By Adrian Musolino
October 7th 2009 @ 4:24am
Related coverage
The AFL backed up its tough talk in 2009
Geelong and St Kilda players fight for the ball during the AFL 1st Qualifying Final between the Geelong Cats and the St kilda Saints at the MCG. GSP Images
‘AFL: In A League Of Its Own’ was the catch cry of the 2009 AFL season promo. It was an aggressive marketing ploy that put the other codes firmly in their place. Its underlying message was backed up with another solid season for the juggernaut code.
A peak audience of 3.62 million viewers for the Grand Final was the highest rated sporting event of the year across the five city metropolitan markets, highlighting the AFL’s appeal to the masses.
It was fitting considering the whole season had been building to the showdown between the two benchmark sides of the competition – Geelong and St Kilda.
Like few AFL seasons in recent times, 2009 had a very segregated feel to it, with Geelong and St Kilda in the lead, followed closely by the Western Bulldogs with Collingwood hanging on behind, the Adelaide Crows closing in as September approached and the rest making up the numbers and fighting amongst themselves.
At the head of the race, Geelong claimed the pre-season competition, the Brownlow for the overdue Gary Ablett and their second premiership in three seasons.
They confirmed their tag as ‘greats’ in a scrappy but thrilling Grand Final against a St Kilda side who, at one stage, threatened to go through the season undefeated.
Both on and off the field there was the usual dose of controversy and debate that seems to characterise the AFL.
Frontal pressure entered the footy vernacular as sides such as St Kilda and Geelong highlighted just how far the game has developed in its intensive pressure in contested possession and tackling, aided by increased rotations off the bench.
Bumping was the other big talking point of the season following Nick Maxwell’s jaw-breaking bump on West Coast’s Patrick McGinnity in the NAB Cup and Buddy Franklin’s suspension for his hit on Ben Cousins.
Protecting the reputation of the game, namely in the minds of parents with kids playing in the junior ranks, was a key requirement for the AFL, especially in preparation for its expansion into uncharted regions.
Tanking remained in the headlines, especially considering so many teams ruled themselves out of September contention so early, and the denials of the AFL only made the matter worse and highlighted a disappointing arrogance from its leadership.
All these controversies may have disappointed many of its core supporters – especially the footy traditionalists who bemoaned the demise of the bump and the stamping out of ‘larrikinism’ as part of a ‘softening’ of the game – but crowd figures remained strong, only dropping slightly – justifiably attributed to the gloomy economic conditions the season started under and the poor performances of clubs such as Hawthorn, North Melbourne, Fremantle and the like.
Sydney also took a hit in the crowd stakes with the ANZ Stadium “blockbuster” against Collingwood drawing 41,042, a record low for that particular fixture at that ground.
However, when that is marked as a record low, it’s clear the AFL doesn’t have the concerns of the other codes.
But this isn’t the ideal time for the Sydney Swans to stagnate with West Sydney on the horizon.
With Barry Hall banished from the club for repeated on-field indiscretions, and the retirement of Michael O’Loughlin, the club cannot afford a laborious rebuilding phase at this crucial juncture for the AFL in New South Wales.
Up north the revitalized Brisbane Lions showed genuine signs of promise with the likes of Daniel Rich quickly adapting to the AFL. Michael Voss deserves much praise for his first year of coaching, typified by the incredible fourth-quarter fight back to eliminate Carlton in the first week of the finals.
But it was the bombshell news of Karmichael Hunt’s defection from the NRL to the AFL’s newest franchise on the Gold Coast starting in 2011 that rocked Queensland and sent shockwaves across Australia.
Elsewhere the Adelaide Crows continued to defy the critics, Port Power admitted to their financial struggles, West Australian struggled on-field and Melbourne clubs were relieved to seal a better deal with the AFL and Etihad stadium that helps ease financial concerns.
The crescendo of off-field movement is building as the AFL prepares for its most aggressive expansionary phase since the birth of the Sydney Swans and Brisbane Bears.
The AFL raised the stakes in with their promotion for this season – a season that delivered on all fronts. But you sense this is the calm before the storm.
Get Australia's best AFL opinion emailed daily.
Like this content? Buzz it up!
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(85)
tifosi said | October 7th 2009 @ 5:16am | Report comment
Whilst it has been a good season for the AFL, I think its a bit much to call the AFL a juggernaut. That really only applies to the NFL, which truly is one.
I thought the NRL final outrated the AFL final though?
Michael C said | October 7th 2009 @ 5:33am | Report comment
Tifosi -
on TV ratings,
firstly, Adrian refered to the 5 capital city figure,
and secondly, the figures that Crikey.com and the DailyTelegraph ran with yesterday were wrong for the AFL as pointed out by Redb on another thread yesterday when he directed people to the actual OzTAM figures (as collected by AGB Nielsen under contract).
However, we do await the official OzTAM figures for the NRL too. The official weekly report is not yet published.
re the article -
a couple of quick things spring to mind -
the Syd v Coll ‘blockbuster’ happened to be up against about the coldest/wettest weekend in Sydney all year, which was unfortunate. Again though, if 40 odd K is the worst that it gets, then that’s acceptable.
