Examples?
Mod. Notice 2018 AFLW - Critics get your fill here.
- Thread starter The_Wookie
- Start date
- Tagged users None
You put AFL jumpers on practically anything and for some reason fans react to it.
Put the exact same woman players in different jumpers and their results and league would have zero coverage.
The AFL were very smart in making the league AFL teams as they know they can dress anything up in AFL jumpers.
The WAFL is second tier and even though it is 10 tiers higher level than AFLW the fans won’t watch it as they feel they can only watch elite level footy. Yet they watch AFLW!!! Go figure
There was a kicking incident early in the season that got 2 weeks and the Collingwood AFLW captain just got 2 weeks for a very rough crude head high bump that would have been given a minimum of 4 to 5 weeks in the AFL.
The incidents on the boundary line in the Collingwood Bulldogs game only got reprimands where I think that the AFL would have given weeks. The MRP is always inconsistent but seems to be more so.
It may just be that because the season is a lot shorter in the AFLW they are trying to make the suspensions proportional. 4 weeks in the AFLW would be half a season and therefore more severe than 4 weeks in the AFL.
Have not heard it discussed anywhere. It may just be that the MRP 2018 will be more lenient.
- Banned
- #404
Think you answered your own question, a shortened season means you get less weeks I presume.
But as for your examples, there was nothing in the bulldogs/pies boundary clash, just a free kick for dangerous tackle near the boundary. The kicking incident got 2 weeks which seems fair enough in an 8 game season - equivalent to 4 or 5 weeks in a full 22 round season
chiwigi
I’ll make tears from your Wines.
https://www.smh.com.au/business/com...e-downs-of-yahoo7-presto-20170215-gud53d.html
They have an absolute golden goose (as do 9 and 10).
Not sure why anyone would be bullish about the long term viability of the AFLW and why it's anything special for networks.
But the AFL / MRP have never said that they are factoring in the shorter season. Or have they, that was the point of my original post.
Crankyhawk
Brownlow Medallist
I thought NBL was on FTA SBS 2
chiwigi
I’ll make tears from your Wines.
Not bullish, but for very little investment they could create themselves a wonderful advertising vehicle with a clear (and substantial) demographic.
Or they can milk the reality TV and repeats cow until it runs dry.
- Feb 29, 2012
- 6,195
- 7,261
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
Pretty sure the NBL pays to have it on. Point is no one wants it even for nothing because it's worth nothing.
It becomes special if it is made a package with AFL. The cost is minimal, All things considered, so the AFL makes it clear that bidders for AFL that also offer to broadcast AFLW will be looked upon favourably. That's all they need do. Broadcasters spending hundreds of millions acquiring AFL are not going to blink at the relatively inexpensive option of adding on a dozen or so AFLW games to help get the bid over.
The comparisons with other sports is meaningless, the NBL doesn't have a much more desirable product with which to hitch NBL negotiations to.
The value to the AFL in the AFLW is in having visible female role models.
My prediction, AFLW is always on fta, and it's never relegated to SBS2.
Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk
- Feb 29, 2012
- 6,195
- 7,261
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
Lol at that complete delusion on negotiations. The comparison is apt, commercially neither have any value on FTA.
Kicking one was probably touch and go. Low impact and more of a push than a kick. As for the rough conduct, 3 down to 2 seemed about right to me.
My understanding is that it is meant to be handled the same way as the men’s (we’ll the old system of the men’s anyway). Human nature would suggest there could be an element of leniency due to accounting for the short season
deltablues
Cancelled
- Jul 16, 2013
- 1,891
- 1,950
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Sturt, Green Bay Packers
OK, you got me.
- Feb 29, 2012
- 6,195
- 7,261
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
I'll bet it won't be on the main channels if 7 or 9 win it, can't see 10 being completely broke with any chance of actually bidding. For sure it'll get thrown in with the deal but it's laughable to suggest that channel 7 or 9 are going to be dictated too that they have a much better chance of winning the rights if they show it on their main channel. No, they'll bid on what they actually want and if the AFL wants it on any secondary channel at all they will have to throw it in free, the FTA stations are not charities and it's not their problem to invest in it, just like every other sport in Aus that doesn't get on FTA or does on some backwater channel.
