Play Nice 2020 Non AFL Admin, Crowds, Ratings, Participation etc thread

Remove this Banner Ad

wagstaff said:
The decline of RU in Oz in the past 15 years has been staggering.

The 2003 WC was a major event in Oz; even in Victoria it created huge interest. I recall the Oz/Eng final getting astonishing FTA ratings that iirc was superior to what SOO and AFL GF can't reach. I recall even members of my own family who usually had no interest in the sport watching the 03 final.

It would've been unthinkable that the sport could decline so rapidly in less than 20 years but here we are. I'm just curious as to what the prime causes of it are. Obviously the decline of the Wallabies (especially their constant Bledisloe failures) is a factor, but it shouldn't be this severe.

I recall on the Titus O'Reilly/Sergio Paradise podcast they discussed why the Melbourne Storm have gained a much better foothold on the town than the Melbourne Rebels. They observed from personal experience how when interacting with RU types who were supposedly trying to entice Vics to get on board they were largely full of contempt and complacency. So perhaps that insularity and snobbishness has been a constant problem for them.
Click to expand...

It's important to note that rugby circa 2003 was an outlier in terms of popularity (as per gigantor's number 3 in his post that just appeared).
 
RussellEbertHandball said:
Has India really taken over cricket?

If they generate 70% of the games revenue, shouldn't they have 70% of the say?

Remember it is Indian TV $$$ that is the ICC's biggest income earner, from the ODI WC and now T20 WC, to develop the game world wide and to advance female cricket, and the test playing countries have only ceded certain powers over to the ICC.

Australia and England ran the game for years and they refused to give up their powers to the ICC compared to what powers football nations have ceded to FIFA and its confederations. Same with many other international sports. Then the $$$ made them less relevant, and they couldn't complain, as English cricket has been about the $$$ since the 1850's when they had professionals and WSC in Oz was all about the $$$.

WSC was about the $$$ and that saw Australia have some control over the cricket calendar once the cricket war was over. Ie they got to play their summer 5 or 6 tests when they wanted, play 3 teams in their ODI comp and they set the rules on who got invited into the tent and drove the rules for ODI's re colour clothing, white ball, lights and day/nighters etc.

T20 was new when the Indian's turned the IPL into a mega rich competition. So yeah the Indian's control that 6 weeks of the calendar. But they don't the other 46 to anywhere near the same extent.

Did they take over ODI's?? Yes they played plenty of them both at home and away in the 1990's and 00's, but all the countries have their comps and its not like India has played 50% more ODI's than any other nation.

India hasn't taken over Test cricket. Yeah they said they don't want to play with the pink ball until they tried it out. Fair enough why give the other side a big advantage. India didn't like the DRS and said it has too many errors before they accepted it. This summer I reckon has proved them right.

The only country that would be able to buy the Australian Open off the ITF (who have control of the 4 slams and Davis cup) are the Chinese, unless something very dramatic happens in Oz and people don't wont to go to the Oz Open. And that wont happen.

The players on the ATP and WTA will have a say if any slam was to be removed. Listen to the players talk about the Oz Open. They love it and all talk about it being the best run and/or their favourite. They know there are plenty of tournaments to make big $$$ - in Qatar, Dubai, China etc, but history is history and the slams have cache in their 4 current cities that no new city would have.

There is more chance of a 5th "major" being introduced, than Melbourne losing its grand slam event.
Click to expand...
I think cricket will continue on the way it is for a fair few years yet but when it does change it’ll happen almost instantly. Most likely start through an expanded IPL competition where top players earn double or triple what their national cricket boards can offer and then the dominoes fall pretty match anyway that India want them to.
 
NoobPie said:
It's important to note that rugby circa 2003 was an outlier in terms of popularity (as per gigantor's number 3 in his post that just appeared).
Click to expand...

Its been unable to shake off its love of the Sydney club game & adapt to a leap over an interstate contest to Super Rugby with its effect on the Wallabies (e.g the Giteau rule *).

*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giteau's_law

The gross mismanagement since John O'Neill & the 2003 World Cup has been the stuff of legends.

Digressing but its interesting to see the latest comments from Netballs boss on its place in womens sport & the challenges from cricket & the footy codes with media rights front & centre:

NoCookies | The Australian

www.theaustralian.com.au www.theaustralian.com.au
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this ad.

The Australian J.Pandaram 6.2

"The stunning development puts major pressure on rugby with the game needing an extraordinary deal to survive".


