Why doesn't the AFL finally put the NRL back into its place?!

[Foreign Legion]

Cam do things like play round 1, before a bye for the away team or Magic round.

Also a lot of Warriors home ganes at 6PM Friday Aus time games so you can give Perth a 9 day break after

Yes of course they will work something out but won't be easy. The PNG to Perth and Auckland flights will be fun too. Players in Perth in particular will get sick of travel very quickly. Flights to Syd/Bris an extra 40 - 70mins than Melb plus no direct flights from PNG to Perth. V'landys will design his own plane to get the teams there in about 25 minutes.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

I do find the passion from the average man in the street in both cities is different.

Almost the first question in Melbourne is "who's your footy team' haven't found that yo be the case in Sydney.

Have found regional NSW is more passionate about rugby league than Sydney

I also find the differing passion for SoO very enlightening.

Queenslanders tie so much of their identity up in SoO.

When they win the series, they’re insufferable, when they lose, they’re inconsolable.

Here in NSW, there’s always a lot of talk about the series, but when we win, it’s like “yay”, and when we lose, it’s “oh well”.

 

[PhatBoy]

LOL, no I don't think there will be teams there. I just am a bit amused at how fast he is pushing for new teams. Lets face it PNG is not a very attractive place to live unfortunately. The only way they will get players there is through a tax dodge. How many travelling fans will attend games each week? Why would you go to PNG to chase money when it looks like R360 (if it happens) will be offering double?

I will be interested to see how the Warriors and Perth go with away games - 4 hours time difference I think and must be at least a 7 hour flight. Hard to fit that into a 'normal' season. Different for one off Vegas round etc.

Warriors and Perth are easily solved. Play them in back to back weeks. Get the fixture out early enough that it makes that trip easy enough to plan, and have Perth playing the Warriors a week after they play a Sydney team with full breaks in between, and have the Warriors doing likewise. It’s a long way from home to be for an extended period but it lessens the travel load at the time

 

[James Colorado]

This point, while not a clincher in this discussion, absolutely needs emphasis.

My understanding is that AFL has a per-game crowd average amongst the very top handful of domestic sports comps in the world.

Most sporting comps round the world would kill for the AFL’s turnstiles numbers. It’s a phenomenon.

Looks like it's currently 6th, depending upon how much stock you place in Wikipedia, 5th in football codes (I'm excluding F1 as it's a whole different thing):

List of sports attendance figures - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The NRL is still on that list, so in global terms attendance is actually quite healthy.

 

[Philhawk]

I also find the differing passion for SoO very enlightening.

Queenslanders tie so much of their identity up in SoO.

When they win the series, they’re insufferable, when they lose, they’re inconsolable.

Here in NSW, there’s always a lot of talk about the series, but when we win, it’s like “yay”, and when we lose, it’s “oh well”.

That’s sydneysiders about sport in general.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Did you ever stop to think that maybe there’s higher reach because it’s an hour longer broadcast? What about the reverse, the nrl introduce quarters and more stoppages in play to drag out the run time which will increase reach because more people will land on the game? Just an absolutely silly argument you’re making here.

But if the higher reach was only as a result of the longer broadcast, we'd see that reflected in the differences between reach and average. And as I posted earlier, the average AFL viewership is about 33% of the broadcast length and for NRL it's about 40%. This leads to an average 'reached' person viewing more of an AFL game, about an hour, compared to 50 minutes for the NRL. So even if the reach is higher because the longer broadcast gives people and opportunity to turn it on, they keep the game on for longer to disagree with the point you're making.

If reach was solely impacted by a longer broadcast length you'd see the average number of minutes per viewer per game equalise around the same figure across both codes, but they don't.

It's really not that hard of a concept to understand.

I have no refusal of anything. I’m simply going off what third party ratings organisations are saying in terms of what is more watched. Which is the nrl. I know that frustrates the hell out of you though.

It frustrates me that you're incapable of doing basic grade 4 division.

I'll spell out an example from earlier in this thread, that's not actually far off what happens in reality.

Sunday broadcasts: AFL 3.20pm to 6pm
NRL broadcast: 4pm to 6pm.

AFL average viewers between 4pm and 6pm: 700,000
NRL average viewers between 4pm and 6pm: 650,000
AFL average viewers between 3.20pm and 4pm: 400,000
AFL average viewers between 3.20pm and 6pm: 625,000.

