Australia a country with no culture: David Gower

[Burgey]

Just an attempt to stir things up, right? I can see the fun of it. I've always liked verbal contests, even when crossing a line.

One thing though: the remarks on English football stadium and its audience, compared to Aussie cricket audience.
Could it be that, in England, cricket, including its spectators and followers, is a somewhat upper class sport, at least compared to football, whereas Australian cricket is the people's number one sport, like football is in England? I've never been to Australia (will do so sooner or later), but I have been to various sports events in England. Watching cricket at Lord's or The Oval is just something so totally different from watching football.....

There might be something in that. I was surprised when I first read on here that cricket isn't played at most every school in the UK.

It there is a perception that cricket isn't a "working man's" sport in England (and I don't know if that's right) then the closest sport here to that would probably be Rah Rah.

 

[the big bambino]

Cricket is your No 1 "National" sport mate. AFL is still very state oriented.....walk into a pub in North Queensland and start talking about AFL and see how far you get.

Despite the introduction of new teams AFL would be a distant 3rd in terms of interest behind Cricket and Rugby League in the Northern half of the country.

Factual but irrelevant. It goes by numbers mates. That's all that matters. Even under your "national" definition, which you use as a convenience to base a dodgy point, I think soccer is our no.1 sport.

 

[Adders]

There might be something in that. I was surprised when I first read on here that cricket isn't played at most every school in the UK.

It there is a perception that cricket isn't a "working man's" sport in England (and I don't know if that's right) then the closest sport here to that would probably be Rah Rah.

I would like to think that wasn't the case but more that cricket is so far behind football in the publics interest in the UK. For example, I went to a very typical comprehensive school, we had cricket facilities there but never used them, all the kids wanted to do 12 months a year was play football..........all the PE teachers wanted to do was let us.

With regards Stapels comment about watching cricket at Lords or the Oval being so different to watching football, they are hardly good examples. Go watch cricket at Headingley or Edgbaston and you won't find it quite so different. But tbh, it is so long since I lived in the UK (20 odd years) I'm probably a bit out of touch...........I hate with a passion when anyone tries to make cricket an elitist sport and always cringe when people throw around terms like "Gentlemen's game". To me it is a hard competitive game and should be played as such, there was nothing gentlemanly about Harold Larwood trying to knock Bradmans head off and I loved it, that is cricket!!

Having the stuffed shirts of the MCC running the game in England I guess there will always be the perception that it is an upper classed game, but I'm not sure that underneath that facade that's the reality. So long as working class players like Freddy Flintoff and Joe Root etc are coming through the system then there is not too much to worry about I guess.

 

[Adders]

Factual but irrelevant. It goes by numbers mates. That's all that matters. Even under your "national" definition, which you use as a convenience to base a dodgy point, I think soccer is our no.1 sport.

All the time you keep calling it "Soccer" no one is going to take you seriously in the sport.

If it just comes down to numbers,what are the "numbers"?? Is it the number of kids playing, the number of bums on seats at games or TV viewing figures?? I can imagine that Football does have more kid participation than either cricket or AFL these days, but where I live anyone over 30 still thinks football is for "Sheilas, Wogs and Poofters"

Of the 4 sports in question only cricket bridges the the age and location issues that prevent any of the others being considered a national sport.

 

[TNT]

A sport where grown men hug each other. Says it all really.

 

[TNT]

Cricket is your No 1 "National" sport mate. AFL is still very state oriented.....walk into a pub in North Queensland and start talking about AFL and see how far you get.

Despite the introduction of new teams AFL would be a distant 3rd in terms of interest behind Cricket and Rugby League in the Northern half of the country.

Yeah whatever you say mate, And we ride kangaroos and wrestle crocodiles before breakfast.

 

[Burgey]

All the time you keep calling it "Soccer" no one is going to take you seriously in the sport.

If it just comes down to numbers,what are the "numbers"?? Is it the number of kids playing, the number of bums on seats at games or TV viewing figures?? I can imagine that Football does have more kid participation than either cricket or AFL these days, but where I live anyone over 30 still thinks football is for "Sheilas, Wogs and Poofters"

Of the 4 sports in question only cricket bridges the the age and location issues that prevent any of the others being considered a national sport.

It'll always be called soccer here though. Mostly because its really only gained prominence within Australia in the last 10-20 years. It's simply used to differentiate the game in a country where there are four football codes. If you're in Melbourne and say you're going to the footy, it means AFL. In Sydney it means going to a league game. People here aren't going to just start calling it football because that's what it's called elsewhere around the world - it's not the way the game has evolved here in relation to the other codes.

 

[Adders]

Yeah whatever you say mate, And we ride kangaroos and wrestle crocodiles before breakfast.

Nice well thought out response.