EDIT:

This is the full transcript from The Australian.


sportsindustry (@footyindustryAU) | Twitter

The latest Tweets from sportsindustry (@footyindustryAU): "News Wrap | Friday, May 8th | WA AFL teams miss out on home games early, India still plan on coming to Australia, Kayo subs take a 30% hit, RA solvency questions https://t.co/ZI3V1TYArR"
twitter.com twitter.com
(Then go to 6.2.20- then click on "Rugby Blows Its FoxSports Deal")

There are already, in the Comments' Section, 474 comments in The Australian- some very savage.
Is RU in Australia entering a civil war- over the possible disastrous prospects for RU in Aust., who bears major responsibility for the disaster, how can RU recover, who & how will fund the GR?

If it is true that the only media partner that might now be interested in broadcasting RU in Aust. is Optus, it places RA in a very poor negotiating position.
The article states, also, that Sky Sports will pay less for Super Rugby etc. for the valuable (live PrimeTime, into Europe) South African Super Rugby broadcasts.

RA will, almost certainly, obtain a much lower Rights $ deal, cf to the previous deal. This will have a very negative impact the funding of elite & GR RU in Australia. There may be a schism emerging between the SRU & RA, over FTA Shute Shield brodcasts.

Can anyone elaborate on the alleged costs of only $3000,000 pa to broadcast 1 Shute Shield game every week for the entire season?
I thought costs of broadcasting matches were much higher.
 
Last edited:
BringBackTorps said:
Can anyone elaborate on the alleged costs of only $300,000 pa to broadcast 1 Shute Shield game every week for the entire season?
I thought costs of broadcasting matches were much higher.
Click to expand...

it's basically a city comp, wouldn't be high end coverage, so $15,000 per game is probably about right
 
Kwality said:
Its been unable to shake off its love of the Sydney club game & adapt to a leap over an interstate contest to Super Rugby with its effect on the Wallabies (e.g the Giteau rule *).
Click to expand...

Not sure what you mean here? My point was that, in the fullness of time, rugby has never been that popular in Australia and the period in the late 90s and early naughties was the exception and not the rule.

For its part, Super Rugby has been an anathema for Australian rugby. The fact that the Shute shield has enduring relative appeal (in contrast to say, the relative decline of the WAFL and the SANFL with the AFL expansion) is because it clearly offers something that Super Rugby cant - i.e. a tribal competition with meaningful opposition, historic rivalries and has imporatance in and of itself - rather than as a pseudo-provincial competition that explicitly plays second fiddle to the national team.

Giteau's rule is an attempt to balance the reality of the players being offered more money to go to England and France with the need to maintain the domestic scene and keep the Wallabies competitive. Not sure of the relevance of that either?
 
NoobPie said:
Not sure what you mean here? My point was that, in the fullness of time, rugby has never been that popular in Australia and the period in the late 90s and early naughties was the exception and not the rule.

For its part, Super Rugby has been an anathema for Australian rugby. The fact that the Shute shield has enduring relative appeal (in contrast to say, the relative decline of the WAFL and the SANFL with the AFL expansion) is because it clearly offers something that Super Rugby cant - i.e. a tribal competition with meaningful opposition, historic rivalries and has imporatance in and of itself - rather than as a pseudo-provincial competition that explicitly plays second fiddle to the national team.

Giteau's rule is an attempt to balance the reality of the players being offered more money to go to England and France with the need to maintain the domestic scene and keep the Wallabies competitive. Not sure of the relevance of that either?
Click to expand...

All factors in the malaise the code faces, it does not know where it fits which makes it impossible to secure a foothold at any level. Even school rugby in Sydney has a loyal following.
RA is worse than rudderless, those steering the boat arent in touch with reality.

The guy heading up Twiggys comp had this to say:
If you let market forces just work unfettered and it's a free for all, we will end up like soccer and every single elite rugby player will play in Europe

"I don't think the sport is big enough to go down that route and prosper. It could go that way and you would have everyone playing in the three European leagues, but is that good for the game? I don’t think it is."

www.smh.com.au

Rugby boss warns against Giteau Law change

The man in charge of Global Rapid Rugby has headed up major clubs in two different hemispheres and across two codes. He has a warning on the Giteau Law debate.
www.smh.com.au www.smh.com.au
 
Last edited:
BringBackTorps said:
Can anyone elaborate on the alleged costs of only $3000,000 pa to broadcast 1 Shute Shield game every week for the entire season?
I thought costs of broadcasting matches were much higher.
Click to expand...
Depends how you cost things, marginal costing vs average costing model.

If you call out an ambulance and you aren't insured, it will cost you about $800. Why so high? If it took 1 hour to go from the call to dropping you off at hospital did it really cost $800 of petrol + wear and tear of the vehicle for 1 hour, plus 1 hour of wages and benefits for the 2 or 3 people in the ambulance and any drugs or medical components used to help you get to the hospital?? No. But if you are a cost recovery organisation you have to recover your costs over the average of year and that at sometimes you are not earning monies that hour.

