www.afl.com.au/news/1162988
FANS' VERDICT: Opinions clear on subs, extra time, 20th team
It's similar to how Kyle Sandilands and Jackie O are also immensely popular with people for some reason
his constant confusion
Speaks to the lowest common denominator. They can relate to him
his Pies bias
See above
I chortled
Worth noting that places like reddit tend to represent a smallish subset of the footy community. For every one of us who may criticise BT we probably got a Dad, a few uncles, or at the least, know several old mates down the pub who all like BT quite a bit.
It could also simply be a generational thing, I don't hate BT like some but he's far from my favorite commentator. But talk to anyone over 50 or 60 and they mostly seem to like him or are indifferent to him, and can't understand any of my common (especially here on this subreddit) criticisms towards him.
turns out people care less about being 100% accurate all the time and more about energy and excitement
also a lot of people who probably only watch on FTA
It could also simply be a generational thing, I don't hate BT like some but he's far from my favorite commentator. But talk to anyone over 50 or 60 and they mostly seem to like him or are indifferent to him, and can't understand any of my common (especially here on this subreddit) criticisms towards him.
Most 50yo lived when we actually had elite sports commentary before TikTok, so I imagine they are mainly against BT.
My 80 yo dad hates BT, so do most of the other 50+ people that I speak to about footy (which admittedly is not many).
Yeah I guess everyone moves in different circles so maybe what I said isn’t true for everyone.
Still, that poll had over 30,000 responses. So not a bad sample size.
Yea fair point, I wasn't so much saying I expected Reddit to be a good consensus of what the general public thinks, just can't fathom actually enjoying hearing him commentate.
Country Roads and Sweet Caroline are two different songs
This killed me on the weekend, what a fucking nuffie, dude's bordering on full Trump brain and is about 5 years past his expiry date.
The things I’m glad about is that the vast majority don’t want regular season extra time and that almost everyone wants the length of the game to stay the same
Whomever said the quarters were too long should be shot
It’s like cricket commentators pushing for four day tests. If the game is too boring for you mate fuck off and watch something else.
If anything, the Test match should have 6 days. One day booked just in case of rain. If weather causes significant delay, activate the 6th day.
Like the old timeless tests at the end of a series to guarantee a result
Canberra the most popular remotely realistic new team option, nice!
- The ACT Government looking into upgrading Manuka.
- The Giants looking for alternatives through the Easter Show.
Bit by bit, a Canberra team edges forward.
Im torn between either send north up to the NT or give them a brand new team send the kangas up to the NT would give Canberra the new and last license
Can we fuck off with moving North somewhere else pls. We might be shit on field but our finances are solid and they're committed to Arden street, they're not moving any time soon, likely ever.
I agree that North doesn't need to move, but what will the financials be like after the move from Tasmania? Is that still $4m a year?
Will three to four games in the NT be needed to keep your finances solid?
Darwin is romantic but the problem really is that it's like the size of Albury Wodonga and the NT government's own feasibility report concluded they'd need to get funded like Gold Coast or GWS twice over. Only way it could ever work is as a permanent non-commercial subsidy commitment by a government on social benefits grounds. That's before you get into the logistics of a side in Darwin from things like a climate perspective.
The NT team would be more of a social thing for the youth and whatnot in the NT as for funding that’s here the feds come in and do whatever they want
Moving an underperforming team is a ridiculous notion. What's happens when theoretically in 2 years, north arent bottom? Then do we move who's on the bottom then? The bottom team rotates all the time, seems stupid to pin the move on whoever happens to be at the bottom at that time.
It's disgraceful to advocate in favor of relocating someone elses football club. Either put your own club forward, or keep your thought to yourself.
Thx for the down votes
You're welcome.
I see they didn't include the grand final time results?
Also the abomination that is opening round
Im nervous about this cos I'm scared it's cos they want to try the night game and no one wants it
As if the afl care what fans want
No need to be so conspiratorial. They've been releasing the results across multiple articles. It'll come out some time in the next week.
It'll be interesting to see, given it's quite remarkably consistently around the 70% in favor of the day Grand Final.
