Does anyone know if Sydney Morning Herald has a gripe against AFL for some reason?

Question

I S**t you not there was more about Mark Viduka today than AFL and this is GF week and the day after the Brownlow. The Daily Telegraph had heaps more AFL news.

Answer 1

Sydney Morning Herald has run a range of policy campaigns by refusing to cover things in the last 10 years - including anything in Melbourne or Canberra unless they can write rubbish about it.  

Telegraph has covered Aussie Rules from the start.  They were the only paper that covered our grades or visiting VFL teams when I played there in 1978.

Best thing to do ... don't buy it!  (I refuse to do so now)

Answer 2

the coverage in both papers is awful

i bought today's telegraph and yes it had much more coverage but there coverage through out the year is 1 page of swannnnnnnies news and thats it, not everybody in sydney follows the swans

conda regarding your question about judds girlfriends dress a few years ago todays telegraph (tue) page 3 had a picture of the dress

Answer 3

I just wish I could get the SMH! Try the West Australian! Eagles Eagles Eagles blah blah blah!!

Answer 4

Wow, that sucks. In Canberra, there is slightly more rugby league and union than Aussie rules but thats cause we dont have an AFL team.

There wasn't anything in the paper today about Viuka in Canberra.

Answer 5

No offence but AFL will hardly be mentioned, this is a Rugby League City and always will be. Although they did mention the Brownlow on page 3 & 78 in the Telegraph, but it will always be dominated by Rugby League than Rugby. How much coverage will the Storm get in Melbourne, very little ?