Administration - The AFL v NRL *Moderator Approved* - Rules in OP

[mxett]

So the NRL, adopts a FIFO approach, just like the AFL does. Its no different, and your kidding yourself if you believe otherwise. Literally the AFL claims to be national, but with no full time teams in the National capital, Tasmania, or the heaviest populated area outside the capitals? we FIFO into a state and both mainland terriotries - if you want you can that we FIFO into New Zealand now as well. The hypocrisy of the argument is astounding.

The AFL have a team in the 6 biggest cities in Australia, covering a population of 16m people. The only thing stopping them having a team in Canberra and Hobart is their populations wouldn't be able to support a team to the level that would be able to compete with the AFLs wealthy clubs

 

[The_Wookie]

The AFL have a team in the 6 biggest cities in Australia, covering a population of 16m people. The only thing stopping them having a team in Canberra and Hobart is their populations wouldn't be able to support a team to the level that would be able to compete with the AFLs wealthy clubs

that has nothing to do with the interpretation of the word national that is going on in this thread at the moment, and even then, its only a guess. If Tasmania cant support a team, why would they be the next cab off the rank? and if Tasmania can be the next cab off the rank, then why not newcastle as well? If the NRL can sustain the Raiders, their reserves (with a separate cap at that), and development, then the AFL could sustain a side there.

 

[Stewies Power]

The AFL have a team in the 6 biggest cities in Australia, covering a population of 16m people. The only thing stopping them having a team in Canberra and Hobart is their populations wouldn't be able to support a team to the level that would be able to compete with the AFLs wealthy clubs

This. Also, the AFL is the only football league in Australia to host premiership season matches in every capital city in Australia. It is clearly a more national league than the nrl, not that I think anyone is disputing this though.

 

[Aucklander]

I wonder if you blokes will be so boisterous when this starts up. No Adelaide side despite allegedly being stronger at the grass roots than Rugby league.

Link
ARU Board approves nine team National Rugby Championship to start in August 2014

Australian Rugby Union today announced nine teams will compete in the inaugural season of its new domestic Rugby competition, the National Rugby Championship, which will kick off in August this year.

The competition will include two teams from Queensland, four from New South Wales and one each from the Australian Capital Territory, Victoria and Western Australia, and as part of a deliberate strategy to re-engage with passionate Rugby supporters in regional Australia it will include teams representing Queensland Country and NSW Country.

At the end of the day if the N in National RL only upsets a few AFL fans, then big deal.

 

[Stewies Power]

I wonder if you blokes will be so boisterous when this starts up. No Adelaide side despite allegedly being stronger at the grass roots than Rugby league.

Link
ARU Board approves nine team National Rugby Championship to start in August 2014


At the end of the day if the N in National RL only upsets a few AFL fans, then big deal.

Union isn't strong in Adelaide with grass roots by any means, but it's still stronger than league is here. Says quite a bit about the state of RL, actually.

 

[fabulousphil]

Seems to me that unless you have a reasonable expat population ie melbourne for leagueies, or unless you have a junior comp, then there's almost no point expanding to areas with no history with any game. GWS will possibly work long term becauseboth juniors and expats give them something to build on. Nrl in Adelaide has almost no prospect of success. Don't know how many local nrl teams there are there, but it's hardly a sponge for qlder and Nsw people.

I would have to disagree with that, this is one of the main reasons why RL people tend to have a very big chip on the shoulder when the word (initials ) AFL is mentioned, they seem to have quite the defeatist attitude about their game

They can spew out words like zealots, missionaries etc etc, when talking about AF fans but the real fact of the matter is many people who follow the National game have no qualms about getting down and dirty and attempt to grow the game, no matter where they are, because they have confidence in what they follow, and it is not a new found confidence.

That positive attitude ( in general) has seen the game grow in the most un AFL places in the country, like the Darling Downs, Cairns, FNQ in general and even in Newcastle recently.

 

[fabulousphil]

I wonder if you blokes will be so boisterous when this starts up. No Adelaide side despite allegedly being stronger at the grass roots than Rugby league.

Link
ARU Board approves nine team National Rugby Championship to start in August 2014


At the end of the day if the N in National RL only upsets a few AFL fans, then big deal.

The toffs and elbow leather patch brigade at ARU central are obviously not looking at maps either.

 

[mxett]

that has nothing to do with the interpretation of the word national that is going on in this thread at the moment, and even then, its only a guess. If Tasmania cant support a team, why would they be the next cab off the rank? and if Tasmania can be the next cab off the rank, then why not newcastle as well? If the NRL can sustain the Raiders, their reserves (with a separate cap at that), and development, then the AFL could sustain a side there.

Of course it does. It geographically covers the West, South and East of Australia. It demographically covers 70% of the nations population and plays regular games for another 5%. The remaining population is mostly regional

Tasmania will struggle to host their own team because of their population spread

Newcastle? Thats like asking the NRL to expand to Geelong. The NRL manage to sustain clubs in smaller centres because the majority of their clubs arent much better off and their competition is in a weaker financial position overall. What choice do they have? They have limited options because RL isnt a popular sport in 4 Australian states, so they had to go regional within their own heartland states.

