The Australian newspaper has leaked a sensitive AFLPA document drawing the battle lines over fantasy footy.
The story Rivals scramble for fantasy football dollars by Simon Canning in the business section of Monday’s Australian newspaper is the first mainstream media article in what I suspect to be a long line detailing the squabbling by a large number of parties over the increasing profits to be made in fantasy football. Canning’s scoop is a document sent by the AFL Players Association to the 16 players in the Dream Team Player League, which contains some of the biggest names in the game. In addition to the figure of $1500 that is being paid to each player to spruik for Dream Team in interviews – such as Luke Hodge on the DT Talk podcast – the letter lets slip the concerns that the association and others have over the rise of Super Coach past the official DT competition in registrations, as I blogged about recently.
Let’s take a step back here. What are we fighting over? There are a large number of stakeholders in this battle and they each have their own agendas.
• The AFL holds all of the copyrights, but it appears not to be involving itself in public at this stage.
• The AFLPA wants to get a cut from fantasy footy for use of players’ intellectual property.
• News Limited is only interested in newspaper circulation and page views, beating the absent Fairfax over the head in the marketplace.
• VirtualSports (aka VaporMedia) operates both the DT and SC competitions, so it’s a Swiss banker as far as taking sides are concerned.
• Champion Data provides its specially formulated ranking points to News as their Super Coach scores, but is part owned by the AFL.
• Telstra pays the AFL $12 million per year for rights to exclusive Internet content, in the third year of a five year deal.
• FanFooty (and its brethren) is interested in providing live stats for both DT and SC to enhance fans’ enjoyment of fantasy football.
• Last but not least the fans, who are angry that they can’t get live scoring for Super Coach for reasons they don’t understand.
As you can see, we have some parties at loggerheads here. The AFLPA wants to push Dream Team because it gets no cut from Super Coach. Champion and VS get a cut from both, and are interested in both becoming bigger. Telstra is even more annoyed at News than the AFLPA because News is agitating to be given live online scoring on Superfooty, which cuts into their online turf for which they are paying top dollar. Champion Data has been instructed to restrict the flow of Super Coach scores to News, though the source of that decision is uncertain… with News firmly pointing the bone at Telstra.
News loves to push its corporate agenda through the Australian newspaper, and this article is no different. Their long-term aim is clearly to unseat Telstra from its exclusivity in the next Internet rights deal, which won’t start until 2012. Fantasy football has kind of come underneath the radar for the AFL’s Internet rights policy, and their failure to account for the rise of newspapers wanting their own online properties to benefit from fans’ insatiable demand for fantasy footy products is at the heart of this dispute. At the time of the last deal’s negotiation in 2006, Super Coach was only in its first year and lagging well behind the official Dream Team competition in registrations. Sportswear deals on Rebel Sport Catalogue.
The AFL should have foreseen, if it had done a skerrick of research, that the Australian industry was developing along British lines, not American ones. English newspapers dominate the industry with huge salary cap competitions surrounding the English Premier League. AFL Dream Team is a salary cap competition, well suited to newspapers (and mainstream media Web sites) who crave competitions with rules allowing mass entry and low barrier to enjoyment. Private draft leagues, the hallmark of the US industry, have never taken off here, with the AFL’s own Premium Dream Team private draft league product still in limbo this year after round 3, and not looking like launching with any kind of fanfare in 2009, if at all.
Some of the claims in the article, like the one that Super Coach is “like having a major natural disaster on the front page every Monday and Friday”, are perhaps a bit overblown, but that’s the way that News plays it. This is a story we’ll hear more and more about during the current AFL internet rights contract. The AFL is now in the invidious position of having got both News and Telstra riled up on this issue. It is a rod for their back of their own making.
Burley
April 15, 2009 at 5:57 pm
@ Dan, just because a player doesn’t get any stats does not mean he isn’t important to the team. I am trying to say that Presti is as important as Shaw yet this still isn’t reflected in the SC scoring.
Therefore why waste time on SC when the underlying principle of scoring is the same (possessions) but the end result (a players score) is based on unknown quantities.
If SC suddenly found a way to make each players worth equal to their actual importance in a team i could see the justification for preaching about the SC scoring system.
@ Adamh, thanks, at least someone managed to grasp my rather simple to understand arguement.
cman
April 15, 2009 at 6:02 pm
sameaslastweek, thats a really good point that I haven’t seen brought up before.
dan, the SC weakness seems to be weighting of scores to certain types of possesions and what is/not is efficient.
