If thats the second biggest sport in Brazil, what can we do to help you change that?

In US, American Football and Baseball manage to have different schedules, as Cricket and Australian Football down under. But Basketball, Hockey, Soccer and Lacrosse, with more or less success, try to find some space: Basketball and Hockey in winter, against NFL; and Soccer and Lacrosse in summer, against MLB. Oddly enough, besides being the strongest code, NFL’s one-game-per-week schedule somehow allowed enough room specially to Basketball to develop. It seems Baseball is the hardest code to face against, as Soccer and Lacrosse leagues are still far behind the other sports.

Since I live in a only-soccer-minded country (Brazil), that even the National Volleyball team, besides being the strongest in the world, cannot carry up the game, I’m curious how the problem is handled by the Australians.

“………During the boom of the 1880s, three new clubs were formed: Footscray Football Club in 1883, a Protestant working-class club; Fitzroy Football Club (1884), based in the newly affluent inner-northern suburb; and Richmond Football Club (1885), a classic Catholic working-class club. …..”

http://www.fullpointsfooty.net/western_bulldogs_(1).htm

Only Lang Park had a higher average crowd in 2009

http://stats.rleague.com/rl/crowds/2009.html#venue

http://stats.rleague.com/rl/crowds/summary.html

http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/tg-sydney-swans?year=1993

http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/tg-sydney-swans?year=1992

South Australia has had the same constitution since 1857

http://www.parliament.sa.gov.au/AboutParliament/History/TheFirstParliament/SouthAustraliasParliamentaryConstitution.htm

“……South Australia now had a Constitution which was one of the most advanced in the world. This was a time when many countries had no representative institutions, or where only the wealthier or landowning groups had the right to vote. There was great pride in this achievement………”

NSW has had the same Constitution since 1856.

Most most importantly, Australia has one of the oldest sporting cultures in the world. The first recorded cricket match in Australia took place in Sydney in December 1803. The rules of Australian rules football were written down in 1859.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion/editorials/melbourne-storm-should-inspire-us-all/story-e6frfhqo-1225782702384

“Melbourne Storm should inspire us all

WITH its emphatic 23-16 NRL Grand Final victory yesterday over the Eels, Melbourne Storm has iced the cake for our town’s sports lovers……….

……..Its win adds to the state’s trophy cabinet. Our Bushrangers won the Sheffield Shield, state cricket’s top prize, last summer, Victory won the soccer A-League, the Vixens triumphed in netball’s ANZ championship and the South Dragons took the national basketball title.

The AFL Grand Final, of course, was disputed by two Victorian teams.

No one could seriously deny that Melbourne is Australia’s sporting capital……………….”

It’s not that NZers don’t passionately love Rugby and the reality is that it’s by far the number one code but we’re very rarely into nothing else full stop. Deaker on Sport (a SKY TV production) is a good example of the supposed popularity of minority sports in NZ. Yes they pretty much always use the first section for Rugbytalk and then diversifies from there. But having said that an AB loss constitutes a lonely dark day for many NZers…something similar happened with the Ashes loss mind you

But by in large our sporting consumption is much broader than it seems some on the Roar have, and you guys live in a country where there’s next to nothing stopping any sport from flourishing, apart from the media and well the Internet now means you no longer have any excuses…

About metrosexuals, I was referring to Paul Henry (TV One’s Breakfast Male presenter) who only started taking an interest in RL the year before last when it looked like the Warriors were in with a shot to win, before being manhandled bt the Eels and I have to say it’s all beginning to make sense now: the Warriors gave the Eeels all the confidence they needed

now i am going to pretend bro, that I didn’t read that. These words that you write are never to spoken in public while wearing an ALL BLACK jumper or anywhere within 200 miles of the canterbury plains. Now run along to church and say 10 hail mary’s my son. You need some help my bro because as a Kiwi, your brothers expect more. And metrosexuals following the warriors bro??? Ho long since you been to Auckland. Bro, its my bros in East Auckland that love the warriors and not too many of them are metrosexuals. By the way bro, what does metrosexual mean???? If its having sex on the metro link then yes, maybe some of them are warriors fans

Basically what I am saying is that for all of Aussie rules’ beautiful/rough/tough.skillful/talent-laden aspects there is not enough in it for Sydneysiders. Maybe orig it was a matter of Sydney v Melbourne, being a loser in that contest would’ve done exactly the opposite of what 150 years since has done: that is give each side a credible understanding of its own invincibility. However now it’s not a game that speaks to people who don’t want a single code.

