Women's Footy AFLW and MFC Women's General Discussion

[Toump Ass]

Nice one Daisy

 

[jhong]

“ the World Cup goes for 4 weeks” said Gil . What kind of answer is that ffs .

 

[Cannon82]

“ the World Cup goes for 4 weeks” said Gil . What kind of answer is that ffs .

Not much of an answer, but really, what are people expecting? A 14 week season with three weeks of finals? When are they supposed to play that? January through to the start of the season and/or concurrently with the AFL? I doubt they'll want to run concurrently given that the AFLW fans are going to almost entirely be comprised of AFL fans.

 

[TheCount]

“ the World Cup goes for 4 weeks” said Gil . What kind of answer is that ffs .

Oh god ... You just know when they were discussing it, that was one of the justifications, and he would have thought everyone would have agreed with him.

Surely they'll reconsider after this sort of backlash.

 

[Bluelegs]

Not much of an answer, but really, what are people expecting? A 14 week season with three weeks of finals? When are they supposed to play that? January through to the start of the season and/or concurrently with the AFL? I doubt they'll want to run concurrently given that the AFLW fans are going to almost entirely be comprised of AFL fans.

Every team playing each other once and a two week finals series is not a huge ask. The AFL brought two new teams in and want to shorten the season. If they weren't ready for new teams don't bring in new teams.

 

[Cannon82]

Every team playing each other once and a two week finals series is not a huge ask. The AFL brought two new teams in and want to shorten the season. If they weren't ready for new teams don't bring in new teams.

7 weeks and 2 weeks of finals, fine. Agree enough there. But let's be honest - AFLW is a gimmick. Don't imagine the AFL are keen to keep pouring cash into what is essentially an appetizer for the football season.

 

[jatz14]

Not much of an answer, but really, what are people expecting? A 14 week season with three weeks of finals? When are they supposed to play that? January through to the start of the season and/or concurrently with the AFL? I doubt they'll want to run concurrently given that the AFLW fans are going to almost entirely be comprised of AFL fans.

They cannot hold the season in 'clear air' in the long run. It made sense the first season to find some clear air, it made less sense the second season. It makes zero sense now, and in 2020 when there are even more teams, what then? Do they try to squeeze a 14 team league into a month and a half?

AFLW has to overlap other sports, personally I think it should overlap men's AFL.

It will hurt crowds and viewers, but so what. It has to happen eventually, rip the bandage of, do it now.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

 

[jhong]

Not much of an answer, but really, what are people expecting? A 14 week season with three weeks of finals? When are they supposed to play that? January through to the start of the season and/or concurrently with the AFL? I doubt they'll want to run concurrently given that the AFLW fans are going to almost entirely be comprised of AFL fans.

All valid points , none of which “gil” addressed . #sackgil

 

[Cannon82]

They cannot hold the season in 'clear air' in the long run. It made sense the first season to find some clear air, it made less sense the second season. It makes zero sense now, and in 2020 when there are even more teams, what then? Do they try to squeeze a 14 team league into a month and a half?

AFLW has to overlap other sports, personally I think it should overlap men's AFL.

It will hurt crowds and viewers, but so what. It has to happen eventually, rip the bandage of, do it now.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

Problem is, the AFL makes money, the AFLW does not. Are people paying to watch AFLW games yet? It's a double whammy if you're losing people who would pay to watch an AFL game to go to AFLW. It would mean 4 more games per weekend for a certain length of the season - how many new fans are going to turn up? Wouldn't be many, certainly not enough to sustain the competition. It's hard enough for the AFL to sustain Gold Coast and GWS, yet alone bringing more teams into an already saturated market.

 

[Cannon82]

All valid points , none of which “gil” addressed . #sackgil

Let Gil interview the Auskick kids and Hamish can run the league. At least the interviews might be funnier.

 

[WolfgangV]

I doubt they'll want to run concurrently given that the AFLW fans are going to almost entirely be comprised of AFL fans.

I'm assuming you haven't been to any AFLW matches. If you had been you might be surprised at the composition of the crowd.