NRL can claim "more viewers" because the average is 25,000 higher. This obfuscates how people would commonly understand what is "more watched".

When obviously more people are both watching AFL when both sports are being broadcast simultaneously, plus some people are watching AFL when NRL isn't even broadcasting at all, which further adds to which is "more watched" layperson's understanding of the term.

Now you want to consider total minutes watched. Basically anything that doesn’t show the nrl as the most watched.

To answer the question of what is more watched, I want to consider ... what is more watched in the country, by counting the total time that it is watched? What's wrong with that.

Because NRL isn't the more watched sport. The above example is typical for every sunday in the country. The NRL is not more watched. I cannot make that more clear. You want to claim something that is an untruth. The NRL's media releases propagandises in making that claim. It is untrue more people watch NRL. Which is a natural follow because AFL is the bigger sport in non-TV media, such as Google Trends data, so that would logically translate to more people watching AFL on TV.

But it’s too bad that the industry has settled on average viewers a long long time ago.

Yes ... for the purposes of identical timeslots and identical number of ad breaks they can sell in non-Sport TV broadcasts, about 7-9 minutes of advertising per half hour on a standard midweek timezone.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Even if you’re totally correct on the relative strength of the two codes (and I’m not entirely convinced you are, but for the sake of argument) - there is no conceivable way the AFL is going to “blow away” (whatever that means precisely) the NRL anytime soon.

AFL may well be bigger. NRL may well use biased TV metrics.

But NRL is still a huge, lucrative comp. It just isn’t going to die.

I’m no huge fan of the code although I can enjoy it on its own merits, but growing up in Sydney I’ve grown up with the passion that people have for it and the game’s history, and if the OP thinks that’s going to be “blown away” by anything, they need to spend some time in NSW or QLD till they know what they’re talking about.

Sure. I don't hate the NRL and I never claimed to agree with the premise of the thread title or the OP that the NRL is going to be 'blown away'. I said earlier in this thread I would be counted among the NRL's 7.3 million people that watch the game occasionally or regularly, and I probably watch at least an hour of NRL per week on average through the winter plus all state of origin games etc. I enjoy the sport, enjoy its history, see sporting merit and entertainment in it, understand the rules, have been to Storm games etc. etc. etc. The NRL has done very well to grow its revenue in recent years and the difference between it and the AFL is probably smaller now than it was in 2019.

But as you can tell by my passion I work in sports business/sports media and I've had to explain the TV point to people in my professional life too (ie people who know I work in the industry and maybe get confused as to why the NRL gets much smaller TV deals if they take the NRL at its word that more people watch their game, or how that computes with their previously correct default assumption that the AFL was the bigger national sport).

All of them, unlike NRL propaganda agreements, and even NRL fans and Sydneysiders, understand where I'm coming from once I explain to them the basic grade 4 maths like I'm explaining here.

 

[hampton]

But if the higher reach was only as a result of the longer broadcast, we'd see that reflected in the differences between reach and average. And as I posted earlier, the average AFL viewership is about 33% of the broadcast length and for NRL it's about 40%. This leads to an average 'reached' person viewing more of an AFL game, about an hour, compared to 50 minutes for the NRL. So even if the reach is higher because the longer broadcast gives people and opportunity to turn it on, they keep the game on for longer to disagree with the point you're making.

Lots of if’s and buts and maybes. When OzTAM updates the ratings and rankings to reflect the above I’ll take it into consideration, not from some forum guy.

If you wanted to start re-ranking the ladder as well based on most goals kicked, or some other methods that you think might be better or more accurate to reflect true ladder position, ill also ignore that and stick to the official ranking methods.

If reach was solely impacted by a longer broadcast length you'd see the average number of minutes per viewer per game equalise around the same figure across both codes, but they don't.

It's really not that hard of a concept to understand.


It frustrates me that you're incapable of doing basic grade 4 division.

I'll spell out an example from earlier in this thread, that's not actually far off what happens in reality.

Sunday broadcasts: AFL 3.20pm to 6pm
NRL broadcast: 4pm to 6pm.

AFL average viewers between 4pm and 6pm: 700,000
NRL average viewers between 4pm and 6pm: 650,000
AFL average viewers between 3.20pm and 4pm: 400,000
AFL average viewers between 3.20pm and 6pm: 625,000.

