Play Nice 2019 Non AFL Admin, Crowds, Ratings, Participation etc thread

[jatz14]

People seem to get annoyed about kids playing a specific school sport as being counted as a participant.

If the PE curriculum includes 5 or 6 sports for the year, then those 5 or 6 can count those kids as participants, and the other 30 sports that exist out there cannot.

It isnt a problem if people are aware of what the number means, however, it is frequently not presented this way. A rising participation number, attributed to a rise in school programs, is usually presented as growth of the sport, good news, etc etc.

However, making kids who have no interest in cricket, and no interest in sport, take part in a school sports program, cannot be considered to be a sign of a sports growth or success.

This doesnt mean that the school sports programs are not important. However, if the school sports programs are a cause of a sports growth, and signs of health, then this will be reflected in the growth of actual registered participants.

What we are seeing is, registered player numbers fall, while total participation increases, due to sports programs. The falling player numbers show however, that the vast majority of those school participants play at school, and then give it up immediately.

This is actually a bad combination in my opinion. If you have gotten schools to take up cricket programs in a big way, so that total participation numbers are great, but they dont go on to play cricket, so registered numbers keep falling, where do you go from there?

All that said, there are lots of junior cricket comps in my area, I see quite a few games on over the weekend, so I would have believed registered player numbers way higher than quoted.

 

[Our Game]

"I suspect this increase in RU physicality (away from "running rugby/ball in hand" styles) will increase the popularity of AF in Australia; & will increase GR AF player nos. in NSW, ACT & Qld."

The more physical type of RU suits the Islanders and Maori players due to their bigger body shapes that now make half of the Wallabies to the detriment of other ethnic groups.IMHO this will impact on who plays and who watches the game in the future.I wonder how many of these players were actually born in Australia?

 

[Gigantor]

It isnt a problem if people are aware of what the number means, however, it is frequently not presented this way. A rising participation number, attributed to a rise in school programs, is usually presented as growth of the sport, good news, etc etc.

However, making kids who have no interest in cricket, and no interest in sport, take part in a school sports program, cannot be considered to be a sign of a sports growth or success.

This doesnt mean that the school sports programs are not important. However, if the school sports programs are a cause of a sports growth, and signs of health, then this will be reflected in the growth of actual registered participants.

What we are seeing is, registered player numbers fall, while total participation increases, due to sports programs. The falling player numbers show however, that the vast majority of those school participants play at school, and then give it up immediately.

This is actually a bad combination in my opinion. If you have gotten schools to take up cricket programs in a big way, so that total participation numbers are great, but they dont go on to play cricket, so registered numbers keep falling, where do you go from there?

All that said, there are lots of junior cricket comps in my area, I see quite a few games on over the weekend, so I would have believed registered player numbers way higher than quoted.

I have a slightly different perspective.

If cricket can get schools to force a cricket program down the throats of kids who don't really like cricket, that's a much better outcome than cricket not being played at the school (from the governing body perspective).

Archery, badminton, bowling, curling, Royal Tennis, Fencing, Lacrosse, Water Polo, Table Tennis, Ultimate Frisbee, Volleyball, baseball, ice hockey, korfball, Sailing, squash, and many, many other sports, would all love to have their sports forced upon unsuspecting school children.

But only a handful of sports have the capacity to achieve this, and if it happens, it's an achievement worth mentioning.

Also if it's part of the curriculum, meaning at least a few weeks of PE time has been dedicated to it, then that's enough to br considered as participation.

Now if the argument is that these sorts of figures need to be broken down more to be better understood, then yes, I agree.

I would also agree that not all participation is equal.

 

[jatz14]

"I suspect this increase in RU physicality (away from "running rugby/ball in hand" styles) will increase the popularity of AF in Australia; & will increase GR AF player nos. in NSW, ACT & Qld."

The more physical type of RU suits the Islanders and Maori players due to their bigger body shapes that now make half of the Wallabies to the detriment of other ethnic groups.IMHO this will impact on who plays and who watches the game in the future.I wonder how many of these players were actually born in Australia?

Plenty of people prefer a more physical game, and it has much more to do with personality and upbringing than body type. Lots of big guys with body types unsuited to soccer still love soccer, and play it at the highest level they can, same will apply to Rugby I think.

