And who is going to pay that insurance bill???

Boom ^ the automatic negativity like that is the same reason nothing is happening. Reach out to people with money an event like that would only do them wonders and basketball wonders in Australia...

Bogut cant play for Australia at the Olympics due to insurance, how is he going to get insurance for this game? It's not negativity its called being a realist.

The other fact is most of the Australian Imports you want to play in this game .............ARENT EVEN IN THE COUNTRY.

Bogut has never missed an Olympics due to insurance issues.

Olympics, World Champs, same shit different bucket.

He never missed a World Champs due to insurance either.

Jacob, you might be very young and forget that Australia played Team USA here prior to the Sydney Olympics and then again prior to the Goodwill Games in 2000.

You seem to attribute this to brilliant management by Football (not the a-league) but its not. Man U and Liverpool are coming here to build their own brand, develop new markets for tv and other product sales.

These are two of the biggest clubs in world sport. They have amazing worldwide reach. People follow them here in large numbers with passion... not the same for basketball clubs.

Can you answer me a question - why does basketball "deserve" to be ahead of soccer in this country?

I was actually at the game in 2000 and it was the best memory of my life pretty much to date.

I understand your point about Man U and Liverpool I truly do HO
but wouldn't Irving want to spread his brand being a young budding star
You'd think bogut would do anything he can to increase the profile of basketball in Australia

And how big would it be for Luol deng to play in a game like this especially when I believe he is here for a Sudanese basketball camp or something like that. He could give 200 free tickets to kids from those camp to the game THAT would be huge for Sudanese kids.

And I know for a fact in WA there are a plenty of very talented young Sudanese boys coming through the ranks.

And in answer to your question HO...

If you look at our national team and the talent we have coming through... Or national team is going to be one of the strongest in the world in 3-4 years time and our national league will be almost non existant if it continues down this path...

Compared to the socceroos.... We have a huge amount of kids playing good college ball and plenty of guys in top European teams... The potential for our national team should be matched by our national league... Which it isn't. The a league is.

And it still takes good football management to make these games with Man U and Liverpool happen.. Otherwise they would always be playing here...


Sebastian as you've already been corrected... Bogut has never missed for insurance... So that's a poor excuse. If you can get 12000 people to the game that would go a long way to help paying insurance anyways I would imagine

And I'm sure there is enough imports around from nbl teams and local leagues that could and would play in a game like this j

Anyway it's just an idea but something like this surely could have been arranged

But Jacob, its not about Bogut or Irving. Its about their clubs. There is no benefit to Bogut of improving the profile of Aussie basketball btw.

And your answer to my question is pretty unfounded. the A-league is no where near good enough to have the European based Aussies playing in it. Thats why they play in Europe. The league does not match the national team.

And, there are more people playing soccer than basketball - perhaps it is more deserving for that reason?

Three of the a-league all stars biggest player have pulled out and many fans are disappointed.

Man U and Liverpool are close to being billion dollar teams. If the A-League can afford the insurance, the NBL can.

skud,

I would venture there is no insurance issue. The A-league will not be paying insurance for anyone but their own, relatively cheap to insure players - and even then that might be being managed by a promoter. The Man U and Liverpool players are playing for their club, this would be covered under their own contract insurance.

"Basketball deserves to be ahead of soccer in this country and you've got fans screaming for some urgency"

- Football is by some distance the largest sport on the planet.

- Football in Australia has 1.7m active, registered participants and is now the number one participation sport in every State/Territory apart from Victoria (and is still growing).

- Melbourne Victory FC alone have a turnover larger than the entire NBL (and probably BA as well).

- Football has been played in Australia for at least 130 years (documented) - probably longer.

- Football had the courage to shut down, restructure and 're-boot' from a clean sheet.

Tell me again how basketball "deserves" better than football?

Bam. Agree with Anonymous. there is no 'deserve' about it. We have to deal with the fact that for some god-unknown reason.. right now A League is bigger then NBL... NBL has been pretty big before I think we need to go 'back to the future' see what worked for us then, and see what elements of that can be implemented now. I think as a main point the offence was way, way better and more exciting. This defensive league is fine for Basketball purists but it isnt going to pick up many new fans. Its a hard juggle though, you can either play a more exciting offensive league and get a rude shock when U go to international tournaments, or you can play like FIBA likes and get a rude shock by a lack of interest... NBL games in the 90s, from the ones ive wateched recently, it wasn't abnormal for a game to get into the 110's-120s

Yes but those seasons saw poor TV ratings and from the mid-90s diminishing crowds.

