Move the AFL for the Soccer World Cup? Bugger off!

RedB, About 2, 1/2 feet back on this thread we were discussing "knives and daggers" -- care to make a comment on that link I put up on your request (AFTL Age journos) ... lol ?? ~~~~ KB

KB - 2 problems. 1 is that in 1908 the 50 year jubilee of Aust Footy was celebrated - obviously the first effort to derail the yet to be formed or only just forming Rugby League in Sydney. In 1958 the 'centenary' of Australian Football 'carnival' was held, again, an obvious attempt to undermine the 50 year jubilee of Rugby League. Therefore, I'd suggest that only an ignorant scribe seeking to create a stir would seriously suggest that the AFL participating with the broader Australian Footy community in the 150th celebration is designed simply to disrupt the Austrlian Rugby league centenary. Roy is up to his tricks. re. the first game of 'Australian Football'. The 'codification' via a 'league' proper is probably a bit irrelevant in the context that the continuous line is drawn via the Melbourne Football Club. It is those rules - of 1859 - and the evolution of those rules that is a direct line to the game today. The fact that early on there was not the 'human' infrastructure of a city the size of London - and so to form a league over night was far from realistic. It is certainly far, far more appropriate that the AFL/Aust Footy in general - draws a line directly back to those rules - simply because of what I mentioned AND that that club, the Melbourne FC is still going strong today. That should be beyond argument and it is entirely disengenous that small minded Rugby folk are squabbling about the 'first Australian rule' or the first 'true game' etc etc. the reality is that all rule sets were in a state of flux - the school of rugby had about 37 rules written down in about 1845 - and, still before each game there was likely to be a squabble over the rules of the day. Needless to say, to play anybody else from beyond the school boundaries would require a compromise. That is beyond dispute. The myth or otherwise for Australian (Melb) Rules is that the squabbling associated with the particular '3 part' game in 1858 is where the determination to create a single set of rules was 'cemented'. Certainly, that can seem a little tenuous. I'd see simply that there could be an 1858 vs 1859 argument here. Now - the 1859 rules. Original handwritten rules dated May 1859; signed by Tom Wills, William Hammersley, J. Sewell, J. B. Thompson, Alex Bruce, T. Butterworth and Thomas Smith: 1 The distance between the goal post shall be decided upon by the captains of the sides playing. 2 The captains on each side shall toss for choice of goal. The side losing the toss has the kick-off from the centre-point between the goals. 3 A goal must be kicked fairly between the posts without touching either of them or a portion of the person of any player of either side. 4 The game shall be played within the space of not more than 200 yards wide, the same to be measured equally upon each side of the line drawn through the centre of the two goals and two posts to be called the kick-off points shall be erected at a distance of 20 yards on each side of the goal posts at both ends and in a straight line with them. 5 In case the ball is kicked behind the goals, anyone of the side behind whose goal it is kicked, may bring it back 20 yards in front of any portion of the space between the kick-off posts and shall kick it as nearly as possible in the line of the opposite goal. 6 Any player catching the ball directly from the boot may call 'mark'. He then has a free kick. No players from the opposite side being allowed to come into the spot marked. 7 Tripping and pushing are both allowed but no hacking when any player is in rapid motion or in possession of the ball except for the case provided by rule 6. 8 The ball may be taken in hand only when caught from the boot or on the hop. In no case shall it be lifted from the ground. 9 When the ball goes out of bounds (the same being indicated by a row of posts) it shall be brought back to the point where it crossed the boundary line and thrown in right angels with that line. 10 The ball while in play may under no circumstances be thrown. first thing - only 10 rules - that leaves a bit of squabbling to be done before each game - so, still fairly fluid. however, the 1863 London rules only had about 11 rules - so, still some fair scope for squabbling. Now - the 1845 Rugby school rules allow: "Fair catch, is a catch direct from the foot" then rabbits on about OFf Side, Knock on being illegal distinguished from a throw on, had the 'try at goal' - and NOT kicking goals directly. So - Sean Fagan firstly, who insists that the first games were likely to be games of Rugby - and that off-side wasn't overly stringent at that time and that Aust Footy probably had some such, however, Rugby school rules # 2,3, 10,11, 12, 13, 14, 27 all refer to off-side or on his side. So, on the standards of the