A kids love of a sport is cemented long before they start considering things like trends in international competitions and body types.

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

Plenty of people prefer a more physical game, and it has much more to do with personality and upbringing than body type. Lots of big guys with body types unsuited to soccer still love soccer, and play it at the highest level they can, same will apply to Rugby I think.

A kids love of a sport is cemented long before they start considering things like trends in international competitions and body types.

This is very true but having nephews who are Islanders who weigh over 100kg and just left primary school last year I can certainly see why smaller kids will lose interest a lot more quickly in contact sports. These kids are stronger than fully grown men and are playing against kids who haven’t even gone through puberty. Parents are also more protective then ever which doesn’t help.
Off topic but I read somewhere that American Samoans are 50,000 times more likely than other Americans to play NFL so they are always going to dominate the two rugby codes too.
Crickets problem is half society driven imo. Kids now have a lot more options in being able to keep in contact and catch up with mates rather then having to play the sport. It is hands down the worst sport to play if you are not good at it and that’s a huge reason why they lose so many and why people don’t take it up. In the country areas money in football has also had a huge affect on it.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Off topic but I read somewhere that American Samoans are 50,000 times more likely than other Americans to play NFL so they are always going to dominate the two rugby codes too.

CBS 60 Minutes did a story on this 9 years ago. The transcript is at this link below over 4 pages. you used to be able to watch the video embedded in the story but you got to jump thru hoops now.

American Samoa: Football Island

Scott Pelley Reports on Why More NFL Players Come from This Tiny Group of Islands Than from Any Other Place in America

www.cbsnews.com

.......
In the last five years alone, the island's six high schools have produced 10 NFL linemen. It's estimated that a boy born to Samoan parents is 56 times more likely to get into the NFL than any other kid in America.

The Samoan people are big. And big is beautiful, according to Togiola Tulafono, the governor of American Samoa.
......

Ok found this grainy copy of the video on You Tube

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

CBS 60 Minutes did a story on this 9 years ago. The transcript is at this link below over 4 pages. you used to be able to watch the video embedded in the story but you got to jump thru hoops now.

American Samoa: Football Island

Scott Pelley Reports on Why More NFL Players Come from This Tiny Group of Islands Than from Any Other Place in America

www.cbsnews.com

.......
In the last five years alone, the island's six high schools have produced 10 NFL linemen. It's estimated that a boy born to Samoan parents is 56 times more likely to get into the NFL than any other kid in America.

The Samoan people are big. And big is beautiful, according to Togiola Tulafono, the governor of American Samoa.
......

Ok found this grainy copy of the video on You Tube

Haha so I was only a thousand times off. Still amazing. I think I got those stats mixed up with something around those numbers with true 7ft tall Americans playing NBA or something.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Haha so I was only a thousand times off. Still amazing. I think I got those stats mixed up with something around those numbers with true 7ft tall Americans playing NBA or something.

1 in 56,000 is the sort of stat that is how many players in the NFL divided by the total USA population ie inc women, babies and retired people. (That maths is actually closer to 1 in 200,000) That's why I looked up the CBS 60 minutes story I watched at the start of the decade.

 

[BringBackTorps]

Plenty[?] of people prefer a more physical game, and it has much more to do with personality and upbringing than body type.[?] Lots of big guys with body types unsuited to soccer still love soccer, and play it at the highest level they can[Yes], same will apply to Rugby I think[No- many light weights fear risk being injured in RU].

A kids love of a sport is cemented long before they start considering things like trends in international competitions and body types.[Parents- particularly mothers- often strongly disapprove of their jnr kids playing RL/RU, having c. a 20kg - 30 kg weight imbalance. Elite teenagers know the trends]

1. Re RU aesthetics

In recent decades, starting with Randwick's Galloping Greens in the Shute Shield, many RU officials (State & Federal) have expressed a preference for "running rugby/ball in hand" styles, "the Australian Way"- the latest being Cheika. They have wanted RU to be played with flair & running in tries (not lots of scrums/scrum resets, not lots of downtime & penalty kicks piling on the points).
RU officials here dont want the dour English etc. style- because they know they will inevitably lose out in popularity to the casual sports' observers, who want faster-paced games, ala RL & AF.