We need to be as entertaining as possible though, no question, and that's got nothing to do with international style etc, it mostly has to do with how the game is called.

Cut out the overt grabbing and pushing like they do elsewhere and it will be a more entertaining product. Adding some more teams wouldnt hurt either, but the reffing is the big one for mine.

Anonymous,

- Correct

- 1.7m figure is publiched by FFA and corroberated by ASC/ABS data.

- At over $20m PA, the Melbourne Victory FC dwarf the NBL clubs combined. And to think they still post a proffit.

- Basketball arrived just yesterday by comparison with football.

- New TV deal (and expanded sponsorship rights) has all but eliminated these losses except for Sydney FC who has a billionaire owner who doesnt seem to care what they spend (which is a mystery to me).

- Football WAS poorly run. Basketball still is.

For my friend Anonymous:

From the BA 2011 Annual Report:

"In its second year of operations, BA Limited (BA) recorded a surplus of $191,164 for 2010-11. This was an improvement against budget of some 25.3% (2010–11 budgeted surplus $152,522). The surplus was built around revenues of $11.181 million, and expenses of $10.989 million."

Absolute 'chicken feed' compared to Melbourne Victory - and light-years behind the A-League - let alone FFA Ltd as a whole.

Just compare the annual media rights income of BA in 2011 of $1,36m to the annual $40m of the FFA? The media income for the FFA for these two recent friendlies' alone (outside of the media rights deal) will be double the NBL income for 2011 and is going to A-League clubs. On top of this, the new media rights deal delivers to EVERY A-League club an EXTRA amount roughly equivalent to BA's total media rights income in 2011.

I have long argued comparisons between these two sports in both participation, exposure and commercial terms are a fantasy designed to provide hope to basketball fans. Basketball is a great sport - but the A-League and football generally are playing on another level all together and the gap is about to get bigger – faster.

Basketball needs to get back to basics and fast.

Mahonjt, the numbers I have seen are around 600K playing soccer in organised comps and around another 300K recreationally. 1.7 mill is a fair stretch on that.

Most of those participants are kids too, much like with basketball which gives similar numbers.

Agreed Paul. The ABS/ASC figures in no way support 1.7 million.

I dont see the need for the soccer v basketball thing anyway, people often focus on the national league too much when assessing a sport's health.

Basketball has a very strong base to build off for support of the national league and national program, if only BA and the NBL owners do the job properly. I think progress will come regardless of any other sport if they do.

Absolutely.

This is the ABS/ASC figures + the FFA database of registered officials, volunteers etc. Thats why I used the term participation. The FFA also administers Futsal/SSF and charges for the pleasure. I don't make these figures up. Even Jeff Kennett was in the press today conceeding (8 years too late) that football participation had passed AFL and that includes their dodgy 'Auskick' numbers which are nothing other than clinics. The total, registered football participation figure is 1.7M and that is a hell of an official figure for basketballt to compete with.

Auskick is weekly 2-hour participation, I am sure there are just as 'dodgy' numbers in stats for soccer as well.

Anyway, we can agree to disagree on the 1.7mill, I think your method of adding those two figures would count a lot of people twice.

No - they are not. In fact, the ASC picked up on what the AFL were doing with Auskick and they have been forced to come clean. The Optus SSF is a modified 'small sided' form of football for young children - however it is actually game based and there are 'leagues' that play over a period of months - they are vastly different products and the ASC know this.

As to the 1.7M - it is not double counting. It represents all REGISTERED participants across the playing, officiating and volunteering communities. This database is expected to grow to over 2m in the next few years (some States are not implementing it fully yet). The FFA are spending a bomb on it for a reason - it is a huge comparative advantage for this game.

Bottom line is, to compare football and basketball for scale and scope is a fool's errand. (1) because the numbers are vastly different and (2) because it does nothing to help basketball honestly face up to its challenges.

I, as a very casual fan of basketball don't pretend to know all that ails it - however I do think that the SEABL competition is a signpost to the future. I wish basketball luck - as an international sport I want to see Australia succeed in sports that actually matter. Basketball is one of them.