The ABC stopped broadcasting the SANFL (and other state leagues) because head office in Sydney had to cut costs to fund its prefered programs. Last year they broadcast the SANFL was 2013 season. At end of 2013 Port wanted a full reunification with its SANFL team, the crows a reserves team in the SANFL, but the SANFL wanted TV coverage. So Koch and Cos Cardone and others at 7 and McGuire Media respectively, worked on packaging up an advertising program of sponsors to cover the $1m production costs so the SANFL didn't have to pay anything to have TV coverage.

Now I don't know how much of that was to pay for contract workers ie cameraman, producers, equipment etc and how much of that was 7's then current employees and equipment just being redeployed, and how much was marginal costing vs average costing model.

Now if you have 4 cameramen and 2 producer types covering the game and they work 5 days a week for the network, is their cost the 3 hours they work on the game or 1/5th of their wage and benefits, ie you had to pay them for that days work if they didn't work on the footy, or more of their time if they plan things during the week?

Given Fox Sports is producing sport 24/7 whereas 7 is producing other TV, Fox might be using a marginal costing model, as their staff would be working on some sport anyway, if they don't cover the RU Shute Shield.
 
Another shocker at the MCG for the BBL.Bring on the AFLW.

Alarm bells were ringing after just 13,275 attended last Friday night’s qualifying final between the Stars and the Sixers at the ‘G.
 
Our Game said:
Another shocker at the MCG for the BBL.Bring on the AFLW.

Alarm bells were ringing after just 13,275 attended last Friday night’s qualifying final between the Stars and the Sixers at the ‘G.
Click to expand...
Very poor crowd even if it is a school night. I was shocked to see it was the stars 16th game this season, in what less then a couple of months? Just dragging on too long imo.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Kwality said:
All factors in the malaise the code faces, it does not know where it fits which makes it impossible to secure a foothold at any level. Even school rugby in Sydney has a loyal following.
RA is worse than rudderless, those steering the boat arent in touch with reality.

The guy heading up Twiggys comp had this to say:
If you let market forces just work unfettered and it's a free for all, we will end up like soccer and every single elite rugby player will play in Europe

"I don't think the sport is big enough to go down that route and prosper. It could go that way and you would have everyone playing in the three European leagues, but is that good for the game? I don’t think it is."

www.smh.com.au

Rugby boss warns against Giteau Law change

The man in charge of Global Rapid Rugby has headed up major clubs in two different hemispheres and across two codes. He has a warning on the Giteau Law debate.
www.smh.com.au www.smh.com.au
Click to expand...

RU has never been a nationwide sport basically it is only really followed and played in numbers in NSW and QLD and the so called"National" team the Wallabies hardly ever has players from outside those two states.That leaves a lot of Australia that dosent know or care about the sport.
 
weewilly said:
RU has never been a nationwide sport basically it is only really followed and played in numbers in NSW and QLD and the so called"National" team the Wallabies hardly ever has players from outside those two states.That leaves a lot of Australia that dosent know or care about the sport.
Click to expand...

True in theory but as a WA educated, every week following Subi in the WAFL, I played most sports as a kid, & the Wallabies are a great Aussie sport brand - you might not be across it but plenty are. Its why the Bledisloe Cup is a sought after game by most States in Aus.
No doubt its in decline.
They way the have ignored a State based comp has been one of many mistakes made by poor administration since the World Cup success of 2003 & the departure of CEO John O'Neill.
 
HavUEvaSeenTheRain said:
Very poor crowd even if it is a school night. I was shocked to see it was the stars 16th game this season, in what less then a couple of months? Just dragging on too long imo.
Click to expand...

Nah, it's more about s**t Stars crowds rather than any other reason. It rated well on TV. Are we too scared to bag out poor crowds in Melbourne because hurr durr sporting capital?

The game tomorrow sold out days ago, so clearly this disinterest isn't everywhere. But I suspect the comp will take yet another credibility hit with a washed out or cut down game. Why is it cricket administrators struggle to foresee obvious events?
 
Rob said:
Nah, it's more about s**t Stars crowds rather than any other reason. It rated well on TV. Are we too scared to bag out poor crowds in Melbourne because hurr durr sporting capital?

The game tomorrow sold out days ago, so clearly this disinterest isn't everywhere. But I suspect the comp will take yet another credibility hit with a washed out or cut down game. Why is it cricket administrators struggle to foresee obvious events?
Click to expand...
TBF, you can't really foresee Sydney getting 200+ mm of rain for 3 days on the final. Reserve day(which they should have) would do bugger all in this regard. that is plain unlucky. they can't shift the game either. That opens a whole can of worms. Obviously, some people are not going get that though.