Expand the bench to five. Reward teams with depth of players.
some results i expected, others i didnt
team in the NT is never happening very surprised thats what some people voted for.
I am surprised that more people aren't in favour of a send off rule.
When Gaff broke that Freo player's jaw and Barry Hall KO'd Brent Staker, they should no longer play a part in that match.
When Alistair Lynch started throwing haymakers in the grand final because he knew he was retiring, a send off rule would have prevented that behaviour.
Should be a red card send off with 10 minutes down to 17 men for really flagrant violent actions. I mean like martial arts action/non footy actions.
I know you see that kinda stuff maybe once every 5 years, so a red card would be rare but I just feel like it's a loophole that needs closing.
i like that u cant be sent off i think its a unique thing and as u said not really gonna matter for 99% of games
Grand final. Some C-grade 20 year old who’s getting delisted at the end of the season. Coach says to him “Mate, I’m picking you to play in the grand final. All I want you to do is go out there and break as many cunts jaws as possible. Just start punching them, concuss them”.
Player then goes around and snipes the oppositions 4 best players out of the grand final in the first quarter.
Kid’s free to play out the rest of the match, becomes a premiership player. Faces no repercussions because he’s getting delisted in a months time anyway.
Obviously it’s a ridiculous hypothetical, but the fact that there’s nothing to prevent it from actually happening is insane.
Next time someone punches someone and breaks their jaw, they will introduce a send off rule.
People are divided on whether it was better to watch 10 years ago, which was 2014 not the 1990s, where all these small tinkering's such as the stand rule, kickouts can run out of the square without a ball up, 9m rule from kickouts, no third man up, no ruck blocking frees, have made a better flowing game and cleared up a lot of congestion.
you forget how many stoppages there were and this number has decreased due to these changes, sure they have gone to far in other areas but games aren't such defensive slogs as they were 10 years ago.
People forget how much of a slog some 04-06 games were. The Eagles were the one of the only teams consistently playing attacking footy.
The 90s had some great footy but also some terrible blowouts
Close games are better than blowouts. I’d rather see a defensive struggle with both teams in it, than an uncompetitive 187-90 scoreline
St Kilda and Fremantle say "hi"
NT will never work without heavy government funding.
WA3 makes the most sense.
Didn’t the wafl come out and say no or some shit
WAFC said no because they want to sell out optus and increase prices. They don't have WA footy best interests at heart at all. WC get huge numbers even when they are historically dogshit and freo are well on their way to getting similar numbers. Even the worst seats at Eagles games cost like 60 bucks and they have years long waiting lists for memberships. AFL can put a team in WA regardless of the WAFCs opinion.
Surely getting more money byselling more tickets by having a 3rd team is better than raising prices.
Overall yes it would, but not initially and that's what the WAFC doesn't want. WC and Freo are making tons of money at the moment with 0 effort and they want it to stay that way. Their goal is to get Freo on the same level of WC so they can start charging more. Don't like it? Go to the WAFL which the WAFC also own.
Nah a stand alone Canberra team would make the most economic sense
Would it? You'd need to start the team from scratch with stadium upgrades, facilities, pathways, etc and it would need financial support to keep itself afloat. WA3 would be cheap as chips and would barely need any support as well as being in a state that is footy mad. Do you think the AFL can afford spending all that money in Canberra on top of GWS, GC and Tassie?
Here we go again.
You keep spouting that WA3 will be cheaper, but never have the numbers to back it up.
Manuka is likely already being upgraded for the cricket. No expense for the AFL.
Canberra will need lower crowds to breakeven. Optus needs crowds of 25-30k to make a profit. WA3 games against lower teams will be losses.
Canberrans have 40% higher median income. More money for merch and memberships.
The ACT government will fund the team with ~$3m a year. Likely give stadium benefits worth more than $2m a year. So likely ~$5m a year annual headstart over WA3.
At the very least, you can say WA3 and Canberra are similar economically. But until you back it up, saying WA3 would be much cheaper than Canberra is just talking out your arse.
You don't have any numbers either. I've explained to you a million times why all your points make 0 sense. I'm just going to start copy and pasting my arguments because all that ends up happening is we go around in circles and I can't be assed making or breaking the same points over and over again.
