20th AFL Team

[The Educator]

I posted figures as well but you didn’t like that either.

No it’s not but it’s unfair to judge a team after 3 years.

You are you are saying again that they are losing popularity whilst ignoring me when I’m saying every new team has a halo effect in crowds in its first year or two.

You are like a dog with a bone I think you’ve lost sight of what you’re even arguing here about the dolphins.

How about this if you want numbers:
- dolphins are in the top 6 of average crowds in the nrl

In comparison to the most recent expansion efforts in the afl, who are sitting in last and second last.

Let’s stick to facts over vibes since that’s your thing. GWS are getting about the same kind of crowds and tv viewers that they did 14 years ago. Not much growth there.


not sure in any of this that you provided any evidence that there’s not enough fans of the nrl in Christchurch to support a team. Clearly there’s enough fans with multiple bids for a Christchurch nrl team out forward by third party investors and the nrl declaring they are a target. But you must have a different set of exclusive data points that you just haven’t shared with us.

Society in Canberra has adjusted to being both afl and nrl but Christchurch are yet to be able to follow both rugby union and rugby league?

Crowds - Christchurch nrl games sold out.

Sure if ‘google trends’ and your specific use case of it is the one and only truth. You barely have to open your eyes to see that rugby league in New Zealand is growing. Just type in rugby league growth in nz in google search since you’re obsessed with google and read some articles.

Again you must have some exclusive access data to show that.


This guy is seriously making the comparison that afl is growing in Pakistan and rugby league in NZ is going backwards and I’m supposed to be having a meaningful discussion here? I wasting my time.

Despite all this talk of Christchurch and Canberra, I still think the 20th teams for the nrl and afl respectively should be Ipswich and WA3.

No he was clearly (to anyone with basic capabilities in crticial thinking) highlighting how dismissable your assertions are.

The google trends data, an actualy objective data point, shows that there is not much difference in the popularity of AF and RL there. THe same data shows that RL is a non event in Christchurch.

At this stage the only thing we have supporting rugby league as an irrisistable juggernaut in Christchurch is the doe-eyed fantasistical assertions of an anonymous deluded fan boy from a dingy basement somewhere in western Sydney

Youve provided no evidence whatsoever and so you are left making absurd strawmen like the bolded

 

[hampton]

Taking the shit games is a part of them evolving into a full-time club.

But the Giants are growing in Western Sydney - no matter how much you deny it.

They got 10.5k to a Suns game this season. That had previously never cracked 8.3k. They are trending in the right direction, and being a full-time club would speed that up.

Canberra as a secondary market it too strong. If the Giants need a secondary market (which I think they no longer do), they need somewhere weaker that doesn't get higher crowds than them; doesn't cause constant calls for relocation; and importantly, doesn't demand so many games.

The Giants must play more games in Western Sydney, and they can't do that tied to Canberra, we already expect more than the three games we're getting.

You say they don’t need Canberra yet gws keep playing there. And it’s way more than a secondary market for GWS it’s been a necessity historically to keep their crowd average more respectful.

If they didn’t need them and had so much demand for western Sydney they would’ve pulled pulled out already one would think as a logical stance.

 

[Dirty Bird]

You say they don’t need Canberra yet gws keep playing there. And it’s way more than a secondary market for GWS it’s been a necessity historically to keep their crowd average more respectful.

If they didn’t need them and had so much demand for western Sydney they would’ve pulled pulled out already one would think as a logical stance.