Basketball deserves to be ahead of soccer in this country and you've got fans screaming for some urgency

This bit probably offended the more passionate soccer fans in some way. It is a basketball forum, most people here are going to prefer basketball over soccer or any other sport for that matter.

It would be great to have NBA stars out here, but Australia isn't really a spot of potential for basketball in comparison to Asia and Europe. General support/ratings/sport wealth goes something like this:

AFL
NRL
--
Cricket
V8 Supercars
--
A whole lotta space
--
A-League/Soccer
--
ANZ Championship/Netball
NBL/Basketball

Basketball and Soccer both have healthy participation numbers, in terms of leagues they both are filled with teams that are not 'financially viable' whatsoever.The difference is the A-League is heavily financed by a group of very wealthy people and Fox Sports with club owners who are also rich. It's not a well run league by any means, nor is it profitable, it's just that they have a good amount of people willing to lose boatloads of cash for their hobby. As a fan of sport in general i'd like to see both leagues - and really all sport leagues here - going well and having international stars come over.

Did you even read the reports on the 'haircut' the V8 Supercars just took on their broadcast deal. They are in very real trouble with spiralling costs and big sponsorship losses as well. Your view of sports financing is a little out of date. You also missed the entire point of my post - that was not to compare football to NRL, AFL Cricket (which are all significantly ahead of it commercially, but not in participation terms) - but to compare it to basketball which was the purpose of this thread. My point is both accurate and evidenced - by almost any measure, football is a far larger sport than basketball in Australia, it is growing and its administrators are doing a vastly better job after a successful 're boot'. Any objective view of all the data supports this. Comparisons between the two sports are ridiculous. The 'daylight' between the two in commercial and other terms is of an order of magnitude. For the record, you left the ARU out which by all accounts has in the past two years slipped behind football in commercial terms - however it was always s well behind by other measures.

Sorry mate, youre not getting too many people agreeing with you.

Your labeling of Auskick as 'clinics' seems uninformed to me, a 10-year-old Auskick member is as much a participant as a 10-year-old at a JFC.

And adding a database to ABS stats without crosschecking gets a figure that isnt backed up by other participant measures, which have soccer slightly ahead of basketball and netball.

Like I said, happy to agree to disagree.

mahonjt

Here is a link to some ABS data with some relevancy about what you are talking about.

http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/subscriber.nsf/log?openagent&49010do001_201204.xls&4901.0&Data%20Cubes&66D284E48F4A2AD7CA257B10000FDFD2&0&Apr%202012&13.02.2013&Latest

It notes a healthy increase in participation for soccer, and a smaller increase for basketball. It shows decreases for a number of other major sports.

It is comparative from 2006-2009-2012.

It shows that soccer is the leading team sport in the critical 5-14 year old groupings. This is the bulk grouping playing ANY endorsed sport other than golf, lawn bowls and a select few others. When the bulk of your participant group comes from this age group, that means that your other groupings, 16-18, 18+ etc are far smaller.

It also shows soccer is not as popular as dancing which must be a concern for you.

Anyway, I have heard the 1.7 million figure before, straight from an FFA executive's mouth at a function. I have also head Keneally talk about 1.1 million or thereabouts involved in basketball. I don't believe either of them, they are taken from broadbrush "did you launch a ball this year" type survey's.... Authoritative participation figures would have football somewhere between 550k - 600k in registered participation and Basketball somewhere between 380k - 450k.

You also need to take into account heartlands. Football is far smaller in Victoria. Victoria is the biggest place for basketball with something like 160k participants - this was quoted in the Herald Sun 18 months or so ago. NSW is biggest for soccer, with allegedly 220k + participants.

When you start to take these into account the 1.7 million does not stack up. There must be less than 160k footballers in Victoria - because basketball is bigger. So if you add NSW's 220k and maybe Victoria at 100k then the rest of the states do not get you anywhere near 1.7 million.

Sorry, you can spruik, but if you are going to quote a source, then use the source. Its easy to find.

Did you even read the reports on the 'haircut' the V8 Supercars just took on their broadcast deal. They are in very real trouble with spiralling costs and big sponsorship losses as well.