The Etihad deal is important, as too is the MCC/MCG deal that sees an extra $100K per match to the home teams. But, certainly it was vital that the AFL and Docklands management improved their relationship.
btw – one of the best signals was that the broadcast rights will ‘at least’ be rolled over, so, if that’s the starting point in negotiations – then, it might be assumed a rise is on the books.
Redb said | October 7th 2009 @ 8:27am | Report comment
No the NRL GF did not out-rate the AFL GF. this is jsut the Daily Telepgraph (News LTd) spinning lies.
On the 5 capital city market the AFL easily out rated the NRL GF, take in regionals the result would be close (but does not include regional WA & SA anyway).
even if the two GF’s drew the same audience and lets say they pretty much did for the ske of the argument.
the NRL goes for 2 hours, the AFL goes for 3 hours. 30% more air time for the TV execs and why the AFL gets a premium over the NRL.
Sorry to bore people to death with ratings and stats but when a statement is wrong it must be corrected. Even the Backpage on the Fox Sports ran with the Daily Telegraph figures to trumpet RL’s ‘ascendancy’.
Redb
Dogs Of War said | October 7th 2009 @ 9:37am | Report comment
“the NRL goes for 2 hours, the AFL goes for 3 hours. 30% more air time for the TV execs and why the AFL gets a premium over the NRL.”
Maths says that is a 50% increase, not 30%. Either way, when AFL struggles to break 150K viewing figures in Sydney and Brisbane each week, with 2-3 games telecast into those markets (and soon it will always be 3 matches per week, who knows, maybe even 4 if you can find a way to get the Friday nights telecast in the next TV contract), then that’s 3 hours of rubbish ratings into some of the best advertising markets, which ends up just giving a leg up to the other TV stations. it’s well know that the Swans regularly got best by reruns of the Iron Chef on SBS on Saturday nights. Says a lot really.
Redb said | October 7th 2009 @ 9:54am | Report comment
DOW,
My maths say that if a program goes for 3 hours and one goes for 2 hours, that is one hour longer, or 30% (techincailly 33%) of 3 hrs. If it was a 50% increase it would be an extra 1.5 hours.
Regardless its an hour longer on the air.
Yes keep on harping on about Iron Chef its worked so well for the NRL in the past. Brisbane AFL ratings up this year, did you notice?
Some of this stuff is getting boring .
Redb
Dogs Of War said | October 7th 2009 @ 10:20am | Report comment
NRL going for 66% of the length of the AFL is true (2/3rds length), but that does not lead to the the AFL being 33% longer. It just means that the NRL has 33% less content.
50% of 2hrs is 1hr. Thus AFL goes for 50% longer as you are comparing the total running time of the NRL vs AFL.
Just makes you figures look better. That said, not sure what the viewing figures are like at 11:30pm at night when the game finishes.
Redb said | October 7th 2009 @ 10:28am | Report comment
DOW,
Can we just agree the game goes for 1 hour longer and move on.
My point which got sidetracked by semantics and you doing a Stephen Hawking impersonisation is the AFL ‘product’ on roughly the same ratings offers the TV execs more advertising spend.
And not just the Grand Final but throughout the home and away season.
So whilst the NRL would be happy, I dont think the AFL exec should go off and hang itself regardless of what the final ratings numbers come in with a tolerance +/- of 5%.
Redb
Michael C said | October 7th 2009 @ 10:56am | Report comment
Gotta agree with DofW here on the 50% longer.
A lot of people stumble on this sort of thing.
btw – the 11.30pm thing is a bugbear for many of us on a Friday night (obviously no issue on GF Saturday arvo!!).
ANd Ch.7 could potentially go live against the gate from 7.30…….but, they are happy with Better Homes and Gardens followed by footy right through to the late news…..and in the old days what would’ve been ‘CLOSE’…….ah the national anthem and test pattern……..(anyone seen any of those ‘test pattern’ shirts as worn by Sheldon – Big Bang Theory – at Jay Jays??)
Dogs Of War said | October 7th 2009 @ 10:56am | Report comment
Yeah. Interesting times ahead for both codes. AFL with their ambitious expansion plans. And the NRL with a view to a restructure via the Independent Commission which seems to be still moving forward (which is probably one of the reasons why no expansion plans have been announced).
Really both codes next TV deal can make or break them. For AFL they need the extra cash to be able to ensure that the new teams can make a loss for the short term (being 5-10years), while the NRL needs the extra money so they can try and get on some sort of parity to the AFL (as the dollars currently aren’t really in the same ballpark, and considering how close the ratings can be, it’s not really on).
AndyRoo said | October 7th 2009 @ 11:29am | Report comment
Michael C
I heard Channel ten always have their requests to have a game moved to live rejected…meanwhile the AFL want channel 7 to go live… crazy TV networks.
Channel nine moving the start of the Rugby League from 8:30 to 7:30 has been brilliant for the game and fans.
Dogs of War
It’s not about getting parity with the AFL it’s just about getting more money so they can do more things. More promotion, more clinics and more events. Perhaps a rugby league Aus Kick. Not to mention bumping up the cap a little to keep players in the NRL for longer.
