Roy Morgan Research Poll 2018

[Carringbush2010]

Membership and attendance the only thing that matters when measuring a club's support. Tigers then daylight to the rest. We've played one less home game than Collingwood, West Coast and Essendon and still have more through the turnstiles. Collingwood probably not even the second biggest and Swans way down the list. Lol morgan poll

View attachment 546669

View attachment 546670

AFL tables is what should be the measure, people are paying to attend games which means they take more than a passing interest. Not someone who doesn't even know a players name yet are rugby league guru's.

Why doesn't Roy Morgan actually put some criteria in there? Because it's highly likely that the bulk of that Sydney supportership are the type that only view the results because they're in the news bulletin.

So Roy if you asked me if I was storm supporter and I said yes you'd probably use my answer in your figures, right? If yes then that would make it a farce just like this poll. I only know of the storm, just because I'm victorian doesn't make me a supporter as I've put zero dollars into that club and have zero interest in the game.

 

[Carringbush2010]

If you lived in Sydney you might.

Yeah but what sort of supporter, if you went around Sydney and asked 100 people who Buddy is you could argue that 90 of em wouldn't know.

 

[The Goon]

Yeah but what sort of supporter, if you went around Sydney and asked 100 people who Buddy is you could argue that 90 of em wouldn't know.

Might be where I live (Eastern suburbs), but I know plenty of genuine match-attending actual Swans members. In my circle of acquaintance you have almost as many AFL supporters as NRL, and Rugby lags behind both.

Sydney also has a very different sports culture to Melbourne. Up here supporting any kind of sporting team is optional. Shocking I know.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

I think Roy Morgan has been in the sun too long. Why are they using the term "supporters"? Supporters are people who actually pour money into the club, i.e. actual members. Just having a casual interest in a club does not qualify as a supporter in my book.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Might be where I live (Eastern suburbs), but I know plenty of genuine match-attending actual Swans members. In my circle of acquaintance you have almost as many AFL supporters as NRL, and Rugby lags behind both.

Sydney also has a very different sports culture to Melbourne. Up here supporting any kind of sporting team is optional. Shocking I know.

Even then it would be hard to argue the for that the bulk of Syd supporters are as interested in the game as footy state supporters, you may know a lot that do. Unless you know all of the 1.2 million "supporters" they have you can't really know how invested they all are.

Purely on the back of that nsw is not a footy state suggests it's unlikely they'll have anywhere near the rusted on supporters that our teams and others like Ess,Haw, and the 4 wa and sa teams.

It's more likely that the vast majority of that 1.2 mill are more invested in the nrl and know next to zero about Australian football. So the poll is skewed and not a true reflection.

Imagine if Roy come up and asked me if I followed the storm, I could say yes and he'd use it in his suspect polls yet I have next to zero interest or knowledge of the game or the club.

 

[The Goon]

Even then it would be hard to argue the for that the bulk of Syd supporters are as interested in the game as footy state supporters, you may know a lot that do. Unless you know all of the 1.2 million "supporters" they have you can't really know how invested they all are.

Purely on the back of that nsw is not a footy state suggests it's unlikely they'll have anywhere near the rusted on supporters that our teams and others like Ess,Haw, and the 4 wa and sa teams.

It's more likely that the vast majority of that 1.2 mill are more invested in the nrl and know next to zero about Australian football. So the poll is skewed and not a true reflection.

Imagine if Roy come up and asked me if I followed the storm, I could say yes and he'd use it in his suspect polls yet I have next to zero interest or knowledge of the game or the club.

Don't get me wrong, the Swans are far, far over-represented in the poll. My comment that you replied to was to someone saying "I've never encountered a Sydney fan outside of Bigfooty". I was simply pointing out that in my experience they have a decent following, comparable to a mid-large Melbourne club.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Don't get me wrong, the Swans are far, far over-represented in the poll. My comment that you replied to was to someone saying "I've never encountered a Sydney fan outside of Bigfooty". I was simply pointing out that in my experience they have a decent following, comparable to a mid-large Melbourne club.

Fair enough, and I'm just pointing the limitations of the poll and to be fair unless ol Roy can use all of the variables instead of just yes or no answers which would be nigh on impossible and ask absolutely the whole population then he won't ever get a true reflection.

Best off ignoring Roy and look up AFL tables - a far more reliable source of numbers.

 

[caloschwaby]

https://www.sportingnews.com/au/afl...gers-andrew-ireland/tehl9vy71vs81xe1rq7jh74oa

Here we go again with this bull

 

[Ron The Bear]

Heard part of an interview with Andrew Ireland on SEN yesterday in which he put great store in the Morgan figures and quoted them relative to Collingwood.

 

[Arwib]

You hear a lot of club executives quote the data. They see it as the broadest possible representation of who their fans are, including all the latent and disengaged ones. It's another datapoint of context for their commercial division. They then try to get those people more engaged through marketing, social media, etc.