Well I did, that's why I know you've decided to be selective about your information. They did a one year TV deal, with the idea being negotiating a proper long-term TV deal to be confirmed at the end of this season. I don't watch, nor care for V8 Supercars, but it's healthier than you make it seem. Telstra pulling out of their digital deal is hardly "very real trouble" or "spiralling costs". Whether you like it or not from a ratings point of view and from attendance point of view, it's clearly above Soccer. I stand by my list.

Your view of sports financing is a little out of date.

Oh really? Please indulge me by telling me where. Adelaide United - the budget club which the Bianco's and Pickards couldn't continually sustain losses isn't exactly 'profitable'. With Tinkler in a bit of trouble the Jets are shakey ground, Gold Coast on TV looked like they had only security guards going to the games (the actual crowd numbers were damn pathetic). Palmer was saying he was losing over a million dollars a year funding GC (not surprised the A-League wanted them out so quickly). Sporting clubs in general - even some AFL clubs - are just not profitable, so it's ridiculous to even think A-League is. Unless you're a major euro soccer club like ManU, NBA club, NFL club etc. you're not financially viable. The crowds the A-League gets is certainly not viable to the costs incurred either. Sponsorship isn't that terrific for some AFL clubs, let alone any A-League teams. As i've already stated A-League is running purely on the few rich businessmen who love soccer and the Fox Sports TV deal. It is not a financially sustainable or viable model without those two aspects, it leaks money left, right & centre. If you took those two away, NBL would be far more viable (and that's saying something) but I guess if you've got lots of cash available, you might as well use it.

You also missed the entire point of my post - that was not to compare football to NRL, AFL Cricket (which are all significantly ahead of it commercially, but not in participation terms) - but to compare it to basketball which was the purpose of this thread.

I understood that, but really basketball and soccer are pretty close together when it comes to development and juniors and participation the difference isn't worth wasting the breach on arguing. In the broad sporting landscape they're pretty similar on those levels. The difference is the professional leagues, where the A-League, as i've stated is run badly from a sustainable point of view but they are cashed up and have capitalised on having all that extra cash in terms of marketing, crowd numbers etc.

My point is both accurate and evidenced - by almost any measure, football is a far larger sport than basketball in Australia, it is growing and its administrators are doing a vastly better job after a successful 're boot'.

Well no, you've made your own interpretation of figures that haven't actually been appropriately sourced. To present the figure as 'true & accurate' at this point is to mislead. Also 'far larger' is hardly creditable as a measurement or as being accurate. I think the difference, taking into consideration fluctuations and trends, is relatively negligible.

Any objective view of all the data supports this. Comparisons between the two sports are ridiculous.

It's easy to claim you have the objective view, many would disagree and have very good reasons for doing so. Or, there could be multiple objective views which contrast, possibly placing different weightings on data or factors - or even considers different data as being 'accurate', or interprets data differently. The comparisons between the two sports are ridiculous in the way we've gone about it because as i've stated before the junior/development etc. the difference is relatively negligible and the professional league obviously A-League is more popular and doing better - as it should - it has trucks of cash. When it didn't have truckloads of cash look at the NSL, not great. NBL used to be just about the top league back of any sport in the day. Things change.

If you read the OP, it's pretty just having a go at the NBL for generally being badly managed and outshone for the umpteenth time. I don't think anybody here would deny the NBL has on many occasions been run incompetently, we understand the NBL doesn't have much money and it lacks being commercially attractive (very much a catch-22). It seems you've just latched onto an off-the-cuff remark which really never should have been focused on in the first place about basketball being more deserving than soccer. We're basketball fans, we are probably going to prefer basketball to soccer.

For what it's worth, I enjoyed watching the Liverpool v Melbourne game tonight.

You'll neveeeeeeeeer waaaaaaaalk aloooooooone agaaaaain....

Good Thread - Paul I like your posts but have you ever seen a game in Europe (particularly Greece).
YOU can almost break someones arm and not get called

Seemed to be a good for their game last nite.
95,000 at the MCG singing was moving.
Made me think that we don't have a club song
Nevertheless, most likely you'd want a 48minute game if we ever did something.

Haha, there are some blokes in Europe who know how to play dirty, that's for sure. But if you watch recent seasons theyve cleaned up the way the call the game in Europe, particularly in the better leagues.