Election day is here, and “Code Wars” are always a big talking point. To combine the two; how would Australia
vote if instead of Liberal, Labor, Greens etc, the choice was Aussie Rules, Rugby League, Rugby Union or Soccer?
The first results to come in on election night are usually from Tasmania. The southern state is Aussie Rules
heartland, extremely safe; and despite some concern that the AFL are showing more interest in the marginals
than their Tasmanian heartland, it’s hard to see Tasmania doing anything other than giving Aussie Rules all five
House of Reps seats and all six Senate seats.
The ACT may once have been marginal, but is strongly pro-League these days. Rugby Union has a strong
candidate with the Brumbies, but Aussie Rules struggles to get a candidate up. Aussie Rules may give
preferences to Rugby Union to make the seats closer; but the likely result in the ACT would be that Rugby
League would take both House of Reps seats, while League and Union would elect one Senator each.
Victoria is traditionally extremely safe Aussie Rules territory. The majority of AFL clubs are based in Victoria,
achieving attendances up there with the best leagues of any code anywhere in the world. Other codes have
established a presence in Victoria. Soccer has done well here, and Rugby League had shown some promise
before the local candidate was so publicly disgraced. Rugby Union will be launching a Rebel campaign, but it’s too
late for this election. I would call Victoria as electing Aussie Rules to all 37 House of Reps seats, with Aussie Rules
electing five Senators and Soccer electing one.
Much of New South Wales is Rugby League heartland. The southern part of the state favours Aussie Rules, with
the so-called “Barassi Line” roughly in line with the Murrumbidgee River rather than the state border on the
Murray. Farrer and Riverina would be likely Aussie Rules seats, while Eden-Monaro would be much closer.
Rugby Union will poll well in several North Shore and Eastern Suburbs electorates. But the Roosters and Sea
Eagles will ensure the Rugby League vote is still strong. Rugby Union’s best chance of Lower House seats would
be on the North Shore, where Rugby League has been disenfranchised for 10 years. Aussie Rules polls
reasonably well on the North Shore, and their preferences may be enough to get Rugby Union over the line in
North Sydney and Bradfield. Aussie Rules will also poll a respectable vote in Sydney’s north-west, but Rugby
League would still be way too strong in Mitchell.
Soccer has reasonable support around Sydney, particularly in the south-western suburbs. But it would be a hard
ask to expect its support in any area to be strong enough to win a House of Reps seat. Soccer should also poll
well in the Central Coast seats of Dobell and Robertson, where the Mariners are a strong local candidate and
Rugby League’s party headquarters have yet to endorse the local Bears candidate; but there should still be
enough Rugby League support for them to hold the seats.
I would call NSW as electing 43 Rugby League members to the House of Reps, with Aussie Rules taking Farrer,
Riverina and Eden-Monaro and Rugby Union taking North Sydney and Bradfield on preferences. In the Senate, I
would call Rugby League winning three seats, with Aussie Rules, Rugby Union and Soccer winning one each.
vote if instead of Liberal, Labor, Greens etc, the choice was Aussie Rules, Rugby League, Rugby Union or Soccer?
The first results to come in on election night are usually from Tasmania. The southern state is Aussie Rules
heartland, extremely safe; and despite some concern that the AFL are showing more interest in the marginals
than their Tasmanian heartland, it’s hard to see Tasmania doing anything other than giving Aussie Rules all five
House of Reps seats and all six Senate seats.
The ACT may once have been marginal, but is strongly pro-League these days. Rugby Union has a strong
candidate with the Brumbies, but Aussie Rules struggles to get a candidate up. Aussie Rules may give
preferences to Rugby Union to make the seats closer; but the likely result in the ACT would be that Rugby
League would take both House of Reps seats, while League and Union would elect one Senator each.
Victoria is traditionally extremely safe Aussie Rules territory. The majority of AFL clubs are based in Victoria,
achieving attendances up there with the best leagues of any code anywhere in the world. Other codes have
established a presence in Victoria. Soccer has done well here, and Rugby League had shown some promise
before the local candidate was so publicly disgraced. Rugby Union will be launching a Rebel campaign, but it’s too
late for this election. I would call Victoria as electing Aussie Rules to all 37 House of Reps seats, with Aussie Rules
electing five Senators and Soccer electing one.
Much of New South Wales is Rugby League heartland. The southern part of the state favours Aussie Rules, with
the so-called “Barassi Line” roughly in line with the Murrumbidgee River rather than the state border on the
Murray. Farrer and Riverina would be likely Aussie Rules seats, while Eden-Monaro would be much closer.
Rugby Union will poll well in several North Shore and Eastern Suburbs electorates. But the Roosters and Sea
Eagles will ensure the Rugby League vote is still strong. Rugby Union’s best chance of Lower House seats would
be on the North Shore, where Rugby League has been disenfranchised for 10 years. Aussie Rules polls
reasonably well on the North Shore, and their preferences may be enough to get Rugby Union over the line in
North Sydney and Bradfield. Aussie Rules will also poll a respectable vote in Sydney’s north-west, but Rugby
League would still be way too strong in Mitchell.
