Why isn't AFL big overseas?

[Beckers]

Its also what you get exposed to. When i was in the USA in 2000, people loved to talk AFL because they used to see it on ESPN. It was one of their early 'filler' sports before they attracted good NFL, NBA, NHA contracts.
When i went back in 2006, no ne even knew a thing about the game because it hadn't been on the box in 5 years.

 

[fishmonger]

The game in full flight, is a marvelous spectacle

Problem is the way it is played at professional level, it barely manages to get off the ground.

I've seen some exciting amateur games this year, but not much to write home about watching AFL.

And this is, sadly, the only footy that people from overseas get to see.

 

[ripitup27]

It's all about movement of people and their cultures. Look at most of the Commonwealth countries, they play soccer or cricket because the empire did.

Australians haven't settled anywhere other than Australia, meaning we haven't been able to spread the game like dominant empires have, and it won't happen that way ever again because there are no unchartered territories any more.

Not only that, but we don't border any other country closely like countries like the USA and Canada. Even though Canada is a Commonwealth, it's sporting influences have come from the USA because they are so close.

It just doesn't happen these ways anymore, meaning it's hard to spread the game.

 

[Clint Bizkit]

Why isn't AFL big overseas?

Why do Victorians, South Australians, Tasmanians and Western Australians like Australian Rules?

Why do people from Queensland and New South Wales like Rugby?

Why do Americans like American Football?

Why do Europeans like Soccer?

The answer for all of these questions is because those games are what we/they were brought up watching and playing.

EDIT: See post above this one also.

 

[randyzany]

It's all about movement of people and their cultures. Look at most of the Commonwealth countries, they play soccer or cricket because the empire did.

Australians haven't settled anywhere other than Australia, meaning we haven't been able to spread the game like dominant empires have, and it won't happen that way ever again because there are no unchartered territories any more.

Not only that, but we don't border any other country closely like countries like the USA and Canada. Even though Canada is a Commonwealth, it's sporting influences have come from the USA because they are so close.

It just doesn't happen these ways anymore, meaning it's hard to spread the game.

England did not colonise or subjugate continental Europe, Latin America and the vast majority of African continent and yet that's where soccer is followed with a religious fevour.

I think that's sufficient proof that soccer becoming a world wide game had little to do with the "English Empire" and maybe more to do with the fact that soccer was embraced by foreigners all over the world for being a relatively simple beautiful game. The English did not have to coerce, convince and/or argue with anyone to fall in love with soccer, it did that all by itself.

Take a look at thugby for comparison purposes, another English game exported everywhere they went, it probably has less than 5% of soccer's world wide support. LOL

 

[_Interpol_]

lol.. its barely popular here (see 19K @ a final), let alone overseas

they have WELL RUN competitions to follow, the afl is a joke

 

[That's deliberate]

Bacause it's a Victorian game.

Everyone else is just a mere observer.

 

[krudmonk]

As someone overseas who follows the AFL, I can't really relate to the uneducated masses. I know that Australian football (known affectionately as "Aussie rules" with the mispronounced "Aussie") is on the map, but only in the sense that Fosters and Crocodile Dundee are. It's a double-edged sword.

If you were to ask a North American the most popular sporting attraction in Sydney, they'd probably think it was AFL just because the two are Australian so they must naturally go together. At the same time, they'd think rugby union is a bunch of people who banded together for their rights as rugby players and that rugby league is a specific rugby competition.

 

[Sportman1987]

We need a name for our sport that prevents it being restricted only to our country - 'Aussie Rules', so its limited to Australia.

We need something like what 'gridiron' is to NFL.

Why? I don't like the idea of changing the game to appeal to outsiders. Expansion isn't inherently good. If others want to play the game, great, but I don't see why making AFL an international game should be a priority.

 

[fishmonger]

It's all about movement of people and their cultures. Look at most of the Commonwealth countries, they play soccer or cricket because the empire did.

Australians haven't settled anywhere other than Australia, meaning we haven't been able to spread the game like dominant empires have, and it won't happen that way ever again because there are no unchartered territories any more.

