Talking Footy

Only an increase on the real numbers by approx 700%

justanotherleaguefan wrote:

it's not a first time they've been caught fudging figures http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_...c02.htm#c02f46


Quote:
2.52 In what becomes somewhat of a circular argument, the AFL stated that a Western Sydney AFL team is necessary to consolidate grassroots efforts in a growing market:

We looked at the absolute size of the Western Sydney market and the need for the AFL to have a presence in a market that has the second strongest growing LGA in Australia. Blacktown and Baulkham Hills have significant support from migrant groups ... We are very aware of our challenges in growing that market, and ultimately we need an AFL franchise to continue the work we are doing at the base. The participation in the greater west of Sydney was of the order of 20,000 participants in 2008. We continue to invest in that region and are building a base to be a team at the top.[46]

the real number
Quote:
Information on the public record, attributed to the New South Wales Minister for Sport suggests that actual participation in Western Sydney is fewer than 3,000.[47]

oops

only out by more than 17,000

The AFL would be quoting figures including auskick where as the minister for sport would not. It's not an exaggeration, it's a difference in the definition of "participant".

How insecure are you losers?

Yep, a biiiiig diff in the definition of participant.

Guess the AFL were too 'insecure' to go with the understood definition eh Xman?

KE, that's why the AFL told the Senate to shove it. Because they got the definition WRONG!

Some more facts for everyone to consider:

- initial expression of interest by the AFL was for Glover St in Lilyfield.
- Count paid up school players who are unable to play for a club as their is no place for them in Leichhardt.
- Initial expression included broad postcode Forest Hill and Camperdown.
- Second expression of interest was more formal.

Listen to Tom Harley (General Manager AFL NSW/ACT) explain it here:
http://media.sky.apac.kitd.com/streamin ... YO8hlF.MP3

That interview is a weekly program Tom has on Big Sports Breakfast.

It is very clear that rugby league is putting up a stink against football growing ... nothing more nothing less. It is not a fight for Birchgrove, it is a rugby league vendetta. And it is helped along by the newspapers looking to sell papers.

This was posted on BF. hmmmmm, perspective.

TLPG wrote:

KE, that's why the AFL told the Senate to shove it. Because they got the definition WRONG!

I'd go the senates unbiased, objective definition anyday over a desperate and money hungry organisation like the AFL

And you'd be wrong.

BIRCHGROVE OVAL, the traditional home of rugby league, will remain an AFL-free zone.

Leichhardt Council decided at a meeting last night that Australian football would not be played on Birchgrove Oval but in surrounding suburbs, despite a bid to use the venue as a facility for the sport.

Before last night's meeting, the NSW/ACT AFL had been accused of exaggerating the code's registration figures in the Leichhardt municipality to boost its chances of using the ground.

Councillor Darcy Byrne, who has campaigned against Australian football being played on the ground, said the decision was made by the NSW/ACT AFL not to use the venue.

Advertisement

''After the revelations about their actual number of local players, the NSW AFL specifically requested not to be allocated to Birchgrove Oval,'' Byrne said.

In the local AFL body's original submission to council, it was claimed they had 1644 registered players before later reducing the total to 238.

Granting permission for AFL to be played on Birchgrove Oval would have handicapped the Balmain and District Football club, which has 1248 registered players.

The deception by the NSW/ACT AFL is sure to prompt questioning from rugby league administrators regarding the accuracy of the registration figures across Sydney, in particular western Sydney, the home of AFL's newest club, the Greater Western Sydney Giants.

Byrne declared the decision a win for local children who were in danger of being booted off the venue because of the misleading registration figures.


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/rugby-league/leag ... z21ZrH1riA

Let's hope the ARLC spend a couple of hours investing it's time to embarrass the AFL further. It is out there and it will not take much to find it! I wonder how much more the AFL have lied about?

Former Geelong capt & AFL NSW boss Tom Harley tells Leichhardt Cl the claim AFL wanted to use league's iconic Birchgrove Oval was untrue.

Tom Harley #aflnsw said AFL had never asked for use of#birchgroveoval and alleged battle with league for control was a political beat up.

Looks like this entire episode was a beat up by Sydney media to sell papers! How pathetic!

So if the AFL playing numbers are so low in Sydney then why do u Rugby League people care so much?

There is nothing to be afraid of then. But something tells me they are more which is why u are all so paranoid!!

I think you got it all wrong pete. RL supporters, like the general society, like people and organisations to be honest and transparent. That's what we care about matey. Anyone who is scared about, or thinksabout, the AFL taking over Sydney is a fool. Its a massive city and plenty of room for both codes to coexist.

And yet you lot are trying to put us down every second you can! Paranoia runs wild!

Well why do yous have the need to lie about figures

TLPG wrote:

And yet you lot are trying to put us down every second you can! Paranoia runs wild!

No I'm simply putting up truthful comments and statements. It's you turkeys who are paranoid.

justanotherleaguefan wrote:

Well why do yous have the need to lie about figures

Who lied? The NSW AFL put an initial submission in like all other sports. When it came to the final submission they adjusted their numbers of participants after doing a more accurate analysis.