Doubt more than key games are on main channels. Most will be secondary. In WA, most AFL games are secondary. Opening game and gf maybe.
I also think it will not be 'dictated'.
AFLW broadcasts will be like Contra, a way of cash strapped tv companies sweetening their offer a little without having to find cash up front. Its worth it to the AFL as the AFLW is more valuable (not in a cash flow sense) the more visible it is.
TV companies are businesses, and they will be looking for ways to put themselves ahead of the pack in rights negotiations that do not involve more money.
This is such a simple and relatively cheap way to do it, the AFL isn't going to have to ask imop. Note that I am not suggesting this will be a major factor, coming in with a shitty offer plus AFLW doesn't cut it. It would be a little cream on a big cake.
The only real issue is how long it is until the next rights deal comes up.
Will TV execs think it's worth keeping the AFL sweet in the meantime by offering to put on AFLW?
I think so, in the face of what may be multi billion dollar negotiations, it's like a company rep leaving a box of branded pens in the tea room. Might not help, cannot hurt.
Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk
It will only ever be with the men’s rights, there is no way 9 or 10 would want the AFLW as a stand alone product in the next 10-20 years.
So it will only ever be on TV as a package with the men’s game. It’s a tag along product at this point with little commercial value.
- Feb 29, 2012
- 6,195
- 7,261
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
This is my point, they are not going to sign on to something the AFL wants them to do that is going to cost them money for that precious air time where they can be putting on things that bring in revenue. It also is not a true statement that the AFLW is worth more the more visible it is, it hasn't held true for any other sports that struggle for FTA time because if something is worth nothing, making it more visible with no one watching it makes it still worth nothing.
Look I know you love AFLW and that's OK but it's blinding you to a lot of things and one of those is clearly commercial reality.
- Feb 29, 2012
- 6,195
- 7,261
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
I will add for balance I think that the best thing and what imo they should have done, waited some years and built up the domestic comps and then launched a full comp with every team at once that mirrors the mens, double headers every game women then men. That solves well to me all the issues, people are going to watch whether they want to or not as they'll either physically be at the game or waiting to watch on TV and I reckon the buy in would have been much more. When the 36ers and Lightning had double headers it was the prime WNBL time in this town because the market wasn't fractured and people got behind them, good bang for your buck etc.
So it will be in FTA then? I don't think the AFL will care why it's on FTA.
A league and W league are also on FTA, with no better or poorer ratings.
Sent from my Lenovo TB3-710F using Tapatalk
owen87
Premium Gold
- Apr 23, 2016
- 30,944
- 43,372
- AFL Club
- Essendon
I can see the AFL being swayed by a potential bid package committing to a certain number of games being broadcast on FTA - whether main or secondary channels - so long as that doesn’t compromise the dollar value of the bid.
More visibility means a more appealing product for potential club sponsors, so the AFL has less of a financial exposure - or may even make a profit on the league.
Whether any channel will see sufficient viewer figures to justify replacing whatever rubbish reality tv show they usually run on their main channel is a different matter.
chiwigi
I’ll make tears from your Wines.
Rupert Murdoch sold everything but his news and sports arms to Disney. Why?
Because for 'normal' TV only Sport and News will make money in the future, everything else will be down to streaming high quality shows.
The AFLW then turns into a good vehicle for a specific advertising audience.
Because for 'normal' TV only Sport and News will make money in the future, everything else will be down to streaming high quality shows.
The AFLW then turns into a good vehicle for a specific advertising audience.
In the interest of keeping the grounds in good condition double headers every match is not possible. Thats why the reserves was moved.
threenewpadlocks
Brownlow Medallist
Also "waiting for the domestic leagues to strengthen" for an 18 team competition, you'd be waiting literally forever because the talent pool and ability to invest in player development only occurred because the competition was launched in the first place, giving women's footy visibility and making it attractive for investment.