Redb said | October 7th 2009 @ 1:46pm | Report comment
“It just means that the NRL has 33% less content.”
So you did understand my maths – thank you Mr. Hawking.
Nicko said | October 15th 2009 @ 5:56pm | Report comment
After living in Sydney for 6 years I’d say rugger has 95% less content. After going to many rugger games it’s just so repetitive. Run with ball, get tackled to ground, get up play ball, next player picks up ball, throw ball, next player catch ball run, wash and repeat.
Jeff Baxter said | October 7th 2009 @ 5:54am | Report comment
The difference between analysis and restrained propaganda is the overuse of hyperbolic keywords. As a non-australian this didn’t feel like a useful insight into the state if a fascinating and unique sport but more like a barely disguised volley in a seemingly endless code war. I know these seem like the hot topics and gets the replies in the hundreds but couldn’t they take a rest now the respective seasons are over?
The Answer said | October 7th 2009 @ 7:38am | Report comment
‘Protecting the reputation of the game’ for mum’s and kiddies and then not a hint of irony when discussing the signing of Karmichael Hunt and how that fitted into the ‘we do what mum’s want’ stance.
These AFL mum’s must be pretty fruity.
Redb said | October 7th 2009 @ 8:31am | Report comment
well that’s a cheap shot, shall we dig out all the off field incidents in Rugby League and parade them in front of mothers in AFL heartlands??
Redb said | October 7th 2009 @ 8:29am | Report comment
Good article Adrian.
The AFL GF lived up to the occasion, it really helped having the Bulldogs, Collingwood and even Adelaide challenge the two top runners in the finals leading to the biggest finals crowds in AFL history.
Can’t wait until 2010.
Redb
AndyRoo said | October 7th 2009 @ 9:00am | Report comment
I am a bit worried about the Lions. Voss seems a good coach but apart from Daniel Rich all the stars are old. It looks like they have a 1 or 2 year window and then it will be a long rebuilding phase.
Forgetmenot said | October 7th 2009 @ 9:01am | Report comment
Good article.
As a Cats fan i have to agree that this season was one of the best i have seen!!!!!
Recent years have been very critical for all four ‘major’ football codes. As discussed in previous years, GC and WS are key areas in the ‘war’.
Next year will be interesting to see how the AFL focus both their marketing, and more importantly their money.
The Link said | October 7th 2009 @ 9:19am | Report comment
RedB, you’re fond of quoting these guys in the past
http://www.tvtonight.com.au/20 09/09/week-39-2.html
2,704,000 metro figures for the AFL.
The Terror is inclined to spin, but it looks like they have something to back them up
The Link said | October 7th 2009 @ 9:20am | Report comment
http://www.tvtonight.com.au/20/09/09/week-39-2.html
Michael C said | October 7th 2009 @ 8:12pm | Report comment
Do you realise what ratings TVTonight use??
The preliminary OzTAM figures.
OzTam figures are the official ratings figures. AGB Nielsen are contracted to do it.
The preliminary figures ARE NOT what OzTam later publishes on it’s website and stores in it’s archive as the official ‘actual’ figures.
There is usually a minor variation from the un-validated preliminary data to the validated figures that OzTam effectively sign off on.
For example the AFL prelim final Coll vs Geel on ‘TVTonight’ is listed at 1,449,000. But, the OzTam official figure is 1,446,000. So, an actual drop of 3000 via the ‘validation’ process.
The week of the AFL GF, the Wed night Two and a half Men was 1,342,000 on ‘TVTonight’, but,
the OzTam ‘official’ figures are 1,344,000.
So, normally, +/- a couple of thousand. No big deal. And so the Daily Telegraph and Crikey and NRL ‘true believers’ have run with the numbers…..and run hard.
It’s very odd then for the AFL GF to vary from 2,704,000 to 2,878,000. And even the pre match that went from preliminary 1,505,000 to 1,697,000. That was 174,000 and 192,000 respectively.
So, I’d advise you to not waste our time with the ‘TVTonight’ link…..it’s ‘unofficial’ figures.
What is also odd – the TVTonight figures DO NOT show anything for the AFL GF ‘Post Match’. Nothing at all. Whilst the OzTam have the Post Match displayed separately with 2,448,000. Might it be possible the TVTonight figure has combined the Match and Post Match?
Who knows.
Either way – - it’s all OzTam data. TVTonight aren’t a different system. If you do a site search on TVTonight on the word ‘Oztam’ you’ll get taken straight to the same stats you’ve refered to.
btw – for the NRL PF2 that week, TVTonight 1,353,000 vs the later OZTam figure of 1,254,000. So, a drop of 99,000?!?!?!?
The Link said | October 12th 2009 @ 12:12pm | Report comment
I understand what TV Tonight is providing. What it shows that there isn’t some vast News Ltd conspiracy, other sites were running with the figures, so hardle a ‘waste of time’ to point this out.
The comparison seems to have been made on the only metric genuinely available at the time that allows for a comparison. Any further comparison is uselss until the NRL OZTam figures come out, whatever they may be.