day, including over the next 20 years, that's a fairly good illustration of off-side. For the Melbourne rules to NOT mention off-side implies that it wasn't there. So - to Harrow - they use a pork pie 'ball' the have off-side they have a really complex system around a 'catch', - 'yards' - the sort of thing only a school could come up with - i.e. can only be caught by a member of the same team who was behind the kicker when kicked - otherwise off side, but can be caught by any of the opposite side etc etc. they have a 'baseline', and kick goals called 'bases', So - maybe a snippet of influence there? Hardly the 'game' of Harrow in it's virgin form - although, note, the Harrow lads called their game 'footer'. Thomas Wills had been educated at Rugby School in England (where Rugby football had been codified since 1845). Wills had also, like W. J. Hammersley and J. B. Thompson, been to the University of Cambridge. The Cambridge Rules, drawn up in 1848, included some elements which are important in Australian football, such as the mark. Thomas Smith was Irish and had attended Trinity College, Dublin, where the Rugby School rules were popular at a very early stage. These men would have been familiar with other public school and university games. And so to the Cambridge Rules circa 1856 The Laws of the University Foot Ball Club 1-This club shall be called the University Foot Ball Club. 2-At the commencement of the play, the ball shall be kicked off from the middle of the ground: after every goal there shall be a kick-off in the same way. 3-After a goal, the losing side shall kick off; the sides changing goals, unless a previous arrangement be made to the contrary. 4-The ball is out when it has passed the line of the flag-posts on either side of the ground, in which case it shall be thrown in straight. 5-The ball is behind when it has passed the goal on either side of it. 6-When the ball is behind it shall be brought forward at the place where it left the ground, not more than ten paces, and kicked off. 7-Goal is when the ball is kicked through the flag-posts and under the string. 8-When a player catches the ball directly from the foot, he may kick it as he can without running with it. In no other case may the ball be touched with the hands, except to stop it. 9-If the ball has passed a player, and has come from the direction of his own goal, he may not touch it till the other side have kicked it, unless there are more than three of the other side before him. No player is allowed to loiter between the ball and the adversaries' goal. 10-In no case is holding a player, pushing with the hands, or tripping up allowed. Any player may prevent another from getting to the ball by any means consistent with the above rules. 11-Every match shall be decided by a majority of goals. Again, a rule here or there that is similar or mostly the same, but the obvious thing about the Melbourne rules is that they are a unique combination. The main joker in the pack is Sheffield who also had no off-side. However, the common thread is that both Sheffield and Melbourne were rule sets established by cricketers for the purpose of playing a game for fitness. Therefore, all that off-side rot was too restrictive (seemingly). Some of Fagans assertions for example are that certain rules were brought in (such as bouncing the ball) to stop obvious rugby style play. And perhaps so, perhaps too many new folk to the game applied their own interpretations and unwritten 'understandings' became written. No one knows. There's no video footage. The game appears to have been positional quite early. Out of all that KB - can you definitively claim that that set of rules was not sufficiently unique as to stand apart. I think so. I reckon Roy Masters and Sean Fagan are the ones being more troublesome and mischievous at present. They are most certainly filling in what gaps they can assume are present with their own interpretations or suppositions. And, again, people NEED to separate the AFL from Aust Footy in general on this topic. We are celebrating the first game between Old Scotch and Melbourne Grammar - they are 'Aust Football' schools. They play annual games to celebrate this match - and this year will be the 150th - how significant was that game? I don't know. It seems that prior to 1908 it was deemed significant - they probably knew more back then than us now. Maybe it requires a little leap of faith - there's who religions based on that, there's a Trophy for the RUWC based on that - and really, what rock solid evidence is there for the Aust Footy community to break the 1908,1958, 2008 time line of 'anniversary celebrations'?? You wanna tell me they aren't doing their darndest to undermine the Aust Football celebrations - which they must have known were coming. And, from the AFL media I've actually not heard anything or any reference to suggest that the NRL centenary is unwarranted - although I'm yet to see any examples of the 50 year jubilee of RL in Australia.