NRL can claim "more viewers" because the average is 25,000 higher. This obfuscates how people would commonly understand what is "more watched".

When obviously more people are both watching AFL when both sports are being broadcast simultaneously, plus some people are watching AFL when NRL isn't even broadcasting at all, which further adds to which is "more watched" layperson's understanding of the term.

It’s simple, NRL is the most watched. AFL has more people tuning into it at some point during the game - whether because it’s simply a longer broadcast or not we don’t know. I do know that the nrl games that went into extra time in 2025 had a good deal higher reach than other equivalent games, take it for you what want.

By your own numbers, seems the ‘passionate’ afl fans only watch 33% of the game.

Mind you I’m not saying nrl is bigger or afl is bigger I’m just refuting some of the delusional posts in this thread that the afl is blowing anyone away, and questioning why that should even need to be the case.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

When OzTAM updates the ratings and rankings to reflect the above I’ll take it into consideration, not from some forum guy.

You are refusing to ackonwledge that you can quite easily calculate the points I'm making by dividing average over reach and multiplying by broadcast length. The ratings and rakings do reflect the above, they're the literal inputs I'm calculating here.

Because you seem too obtuse to believe me, I'll literally do the maths for you here:

https://footyindustry.com/index.php/2024-afl-tv-ratings

2025 NRL TV Ratings - SportsIndustryAU

Ratings are sourced from VOZ, Nine Network, Foxtel or Mediaspy with occasional input from Media Reports. Please note Foxtel and Kayo data is not available

footyindustry.com

AFL:

Sun 25/5 – Seven 466k (BVOD 23k) Reach 1.371m 466/1371 = 34% 34% of a 160 minute broadcast is 54 minutes. Ergo of the 1.371 million people that watched at least 60 seconds of the AFL broadcast, they watched an average of 54 minutes each.
NRL:
Sun 24/5 – Warriors/Raiders Nine 511k (BVOD 63k) Reach 1.265m

511/1.265 = 40% = of a 2 hour broadcast, of the 1.265 million people that watched at least 60 seconds of an NRL broadcast, they watched an average of 48 minutes each.

Across millions of viewers, that six minutes adds up - obviously it's millions of minutes difference in accumulated minutes watched.

It’s simple, NRL is the most watched. AFL has more people tuning into it at some point during the game - whether because it’s simply a longer broadcast or not we don’t know. I do know that the nrl games that went into extra time in 2025 had a good deal higher reach than other equivalent games, take it for you what want.

It's not though. I don't know how many times I have to repeat myself that everyone else reading this thread will agree with me. NRL is not the most watched league.

AFL has more people tuning into it at some point during the game and when they do, on average, they watch more broadcast minutes of the game than the NRL does. It's really not that hard to understand.

By your own numbers, seems the ‘passionate’ afl fans only watch 33% of the game.

And 'passionate' NRL fans only watch 40% of the game, what's your point? I can't fault the 'lack of passion' a given AFL fan (often neutral and not supporting either team) has for not watching football specifically before 4pm on a Sunday, or after 9.30pm on a Thursday night, hours which are typically unsociable for any TV watching yet are hours that the AFL broadcasts when the NRL doesn't.

 

[Hoops]

You mean like industry Oztam offical source of tv ratings are parroting NRL talking points?

Except reach is at least 60 seconds watched, so that 'math' might work out that someone was watching a minute of an AFL game. And you'd be ok with counting that as a view?


Yes I never said that the AFL don't have a bigger ticket revenue than NRL. But if you're trying to hang your hat on that as the most important metric to show that the AFL is vastly ahead of the NRL, you're wrong.

This thread is exactly the warped Victorian view that believes the AFL is vastly ahead of the NRL nationally and needs to 'squash' NRL, for whatever reason, to retain it's dominance. It reeks of insecurity, and is driven from ignorant views.

The AFL is vastly ahead of the NRL , but don't need t squash anyone. it's just a question put forward by an ignorant poster. I haven't seen anyone back up that claim.

 

[The_Wookie]

Using the 'New Rating System' which was brought in when the AFL began to pull away from the NRL significantly. The ratings does not take into account the amount of people watching but more the amount watching at one time. Because the NRL has a significantly shorter game with less breaks, this favours them. Does it favour the sponsors/Advertisers though? No - which is why the AFL hold a markedly higher TV Rights than the NRL.