Gibbo said | October 7th 2009 @ 11:24am | Report comment
Great year to be a cats fan, however perhaps a promotion/relegation system would make it interesting for the also rans – how most of them paid attention after mid-season is beyond me.
Lazza said | October 7th 2009 @ 12:41pm | Report comment
Why do Grand Finals in Australia get such poor ratings? In America 100m people watch the Super Bowl, that’s one third of the population. In England almost half the country watch the big Football games. In Australia we get 3-4m in a population of 21m? We are not as passionate about our sport as many believe.
MyGeneration said | October 7th 2009 @ 12:51pm | Report comment
Um, because we don’t have a dominant code?
Lazza said | October 7th 2009 @ 1:00pm | Report comment
Even if you count both the AFL and NRL figures together you still get a poor result.
MyGeneration said | October 7th 2009 @ 3:29pm | Report comment
I’m not sure what you mean by poor, but if Roarers can’t agree on what constitutes an authority on TV viewing figures for Australia, could luck convincing us on OS figures. Which PR machine(s) did your numbers come from
?
ManInBlack said | October 7th 2009 @ 3:37pm | Report comment
Is it a bad thing not being like the US???
Timmuh said | October 7th 2009 @ 10:47pm | Report comment
If you add both together you get around the 7 to 8 million mark, depending on the year. Or around one-third of the nation watching one grand final or the other. Roughly the same proportion as you state for the Superbowl.
The AFL Grand Final probably has more people watching than the figures show. Being a Saturday afternoon a lot of barbecues are held, a lot of pubs have tens or hindreds of people watching; its a very different viewing habit to the usual 2-3 people watching a TV set that the ratings are based on.
To a degree this would also be true of the NRL, but less so as it is held on a Sunday night and the NRL’s second market (Queensland) doesn’t have a long weekend. Therefore, less large groups will be watching as they have to work the next day. In Queensland only, and for the NRL GF only, do the numbers probably give a fairly true reflection of the viewing audience. Elsewhere, for AFL everywhere and NRL in NSW and ACT, the numbers are likely to be gross under-estimates.
Dogs Of War said | October 7th 2009 @ 10:49pm | Report comment
You realise that comes into the figures. We used to have a box at our house, and when you have BBQ’s etc and extra people are watching, you punch them into the viewing numbers.
Timmuh said | October 7th 2009 @ 10:56pm | Report comment
I wasn’t aware of that feature (not having had a box myself, and had been led to believe from others that there was no such thing), but even so, how many people would actually do it?
Dogs Of War said | October 7th 2009 @ 11:02pm | Report comment
Well I suppose it depends on how much you love your footy. My mum used to plug the Dog into the setup, and leave the NRL on a Friday night wiht only the Dog watching the game.
I usually made sure I accounted for everyone in the room (footy or no footy). I suppose it’s the duty you have when you own one, though I am sure some don’t go to all that trouble either.
AndyRoo said | October 8th 2009 @ 9:00am | Report comment
When it was explained to me how the box works (circ 99-2000) the box randomly validates you and you have to indicate your still watching…. so what I want to know is how did your mum train the dog to hit the button
@Timmuh
They do supply prizes and stuff for continual loyalty and using the program fully so I think a lot of people would make the effort to do it properly.
Michael C said | October 8th 2009 @ 9:03am | Report comment
I’ve heard of a lot of people who really can’t be bothered adding in the extras.
I reckon though, with Sydney being so much more a convoluted ‘football’ market – that people seem more attuned to what’s good for their ‘code’. In Melbourne, Perth and Adelaide too – I suspect that the code vs code has never been such an issue. Likewise, NRL folk have more of an interest in ratings etc around their percieved injustice on Broadcast Rights.
I could be way off – but, I reckon the example you speak of with the Dog watching the game in the Melbourne context is more akin to the fan who signs up their dog as a club member!!!
At the end of the day though – OzTam only samples a population size of around 14-15,000 nationally, and only 4500 or so each for NSW and Victoria to extrapolate out from. Generally it’ll show trends okay, over time – but, can be dangerous being looked at in too much isolation. (just like the ERASS sports participation stats we often review on here).
Dogs Of War said | October 8th 2009 @ 9:09am | Report comment
It doesn’t. You turn on the TV and the box knows that the TV is on. You have your control for changing the TV channels which takes over your old controller. You have some quick selections for people who are usually in the house, and another to add vistors. The Dogs was listed as a family member by my mum, and when she would go out she would turn the TV on to keep the Dog company (So the Dog hears someone talking) and just plug the Dog into the control as someone watching.
It might want to re-validate if you don’t change the channel for 2-3 hours or something?
Redb said | October 7th 2009 @ 1:06pm | Report comment
Maybe it has to with the fact that people watch the Grand Finals together, whether at home, with family/friends, BBQ or at a pub. TV ratings dont factor in 10 people around 1 TV set.