KB, Bit off topic re misnomer Masters. It seems we AFL folk need to reject your World Cup bid on the grounds that our ground is too busy fielding two suburban club football games. sorry bout that. now if you can only convince those big wigs as FiFA to move to the soccer summer season in OZ, I'm sure we'd be happy to watch the Socceroos beating Cameroon. cheers Redb

Michael C wrote:: I’m still trying to work out the whole point of you raising Roy Masters and his thoughts about the ‘Harrow’ game. Sean Fagan is the first to point out that Aust Football was NOT played regularly on ovals for quite some time. Yeah, Harrow played a fair part in the first soccer rules. i.e. allowing ‘fair catches’ and no x-bar for goals. Comrade C, I must admit I at first found it hard to understand Roy Master's point -- but I think it is that AFTL is only 131 yrs old and it is not a true indigenous article as your masters have alluded you to.. Now remembering I am a Football tragic trying to understand John Harms and Roy Master's discussion here -- Roy has made some valid points that it was not until 1877 that the VFL was formed and his argument is that AFTL's 150 celebrations are designed to disrupt the 100 yrs of Rugby League in Australia; nothing else as the original game did not remotely resemble the game that was played in 1850 according to him. But more like Rugby or Harrow Football; after doing a search on Harrow I found that. That game resembles AFTL more than Rugby, Rugby League, or Soccer. Especially when point scoring is involve, as it is described in its URL site (base score) where a punt for goal from a mark between to up right post without a crossbar to as high as you wish will give you the points... Sound familiar... ha ha.. Now it seems that Harrow was played in 1830 and before that in 1803 it was called Fug football similar to what Thomas Ellis describes in the Geelong FTC site.. So sorry Comrade I shall have to run with Roy on this one.. PS. Burt is still recovering in hospital after the generic Vegemite from Micky; now this news will certainly kill him off -- but mums the word on this one.... Along with the coming Blues Victory..(Sheffield Shield).. He still has some unpaid betting debts he owes me.. ~~~~~ KB

KB - I'm still trying to work out the whole point of you raising Roy Masters and his thoughts about the 'Harrow' game. Sean Fagan is the first to point out that Aust Football was NOT played regularly on ovals for quite some time. Yeah, Harrow played a fair part in the first soccer rules. i.e. allowing 'fair catches' and no x-bar for goals. But, rugby allowed 'fair catches' (marks), rather than calling 'yards', and goals rather than 'bases', and used a ball rather than a deformed oversized pancake. We all know that the objective in London circa 1862/63 was to agree on a compromise set of rules. They didn't. In Melb in 1858/59, the did. It must therefore be a set of rules that one can find equivalents in some of the 'known' rules sets of the day. That's a no brainer. It wasn't about 'inventing' rules overnight, it was about inventing a RULE SET. Anyway, have a look through the 37 or so rules of the school of rugby game circa 1845, roughly the game that Thomas Wills would be exposed to. Although, on that point, there's a new thesis downplaying the overall role of Thomas Wills and giving more credit to Hammersley and a couple of others. MC

KB, Pura?............. we are getting creamed :-) Sorry, dont buy the argument re stadia as they will predominantly be rectangular in shape. If the cricket World cup required stadia upgrades for the SCG and the Gabba, then that may help footy. We are talking massive disruption to the AFL season, in fact due to cricket, the MCG,SCG are unavailable earlier or later. But really its more the huge break during the season. We'll have to agree to disagree. cheers Redb

Redb wrote:: In your last paragraph you allude to the possibilties of stadium upgrades as a result of the WC bid. That’s great, move the tournament to soccer season in OZ and I’m in. RedB, If it could be done it would be done, but it can't be done; as the world cup is tied to a world wide international FIFA calender, and unfortunately it falls within the winter season of the southern hemisphere. However, it is a small price to be paid by the other codes to start their season earlier, and finish later, in return of new all purpose stadia built, with upgrades to others.. And there would be no need to cancel any other codes program for the season (I refer you to Simon Hill's posts on that) just an early start of maybe 2 weeks, and a late finish to the season of 3 weeks; in return of new stadia built for the use of all codes.. As Brisbane Lions benefited from the Sydney Olympic game's Football tournament of a redevelopment of the Gabba... So in short their is always a legacy left when such an event like this takes place for all to benefit from; not to mention the $27b injection into the economy for the nation. As Japan and Korea had received and that's on record.. So to stand in its way is unAustralian... How's the Pura progressing.. I'm just about to check the scores... ?? don't tell me.. ~~~~~~~ KB

KB, In your last paragraph you allude to the possibilties of stadium upgrades as a result of the WC bid. That's great, move the tournament to soccer season in OZ and I'm in. cheers Redb