For the AFL, too, it's important for the same reasons. It tells them things like there's over 8m theoretical fans, but only 6m watched any games on TV and only 2m attended a game and only 1m are members of a club. And there's a fair bit more detail that's just for customers of RM.

AFL tables is what should be the measure, people are paying to attend games which means they take more than a passing interest. Not someone who doesn't even know a players name yet are rugby league guru's.

Why doesn't Roy Morgan actually put some criteria in there? Because it's highly likely that the bulk of that Sydney supportership are the type that only view the results because they're in the news bulletin.

So Roy if you asked me if I was storm supporter and I said yes you'd probably use my answer in your figures, right? If yes then that would make it a farce just like this poll. I only know of the storm, just because I'm victorian doesn't make me a supporter as I've put zero dollars into that club and have zero interest in the game.

Because the customers of Roy Morgan's market research surveys are the people who pay for the details around demographics and levels of engagement. Clubs and the AFL know other stuff from the surveys, like attendance and TV viewership rates within the "fan base". Plus they obviously have their own membership databases.

The Swans will know from the available data that they have lower attendance and TV engagement rates than most other clubs. They'll also know other such important context like whether their non-member attendees are the same people repeatedly, or lots and lots of people attending once (those would each suggest different membership strategies).

They also know things like how well the huge casual/barely engaged fanbase translates into things like sponsorship and marketing dollars where the breadth of eyeballs has some value.

Here, RM are just advertising themselves with simple headlines. We ain't the customers.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

That figure is pretty amazing considering we were tipped to finish bottom 4, and the 3 on top of us were expected to play deep in to September.

Pound for pound, we are the staunchest. Always have been, always will be.

View attachment 546399

Wouldn’t “always staunchest” mean through thin times and thick?

Yet you’re using the fact that North were tipped to have a poor season as a reason for why there’s three teams above you?

Your argument defeats itself

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

Andrew Ireland is not serious when he says that they have 1.1million 'supporters' though, is he?

 

[Hoops]

It is robust statistically based on the question\s asked, just because there is conjecture on what constitutes a 'supporter' doesn't make the data wrong.

 

[Arwib]

Wouldn’t “always staunchest” mean through thin times and thick?

Yet you’re using the fact that North were tipped to have a poor season as a reason for why there’s three teams above you?

Your argument defeats itself

Also the data was collected in surveys between July 2017 and June 2018, so can't be said to be strictly collected against pre-2018 expectations. (Also means it hasn't fully captured the post-premiership Richmond boost yet, and is the first survey that has captured the Bulldogs' one)

 

[Tiger Toffee]

Morgan poll person conducting the survey on the streets of Sydney.

Morgan: hi how are you
Joe Blow: good
Morgan: morgan poll research on which AFL team you follow
Joe: ummm roosters
Morgan: no their NRL i'm talking AFL, are you swans or giants or anyone else
Joe: which one is sydney
Morgan: the swans
Joe: yeah them

 

[Tiger2709]

It is robust statistically based on the question\s asked, just because there is conjecture on what constitutes a 'supporter' doesn't make the data wrong.

Doesn' t make it right either apparently between 12k and 14k are surveyed, be interesting to know how many state by state but that is.

Also interesting how the survey is worded.

 

[Arwib]

The actual method is likely to have been as part of their online panel surveys, ie market research. People sign up to participate in paid market research and periodically get sent various surveys.

They'll have started out general collecting collect a heap of consumer info, and thrn drilled into the stuff you answer 'yes' to. Following football and other sports would be just one of a whole bunch of areas asked about. Results would be stratified and weighed to be representative.

 

[kid_a]

Morgan poll person conducting the survey on the streets of Sydney.

Morgan: hi how are you
Joe Blow: good
Morgan: morgan poll research on which AFL team you follow
Joe: ummm roosters
Morgan: no their NRL i'm talking AFL, are you swans or giants or anyone else
Joe: which one is sydney
Morgan: the swans
Joe: yeah them

yep, Had them come to my house and knock on the door, had nothing to do that day so thought "sure, why not".
Thats pretty much how the line of questioning goes if you are unsure of the possible answers.

A better poll would to gauge support would be to ask "do you have any vested emotional interest in any AFL club?" OR "what is your favourite AFL club and do you watch them play at least once a month?"
Or even just get people to list their three favourite sports teams, if an AFL club pops up there most likely the person is (at least to some degree) a supporter of the team.

I mean for instance my brother and I watch the Eagles every week religiously, my sister on the other hand will watch a game if its on TV or a pub during a get together or at a convenient time, but she will watch and cheer any finals the Eagles play in if she can, which imo means shes still a supporter just not a full on hardcore supporter like my brother and I.

I would suspect in terms of hardcore fans and milder supporters (who still genuinely like the team and watch when it suits or at least keep abreast of the sides results) the top five would be:

Adelaide, Colingwood, Essendon, Richmond, West Coast (done in alphabetical order so as not to incite any pety "d**k measuring" squabbles between different clubs fans)

Swans would be in the next rung down after them, probs along with Carlton, Hawthorn and maybe Freo