AFL X

[BringBackTorps]

Further clarification from the AFL on reasons/strategy for development of AFLX:-

. AFL wants to "significantly push" into China, where there are very few ovals; & India, which will in 2024 be the world's largest country, & has the fastest growing economy.
(Both have very large, & growing, affluent middle classes).
. AFLX "...primary audience is kids & families ...reason for the high scoring...active play... short format of 2 x 10 min. halves".
. interestingly, "AFLX, playing on rugby & soccer grounds, will give the AFL more scope to push the game into NSW & Qld".
(The SCG, Spotless & Gabba are unavailable for AF matches over summer -so, to further promote AF, play AFLX there in rectangular stadia).
. Mentions AFLX will have 10 a side -inc. Reserves?

The AFL (which already has a General Manager For China, D. Stevenson -"AFL has its sights firmly set on taking AFLX to Asia") has a very clear strategy to grow into new markets -& will utilise the plethora of rectangular stadia!
The AFL should be congratulated on its ambitious plans. How much will AFLX cost, how many years should the trial period be, & will AFLX succeed in significantly promoting AF?

www.afl.com.au/news/2018-01-02/x-marks-the-spot-for-asian-expansion

To give AFLX an important & VERY exciting Point of Difference with standard AF, I would like a rule that allowed any torpedo goal kicked outside 50 mtrs to automatically be worth 2 goals; or allow another torpedo-only shot at goal from the 50 mtr line (& scrap the apparent rule that would allow any goal kicked outside 40 mtrs to be worth 10 points).

Some of the BIGGEST crowd roars ever heard in the VFL/AFL have been when monster torp goals were kicked eg Blight, Rocca, Fletcher, D.Bradshaw (at SCG) etc. Commentators & historians noted similar crowd roars in earlier eras, when these big torp goals were often attempted.
The game is much poorer as a spectacle without big torp goals:the AFL has abandoned a very powerful "evangelising" feature.

 

[Cmarsh]

Further clarification from the AFL on reasons/strategy for development of AFLX:-

. AFL wants to "significantly push" into China, where there are very few ovals; & India, which will in 2024 be the world's largest country, & has the fastest growing economy.
(Both have very large, & growing, affluent middle classes).
. AFLX "...primary audience is kids & families ...reason for the high scoring...active play... short format of 2 x 10 min. halves".
. interestingly, "AFLX, playing on rugby & soccer grounds, will give the AFL more scope to push the game into NSW & Qld".
(The SCG, Spotless & Gabba are unavailable for AF matches over summer -so, to further promote AF, play AFLX there in rectangular stadia).
. Mentions AFLX will have 10 a side -inc. Reserves?

The AFL (which already has a General Manager For China, D. Stevenson -"AFL has its sights firmly set on taking AFLX to Asia") has a very clear strategy to grow into new markets -& will utilise the plethora of rectangular stadia!
The AFL should be congratulated on its ambitious plans. How much will AFLX cost, how many years should the trial period be, & will AFLX succeed in significantly promoting AF?

www.afl.com.au/news/2018-01-02/x-marks-the-spot-for-asian-expansion

To give AFLX an important & VERY exciting Point of Difference with standard AF, I would like a rule that allowed any torpedo goal kicked outside 50 mtrs to automatically be worth 2 goals (& scrap the apparent rule that would allow any goal kicked outside 40 mtrs to be worth 10 points).
Some of the biggest crowd roars ever heard in the VFL/AFL have been when monster torp goals were kicked eg Blight, Rocca, Fletcher etc. Commentators noted similar crowd reactions in earlier eras when these big torp goals were often attempted -the game is much poorer as a spectacle without them.

My question would be does the AFLX concept need to succeed in Australia first in order for the push O/S to work? I guess the AFL are using the upcoming matches in February as a trial to gauge public interest and also justification for the costs of bringing it overseas.

 

[telsor]

My question would be does the AFLX concept need to succeed in Australia first in order for the push O/S to work? I guess the AFL are using the upcoming matches in February as a trial to gauge public interest and also justification for the costs of bringing it overseas.

I'd divide it up into 3 parts.

1. Heartland AFL territory....and no, it doesn't have to succeed there, but clearly, that's not the main target anyway..
2. 'rugby' parts of NSW/QLD.
3. Overseas.