Firstly - Did you know that in the 12 seasons (ignoring covid) that GWS have played at both venues that GWS had higher crowds in Sydney in 7 of those seasons. The 5 that were bigger in Canberra - 2012 (by 314), 2013 (by 71), 2016 (by 760), 2022 (by 3,701) and 2024 (by 904). But over the course of the 12 years, GWS average 195 more in Sydney than in Canberra (ps. I ignored the crowds at Stadium Australia, that would bring up GWS' Sydney stats more)

I also love how you waited until GWS' 14th year to take a shot at GWS's crowds. Since their 3rd season (and ignoring covid) they've only had 1 year with an average crowd less than 10,000

Sydney were doing it right up until their 13th season, infact, they managed it 4 times in 5 years. Which on pure facts is once less than GWS, but I never count 2020/21 towards anyone's attendances. Which means Sydney had more seasons with sub 10,000 crowds than GWS to this same point in their life

 

[hampton]

Firstly - Did you know that in the 12 seasons (ignoring covid) that GWS have played at both venues that GWS had higher crowds in Sydney in 7 of those seasons. The 5 that were bigger in Canberra - 2012 (by 314), 2013 (by 71), 2016 (by 760), 2022 (by 3,701) and 2024 (by 904). But over the course of the 12 years, GWS average 195 more in Sydney than in Canberra (ps. I ignored the crowds at Stadium Australia, that would bring up GWS' Sydney stats more)

I also love how you waited until GWS' 14th year to take a shot at GWS's crowds. Since their 3rd season (and ignoring covid) they've only had 1 year with an average crowd less than 10,000

Sydney were doing it right up until their 13th season, infact, they managed it 4 times in 5 years. Which on pure facts is once less than GWS, but I never count 2020/21 towards anyone's attendances. Which means Sydney had more seasons with sub 10,000 crowds than GWS to this same point in their life

You say that like it’s an achievement that gws average higher in Sydney, their actual market with 5.5m inhabitants, playing against the top teams, over Canberra a small city with the shitter games. I don’t know how much of a flex you think that is.

 

[Canberra Pear]

You say they don’t need Canberra yet gws keep playing there.

Because they're overly cautious. But it's also a deal they signed in 2022. It will be a different scenario by 2032.

And it’s way more than a secondary market for GWS it’s been a necessity historically to keep their crowd average more respectful.

This is such a weak argument.

Canberra maybe raises Giants crowds by maybe 500. And if anything, it makes Sydney crowds look worse when people inevitably compare the two.

It also ignores that it negatively affects Sydney crowds. There's usually a slump after the absence from the loss of momentum.

If they didn’t need them and had so much demand for western Sydney they would’ve pulled pulled out already one would think as a logical stance.

Once again, 2022 was a different time. Poor crowds from Covid created uncertainty and Tasmania was far from a done deal.

Both the Giants and Canberra are in much better positions now.

 

[RedV3x]

Dude, you're on an AFL forum.

Don't worry about it. The mods don't think this off topic so go for it.

 

[RedV3x]

The nrl haven’t even scratched the surface

You're joking right. So what's with the low attendances.

Perth still coming

Cannot wait for that millstone to truly develop.

dolphins should’ve entered 20 years ago

Yes that's how dumb the NRL are.

Canberra

is being eased in with GWS providing the pathway.

You think rugby league in Queensland doesn’t have enough support in SEQ for another nrl team?

Well no. Why don't they fix the Titans first.

And they’re based in the Redcliffe peninsula of much smaller population than the unserviced Ipswich area.

Well that was smart of the NRL don't you think.

the afl expansion teams

Hello, Brisbane LIons and the Sydney Swans have been hugely successful.
Brisbane LIons and the Sydney Swans have been so successful that we consider them a natural feature..

There are multiple other non-QZ nrl teams

Which makes one wonder why the NRL isn't called the PRL.

NZ2 would also be a no brainer in Christchurch.

And another knife in the NRL pie.

South Island has 1.2m people total.

South Island is 840km long with a mountain along the spine you idiot.

I still think WA3 makes the most sense,

That's good. That means it the wrong option.

Canberra makes sense but it’s currently propping up GWS

A Canberra AFL side would be mutually beneficial to both Canberra and GWS.
I think Canberra is the best option simply because if offers double the improvement.

Brisbane2 is way too early to be discussed.