I’ve followed soccer since I was a kid as I was born in England and lived there for 3/4 of my life. I have to say that coming to Australia was like a breath of fresh air to me because you’re not all obsessed with soccer (btw I’m fine with calling Association Football ’soccer’ as any claim of exclusivity in the use of the word ‘football’ is both extremely arrogant and a big turn-off to a nation that has been proud of it’s own codes for the last 150 years… and because it winds up you soccer evangelists). Simon, I must say when I saw your name my eyes lit up as I thought you were Simon Hill. Then much to my dismay after realising that you were Simon from Melbourne.. (not that there is anything wrong with that.) But if you go back a bit on this blog you will find Simon Hill's account of thing to how they really are, and how he as a mature and rationale football ex pat Englishman commentator saw how football folk were treated so shabbily in this country by AFTL and Rugby folk.. His contribution to this discussion was quite enlightening.. I hate to burst your bubble on the 150 years of AFTL, but 150 yrs ago your game was a game of Harrow Football, which has been claimed by Roy Masers in a discussion with John Harms AFTL historian, author, and Geelong life member, which he could not deny or confirm.. Roy claims that Harrow Football by his research was introduced to Australia 150 years ago by English school masters migrating to Australia to support the school system. Harrow was a combination of rugby, socca, tackling, and marks played with a round ball one and half times the size of soccer ball played on a cricket oval.. These are the claims of Roy Masters RL commentator and I believe him.. It makes sense.. Now I don't mind calling my game soccer; if the indigenous game calls its game Aussie Rules in the media.. Instead of trying to dominate the landscape by calling the indigenous game "Australian Football League" which in fact could mean anything from the Rugbies to AFTL to soccer.. So for me it's not an issue that I call my game football; as it's known throughout the world as Football I.e. (examples) Italian Football, Greek Football, Spanish Football and Scottish Football ... I have yet to mention English Football, but I still have another two hundred countries to go before I can get there.. Europe is not obsessed with football; the British isles is in fact a continent obsessed with winners; it just happens to be Football for the moment. With English club sides dominating European Football with players from all over the world, and they also had a good spell with the English Rugby Union National team who can ever forget Johnny Wilkinson's wonderful kicking exploits.. It seems to me that you want Australia to be dominated by a single code of Aussie Rules.. I say bring on the 2018 FIFA world Cup in Australia and create a $27b injection into the economy. Just on a short note about Ballymore and Carrara if Australia were to win the FIFA 2018 world Cup an all purpose stadium would be built at Carrara and an upgrade for Ballymore and maybe a new all purpose stadium in Tasmania.. All on Federal monies as it is possible that by 2018 instead of a FIFA 32 team tournament it could grow to a 36 team tournament.. ~~~~~~ KB

Simon - hmmmm, initially I thought you might be Simon Hill in disguise (like how Tarzan didn't recognise the Elephants, because they were wearing sunglasses) - then I read on. Obviously you ARE NOT and THAT IS a breath of fresh air. KB - look, if soccer wants all the crap coverage about what retired 'stars' are doing etc etc. Fine. I loved Carey on the field. Never ever cared whether a player was a laywer or labourer - alas, these days they tend to all be professional footballers - maybe, maybe stretching a degree over 8 years - which some folk do without the excuse of a concurrent professional career - but, that's another story about wasted efforts and efficiency of drinking time. anyway, KB, to get to the point, be glad that you don't have to put up with the 'good names' of stars past, and precious memories of fields of feats - being dragged through the mud by a voracious media. In England, you'd be getting all this rot about your preferred game. I am sick of the media labelling people as bad role models!!! If they didn't report it, then, no one would know and they wouldn't therefore be bad role models........ I'm over it. I just want to be able to watch the '96 and '99 GF videos without thinking stuff that I wasn't thinking at the time.