Freud of Football said | October 7th 2009 @ 9:55pm | Report comment
Yes and of course the Super Bowl is watched just by American individuals? No, they have exactly the same traditions for the SB, people get together, bars are packed etc. It’s probably got to do with the fact that the SB figures are blown out of proportion by the marketing idiots in the US. An AFL grand final produces pocket change compared to the SB where ads are worth millions, every million viewers they tack on to that figure will increase their revenue by X%, why wouldn’t they fake it?
Forgetmenot said | October 7th 2009 @ 1:21pm | Report comment
I think it would have to do with the ratings system used.
Alot more than half the people i know (prob about 70%) watch either the AFL or NRL GF. I know a wide spread of people as well (most foreigners i know watch both when in Aust).
eastgate said | October 7th 2009 @ 4:18pm | Report comment
“Protecting the reputation of the game, namely in the minds of parents with kids playing in the junior ranks, was a key requirement for the AFL, especially in preparation for its expansion into uncharted regions.” –
Yeah that’s why they acquired Karmichael Hunt ! Aside from his prior off-field issues, Karmichael will be a costly dud to the AFL – just look at Rugby’s experience with league converts.
Ultimately GC17 will be a success, but not because of Karmichael.
Freud of Football said | October 7th 2009 @ 5:13pm | Report comment
Adrian I’m going to go against the trend here, everyone is praising you for your wonderful piece but I find it very hard to swallow.
What is it that makes Geelong so great? I’d really like to hear your opinion here as it’s a word that has been bandied about in the media since about 5 minutes after the siren sounded and to be frank I’m sick of it. I’m a crows fan who was ecstatic when they won back-to-back flags in 97-98 the second of which was from 5th place on the ladder but that didn’t make them great. I also follow Geelong as a friend of mine plays for them but I do not believe they have raised themselves into the pantheon of greats after this season.
Brisbane at the start of the 00’s, that was a great team. That was the kind of team you couldn’t tip against, you expected them to win every week because they were just a great team. Hawthorn in the mid-late 80’s, that was another GREAT team – everyone feared them. So what basis do you have to now put Geelong alongside them? 2 flags in 3 years is enough to make them “great”? I don’t think anyone fears them, coaches know they are beatable.
Geelong are a very good team, not a great team – please note, there is a difference. North Melbourne were a very good side in the late 90’s, West Coast at the start of that decade and alongside these two teams is where Geelong currently belongs.
“Like few AFL seasons in recent times, 2009 had a very segregated feel to it“ – Again, for four years no-one could beat Brisbane, yes they didn’t go through undefeated but they had an aura about them, they had a midfield like no other, goals came from everywhere (I think it was one of the Scott’s who kicked 6 goals off half-back in one game), they had some of the most unpredictable players and an incredibly solid defense with a huge forward line and enough crumbers to have them consistently kicking 100+ points per game.
That was fairly recent and did that not feel segregated to you? Or Essendon around the turn of the century? Again, they were smashing everyone at the time, they just didn’t make it count with only one flag to show for it but they were as dominant as Geelong, probably even morseo.
Lloyd of course was the last of the truly great FF’s with Lucas at CHF, not a bad combination? Hird was just a freak on his day as was Long and then the lesser lights, Smokin’ Joe, Mercuri, Caracella etc. in the midfield, the hardmen with the Johnson boys and Solomon, two excellent ruckmen in Barnes and Alessio, Fletcher down back and Sheedy coaching them. Again, did that not feel segregated to you? Were they not miles ahead of everyone else?
Redb said | October 8th 2009 @ 6:49am | Report comment
Freud,
I simply dont agree with your analysis of Geelong as a great team. Over 3 seasons they have won an enormous number of games and when it really counted in 2009 they stood up.
Ablett, Bartel and Selwood are game breakers. We all know Ablett is a great player but Jimmy Bartel is my favourite in the Cats set up – this bloke is a footballer – goes hard and gets the ball – wins the game when it has to be won. Few people credit Bartel for Geelong’s win for his stopping job on Lenny Hayes, it was not a glamourous role but highly effective.
The Bombers were just as good 10 years ago, but were robbed by a season long injury to James Hird in 1999 and unlike Geelong were unable to keep their players due to salary cap pressure in 2001 releasing Caracella, Blumfeid and Heffernan – 3 excellent 2nd tier players.
IMO Geelong are as good as the Bombers 1999-2001 team, but not as good as the Essendon team from the mid 80’s or Hawks in the 1980’s decade – the greatest ever team. (Geez I hate saying that)
The great thing about the 2009 season was St Kilda – a worthy challenger they will be hard to beat in 2010.
Redb
Gibbo said | October 8th 2009 @ 9:57am | Report comment
geelong = great because we have max rooke.
Redb said | October 8th 2009 @ 10:14am | Report comment
he added a bit of spice to Geelong’s forward line when Stevie J wasnt quite right.
Brian said | October 8th 2009 @ 1:03pm | Report comment
“Hawks in the 1980’s decade – the greatest ever team”
Redb said | October 8th 2009 @ 1:10pm | Report comment
thought you’d like that.
…. 
Michael C said | October 8th 2009 @ 9:23am | Report comment
Great teams in a different era. Look back 20 ish years to Hawthorn from 1983 – 1989 making 7 straight GFs, with Dipper, Dunstall, Brereton, Tuck, Platten etc etc….great team. But, assembled pre draft, pre salary caps etc. And in a 12 team state based competition.
