I’m amazed the AFL hasn’t tried to Streisand that ad out of existence.
@Henry’s Angry Pills Isn’t the age old argument for interchange restrictions that dropping it will just cause coaches to drop fatigued players behind the ball?
It's a bit obtuse but The Age also ran an article about the effect of GST on online purchases and they showed a graph showing the online price last year, the local retail price, and the online price this year with GST. It was an absolutely worthless piece of statistical "analysis" as it didn't show the impact of the GST as the biggest factor in the differences was the drop of the dollar.Average attendance has gone from 36,948 to 39,038. Meanwhile television audiences have shrank by an average of 2,090...If you look at population growth plus revenues and investments over that time and it is significant.
So the joke here is, they talk about the drop in ratings and the increase in crowd attendence, but the figures I made up show that the people not watching on TV are the ones going to the game…
Either way, the numbers they quoted are worthless. They show two years average attendences. Not the best sample size. How was last year rated historically? A poor attendence year? On trend? TV viewing has gone down but the same questions can be asked? What about TV viewership across all sports? The article declares there is an issue here but it does nothing to actually make its own case.
More people going to games, less watching at home. More people going and watching in WA (top two teams), way less in QLD (bottom two teams).
How surprising.
@Henry's Angry Pills Isn't the age old argument for interchange restrictions that dropping it will just cause coaches to drop fatigued players behind the ball?Well, yep. Whether it will it work is another question. I don't think anyone can actually predict it.
It's a bit obtuse but The Age also ran an article about the effect of GST on online purchases and they showed a graph showing the online price last year, the local retail price, and the online price this year with GST. It was an absolutely worthless piece of statistical "analysis" as it didn't show the impact of the GST as the biggest factor in the differences was the drop of the dollar.Average attendance has gone from 36,948 to 39,038. Meanwhile television audiences have shrank by an average of 2,090...If you look at population growth plus revenues and investments over that time and it is significant.
So the joke here is, they talk about the drop in ratings and the increase in crowd attendence, but the figures I made up show that the people not watching on TV are the ones going to the game…
Either way, the numbers they quoted are worthless. They show two years average attendences. Not the best sample size. How was last year rated historically? A poor attendence year? On trend? TV viewing has gone down but the same questions can be asked? What about TV viewership across all sports? The article declares there is an issue here but it does nothing to actually make its own case.
Yeah, I haven’t read the article. Was just commenting on a longer scope of statistical evidence that(as you mentioned) have not been considered. I mean what about people watching sport (let along AFL) on mobile devices, through online streaming services, pubs/bars, etc. You cannot just factor in TV as the single most detrimental factor.
I agree with all the above, possibly written by the work experience kid, actually no the senior journalist. The kid would have done more research.
Average attendance has gone from 36,948 to 39,038. Meanwhile television audiences have shrank by an average of 2,090...If you look at population growth plus revenues and investments over that time and it is significant.
Well also, if you read the full article, I think Rohan made the point that the year on year figure for attendance is coming off a horror number from 2014 - the year of the 6.40pm Sunday Twilight Blockbuster. If you go back 5 years, the average was 5,000-10,000 more.
Too many ■■■■ teams, rolling maul, game turned into fodder for live betting markets, blue jumpsuits on hovercraft.
Thank fahk for some teams who have history and remain about solid football values* (
(*Drug free since February 2013!).
Go nuts: http://afltables.com/afl/crowds/summary.htmlIt's a bit obtuse but The Age also ran an article about the effect of GST on online purchases and they showed a graph showing the online price last year, the local retail price, and the online price this year with GST. It was an absolutely worthless piece of statistical "analysis" as it didn't show the impact of the GST as the biggest factor in the differences was the drop of the dollar.Average attendance has gone from 36,948 to 39,038. Meanwhile television audiences have shrank by an average of 2,090...If you look at population growth plus revenues and investments over that time and it is significant.
So the joke here is, they talk about the drop in ratings and the increase in crowd attendence, but the figures I made up show that the people not watching on TV are the ones going to the game…
Either way, the numbers they quoted are worthless. They show two years average attendences. Not the best sample size. How was last year rated historically? A poor attendence year? On trend? TV viewing has gone down but the same questions can be asked? What about TV viewership across all sports? The article declares there is an issue here but it does nothing to actually make its own case.
There’s categories for stadia, state, team etc.
It seems more like Vic especially had a historical high from about 2007 - 2013 (ie the Cats v Pies v Saints v Hawks v Swans era); and we’ve rolled off from there.
Prior to that it was Bris v Port v Ade v Swans v Weagles in the top 4. Not much in it for the Vics, pretty solid everywhere else.
Too many teams, too many rubbish footballers running around, too many games each week, too much oversaturation of the game in the media, too many so called football 'personalities' with their crap opinions, way too much politics involved now, too over coached poor quality matches.Game’s a farking mess.
This. So much this.