Cricket Australia does need to put their foot down regarding the starting time of the match and when it is played.
 
Rob said:
Nah, it's more about s**t Stars crowds rather than any other reason. It rated well on TV. Are we too scared to bag out poor crowds in Melbourne because hurr durr sporting capital?

The game tomorrow sold out days ago, so clearly this disinterest isn't everywhere. But I suspect the comp will take yet another credibility hit with a washed out or cut down game. Why is it cricket administrators struggle to foresee obvious events?
Click to expand...
BobbyMorri said:
TBF, you can't really foresee Sydney getting 200+ mm of rain for 3 days on the final. Reserve day(which they should have) would do bugger all in this regard. that is plain unlucky. they can't shift the game either. That opens a whole can of worms. Obviously, some people are not going get that though.

Cricket Australia does need to put their foot down regarding the starting time of the match and when it is played.
Click to expand...
Absolute joke that they don’t have back up dates for a grand final. Amateurish crap that is.
It is a poor crowd but I think Melbourne would get as many to a grand final as Sydney would, especially considering you are comparing a prelim on a Thursday and the other a Saturday night game grand final.
16 games, soon to be 17 games in 50 days is overkill though.
 
BobbyMorri said:
TBF, you can't really foresee Sydney getting 200+ mm of rain for 3 days on the final. Reserve day(which they should have) would do bugger all in this regard. that is plain unlucky. they can't shift the game either. That opens a whole can of worms. Obviously, some people are not going get that though.

Cricket Australia does need to put their foot down regarding the starting time of the match and when it is played.
Click to expand...

CA should have at least 1 reserve day, and allow play until as late as humanly possible. This crap where play must end at 9:30 or 10pm and they cut short games to ensure that is a load of complete s**t. They're even promoting the possibility of a 5-5 game! Laughable.

This is a grand final. Every possible opportunity needs to be given for the full game to be played. Not some 5 over bullshit. Integrity has to come first. Always. Real sports leagues know that. Otherwise you may as well sell yourself as pro wrestling.
 
A League decides Sydney is too wet, so they postpone a regular season game and commit to playing it later.

BBL does jack s**t, and if their *grand final* is rained out they award the title by default.

You know you're running a joke league when the A League looks professional in comparison.
 
Rob said:
Nah, it's more about s**t Stars crowds rather than any other reason. It rated well on TV. Are we too scared to bag out poor crowds in Melbourne because hurr durr sporting capital?

The game tomorrow sold out days ago, so clearly this disinterest isn't everywhere. But I suspect the comp will take yet another credibility hit with a washed out or cut down game. Why is it cricket administrators struggle to foresee obvious events?
Click to expand...
Melbourne people are pretty shrewd and dont like being conned. The BBL is a concocted comp that now goes on for way to long and people are voting with their feet.
 
Our Game said:
Melbourne people are pretty shrewd and dont like being conned. The BBL is a concocted comp that now goes on for way to long and people are voting with their feet.
Click to expand...
but not their eyeballs. no tennis probably helped here.



has any BBL final ever been well attended in Melbourne.....I recall when Hobart, with Tim Paine starring, thrashing the Stars in front of no-one in 2014. Been an issue for a while. And Melbourne people are a lot of things. Perhaps they are not as sport-loving as they always say ;)

Or they spend all their money and attention at the AO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

The_Wookie
Play Nice 2024 Non AFL Crowds/Ratings and other Industry thread
13 14 15 16 17
Replies
400
Views
20K
weewilly
W
The_Wookie
  • Sticky
Play Nice 2024 AFL TV Ratings
2 3 4 5
Replies
112
Views
9K
weewilly
W
The_Wookie
  • Locked
2024 AFL TV Ratings and Streaming
2
Replies
46
Views
3K
The_Wookie
The_Wookie
Football Tragic
  • Poll
Does the AFL have anything to fear from the Matilda's recent success and the NRL's TV ratings?
2 3 4
Replies
76
Views
6K
Tandy
Tandy
The_Wookie
Play Nice 2023 Non AFL (or lower league) Sports Industry Discussion
47 48 49 50 51
Replies
1K
Views
64K
threenewpadlocks
threenewpadlocks
The_Wookie
2023 Crowds and TV/Streaming
191 192 193 194 195
Replies
5K
Views
215K
Consolaçao
C
Bjo187
Play Nice The Reach is King thread
2 3
Replies
67
Views
4K
weewilly
W

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top