For a time we had Papua New Guinea and Nauru as dependencies. And we exported the game to both of them - successfully too I might add. Footy is Nauru's national sport and in PNG it has come close, the Sydneysiders just took the potential more seriously.

Also New Zealand was once an Australasian colony and footy was played there for a while until it became a separate nation.

So if only our reach extended outside the Oceanic region ....

Still, it can and will grow overseas. There are almost a million Australians abroad. That is enough to start some serious grassroots programs. ..

 

[greennick]

Incorrect. The manner in which football(soccer) spread had nothing to do with an "empire".

Englishmen and other expats that travelled over the world (for cultural experiences, diplomacy or whatever reason they travelled) had no intention whatsoever of converting anyone to soccer.

For example In South America (the English empire had zero influence there) the locals saw the pommies play games of soccer between themselves to pass the time whilst they were there and were very much intrigued by it. Gradually the game took off, there was never a plan to evangelise people to become soccer devotees. It's human nature to reject something when it's been shoved down their throat but give it a chance if it's not forced and that's what happened in the case of soccer. The fact that it' a relatively simple game but fun to play and understand didn't hurt its chances of acceptance either.

That was the point numbnuts.

Obviously the English didn't go around take over countries and then send in the missionaries to convert everyone to playing soccer. That just happened and was a side thing as a part of them being there. But if they were not there, then the game would not have had any way to spread.

Same with the US with NFL/Baseball/etc. You can watch sportscenter and get all the scores and highlights. You can watch CNN and it will update you with all the scores. Anyone know how to find out the AFL scores on TV overseas? Good luck with that!

 

[greennick]

no it was directed at me coz im just a dumb carlton supporter that cant voice their opinion

Well at least you know your place.

You are racist too by the way. You know you can't start a sentence with "I'm not racist but" and then follow it with a racist statement and still be considered not racist?

 

[Glasslove]

I didn't get a chance to read through the entire thread, so sorry if this has already been raised..

There was an article in one of the weekend papers magazines a couple of weeks ago. Check out this site:

http://www.usfooty.com/usfooty/

Apparently Aussie Rules is growing in popularity in the US. A lot of Americans enjoy the physical side of the sport and also the social aspect after the game. They now have 10,000 participants in 10 years and most of the players aren't expats.. the majority of them are now US citizens..

So there you go.. it might get there!

 

[crazyman27]

Right now the Bulgarians are asking the same question about midget tossing.

Let's be honest, the only reason we would want Aussie rules to become an international sport is so there could be an Aussie Rules World Cup and we could watch Gary Ablett, Buddy Franklin and the like running rings around the Brits and Yanks.

 

[smasha]

THE AFL is becoming a greedy corporation.

Makes me envious when i see the EPL or other leagues for that matter and every club has their own stadium while we have 2 for every bloody club in Melbourne.

That reeks of greed by the AFL.

 

[Rob]

THE AFL is becoming a greedy corporation.

Makes me envious when i see the EPL or other leagues for that matter and every club has their own stadium while we have 2 for every bloody club in Melbourne.

That reeks of greed by the AFL.

Eh? Would seem to be the opposite. Instead of a bunch of 4th rate shitboxes, they can supply 2 world class stadiums so more people can get in at a higher comfort level.

If you're envious of the EPL, go and see what it costs to get a seat at a game involving one of the top clubs in England and then come back and preach to us about greed.

 

[Goosecat]

Whilst British empire growth helped to a degree other posters here have touched on the vast "soccer" pick up in countries not influenced by that and the relative failure of certain other English sports comparitively.

Certainly the USA hasn't gone around taking over country after country thus speading baseball ( though some might say they have economically and culturally ). Yet baseball is now played throughout numerous countries in Sth America and Asia. Countries who normally try to avoid taking on anything particularly "American."

I think like most things in life that become hugely influencial there is more then one specific reason for vast popularity.

To become a truly international sport certainly Australia would need to exert more of a cultural influence on the rest of the world which I find difficult to imagine as a real possibility sheerly because our size both population wise and economically renders us too small to have any real impact globally.