 

[Aucklander]

Union isn't strong in Adelaide with grass roots by any means, but it's still stronger than league is here. Says quite a bit about the state of RL, actually.

Yep. As I said, Adelaide is a waste of time and the NRL won't go there just to appease a few AFL fans who spend hours bagging everything about the game.

 

[The_Wookie]

Of course it does. It geographically covers the West, South and East of Australia. It demographically covers 70% of the nations population and plays regular games for another 5%. The remaining population is mostly regional

Tasmania will struggle to host their own team because of their population spread

Newcastle? Thats like asking the NRL to expand to Geelong. The NRL manage to sustain clubs in smaller centres because the majority of their clubs arent much better off and their competition is in a weaker financial position overall. What choice do they have? They have limited options because RL isnt a popular sport in 4 Australian states, so they had to go regional within their own heartland states.

And the AFL isnt popular with half the population, and that includes several of its largest media markets. When will you people understand this - The National part of the NRL is as relevant to the country as the Australia is to the AFL (or the National N in SANFL).

 

[mxett]

Yep. As I said, Adelaide is a waste of time and the NRL won't go there just to appease a few AFL fans who spend hours bagging everything about the game.

No, there are some good things about RL, like SOO, but being national in Australia isnt one of them

 

[mxett]

And the AFL isnt popular with half the population, and that includes several of its largest media markets. When will you people understand this - The National part of the NRL is as relevant to the country as the Australia is to the AFL (or the National N in SANFL).

Every key indicator points to the AFL being more popular outside its heartland than the NRL in its few expansion locations. Add to that the AFL have far more expansion teams and games. I'm not suggesting the AFL is popular across the nation, but it is certainly the most national of any football code, and given the locations of its clubs, deserves a national label

 

[AliceCat]

Of course it does. It geographically covers the West, South and East of Australia. It demographically covers 70% of the nations population and plays regular games for another 5%. The remaining population is mostly regional

Tasmania will struggle to host their own team because of their population spread

Newcastle? Thats like asking the NRL to expand to Geelong. The NRL manage to sustain clubs in smaller centres because the majority of their clubs arent much better off and their competition is in a weaker financial position overall. What choice do they have? They have limited options because RL isnt a popular sport in 4 Australian states, so they had to go regional within their own heartland states.

Agree that Newcastle would have rugby leagues strongest heartland area. That said theres a very strong local comp there. That said after WA3 and Tassie i have no doubt that Newcastle will be discussed as a serious possible expansion club along with a NthQLD team, say in 2040ish.

 

[Aucklander]

No, there are some good things about RL, like SOO, but being national in Australia isnt one of them

Rugby league is played across the nation therefore making it National.

 

[mxett]

Rugby league is played across the nation therefore making it National.

About as national as Aussie Rules is international

 

[Aucklander]

About as national as Aussie Rules is international

Are you denying the game is played across the nation?

 

[mxett]

Are you denying the game is played across the nation?

No more than Aussie rules is played in numerous nations around the globe

 

[fabulousphil]

Are you denying the game is played across the nation?

Bit like denying La X is played across the nation, a couple of kids in Sydney and QLD might sling a ball down at the park, but the National mens team has ATM 5 WA boys, 11 SA boys and 9 Vics ( no players from NSW or QLD ) in the team and is reflective of every National La X team we have. ( men, women and underage teams)

 

[Aucklander]

I'll take that as a yes then. Cheers boys.

 

[AliceCat]

And the AFL isnt popular with half the population, and that includes several of its largest media markets. When will you people understand this - The National part of the NRL is as relevant to the country as the Australia is to the AFL (or the National N in SANFL).

The AFL is far and ahead more national than NRL…are you serious??

Plus year on year interest in AFL in NSW/ACT & QLD grows. Compare the state of the game 15yrs ago to what it is now..caulk and cheese. Meanwhile the NRL has gone backwards in Sydney and is treading water in QLD. All the while Gold coast is slowly turning towards being an AFL town as is Canberra. Far NthQLD is AFL country and much of country QLD (Excpet for Townsville) is experience an increased interest in Aussie rules.

Granted Sydney/Wollongong/Newcastle is very hostile country for AFL while Brisvegas just follows whatever team is winning. I remember when the lions went 3 in a row people were declaring brisbane an AFL city such was the interest..that didn't happen in melbourne when the storm won.

Anyway for the record i always thought the N in NRL stood for NSW. Also btw not much League up here in the NT..and the NSW/QLD boys that come up here end up playing and following AFL…its a pleasure to watch!

 

[The_Wookie]

The AFL is far and ahead more national than NRL…are you serious??

never more serious.

