When I mentioned the 90% I was talking about American sports,tbh. I'd be very surprised if 25% of the world follows cricket with any real interest. There's India and Pakistan, you lot and a proportion, (say, 10%), of our lot that follow it on a regular basis. Other than that no one springs to mind. I mean, why do you think they're all buggering off to the new Indian Super or Champions League or whatever it's called. It's not because we're desperate to keep it here, is it. Hands up all those who can name them without looking them up? Look, I like some other sports too and I'll watch them from time to time when there's no football or anything else decent on the telly on but that's a long way from saying that people watch them on a regular basis. I mean, have you actually tried to watch a cricket game for any period of time?? Talk about watching paint dry... and as for GOLF!!!! Yeah, we have swimming baths over here as well and many small children use them on a regular basis. Agreed. I suppose it might help if I knew who any of those people are. Presumably golfers from the context but they don't ring any bells. Having said that I have heard of Harrington and I did know he was Irish but other than that it's a bit of a fog. I've heard of Sandy Lyle but that's only because his old man have me a few golf lessons. My sentiments exactly... about most other sports apart from football. You've already said that. ... and that!
Footysux is just bitter becasue his rugby league team- the Knights are going to lose out on their semi final spot to my team- the Eels, and because I'm a better player at cricket than him! He is not typical of Aussie supporters! To get this thread back on topic- I'm trying Nutter- I am! As I said to Toon in another thread, I'm surprised that people were surprised that the Poms are doing well this Olympics. Every country likes to do well and throws money at any athelete who could do well for their own Olympics, and that usually starts at the one before so they get experience in first. So with the amount of pounds the Poms are spending, you'd hope they'd be beating us. Next Olympics, the Chinese tally will drop back down to about second, the Poms might go up to at least third- you guys should beat the Russians, and the Yanks will get back to number one. We'll still be scrabbling around for fifth or sixth- but that ain't bad for us at all.
Leave my knights alone el-capitan. Considering the mess we wre in last year, we have done well to reach this far compared to your so called stars who should be near the top instead of fighting to get in the top 8. I am captaining the cricket side tonight due to Bucks not wanting the captaincy so I am going to give you laps for condescending view on the knights. By the way Andy, you do have better football supporters than us except for el-capitano who spends his whole life studying the habits, clothes and lives of liverpool players.He is also known to spread the odd rumour now and then regarding his cricket abilities.
TBH, this is the most telling point as far as I'm concerned. Y'see, the difference between football in most countries around the world; cricket in India and Pakistan; the yank sports in America, and ALL the Olympic sports is that with football and the like it's people's OWN money they're spending. With rowing, swimming, cycling, track and field and the other stuff it's someone else's. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/ot...lympics-funding-key-to-British-gold-rush.html As I said, I watched and enjoyed the Olympics but if someone wants several hundred pounds from me every year to allow me to watch them every 4 years??? Forget it!
I disagree with you on that point Andy. I am not sure how things work in Brit re funding of stadiums etc but in Australia, the gov't does give funding to sporting bodies or club to upgrade their facilities. Thus they are using the taxpayer money to help a small minority (in the scheme of fan support for a club) of supporters. So let's say for argument's sake Manyl(rugby league side) in Aust received $5 million from the gov't to upgrade their ground, the club itself would have to raise another $15 million for the entire project. What is in it for the rest of the league fans of other clubs? It is the same with the olympics, the funding on a global scale is large but when broken down to minute details, each individual olympic gold medalist would be luck to recieve 20k here. I am not sure if the Brits or your 4 nations reward medal winning athletes but many nations do. Some countries give houses, cash etc. 20k in Australia does not go a long way so at what cost national pride? Also in Aust, the only olmypic sports that get a decent coverage during non olympics period is the commonwealth games plus maybe the world championship swimming or athletics. The other times we have our footy codes or cricket or tennis or golf etc.
Well, it's the opposite and it's not just Britain. The government charges them tax, - VAT, corporation tax, etc, - and, (sometimes rather grudgingly), allow them to improve their facilities. However, if they do, they have to pay increased rates, (read: taxes).The idea that sport has to be propped up by the taxpayer is very much an American idea, (and Australians, apparently), and certainly hasn't hit Europe. Well, not the bits of it I've heard of. The only exception I can think of was when Real Madrid was in a huge financial black hole and was given planning permission on a piece of land that up till then had been their old training ground, (so, worth $x), and suddenly became worth $x times about 100. It was then sold to the local government, (i.e. the same people who had allowed the change of use). Clearly, there is not one jot or scintilla of truth in suggestions that this constituted any sort of corruption and 'bung' to prop them up by the local government, (who have to get voted into power, of course), and any such suggestions are as scurrilous as they are risible. In general, though, it's always been a bone of contention among football fans, (particularly in Britain), that they pay taxes for their interest and taxes, (probably the same ones), are used to subsidise the opera, theatre, etc, which they've got sod-all interest in.
