Talking Footy

NSWAFL wrote:

AFL crowds at local games always congregate around the change rooms. This includes the photographer. So it is easy to miss a crowd of about 100 or so. Amateur status is irrelevant. The game is being played and that's all that matters in this argument.

The Claimant provided a comprehensive summary of factual information indicating the RFL's professionalism on page one. The Challenger in a bumbling and highly unfortunate response provided a list of international AR teams numbering 60 asking for the Claimant to provide 3000 RL teams in response. The 60 teams provided were highly sus, with links leading to pornography, facebook and other bogus sites, which effectively made a mockery of the challenger and his argument. The Claimant went on to provide further more significant evidence and although his presentation was clearer and more comprehensive, and his claim most probably correct, he was unable to make a strong comparitive case. He did not provide evidence of AR being 50X smaller than the RFL.

A difficult case which raises many questions for addressing claims in the BS files.

Conclusion: No result and a harsh public warning dealt to the Challenger re: posting links he has not viewed and the fact that posting BS links is no different to making a BS claim which may be challenged and proven as BS

The Claimant provided significant evidence proving conclusively that RL is a small but significant part of the sporting landscape in the UK. However much of his evidence related to areas such as professionalism and finances, that on their own do not quantify size, but indicate it. He also did not present evidence to show the size of AFL outside Australia, making a comparison of 50 times all but impossible. Clearly RL in the UK is much bigger than AFL outside Australia, but by how much is difficult to say. The challenger, and others, presented evidence regarding participant and competition numbers showing the difference in these indicators is likely to be less than 50 times. However, size cannot and should not be defined by numbers of players or competitions alone. There are other factors to consider than make the comparison too difficult.

Conclusion and recommendation: 'Undecided' result.

cos789 wrote:

"We're really keen to build South Africa and the South Pacific in the traditional sense, to get participation numbers up," Sheehan said. "And from that talent emerges.

"Right at the moment, we have 100,000 people playing football around the world (outside Australia) and most of those are in the southern hemisphere.

"We'd like to build that to about 200,000 in five years. If we set it up, the kids will come and play, and we're really quite ambitious about South Africa and the South Pacific. In other parts, like the US, Canada and Ireland, there might be the odd one at 20 or 21 who might switch across, but we'll never grow to be quite large in the northern hemisphere.

"But we really think there's a niche for us in the southern hemisphere to grow into a mass participation sport.

http://asopa.typepad.com/asopa_people/sport/

That'd be what parafeel ? 100,000

parafeel , wakeup , wake up , are you all right ? get off the floor man you look terrible!!

cos789 wrote:

King-Eliagh wrote:

Holy smokes batman, the AFL is a dominant force o/s! check out the masses at the final of the european cup!



Yep its 'BIG' o/s alright

Yes, you have a photo of 4 players holding up the Cup.
Is this the presentation ceremony - no.
Is this just after the finish of the game - no.
Is there a shot of the stadium - no

All this prooves is that they're using AR posts.

NSWAFL wrote:

AFL crowds at local games always congregate around the change rooms. This includes the photographer. So it is easy to miss a crowd of about 100 or so. Amateur status is irrelevant. The game is being played and that's all that matters in this argument.

NSWAFL wrote:

Thanks for the update, Cos!