Brisbane2 has to be discussed before the Olympic stadium is built
and the Brisbane Lions juggernaut overpowers Queensland and the AFL.

 

[hampton]

No he was clearly (to anyone with basic capabilities in crticial thinking) highlighting how dismissable your assertions are.

The google trends data, an actualy objective data point, shows that there is not much difference in the popularity of AF and RL there. THe same data shows that RL is a non event in Christchurch.

At this stage the only thing we have supporting rugby league as an irrisistable juggernaut in Christchurch is the doe-eyed fantasistical assertions of an anonymous deluded fan boy from a dingy basement somewhere in western Sydney

Youve provided no evidence whatsoever and so you are left making absurd strawmen like the bolded

Even though it’s not too late to delete this inane post, here’s some google trends objective data you guys love that shows how little interest afl has in comparison to nrl in the Canterbury region.

I can’t believe some of you are so delusional in here to think that league and afl are as popular as each other in major cities of nz. To even utter it is cringe worthy.

 

[hampton]

You're joking right. So what's with the low attendances.


Cannot wait for that millstone to truly develop.



Yes that's how dumb the NRL are.


is being eased in with GWS providing the pathway.


Well no. Why don't they fix the Titans first.



Well that was smart of the NRL don't you think.



Hello, Brisbane LIons and the Sydney Swans have been hugely successful.
Brisbane LIons and the Sydney Swans have been so successful that we consider them a natural feature..



Which makes one wonder why the NRL isn't called the PRL.


And another knife in the NRL pie.



South Island is 840km long with a mountain along the spine you idiot.



That's good. That means it the wrong option.



A Canberra AFL side would be mutually beneficial to both Canberra and GWS.
I think Canberra is the best option simply because if offers double the improvement.



Brisbane2 has to be discussed before the Olympic stadium is built
and the Brisbane Lions juggernaut overpowers Queensland and the AFL.

How long are we going to be calling Sydney swans and Brisbane lions expansion teams? They’ve nearly been around for 50 years for god sake. Still Brisbane lions are receiving funding as though they are a new expansion.

We hear about multi generational adoption is needed for gws and suns but we’re already there with the swans and lions pushing 50 years and they’ve both achieved a solid niche, but hardly a “”juggernaut” that’s “overpowered” anything and it will still be the case is another 50 years too.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

I posted figures as well but you didn’t like that either.

No it’s not but it’s unfair to judge a team after 3 years.

You are you are saying again that they are losing popularity whilst ignoring me when I’m saying every new team has a halo effect in crowds in its first year or two.

You are like a dog with a bone I think you’ve lost sight of what you’re even arguing here about the dolphins.

How about this if you want numbers:
- dolphins are in the top 6 of average crowds in the nrl

In comparison to the most recent expansion efforts in the afl, who are sitting in last and second last.

Let’s stick to facts over vibes since that’s your thing. GWS are getting about the same kind of crowds and tv viewers that they did 14 years ago. Not much growth there.


not sure in any of this that you provided any evidence that there’s not enough fans of the nrl in Christchurch to support a team. Clearly there’s enough fans with multiple bids for a Christchurch nrl team out forward by third party investors and the nrl declaring they are a target. But you must have a different set of exclusive data points that you just haven’t shared with us.

Society in Canberra has adjusted to being both afl and nrl but Christchurch are yet to be able to follow both rugby union and rugby league?

Crowds - Christchurch nrl games sold out.

Sure if ‘google trends’ and your specific use case of it is the one and only truth. You barely have to open your eyes to see that rugby league in New Zealand is growing. Just type in rugby league growth in nz in google search since you’re obsessed with google and read some articles.

Again you must have some exclusive access data to show that.


This guy is seriously making the comparison that afl is growing in Pakistan and rugby league in NZ is going backwards and I’m supposed to be having a meaningful discussion here? I wasting my time.

Despite all this talk of Christchurch and Canberra, I still think the 20th teams for the nrl and afl respectively should be Ipswich and WA3.

