Will the Swans' bandwagon roll in 2010?

More alarmist garbage from AFL fans about the world cup. You guys are really scared of soccer aren't you?

Neither does the NRL. The only two southern cities that are needed in a national comp, Perth and Melbourne, will be covered in 2013. NRL will have in 2013 a presence in 8 of Australia's 10 largest popualation centres, only Adelaide and the Sunshine Coast (mooted for a side or a Sea Eagles/Sharks relocation) without a side, compared to AFL's 6 (including GC). That said, AFL is focusing on the biggest cities with 2 in each state capital, where NRL favours a 1 team city model with regional centres represented. The NRLs apraoch will ensure it remains strongest in the large growth areas of NSW and QLD. Adelaide is the only place to go then of any relevence, and its only relevant because of TV ratings there counting. It would be a very long term issue for the NRL, with a second New Zealand side in Wellington, an Ipswich side and a Sunshine Coast team in Qld more important. Conversely, where is the AFL's long term growth going to come from? Perth? Hobart? South Africa?

You could argue that AFL would be as relevant as A league in that scenario. AFL and RL developed strongly because they were centred in the two most important cities in late 19th-20th centuries. If dwarf tossing became the king sport in Melbourne or Sydney I bet there would be a very healthy following today. It wasn't spite for AFL or melbourne that ment it didn't develop here. Simply that we already had a great game putting down big cultural ties to the community by the time AFL showed up.

no, but apparently the storm is bigger than collingwood

AFL is on the anti-siphoning list and Super14 and A-League aren't, so it has to be shown FTA by law. http://www.acma.gov.au/WEB/STANDARD/pc=PC_91822 NRL is on the list too. The networks save money by showing the same program in all states - AFL, even if the ratings are low in some states.

I ripped into your post because it reeked of superiority about the Lions being on FTA while the Reds and the Roar aren't. That isn't because AFL is a more popular sport in QLD it's because the AFL do a better job and are in a better position than the ARU. The Reds if on free to air and well run would be Brisbane's number two team, but their not so they aren't. Nothing to do with "no one wants to whatch RU or soccer, apart from the International games." ... that's just over simplified rubbish to bag other codes when the reality is the Lions coverage has been is part of the TV contract subsidised by the codes strength in Melbourne.

I wonder what % would support the world cup if all the new stadiums will be white elephants and the NRL and AFL seasons suffer great inconvenience and financial losses. I wonder what % of the Australian population actually "give a stuff" about soccer. I imagine it depends on how you term the question Lazza.

Thats was to be expected, and is to be expected with new GWS side. It will take time. The way I see it, the Swans average 30k fans now. If they loose say 10k to the new team, thats 10k to GWS and 20k to Swans. If the GWS can get 10k new poeple interested in Aussie Rules, then thats 20k to them - that will take a lot of time, but there is huge upside - which is why the AFL believe its a risk worth taking.

They are stupid polls - soon they will be saying the Melbourne Storm is the biggest sporting club in the country...try telling that to Eddie McG.

Cuz I said "2 teams in one city" For the reasons that Lazza said above

Interesting AndyRoo You bag my comments further up when I suggested that the Lions are Number 2 in QLD (undeniably based on attendances, and arguably based on tv audiences), then you rip out this chestnut: "I think they beat the Wallabies when they went head to head. I thought that was a pretty big achievment and proof their number 2 in QLD." What exactly are you saying?

I'm disappointed that this thread hasn't taken off into a full blown code fight. For shame, Roarers.

Prior to the code war I would regularly read about how Swans fans were just a joke. No history, no knowledge, cheer in the wrong places.....more interested in chatting amongst themselves about childcare and real estate than actually watching the game. I remember a particular Richard Hinds article were he ridiculed the swans crowd because it was full of "new" scarfs. To him that was the ultimate put down a real supporter like himself could make to the fakes and blow-ins at the SCG, Funny that they have now become brothers in arms...and a peculiar point of pride for the same folk who until a few years ago found them so objectionable

It wasn't the AFL, it was a Morgan poll and they do it for the NRL and the A-league too

95% said they would be supporting Australia in the World Cup. That means that there are 20 million Soccer fans in the country.

Lazza said The real story was that 80% of Sydneysiders said “I don’t give a stuff”. That leaves 20% and thats OK.

In a typical 'two team' town every sports fan is interested in the derby and it dominates the media leading up to the game. It's not quite the same when you have a dozen or so teams in one city. I must admit that the AFL has a very good 'spin' department though. Do you remember when they claimed that the Swans had a million fans in Sydney? They conducted a survey and asked a simple question - "Who do you support in the AFL?" Just "who do you support' not whether you actually watch or attend any games. The real story was that 80% of Sydneysiders said "I don't give a stuff".

JamesP The Pay TV ratings dont break it up by state but the Reds ratings look very comaprable to the Lions ratings in Brisbane despite one being on FTA (a huge advantage) and the other on pay TV.