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

HavUEvaSeenTheRain

Norm Smith Medallist
Apr 20, 2006
9,110
12,172
AFL Club
Carlton

Are those figures in the article including professional club handouts? Because if so those $ figures per participant are almost irrelevant. You would have to get down to purely grassroots funding. Also I imagine country league and football clubs would gain a hell of a lot more funding conparitivly because the are vital to small communities.

One of the main reasons these participation figures are pointless are because recreational fisherman ect will start demanding billions.
Also where’s basketballs funding figures?
 

HavUEvaSeenTheRain

Norm Smith Medallist
Apr 20, 2006
9,110
12,172
AFL Club
Carlton
Sorry but that is really dubious at a number of levels

Firstly, what is included in those funding figures? Funding related to elite facilities that are granted in the context of very long term contracts with a range of obligations are not relevant to participation numbers

Secondly, the Ausplay survey actually reports organised participation by adults so why use the figure that includes casual participation? People playing in the park do not need refurbished pavilions.

Soccer's problem is it cannot live within its means. If you are ripping kids off to pay for semi professionals / professionals than getting more grants isn't going to help. The model is broken
Beat me to it. I think they need to realise their position like basketball has. No doubt they envy Football and Leagues positions but they have to build it to get there not just expect it to be given to them.
All they have to do is get all their supporters engaged at all levels like the other codes have and it would happen. The problem is they aren’t because huge amounts of the players still see it as more of a hobby, like surfing, fishing, riding ect
 
Nov 8, 2000
33,295
21,790
South of the river
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Peel Thunder
How do you determine 'funding to codes'? Any given park hosts multiple sports - I can only speak for Perth but it's pretty much the norm for any footy ground to become a cricket ground during summer. So if a new changeroom is built for that park, do you allocate 100% of it to both sports? Or say the council builds a rec centre with 10 different sports played there, how on earth do you allocate that? Or if a sporting team pays market rent for a facility, is the capital cost still counted?
And i'm also assuming this doesn't include expenses at the professional level - as if it did then participation is pretty much irrelevant. It's about bums on seats - obviously footy has a lot more demand for spectator infrastructure because it has more spectators.

Notwithstanding the fact that there is no source provided for that info, i'd want to see the methodology before taking it as fact.
 
Jul 2, 2010
37,953
36,136
Adelaide
AFL Club
Carlton
Sorry but that is really dubious at a number of levels

Firstly, what is included in those funding figures? Funding related to elite facilities that are granted in the context of very long term contracts with a range of obligations are not relevant to participation numbers

That im trying to get to the bottom of now.

Secondly, the Ausplay survey actually reports organised participation by adults so why use the figure that includes casual participation? People playing in the park do not need refurbished pavilions.

The Ausplay survey doesnt report organised participation by adult on a state by state basis.
 
Jul 2, 2010
37,953
36,136
Adelaide
AFL Club
Carlton
How do you determine 'funding to codes'? Any given park hosts multiple sports - I can only speak for Perth but it's pretty much the norm for any footy ground to become a cricket ground during summer. So if a new changeroom is built for that park, do you allocate 100% of it to both sports? Or say the council builds a rec centre with 10 different sports played there, how on earth do you allocate that? Or if a sporting team pays market rent for a facility, is the capital cost still counted?
And i'm also assuming this doesn't include expenses at the professional level - as if it did then participation is pretty much irrelevant. It's about bums on seats - obviously footy has a lot more demand for spectator infrastructure because it has more spectators.

Notwithstanding the fact that there is no source provided for that info, i'd want to see the methodology before taking it as fact.

If you see the twitter conversation with the journo I query it all the way down.
 
Jul 2, 2010
37,953
36,136
Adelaide
AFL Club
Carlton
Are those figures in the article including professional club handouts? Because if so those $ figures per participant are almost irrelevant. You would have to get down to purely grassroots funding. Also I imagine country league and football clubs would gain a hell of a lot more funding conparitivly because the are vital to small communities.

All i can tell you is what they've given me. I asked for sources and the journo gave me the image you can see.

One of the main reasons these participation figures are pointless are because recreational fisherman ect will start demanding billions.
Also where’s basketballs funding figures?

Its an article written by a soccer journo about soccers percieved woes. basketball is irrelevant to their point.
 

HavUEvaSeenTheRain

Norm Smith Medallist
Apr 20, 2006
9,110
12,172
AFL Club
Carlton
All i can tell you is what they've given me. I asked for sources and the journo gave me the image you can see.



Its an article written by a soccer journo about soccers percieved woes. basketball is irrelevant to their point.
I imagine Basketball was left out because they would be getting the least of the lot and they actually have a lot of similarities with soccer (high participation, low professional interest/engagement)
The difference is they acknowledge they have to live within their means
 

BringBackTorps

Club Legend
Jan 5, 2017
2,963
1,827
AFL Club
GWS

Ausplay participant nos. are very unreliable.
Ausplay only surveys c. 25,000 people in Australia.