Plus year on year interest in AFL in NSW/ACT & QLD grows. Compare the state of the game 15yrs ago to what it is now..caulk and cheese. Meanwhile the NRL has gone backwards in Sydney and is treading water in QLD. All the while Gold coast is slowly turning towards being an AFL town as is Canberra. Far NthQLD is AFL country and much of country QLD (Excpet for Townsville) is experience an increased interest in Aussie rules.

You actually have evidence that league is going backwards? I want links people, not evangelism. Canberra is an AFl town? on what basis. Last time i looked, crowds were almost identical for AFL and NRL matches (actually after checking in 2013 the Raiders averaged 10k to GWS 8.3k), and the Raiders were financially very well off. Raiders members compare favourably to GWS canberra members. Trading water in Queensland? The Broncos are hands down the biggest club in Queensland of any code, not to mention actually profitable.

Granted Sydney/Wollongong/Newcastle is very hostile country for AFL while Brisvegas just follows whatever team is winning. I remember when the lions went 3 in a row people were declaring brisbane an AFL city such was the interest..that didn't happen in melbourne when the storm won.

The Broncos have done pretty well over the years. A second Brisbane side in the NRL, with the coming Rugby Union Championship could kill the Lions for a while if they dont pick up soon.

Anyway for the record i always thought the N in NRL stood for NSW. Also btw not much League up here in the NT..and the NSW/QLD boys that come up here end up playing and following AFL…its a pleasure to watch!

Ive pulled the figures for both Rugby league and AFL NT for a thread on Talking footy, with the inclusion of Touch Footy now, the numbers in the territory are pretty damn even. - http://www.footyindustry.com/?page_id=200

--------------------------

According to the NRLs 2013 annual report, rugby league in the northern territory features 2,112 players in 102 teams in 15 clubs.

According to AFL Northern Territory it has 5,497 people playing senior club football, with the number blowing out to 9464 when junior and youth clubs are taken into account. This number does not include school football (another 13,700), Auskick (abnother 4,700) or nine a side.


So what about Touch and Oztag? Bearing in mind that the NRL is now formally affiliated with Touch Football, it bears consideration

The Touch Foootball Association 2013 annual report (pg 24) puts touch figures at 2,342. According to its website Oztag has no presence in the NT - and while negotiations are apparently underway to affliate, according to this article in the Telegraph - currently considers itself a separate sport.

School figures could not be found either in the NRL Annual Report, or the NTFL 2013-2017 Strategic plan, or in recent State of the Game documents from the NRL. The ARL did not include them separately in Annual reports as far as I can tell.

With Touch included in school league figures, Id expect league figures to run very close to the Australian football ones in the NT if not be higher.

-------------------------------------

In case you guys have forgotten, Im an AFL man through and through, but some of the posts here recently are fanatical, to say the least.

 

[Stewies Power]

The fact that the Giants - a team based in Sydney - are even close to the Raiders pretty much sums up RL in Canberra. When the Lions were winning 10 years ago, their crowds were better than the Broncos. As AliceCat said, Brisbane follows whoever's winning, hence the QLD Reds getting bigger crowds than the Broncos 2 seasons ago. If the Broncos had consecutive years of mediocrity ala the Lions in recent years, their crowds would plummet.

I don't like how people try and associate touch footy with RL. Just because the nrl reached an agreement with Touch Football Aus to try and make RLs playing numbers look better, that doesn't mean the people who play Tocuh give two shits about RL. I know plenty of touch footballers who couldn't even name 4 nrl teams if their lives depended on it. Same goes for indoor soccer. People play it for fun, but when it comes to actually following the sport at the top level they are no where to be found.

 

[saviour01]

I am not a Croweater by any stretch, but i disagree with that, it belies the actual meaning of National IMO.

Every national org includes, or should include Adelaide in their plans.

AFL doesn't even have a team in the nations capital lol. How can you be national without a team in the capital? It would be like London without a team in the EPL or Madrid without a team in the Liga BBVA. Is there any big sport in a country that doesn't have a team in the capital?

 

[mxett]

AFL doesn't even have a team in the nations capital lol. How can you be national without a team in the capital? It would be like London without a team in the EPL or Madrid without a team in the Liga BBVA. Is there any big sport in a country that doesn't have a team in the capital?

Because it's a small city with a large proportion of transient residents made up of students and politicians. The NRL have a team there but this team gets little to no FTA coverage and regular crowds under 10k. Why bother?

 

[saviour01]

I would agree to an extent with your post, however the AFL has a far bigger presence in those areas you mentioned and plays games there.

Newcastle AFL is interesting, ATM a 3 division 24 team comp, and plans of entering a team in the NEAFL.

Newcastle AFL is a joke. We had a couple of players from our ressies go up and go straight into their first grade. These are guys who are playing 3rd div in Sydney (which is a terrible comp as it is).

The Sydney teams that entered into NEAFL bought like 30 blokes each that year anyway. If there was one from Newcastle then there would probably be 1 or 2 local players. NEAFL gets like 100 people to games anyway.