I've followed soccer since I was a kid as I was born in England and lived there for 3/4 of my life. I have to say that coming to Australia was like a breath of fresh air to me because you're not all obsessed with soccer (btw I'm fine with calling Association Football 'soccer' as any claim of exclusivity in the use of the word 'football' is both extremely arrogant and a big turn-off to a nation that has been proud of it's own codes for the last 150 years... and because it winds up you soccer evangelists). I pity you if you want Australia's sporting landscape to become like Europe's. Pick up any English tabloid in the middle of the off-season of the EPL and it's back pages are still full of anything ranging from soccer transfer talk to what David Beckhams new hair looks like. Watch Sky Sports or Setanta (or even the BBC) and it's 10 mins of soccer news follwed by 2 mins of everything else. They have as a nation become so one-eyed with soccer that they don't care (let alone understand) other games and as a result anyone who likes anything else is treated as a bit strange. If you wonder why England is so useless at any number of other sports, it's because they're too busy playing, watching and reading about soccer to allow anything else a look in. It's quite frankly... sad for all concerned. Be proud that for 150 years you have had your own codes. They might not have had the financial clout behind them to take them to the world, but they are yours. Be proud that some of us can enjoy 4 codes, because we're level-headed. Australia has been proud to be itself for so long and there are plenty of people pushing for it to become a republic, how ironic it is then that the soccer evangelists are pushing for us to embrace an English sport. Kick out the Queen... but let's all try to be more English! Don't get me wrong, if you can kick it, I'll watch it. However I object to those of you that get some kind of thrill out of wanting to see the demise of other codes and those of you with an inferiority complex because they think that soccer get's a hard time in Oz. We hear you; soccer is the 'World Game' (like tennis and golf), but then again McDonalds is the 'World Restaurant' and too much obsession with fast food/fast sport is bad for you! In short, appreciate all the codes for what they offer, and don't become so obsessed with soccer that you think it's fine for Australia to flush millions of taxpayer dollars down the swannie in a World Cup bid when they don't want to fund Ballymore, Carrara etc. etc.

Redb as I said the hysteria of some of your AFTL commentators leave me breathless at times, (check 5th parra) and like you watch all codes of football on FTA TV. And to tell you the truth I may have watched more Rugby League and AFTL more than my preferred football as I am treated like a second class citizen and forced to go to the local RSL to watch the odd HAL and Socceroo match when it is on on a reasonable time. Because we can't get a FTA coverage even now with all of the magnificent ratings that Fox are receiving we poor Football folk who cannot afford Fox are still left to watch our less preferred live sports. http://www.theage.com.au/news/soccer/twin-stumbling-blocks-could-stymie-australias-bid-for-world-cup/2008/02/24/1203788146015.html And to top it off; we have to sit thru the life stories of the drunken buffoons and drug habits of Wayne Carey when we would have liked a simple wrapped up report on the Melbourne Victory ACL match against the Sth Koreans ... Not a word; even when you had a turnout of 23k for God's sake.. This is the point "Midfielder" was making we have an audience all over the nation interested in the progress of Melb victory but Barry Cassidy chose stories that did not concern the majority of the nation.. As the ABC is the national broadcaster and government funded they have a duty to report news worthy items of national achievement and Melb Victory is a significant story to the nation not Wayne Carey's indiscretions of drug use which I find appalling to have to sit thru.. unlike you a Melbourne Victory supporter I would have found the Melbourne Vic's Victory much more an engaging story.. But not one word .. How's the Pura Cup going did we NSWelshmen smack you arses again..?? ~~~~~~ KB

KB, Finally, neutral ground in which to joust. :-) What Timmy Cahill goal are you referring to? Which AFL journo are you referring to? Do you think the Lcuas O'Neilll penalty was conversely a bad thing for soccer's image in OZ, ie: robbed by a dive? Now you know I'm not against soccer, i enjoy the EPL, Melb Victory,etc, but i don't think the AFL should move aside with a heres the keys to the MCG carpark whilst we go fishing at Cape York approach. What happens in a vacuum? No free kick to the round ball code methinks, it certainly would never be reciprocated. I'm happy for the World Cup to be held during the A League season, I think that's fair all round. cheers Redb

Redb wrote: Les Murray included and read soccer fans try the line that the AFL and NRL have nothing to worry about, that’s the crap. Should the AFL step aside for soccer, the answer is no. But the issue is far more complicated than a yes/no response, which is why the AFL has been tentatively supportative. Redb, I agree with you its war....!!! and the "Smell the Fear Syndrome is ripe and spreading" not that I am an advocate of it. However, I read a piece from one of your AFTL jurnos describing that goal that Timmy Carhill scored against Japan in the WC and he described it as a dagger straight in the chest of AFTL he,he,he... I am sure it was the furtherest thing from Timmy's mind when he hit the back of that net...Ha, Ha.. If he only knew what a stir he caused in the Melbourne Age and the Sun Herald ... He might have gone on and scored a hat trick... Football will be the number one code buy 2018...he,he... then the rugbies and then AFTL....He He... Why cos your extension ladder only can reach up to Brisbane.. ~~~~~ KB