FAR worse, however, it simply asks respondents if they played a sport at least ONCE in the last 12 months. If the person answers "yes" to this question for a particular sport, they are then counted as a "participant" in that sport!
It is for this reason that walking, gym, swimming are recorded in such huge nos. by Ausplay; & it also records many "minor" sports having large nos.

The most reliable statistics are those compiled by each sporting organisation of its own, registered participants (which, very usefully, break down their nos. into the various formats eg club competition, school competition, one-off events, Gala days, short term community programs etc.).

On the Official AFL 2017 Registered participant nos., cf the Official FFA 2017 Registered participant nos. (ie approx. 1,547,000 to 1,631,000), Australian Football is now very close to soccer. Both Official figures, however, include a majority of "participants" who are only involved in these sports in a one-off Gala Day, very short program etc ie not lengthy, proper Club or school competition players.

The FFA, various soccer officials & journalists have been peddling the falsehood for several years that soccer has more "participants" than AF, RL, & RU combined. They say this, I suspect, to attempt to attract greater funding from govts., Councils, sponsors etc. - & more media attention.
 
Last edited:

NoobPie

Cancelled
Sep 21, 2016
7,356
5,255
AFL Club
Collingwood
That im trying to get to the bottom of now.

Good luck with that! You'd think the journalist who was given the information might have sought that out if he was professionally inclined


The Ausplay survey doesnt report organised participation by adult on a state by state basis.

It does for the five mainland states....and it should be noted that the table given to you was done at a national level.

This is based on Victoria's....

1550542828719.png


Basically soccer's informal participation numbers are inflated by the nature of the game. I personally play futsal and park soccer so I'd be showing up in those figures. Why should some soccer club get more money for facilities relative to other sports on account of me playing soccer at a school or in a park?
 
Nov 8, 2000
33,295
21,790
South of the river
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Peel Thunder
All i can tell you is what they've given me. I asked for sources and the journo gave me the image you can see.

Basically he gave you the same numbers from the article but in table form, as if that gives them more credibility. For a professional journo, that's pretty pissweak.

Call me cynical, but I suspect there's a heavy influence of self interest here. Not just about the figures, but about the timing - I note it's a pretty narrow period it's looking at.
 
May 4, 2009
12,366
11,518
Tasmania
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Furth
But i find the whole "by the numbers" approach flawed. Every sport and club have different needs and it is a simplistic approach to just say a sport should get said funding just because it has x number of people. It is far too simplistic.

Our democracy "works" via lobbying for funding. That is the role of sporting organisations. You would hope that they would be able to make a really good case for more funding if little Timmy couldn't play on the weekend because there are no facilities available. For me, that is the most important aspect of sporting funding at grassroots level. That every kid/adult can play.

We get one of these articles about a sport every month or so. It must be soccers turn. Next month will be the other 2 football codes. Not saying the articles are not right, but every sport always wants more funding.
 

HavUEvaSeenTheRain

Norm Smith Medallist
Apr 20, 2006
9,110
12,172
AFL Club
Carlton
But i find the whole "by the numbers" approach flawed. Every sport and club have different needs and it is a simplistic approach to just say a sport should get said funding just because it has x number of people. It is far too simplistic.

Our democracy "works" via lobbying for funding. That is the role of sporting organisations. You would hope that they would be able to make a really good case for more funding if little Timmy couldn't play on the weekend because there are no facilities available. For me, that is the most important aspect of sporting funding at grassroots level. That every kid/adult can play.

We get one of these articles about a sport every month or so. It must be soccers turn. Next month will be the other 2 football codes. Not saying the articles are not right, but every sport always wants more funding.
Yep they should have grounds to play on and I know especially in Sydney they are struggling so they definitely need support with that but the whole $ per participant is contrived bs
 

NoobPie

Cancelled
Sep 21, 2016
7,356
5,255
AFL Club
Collingwood
But i find the whole "by the numbers" approach flawed. Every sport and club have different needs and it is a simplistic approach to just say a sport should get said funding just because it has x number of people. It is far too simplistic.

Our democracy "works" via lobbying for funding. That is the role of sporting organisations. You would hope that they would be able to make a really good case for more funding if little Timmy couldn't play on the weekend because there are no facilities available. For me, that is the most important aspect of sporting funding at grassroots level. That every kid/adult can play.

We get one of these articles about a sport every month or so. It must be soccers turn. Next month will be the other 2 football codes. Not saying the articles are not right, but every sport always wants more funding.