I’ve had enough. I don’t like football anymore & I hate the AFL. I have my Essendon Membership, I go to games to support my club, I’ll watch them play interstate games on TV, that’s all.
Other than Essendon, I don’t give a ■■■■ about anything to do with football. And I’ve become increasingly more excited by the Cricket and the A-League.
I think a lot of people are disillusioned with the AFL, the conduct of the football tabloid media, and the entertainment of the game.
If I wanted to watch a stage managed result… I’d go watch wrestling.
I think I actually am growing to dislike the game of AFL now. Too soft. Blokes getting cheap frees. No reward for good tackles. Backs scrag the hell out of a forward, but a forward gets zero room for error, unless he is an AFL favourite. The gladiatorial nature of the game has largely been removed imo.
Essendon though… I love this club more than ever.
With credit to CJohns' twitterz, Essendon has the longest running streak of home games above 30k at 55 (since 2010, Brisbane rd 21)
I hope the streak doesn’t end in the next 7 weeks. It would have to be at risk this week, next week against the Bulldogs and in the game against Adelaide.
I’m part fo the AFL fan focus and get survery from time to time where I tell the AFL what I think. Not that it probably does much good. The latest one is about rules, making the game shorter and the sub rule. I thought you might be interested in some of my responses below. Cant remember the specific questions but I will give you an idea.
This was positives and negatives about the game
There have been too many rule changes with no consideration of the ongoing and downstream effects. The umpiring is woeful, completely inconsistent. There is mass confusion from both players and fans and sometimes umpires. Games can be terribly boring. The results due to so many silly little knee jerk reaction rule changes over the years are now coming home to roost. And people want to change more things to fix the problems.
Length of the game, it is too long should it be made shorter (not is it too short, they try to get the answer they want)
You have already shortened the game once. Just leave it alone. Change for the sake of change is what has got us where we are. You have already close to ruined the game we used to love. Whats the point of making the game shorter? Fit in better with televison? Don’t you realise people are sick of this tinkering?
Substitute (do I get excited when a sub comes on, do I think its exciting with fresh players, do I look excitedly to see who the sub is going to be, not do I think poor bastard)
If there was ever any point to the substitute, apart from Demetriou trying to reduce the number of rotations after changing the rules to speed up the game, it has never been made clear. Its a pain in the neck for the club to have to pick a player to be the substitute. Its woeful for player development. They finally get a game, then they are sub, cant come until the last quarter, then they get dropped the next week so they can actually get a game in the VFL, because after all they want to play football. Once again it was change for the sake of change with no thought for the bigger picture.
I sometimes wonder who is running this game. And perhaps the laws of the game committee need to have a few people experienced in business process review so they can methodically work through ALL the consequences of rule changes before making a decision on what to change.
I think this was still about the sub and other changes.
Its absolutely pointless, having been brought in by someone who clearly didn’t consider the consequences, but why am I surprised, that’s what happen with all the rule changes. Apart from the interchange being brought in I can’t off the top of my head think of ONE rule change that has improved the game.
Tackling is ruined, the bump has gone, dropping the ball is rife, no more tactical plays such as punching the ball over the line or kicking with skill to the boundary to force a ball up.
Where’s Rocky: “what have you got to say now Mr. Demetriou?” ■■■■.
Discussing on SEN now.
Edit: scrap that, two minutes of f all.
Definitely a big turn off for me watching the game on tv are the commentators… They make any game unwatchable. I have always hated the way the camera’s rarely show wide shots - so you can’t see the way the play is being set up. Going to the footy is by far the best way to watch … unfortunately for those living interstate (NT) it’s the only way to watch my team. The tv commentators are so woeful I can’t bear to listen to any of them… esp mcguire, ‘dermie’, dwayne ‘rustle’, and brad johnson. So mostly I switch off or mute or listen to the radio where possible (at least they have to follow the play).
Everyone fetishises the hardness and discipline and effort of defensive football. When a team gets demolished, people talk about not enough tackling, not working hard enough the other way, etc, etc. All the rhetoric about what it means to be a good team is about defense. Then the same people who harp on endlessly about defense suddenly start complaining that the game’s got too defensive. Get the defense right as a coach, you get a few more years to try and fix the attack. Get the defense wrong, and you get the sack.
Add to this the fact that finding players with the discipline to play defense is far easier than finding players with the flair for attack, and you’ve got yourself a recipe for dour football.
Changing the rules isn’t going to change any of that, unless the rule changes start getting really big.
Fark the afl.
In terms of watching the game,
I enjoy watching Fox - Sandy Roberts is good.
Dare I say it at times Eddie is good to, Baring in mind this is comparing him to the likes of BT & CO
I support KB on a limit on interchange.
Yep. No one agrees with that idiot on anything but he’s right on this.
I wish instead of asking “how can we change the game” we could ask “how can we change the game and ignore business realities”.
- Almost none, or no interchange
- 17 games a season
- Shut down GC, GWS and Brisbane