Michael C, It is incredbile how folk from NSW don't see the bias towards Sydney sports on supposed national news, sports, early morning TV shows. They show NRL as if its the national game, and your right only footage or commentary from Swans games. and they call us biased :-) hehehe...and then they whinge about the Offsiders - which surprise surprise is produced in Melbourne. cheers Redb

Midfielder - I realise you were 'forwarding' the comments. My main thing is that I've heard a bit over the last few years - especially since we've got ourselves our 24 hour talk radio sports station in SEN - I've heard people complain about all the negative stories at times - and the main response - "We're not here to be a publicity tool". However, now that they are signed on with the AFL as a 'Broadcast partner', will we see a change? So far - seemingly not. The FTA networks are at war - that is not in question. I presume. They have available to them certain tools of warfare. That shoud come as no surprise. And amongst the primary weapons of warfare are (apart from Surprise, soft cushions and cumfy chairs) TV content especially SPORT. TV news is superficial. A 30 min broadcast including ads. Ultra superficial. Sports Tonight on TEN. Isn't too bad. We still had to put up with the bozo (Tim Webster) a few years back stating "Nathan Buckley has resigned", when he had actually "re-signed". However - I again point out how often Channel 7 FAILS to fit the portrayal as in the comments regarding TEN. Sunday morning on Channel 7 - they show video footage of all the NRL games from the previous day/evening, and, ONLY show the highlights of the Swans game from the Sat night AFL offering - irrespective of the quality or teams in the other game. A supposed NATIONAL show, based in Sydney - displaying Sydney centric tendancies. That's what we have to put up with. For that, I find it a bit rich John Ryan in Perth complaining about poor NRL coverage....he's in a state with NO NRL team. A state with 2 AFL clubs that have a combined membership of almost 100K, and the best supported super 14 Australian Club. And he want's them bumped off the sports sections for NRL coverage....... People have to be realistic here. ------- Some people praised Lowy at the time for securing the 7 year Foxtel deal. It provided financial certainty. It also hid away the HAL and more importantly the Socceroos. It ensures that this wonderful 'Asian' adventure is LOST on most of the Australian public. As Redb says though, soccer more than any other code can afford to be patient, because, it is the child of a global behemoth. If that's the message sent out by the FFA - then, don't blame the FTA networks for turning their noses up to it. As said - it is an entirely PAY TV product. THe AFL is very interesting because it is split between 2 of the 3 FTA networks PLUS Pay Tv. Will we one day see the AFL providing a guaranteed Saturday night slot with 2 games - each including AT LEAST one of the 2 QLD teams and one with at least 2 of the NSW teams. They then can sell that slot - the Saturday night slot to perhaps a Channel 10 who broadcast one game into NSW, the other into QLD, either into the rest of the country? I reckon the AFL are heading towards a situation of potentially engaging all 3 FTAs with a different day each. It becomes a tailored offering. Back to soccer though - the thing out of all this is, get SBS on side first. If SBS (soccer broadcasting network) can't give the HAL coverage and respect in Australia - then, is that not the ultimate indicator of self interest overriding all else. Win SBS first, then start complaining about the other media.

Midfielder, i have no doubt that Frank lowy's strategy is to boil the other codes slowly. That's why the A League is in summer and not winter, that's why he has taken a national approoch to the World Cup bid, so its done with national fervour in mind for the good of the country. Many commetnators, Les Murray included and read soccer fans try the line that the AFL and NRL have nothing to worry about, that's the crap. Should the AFL step aside for soccer, the answer is no. But the issue is far more complicated than a yes/no response, which is why the AFL has been tentatively supportative. cheers Redb

