AFL missing its chance to send the game global

Do not know who you are Kermit but an excellent concise summary. The one thing you have not mentioned is the Elephant in the room who are IMHO not fully supporting the international cause - The AFL itself. They are dishing out crumbs off the table relative to their financials - Why couldnt they offer 50% of the fares to all of the interested countries that did not arrive. They still have some sort of weird cultural cringe at AFL House.

Look if you arse serioiulsy arguing that the chinese are more passionate about football than indians about cricket you need to have a good think about your life choices.

Appreciate the answer. Best of luck with the tournament.

Fussball England (Scotland and Wales) play under the Great Britain banner and are again attending. (just no womens side). Denmark have attended in 2002, 2008 and 2011 but found it too costly this year - they have a heavy involvement with various European programs and given that there is a junior program they sometimes focus efforts on involving players in opportunities provided there (sometimes a Euro side is run against a visiting AIS side, things like that). Croatia have not yet attended an IC tournament in Australia - they've been growing in the back ground through the Euro 9s and eventually into the 18 a side European Championships - but it is a vast undertaking to get a squad of amateurs both available to make the trip and able (financially) to make the trip. For Nauru - Australian Football is actually their national game and they wouldn't dream of not attending. They generally are around top 5-8 range but I saw them match PNG for a half in 2008 in what was as good a game of footy as you'd want to watch. It's definitely not Aussies making up the teams. Aussie expats aren't eligible. You can't play on any basis of parentage or even grand parents (it's not a Rugby League world cup!!). The tournament is for people who learnt their footy overseas and in the main are still based overseas but there's a qualification to that which I explore a little further down**. The tournament is 18 aside. So, for a lot of players attending it's not what they are used to. Mostly though these days internationals are played as 18 aside on ovals (as available and able). Formal qualification at the competing nation level for the tournament doesn't exist - it's a fully amateur event open to anyone. A nation like Germany has never attended but if money were not an issue then they would have. This year it was hoped that Sth Pacific nations Vanuatu and the Solomon Islands might debut - but for a combination of factors haven't been able to pull it together - however both have growing local comps with juniors progressing through to become the first real wave of local senior players. This is what happens with Tonga & Fiji who did manage to debut in 2011 with quite young sides who had developed through loosely under 16s tournaments over the 2 or so years prior. Now in 2014 both these nations return as well as bringing womens teams. A lot relies on having a vibrant Australian support base of expats able to assist in fund raising and accommodation (social media has massively aided co-ordination of this). **Also very helpful to reduce costs is if a few eligible players might have moved to Australia (permanently or temporarily) and are able and eligible to play and thus reduce the size of the travelling squad required. Fiji for example didn't fully understand/explore this option in 2011 but are in a better position to capitalise on it this time around both with the mens and womens squads. The Irish for example have a fair few who post GFC headed to Australia for work (or better weather) and are eligible to play - the Irish womens footy team in Sydney (The Shamrocks) will often supply a good number of their squad. It would be nice if the absolute best of each nation could attend - to really gauge the improvement of standard. For me, I saw Ireland v PNG in the 2002 GF and they looked very raw in footy terms. Contrast to how professional both squads presented in 2011 and having seen bits of 2005 and 2008 in between I can vouch for the fact that standards and organisation is all improving. The key these days includes delivering coach/umpiring courses in the footy nations to help support the players. That's as big a challenge sometimes as getting access to grounds.

I beleive it comes down to who can afford to show up. I know the american teams are mostly if not all amatuer non profits, I wouldn't be surprised if most of the others are as well.

Is there a qualification process for this tournament? I notice there are not teams from: Croatia, Denmark, England (or combined UK) .. who (allegedly) have strong and vibrant ARules competitions? Yet, Nauru (population 9000) has fielded a team? Or are they mainly the Aussies administering the Detention Centre? Is it a full 18 players-per-team tournament? From what I've read on The Roar, overseas ARules is mainly 9-a-side. Common sense suggests 9-a-side ARules is quite different to 18-a-side?

Will go straight over the top of goosey brucey, couple of six packs short of a slab is old brucey.

I'd suggest you get an education brucy boy and learn what proportionate means. The US isn't proportionately twice the size of Australia.