For example, if Collingwood are playing Hawthorn and Presti spoils 10 out of 14 contests against his direct opponent Franklin, limiting the latter to 4 marks, six kicks and 1 goal and three behinds. Prestis stats may only read 1 mark, 3 kicks, 4 handballs, 0 tackles and 10 spoils. Now if Franklin averages 10 marks, 8 kicks and 4 goals than Prestis possesions have been highly efficient.
Also SCs interpretation of whats efficient is flawed. If a kick from a player hits your star forward on the chest my understanding is that is an efficient possession. But if your star forward had to run to get the mark, ends up on a tight angle with a tough shot for goal rather than one directly in front, clearly the kick that leads to the tight angle is not as efficient as the one that leads to a shot direct in front.
Both DT and SC really on raw forms of statistics that don’t measure intangibles. AFL teams definitely have ways of measuring True Player Values but if they’re anything like NBA teams they’ve invested a lot of money in that research they’re not going to give it away to fantasy football players for free.
I’ve played both for the last 2 years. They both have strengths and weaknesses, although I do find it odd that players who favour SC say its more “accurate”, because it isn’t. It’s only a different form of scoring.
There are Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics.
jack
April 15, 2009 at 6:04 pm
SC over DT hands down
Will
April 15, 2009 at 6:08 pm
The SC vs DT argument is about as interesting as the Coke vs Pepsi, League v Union or I Dream of Jeannie v Bewitched arguments.
cheyne
April 15, 2009 at 6:22 pm
Maybe if we gave Hodgey 15 hungy he’d get us a decent score in DT? 🙂
Dicko
April 15, 2009 at 6:27 pm
@ Will So right, who cares? Personally I play both DT and SC.
But….. Union over League any day.
webby
April 15, 2009 at 6:39 pm
While it is a close call i think i would have to pick Samantha over Jeannie.
Will
April 15, 2009 at 6:50 pm
Yeah, Sam had that girl next door appeal. I’d worry that Jeannie might sleep around a bit while I was in space….sorry…WHO CARES, watch both, play both, play none, play one. Move on.
Warnie
April 15, 2009 at 4:53 pm
Obviously I love DT a lot… a heap! We have a website and youtube show about it. But I think what is so much more apealing about DT is the simplicity of it. You can watch a game and see “That’s worth 3 points” without going… “Ah shit, that travelled 32 metres in the wrong direction and bounced to a team mates… how many points is that?”… haha.. I know that sounds stupid, but I like to know where my points came from!
On players getting paid… how lucky is Hodgey! He has played DT for years, and loves it, and if he gets paid for playing/spruiking it, best of luck to him!
I can’t wait to take him on in our league!! Have to wait until Round 18 tho… dammit!
Warnie
April 15, 2009 at 4:55 pm
Oh also.. our site is back online… changing server – wasn’t as smooth as we first hoped!
Thanks to Chad for getting us back online!! LEGEND!
Chris
April 15, 2009 at 5:01 pm
Amen Will, each to their own…but while we’re on the subject, Ford or Holden? Haha, and how long is a piece of string?
lovepelican
April 15, 2009 at 5:23 pm
Slight change in subject……..
I, like most people it seems, have been considering the Anthony for Beams/Zakka conundrum and have decided, based on the logic below NOT to trade. Are there flaws in my logic? Any comments appreciated.
Firstly, I have assumed that rookies peak after 8 games roughly (shorter if
crap like Hill).
The main pro for doing the trade IMO is that rookie mids generally average higher
and thus make you more money and quicker and there are more downgrade targets in later rounds.
However, it is unlikely, unless I get two injuries/suspensions that either player would be gracing my team (already have Otten as cover who looks reasonable). So purely a cash decision which will not directly affect my total points.
However, I don’t think it is worth burning a trade because…..
……I have 3 backs (Broughton,Hill,Suban), 2 mids (Rich,Otten), 2 rucks
(White/Jacobs) and 2 forwards (Brown,Walker) who are currently all playing
and will all peak in value in Rnds 8-10 (assuming they continue to play).
As such, at the time Beams/Zakka are ripe for the selling, I will have
another 9 potential rookies also ripe for selling and you can’t sell them all at the
same time! A possible trade strategy (Rookies only ignoring the undoubted
injuries) is:
Rnd 8: Sell one of Hill/Broughton/Suban and Upgrade
Rnd 9: Sell Otten and Upgrade (noting by that time Anthony will be providing cover, hopefully)
Rnd 10: Sell Walker or Brown and Upgrade
Rnd 11: Sell one of the remaining Hill/Broughton/Suban and Upgrade
Rnd 12: Sell one of the remaining Walker or Brown (possibly even White/Jacobs) and Upgrade
etc
So sell 5 of the 9 (so should have enough that will have peaked).