MC My post was in responce the over all topic of the thread "Soccer World Cup bugger off". I posted not my throughts but those of a Melbourne Victory football supporter on a MV fans forum, I thought he made some very interestings comments. Like to qoute Indio ........ ..........."Channel TEN is doing what any reasonable private company should do … looking after it’s investment and profit margins … They have made a huge investment on Foody … they have to promote and enhance their returns"… ......."We are dreaming, expecting coverage from channel 10 and 7 … ruthless commercial operators, whose self-interest over rides the promotion of achievements from National Sport codes, not financially connected to them ".... ...........Prehaps for me the Indio statement of ........................"Make no bones about it … we are at war … there will be no quarte given … they are threaten … the desperation to expand the AFL into Gold Coast and West Sydney … regardless of cost and or merit … is a clear sign of hostilities … they are wounded … they know that once we push through the next conscience barrier in oz sports psyche there is no turning back" MC up until this post I did not fully realise the AFL was at war with the other codes. I now realise after this post it is, further in Melbourne football fans realise it. The acceptance by Indio that football can expect little to nothing from traditional media but get on with it live with it..... but fight on regardless. As I said this is a Melbourne boy, ............his point about the "next conscience barrier" opened my eyes to just how far football had come in three or four short years in acceptance, but by no means at the top level. So as I said MC I found this raw emotive response from a melbourne fan, I found interesting and wondered would the world cup bring break through to that "next conscience barrier" and if that in itself would be something the AFL might not want to happen. The side issue I have is Indio seems to assume its football not the NRL that AFL is worried about and i find that a bit hard to believe.

Midfielder - There's a couple of elements to this topic. Certainly - being lost to FTA is not flash for the HAL etc, as, and we've all griped about it - the FTA networks cross promote religiously. The FFA must promote and advertise. The media will always point out it's not THEIR job to promote sports. And, if they have an investment - then, yes, it is their job to promote their own investment. The AFL has media stakeholders. It's that fine line - tNews Ltd ARE part owners of the NRL. However, for a 5 year period - TEN and Seven are key stakeholders in the AFL. [but- then, how do we explain channel 7 on Sunrise incorrectly stating that Sailor.W would still be playing unknown to all if tested positive in the AFL? How do we explain channel 7 reporters paying for confidential medical records that 'were found in a gutter'.......to expose the AFL? that was the most interesting thing last year - the AFLPA 'boycotting' channel 7 for a while - because 7 had crossed the line.]. Anyway - as Redb points out: The Basketball is the Sydney vs Melb thing, a Grand Final series, and the Tigers, via Andrew Gaze have a solid, solid position in Melbourne sports landscape. The 2nd Melb team is a much more fluid thing. MVFC get good solid coverage - but, in the week leading up to the Grand Prix and including the Basketball grand finals - - and the 'tanking' story didn't even emerge until AFTER the MVFC game - well, you can't blame their lack of coverage on AFL pushing them out. If ever, the MVFC had the chance to market themselves - - I don't know if it was being tucked away on a WEdnesday night? against god knows what team from where? in the ACL which 2nd year in, hardly lit up Sydney or Adelaide last year - and the 'Asian experience' so far has only delivered a really bad performance by the Socceroos in the Asian Cup that resulted in a bit of untidy behaviour and comments afterwards. All this needs to take time. What would you prefer - that the media suddenly attempts to pump up this ACL that is a pale comparision of European versions that have a richer history? You need to sell it first!! Until then, don't blame other codes. But - yes, do blame both the 'media' and the apparent huge latent support for soccer in this country who seem divided amongst themselves such that they are as yet unable to conquer. When soccer deserves it, they will get it. Do you doubt that? Many people still point out 'It's only 3 years old', no doubt referring to the A-League. On that basis - what do you expect?

Midfielder, I think the difference between the crowds and level of interest in the media is not a true reflection of Melbourne media coverage more broadly. Melb Victory get pretty good coverage compared to the Melb Tigers. And whilst the crowd was susbstantially bigger for the Victory game it was was against an unknown opponent and mostly Victory members attended. It is a final, but the level of awareness of the ACL is still fairly small. When Victory won the A League season 2007 it got 55,000 and heaps of press coverage. The basketball game had the Melb v Sydney spice and in fact Melb got beaten in game four and still gave it good press coverage. I suspect the basketballs crowd was severally restricted due to the venue, another reflection of basketball's declining status as a mainstream sport in OZ. it was however a national final. War you say...well i think your right. I had a look at an article by Les Murray on the TWG site and even though he is suggesting it is a phoney war between the codes, I think is comemtns further down the article reflect his true position about the future, in his eyes at least, of AFL and NRL. I natually don't share his pessimism with regard to AFL. cheers Redb