I'm not going to quote this line by line, but I said right off the bat that a Christchurch team is viable, even likely.

I'm just pushing back against your own words of calling it a "no brainier", which is clearly untrue - there are enough reasons to doubt the potential success of a Christchurch NRL team that make your words, a "no brainier", not true.

As a city it is one-third of the population of Auckland, something you have not addressed at all.

 

[The_Wookie]

How long are we going to be calling Sydney swans and Brisbane lions expansion teams? They’ve nearly been around for 50 years for god sake. Still Brisbane lions are receiving funding as though they are a new expansion.

We hear about multi generational adoption is needed for gws and suns but we’re already there with the swans and lions pushing 50 years and they’ve both achieved a solid niche, but hardly a “”juggernaut” that’s “overpowered” anything and it will still be the case is another 50 years too.

Solid niche lol - the Swans are the biggest single club in Sydney by average attendance, membership and football derived revenue. The Lions just happen to be up against the Broncos, who are the biggest NRL club in terms of those numbers by quite some margin, but compared to most NRL clubs would be considered a juggernaut on attendance, membership and football revenue data.

Funding is something else entirely. The AFL funding system is not the same as the NRL one, and the AFL literally controls the Giants/Suns and Swans.

It does seem to cost quite a bit more to run an AFL club than an NRL one. NRL clubs receive 130% of the salary cap as a base. The base distribution for AFL clubs doesnt even cover the salary cap. Howewver both the Swans and Lions fall within their clubs share of the media rights, so I really couldnt give a damn what NRL flunkies think.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

They’ve nearly been around for 50 years

Brisbane have been based at the Gabba for 33 years, that's not "nearly"

Still Brisbane lions are receiving funding as though they are a new expansion.

Brisbane Lions receives funding because there's a ceiling on how much revenue they generate, as other than GC/GWS, their main home stadium has the lowest capacity of any AFL team. They have sold out almost all of their home games for the last two years, but hard to generate revenue when other teams' in demand games get crowds of 45,000 and theirs are 35,000 but would have gotten 45,000 in a bigger stadium. The stadium itself, relative to SCG/Docklands/MCG/Adelaide Oval/Perth Stadium is older and also has far less appealing corporate facilities, Lions in a relative sense can't revenue generate the same as those teams and it's only fair they get a bit of money (AFL can certainly afford it) in an equitable sense, much in the same way that Dogs, Saints and North get more funding because the AFL rarely schedules them playing home games against Collingwood, Richmond, Essendon and Carlton.

but we’re already there with the swans and lions pushing 50 years and they’ve both achieved a solid niche,

Selling out the majority of your games is not a niche.

Sydney's average home crowd was over 34,000, Brisbane's was over 30,000. For the sake of comparison the average Docklands crowd in this year's home and away season in the AFL was slightly more than Brisbane and less than Sydney's, that included some games where there was substantial away support with two Melbourne teams playing each other in Docklands. Without capacity constraints, both Sydney and Brisbane would be higher. It's hardly a niche, its both bigger than other sports teams in those respective cities and the level of interest is genuinely strong relative to other AFL teams.

You are you are saying again that they are losing popularity whilst ignoring me when I’m saying every new team has a halo effect in crowds in its first year or two.

I want to go back to this.

So you would assume that in year four, Dolphins crowds will now increase (or is year 3 still the halo effect), and more people in the Roy Morgan survey will say that they are supporting Dolphins? You're the one that's claiming that it's still "growing" and surely the halo effect (your claim) is not impacting the team on year 3 (your words that it's first year or two).

I'm curious. If it's continuing to grow to become a major NRL club, can you give me a prediction as to what you think Dolphins' crowds will be in 2026? Stadium distribution is similar to previous years, 2 games Dolphin Park, 1 at Marrara and remainder at Lang Park.

 

[hampton]

Also since we love using google trends and people tell me afl is as popular as nrl in Canberra, why is nrl google trends significantly higher in the ACT?