Soccer has reasonable support around Sydney, particularly in the south-western suburbs. But it would be a hard
ask to expect its support in any area to be strong enough to win a House of Reps seat. Soccer should also poll
well in the Central Coast seats of Dobell and Robertson, where the Mariners are a strong local candidate and
Rugby League’s party headquarters have yet to endorse the local Bears candidate; but there should still be
enough Rugby League support for them to hold the seats.
I would call NSW as electing 43 Rugby League members to the House of Reps, with Aussie Rules taking Farrer,
Riverina and Eden-Monaro and Rugby Union taking North Sydney and Bradfield on preferences. In the Senate, I
would call Rugby League winning three seats, with Aussie Rules, Rugby Union and Soccer winning one each.
| THE FOOTBALL CODE ELECTION |
This article was originally published on The Roar.
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
| |
 |
South Australia is very strong for Aussie Rules, and other codes struggle to get a look in. Soccer has enjoyed
some success with the Reds, but Rugby Union and Rugby League have made little effort to win over any
support. Aussie Rules would likely win all 11 House of Reps seats, and 5 Senate seats while Soccer elects one
Senator.
Queensland will strongly favour Rugby League. There may be small pockets of Aussie Rules support, but only
the far north in Cairns and Cape York Peninsula could Aussie Rules challenge for a House of Reps seat. Rugby
Union also has good support spread around the state. Soccer have attempted to spread their wings into
Queensland, but weak local candidates are struggling to pull any support from the electorate. I would call
Rugby League winning 29 House of Reps seats with Aussie Rules taking Leichhardt, along with Rugby League
taking 4 Senate seats. Rugby Union and Aussie Rules would also elect a Senator.
Both Aussie Rules and Rugby League are established in the Northern Territory. Aussie Rules would be
marginally stronger, especially among the Aboriginal communities. Aussie Rules would easily win Lingiari, and
would probably take Solomon as well; with Aussie Rules and Rugby League electing one Senator each.
Western Australia would strongly favour Aussie Rules, which is the dominant sport throughout the state. The
local candidates, the Eagles and Dockers, still draw support even when things aren’t running their way.
Rugby League’s failed experiment 13 years ago means it would struggle to pull votes. Rugby Union would do
better, and may attract enough preferences from the other sports to elect a Senate seat. Soccer once pulled
its strongest support in Western Australia, back late in the NSL era; but while soccer support has improved in
the eastern states it has gone backwards in WA.
Aussie Rules would be strongly favoured to win all 15 House of Reps seats, along with five Senators. Rugby
Union would gain a Senator.
So overall, I would call the footy codes election in the House of Representatives:
Aussie Rules - 74
Rugby League - 74
Rugby Union - 2
And in the Senate:
Aussie Rules – 24
Rugby League – 9
Rugby Union – 4
Soccer – 3
Interestingly, although Aussie Rules would likely dominate the two-party preferred vote, as shown in the
Senate numbers, Rugby League would more than hold its own as far as winning seats is concerned.
And although each code has worked hard to gain a presence in each other’s area, enough to get themselves
on the map in non-heartland cities; the effect on a mock football election would only be to change the odd
Senate seat. It seems unlikely that any significant number of House of Reps seats would change hands for a
very long time.
some success with the Reds, but Rugby Union and Rugby League have made little effort to win over any
support. Aussie Rules would likely win all 11 House of Reps seats, and 5 Senate seats while Soccer elects one
Senator.
Queensland will strongly favour Rugby League. There may be small pockets of Aussie Rules support, but only
the far north in Cairns and Cape York Peninsula could Aussie Rules challenge for a House of Reps seat. Rugby
Union also has good support spread around the state. Soccer have attempted to spread their wings into
Queensland, but weak local candidates are struggling to pull any support from the electorate. I would call
Rugby League winning 29 House of Reps seats with Aussie Rules taking Leichhardt, along with Rugby League
taking 4 Senate seats. Rugby Union and Aussie Rules would also elect a Senator.
Both Aussie Rules and Rugby League are established in the Northern Territory. Aussie Rules would be
marginally stronger, especially among the Aboriginal communities. Aussie Rules would easily win Lingiari, and
would probably take Solomon as well; with Aussie Rules and Rugby League electing one Senator each.
Western Australia would strongly favour Aussie Rules, which is the dominant sport throughout the state. The
local candidates, the Eagles and Dockers, still draw support even when things aren’t running their way.
Rugby League’s failed experiment 13 years ago means it would struggle to pull votes. Rugby Union would do
better, and may attract enough preferences from the other sports to elect a Senate seat. Soccer once pulled
its strongest support in Western Australia, back late in the NSL era; but while soccer support has improved in
the eastern states it has gone backwards in WA.
Aussie Rules would be strongly favoured to win all 15 House of Reps seats, along with five Senators. Rugby
Union would gain a Senator.
So overall, I would call the footy codes election in the House of Representatives:
Aussie Rules - 74
Rugby League - 74
Rugby Union - 2
And in the Senate:
Aussie Rules – 24
Rugby League – 9
Rugby Union – 4
Soccer – 3
Interestingly, although Aussie Rules would likely dominate the two-party preferred vote, as shown in the
Senate numbers, Rugby League would more than hold its own as far as winning seats is concerned.
And although each code has worked hard to gain a presence in each other’s area, enough to get themselves
on the map in non-heartland cities; the effect on a mock football election would only be to change the odd
Senate seat. It seems unlikely that any significant number of House of Reps seats would change hands for a
very long time.