A small Swans crowd? Give them a second team
Roar Guru By David Wiseman, 9 Sep 2008 David Wiseman is a Roar Guru
- Tagged:
- AFL, ANZ stadium, Celtic, football, Fremantle, Fremantle Dockers, Port Adelaide, Port Adelaide Power, Rugby League, Socceroos, State Of Origin, Sydney Swans, western Sydney
Related coverage
- Sydney Swans news
- Port Adelaide Power news
- Fremantle Dockers news
- State of Origin 2013 news
- Football news
- Socceroos news
- Socceroos Fixtures news
- Rugby League news
- AFL news
- Toyota Premiership news
- Socceroos 2014 FIFA World Cup Qualifying news
In a slow news week, the ‘non-existent’ crowd for the Swans-Kangaroos final has become a talking point. Typically Greg Baum of The Age is a fine columnist, but him resorting to quoting some nobody and taking his opinion as gospel is a bit rich.
According to this self-acclaimed expert, the Swans fans of yesteryear have moved onto the Socceroos; Sydney people don’t understand why the two recent Grand Finals the Swans played in were not played in Sydney or Perth; and Sydney people have a problem with there being a lack of local Sydney players in the team.
Has the lack of local players hurt the support of the Boston Celtics or Arsenal?
So what they told you with much mirth was that the Swans final drew a paltry 19,127. But what they didn’t tell you was that there were three rugby league matches played in Sydney on the same day, which drew a collective 18,245!
What does all of this mean for the mooted second team in Sydney? Absolutely nothing.
Yes, not withstanding the weather, the Swans should have drawn a better crowd for a final in what was the last match to be played for the year in Sydney. But what chance do the Swans have if the State of Origin fails to draw a crowd?
Before the final State of Origin match this year, there were reports that unless Sydney drew better crowds they would lose games to Brisbane or even Melbourne. The last sellout for an Origin match in Sydney was the second one of 2005.
In 34 regular season matches at ANZ Stadium, the average crowd was 15,034.
In its first year of operation in 1999, it hosted 16 regular season matches and even with the novelty factor only averaged 20,281.
The list of complaints against the venue is well known: sterile atmosphere inside and around the venue, nowhere to park; and overpriced food and drinks.
Another issue which you can’t do anything about is basic supply and demand.
At a smaller venue, the anxiety of missing out on a ticket causes people to buy theirs early so as not to miss out.
At an 85,000 seat stadium there is no rush to buy a ticket as you know there will be plenty left. Come the weekend, the weather is horrible and now you can’t be bothered.
What does all of this mean for the mooted second team in Sydney? Absolutely nothing.
What does matter for them is that they have no history, tradition or culture to draw on.
Port Adelaide bucked the system by inserting an existing team instead of a new one. Compare this to Fremantle who seem to still be experiencing teething problems.
And this is in an AFL town.
The Swans endured a torrid time when they relocated to Sydney. Like an organ transplant which refused to graft, the locals wouldn’t accept someone else’s team while the existing South Melbourne fans didn’t want to accept a team which was no longer theirs.
At least there were 85 years of tradition to draw from!
Things for them won’t be made any easier by a media who can’t wait to stick the boot in when things go pear-shaped. Where expansion happens most often in sports is in the USA. But with the size of the country and the higher amount of teams, there isn’t as much scrutiny.
Plus things feel more regional.
They have their own regional media covering the team, which is likely to be more sympathetic. The same liberties do not exist in Australia.
Take for example the NFL’s Houston Texans, which have been around since 2002.
Since day one they have pretty much been hopeless and to date they have a record of 32-65, which means they win one game for every two they lose.
They are serving America’s fourth largest city, which has a population of over two million. Not withstanding their horrible on-field performances, they have always averaged around 70,000 to home matches.
Are people who currently live in Western Sydney and do not follow any AFL team going to start supporting this new team simply because this new team is more local?
Possibly, but who really knows?
As long as there is no purple in their jumper they should be ok.
September 9th 2008 @ 9:10am
JayJay said | September 9th 2008 @ 9:10am | Report comment
Nice article David. I tend to agree with your premise. The doomsdayers need to put it all into context: as inner-city and beachside property prices continue to skyrocket, young families will increasingly be moving out to the suburbs. Sport is less and less about the inner-city and more about Western Sydney. The AFL needs to pounce before rugby wakes up and taps into these potential riches.
September 9th 2008 @ 9:40am
Mr Mac said | September 9th 2008 @ 9:40am | Report comment
David
Agree in principal
What the AFL (and its fans) don’t seem to realise is that there is more to life in winter than a game.
Further, apply the “sport significance” rule to AFL – i.e. remove two significant countries from that nations that play and ask wheter the game will survive – Ips facto – AFL is insignificant (as is the NRL).
