You get a crowd of a few hundred at local games of football - a mix of family members of the players, with local supporters.

You get somewhere between 2000 and 5000 at the local Grand Finals, depending on the level of the competition.

People only have so many hours in a week, and I'm still not seeing where the crowds will come from to watch AFLW. Because they're not.

 

[burge13]

Need to find a way to clear congestion a bit better. The mens game, to clear congestion you have guys kick 60m but when the women can only kick 30-35 it doesn't get the ball out of a pack of 20 people.

There are some deplorable skills. Often go 5+ minutes without a mark or even clean pick up but skills will get better as time goes on. It won't be quick but when current kids who watch women on TV can grow up to aspire to that, previously not possible, a whole new generation will be involved. Probably another 5-10 years

It will never get 'big' crowds, likely never be profitable, but as a watchable product it's got a fighting chance with time

 

[Cdog71]

If so, no I don't see that being as a result of the introduction of AFLW.

Then I don’t believe you’ve been part of community football for the last ten years.
The development of infrastructure, the expansion of Clubs and the focus expanding and developing the Talent pathway.

Your a waste of time Fadge. These arguments of yours they’re not new but they’re just as short sighted as they’ve ever been.

Just keep enjoying watching and defending a terrible product.

Go and pick another hill to die on Fadge.

Your a waste of time.

 

[jatz14]

And I get where those people are coming from. Compare games of men's and women's footy at any level and the two won't look the same.

Personally, I just think it's a flawed way of looking at women's footy. I know it's probably difficult for anyone who's used to watching and analysing top level footy, but I think it's better to judge the AFLW (and women's footy in general) on its own rather than comparing it to the men's. I think actively following the AFLW (to the point of watching neutral games) as well as a local/state league women's team helps since you end up watching a lot of games and the way you judge standards shifts.

I watch AFLW games this year and only notice the improvements in skill compared to last year. I think the more you watch women's footy, the easier it gets to stop comparing it to the men's game. The hardest part is getting people to give it a chance in the first place.

The entire point of comparing women's footy to men's footy is to denigrate it.

Like the people who scoff at someone suggesting the female 100m world recorder holder is fast, by immediately giving you male world record times.

So, it's a pointless debate.

I have never looked at a woman having a shot from 50 and falling short, and thought, a male player could have kicked that, therefore she cannot kick.

When I am referencing female footy, I only reference female footy. The women kicking it 50 are doing huge kicks, those who can kick 45 are big kicks, 40 is average, 35 sub par, 30 not really up to it at AFLW level. I just don't think about men kicking the footy when watching women kick it, it's completely irrelevant.

But plenty do. And they aren't going to change, They don't want to.

On SM-A346E using BigFooty.com mobile app