There would also need to be as others have mentioned a signifigant simplification of the rules. The sports that have truly become favourites throughout the world all have simple enough rules for any new country, civilisation and their children to understand immediately and become interested in playing before they have a chance to become disinterested whilst attempting to try and comprehend the numerous rules, changes and interpretations that even Australian umpires cant agree on.

I spent 2 footy seasons travelling through Europe and never heard any derogatory comment more often then those based around "bullshit" ( actually it was more often " Bollocks ") rule interpretations. To foreigners a push in the back must be just that, a push in the back. Not something open to argument and interpretation as to its strength or affect on a contest, either its a push or it isn't. The same applies to "holding the ball", and "dropping the ball". Not " incorrect disposal " or " prior opportunity " interpretation vagaries. Either it is or it isn't. That's how it is in soccer, my kid knows you're either offside or you're not, you tripped him or you didn't. The same applies to baseball you hit it or you didn't, it's outside the line or isn't and you caught it or you didn't. That also applies to Tennis and all the other "worldwide" games. The rules are unambiguous and capable of being understood and agreed upon easily by all people of all ages.

Unfortunately " Aussie Rules " continues to be plagued by shortsighted rules committees insistant on making constant changes when the reality is if the original rules had been left as they were intended the game would have progressed of its own natural volition to a high speed sport through the natural increase in professionalism and athletic training, speed and endurance as all other sports have achieved through humans natural developement.

Untill the AFL realises this " Aussie Rules " will never be a " world wide " sport.

 

[SweetLeftFoot]

The notion that it is too hard to understand is crap. My French girlfriend picked up the rules in half a season of watching two games a weekend and she had no background in sport.

There is a reason and it is cultural.

Aussie Rules is a niche product. In the UK they still think it is 'no rules' and violent though Big Baz's effort aside, you see far more really nasty, intend to hurt, challenges in the EPL than you do AFL.

People have already mentally categorised our sport and as such, are resistant to change. They think they know what it is and don't like it. geez, this even happens in our own country: how many NSW/Qld types simply refuse to watch footy because they 'know' they don't like it, even though when you press them, they'll admit they've never watched even a full half.

This is why we should expand to areas that don't have preconcieved notions of what our game is, or where (like Ireland) it is seen favourably.

 

[chrisjie]

Europe
Home sport - Soccer
Will you ever move this from its perch? No

United States
Home sport - NFL
Will you ever move this from its perch? No

Australia
Home sport - AFL
Will you ever move this from its perch? No

You can't encroach on the 'main' sport of any country, especially the same 'brands' of sports.

Oh and NFL is a brilliant sport.

 

[The Casey Cat]

Agree with Goosecat. The AFL wonder why our Northern states and other countries are not interested? It's because a lot of the time ####ing whistles go off these days not even the players know what is going on! And viewers foreign to the game are expected to just cop it and work it out? When they probably don't care for either team? They just change the channel and I can't say I blame them.

 

[Goosecat]

Whilst British empire growth helped to a degree other posters here have touched on the vast "soccer" pick up in countries not influenced by that and the relative failure of certain other English sports comparitively.

Certainly the USA hasn't gone around taking over country after country thus speading baseball ( though some might say they have economically and culturally ). Yet baseball is now played throughout numerous countries in Sth America and Asia. Countries who normally try to avoid taking on anything particularly "American."

I think like most things in life that become hugely influencial there is more then one specific reason for vast popularity.

To become a truly international sport certainly Australia would need to exert more of a cultural influence on the rest of the world which I find difficult to imagine as a real possibility sheerly because our size both population wise and economically renders us too small to have any real impact globally.

There would also need to be as others have mentioned a signifigant simplification of the rules. The sports that have truly become favourites throughout the world all have simple enough rules for any new country, civilisation and their children to understand immediately and become interested in playing before they have a chance to become disinterested whilst attempting to try and comprehend the numerous rules, changes and interpretations that even Australian umpires can't agree on.