Now I’m a NZer, and we’re known for our one-eyed support of RU (and RL when you’re trying to impress the missus that you’re a true metrosexual ) but I can say with all honesty that few if any NZers of my age are truly satisfied by a game of Rugby and yet it speaks out so loud and so deeply to us.

You fans from Aussie rules states are spoiled in that you have both a great spectacle and a multi-faceted game which tells a great story, but if you were to use the same logic which captured Melbourne town’s sporting allegiance to put your case forward for a truly ‘National’ code you might as well resign yourself to nothing more than Cold War bravado. What does Aussie rules offer to the Northerner? Or will you let them make their own meaning or even worse let the media make it for them?

Don’t forget that Football Clubs in Europe, South America were essentially expat-oriented at the entry-point phase of the ‘evangelist’ movement. The expats being British ‘engineers’ apparently Scots being the most prolific. But in England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland as far as I can tell, Football Clubs were originally established to play any/all football code: Cambridge rules after it was ‘codified’) Association (ditto), Rugby school rules (and of course Rugby Football Union rules and there was some significant differences) and other rule variations like Harrow (which was quite popular in South Africa apparently) and Shefield FA rules etc

Now again this may not have any relevance to Melbourne, and being a New World Culture there is susually a fair bit of arrogance that comes with those who cross the Equator, I’ve heard it did weird things to Vasco De Gama’s crew , but over all it is not about whose older than who, but whose got the most capital. For a time England did and thus the game of Association Football was assumed to be the best thing since sliced cheese. Everyone followed England, until it was proven that there was a way to beat them (and even transcend them entirely). But Melbourne as we’ve discussed was independent of this, or rather had enough capital (early enough) to deviate in its own way.

Problem is by playing (and espousing) a single code they forget the wonderful thing called competition. What does competition do, it is what streamlines, what forces players but more importantly administrators to have a think about what is good about their sport and what needs fixing. I mean is it simply a matter of watchability (making the game easier to watch) or is it that by playing the game a certain way you get more and more people to buy into the stroy you’re telling them. Why Rugby football was not mass-popular was because the everyday person questioned whether it was a story they liked the ending of.

Of course there’s no guarantee it’ll ever be fixable, but without an external reference point the game becomes increasingly like a religion: fewer and fewer people with the power to suggest/alter things that aren’t working out so well.

I mean why do you think the game drew such huge crowds Michael C? My personal opinion is not that the VFA/VFL/AFL has an agenda in keeping other sports on the margins (which is no more than a conspiracy theory, but in my darker days I do wonder whether the AFL wants anything less than the total subordination of all other footy codes) but rather the game itself leaves little room for outsiders to make their own meaning of the typical AFL game-narrative

It’s a great narrative for Melburnians, a Beethoven’s ninth kind of thing, but for outsiders who have another vantage point it’s hard to like what they see, not because they hate new things or because they don’t understand it, but because success on the AFL footy field does not quite translate into the kind of success one draws from their native code.

I read this back in July :
“Last night Nine lost its all-important Thursday night to Seven. But all the networks took a hit with SBS screening the Ashes series and managing a 14% share.

The Footy Show plummeted to 785,000, most of which went to the AFL edition. The NRL version slumped to an appalling 138,000 in Sydney. It continues to be immune from any axe because of Nine’s NRL branding and it is known to be a favourite of David Gyngell’s.”

Hmm – is it okay that the NRL has it’s own ‘buddies’?? Such as David Gyngell. Wonder what’d happen without the home town NRL bias?

Firstly – it did not occur ‘at the game’. It was later that evening and peripheral to the senior side premiership celebrations.

Secondly – it is a very sad fact that Geelong, the community and local media have started the “Just think” campaign, which only 3-4 weeks ago the AFL captains helped take national. In light of this, no is not the time to try to point score – - but, more the time to push home the message of responsible drinking and celebration and to “Just think”.

From GFC.com.au, Friday Aug 29 “We’re not saying don’t drink, Just Think. This is a simple message and the Cats urge all AFL supporters to get behind the campaign.”

