Talking Footy

same as a person who has a Rugby League experience I understand

gee these VFL cheerleaders get quite upset when RL uses this term don't they >
& yet don't question for a second the VFL using essentially the same type of term to describe almost all of their growth north of the murray ?



:_<> :_<> :_<> :_<> :_<> :_<>
brainwashed dickheads the lot of em :_<> :_<> :_<>

Raiderdave wrote:

same as a person who has a Rugby League experience I understand

gee these VFL cheerleaders get quite upset when RL uses this term don't they >
& yet don't question for a second the VFL using essentially the same type of term to describe almost all of their growth north of the murray ?



:_<> :_<> :_<> :_<> :_<> :_<>
brainwashed dickheads the lot of em :_<> :_<> :_<>

well when the NRL come up with the figure of 1.4 odd million that had the RL experience, yet cannot elaborate any more
the NRL is well known for fudging its numbers as well

adamj1300 wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

same as a person who has a Rugby League experience I understand

gee these VFL cheerleaders get quite upset when RL uses this term don't they >
& yet don't question for a second the VFL using essentially the same type of term to describe almost all of their growth north of the murray ?



:_<> :_<> :_<> :_<> :_<> :_<>
brainwashed dickheads the lot of em :_<> :_<> :_<>

well when the NRL come up with the figure of 1.4 odd million that had the RL experience, yet cannot elaborate any more
the NRL is well known for fudging its numbers as well

as well
sooooo

you admit the VFL's figures are a load of crap as well dickhead ?

good boy

Now it's 1.4 million? Didn't someone say on another thread it was just 50,000?

No, 1.4 million for rugby league would be about right. When you consider that for AFL it would be a lot MORE than that!

NRLCrap1 wrote:

Now it's 1.4 million? Didn't someone say on another thread it was just 50,000?

No, 1.4 million for rugby league would be about right. When you consider that for AFL it would be a lot MORE than that!

in the NRL 2013 financial report they claim there on top of the registed players playing NRL now days, another 1.4 million people enjoyed the NRL expericence
http://rugbyleague2013.nrl.com/PDF/NRL- ... e-2013.pdf
around page 22
its a typical NRL report plenty of chest beating inflated numbers & no evidence

there have been reports done on the AFL

NSW 7.4M / 32.08%
1st. Rugby League = 112.28 ([4 x 32.08]+[3x32.08]÷2)
1st. Football/Soccer = 112.28
3rd. Rugby Union = 64.16
4th. Aussie Rules = 32.08

VIC 5.7M / 24.79%
1st. Aussie Rules = 99.16
2nd. Football/Soccer = 74.37 (3 x 24.79)
3rd. Rugby League = 37.18
3rd. Rugby Union = 37.18

QLD 4.6M / 20.13%
1st. Rugby League = 80.52 (4 x 20.13)
2nd. Football/Soccer = 40.08
2nd. Aussie Rules = 40.08
2nd. Rugby Union = 40.08

WA 2.3M / 10.79%
1st. Aussie Rules = 43.16
2nd. Football/soccer = 32.37
3rd. Rugby Union = 21.58
4th. Rugby League = 10.79 (1 x 10.79)

SA 1.7M / 7.26%
1st. Aussie Rules = 29.04
2nd. Football/Soccer = 21.78
3rd. no sufficient prescence
4th. no sufficient prescence

TAS 512K / 2.24%
1st. Aussie Rules = 8.96
2nd. Football/Soccer = 6.72
3rd. no sufficient prescence
3rd. no sufficient prescence

ACT 380K / 1.66%
1st. Rugby Union = 6.64
2nd. Rugby League = 4.98
3rd. Aussie Rules = 2.49
3rd. Football/soccer = 2.49

NT 237K / 1.0%
1st. Aussie Rules = 4.00
2nd. Rugby League = 3.00
3rd. Football/soccer = 2.00 (2 x 20.13)
4th. Rugby Union[/b] = 1.00

OVERALL
1st. Football/soccer (292.09)
2nd. Aussie Rules (258.97)
3rd Rugby League (248.75)
4th Rugby Union (170.64)
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=6&start=

its another ******** post buy dickless dave in a attempt to fulfill his insecurity

NRLCrap1 wrote:

Now it's 1.4 million? Didn't someone say on another thread it was just 50,000?

!

50,000 in Victoria foreskin cheese :_<> :_<> :_<> :_<>

how dumb
how fucking dumb

No one believes

Phelpsy wrote:

No one believes

in VFL participant numbers ?

too true
tooooo true

No you don't believe it, which means nothing.

NRLCrap1 wrote:

No you don't believe it, which means nothing.

&
you do d.ick cheese

which means even less

Your opinion of me also means nothing.

It doesn't alter the FACT that AFL participation in the whole of Australia is higher than that of rugby league.

NRLCrap1 wrote:

Your opinion of me also means nothing.

It doesn't alter the FACT that AFL participation in the whole of Australia is higher than that of rugby league.

Wrong Again.
AFL participation is below that of RL's participation.
With Touch numbers(TRL was founded by RL,is owned & run by RL) RL destroys Fumbles fudged numbers.

There are many more AFL leagues and clubs than rugby league clubs by a mile,

Phelpsy wrote:

There are many more AFL leagues and clubs than rugby league clubs by a mile,

ahhhh
the term participant was used dickhead not club based players
RL is at around... well depending on your definition .. between 1.1 & 1.4 Million
the fumbles n bumbles .. at about 800K

& RL takes gold ... again

that is all

boy.. the VFL must be starting to rue using this term so loosely now eh :_<> :_<> :_<> :_<> :_<> :_<>

Its called deflection.
More people Experience/participate in RL than derpball.