I spent 2 footy seasons travelling through Europe and never heard any derogatory comment more often then those based around "bullshit" ( actually it was more often " Bollocks ") rule interpretations. To foreigners a push in the back must be just that, a push in the back. Not something open to argument and interpretation as to its strength or affect on a contest, either its a push or it isn't. The same applies to "holding the ball", and "dropping the ball". Not " incorrect disposal " or " prior opportunity " interpretation vagaries. Either it is or it isn't. That's how it is in soccer, their kids know you're either offside or you're not, you tripped him or you didn't. The same applies to baseball you hit it or you didn't, it's outside the line or isn't and you caught it or you didn't. That also applies to Tennis and all the other "worldwide" games. The rules are unambiguous and capable of being understood and agreed upon easily by all people of all ages. Hence anyone can play it, hence the popularity.

Unfortunately " Aussie Rules " continues to be plagued by shortsighted rules committees insistant on making constant changes when the reality is if the original rules had been left as they were intended the game would have progressed of its own natural volition to a high speed sport through the natural increase in professionalism and athletic training, speed and endurance as all other sports have achieved through natural human and sport developement.

Untill the AFL realises this " Aussie Rules " will never be a " world wide " sport.

 

[Bomber Man]

Thought this might be an interesting link for some to consider, gives a high level timeline of sport evolution/development back to mid-1800s.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sports_timeline

I agree with the theory of structured team sports with documented rules becoming popular and 'common with commoners' at the time the British empire was the world leader and expanding rapidly across the globe.

I could go on about it, but this could quickly result in a macro history study post... and not many would want that...

I'll just say it's important to remember that info moved slowly in those days (only form of comm's was written transported by ship...), was primarily delivered one-way from England (and Europe) to it's colonies, and nothing much was shared between colonies, so soccer spread pretty much unopposed and fairly pure in form. England's influence in mainland Europe was also (debatably) at it's peak, and with Europe adopting the the stuctured rules from Britain the expansion was even stronger to colonies.

IMO, once a few generations in multiple countries took hold (up until, say, WW1) soccer was never going to be unshelved as the preferred sport in many countries world wide.

And I promised myself I wasn't going to go on like that...

 

[MadMac]

The amount of ignorance in this thread is terrifying.

I'll start off simply with this: you follow what you grow up on.

I can guarantee you, 100%, that those who say "soccer is boring", would be saying "AFL is boring" had they grown up on soccer. Simple as that. There is no denying it, no trying to rationalize it. Its how personalities and people are shaped. If you have a bad experience with a dog as a young kid, that could shape how you look at dogs for the rest of your life. The formative stages will determine what you like to do, what you like to watch.

It is very rare that a person will be "converted" to another sport at the age of 25 if they have been brought up on soccer. They may learn to eventually like the AFL - like myself - but if it came to choice between soccer and Aussie rules...theres almost no comparison.

People who say "AFL is fast, hard, high scoring" etc etc completely miss the point. It is why, as has been mentioned, the NFL thrives in the US, and the US alone. It is why Mexico, just across the border, loves soccer. Geographic location doesnt have to mean anything (although it can be different for some cases). Really, it has nothing to do with the isolation or size of Australia. The game was largely confined to a few states up until only 15 years ago. I cant imagine how much global expansionism would have taken place had they had the luxury of bordering other nations.

The United States are the cultural hub of the world, and exert massive influence around the world - and what has that done for the NFL? Its gained some fans, its managed to attract a good crowd at Wembley; its European venture failed. To put it simply, people just arent buying it. The NFL wants to gain fans in Europe for its existing NFL teams. They can do that to some extent, but at the end of the day if gridiron isnt being exposed at a grass roots level in Europe - you're doomed. Nothing else to it.

And this applies to Australia aswell. As long as people arent growing up on Aussie Rules in overseas nations - which looks likely to be the case for forever and a day - then no real growth can take place .

The arugment over Englands imperialism and what it has done for world sport is irrelevant. It happened; theres nothing to discuss. And lets not forget that the inhabitants who created Aussie Rules are infact a result of British colonialism.

Hell, if they spread Darts to mainland Europe, Africa, Asia....then darts could very well today be the "World Game". But they didnt.

AFL would be the world game today if it was spread by the Brits. It would more than likely be the world game (assuming we took rugby out of the equation). But it wouldnt be the world game beacuse its fast and hard and "exciting". It would be the world game because it would have the same strucutres in place that soccer has.

