Round 1 Summary - No surprises

Welcome to World Footy News Friday, June 19 2026 @ 10:57 pm ACST

Round 1 Summary - No surprises | 24 comments | Create New Account

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

Comments are closed and no new posts are allowed.

Round 1 Summary - No surprises

Authored by: simonblack
on Monday, August 11 2014 @ 02:41 am ACST

Totally agree with the last statement that maybe there should be divisions.

The IC should be about the players having FUN and WANTING TO COME BACK and for their teams and family back home to be proud and to grow the game.

Out of 5 matches a team is only guaranteed 1 match! (In the fifth round) where it will be an even match. That’s not good enough. And when that match does come around there is a good chance that a team’s squad will be depleted after 4 rounds of flat out unfairly matched contact sport. (There has already has been bad injuries)

Yes the fixture for IC allows anyone the chance to be in the grand final at the MCG, but this isn’t the TOYOTA AFL premership!!! Come back to reality AFL. Heck throughout Australia there are divisions everywhere (seniors, reserves, second reserves etc). “Hey let’s play our senior against our second reserves that will be a laugh.”

There are more teams in the IC this year so AFL should have adapted to it.
After all this effort AFL put into the IC trying to promote the great game of Aussie rules it’s all lost after the first round. No one wants to see a round with 9 games that are all blow outs. If AFL wants to tap into the Chinese market so bad why humiliate the Chinese team by putting them up against NZ and Canada. Why stream the First round matches live when all we could here from the audio stream was the lone Aussie in the crowed say “and another goal to New Gunnie, geeze this is boring”
Natives of China are not the same height and build as those from FIJI. And when AFL does tap into China it will be Chinese teams vs. Chinese teams not Chinese teams facing Fiji, Tonga etc. AFL is seriously putting the health of the players at risk. Also there should be a limit of how many players are allowed on a team who are basically full time residents of Australia, like 50/50 at least.

Edited on Monday, August 11 2014 @ 02:43 am ACST by simonblack

Round 1 Summary - No surprises

Authored by: Rod Shaw
on Monday, August 11 2014 @ 09:47 am ACST

I think divisions would be so much better! There is nothing to be gained for any footy nation in trouncings like those experienced in the first round.
But previously, teams have been too proud or naive to put themselves in Division 2. Maybe there could have been a 10-8 split or 12- 6 but how many teams would have honestly put their hand up for Division 2?
Maybe the decision making is funding based- if a team does not have a shot at the title- funding may not be forthcoming? unlikely....but a possibility.
Perhaps all new teams need to start in Division 2 as a start.

As far as limiting the numbers of non-resident based players this goes so much against what you are trying to do when you are building footy up in a foreign land.
Sure you want to build up your local comps but you also want to get your players up and into better comps. There is only so much you can do around developing your players through playing internationals, improving the local standard and playing against visiting teams.
The best way to get your players to a better standard is get them into decent football Leagues in Australia. These players learnt the game generally in their native country and then fell in love so much with the sport and had the talent to go to the home of the game and compete against Australians.

Every nation should be proud that this happens and then welcome them into their national team! Why should these players be barred from representing their country when they have done nothing more than to better themselves in their chosen sport?
Rod

Round 1 Summary - No surprises

Authored by: simonblack
on Monday, August 11 2014 @ 11:16 am ACST

yup ok i take back my limit the number of players playing in oz. It only seemed unfair to me because once again it created a uneven match up (a team consisting of 70% canadians playing aussie rules in australia for 3 years vs a teams with no players playing on australia)

But if we bring in divisions than this unevenness wont exist anymore because itll be teams vs teams who both have players plaing in australia.

Round 1 Summary - No surprises

Authored by: Brett Northey
on Monday, August 11 2014 @ 02:00 pm ACST

Yes there have been some people or countries not keen to be relegated to a second division and not have a chance to win the title. But I'm not sure if that is widespread and sometimes dare I say it people need to be protected from what they wish for.

Certainly there were plenty of complaints to us after IC08 I think that the weaker nations didn't want to be battered and humiliated by the top nations. IC11 had the first day seeding round that had a series of much shorter matches which limited the damage.

Ultimately the truth is that those lower teams have no chance of winning the Cup, so the only argument that could be made to give them a chance is sponsorship (as Rod pondered above) or experience against the best. But we question the former and on the latter point I believe that when the gulf reaches a certain level there's not much learning going on.

Meanwhile players are injured, perhaps in their own minds humiliated, and not a very good image of international footy presented to the community.

The article didn't set out to make this a major issue, after all the Cup is a wonderful event, but it does start to hit you between the eyes when you go through the lopsided scores, and recall similar tales of woe from past Cups, and try to think of positive highlights from the opening round.

And finally, dare I invoke soccer as an example, I'm sure all the nations of the world in theory would like to be able to play at the FIFA World Cup finals but of course they have to qualify to get there. And our game is so much more physical and high scoring.

I do not advocate at this stage for qualifying. I think it's quite simple that with so many teams attending and since the AFL has fairly robust seedings then based on that they should allocate a showcase top 8 (two pools of 4, play 3 games, top 2 from each pool go through to semis).

The rest (this year 10 others) can start as Division 2 and pools can be based on however many turn up. The top two from Division 2 can be promoted at the next Cup, the bottom two of Div 1 go down.

So based on this year's seedings: http://www.worldfootynews.com/staticp...d_Seedings

we'd have Canada and Sweden miss out on Div 1. Sweden clearly would've been better in Div 2, Canada would probably be unhappy about that but so be it, they would have to throw all their effort into winning Div 2 and being elevated back in 2017. New teams obviously start in Div 2.

It would also give the AFL more certainty and reliability in programming showcase matches at bigger venues, knowing the top 8 are more likely to show up and do so with good squads etc.--- Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

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

Round 1 Summary - No surprises

Authored by: Olivier Tresca
on Saturday, August 16 2014 @ 10:37 pm ACST

Although I completely agree that sending players to learn the game in Aus is great, what good does it do to the local leagues if they never head back home? What I worry about is what might happen in a few years time, when some country are able to field a team made entirely of Aus based players and don't select localy based one. Do we want the IC to be a tournament of expats living in Australia?

The other concern I have is that we are seeing teams that look one way in their local competition, and completely different at the IC. If you consider Ireland for example, they lost against France in the EU cup, based on that you could assume that France would do relatively well against them here, but no they got flogged. I know that the team roster will vary a lot from competition to competition, mostly because of budget constraint put on players. However, having a Euro Irish side and an Aus Irish side that plays the IC (or any other country for that matter), seems like it's not the way forward.

I'm not suggesting Aus based player don't get to play in the IC, but maybe the eligibility rules must be changed. Something like, if you are a long time Aus resident you can play only if you have already played a couple of games for your country in the year leading to the IC.

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

Round 1 Summary - No surprises

Authored by: Brett Northey
on Monday, August 11 2014 @ 02:07 pm ACST

I agree with a lot of what you say Simon, although don't worry about the Chinese physique. There's plenty of tall Chinese and tough smaller guys, and a team like Fiji is always going to be daunting physically to most opposition.

Even with 2 divisions Fiji would be in Div 2. Be glad Samoa are not here - they were brutal a few years back. And if they do return it would presumably be in Div 2, but hopefully with more focus on the skills than smashing their way to wins.---
Brett Northey - Co-founder and Chief Editor of WFN

---
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