The fight for AFL turf across the world
Posted: Mon Nov 25, 2013 5:07 pm
There has been a lot of argument over the last few days about international AFL presence. I've already said that AFL has been played in 69 countries, which is 19 more than the ones that play rugby league.
But I have realised something that is a hold back for AFL outside of Australia. It's not this supposed lack of interest. It's the lack of proper facilities.
Outside of countries that play cricket, who has the right sort of oval that we can play our game on? It's a struggle. That's why having 69 countries playing the game is such a big success. This is happening in spite of this hold up. Now even in countries where cricket is played, the weather is a big factor. Take the UK for example. During the summer all the ovals are taken up by cricket. They would be available during the winter, but there is one weather event that can stop AFL. Snow. You don't get much of that in Australia in the winter. But in the UK you get plenty. Not only that, cricket lovers aren't keen on letting AFL on to their precious pitches. This is apparently not unknown even in Australia.
The other thing I notice, and this would hold back any decent crowds, is social facilities. Cricket at local level draws poorly so the facilities aren't there. It's just a matter of bringing a picnic table and (knowing the UK weather in summer) a brolly. So there is no cover and that keeps people away in the winter.
The only country that has similar conditions to Australia is New Zealand, and maybe South Africa.
The other problem with the bigger venues for cricket is that they are used as much as possible to fit in tours. The cricket season tends to be all year round, especially in the tropics in India and the West Indies.
Now in other countries there are no ovals. One of the advantages rugby league has in the US is that their field of play is the same in size and shape as an NFL field. And those are all over the place, and have facilities as well. It's not dissimilar with soccer. It's an easy task to just change the posts.
And yet, rugby league is still 19 countries short. Look at all these advantages, and yet AFL supporters in the 69 countries that play it overcome the odds and get something going. Now if RL had the same sort of determination and with these advantages I have to ask - what is their problem with expanding?
One more thing for this rant - the main reason why the IC doesn't pull crowds yet is because of the fact that no Australians are playing. Australia is the only country at present who can host the IC as it has the number of ovals available that are required. However, as more overseas players are recruited into the AFL like Aliir Aliir in the 2013 draft, the interest will increase. Both at home and overseas. We have the determination, and maybe one day the facilities will follow. And maybe one day soon, the local English AFL competition could play their grand final at The Oval.
But I have realised something that is a hold back for AFL outside of Australia. It's not this supposed lack of interest. It's the lack of proper facilities.
Outside of countries that play cricket, who has the right sort of oval that we can play our game on? It's a struggle. That's why having 69 countries playing the game is such a big success. This is happening in spite of this hold up. Now even in countries where cricket is played, the weather is a big factor. Take the UK for example. During the summer all the ovals are taken up by cricket. They would be available during the winter, but there is one weather event that can stop AFL. Snow. You don't get much of that in Australia in the winter. But in the UK you get plenty. Not only that, cricket lovers aren't keen on letting AFL on to their precious pitches. This is apparently not unknown even in Australia.
The other thing I notice, and this would hold back any decent crowds, is social facilities. Cricket at local level draws poorly so the facilities aren't there. It's just a matter of bringing a picnic table and (knowing the UK weather in summer) a brolly. So there is no cover and that keeps people away in the winter.
The only country that has similar conditions to Australia is New Zealand, and maybe South Africa.
The other problem with the bigger venues for cricket is that they are used as much as possible to fit in tours. The cricket season tends to be all year round, especially in the tropics in India and the West Indies.
Now in other countries there are no ovals. One of the advantages rugby league has in the US is that their field of play is the same in size and shape as an NFL field. And those are all over the place, and have facilities as well. It's not dissimilar with soccer. It's an easy task to just change the posts.
And yet, rugby league is still 19 countries short. Look at all these advantages, and yet AFL supporters in the 69 countries that play it overcome the odds and get something going. Now if RL had the same sort of determination and with these advantages I have to ask - what is their problem with expanding?
One more thing for this rant - the main reason why the IC doesn't pull crowds yet is because of the fact that no Australians are playing. Australia is the only country at present who can host the IC as it has the number of ovals available that are required. However, as more overseas players are recruited into the AFL like Aliir Aliir in the 2013 draft, the interest will increase. Both at home and overseas. We have the determination, and maybe one day the facilities will follow. And maybe one day soon, the local English AFL competition could play their grand final at The Oval.
> 