The more cosmopolitan the city the more the rule applies
September 9th 2008 @ 9:52am
Mr Mac said | September 9th 2008 @ 9:52am | Report comment
David
Did you also see Gerard Whateley paternalistic comment on ABC’s offsiders last Sunday?
September 9th 2008 @ 3:33pm
Spiro Zavos said | September 9th 2008 @ 3:33pm | Report comment
The notion that the western suburbs of Sydney will be the answer to the various codes crowd problems is intriquing. RL which rightly claims the western suburbs as its heartland finds it hard to get great crowds in its hearltland. The virtual demise of the Magpies at Campbelltown is an example of this. Further out than the western suburbs, Penrith is struggling for viable crowds despite the fact that its league club is one of the most successful in NSW and is expanding to other areas.
On the other hand, Brisbane is going great guns for RL – and rugby union, at least for the Bledisloe Cup Test.
It may be that the western surburbs of Sydney are just too vast, with the size aggravated by a very poor transport system. It may be too difficult and too expensive for people to get to the game they can watch on television, an explanation why the RL television ratings this year are extremely good.
What this means for the AFL is that they should be extremely careful about a second Sydney team in the western suburbs. The heroic crowd projections will probably not eventuate.
September 9th 2008 @ 3:39pm
True Tah said | September 9th 2008 @ 3:39pm | Report comment
Spiro,
I think the main mistake is that people class the Western Suburbs as one homogenous area, when this is far from the truth…Westy pointed out on another thread all the details relating to this.
AFL needs to pick which part it intends to base itself in, Blacktown would be ideal, as it has largely been neglected by RL and it faces the issue of being halfway between Parramatta and Penrith.
September 9th 2008 @ 4:10pm
Andrew said | September 9th 2008 @ 4:10pm | Report comment
I think it is all very interesting.. To me it is evidence that AFL and RL has peaked. RL probably has too many sydney teams and would be better off culling some, however this would create a fan backlash. It is a difficult situation, the same that the AFL is in, too many Melbourne teams and nowhere else to expand.
Football can only prosper. It will be a huge success in western sydney when they get a second team estabilished in 2010. Football does seem to me at this time to be the only sport which can expand, and expand successfully. (gold coast, north queensland, western sydney, canberra, melbourne)
The AFL might have the money but is it really worth spending the money on something that will not be successful. Football is too strong in NSW, every man and his dog plays it at some level.
September 9th 2008 @ 4:37pm
jimbo said | September 9th 2008 @ 4:37pm | Report comment
Interesting dilemma the AFL now faces.
The declining Sydney AFL market has raised some concern, but to pull out now would be seen as a victory for the other codes and a weakness of the AFL, so the second Sydney team goes ahead.
The plan to use ANZ as the second team’s home ground has also attracted some criticism particularly since the ANZ is a horrible place to watch an AFL game when it is half or quarter full.
The AFL has had to come to the realisation that it is not the dominant code north of the Murray and doesn’t get everything it asks for from Sydney people, no matter how many ads you run. Especially saturation advertising about how “AFL made Australia”.
There is also the added complexity of the new AFL Media deal that was to be based on the strength of the growing AFL TV market in NSW and Qld.
The evidence doesn’t suggest a growing market.
It would now seem unlikely that the AFL will secure a billion dollar media deal.
2012 is still 4 years away and the situation may change again if the AFL can turn things around – the AFL commissioners’ light at the end of the tunnel to keep pressing on with a second Sydney AFL team.
September 9th 2008 @ 4:45pm
Redb said | September 9th 2008 @ 4:45pm | Report comment
Jimbo,
An interesting question…now that the Swans have won their first final, I suspect that the Bloods would get a very good crowd in the coming semi final if it was played in Sydney!
How quick can these things turn around – bloody quick.
I dont agree the AFL thought it was the dominant code north of the Murray, never ever seen that or heard that. What I have heard is that is it the biggest code nationally, there is a difference.
Redb
September 9th 2008 @ 4:49pm
Redb said | September 9th 2008 @ 4:49pm | Report comment
as muchas the AFL needs to pull its head in and change tactics in Sydney froma PR perpective, other codes should not read too much into the instant demise of AFL in Sdyney after one final.
It may actually do the code good to be seen as the underdog now in Sydney.
In Melbourne, media and fans have questioned the AFL’s second Sydney team’s timing, but the focus is on whether Hawthorn with Buddy Franklin can knock off Geelong – a game to be salivated.
Redb
September 9th 2008 @ 9:24pm
sheek said | September 9th 2008 @ 9:24pm | Report comment
It strikes me that the attention given to the small Swans ground was an opportunity by an AFL-phobic Sydney media to score a free hit. Or try to!
It was a miserable night, Telstra stadium itself is a price rip-off bandit, & the Swans have failed to show consistency. Why on earth would people bother to venture out in the muck, get ripped off their hard earned savings, to watch a team that might, or might not, deliver?