 

[LeverPuller]

Problem is, the AFL makes money, the AFLW does not. Are people paying to watch AFLW games yet? It's a double whammy if you're losing people who would pay to watch an AFL game to go to AFLW. It would mean 4 more games per weekend for a certain length of the season - how many new fans are going to turn up? Wouldn't be many, certainly not enough to sustain the competition. It's hard enough for the AFL to sustain Gold Coast and GWS, yet alone bringing more teams into an already saturated market.

I think curtain raisers are a real possibility.

 

[Cannon82]

I'm assuming you haven't been to any AFLW matches. If you had been you might be surprised at the composition of the crowd.

I certainly haven't, and I'm not quite sure what you mean by that. Are there that many sexist people who won't watch men play at an elite level but feel the need to watch women play park level football? I would've guessed the "composition" of fans at AFLW games would be shitloads of parents with kids in tow, so I doubt they'll be going to two or three games in a weekend.

 

[Cannon82]

I think curtain raisers are a real possibility.

Do people pay to get into those early, or does your full ticket get you in to the AFLW game or do people pay extra for a "match day" ticket... because I'm not sure any of those are great options.

 

[LeverPuller]

Do people pay to get into those early, or does your full ticket get you in to the AFLW game or do people pay extra for a "match day" ticket... because I'm not sure any of those are great options.

I think ticket gets you in. Same as right now.

They’ll probably up the price on reserved

 

[Cannon82]

I think ticket gets you in. Same as right now.

They’ll probably up the price on reserved

Which I don't like. Shouldn't have to pay for it if you're not interested in watching it. Seems like whatever happens, there'll be an AFLW tax imposed somewhere. Like all the extra garbage you pay for with your Pay TV subscription when you only really want the sports channels.

 

[TheCount]

I think ticket gets you in. Same as right now.

They’ll probably up the price on reserved

Can't see any reason for a price increase, the current games are free ...

Curtain raisers is the way to do it, first 7 weeks can be as the first two seasons, stand alone fixtures as suburban grounds, then move them to curtain raisers at AFL venues for the last two rounds and the finals. No doubt people will complain about having to buy a ticket etc, but they'll need to suck it up, few things in life are free, they got 7 rounds of it already, and it's better than 6 rounds.

 

[Bluelegs]

7 weeks and 2 weeks of finals, fine. Agree enough there. But let's be honest - AFLW is a gimmick. Don't imagine the AFL are keen to keep pouring cash into what is essentially an appetizer for the football season.

Then why even bother bringing in two new clubs? The AFL just seem to have no real clue about the right way to build this competition. I think they're terrified of having to compete with other sporting events like the Australian Open but it's such a stupid fear to have, the competition is a niche and the AFL needs to just embrace that for 10-15 years until the grassroots have grown enough to build up a decent talent pool.

 

[Cannon82]

Then why even bother bringing in two new clubs? The AFL just seem to have no real clue about the right way to build this competition. I think they're terrified of having to compete with other sporting events like the Australian Open but it's such a stupid fear to have, the competition is a niche and the AFL needs to just embrace that for 10-15 years until the grassroots have grown enough to build up a decent talent pool.

Buggered if I know - as you might have gathered, I'm in the "there should be zero AFLW teams" camp. I'd imagine there would have been some quite heavy discussions on the matter between the bean counters + traditionalists and the head-in-the-cloud progressives over how this should be handled. If you run it like a business, you'd close it down tomorrow, but they're not fully committing to the charity effort either.

 

[jatz14]

Problem is, the AFL makes money, the AFLW does not. Are people paying to watch AFLW games yet? It's a double whammy if you're losing people who would pay to watch an AFL game to go to AFLW. It would mean 4 more games per weekend for a certain length of the season - how many new fans are going to turn up? Wouldn't be many, certainly not enough to sustain the competition. It's hard enough for the AFL to sustain Gold Coast and GWS, yet alone bringing more teams into an already saturated market.

Anecdotally at least, there are a significant number of new fans, and even returning disillusioned old fans.

I also think there is a pretty simple solution. Schedule as many women's home games as possible for when the men are interstate. For WA, Qld etc, it's perfect. Freo fans don't go to Eagles games when Freo are away, so give them a Freo women's home game.

Eagles men and Freo women play in Perth one weekend, alternate for the next.

Also a reality that an entire round of AFLW might only have 15k people. What sort of impact does that really have on the AFL, especially if most of the games do not have a local clash.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

 

[Cannon82]

Anecdotally at least, there are a significant number of new fans, and even returning disillusioned old fans.