Maybe one of the posters can enlighten me that now google trends data is wrong.

 

[hampton]

Oh right I forgot afl in Sydney is a major sport with major popularity across the board, just dominating, but rugby league in New Zealand is, and I quote a “non-event”.

The reality is afl is pretty popular in Sydney and Brisbane and growing, but nowhere near the dominant sport. Whereas league is on many measures more popular in NZ than afl is in the northern states. League has a long history in Nz it’s not a recent upstart.

This is evidenced by the warriors being the biggest rugby club of all codes in Nz. Nrl and nrlw games selling out in cities across Nz. Multiple consortiums putting business cases for another Nz team. Tv figures where nrl is competing against top flight rugby games.

Have you seen tv figures for afl in northern states? It’s very low and hardly close to nrl. On what grounds are those here saying that afl is supremely popular in Brisbane and Sydney and rugby league is a nothing sport in NZ? It’s certainly only based on make believe.

So in nsw whether you call afl popular in a niche group, or very popular, or whatever you want I don’t care. I don’t call it ‘very popular’ because it’s not - it’s popular among a niche group. If anything afl is less popular in nsw/qld than rugby league is in NZ. At best they’re comparable, and the afl has stuck 4 clubs in the northern states and the nrl just 1 in Nz so far.

I can go on and on but there will still be those in here that think nrl is not followed anywhere other than Auckland, that afl is wildly popular in Sydney but league is nothing in NZ, that rugby league is a non event in Nz comparable in Nz to afl support etc

 

[RedV3x]

How long are we going to be calling Sydney swans and Brisbane lions expansion teams?

Well you're right. The Sydney Swans and Brisbane Lions are now a large part of the sporting landscape.
The Brisbane Lions rival the Broncos as the most attended professional sporting club in Brisbane.
The Sydney Swans at times rival the attendance of all the NRL home games in Sydney.

People once laughed at the idea of AFL in Sydney and Brisbane.
Well they're not laughing now are they. They are scared and running.
You have the NRL's leader doing all sorts of things to halt the growth of AFL in NRL "territory".

The simple fact is that AFL is a better product and a product that easier to sell.
Australian Football is the choice of Australians, when they indeed had a choice.
The choice was removed from New South Welshmen and Queenslanders in history
but now there is no barrier to Australian Football becoming uniformly popular across Australia.
Soon New South Wales and Queensland will be more important than traditional AFL states.

 

[goodolcollingwood]

Oh right I forgot afl in Sydney is a major sport with major popularity across the board, just dominating, but rugby league in New Zealand is, and I quote a “non-event”.

The reality is afl is pretty popular in Sydney and Brisbane and growing, but nowhere near the dominant sport. Whereas league is more popular in NZ than afl is in the northern states.

This is evidenced by the warriors being the biggest rugby club of all codes in Nz. Nrl and nrlw games selling out in cities across Nz. Multiple consortiums putting business cases for another Nz team. Tv figures where nrl is competing against top flight rugby games.

Have you seen tv figures for afl in northern states? It’s very low and hardly close to nrl. On what grounds are those here saying that afl is supremely popular in Brisbane and Sydney and rugby league is a nothing sport in NZ? It’s certainly only based on make believe.

So whether you call afl popular in a niche group, or very popular, or whatever you want I don’t care. I don’t call it ‘very popular’ because it’s not - it’s popular among a niche group. If anything afl is less popular than rugby league is in NZ

I can go on and on but there will still be those in here that think nrl is not followed anywhere other than Auckland, that afl is wildly popular in Sydney but league is nothing in NZ, that rugby league is a non event in Nz comparable in Nz to afl support etc

You're in an AFL forum mate. If you think you're going to get unbiased discussion, you're in the wrong place. The truth is both the AFL and NRL are excelling atm at the expense of the rest of the sports.