I’m not sure how you want this handled anyway, it’s been reported on ABC nationally, SMH, WAtoday etc etc. What are you after??

btw – ch.9 is the NRL broadcast partner – - how do you figure the AFL and it’s broadcast partners play any role whatsoever??

Note – the AFL deal includes contractual stipulation of minimum broadcast into Sydney and Brisbane – which might be argued devalues the whole deal anyway.

Blame the NRL for the NRL coverage – - not the AFL.

Another reason the AFL is so sucessful in terms of crowds & membership particularly in Victoria and the Southern States, is the protection it recieves in the media. When a team like the Storm with stars such a Billy Slater can’t get a decent break on FTA TV, shows what lengths the AFL & its media buddies will go to ensure no other sport gets a fair go. This would go a long way to explaining AFL’s unusally good crowds etc. protected market protected sport. The NRL has done well considering we have had the AFL rammed down our throats for the last 3 decades. We seem to get all the good & positive media coverage of AFL but none of the bad stuff that has been recently used by the media to eat away at the NRL support i.e. a bloke being bashed to death at a amateur AFL game this past weekend but nothing in the ‘wider’ national media.

is that your idea of ‘adding to a thread’…..Redb has been challenging you to give us something. Was that the best?

5.7 billion can’t be wrong…….except……they, and we know this, because soccer folk stress that AFL has zero audience outside of Australia where the game has never been heard of or seen – - – so, it’s not a wrong or right argument. It’s one of total ignorance. Not their fault.

What get’s me,……apparently it’s zealotry to feel that it’s kinda nice that people overseas have taken up the game once having a chance to do so, and even take the time and make the effort and foot the expense to trek to Australia to play a tourney once every 3 years…….

apparently that’s zealotry.

What do you call the soccer try hards who keep trying to brainwash the independant football state of Australia – - for 100 odd years, and do you know what – the good people of the worlds most competitive football market who are drawn from folk from around the ‘football’ world – - and who continue to reject soccer as a domestic tour de force…….THEY my friend, are the one’s who can’t be wrong because they (We) are the ones with the choice and the knowledge.

I am from Brisbane and saw the last 10 mins as the lions overtook carlton…fantastic

Also saw the 3rd quater where collingwood came back against the crows and it had it’s moments but I largely felt it was dull as dishwater because a large chunk of the game is scrambling for the ball or a kick to an open team mate. didn’nt bother watching the 4th quarter. Probably because I didn’t really care who won, if I was emotionally invested then i would be glad too see my team retaining possession in this way.

Not ignorant but sports people follow are not chosen using scientific knowledge or analysing all the sports in the world. you like what you like but more often than not you like what your dad likes (but support some team that really s$%ts him).

There’s a damn good reason why it has huge crowds and supporter/membership bases. Fans are fanatical about the game 10x anything the A-league or NRL will offer. It’s a unique, fast and furious game that gets your heart racing. Your either to stupid to understand it or to ignorant.

Is Soccer and RL a superior spectacle?……………You wouldn’t think so going by consistently poor crowds in crappy little suburban park grounds where fans sit on the grass.

It does though illustrate their culture – sports was a collegiate thing. A schoolboy thing.

Twopenny – observed even back then, that in Australia, unlike England, sports and athletic pursuit was more the post school pursuit in young Australia. (The “All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy” maxim was observed as an accepted maxim.

In the “Young Australian” section, page 33, Twopenny observes about the Australian male youth “it is not till leaving school that his athleticism becomes fully pronounced: thus reversing the order observed in England, where the great majority of the boys, who are cricket and football mad at school, more or less drop those pursuits as young men.”

This was an important factor – the development of ‘community’ sports rather than (educational) institutional sports.

Firstly, the great intercolonial rivalry was with cricket – - that was the well established game. Winter sporting pursuits we not in the same league….so to speak (and might just as easily ended up being rifle clubs – Tom Wills’ alternate suggestion).