The invidious dilemma for Aust. RU officials is that, at international & Super Rugby levels, playing "exciting running rugby" can make Aust. teams now generally non-competitive against top opponents. Losing regularly will increase the downward spiral Aust. elite RU has been experiencing.
(But the Aust. U18 Schoolboys team defeated NZ for the first time in 7 years, in 2019; & our U20 team came 2nd in the RU World Cup to France in 2019)

Re Jnr RL & RU Participation Levels

For c. 20 years+, RL & RU officials have expressed concerns about large weight disparities in their respective jnr sports, & the negative effect on male player nos. Both Aust. RU & RL have long term male, competition player no. declines.
Both jnr RL & RU are now introducing jnr weight divisions to placate these concerns.


2. NRL.com 31.10

An interesting, first press conference from P. V'landys, new NRL Commission Chairman.
He wants to (paraphrasing):-

. improve GR RL participant nos., specifically stating he wants to re-establish "...Country RL as the leading sport in NSW & Qld".
. determine in "the next few months" what is the optimum footprint for the NRL ie will expansion occur?
. improve all the Sydney NRL suburban grounds
. ensure NRL revenues are maintained at the next Rights agreement, as they represent 60% of NRL revenues

V'landys to focus on referees revamp in new role

After two days in charge of the ARLC, Peter V'landys has addressed several of the game's biggest issues as he fronted the media for the first time on Thursday afternoon.

www.nrl.com

Many RL commentators are saying all the NRL teams are safe with V'landys- none will be merged or relocated; but Ch. 9 executives say they want another NRL team in Brisbane, 1 less Sydney team, & no expansion beyond 16 teams (as the talent pool is too shallow, & don't want average NRL skill levels to decline).

 

[NoobPie]

Twenty20 got 248K for the second session which isn't terrible given the onesidedness of the competition

A League got 25K last night.....is that the worst ratings for a friday night game in the first month or so ever?

TV Ratings Friday 2 November 2019

Friday top 20 TV shows plus FTA network shares plus Sub TV sport

www.mediaweek.com.au

 

[Aussie in exile]

Cricket Australia got caught out by Fairfax papers middle of this year but looks like they could still be fudging.

Last year it was 1.65 million total participants and 684,356 registered players, those graphic shows 965,674 participants but no figure for registered players.

This matters because the 2012 Independent Sports Panel report findings and recommendations, said
government funding should be pegged to participation numbers. Sport Australia ( yes changed name from Australian Sports Commission a while back) have accepted this recommendation.

The SMH and their sister publication The Sun-Herald spent time digging thru the numbers and

How we exposed Cricket Australia's double counting

Thousands of registered cricketers in Australia have been counted more than once - and some up to 10 times.

www.smh.com.au

Most major sports recognise two sets of numbers when it comes to how many players they have. One is the participation rate, and the other is the actual number of players. Cricket Australia has each year boasted a growing participation rate, which stretches credulity, because the number of clubs and teams has been falling for a decade and people involved in the cricket community at club and school level see registrations in decline. Cricket Australia publicises an estimate of ‘participation’, which has been rising steadily to its current claim of a record high ‘1.65 million Australians’. It does not know the real number of players. This is to its advantage: it can tell its stakeholders that it has a rising participation rate and boost the value of its product.
.............
While CA claims 1.65 million total participants and 684,356 registered players, the number of unique cricketers playing during the past two years is 247,060.

This is how the double counting works

How we exposed Cricket Australia's double counting

Thousands of registered cricketers in Australia have been counted more than once - and some up to 10 times.

www.smh.com.au

Why the disparity? In a word, double-counting. When a player – to take the most-frequently occurring cricket-playing name in Australia, Manpreet Singh – joins a team, he is one player. But when Singh is promoted a grade, he becomes listed as a second player. When he get picked in a representative team, he becomes a third player. When he joins a Sunday competition, a midweek T20 competition and a winter league, suddenly this one Singh is six registered players. Then the association his club is part of counts him again, and sometimes the umpires’ association does as well. Singh is now eight players. We know it is the same Manpreet Singh because of his unique player ID. This has happened with thousands of cricketers, and some of them were counted more than 10 times each.