 

[hampton]

Well you're right. The Sydney Swans and Brisbane Lions are now a large part of the sporting landscape.
The Brisbane Lions rival the Broncos as the most attended professional sporting club in Brisbane.
The Sydney Swans at times rival the attendance of all the NRL home games in Sydney.

People once laughed at the idea of AFL in Sydney and Brisbane.
Well they're not laughing now are they. They are scared and running.
You have the NRL's leader doing all sorts of things to halt the growth of AFL in NRL "territory".

The simple fact is that AFL is a better product and a product that easier to sell.
Australian Football is the choice of Australians, when they indeed had a choice.
The choice was removed from New South Welshmen and Queenslanders in history
but now there is no barrier to Australian Football becoming uniformly popular across Australia.
Soon New South Wales and Queensland will be more important than traditional AFL states.

Who laughed at it? I don’t see that anyone did. Sydney swans and Brisbane lions are most certainly a part of the sporting landscape.

The reality is though that the afl still considers them as expansion teams and as such many posters here do because they haven’t reached the level of cultural impact and significance in their states that the afl aspire to.

They are a part of the landscape but are not dominating anything. Like the Sydney kings, Sydney FC, or any one of the bigger nrl clubs in Sydney.

 

[Canberra Pear]

Also since we love using google trends and people tell me afl is as popular as nrl in Canberra, why is nrl google trends significantly higher in the ACT?

Maybe one of the posters can enlighten me that now google trends data is wrong.

For one thing, Canberra has its own NRL team. Four times as many home games. Much more reason to search.

And secondly, the Raiders were absolutely flying this year.

AFL has a lot of latent support in Canberra. People who come from AFL families, follow AFL teams, but are less invested because we're a bit removed from the AFL bubble. They're not searching AFL on google, but they lean AFL and would be activated pretty quickly if we actually had a team to get behind.

Unfortunately, it's hard to properly measure the two when we only have a team in one of the leagues.

But regardless, it's common for Canberrans to follow both, so NRL support doesn't negate AFL support.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Also since we love using google trends and people tell me afl is as popular as nrl in Canberra, why is nrl google trends significantly higher in the ACT?

Maybe one of the posters can enlighten me that now google trends data is wrong.

Because there's an NRL team in Canberra not an AFL team in Canberra, so people are going to be naturally interested (irrespective of their trend toward their favourite sport) toward the only actual professional team in the city?

It's absolutely correct though, that in terms of which of the two sports is preferred, that it's roughly a 50/50 split. It's just that (obviously) many people who prefer AFL have an interest in the Raiders as their hometown team, while obviously there's no hometown team for people who prefer NRL to have an interest in re AFL.

You're acting like it's this grand conspiracy and we're all incorrect where like, two seconds of actually using some critical thinking skills here would answer your question.

 

[hampton]

For one thing, Canberra has its own NRL team. Four times as many home games. Much more reason to search.

And secondly, the Raiders were absolutely flying this year.

AFL has a lot of latent support in Canberra. People who come from AFL families, follow AFL teams, but are less invested because we're a bit removed from the AFL bubble. They're not searching AFL on google, but they lean AFL and would be activated pretty quickly if we actually had a team to get behind.

Unfortunately, it's hard to properly measure the two when we only have a team in one of the leagues.

But regardless, it's common for Canberrans to follow both, so NRL support doesn't negate AFL support.

But that’s not the question the point is that there are many people here that are saying afl is as popular as nrl in Canberra (today, not with a hypothetical new Canberra afl team). This data shows it isn’t.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Oh right I forgot afl in Sydney is a major sport with major popularity across the board, just dominating, but rugby league in New Zealand is, and I quote a “non-event”.

The reality is afl is pretty popular in Sydney and Brisbane and growing, but nowhere near the dominant sport. Whereas league is on many measures more popular in NZ than afl is in the northern states.

This is evidenced by the warriors being the biggest rugby club of all codes in Nz. Nrl and nrlw games selling out in cities across Nz. Multiple consortiums putting business cases for another Nz team. Tv figures where nrl is competing against top flight rugby games.