The measure of greatness in this new ‘modern’ era probably needs to be more narrow – -i.e. over 2,3 or 4 years?? Was North Melbourne a good team in the 90’s because they made 3 GFs in 4 years and won 2? Or, were they a ‘modern great’ team because they made the Prelim final weekend every year from 1994-2000 in mostly 16 team competitions??
Certainly, the Geelong win/loss record over these 3 seasons is great by any measure. Were they pretty unlucky to not have won 3 from 3 GFs? A little choke perhaps and that’s the difference of 3/3 as great and 2/3 as good??
Their style of play has certainly been great for footy – - play on, agressive, – - none of this clinical soccer/basketball style stuff. Geelong may handball a lot, but, only so they can keep the ball moving and get it in the hands of the precision foot skilled players.
I reckon they’re a great team. And especially as they don’t so much have a team of champions….but are a champion team.
Redb said | October 8th 2009 @ 1:07pm | Report comment
MC,
I agree nothing wrong with how Geelong play the game.
Round 14 2009 between St Kilda and Geelong still looms large in memory as probably the greatest game of Australian Rules Football ever played. Non stop action, quick ball movement on the ground and in the air, high intensity tackling, marks under pressure…. great stuff.
Considering the speed at which the game is evolving and the usual copying of the “Premier’s” style, I think the game will go up again to yet another gear next year.
Redb
Norm said | October 7th 2009 @ 10:01pm | Report comment
The “juggernaut” is a novelty in the eastern states Adrian.
Freud of Football said | October 7th 2009 @ 10:07pm | Report comment
Well you continue to live in your little two and quarter state world with the two dying codes struggling to see which will fold first. For the rest of the country AFL is the number one sport and it also has a pretty decent following in the other 2.25 states as well
Norm said | October 8th 2009 @ 4:55pm | Report comment
If I had any idea what you were talking about I’d respond.
Freud of Football said | October 8th 2009 @ 5:06pm | Report comment
All that fresh eastern seaboard air got to your head? Stop thinking that the AFL is a novelty, it’s Australia’s biggest sport and just because it isn’t the dominant code in 2.25 states doesn’t detract from how well loved it is ACROSS the country.
Norm said | October 8th 2009 @ 9:18pm | Report comment
Has Sigmund got into your head? Over 3.1 million attended rugby league matches in NSW & Qld during 2009. No other code got anywhere near that figure. Aggregate TV ratings, same story. You’re staring to believe your own pseudonym.
Pete said | October 8th 2009 @ 9:34pm | Report comment
2.25 states.. that’s over 50% of the population….
Freud of Football said | October 8th 2009 @ 9:47pm | Report comment
Population doesn’t mean anything in this caseas these states are split between the two rugby codes, AFL and football whereas the rest of the country is AFL/football.
westy said | October 7th 2009 @ 10:24pm | Report comment
gee freudie i am usually gulilty of the overkill. I do not think anyone is dying nor is it inaccurate to say Aussie rules is the largest on all scales except juniors which i think would go to football.
I was genuinely interested in your analsis of great teams and players.
Brian said | October 8th 2009 @ 1:07pm | Report comment
Geelong have won 2 but I can’t see how they can be considered unluckly. If anything the Hawks victory over them in 2008 on the back of their errant goalkicking was much more comprehensive than their victory over an errant St Kilda by essentially one goal in conditions that were very detrimental to St Kilda’s best player. 2 is all they deserve and given the dominance of the Eagles in the 1991 season I put them in that bracket. NM in the late 90s or the Lions are still shead. The Bombers are hard to argue for cause they only climbed the mountaintop once.
Michael C said | October 8th 2009 @ 1:38pm | Report comment
Luck is an interesting factor.
Had North kicked straight in the first half of the hot and windy conidtions in ‘98, the game ought have been over at half time (would they have back up in ‘99??? who knows).
Essendon, unlucky to be knocked out in both ‘96 and ‘99 prelims by 1 pt each time? Unlucky to hit Brisbane on the rise in 2000?? OR…..very lucky in 2000 with a golden run injury wise and from the tribunal that left them almost untouched come the finals and taking on a GF underdog in Melbourne on the big day.
Geelong – were a tad lucky this year. And StKilda unlucky. But, you get luckier the more times you present for the 2nd last and last weeks in September. THe more Prelims you get to, the greater the chance of making GFs and then on the day – anything can happen. In a sense, really good teams will find a way to get back the next year….
…that was evident with North back in ‘97 when in Round 1, Carey went down with a shoulder and the whole premiership defence was given a huge blow. But, still, they managed to work from 7th into the Prelim. Perhaps THAT year was the ‘greatest’ measure of their ‘greatness’……i.e. how they performed when the balance of luck perhaps went the other way.
Redb said | October 8th 2009 @ 1:52pm | Report comment
MC,
One thing I can say with absolute confidence is that Essendon never looked liked losing the 2000 premiership.
Desperately unlucky not to have Hird for the whole 1999 season.