I also think there is a pretty simple solution. Schedule as many women's home games as possible for when the men are interstate. For WA, Qld etc, it's perfect. Freo fans don't go to Eagles games when Freo are away, so give them a Freo women's home game.

Eagles men and Freo women play in Perth one weekend, alternate for the next.

Also a reality that an entire round of AFLW might only have 15k people. What sort of impact does that really have on the AFL, especially if most of the games do not have a local clash.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

Sounds simple, would surely work to some degree, but the Suns and GWS were drummed up on similar principles. I guess its the difference between a new team no one gives a s**t about and a tack on on to an existing team, but I have my doubts about how many people would be coming through the gates when there are other options available.

 

[PerfectFooty]

“ the World Cup goes for 4 weeks” said Gil . What kind of answer is that ffs .

Does Gillon even AFL?

Who cares what the world cup does

 

[Cannon82]

Who cares what the world cup does

Rather a large number of people.

 

[WolfgangV]

I would've guessed the "composition" of fans at AFLW games would be shitloads of parents with kids in tow, so I doubt they'll be going to two or three games in a weekend.

As I said, if you'd been to any AFLW matches you might be surprised. But you guessed again, and again got it wrong.

It is interesting that people (and this is not specifically targeted at you, Cannon82) who have no genuine interest in women's football, have no real knowledge of the recent history of the game at the state level, and who are free to admit they don't think there should even be an AFLW, are so keen to push their opinions forward about the present and future directions of the competition. The ignorance displayed is breathtaking, straw man arguments abound, and they provide no insight or valid contribution to how women's football can successfully move forward.

My suggestion, for what it is worth - shut the f*** up and let those who have a spent the time and effort to have an understanding of the sport make the decisions. Believe me, it's not going to adversely effect you in anyway. Oh, what's that? Worried about having to pay for a competition you don't want? Well how about a little back pay, then - the untold millions of dollars of the last 100 years that women, and men for that matter, have paid in memberships and ticket prices to watch the men's game that they would have spent on women's football HAD IT BEEN AVAILABLE.

 

[Cannon82]

As I said, if you'd been to any AFLW matches you might be surprised. But you guessed again, and again got it wrong.

It is interesting that people (and this is not specifically targeted at you, Cannon82) who have no genuine interest in women's football, have no real knowledge of the recent history of the game at the state level, and who are free to admit they don't think there should even be an AFLW, are so keen to push their opinions forward about the present and future directions of the competition. The ignorance displayed is breathtaking, straw man arguments abound, and they provide no insight or valid contribution to how women's football can successfully move forward.

My suggestion, for what it is worth - shut the f*** up and let those who have a spent the time and effort to have an understanding of the sport make the decisions. Believe me, it's not going to adversely effect you in anyway. Oh, what's that? Worried about having to pay for a competition you don't want? Well how about a little back pay, then - the untold millions of dollars of the last 100 years that women, and men for that matter, have paid in memberships and ticket prices to watch the men's game that they would have spent on women's football HAD IT BEEN AVAILABLE.

Do you meet and greet every fan on their way in to the grounds at every game? I'm happy to admit I haven't attended, never will and am purely speculating, but you're not particularly forthcoming with what makes you a subject matter expert on the composition of AFLW crowds everywhere, and apparently "state level" football in general.

Allow me also to respond in kind - this isn't directed specifically at you WolfgangV but more so at those who think that being self-avowed AFLW supporters makes them fans who've transcended to a higher level of existence, shut the * up yourselves and hop off your high horses. The only thing principally "different" about the women's game is the woeful standard. Are they not playing AFL football? Are they not also wandering around a big park (badly) kicking a Sherrin? What theoretical understanding am I missing here? What is it about women playing a sport that is so appealing to you? The only thing that we can agree on is that these women are being paid to play football at a significantly worse level than your average U16s competition. Until proven otherwise, you're all clearly sexists.

Also, you can't backdate the "cost" for the women's competition. You paid for a ticket to a game or membership to your club's AFL season... you got what you paid for. You want to go watch women play, go down to the local competition and watch them play. You wouldn't be able to tell the difference in standard anyway.