Everyone in cricket administration knows about this double-counting, and Cricket Australia admits it has problems with its data. But until now, they didn’t know how widespread the distorting effect of this double counting was, and how seriously it affected the debate about the decline in club cricket.

The other component in CA’s ''1.65 million Australians'' is school children in physical education classes where cricket is played. CA estimates this number at more than 950,000, but these participants are undocumented in MyCricket and CA admits that the estimate is imprecise.

Our number of 247,060 cannot be exact, but we think it is close. When we counted all registered players, including double-counts, the total came to 667,395. This was close to CA’s 684,356 ''registered players'', so we think we’re not far off. Whatever the true number, CA does not have better quality data than this.

AFL is not exactly clean when it comes to fudging playing numbers

AFL accused of exploiting figures

THE NSW/ACT AFL has been accused of exaggerating its registered players in the Leichhardt municipality, calling into the question the sporting body's numbers across Sydney.

www.smh.com.au

 

[NoobPie]

AFL is not exactly clean when it comes to fudging playing numbers

AFL accused of exploiting figures

THE NSW/ACT AFL has been accused of exaggerating its registered players in the Leichhardt municipality, calling into the question the sporting body's numbers across Sydney.

www.smh.com.au

Haha the "birchgrove oval saga" from back on 2012

You're sad dude

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

AFL is not exactly clean when it comes to fudging playing numbers

AFL accused of exploiting figures

THE NSW/ACT AFL has been accused of exaggerating its registered players in the Leichhardt municipality, calling into the question the sporting body's numbers across Sydney.

www.smh.com.au

They all fudge, especially since the 2009 (Crawford) Independent Sports Panel Report recommended that government funding should be more heavily weighted towards community level participation, not elite sports level and since around 2012 the government via Australian Sports Commission now called Sports Australia since mid 2018, made a major shift in funding focus money wise towards participation and a new approach to elite sports was implemented with the Australia's Winning Edge 2012–2022 strategy.

The monies for elite sports has been maintained with a spike in an Olympic year, but the big growth in funding is driven by the high numbered community participation sports.

Part of the reason to push for development of women's sports at the elite level, especially the non Olympic sports, is that funding largesse is attached to jacking up girls and women's participation numbers, mainly fairly as well as the dodgy stuff, so that infrastructure funding and general funding can be released for both elite and community participation.

Its why John Coates of the AOC and John Wylie chair of Australian Sports Commission/Sport Australia have been at loggerhead most of this decade. Wylie became Chair a couple of months before the Australia's Winning Edge 2012–2022 strategy was released. He also was chair of MCG Trust at the time.

 

[BringBackTorps]

P. Rothfield, in the Daily Telegraph, has recently written on RL's strategic problems & directions; & what steps new NRL CEO, P. V'landys needs to adopt.
Can anyone please open the links on these articles, & post here (both behind paywalls)?

No Cookies | Daily Telegraph

No Cookies

www.dailytelegraph.com.au

No Cookies | Daily Telegraph

No Cookies

www.dailytelegraph.com.au

 

[Aussie in exile]

Haha the "birchgrove oval saga" from back on 2012

You're sad dude

Did the AFL fudge the playing numbers yes or no?

 

[Aussie in exile]

They all fudge, especially since the 2009 (Crawford) Independent Sports Panel Report recommended that government funding should be more heavily weighted towards community level participation, not elite sports level and since around 2012 the government via Australian Sports Commission now called Sports Australia since mid 2018, made a major shift in funding focus money wise towards participation and a new approach to elite sports was implemented with the Australia's Winning Edge 2012–2022 strategy.

The monies for elite sports has been maintained with a spike in an Olympic year, but the big growth in funding is driven by the high numbered community participation sports.

Part of the reason to push for development of women's sports at the elite level, especially the non Olympic sports, is that funding largesse is attached to jacking up girls and women's participation numbers, mainly fairly as well as the dodgy stuff, so that infrastructure funding and general funding can be released for both elite and community participation.

Its why John Coates of the AOC and John Wylie chair of Australian Sports Commission/Sport Australia have been at loggerhead most of this decade. Wylie became Chair a couple of months before the Australia's Winning Edge 2012–2022 strategy was released. He also was chair of MCG Trust at the time.