Redb
Brian said | October 8th 2009 @ 3:03pm | Report comment
I agree consistently getting to the final weeks is what helps make luck. That’s why Geelong aren’t great yet. The Hawks played 8 out of 9 GF 1983-1991, the Roos played 7 PF 1994-2000. Even the Lions who took their opportunities threatened for 6 years 1999-2004. That’s why Geelong aren’t in the bracket of the aforementioned yet. Of course they could win for the next two years straight.
Essendon were not great cause they only won once but I will say their victory in 2000 was absolute. The only team near them that year was Carlton and injuries didn’t fall the Blues’ way come September. If Essendon had to beat Melbourne 10 times straight I believe they would have done so
Michael C said | October 8th 2009 @ 3:15pm | Report comment
Yeah, Brisbane, ironically we beat them in the Prelims in both premiership years in ‘96 (as the Bears) and ‘99 (as the Lions).
1999 of course was the year where everyone was dreaming of the ideal Essendon vs Brisbane GF match up (like Geel vs StK this year).
Instead, they got North vs Carlton. Ah well. We laughed all the way to the dais.
Redb said | October 9th 2009 @ 7:31am | Report comment
MC,
And Brisbane were very unlucky to lose Voss for year with a broken leg.
Redb
Michael C said | October 9th 2009 @ 8:05am | Report comment
I feared back in ‘93 that North had wasted their one window of opportunity when Carey did his Hammy up at Carrara and then with squandered a top 4 finish in rnd 22 when Carey couldn’t kick straight and Longmire did his knee……
but, little did I know we’d play Prelim final weekend for the next 8 seasons straight……
The Voss broken leg probably only helped increase the burning desire of he and the group of players……
….which gets to a parallel to the relatively current thread about “Do you have to lose one to win one”.
btw – gee that footage of his leg just bending where it shouldn’t…….that was so……uncomfortable!!!
Redb said | October 9th 2009 @ 7:52am | Report comment
http://www.smh.com.au/news/lhqnews/afl-keen-to-beat-league-to-the-loot/2009/10/08/1254701106840.html
“The NRL’s belief strong grand-final ratings last weekend would help their next TV deal was punctured slightly with the revelation yesterday the AFL’s decider had in fact beaten its rugby league counterpart in national ratings, not the reverse as had been claimed originally. Recalibrated figures lifted the AFL’s ratings by almost 400,000 nationally.”
Hopefully the Daily Telegraph will publish a form of retraction as well (wont hold my breath).
Redb
Michael C said | October 9th 2009 @ 8:39am | Report comment
Oh gosh…..
just goes to show you should never ‘PAY OUT’ until correct weight is signalled.
AndyRoo said | October 9th 2009 @ 8:59am | Report comment
So we should wait until the NRL figures are finalised
Michael C said | October 9th 2009 @ 9:26am | Report comment
Short answer – Yes.
Note – for that AFL GF weekend, the AFL figures when ‘validated/finalised’ increased, whilst the NRL PF 2 decreased. Both by substatial amounts (i.e. 170K and 99K respectively).
Normally the variation is very minor…….just a couple of thousand.
At any rate – all along on this front, Redb and myself have argued NOT that the AFL is better, or anything – - but, simply that the figures being used were infact wrong.
So, back to the short answer – yes, let’s all wait for the NRL figures to be finalised.
Redb said | October 9th 2009 @ 9:50am | Report comment
said from the start the AFL figures were wrong.
Others will want to beat their chests about the NRL, my main critcism was aimed at the Daily Telegraph for jumping the gun and declaring a victory for their product.
Redb
James said | October 9th 2009 @ 12:01pm | Report comment
Come in Oikee…where are you???
The Link said | October 14th 2009 @ 4:06pm | Report comment
Looks like they’ll need a retraction on the NRL GF metro ratings too as they have come out higher
http://www.oztam.com.au/documents/2009/E_20091004.pdf
Matt S said | October 9th 2009 @ 8:14am | Report comment
Funny that, the figures suddenly change. I see RedB you take the new figures without a hint of scepticism.
Michael C said | October 9th 2009 @ 9:29am | Report comment
All the figures originate from OzTam. The official figures provider.
The first incorrect figures were simply the un-validated preliminary figures – that OzTAM do NOT publish on their website.
About 2 weeks after those are bandied about, OzTAM release and publish the validated correct and final (official) figures.
Why do you question Redb in accepting this process???
Do you accept it? (and again, let’s wait for the official validated NRL figures).
Redb said | October 9th 2009 @ 9:51am | Report comment
Let’s see how you view the NRL numbers when they arrive, will you and other NRL tragics be skeptical?
Dogs Of War said | October 9th 2009 @ 9:57am | Report comment
400K increase. Only the AFL could make them go up like that. How often does this occur, figures being reclassified because they didn’t like the result first time around.
Either way, as long as the NRL concentrates on the path they are going down, within the next 10 years we won’t even have to have this conversation, as it will be quite clear who the dominate code is.
Redb said | October 9th 2009 @ 10:06am | Report comment
The actual numbers were posted on the Roar days ago, it just takes you Sydney folk awhile to catch up.