I am not aware of any other sport that will-fully miss-characterises the funding and participation of other sports in order to prosecute a case it should exclusively get more. I could be wrong but I have seen soccer do it twice now and can't recall a comparable example from other sports
 

BringBackTorps

Club Legend
Jan 5, 2017
2,963
1,827
AFL Club
GWS
I am not aware of any other sport that will-fully miss-characterises the funding and participation of other sports in order to prosecute a case it should exclusively get more. I could be wrong but I have seen soccer do it twice[much more] now and can't recall a comparable example from other sports
Multiple soccer Officials & soccer media commentators have claimed falsely (paraphrasing) "Soccer has more participants than the other football codes combined". They select deliberately the deeply flawed Ausplay statistics that inflate soccer nos. cf Ausplay AF, RL, & RU nos. (Ausplay, a small survey of only 25,000, record a person as a sport "participant" if the person answers he/she played that sport only ONCE in the last YEAR!).

Soccer's Football West CEO J. Curtiss has also falsely claimed in Nov.2017 soccer has more GR participants in WA than AF.

https://www.communitynews.com.au/comment/news/soccer-cements-itself-as-was-most-popular-team-sport/

As you have correctly alluded to, it is much easier to play & organise the "simple", non-body contact small-sided game of soccer cf. the body-contact codes.
The Ausplay survey would be much more likely to identify/record these soccer "participants" (often playing only 1 game in a year) cf the more rigorous/physically demanding AF, RL, & RU codes.

The FFA, since 2017 only, use Ausplay statistics exclusively in their Annual Reports (ie not their own FFA Official, much more detailed, registered participants). All the other codes, in their Annual Reports to the ASC, quote exclusively their own Official registered participant nos. not a survey! These detailed FFA Annual Financial Reports are legally required to be presented to the Australian Sports Commission, & are supposed to be accurate.
The FFA's unique approach (ie citing only the very imprecise Ausplay survey) is because Ausplay over-represents soccer, & under-represents the other football codes.

FFA Annual Financial Report 2015 Official Registered Participants- 635,000 (see page 4 in link)
https://www.ffa.com.au/sites/ffa/files/2017-09/FFA Financial Report for the year ended 30 June 2015_1cymyvjvwhzc11hihyzzvcucaq.pdf

FFA Annual Financial Report 2016 Official Registered Participants- 665,000

FFA Annual Financial Report 2017 Official Registered Participants- 1,100,000 (?! Now only cites Ausplay! Brilliant & huge increase by the FFA in one year, world class recruitment effort- how much bigger were the FFA executive bonuses!)
See pg 4 in this link-only mentions Ausplay nos.!
https://www.ffa.com.au/sites/ffa/files/2017-11/FFA Financial Report for the year ended 30 June 2017_0.pdf

(At posts 1159 & 1169 in this thread, I have analysed, in great detail, the recent history of the FFA Annual Official Registered Participant nos.- & their various claims/distortions/falsehoods about their nos. The MSM are too lazy & incompetent to analyse the FFA nos./claims, & simply regurgitate the FFA falsehoods. I don't wish to retype all the above posts again, with multiple links/citations- but some may wish to peruse those posts above for more information).

I suspect there will be an increased, very public, FFA campaign/code war to obtain more govt. & Council funding etc. for GR soccer facilities. The FFA will use the obviously flawed Ausplay statistics to "justify" its claim soccer (citing Ausplay nos., not their Official Registered nos.- & FFA citing also only Ausplay under-recorded AF, RL, & RU nos.) is being underfunded/disadvantaged etc.

The FFA is aware that the AFL will be seeking much more govt. etc funding for facilities to accomodate the AF GR boom. The FFA will attempt to "subvert" the AFL's requests. It will claim soccer, due to its "huge" (inflated) Ausplay nos., has been underfunded, thus has a greater priority/justification for much increased GR soccer facility funding.

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/soccer...on-soccer-infrastructure-20181007-p5088s.html

I strongly suspect the FFA is also using Ausplay nos. to attract local, Chinese, Arabic, & other foreign funding/support for new A League expansion licences- to help awaken "the sleeping giant of Australian sport" to its "rightful manifest destiny & triumph".

On 5.5.2015, the Herald Sun reported the FFA was stating, in its "Whole Of Football Plan... an active participant base of four million people was possible" by 2035.
By 2035, the "FFA has set the goal of soccer's A League becoming the most popular sporting contest in the nation, eclipsing AFL, NRL, cricket and rugby".
These are sentiments/future trajectories the FFA is, I assume, pushing heavily to the foreign investors (excluding Chinese Communist Party Soft Power Australian political ambitions)- private businesses want to make a profit eventually!

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/v...a/news-story/66343c59cbab3be9a0774ee2bd9415c4
 
Last edited:

Our Game

Club Legend
Sep 30, 2014
2,881
1,705
Sandringham
AFL Club
Geelong
"On 5.5.2015, the Herald Sun reported the FFA was stating, in its "Whole Of Football Plan... an active participant base of four million people was possible" by 2035.
By 2035, the "FFA has set the goal of soccer's A League becoming the most popular sporting contest in the nation, eclipsing AFL, NRL, cricket and rugby""

That plan is going really well isnt it?. The way the A League is struggling ATM it may not even exist in 16 years in its current form.
 