The whole "exciting argument" as I said is irrelevant. People have seen AFL overseas, and many have said its boring. Same goes with some Australians who think soccer is boring. So clearly, here, we are seeing that something is not adding up. Someone is telling the truth and the other is lying right? Well, as mentioned, thats not quite true. Its all about growing up with a game (whatever it may be) and becoming attached to it to the point of identifying yourself with it.....

Which, mind you, is why people continue to have debates over which sport is better. Even though arguing about the validity of one sport being "better" than the other is completely rubbish when you think about it - because you're never arguing objectively, only subjectively.

Awesome post

It is amazing that it's being ignored however.
And to all those talking about British Empire spreading the game, they obviously don't know what they're talking about. Lot of countries that were colonised by Brits don't have soccer as the number 1 sport. On the other hand, countries that have never been under British control have embraced it. In fact most of the continental Europe had some sort of conflict with UK.

 

[randyzany]

That was the point numbnuts.

Obviously the English didn't go around take over countries and then send in the missionaries to convert everyone to playing soccer. That just happened and was a side thing as a part of them being there. But if they were not there, then the game would not have had any way to spread.

Same with the US with NFL/Baseball/etc. You can watch sportscenter and get all the scores and highlights. You can watch CNN and it will update you with all the scores. Anyone know how to find out the AFL scores on TV overseas? Good luck with that!

******* do you have comprehension problems? I quoted the part of his post which mentioned the "Empire". Like I said the VAST MAJORITY OF THE WORLD WAS NOT COLONISED BY ENGLAND, and interestingly enough soccer took off largely in countries where they had little influence(South America, most of Africa, Italy, Spain etc...). Can your puny brain grasp that?

In a lot of cases the English didn't even make it to particular countries but it got there via people from other nations that had adopted and embraced it with gusto. Thus lot of the credit has to go to the game itself, it appealed instantly to many. If soccer's popularity was all down to the "English Empire" then cricket and thugby would be equally as popular and they are clearly not. Sheesh it really isn't that hard to understand or are you one of those imbeciles that has a hard time admitting soccer is actually a decent sport?

 

[harmesy 37]

******* do you have comprehension problems? I quoted the part of his post which mentioned the "Empire". Like I said the VAST MAJORITY OF THE WORLD WAS NOT COLONISED BY ENGLAND, and interestingly enough soccer took off largely in countries where they had little influence(South America, most of Africa, Italy, Spain etc...). Can your puny brain grasp that?

In a lot of cases the English didn't even make it to particular countries but it got there via people from other nations that had adopted and embraced it with gusto. Thus lot of the credit has to go to the game itself, it appealed instantly to many. If soccer's popularity was all down to the "English Empire" then cricket and thugby would be equally as popular and they are clearly not. Sheesh it really isn't that hard to understand or are you one of those imbeciles that has a hard time admitting soccer is actually a decent sport?

Soccer was established in Argentina on the back of English engineers who went over there to work. ie there are still clubs in Argentina called Arsenal and a variety of other English sounding teams. Look it up. it is well documented.


It is all about exporting culture and one day (not in our life time) Australian Rules will be exported as it is the fastest game, the most skillful game and the best to play (in my experience). Already they have a reasonable competition in the USA. That could be added to if they call it usa footy, or give it an american feel.


Soccer has numerous flaws - top of the list is whether or not it is a contact sport? the game on the weekend between melb v and adelaide was decided by someone pretending? he got tripped over. They should take contact out completely as it makes it too hard to follow or at the very least too frustrating.


Such and such team won a game because they had a player that got tripped. It is un-Australian to borrow a hackeneyed phrase to see someone /a team win due to such uninspiring actions.

No Aussie Rules match or rugby match is decided by someone tripping themselves over - even if there was incidental contact.



re- where you have grown up determing your sporting background. If SEQueenslanders are given a 50/50 choice of playing Australian Rules or Rugby it is obvious which one they would choose. One game you get to mark the ball, kick it and run with it - the other you run 2 metres and get tackled by 2 blokes.