How about accepting the intial numbers re the AFL GF of 3.4M published by the Daily Telegraph were wrong as pointed out.
The Oztam/Agneilson numbers days ago showed it was 3.8M for the AFL GF. Don’t like the result so you just deny it exists eh?
re your last sentence that sounds a lot like hubris to me – is the NRL on war footing to dominate the country and kill off all other codes. Geez I’ll wait 6 months and give the Daily Telegraph a call, they’ll love it.
Redb
Dogs Of War said | October 9th 2009 @ 10:08am | Report comment
Well your happy to go off without official NRL figures from Oztam. So how can you be so sure the same mistake wasn’t made with the NRL figures? Seems they do make errors.
MyGeneration said | October 9th 2009 @ 10:34am | Report comment
Lies, damn lies, and ratings figures
Redb said | October 9th 2009 @ 10:49am | Report comment
Dow,
if you pay attention I have not made any comment on the NRL numbers.
Now let’s see, I’ve left the Daily Telegraph’s phone number around here somewhere.
Redb
The Link said | October 9th 2009 @ 10:54am | Report comment
The Terror plus about 5 or 6 other sources were quoting the initial statistics which had the NRL GF coming out on top, hardly the outright lies and propoganda that have been claimed.
All that has happened since if the AFL final figures have come out, which apparently went up due to the AFL GF overlapping into a later time slot.
Lets all take a breath till OzTam figures come out for the NRL GF.
Redb said | October 9th 2009 @ 11:19am | Report comment
See above point to DOW. But I’ll be sure to wear my skeptics hat to return the favour.
Michael C said | October 9th 2009 @ 11:40am | Report comment
Don’t forget, the amended figures also so the NRL Prelim final 2 drop from 1,353,000 to 1,254,000.
A 99,000 decrease……
just shows, don’t it, that OzTam must be just another Mike Fitzpatrick run company!!!!
Seriously though, the initial figures did not include the Post Game that was rated at 2.448 million. The ‘amended’ figures listed the Post Game separately (as per the Pre Game).
The Pre Game is perhaps more interesting, as that jumped from 1.505 million to 1.697 million. That’s 192,000. That’s more than the adjusted increase for the GF proper.
The Link said | October 14th 2009 @ 10:21am | Report comment
Didn’t know where to post this but he NRL GF figures are out on Oztam.
5 city metro of 2,528,000
http://www.oztam.com.au/documents/2009/E_20091004.pdf
As opposed to ‘initial’ figure of 2,416,000
Up by 112,000
Not sure how this impacts the final figure plus regionals?
sean maguire said | October 9th 2009 @ 5:49pm | Report comment
Michael, you do realise who owns Oztam don’t you? Probably part of the contra payments to pump up the ratings. I call shenanigans!
Westcoast929406 said | October 9th 2009 @ 6:40pm | Report comment
While the pundits discuss the ratings out in the grassroots areas of Queensland the AFL continues to spread the gospel according to Saint Tom Wills.
This time venturing into Rugby League heartland like Innisfail – First up run 6 week Auskick Clinics to get the kids interested? Some of them will stick – Then start school comps – Some more will stick – Then start a junior club later.Thats the formula all over the country and it works.
Check out the ute and the signage on the door – No sneaking around corners like some of the pundits say the AFL does..
Yes the AFL has another record year for participation- Now up just under 733,000 -Up from 691,000 in 2008 an increase largely driven in the schools we believe. Have to wait until Feb 2010 for actual breakdown in annual report.
AFL fans out there enjoy the news.
Link—
http://www.sportingpulse.com/assoc_page.cgi?client=1-4711-0-0-0&sID=56333&&news_task=DETAIL&articleID=10219377§ionID=56333
bever fever said | October 9th 2009 @ 6:56pm | Report comment
Queensland country is interesting for grass roots AFL, around Cairns aussie rules would be up there with league for the most popular footy code (senior and junior)but falls away the further you get out of the Cairns area.
Not sure why its so popular around Cairns, lots of southern expats i would imagine.
AFL is becoming more popular around the cape york far north area but Townsville would be the one town/city that aussie rules has little to no foothold. The cowboys have made sure of that.
At the end of the day Brisbane, GC, sunshine coast and far northern NSW are the main areas to target for growth.
Westcoast929406 said | October 9th 2009 @ 8:58pm | Report comment
We have always thought that QLD is more accepting of our game generally than NSW north of the Riverina.
Speaking of growth it appears that Auskick nationally may have levelled out. The 2009 total figure of 168973 is only 5000 up on 2008 which in turn was 3000 up on 2007. Prior to 2007 there were big increases.
This means the national 40,000 overall growth in 2009 from 2008 was driven by principally by Schools and other sources like RecFooty.
Townsville had that new AFL/Cricket ground opened in 2007/8?,
http://www.sportingpulse.com/comp_info.cgi?action=VENUE&venueid=8011921&client=1-3484-0-0-0
There is a saying – Build it and they will come. Its all about perception and credibility with the kids. Noticed they now have
regular girls comps up there now as well.
But the Cowboys do dominate the town.