May 4, 2009
12,366
11,518
Tasmania
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Furth
I am not aware of any other sport that will-fully miss-characterises the funding and participation of other sports in order to prosecute a case it should exclusively get more. I could be wrong but I have seen soccer do it twice now and can't recall a comparable example from other sports
It is called lobbying. Just because we may not like the argument, doesn't make it misleading or effective.

Get rid of the persecution complex as well. You sound like "hyper sensitive soccer fan." your words, not mine.



Multiple soccer Officials & soccer media commentators have claimed falsely (paraphrasing) "Soccer has more participants than the other football codes combined". They select deliberately the deeply flawed Ausplay statistics that inflate soccer nos. cf Ausplay AF, RL, & RU nos. (Ausplay, a small survey of only 25,000, record a person as a sport "participant" if the person answers he/she played that sport only ONCE in the last YEAR!).
etc etc etc
So??????

Aus Play is an official government survey. Your issue is with how surveys are conducted. That is how surveys are taken anywhere in the world.

I swear we had the same discussion the last time.

It is called lobbying.
"On 5.5.2015, the Herald Sun reported the FFA was stating, in its "Whole Of Football Plan... an active participant base of four million people was possible" by 2035.
By 2035, the "FFA has set the goal of soccer's A League becoming the most popular sporting contest in the nation, eclipsing AFL, NRL, cricket and rugby""

That plan is going really well isnt it?. The way the A League is struggling ATM it may not even exist in 16 years in its current form.

Anything new to add..........
 

NoobPie

Cancelled
Sep 21, 2016
7,356
5,255
AFL Club
Collingwood
It is called lobbying. Just because we may not like the argument, doesn't make it misleading or effective.

Get rid of the persecution complex as well. You sound like "hyper sensitive soccer fan." your words, not mine.

Yeah Naaah, I just pointed out that no other sport I am aware of willfully (and publicly) misrepresents the funding and participation data of other codes in order to lobby the government for money

Australian soccer's persecution complex is very much reflected in that behaviour. I don't think football is being persecuted at all. That's a bizarre contortion

And, once again I point this out, I am on a football forum criticising behaviour of Australian soccer on a cross-code thread in response to a moderator linking an article here. I'm not sure if that makes me "hypersensitive" but if it does what words are left for soccer fans coming on to a football forum taking offence to anything that might resemble criticism of soccer?

In summary, Australian soccer lowering its colors again with bad faith behaviour, feeding the beast which is world sports biggest persecution complex
 
Last edited:
May 13, 2012
15,809
5,960
AFL Club
GWS
Other Teams
Brumbies, Socceroos
I wonder if these figures take into account that in the suburbs and regions oval fields are generally shared between cricket and football clubs, or that many clubs in regional Victoria/Southern NSW also have attached netball clubs.

Probably not.

In these sorts of discussions, without exception, money spent on Carrara or the Sydney Showgrounds, for example, constitutes money spent on Australian Football (with no recognition of AFL contributions).

But if the Victorian Government, for example, spends some $300 mill building a rectangular stadium (with zero contribution from any sport), that is NOT money spent on soccer.
 

NoobPie

Cancelled
Sep 21, 2016
7,356
5,255
AFL Club
Collingwood
I wonder if these figures take into account that in the suburbs and regions oval fields are generally shared between cricket and football clubs, or that many clubs in regional Victoria/Southern NSW also have attached netball clubs.

I assumed it was primarily for major facilities like Princess Park and the Lions Springfield facility. It is not even clear whether this is something FFA hatched together or whether the government provided it

The community sport infrastructure grant program apparently dolled out about $30M in the first round so that could only be a fraction of what is in that table...

https://www.sportaus.gov.au/grants_and_funding/community_sport_infrastructure_grant_program/feedback

https://www.sportaus.gov.au/grants_...grant_program/successful_grant_recipient_list

Obviously you've heard nothing back from the FFA?
 

BringBackTorps

Club Legend
Jan 5, 2017
2,963
1,827
AFL Club
GWS
1. Wookie

Any chance you can provide more detailed graphics/other info. on the FFA 2018 playing nos. on all their other soccer programs ie school competition players; short term school soccer Phys. Ed & other school short term programs; one -off school Gala Days; & one-off or short term community programs; summer comps.; male & female futsal; what does FFA mean by "social" players; what does FFA mean by "community events and promotional experiences" etc.?

2. The govt./Council GR funding dispute between soccer & AF is starting.

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/...l/news-story/85e94d5e4ce5d6dbdcfa9afc62e73add
 
Last edited:
Back