Whilst this is going on, Rnd 6, Anthony is no longer “stressedâ€. He has
some indecent photos of Laidley so can bribe selection, and then proceeds
to average the same as Beams/Zakka are currently getting.
Rnd 13/14: Anthony peaks and is ripe for selling at same price as
Beams/Zakka , who I never got around to ditching as I had other cash cows to
cull.
Conclusion: same net cash, same points (as never counted in my 22 anyway) and one more trade!
CFC 1979
April 15, 2009 at 6:52 pm
monty – do you think the AFLPA would go to court to protect their intellectual property ( ie baring the use of the players names for profit ). I am hearing this saying far too much lately. I think these blokes get paid good $ as it is. Would be a sad day if they took it that far just for a cut.
Wardy
April 15, 2009 at 7:02 pm
Samantha is a hottie, but i think Jeannie would go that extra mile 😉
Hutcho42
April 15, 2009 at 7:41 pm
I’ve been doing US Fantasy NFL for a bout 6 years and find that the private comps are absolutely brilliant. Their websites are far superior! I hated NFL 6 years ago, now it rivals AFL. Come on Australia, pump more money into sites like fanfooty so we can enjoy fantasy sports even more!!!!
Wardy
April 15, 2009 at 7:44 pm
I suggest it should cost $1.00 to register for fanfooty … waddaya reckon m0nty?
Epicaricacy
April 15, 2009 at 7:44 pm
What’s with all this talk about advertising revenue for these companies and fan footy? Has no-one heard of firefox ad-block? Geez, I don’t even see the Telstra header and footer thanks to the ad-block elements hider. The last time I saw an advert on the Internet was when i used a public computer!!
m0nty
April 15, 2009 at 8:08 pm
Wardy: I tried that back in 2005 and it didn’t work. I got about 80 members. 😀
korza
April 15, 2009 at 8:19 pm
@Monty you greedy pig,i hope you refunded those poor 80 souls thier $1 back
Wardy
April 15, 2009 at 8:20 pm
Does that mean you shoudln’t try it again m0nty?? … would be like giving up at qtr time cos you’re 4 goals down
Wardy
April 15, 2009 at 8:22 pm
hey sorry mate … forgot youre a hawk
Tony
April 15, 2009 at 8:41 pm
i would definatley pay for a site with the info available on this site! it is invaluable info and there is no other site like it! good work monty and go the mighty hawkers!
korza
April 15, 2009 at 8:58 pm
@ Tony
You richard sucking thorn,i live in a rented unit in the slumps of Broadmeadows Vic.
How the f##k can i afford to pay $1 for membership to this site.
Stop encouraging that fat bearded 4 eyed f..k to take bread and milk of my dining table.
Mark
April 15, 2009 at 8:59 pm
It drives me nuts how Australians are spoonfed and treated like babies with fantasy sports. A salary cap system coupled with never-ending player guides and trading advice leads to teams being 80% the same. Bring in player drafts or auctions to sophisticate Australian fantasy sports and make it a challenge. Are SC and DT afraid if they make their competitions, say, a CHALLENGE, fans will run scared??
Prospector
April 15, 2009 at 9:14 pm
Does Simon Canning have a good haircut, or is he bald like so many champions?
dan
April 15, 2009 at 9:30 pm
Burley,adamh and cman a spoil isnt a possession, i understand what you are saying but how many brownlows best & fairest etc, etc have ever been won by this playing style.
Further last time i checked a spoil isnt a scoring stat in DT either, by your logic a say player A and player B both have 10 kicks each but A kicks 9 clangers or results in turnover which are scored upon in DT he has the same scores… apples n oranges i guess.
Huge Action
April 15, 2009 at 9:33 pm
Macca Says: 8:35 am, April 15th, 2009
I think the AFLPA and associated supporters of DT is going about this the wrong way. The key are the gaming rules in SC v DT and not marketing. I think DT got lazy and was trumped by SC.
People may start of their fantasy gaming via the DT competition but I know myself that I tend to gravitate more to SC as it offers alot more for the discerning participant.
DT is at best a SC-lite.
I await and see the success of DT trying to gain market share through it’s marketing strategy of the “player’s game of choiceâ€. To me a marketing strategy like this only work on homogeneous products ie products with little to no discernible differences. The marketing team would come in and create an image difference through advertisements.
As I said above, IMO SC is superior to DT due to its scoring system. Fantasy coaches knows and prefer that and no amount of marketing going to change that reality and preference.
DT should spend money developing a better system or swallow its pride and copy the SC system. Once copied – then add the marketing slant on it. The AFL website could then be a platform for all things DT.