The the fact that the NRL are allowed to use these 'Average Ratings' is a sham and doesn't mirror each leagues ratings value.

Well this entire post is nonsense.

VOZ didnt start until 2023, the AFL werent pulling away fron the NRL signficantly before that.

 

[mikey127]

As a followers of both the AFL are still number 1 but the NRL has def closed the hap in recent times.

 

[Foreign Legion]

Warriors and Perth are easily solved. Play them in back to back weeks. Get the fixture out early enough that it makes that trip easy enough to plan, and have Perth playing the Warriors a week after they play a Sydney team with full breaks in between, and have the Warriors doing likewise. It’s a long way from home to be for an extended period but it lessens the travel load at the time

That is a good idea I admit but it will still take it toll on players - especially players in a relationship and even more so any with kids. Do you think the time zone difference is significant enough to have an effect on the travelling team? I think it will be really hard for Perth travelling to Auckland.

 

[bigleague]

That is a good idea I admit but it will still take it toll on players - especially players in a relationship and even more so any with kids. Do you think the time zone difference is significant enough to have an effect on the travelling team? I think it will be really hard for Perth travelling to Auckland.

Maybe they could play during magic round?

 

[PhatBoy]

That is a good idea I admit but it will still take it toll on players - especially players in a relationship and even more so any with kids. Do you think the time zone difference is significant enough to have an effect on the travelling team? I think it will be really hard for Perth travelling to Auckland.

It would if they played the NZ game first. Not so much if they played the Sydney game first IMO. Remember most of these guys if not all of them will be used to the Sydney/Brisbane/Townsville/Canberra/Melbourne to Auckland trip and difference in Timezone so it’s a factor they’ll be familiar with in that respect. It won’t be without its challenges but there are always some ways around it.
The other alternative is to make it a one-match fixture (not everyone plays everyone twice) and stage it at Magic Round.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

That’s sydneysiders about sport in general.

Nah, it's not me and my beloved Swans.

 

[Papa G]

How much money does the Victorian State Government pump into the the AFL as opposed to how much the NSW Government pumps into the NRL? AFL is treated as an Opiate of the Masses in Victoria whereas in NSW a good revenue stream for the NSW government through Pokie taxation. AFL expansion is far more state sponsored, ideologue and zealot driven. The ridiculous amount of money and haste in introducing AFLW is evidence of that. Hearts and minds. Divide and conquor.

 

[Professor Knowall]

How much money does the Victorian State Government pump into the the AFL as opposed to how much the NSW Government pumps into the NRL? AFL is treated as an Opiate of the Masses in Victoria whereas in NSW a good revenue stream for the NSW government through Pokie taxation. AFL expansion is far more state sponsored, ideologue and zealot driven. The ridiculous amount of money and haste in introducing AFLW is evidence of that. Hearts and minds. Divide and conquor.

OL, I'll take the bait. That entire post is arrant nonsense, of course - though I suppose it accidentally exposes the obscene amount of gambling revenue the NRL rakes in from its erstwhile battler supporters through the huge polie palaces of its clubs-

'$1 million an hour': Calls for urgent reform as NSW pokies losses soar

Wesley Mission is calling for urgent action as new figures show the state's poker-machine players are losing more than $1 million an hour.

www.abc.net.au

Victoria actually has a much higher tax on pokies than NSW, thus earning more from gambling revenue than NSW, despite the smaller population and far fewer pokies (and relatively few of these belong to AFL clubs - the Penrith Panthers alone have more pokies and revenue than the combined total of all AFL clubs) -

Gambling data

Access a range of gambling data in Victoria, including expenditure by Local Government Area, venue-specific data, and license details for major operators like Crown Melbourne, Tabcorp, and Tattersalls. Explore information on Electronic Gaming Machines, keno, and more, along with Australian...

www.vgccc.vic.gov.au

In contrast, the NSW govt caved to the NRL and its gambling industry lobby, keeping the pokies taxes -

https://www.catefaehrmann.org/govt_forgoing_1_billion_in_gambling_tax_revenue

As for the question "How much money does the Victorian State Government pump into the the AFL as opposed to how much the NSW Government pumps into the NRL?", well obviously the NRL has gotten far, far, more from NSW than the AFL could ever hope to get from the broke Victorian Govt. Just look at the two brand spanking new stadiums the NRL got for nothing over the past few years - must be worth at least a billion and a half. In contrast, the only major stadium the Victorian Govt has ever fully funded ... is the rectangular stadium used by Melbourne Storm.