Have you seen tv figures for afl in northern states? It’s very low and hardly close to nrl. On what grounds are those here saying that afl is supremely popular in Brisbane and Sydney and rugby league is a nothing sport in NZ? It’s certainly only based on make believe.

So whether you call afl popular in a niche group, or very popular, or whatever you want I don’t care. I don’t call it ‘very popular’ because it’s not - it’s popular among a niche group. If anything afl is less popular in nsw/qld than rugby league is in NZ. At best they’re comparable, and the afl has stuck 4 clubs in the northern states and the nrl just 1 in Nz so far.

I can go on and on but there will still be those in here that think nrl is not followed anywhere other than Auckland, that afl is wildly popular in Sydney but league is nothing in NZ, that rugby league is a non event in Nz comparable in Nz to afl support etc

My god you're living in your own reality and you're pigheaded.

Nobody is making the claim that the AFL is an immensely popular competition in the cities of Brisbane and Sydney.

It's just that - Sydney population 5.5 million
Brisbane population 2.8 million
Auckland population 1.8 million
Christchurch population 500,000

Sydney and Brisbane have enough people that their AFL teams can be very successful, even if you split hairs on the extent of its popularity or whether you want to call it "niche" or not.

Rugby League can be more popular in a relative sense in Christchurch but its still doing it in a city of 500,000 people, making it reasonable that there could be doubts that there's enough of an interest base to make a team viable. Again, nobody here is saying that the NRL won't put a team in Christchurch (something that you've invested in your own head) or that it is guaranteed not to be successful, we're merely pushing back against your own language that you're 100% confident that it will be a success.

This isn't rocket science.

 

[hampton]

Because there's an NRL team in Canberra not an AFL team in Canberra, so people are going to be naturally interested (irrespective of their trend toward their favourite sport) toward the only actual professional team in the city?

It's absolutely correct though, that in terms of which of the two sports is preferred, that it's roughly a 50/50 split. It's just that (obviously) many people who prefer AFL have an interest in the Raiders as their hometown team, while obviously there's no hometown team for people who prefer NRL to have an interest in re AFL.

You're acting like it's this grand conspiracy and we're all incorrect where like, two seconds of actually using some critical thinking skills here would answer your question.

Again make believe. This data shows it’s not 50/50 it’s more like 70/30 split and 60/40 at best.

Cmon you were the one showing google trends data and now that it doesn’t suit your narrative it’s not useful anymore?

So predictable.

 

[Canberra Pear]

But that’s not the question the point is that there are many people here that are saying afl is as popular as nrl in Canberra. This data shows it isn’t.

I'm not saying it is, but one specific set of data cherry-picked for the Raiders' most successful year in ages doesn't negate it either.

The AFL v NRL popularity debate in Canberra has been raging for decades and it's more nuanced than one data point can sum up.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

But that’s not the question the point is that there are many people here that are saying afl is as popular as nrl in Canberra (today, not with a hypothetical new Canberra afl team). This data shows it isn’t.

It's a 20th AFL team thread. We're interested in the idea of what the support would be for the AFL if the 20th team is in Canberra.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Again make believe. This data shows it’s not 50/50 it’s more like 70/30 split and 60/40 at best.

Cmon you were the one showing google trends data and now that it doesn’t suit your narrative it’s not useful anymore?

It's not make believe. The Canberra region participation rate for Australian football is 10,000, and for Rugby League its 6,000 (that is, active adult participants that play consistent community football)

Once you adjust for the fact that a) RL is about 80% as popular as AF generally across the country and b) the participation rate for Australian Rules is generally higher anyway than RL as a participation sport, and divide those figures against the 10,000 and 6,000 figures, you get almost a bang on 50/50 split in the sport

AusPlay results | Clearinghouse | ASC

From July 2023 onwards

www.ausport.gov.au