That’s my two bobs.
couldn’t have said it better myself! SC will become ever more popular in the future due to it’s nature of reflecting the true performance and unpredictability of a players performance. If DT want to compete they need to base their points more on the SC system rather than the rather predictable and somewhat antiquated system of possession only. As a tiges supporter I know that 30 possies isn’t necessarily the measure of a good game!
Roving Bridesmaids
April 15, 2009 at 9:41 pm
In DT, Joel Corey was last year the best player in the league.
In SC, it was Ablett. The year before it was Bartel.
Case closed on which is better.
Pfruin
April 15, 2009 at 10:15 pm
Hey monty is the podcast on tonight or tomorow night buddy ??
m0nty
April 15, 2009 at 10:37 pm
Hopefully tomorrow, Molly has been crook today.
Barack Obama
April 15, 2009 at 10:57 pm
Super Coach IS BETTER than Dream Team!
Professor
April 15, 2009 at 11:35 pm
SC is more challenging than DT.
the dud
April 15, 2009 at 11:57 pm
dt to the day i die
dtisthebestfullstop
April 16, 2009 at 12:08 am
read the name… enough said
da gong
April 16, 2009 at 12:55 am
shame such an interesting conversation has been derailed by DT v SC and ‘what change to my team?’ nonsense. was deadly interesting before.
the aflpa is joking if it thinks players have intellectual property over their stats.
i’m becoming increasing cranky at the promises in the supercoach site that aren’t delivered – eg a complete detailed stats breakdown, when all you get is the basic kick, mark, clanger etc. makes me wonder if resch, early in this discussion, was right when he says they will now try and sell this info to players. not only can we not get live scores but we can’t get detailed scores either. is this champion data’s fault, virtual sports, or the SC crew? either way it make the site look amaterish and lienates fans.
well, boys, don’t fuck us fans over because it is us who have made these games so popular.
and monty, long live your insight. nice writing.
da gong
April 16, 2009 at 1:00 am
by the way, what has the AFL players’ association doing with a job title of ‘general manager of operations’? who are these guys?
sorry, this may be something from which the players can’t make a buck.
Weight Watcher
April 16, 2009 at 9:50 am
why on earth would u want to pay for this site? dont change what already works. motny will be seen as a greedy turd just like the AFLPA and news. keep it the same monty, your a living legend already
Weight Watcher
April 16, 2009 at 9:52 am
why isnt the dt talk website working
hamish
April 16, 2009 at 9:57 am
Monty, last year didnt we have acces to prices and break evens for each player, is that happening this year?
lea
April 16, 2009 at 10:30 am
yeh wats with the dt talk site?
Narkee
April 16, 2009 at 11:07 am
DT is a shoe in over SC!
SC is fun, but I believe DT is for the true fantasy AFL player!
Tim
April 16, 2009 at 1:09 pm
Weight Watcher – you presupposing that keeping it free works for m0nty as well as you.
Who knows how much time he sacrifices for us. If he asked modest compensation for his time (that he could otherwise spend working and earning), there’s nothing ‘greedy turd’ about that.
Resch
April 16, 2009 at 1:29 pm
The question is would you pay News Ltd for a package which allowed you to see live head to head SC scoring plus access to additional data and an weekly analysis email?
I know I would be tempted if is was $5-$10/season.
jake
April 17, 2009 at 8:06 pm
monty,
what happened to fanfooty yesterday?
i was getting worried
da gong
April 17, 2009 at 8:16 pm
welcome back monty glad you survived the forces of evil’s attempt to shut you down
ax
April 17, 2009 at 8:33 pm
came on last night after a few beers at a function and where were the lions/pies fantasy scores!?
haryscary
April 17, 2009 at 9:14 pm
ITS AN ABSOLUTE DISGRACE THAT THIS WEBSITE WAS DOWN FOR MAINTENANCE ON A F*U*CKING FRIDAY NIGHT MONTY – WHY NOT DO IT DURING THE WEEK.
UNBELIEVABLE – SERIOUSLY
Dicko
April 17, 2009 at 9:36 pm
If this is satire hairyscary it missed the mark. If not, don’t be so bloody rude. It’s not as if you pay for the use, is it?
haryscary
April 17, 2009 at 10:19 pm
Bite me Dicko – if your going to run a site then it should be run properly – otherwise dont f*u*cking bother.
With so many people trying to use the site it is simply not acceptable to have it down whilst a game is running.
And you can stick your Satire comment squarly up your a*rse
ash1050
April 17, 2009 at 10:52 pm
haryscary you didn’t have the scores for one night big deal, imagine if the trasfer was done on a saturday afternoon, it’s hardly worth going off tap and screaming about.