They do indeed, so it begs the question why are some posters in denial when if comes to the AFL fudging numbers?

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

They do indeed, so it begs the question why are some posters in denial when if comes to the AFL fudging numbers?

Don't know. I know there is double counting, have for a long time, but that Sun-Herald article shows their should be serious audits if governments are directly linking sports $$$ to participation numbers.

I have always watched the competition registered players numbers closer than participation numbers. The AFL wants more eyeballs, so a 6 week Auskick program numbers look good, as it helps turn kids into potential viewers if they don't play the game competitively, but the true indicator of strength of the game, IMO, is competition registered players numbers.

That Sun-Herald cricket article shows they can be inadvertently false if no one checks them and players are counted 2,3,4 or more times.

I guess the counter argument is, if double, triple etc counting has always happened re competition registered players numbers, then you still get a good indicator of the growth or decline in the game, by comparing year on year numbers using a similar methodology ( unless there is a massive change in players from being registered in 2 or 3 comps (school+club 1+club 2) to say 8 comps).

 

[The_Wookie]

AFL is not exactly clean when it comes to fudging playing numbers

AFL accused of exploiting figures

THE NSW/ACT AFL has been accused of exaggerating its registered players in the Leichhardt municipality, calling into the question the sporting body's numbers across Sydney.

www.smh.com.au

in 2012. In this instance it wasnt so much fudging as not supplying the right numbers. And they were corrected when asked for clarification. Entire thing was a beat up driven by the SMH - the Telegraph never even mentioned it - whose editor was heavily involved in a soccer club in the same area.

saga article i wrote here: http://www.footyindustry.com/?page_id=176

AFL Sydney was incorrectly reporting the wrong numbers for a little while aroiund this time - the league had a report done, the guy who wrote the report was hired to implement its recommendations and the league changed the way it reported its figures as a result.

ref: Community Australian Football in Sydney A Health Check

 

[The_Wookie]

They do indeed, so it begs the question why are some posters in denial when if comes to the AFL fudging numbers?

The question really is when are you going to stop pretending you arent a trojan horse on this forum. This was 7 years ago ffs. I dont see you mentioning the crowd fudging that was rife in the NRL at the same time.

Don't know. I know there is double counting, have for a long time, but that Sun-Herald article shows their should be serious audits if governments are directly linking sports $$$ to participation numbers.

Governments would take more notice of the ABS, ERASS and SportAU survey data than anything put out by the sporting bodies which is less aimed at governments and more at corporate Australia.

No one knows really if these numbers put out by the AFL, NRL, Soccer and others are unique identifiers or are school participants who play football socially and/or in league competitions counted multiple times pending registrations?

Ive no faith in the SMH representation on this given the bias of its editorial staff on this particular occasion as reported in Crikey at the time.
ref: https://www.crikey.com.au/2012/07/25/glenn-burge-trumps-tom-harley-in-sydney-soccer-stoush/

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Governments would take more notice of the ABS, ERASS and SportAU survey data than anything put out by the sporting bodies which is less aimed at governments and more at corporate Australia.

No one knows really if these numbers put out by the AFL, NRL, Soccer and others are unique identifiers or are school participants who play football socially and/or in league competitions counted multiple times pending registrations?

Ive no faith in the SMH representation on this given the bias of its editorial staff on this particular occasion as reported in Crikey at the time.
ref: https://www.crikey.com.au/2012/07/25/glenn-burge-trumps-tom-harley-in-sydney-soccer-stoush/

Governments take most notice of who lobbies them and what arguments they put to them. Remember ministers make these sorts of decisions as much as bureaucrats.

 

[Aussie in exile]

The question really is when are you going to stop pretending you arent a trojan horse on this forum. This was 7 years ago ffs. I dont see you mentioning the crowd fudging that was rife in the NRL at the same time.



Governments would take more notice of the ABS, ERASS and SportAU survey data than anything put out by the sporting bodies which is less aimed at governments and more at corporate Australia.

No one knows really if these numbers put out by the AFL, NRL, Soccer and others are unique identifiers or are school participants who play football socially and/or in league competitions counted multiple times pending registrations?