Melbourne, as observed by Englishman Richard Twopeny via his “Town life in Australia” book (a collection of a series of essays of observations) – pointed out how Melbourne

(check out Twopenny’s writings : http://www.scribd.com/doc/2398986/Town-Life-in-Australia-by-Twopeny-Richard-Ernest-Nowell-18571915)

Go to page 74 and he observes around the time of writing that in Sydney there were not a dozen clubs, whilst in Melbourne at least 100 with up to 10,000 people paying their sixpence for example to watch Melb vs Carlton. Really, for most of this period, Sydney was hardly worth it’s salt as a ‘football evolutionary city’. There’s absolutely no reason the Melbournians would worry about what was happening in Sydney. And around the world……well, Melbourne was per capita, the most advanced footballing city in the world. In the US for example – it was the domain of the Universities – - not the townships. For me, to find references in Blainey’s “A game of our own” to a football match b/w Stratford and Sale back in the 1870s….(2 small towns 220-240Km east of Melbourne – back then, before rail, connected via steam ship.

And around the world, look at Germany as an example – most of their ‘oldest’ football clubs originally had formed to play other sports and only took up football much later. I gather Deutscher FV 1878 Hannover is considered their oldest. Why on earth would Melbourne care about such a juvenile football ‘culture’ in such a far flung nation? Even South AFrica, they have references to the ‘Savages’ back to about 1882-83,…it’s vague, and the Hamiltons Rugby club around 1875. Again, all too late for the much more advanced football culture of Melbourne to worry about.

Melbourne really was that far advanced – - in a sense there was no looking back, and in anther sense, there was reason to believe that they had solved the conundrum of a single code for all to play and it would be just a matter of time for others to fall in line (but, that ignored politics and other non sporting issues that would ensure that this resolution for most – would be an impossible holy grail).

Thus, at intercolonial football, even playing the same game, the Victorian colony was dominanet (and, around this time, Twopenny records Melb pop 280K, Syd 220K and Ade 70K. There was an attraction for the NSW colony to play QLD at Rugby where they could win, rather than submitting to the Victorians.

(and Twopenny was fully assertive that the Victorian game was the best by far to play and watch).

Across the period 1850s to 1870s – you need to recall that it wasn’t until the 1870s that the RFU was established. That not until the 1870s did the London FA and the Sheffield FA effectively finalise their merger – remember, the London FA initially had no x-bar, that came from Sheffield, along with the corner kick.

The Victorian game experimented in various ways during this time, initially, the rules like most football matches – were confirmed before kick off – - after all, a list of 10 or 12 rules is clearly not enough. The Victorian game certainly was to evolve in big ways by the time the VFL came into being. The ‘kick off’ would go, players would line up positionally around the ground, scoring would become 6 pt goals + behinds etc etc.

Until the All-Golds tour of England (primarily a NZ exercise) – the ‘business of international football’ was not such a big deal. So, for about 50 years – that perspective was not that big a deal. Probably because, people were still unsure what code would rule in the end, thru the 1880s especially Sydney and Brisbane could so easily still have gone down the Vic rules path – and until the English League was established in 1888, there weren’t such obvious institutions/structures of ‘football’ in England.

Was it arrogance? A bit of that, but, you need to put yourself back in 1870s Australia and see what there was around you……and how long it took to get there!!!

to this bro

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ZvIFoKqDm8&feature=related

Why was playing against Melburnians seen as the high point of a tough if ‘fair’ working week? I mean no offense, but even in those parochial days the Melburnians would have given a lot to play against the best footballers from Sydney (just like they did with Cricket) and as has been pointed out for 50 years they did so, but what didn’t they do was learn from or cross-polinate with those playing by other football rules.

Even from those early and optimistic days there was little motive/incentive to take on board how football was evolving round the world but more specifically in Sydney. Yes seeing as Sydney’s footballers were mostly at that time aristocratic-minded gentlemen (many of them really only wannabes and I mean c’mon who would want to pay to be a gentlemen anyway ) maybe there wasn’t too much for an aspiring social class to take on board, but it really must be explained why Australian rules veered off so early and made no point of attracting other football rules/conventions under it’s wing

Essentially Melburnians were arrogant about their beloved rules and unlike Cricket there was little or no desire to play by any one else’s rules other than their own…which is a bit dodgy as Aussie rules was the most archaic of all codes (not in terms of the social networking it fostered, but in terms of rules which had evolved very little from 1840s/50s to the 1860s/70s.

Rugby, Association and American footballs were all changing much quicker and I believe personally keeping up with the Industrial Revolution times and the Modern social revolutions happening in the later half of the 19th Century.

You see like the US Eastern Sea Board Universities (well actually the Ivy League really) in the 1870s, Melburnians had a vision for football which they wouldn’t share with any alternative/resistant visions.