They don't receive anything at all. We're just taking about doing it now. TBH, up until 96/97 when the national lottery started being dished out, (and it takes years for these things to have an effect), it's a bloody miracle we won anything at all. They had almost no backing, they were usually true amateurs, (they often held down jobs from 9-5 and had to take time off work to compete), and then received nothing for it apart from the kudos of the competition. When you compare that with the yanks and their 'college students' and the eastern block countries and their 'army volunteers', it's a bit of a fecking joke, tbh. It was, literally, professionals against amateurs. Now we've started winning a bit and everyone's started whining and changing the way the medals are counted so they only count if your name starts with a 'K' Maybe you can see why we're a little pissed off, mate???
Actually, I don't think anyone begrduges the British winning gold. The 4 nations that is a different story but we already covered that. The funny part is other than some of our elite (gold medal chances) swimmers and athletes, everyone else is almost an amateur in that they hold down jobs or parents help out etc. Some like our sailors or rowers or judo fighters may make money from jobs or teaching etc similar to your athletes. There are academies which train the youngsters in certain sports but the money the actual athlete gets is usually a scholarship if they are lucky. You will find that most countries do subsidise their athletes in hidden ways ie scholarships, fundraisers etc. However most of the olympic sports also relies heavily on tv coverage. When the games were on, most events shown (80-90%) only were on aussie medal events chances, the only exceptions being swimming, athletics (not field), some rowing and cycling. Media coverage also dictates funding and sponsorship in the land of oz. Our new football league (A league) and the socceroos (national football team) can only be seen on pay tv.
I don't know but I'd imagine the problem that soccer's going to have their is one of the distance the clubs are from each other and from the fans, like the USA. If they're also going to charge people to watch them that's gonna make things bloody tough in the long run. Just as a matter of interest what sports do most kids play in the playground there?
That is an interesting question, Andy. As you know Australia has 6 states. They are NSW, Qld, WA, SA, Victoria and Tasmanaia. All six states play cricket for summer in the schools with options of other sports such as baseball, golf etc. But in winter time, the sport in most schools are dependent on the states. Soccer (football) is an option in all schools. But in NSW and Qld, we have rubly league and union as the predominant sport while in rest of the states it is aussie rules (almost like gaelic football but with an oval shaped ball). Aussie rules has also spread to Qld and NSW with a side from each state playing in the local national comp called the AFL. The AFL has spent a lot of money trying to promote the game in NSW and Qld. They are currently looking at expanding the comp by including another side from each state within the next 3 years. We have a population of 21 million but we play a huge diversity of sports. Soccer is getting more popular especially with the advent of the new league a few years back and the Socceroos playing in the last world cup. Since the Socceroos left the Oceania group and entered the Asian qualifying group for the World Cup, the national body is getting wealthier too. Before the only time we ever saw our best players was a two leg playoff for a world cup spot with a South American side after we beat the oceania teams with a 2nd string side. Now over the next few years, we will be seeing them a lot more. Just imagine if the only time you saw an English side play with their best players was once every few years, that was what it was like a few years back with the Socceroos.
In terms of distance Australia is far more centralised in it's main 5-8 cities than the USA. Of the 21 million population, Sydney has 4.5, Melbourne 3.5 Brisbane 2, Perth 1.5 and Adelaide 1 million. Newcastle and the Gold Coast have a bit ove a half million each, with 350,000 or so on the Central Coast, so by the time the Gold Coast come in next year that's about 14 million covered, or 2/3 of the population. Townsville brings in the North Queensland Area (about 2-300,000 close enough, about a half million overall) and most of the rest of the population would be within 4-5 hours max drive of a team. In terms of the young kids, Football (Soccer) is by far the largest participation sport, and has been for a long time. AFL stats talk themselves up but they count everyone who has received an Auskick pak (given out free at schools) as an AFL participant, but if you look at the grounds on the weekend Football is much bigger. In my area of Perth (big AFL bias) we have a football club with 850 members - and have to turn more away, but the 2 AFL clubs in the region would total less than 400, of course with the pro AFL bias in government there is only one ground for football but 4 or 5 for AFL. What has happened in the past is that at around 14-15 most of the kids would switch codes to AFL or League or Union, but this is what is now changing with the A-League - a lot more of these kids are staying with the world game, and the good athletes are seeing that there is far more opportunities, adding both in Australia and around the world, whereas only Union offers anything like the international game of football and it is much less, League has fark all and AFL is literally non-existent on the international stage. When you look at the crowds for the main codes, in the under 35 age group the A-League performs very well - this is the generation(s) that will carry us forward.