Australian Game of Football is Best - New York Times

Welcome to World Footy News Friday, April 03 2026 @ 04:07 am ACDT

Australian Game of Football is Best - New York Times | 8 comments | Create New Account

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.

This site requires you to be logged in to post a comment. If you have an account already (or need to create one), please login here.

Australian Game of Football is Best - New York Times

Authored by: Stephen Anthony Funder
on Wednesday, November 12 2008 @ 12:26 pm ACDT

The reply by BeijingBomber regarding International Development of AFL was very intelligent.The opportunities if reported accurately in China and India are immense.However unlike past history they must show uncharacteristic gumption,drive,planning and ambition and not be weighed down by the naysayers,
doomsayers and the small minded suburban pessimists
who have held back AFL to such a degree that it amounted to nothing more than a very successful suburban competition.Start acting instead of contemplating and the popularity of AFL will explode to levels you never thought possible.

Australian Game of Football is Best - New York Times

Authored by: Brett Northey
on Wednesday, November 12 2008 @ 03:36 pm ACDT

Well let's not talk down the game that far (saying it was just a successful suburban competition in one city), although I am a little confused as I think you're using the term AFL interchangeably to refer to either the AFL (the league) and the actual sport Australian football - which is one of many reasons I hate the game being wrongly called AFL, it causes confusion.

But don't let the old VFL propaganda fool you. Australian football was a VERY successful suburban competition in MANY Aussie places, i.e. Melbourne, Perth, Adelaide and Hobart, and a modestly successful one in Brisbane, Darwin and Sydney. It is also embedded in country WA, SA, Vic, Tasmania and southern NSW. It was never contained to just Melbourne. I worry that people will think that the VFL changed its name to the AFL and created non-Victorian teams out of nothing - in most cases they were created and supported by the local leagues that had been around for 100+ years.

The AFL was built on all that success - the TV rights wouldn't have been worth much if the game wasn't already #1 in the other cities, and that was due to the local leagues. But obviously I agree with your point that after 150 years the game should have gone a lot further than it has (otherwise we wouldn't have set up this site).

---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

RSS news	RSS events
Twitter	Facebook

World Footy News

Search

Translate

User Functions

Events

Featured Sites

Older Stories

Friday 11-Apr

Sunday 30-Mar

Thursday 27-Mar

Friday 21-Mar

Thursday 06-Mar

Wednesday 05-Feb

Tuesday 04-Feb

Socials

Who's Online

What's New

Articles last 2 weeks

Comments last 2 weeks

Links last 2 weeks

Advertisements