Are you suggesting that both AFL and Rugby League are not heavily influenced by location in terms of interest in Australia? Both codes are trying their best to rectify this situation but it is a long way off before folk in Townsville will give a stuff about the AFL and Melbourne Storm has a membership and following like Hawthorne or Collingwood for eg.

I'm not sure why this is even a debate, it's a fact.

 

[Firefighter]

Soccer is for the wankers.

 

[Backlash]

Cricket is your No 1 "National" sport mate

It won't be within a generation that's for sure.

 

[Adders]

It'll always be called soccer here though. Mostly because its really only gained prominence within Australia in the last 10-20 years. It's simply used to differentiate the game in a country where there are four football codes. If you're in Melbourne and say you're going to the footy, it means AFL. In Sydney it means going to a league game. People here aren't going to just start calling it football because that's what it's called elsewhere around the world - it's not the way the game has evolved here in relation to the other codes.

Perhaps you could get that across to TNT, he seems to be struggling with this reality.

Fair call on the rest of your post, I understand the "footy" confusion...........but the boys at the SBS are keen to see the game be called Football here and I think most Aus Football fanatics have adopted it. The fringe watchers or AFL/NRL heads are the ones that that will only accept it being called Soccer......which again is fair enough.

 

[hendrix]

All the time you keep calling it "Soccer" no one is going to take you seriously in the sport.

The point at which you use semantics to discredit another person's argument is when no one is going to take your argument seriously.

 

[Jono]

Adders cricket is not clearly our national sport anymore. It's just a fact. Just because it's evenly spread across the country doesn't mean it is the number one sport anymore.
Interest at grassroots is down, it doesn't get the ratings that NRL and AFL gets, and it doesn't get the media coverage either.

And even if it is our national sport still, it's barely holding on. So you coming here and saying just because some people don't watch AFL in rural Queensland or don't watch soccer in some pub of Bogans, doesn't represent the sheer numbers and data. All it does is represent your perception.

 

[uvelocity]

if hating diveball makes me a bogan, so be it

 

[the big bambino]

All the time you keep calling it "Soccer" no one is going to take you seriously in the sport.

If it just comes down to numbers,what are the "numbers"?? Is it the number of kids playing, the number of bums on seats at games or TV viewing figures?? I can imagine that Football does have more kid participation than either cricket or AFL these days, but where I live anyone over 30 still thinks football is for "Sheilas, Wogs and Poofters"

Of the 4 sports in question only cricket bridges the the age and location issues that prevent any of the others being considered a national sport.

Its called soccer coz that's what it is: Soccer.

Football, as explained to you, can refer to any of 4 codes. Its arrogance for soccer to claim the description football all for its greedy little self.

For (re) pete's sake the issue was about the no.1 sport in the country. National sport is an irrelevant diversion brought in by yourself bcos you don't like the fact aussie rules in our no.1 sport. Or soccer. One or the other. Now I don't like it either but its nothing to get yourself knotted over. Its just a fact. Cricket will have to compete in a very busy market to get its numbers up.

 

[Adders]

Adders cricket is not clearly our national sport anymore..........

And even if it is our national sport still, it's barely holding on.

So it is or it isn't Jono??

Look, I've got no idea what criteria they use to determine a "National Sport" I asked earlier do we judge this on kids participation, bums on seats at games or TV Audiences?? The only point I'm trying to make is that cricket is still ahead of the football codes for universal interest in this country. Not sure why that's getting so many knickers in knots, I would have thought it was obvious??

 

[TNT]

So it is or it isn't Jono??

Look, I've got no idea what criteria they use to determine a "National Sport" I asked earlier do we judge this on kids participation, bums on seats at games or TV Audiences?? The only point I'm trying to make is that cricket is still ahead of the football codes for universal interest in this country. Not sure why that's getting so many knickers in knots, I would have thought it was obvious??

More bums on seats at AFL football, More TV viewers of AFL football than any other sport. More interest in AFL football than any other sport. Not many Aussies would even know that the CT is being played at the moment.

 

[Backlash]

Cricket will have to compete in a very busy market to get its numbers up.

Which it's quite clearly not doing anymore. Like I said, if it is the national sport then it won't be within a generation.

With the way it is run, I sometimes wonder just how relevant Cricket will be at the end of my lifetime.

 

[BoyBrumby]

It'll always be called soccer here though.

Governing body begs to differ.

 

[Spark]

Soccer is most definitely not the national sport. No way. It'd be about 4th or 5th on the list, IMO, despite massive strides in the last decade or so.

It depends on the yardstick you use, though. Cricket's viewer figures are actually amazingly healthy and have increased somehow in recent years - it's not exactly fair to compare raw figures to, say, NRL or AFL given that how many games they get telecasted every week for 25+ weeks of the year, compared to cricket which has a bunch of five-day Tests and some one-dayers. In terms of national prestige, cricket's nearest competitor is probably rugby union, but that's a definite second.

It's in participation at the youth level where cricket is being smashed by AFL.