Ive no faith in the SMH representation on this given the bias of its editorial staff on this particular occasion as reported in Crikey at the time.
ref: https://www.crikey.com.au/2012/07/25/glenn-burge-trumps-tom-harley-in-sydney-soccer-stoush/

All I'm doing is reporting facts.
Do you have a problem with me reporting facts?
Surely the site is not going down the road of AFL accreditation's? where journos can and have lost their AFL accreditation for reporting facts that the AFL don't like.

 

[Cmarsh]

Twenty20 got 248K for the second session which isn't terrible given the onesidedness of the competition

A League got 25K last night.....is that the worst ratings for a friday night game in the first month or so ever?

TV Ratings Friday 2 November 2019

Friday top 20 TV shows plus FTA network shares plus Sub TV sport

www.mediaweek.com.au

I'm sure that people will point out that the a league was up against the cricket yesterday however soccer has stated ambitions of becoming the number 1 sport in this country. Having ratings 10 times less when up against a competing sport brings home the reality they are along way from their stated goal.

 

[jatz14]

All I'm doing is reporting facts.
Do you have a problem with me reporting facts?
Surely the site is not going down the road of AFL accreditation's? where journos can and have lost their AFL accreditation for reporting facts that the AFL don't like.

Facts are great, love facts, but which facts you use and which you ignore says a lot.

I have no doubt all figures are rubbery, and part of that is the shear logistical difficulty of getting accurate numbers.

It also makes sense that a sport given a large amount of difficult to tabulate data will use the most favorable numbers at hand, as opposed to spending time and money to make themselves look worse by producing more accurate but less impressive numbers.

Given all that, I think soccer's numbers are more rubbery than other sports given the ease with which social and summer leagues can be set up. It isn't unusual for a kid to play in 3 or 4 different soccer comps in one year, even without being in pathway comps. Soccer has also hung it's hat on participation, all of its commentary around its place in the sporting landscape revolves around its participation rate. It needs a big number.

Basic analysis of soccer's numbers shows they include lots of people who cannot actually be playing. All club officials, coaches, trainers umps count as participants.

So, are the AFL fudging numbers, no. Are any sports fudging numbers, no.

Do the numbers they report sometimes not mean what people assume they mean, yes.

The numbers reported, for all sports, are real, but do those numbers accurately and reliably represent what people think they do, No.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

 

[The_Wookie]

All I'm doing is reporting facts.

selectively and generally not in contect.

Do you have a problem with me reporting facts?

your chosen facts, yes, as a matter of fact I do.

Surely the site is not going down the road of AFL accreditation's? where journos can and have lost their AFL accreditation for reporting facts that the AFL don't like.

Dont be so melodramatic.

Facts are great, love facts, but which facts you use and which you ignore says a lot.

I have no doubt all figures are rubbery, and part of that is the shear logistical difficulty of getting accurate numbers.

It also makes sense that a sport given a large amount of difficult to tabulate data will use the most favorable numbers at hand, as opposed to spending time and money to make themselves look worse by producing more accurate but less impressive numbers.

Given all that, I think soccer's numbers are more rubbery than other sports given the ease with which social and summer leagues can be set up. It isn't unusual for a kid to play in 3 or 4 different soccer comps in one year, even without being in pathway comps. Soccer has also hung it's hat on participation, all of its commentary around its place in the sporting landscape revolves around its participation rate. It needs a big number.

Basic analysis of soccer's numbers shows they include lots of people who cannot actually be playing. All club officials, coaches, trainers umps count as participants.

So, are the AFL fudging numbers, no. Are any sports fudging numbers, no.

Do the numbers they report sometimes not mean what people assume they mean, yes.

The numbers reported, for all sports, are real, but do those numbers accurately and reliably represent what people think they do, No.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

This. The AFL doesnt just report a total number, nor does the FFA. They each break down their participation numbers fairly well. The numbers are there - Its how the media reports them. RussellEbertHandball - the AFL has consistently reported both a total figure and a registered competitor figure since the 90s.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

This. The AFL doesnt just report a total number, nor does the FFA. They each break down their participation numbers fairly well. The numbers are there - Its how the media reports them. RussellEbertHandball - the AFL has consistently reported both a total figure and a registered competitor figure since the 90s.

I know the AFL have reported numbers in their annual report for a long time, but their break down has been more informative and comprehensive it seems since that 2009 ISP report.