Do you think the cricket will be upgrading manuka enough for an AFL team. Why wouldn't the AFL be expected to contribute for the upgrade. You still need to justify that upgrade to taxpayers and I doubt that gets done without the support of the AFL.
You don't think we would crack 25k in the AFLs second biggest market? Come on man. Even west coast who are historically terrible at the minute coming of a spoon season are getting massive numbers. If vic can survive with 10 teams I find it ridiculous to think WA can with 3.
The income is completely irrelevant.
Higher income ≠ more footy spending.
Canberra has a much smaller population so the median income will look better. When looking at other measures of central tendency, perth has a higher average income than Canberra and that's out of 2.3 million people rapidly expanding. Perth had far more people there are more wealthy people living in Perth.
Canberra has the worst cost of living rating in Australia. Any extra money someone in Canberra will get will go straight to bills, fuel, groceries and other essentials.
How do you know those people will even go to the footy? Wealthier people watch Aussie rules in WA. They will likley be watching rugby union or rugby league in Canberra who have decades of a headstart.
That 3-5 million really isn't that much in the long run and the team will have to rely heavily on AFL payments to stay afloat. A WA team will immediately have interest and have far more advertising opportunities compared to a Canberra team. West coast and Freo were 1st and 3rd in revenue without pokies and grants last year. WA teams are cash cows while a Canberra team wouldn't even come close to the top of that list.
I can't say that because it's untrue. WA has everything already here for footy. Canberra does not.
I wish you wouldn't cut and paste, because I've debunked it before and you keep using them.
You don't have any numbers either
The difference is you're constantly making the claim that WA3 will be cheaper. The burden of proof is on you. Until you can make it stack up, stop making the claim.
Do you think the cricket will be upgrading manuka enough for an AFL team. Why wouldn't the AFL be expected to contribute for the upgrade.
They probably will contribute a bit, but it's happening regardless of a team of our own. So it's not relevant to the cost of the team.
You don't think we would crack 25k in the AFLs second biggest market?
I think you will for a lot of games. But for games against the Suns, Giants, Port etc I expect them to be under 25k. Which will be losses. Those games will be profits at Manuka.
- Higher income ≠ more footy spending
Not sure how you can even say that with a straight face. It means a higher proportion of the population can afford to go to the footy. Pretty basic logic.
- Canberra has a much smaller population so the median income will look better. When looking at other measures of central tendency, perth has a higher average income than Canberra and that's out of 2.3 million people rapidly expanding. Perth had far more people there are more wealthy people living in Perth.
Do you have a link to the central tendency numbers?
Of course Perth has more rich people. And most who are footy fans already follow West Coast, and a few to Freo. Not many leftover rich AFL fans.
- Canberra has the worst cost of living rating in Australia. Any extra money someone in Canberra will get will go straight to bills, fuel, groceries and other essentials.
You're grasping at straws. To live comfortably , you have to earn 4% in Canberra than in Perth.
- How do you know those people will even go to the footy? Wealthier people watch Aussie rules in WA. They will likley be watching rugby union or rugby league in Canberra who have decades of a headstart.
You're a rugby league fan. You have to know that the stereotype isn't for wealthy people to follow league.
The ACT bought more Tasmanian FC foundation jumpers per capita than any mainland state. Why? Because our AFL fans are wealthy. Canberran AFL fans are incredibly untapped.
That 3-5 million really isn't that much in the long run and the team will have to rely heavily on AFL payments to stay afloat.
$3-5m every year isn't much? That's the difference between Collingwood and the Western Bulldogs.
Burden of proof? This isn't a court case. It's common sense that a place that needs to build everything from the ground up is going to be more expensive than somewhere with everything set up.
Do you think the AFL wants another stadium controversy right after the one in Tasmania?
I doubt a 3rd WA team would get under 30k for any game. WA is footy mad and we have 2.2 million people here. Plenty of people want to get to footy.
Not nessasarily, people vary greatly with how much they spend on footy. One fan from a low income may spend more on football games than a high income person would who just casually catches a game every once and a while. The biggest and richest clubs tend to have working class followings and football is more popular with middle and low income people. I think you are putting too much weight to how much income actually matters.