If they can make significant inroads into one, or both of the latter two then they could claim it to be a success, which I'd base both on participation/interest and in the longer term, the flow on from those into the 'real' game.

 

[Cmarsh]

I'd divide it up into 3 parts.

1. Heartland AFL territory....and no, it doesn't have to succeed there, but clearly, that's not the main target anyway..
2. 'rugby' parts of NSW/QLD.
3. Overseas.

If they can make significant inroads into one, or both of the latter two then they could claim it to be a success, which I'd base both on participation/interest and in the longer term, the flow on from those into the 'real' game.

The thing is if aflx is successful overseas then it would be the "real" game overseas due to the plentiful availability of rectangular fields.

 

[telsor]

The thing is if aflx is successful overseas then it would be the "real" game overseas due to the plentiful availability of rectangular fields.

Not really sure how that'd be a success for AFL then.

 

[NoobPie]

The thing is if aflx is successful overseas then it would be the "real" game overseas due to the plentiful availability of rectangular fields.

It would always defer to the real real game. It would be entry level in both exposure and participation. If people got massively into it, interest would soon turn to the AFL. The best it would do would help bash out deeper niches than there is now, and create a slightly less faint global footprint to complement Australian hegemony

 

[BringBackTorps]

It appears that the AFL's vision for AFLX in Australia is to be the AF summer equivalent of the glitzy BBL ie AFLX will be high scoring, minimum stoppages, fast action (which, incidentally, is the opposite of the generally pedestrian, dawdling nature of soccer -to be played on soccer grounds!).

This Age article provides a detailed analysis of how Ch.10 very successfully (massive TV ratings) "hyped" the BBL with its TV Commentary style/strategy.
Could a similar broadcasting strategy be utilised to promote the glitzy AFLX?

When the BBL was announced, & during its first season, it was widely mocked by sport experts, & many members of the public. There is much "humble pie" & hubris now -the BBL is a phenomenon!

www.theage.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/blockheads-and-bucketheads-there-are-lessons-for-nine-in-tens-bbl-coverage-20180101-h0by87.html

 

[Cmarsh]

It would always defer to the real real game. It would be entry level in both exposure and participation. If people got massively into it, interest would soon turn to the AFL. The best it would do would help bash out deeper niches than there is now, and create a slightly less faint global footprint to complement Australian hegemony

I wouldn't be so quick to assume that if aflx garners some interest overseas then we will automatically see more overseas interest in the 18 a side product. The reason I say this is because we haven't seen the kids and teens now going to BBL matches all convert to test cricket lovers or even ODI fans. One of the objectives of the aflx offering is to decrease congestion on field and so create a faster more free flowing game. This remains to be seen if this happens in practice but people that are attracted to a higher scoring, open and faster game may just stick to aflx.

 

[Cmarsh]

Not really sure how that'd be a success for AFL then.

Because people would be watching a game that features marks, handpasses and 6 point goals rather than watching a game where you only use your feet and head and score 1 point goals into the back of a net.

 

[telsor]

Because people would be watching a game that features marks, handpasses and 6 point goals rather than watching a game where you only use your feet and head and score 1 point goals into the back of a net.

A sporting body developing another sport because its somewhat similar without getting much crossover benefit doesn't strike me as a win.

 

[kaypee]

I wouldn't be so quick to assume that if aflx garners some interest overseas then we will automatically see more overseas interest in the 18 a side product. The reason I say this is because we haven't seen the kids and teens now going to BBL matches all convert to test cricket lovers or even ODI fans. One of the objectives of the aflx offering is to decrease congestion on field and so create a faster more free flowing game. This remains to be seen if this happens in practice but people that are attracted to a higher scoring, open and faster game may just stick to aflx.

it would be about finding players as well. If some freak bobbed up playing AFLX in Denmark who wouldn't otherwise have touched a sherrin, then everybody would be happy (and presumably the Danes would also take a bit of an interest should he get picked up by an AFL club)

 

[NoobPie]

I wouldn't be so quick to assume that if aflx garners some interest overseas then we will automatically see more overseas interest in the 18 a side product. The reason I say this is because we haven't seen the kids and teens now going to BBL matches all convert to test cricket lovers or even ODI fans. One of the objectives of the aflx offering is to decrease congestion on field and so create a faster more free flowing game. This remains to be seen if this happens in practice but people that are attracted to a higher scoring, open and faster game may just stick to aflx.