It's worthwhile mentioning that the fifth international cup kicks off on August 9 with a welcome reception in Federation Square. The teams this year: Men's teams: Canada, China, Fiji, Finland, France, Indonesia, Ireland, Great Britain, India, Japan, Nauru, New Zealand, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, South Africa, Sweden, Tonga, USA (18 teams) Women’s teams: Canada – Northern Lights, Canada – Midnight Suns, Ireland, Fiji, Tonga, USA – Freedom, USA – Liberty (7 teams). Indonesia and Pakistan are making the very first appearance, while Finland is back for the second time after a bit of a gap. Women's footy is going so well in Canada and the US that they have brought across two teams. This is the second time there has been a women's section, and Fiji and Tonga are making there first appearance Ireland remains the favourite for both the men's and women's title, although PNG and NZ remain strong in the men's. The Irish women's team call themselves the Banshees. You can see a profile of them here on the AFL Europe website: http://www.afleurope.org/irish-banshees-players-profiles/

Flicka, very disappointed in you. Don't you know we only speak about auskick numbers in multiples of tens of thousands, even if its not true. And ONLY 4000 for all of Sydney - ridiculous - don't you know there are nearly 5 million people in Sydney - get with the scheme mate - there's 50000 AFL players in western Sydney alone - get back on board Flicks - you've fallen overboard.

good onya Mister Football cant wait

Poor Goosey Brucey, About 4,000 kids play Auskick across Sydney on Saturdays bruce. There's a good lad Bruce, run along now.

Tezza old mate - I,ve just checked out a few figures and I think your rudimentary calculations are a tad more rudimentary than you think. I don't want to embarrass you but I suggest you might want to re visit the respective value of AFL and NFL media deals - there's a good lad!!

Wow Tezza , that's really stupendous - so how much is the NFL,s media deal per year - on your rudimentary figures it must be roughly double the AFL,s. That's almost unbelievable - did Flicks tell you that ? Lol

Wow Flicka, you,re good - wam!! Straight between the eyes for poor old Brian - knock out blow - he won't be back - kapow !!! Now -tell us about Cherrybrook Aussie rules - how many thousands of kids play on sat. and sun - use auskick numbers if ya want - no one will know the difference lol - come on Flicks blow us away lol...lol...

Brian Orange - Can't quite say 'anyone in Europe'. There is a small but growing European population of Aust Footy players/followers that are NOT expat Aussies and are not even reliant upon expat Aussies. It may only number in the 1'000s, perhaps 10'000s. Certainly not millions I grant you. Mostly this small band has evolved without significant AFL interaction. Importantly though there are more and more examples of there being a potential market such that the AFL would be foolish to NOT see what might be able to happen. The stories around the spread of Aust Footy (hate the term 'AFL') around the world is less for the (mostly disinterested) people of Victoria to read and more for those around the world who use social media to share their stories and ideas and hook up in some cases for matches whether domestically or internationally - such as the Dutch team trekking to Dalmatia to take on the Croatian Knights - - neither of whom could make it to Melbourne for the 5th International Cup in August (just 1.5 wks away now). Exciting!!!!

Brian Orange - I'll elaborate : 1) There never was an assurance of a specified sum. The MOU was an assurance that a framework for assessing the rights to compensation and delivering that compensation would be in place. No idea where you're plucking $1 billion from (sounds a little Dr.Evil!!!) 2) The NRL assertion you've made I'd dispute. That the NRL and ARU both co-signed the MOU with the AFL and Govt illustrates that they were lining up for any potential compensation claims. Note too - the FFA were working on producing 'work around' proposals for the other codes. They only managed to deliver one - to the NRL - and they flatly refused it stating that clubs etc couldn't be put at risk (wasn't nearly as widely reported as it should've been by Gallop wasn't as newsworthy as Demetriou!!). They never even got that far with the AFL. 3) You're right about the 'perceived lack of co-operation from the AFL'. In the main it was a perception. The story was over blown and misrepresented. Even the Victorian papers went back and forth on this story - and the Age certainly carried the pro-FFA Michael Lynch and Michael Cockerill stories so it's a bit glib to try to throw a blanket over the two Melb/Vic papers. 4) To call it 'Blocking and delaying tactics' is assuming that to be a deliberate strategy. Being 'Perception'. Nothing was delayed/blocked from being submitted on time. However - one must question the capabilities of the FFA to deliver without the assistance of Govt. The expectations the FFA had of other codes and Govt intervention seemed perhaps at odds with reality. And surprisingly with Ben Buckley on board - the displayed understanding of the AFL contractual arrangements at Etihad and the MCG over exceedingly long timeframes was well misunderstood (I presume by Lowy over ruling Buckley??). And do note the greatest likelihood is that the AFL will buy out Etihad early - at least 5 years prior to the 2025 assumption of total ownership - so come 2022 the AFL would be more enconsed at Etihad that at present. The efforts by Lowy to use Govt as a bulldozer to clobber the other codes - and the AFL in Melbourne in particular given that (Etihad) that was the prime battleground (and an odd battleground at that - given the AFL had acquiesced on the other venues/states) is one of the reasons many AFL followers lost any sympathy for the FFA bid and Mr.Frank.

Ha…you say what????

Not entirely correct.