WA has the highest average salary in the country
How are they going to support west coast when they can't even get a membership or tickets?
The Northern Perth reigion has 750k plus people and is rapidly expanding. Plenty of rich mfers on the coast that way that would absolutely jump on a local team.
That stereotype just proves my point because all the rich people will be watching rugby union instead of Aussie rules. The brumbies are only half decent Aussie team in the super rugby. The stereotype also isn't law and there are plenty of richer NRL fans. Look at the roosters fanbase.
That's a massive stretch and not how you analyse data at all. All that tells you is that people from the ACT brought more Tasmanian team guernseys. There could be a million reasons why. It could also be that it's because they don't have their own team or there are a high population of Tasmanians in Canberra. It could be anything.
A Canberra team is going to need a whole lot more than 3-5 million to stay afloat, that comes out of the AFLs pockets.
Burden of proof? This isn't a court case.
It's not a court case, but you keep stating it as a fact. Until you can prove it, stop spouting it as if it's a fact. And until business cases show you're right, I'll keep shutting you down every time you try to pass it off as a fact.
Do you think the AFL wants another stadium controversy right after the one in Tasmania?
Can you read? Manuka will likely be sorted for a BBL team before an AFL team will enter.
I doubt a 3rd WA team would get under 30k for any game. WA is footy mad and we have 2.2 million people here. Plenty of people want to get to footy.
Freo have got a few 33k crowds. WA3 won't be anywhere near as popular as Freo. WA3 would absolutely get multiple sub-30k crowds a year.
WA has the highest average salary in the country
Once again, median is more important because it means a larger proportion of the population can afford to go. As an example, say only the top 50% of people in Perth can afford to go, that same price point means the top 70% of Canberrans can afford to go.
That's a massive stretch and not how you analyse data at all. All that tells you is that people from the ACT brought more Tasmanian team guernseys. There could be a million reasons why. It could also be that it's because they don't have their own team or there are a high population of Tasmanians in Canberra. It could be anything.
It's a few factors, but you're right that we don't have a team is a factor. Canberra AFL fans are hungry for more AFL content that we spent $90-$100 on merch for another team. We bought 29% more per capita than West Aussies. So either we have more AFL fans than people give us credit for, or our AFL fans have more money (but most likely, a combo of both)
A Canberra team is going to need a whole lot more than 3-5 million to stay afloat, that comes out of the AFLs pockets.
That's $3-5m on top of everything else. You can't just brush it aside as nothing. We have the higher incomes and lower costs, PLUS millions in support. With all of that combined, you can't state that WA3 will be cheaper as a fact. You have to admit there's at least a chance that Canberra will be cheaper.
I doubt NT would work even with heavy government funding. The isolation can't be overcome with money.
WA3 would also help lower the travel requirements for the WA teams.
Well, I was right. The majority of AFL fans don't understand demographics.
Of course they don't. They probably wouldn't know how far away the NT is, or anything about it. It's just a nice idea to have a team in every state (territory)
Was there a question regarding the grand final time?
In the survey yes but wasn’t shown here for some reason
should have filled it in, Ken as best coach
Why does everyone hate Draw FC so much?
I was kind of surprised maintaining the sub was so high. I assumed it would be like 5%.
Reddit isn’t the general consensus
Lots of people actually like the sub?
People often just vote for the status quo if they’re not super engaged with the information and discussion around an issue
It's stupid, just add a 5th to bench
That's what I thought everyone thought. Either 4 or 5, no sub. Clearly I am wrong.
Yeah just go with 5, gives flexibility if there's an injury and allows more options with gameday tactics. Win win for everyone.
And we'll finally be able to see debutants not sit on the bench with a vest for 3.5 qtrs
I think the sub rule is fine, and I was disappointed to see it go the first time.
I feel like Principal Skinner seeing BT 2nd in the favourite commentators...
Fair play, like what you like, but jeez his constant confusion about the rules and complaints about decisions when his understanding of the rules is clearly wrong is just bafflingly frustrating and does more harm than good. Nevermind his Pies bias and his inability to know that Country Roads and Sweet Caroline are two different songs.