I will confidently assume that, it is just a matter of degree. For ever ten people that become interested (play / watch) AFLX some number of them will be interested in the original. Whether it is 2 or 8, this will be the case.

The comparison with BBL/test cricket is obviously wrong. BBL is played on the same sized grounds with the same sized teams...it is just that it is played over 1/15th of the time and completely inverts the game from patience and attrition to explosive and intense. The AFL is already and explosive and intense game. It is still fast and free flowing compared to most other sports going around. AFLX will be faster and more free flowing, sure, but primarily it is overcoming all the constraints with size (ie cost, player requirements, stadia and facilities etc).

Kaypee provides one example of how the AFLX, if it was to take root anywhere enough to establish youth competitions, could produce players good enough to say get cat b rookie spots and eventually play in the AFL. They knock on of this, one would suspect, that a large chunk of those involved in AFL X would take a larger interest in the AFL, and perhaps more that hadn't had an interest in either

In reverse, AFL X could see recently retired starts such as Dane Swan, Brent Harvey, Stevie J etc play on for a few years in AFL X tournaments in other countries. Even if the audiences are largely expats you are servicing them and keeping them connected to the game

It's no regrets

 

[JohnZ]

My thoughts are that the AFL wants to make money in Asia, IE China and India. India has the ovals, but there's no way they'd let a pitch be dug up for a game. Today.

You introduce AFLX on a soccer/rugby pitch, and the locals become familiar with the game, then you can look at using this new fan base to transition them to the original game, if they can make more money from it.

 

[Gigantor]

A sporting body developing another sport because its somewhat similar without getting much crossover benefit doesn't strike me as a win.

At the moment Australian Football is virtually unknown in these two large Asian countries (crucially, the two most populous countries in the world, with close ties to Australia, and where soccer isn't overly dominant).
Maybe AFLX is a way of increasing recognition of the game as a whole.
It clearly has a much better chance of increasing recognition than standard 18-a-side footy.
Also we've seen Rugby 7s work in non-rugby nations, so there is no reason why AFLX can't work in a similar manner (weekend tournament, 15+ games played across the weekend at the one venue).

 

[Ned_Flanders]

AFL x will not even last as long as a Bryce Gibbs tackle

For it to work it needs to bastardise the afl game

 

[BringBackTorps]

AFL x will not even last as long as a Bryce Gibbs tackle

For it to work it needs to bastardise the afl game

I assume you realise there are very few large oval grounds around the world -but, obviously, probably 1,000,000+ soccer, RU, & smaller parks etc...the rationale for the AFL's strategy. It is also very difficult for AF, an UNKNOWN sport for 99%+, to start up overseas with the requirement a team needs at least 18 players. AF has grown overseas from starting 9-a-side non-contact/contact comps. (then some clubs move to 12,15, or 18-a-side contact comps.later).

Also, many people predicted contact RU 7's (no scrums, lineouts etc) would never be popular -but it has been, & given RU a big boost in many non-RU countries (& many females are beginning also to play contact RU 7's:no scrums).
Also, many predicted T20 cricket would never work, even after season 1...it has become a phenomenon (& assisted in many females starting to play cricket).

AFLX will involve kicking & goal scoring, marking, handballing, tackling etc.-its genesis is clearly AF. Its very wise for the AFL to trial it -MAJOR potential strategic benefits for AF here & overseas.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

I assume you realise there are very few large oval grounds around the world -but, obviously, probably 1,000,000+ soccer, RU, & smaller parks etc...the rationale for the AFL's strategy. It is also very difficult for AF, an UNKNOWN sport for 99%+, to start up overseas with the requirement a team needs at least 18 players. AF has grown overseas from starting 9-a-side non-contact/contact comps. (then some clubs later move to 12,15, or 18-a-side contact comps later).

Also, many people predicted RU 7's would never be popular -but it has been, & given RU a big boost in many non-RU countries (& many females are beginning also to play contact RU 7's:no scrums).
Also, many predicted T20 cricket would never work...it has become a phenomenon (& assisted in many females starting to play cricket).

AFLX will involve kicking, marking, handballing, tackling etc.-its genesis is clearly AF. Its very wise for the AFL to trial it -MAJOR potential strategic benefits for AF here & overseas.

