> >> The crowds in Australia have not increased significantly in recent
> >> but they have increased slightly, attendances are up in almost all
> >> the game including shield (not that you would notice if you went to a
> >> and the cost of tickets is up as well. However, that is not the key
> >> concern here. Corperate sponsors see the potential for cricket to
> >> take off (it is already Australia's most popular team sport by a long
> > Interesting the ABS has Aussie Rules as the most popular sport and as it
> > also a team sport then one could assume that Aussie Rules is the most
> > team sport (I am assuming you mean as a watched sport otherweise the
> > corporate sponsorship is somwhat irrelevant) Aussie Rules also has had
> > highest amount payed for television rights.
> Interesting, I am still going on my ABS brochure I got in 1997, but them
> cricket was the most popular team sport by a long way for participation
Participation is not really a valid statistic when one is talking about
corporate sponsors as the are far more interested in who is watching the
That list as at 1999 is as follows number of people over 15 who attended
matches (excluding school and junior competitions)
1. Aussie Rules 2,509,200
2. Horse Racing 1,756,400
3. Motor Sports 1,574,300
4. Rugby League 1,501,100
5. Cricket 942,500
6. Soccer 621,200
7. Harness racing 534,800
8. Basketball 526,000
9. Rugby Union 446,200
10. Tennis 444,000
As I read the list it goes :
> 5.Rugby (both codes listed together)
> 9.Lawn Bowls - unbelievable! (guess the seniors boost this)
> > > with scandels and league problems in Rugby, and AFL just being plain
> > boring,
> > See you have never watched it then
> As Dianne correctly pointed out this was a mini troll. I love the "Footy"
> debate here, I was actually expecting to catch me a big squirming Rugby
> they nomally hook first......
> I have both played at a reasonably high level and watched AFL, and whilst
> does have appealling elements ie high marking, and I don't really think it
> is boring, high scoring sports such as Basketball and AFL don't really
> appeal to me,
Why then does cricket as it would be the highest scoring sport of the lot?
> as there is more emphasis on the scoring than the playing.
> Rugby and soccer appeal more as there is more "infield" contest.
Now that's funny.
> think the degree of individual skill in soccer is far more appealing -
> is comaparable to a soccer player juggling the ball from his knee to chest
> to thigh to foot, flicking it over an opponent, pulling it through his own
> legs dribbling untouchablly past three or four defenders before turning to
> shoot from thirty metres out and perfectly placing it in the top corner of
> the goal, in AFL?
A player taking a great mark, playing on and shruging two or three tackles,
runing down the wing bouncing two or three times, baulking an opponent and
then slotting the ball through the goals on the run from 55 metres out on a
45 degree angle.
It is no wnder there is a much higher degree of crowd *** at the soccer
as the game is so ***y frustrating to watch.
>Any body who is strong, aerobically fit, and has a certain
> degree of hand eye, hand foot co-ordination can play AFL (not at top level
> perhaps) but the same cannot be said for soccer.
the level of skill you are referring to in soccer is somewhat rare and you
can go many games without seeing that sort of play. Only players of the ilk
of Maradona and Pele seem to be able to have performed like you suggest with
any degree of consistancy. And y7es I do watch quite a bit of soccer
(Thanks to Austar) and as a spectacle it isn't anywhere as good as Aussie
Rules, as for RL, anyone who is built like a bouncer at a nightclub and with
a subnormal IQ can play that.
> What year is your ABS stats from?
> I will log onto their website and check,
> as I have made this assertion in RSC before.