The rest of the post is just rhetorical gibberish.

 

[hampton]

OL, I'll take the bait. That entire post is arrant nonsense, of course - though I suppose it accidentally exposes the obscene amount of gambling revenue the NRL rakes in from its erstwhile battler supporters through the huge polie palaces of its clubs-

'$1 million an hour': Calls for urgent reform as NSW pokies losses soar

Wesley Mission is calling for urgent action as new figures show the state's poker-machine players are losing more than $1 million an hour.

www.abc.net.au

Victoria actually has a much higher tax on pokies than NSW, thus earning more from gambling revenue than NSW, despite the smaller population and far fewer pokies (and relatively few of these belong to AFL clubs - the Penrith Panthers alone have more pokies and revenue than the combined total of all AFL clubs) -

Gambling data

Access a range of gambling data in Victoria, including expenditure by Local Government Area, venue-specific data, and license details for major operators like Crown Melbourne, Tabcorp, and Tattersalls. Explore information on Electronic Gaming Machines, keno, and more, along with Australian...

www.vgccc.vic.gov.au

In contrast, the NSW govt caved to the NRL and its gambling industry lobby, keeping the pokies taxes -

https://www.catefaehrmann.org/govt_forgoing_1_billion_in_gambling_tax_revenue

As for the question "How much money does the Victorian State Government pump into the the AFL as opposed to how much the NSW Government pumps into the NRL?", well obviously the NRL has gotten far, far, more from NSW than the AFL could ever hope to get from the broke Victorian Govt. Just look at the two brand spanking new stadiums the NRL got for nothing over the past few years - must be worth at least a billion and a half. In contrast, the only major stadium the Victorian Govt has ever fully funded ... is the rectangular stadium used by Melbourne Storm.

The rest of the post is just rhetorical gibberish.

Hmm not quite sure about this.

Yes the nsw government has funded Allianz stadium and CommBank stadium, both much needed multi-sport venues.

CommBank part of a much wider renewal and upgrade of Parramatta as a major city capable of attracting big events. Allianz needing more immediate attention due to numerous issues with the old ground. They dropped funding for an Accor upgrade.

Yes NSW is a much richer state than Victoria and can afford these things. But the Victorian government has spent plenty on afl in recent times.

• 500m in funding direct to afl to keep the afl grand final in Melbourne, and upgrades across various Australian football venues in the state
• 225m to upgrade Etihad
• 100m to upgrade princes park and kardinia park
• 450m for multiple high performance centres (mix of state and federal)

On top the federal government chipping in billions on Macquarie park and upcoming MCG upgrade. And nation wide school programs.

Keeping in mind Victoria debt to GSP is about 25% compared to about 12% for NSW. It’s likely that NSW will soon spend 500m+ on a big SCG upgrade

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Hmm not quite sure about this.

Yes the nsw government has funded Allianz stadium and CommBank stadium, both much needed multi-sport venues.

CommBank part of a much wider renewal and upgrade of Parramatta as a major city capable of attracting big events. Allianz needing more immediate attention due to numerous issues with the old ground. They dropped funding for an Accor upgrade.

Yes NSW is a much richer state than Victoria and can afford these things. But the Victorian government has spent plenty on afl in recent times.

• 500m in funding direct to afl to keep the afl grand final in Melbourne, and upgrades across various Australian football venues in the state
• 225m to upgrade Etihad
• 100m to upgrade princes park and kardinia park
• 450m for multiple high performance centres (mix of state and federal)

On top the federal government chipping in billions on Macquarie park and upcoming MCG upgrade. And nation wide school programs.

Keeping in mind Victoria debt to GSP is about 25% compared to about 12% for NSW.

I mean it's a more than a bit disingenuous to call NSW's stadiums "multipurpose" but not call Victoria's ones also "multipurpose", and to include high performance centre spending in Vic but not in NSW, and not consider the $10 million spent by the NSW government "in funding direct to the NRL to keep the NRL grand final in NSW" if you're trying to make a comparison here:

Future NSW NRL stars the focus of new Centres of Excellence

The NSW Government will spend $113 million over the next four years with a Budget boost to deliver three new state of the art Rugby League Centres of Excellence, to support the development of future male and female NRL players.

www.sport.nsw.gov.au

NSW secure grand final hosting rights with mammoth $10m 12-month deal

NSW secure grand final hosting rights with mammoth $10m 12-month deal

www.foxsports.com.au

 

[hampton]

How many professional sports are using marvel on the regular?