First i think noone outside of oz will gaf about aflx outside a very very very small minority

Second pushing aflx in the northern states is a bad move. T20 is killing odi and test cricket, aflx will so the same if anyone gaf about iy

 

[NoobPie]

First i think noone outside of oz will gaf about aflx outside a very very very small minority

Second pushing aflx in the northern states is a bad move. T20 is killing odi and test cricket, aflx will so the same if anyone gaf about iy

Have you been drinking?

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Have you been drinking?

No

The world.does not care about aussie rules, regardless of ground its played on

Ultimately its a game which will.always be premierly based in oz, so that lacks the appeal and coin on options like bball, soccer, and even golf and tennis

As for qld/nsw, alfx is a mistake. Its either a failure, or it draws appeal.from the real thing, which is an issue as the skill set will be different to oval based afl

I know you have a.mega robochubby for pax af, but aflx isnt the way to achieve it. Its either a money sink, or a replacement for af

 

[NoobPie]

No

The world.does not care about aussie rules, regardless of ground its played on

Ultimately its a game which will.always be premierly based in oz, so that lacks the appeal and coin on options like bball, soccer, and even golf and tennis

As for qld/nsw, alfx is a mistake. Its either a failure, or it draws appeal.from the real thing, which is an issue as the skill set will be different to oval based afl

I know you have a.mega robochubby for pax af, but aflx isnt the way to achieve it. Its either a money sink, or a replacement for af

Wow, talk about triggered! I just thought your post read a bit like you'd been drinking.

It wasn't very coherent in either prose or logic which made me think you might have been drinking. Relax a little

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Wow, talk about triggered! I just thought your post read a bit like you'd been drinking.

It wasn't very coherent in either prose or logic which made me think you might have been drinking. Relax a little

Its a forum and im writing on a phone, and its me. I never post with anything resembling prose you idiot

 

[Gigantor]

It looks like prose to me.

 

[robbieando]

Also, many people predicted contact RU 7's (no scrums, lineouts etc) would never be popular -but it has been, & given RU a big boost in many non-RU countries (& many females are beginning also to play contact RU 7's:no scrums).
Also, many predicted T20 cricket would never work, even after season 1...it has become a phenomenon (& assisted in many females starting to play cricket).

Rugby Sevens has been played since the 1883 when it was developed in Melrose, Scotland for an annual tournament which is still held to this day (you know simple research can discover this fact rather than making stuff up). Since the mid 1970's with the start of the Hong Kong 7's saw the rise of the code outside its traditional base taken off with the help of Sevens.

Also Rugby Sevens still has scrums and lineouts, don't know where you got the idea they were removed for sevens, maybe do your research on the rules and the tactics around them compared to the 15 a side version of the code, rather than make it up. But here are two videos to help you out for future reference




Hell Rugby Sevens scrums are more contested than Rugby League scrums

 

[BringBackTorps]

Rugby Sevens has been played since the 1883 when it was developed in Melrose, Scotland for an annual tournament which is still held to this day (you know simple research can discover this fact rather than making stuff up). Since the mid 1970's with the start of the Hong Kong 7's saw the rise of the code outside its traditional base taken off with the help of Sevens.

Also Rugby Sevens still has scrums and lineouts, don't know where you got the idea they were removed for sevens, maybe do your research on the rules and the tactics around them compared to the 15 a side version of the code, rather than make it up. But here are two videos to help you out for future reference




Hell Rugby Sevens scrums are more contested than Rugby League scrums

I should have written "RU 15's type & frequency of" - after my "no" in "no... scrums, lineouts etc". RU 7's has been designed as a much more free flowing, ball in hand game, with less emphasis on scrums & lineouts. RU 7's have much fewer players, also, involved in their scrum & lineout.

I never said RU 7's was a new sport -I was aware RU 7's has been played for a very long time. In recent times, however, it has been given more emphasis by RU orgs. & become more popular (now an Olympic sport) -to attract people to a more free flowing game who might not like the inscrutability of the Rules, & incessant stoppages/scrums/lineouts/mauls etc of RU 15's.

The force applied in a RU 15 scrum is much greater than a RU 7 scrum, & the strength required for lifting a player in the RU 15 lineout is greater cf RU 7's.
The typical RU 7 player is a "lightweight" cf his RU 15 counterpart. RU 7's is a much greater running game, requiring greater fitness ie much less requirement for brute strength.

 

[NoobPie]

It looks like prose to me.

Well it sure ain't poetry!