CommBank stadium and Allianz are used by nrl, super rugby and soccer. Both men’s and women’s. Internationals of a variety of sports. If we’re just talking about sport.

So yes they are. I was addressing also the poster above saying the nsw government is upgrading ‘nrl venues’

 

[threenewpadlocks]

How many professional sports are using marvel on the regular?

CommBank stadium and Allianz are used by nrl, super rugby and soccer. Both men’s and women’s. Internationals of a variety of sports. If we’re just talking about sport.

So yes they are. I was addressing also the poster above saying the nsw government is upgrading ‘nrl venues’

It's used to full capacity for 12 months of the year for things like concerts and the like, which are not too dissimilar to sport if we are talking about "fairness in government spending"

 

[Papa G]

The AFL and Vic Government are joined at the hip. It's almost a ministry without the name.

We’re Backing The Mighty MCG Into The Future

The Melbourne Cricket Ground (MCG) is the jewel in Australia’s sporting crown. We want to keep it that way.Premier Jacinta Allan joined Minister for Tourism, Sport and Major Events Steve Dimopoulos, Melbourne Cricket Club (MCC) CEO Stuart Fox and the MCG Trust Chair the Hon. Steve Bracks AC...

www.premier.vic.gov.au

Quotes attributable to Premier Jacinta Allan

“The MCG is our economy’s home ground advantage – we want to keep it that way.”

“We’re planning for the future so the ‘G can remain the best stadium in the world.”

Quotes attributable to Minister for Tourism, Sport and Major Events Steve Dimopoulos

"The MCG is critical to our reputation as the sporting capital of Australia, and we want to make sure it can continue to support the very best events for years to come.”

“The footy festival is the best place for footy fans of all ages to experience the passion and excitement of Grand Final week in the shadow of the mighty MCG.”

Laughable. It's not even the best stadium in the country.

 

[Hoops]

How many professional sports are using marvel on the regular?

CommBank stadium and Allianz are used by nrl, super rugby and soccer. Both men’s and women’s. Internationals of a variety of sports. If we’re just talking about sport.

So yes they are. I was addressing also the poster above saying the nsw government is upgrading ‘nrl venues’

For the years 2024 and 2025 based on total attendances divided by capacity, below is how utilised each stadium has been in that time.

Stadium	Capacity	2204 Total	2025 Total	No. times filled
Comm	30000​	446474​	515235​	32.06​
Alianz	42500​	708910​	766277​	34.71​
MCG	100024​	3734266​	3419533​	71.52​
Marvel	56347​	1619953​	1558319​	56.41​

This doesn.t even include concerts which would heavily favour Melbourne's stadiums, plus not a full season of cricket this year.

Austadiums | Australian Stadiums & Sport

Austadiums is the home of Australian stadiums and sport, featuring details on every stadium and sports event, including news, seating maps, stats, crowds & tickets.

www.austadiums.com

 

[Hoops]

The AFL and Vic Government are joined at the hip. It's almost a ministry without the name.

We’re Backing The Mighty MCG Into The Future

The Melbourne Cricket Ground (MCG) is the jewel in Australia’s sporting crown. We want to keep it that way.Premier Jacinta Allan joined Minister for Tourism, Sport and Major Events Steve Dimopoulos, Melbourne Cricket Club (MCC) CEO Stuart Fox and the MCG Trust Chair the Hon. Steve Bracks AC...

www.premier.vic.gov.au

Quotes attributable to Premier Jacinta Allan

“The MCG is our economy’s home ground advantage – we want to keep it that way.”

“We’re planning for the future so the ‘G can remain the best stadium in the world.”

Quotes attributable to Minister for Tourism, Sport and Major Events Steve Dimopoulos

"The MCG is critical to our reputation as the sporting capital of Australia, and we want to make sure it can continue to support the very best events for years to come.”

“The footy festival is the best place for footy fans of all ages to experience the passion and excitement of Grand Final week in the shadow of the mighty MCG.”

Laughable. It's not even the best stadium in the country.

So a politician is talking up their events and assets? Wow, I'm shocked!