- Moderator
- #51
Which sport is the most watched, Rugby league or Aussie Rules?
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 8 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Bring back the Adelaide Rams ****en
- Thread starter Larry the Liquidator
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
Castres Treize
Club Legend
RL, Well it is when you use the official stats, not some Footy supporters biased site that jumbles around the figures, rounds certain ones up for one code and completely misses out on the late night ratings in the 3 other big cities and not to forget regionals for the other code.
It biased towards one football code to make it look better.
Why not use TV tonight and post all the newspaper articles that state RL is the most watched?
It biased towards one football code to make it look better.
Why not use TV tonight and post all the newspaper articles that state RL is the most watched?
Aussie Rules
- Jun 18, 2008
- 56,090
- 24,407
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- MUFC,BristolR, GB,Duke,LAA,NYK
would be awesome to have a Adelaide team in the NRL even if i would stick with my Raiders. Hindmarsh Stadium would be perfect for League.
falconpunch
Debutant
- Jun 2, 2010
- 64
- 0
- AFL Club
- GWS
Adelaide aren't a high priority and also aren't ready yet. It is disappointing that no work is being done there to grow the game, unlike Perth. Hopefully when the next round of expansion comes up (which, given how many bids are pushing for entry, won't be too long I think) Adelaide puts itself in contention.
storm fan
Club Legend
The reason why Rugby League is the most watched sport on TV in Australia is because its the preferred sport in the biggest TV market (Sydney) the third biggest TV market (Brisbane) and the fourth biggest TV market (Northern NSW).
While its also big in Canberra and shares the market 50/50 in the NT.
Those are the real facts, AFL fans can twist them however they want to. But the fact is Rugby League is the mots watched sport in Australia due to its strange hold over the big TV markets.
And that is just in Australia, The NRL is also watched in Malaysia, Singapore, Africia, America, Canada, England, Scotland, Wales, Ireland, France, Samoa, Fiji, New Zealand, Tonga, Niue, (any other pacific country that picks up FijiTV). Other forms of Rugby League (international Rugby League, Super League, Elite Championship just to name the major ones) are also beamed into places like Abu Dhabi and the other Arab countries.
I support the AFL, i love watching AFL games. I would watch an AFL grand final over an NRL grand final every day of the week. But you can't ingore facts and to be ignorant enough to not accept fact for fact is sad.
Those often quoted figures about the NRL outrating the AFL is Rugby League spin. It includes all Toyota cup games all representative games plus of course the NRL games. And since they accumulated those figures by adding one to the other wouldn't it then be fair to accumulate the hours watched of each. and considering the AFL goes for 50% longer and Rugby League does not have 50% more games on TV. Than the AFL does indeed have more viewers. These figures ALSO DO NOT include Regional WA, SA and all the NT (which by the way is as much AF>RL than ACT is RL>AF) and may not even include Tasmania on FTA, plus the double counting that occurs with the FTA figures in NSW and Qld It also does not include the Main Event game on Friday night in NSW and Qld. So with all that in mind it is indeed safe to say that Aussie Rule has more viewers.
Here is more proof from a Roy Morgan survey that has a much larger sampling rate than OzTam etc. of the dominance of Aussie rules.
Here is more proof from a Roy Morgan survey that has a much larger sampling rate than OzTam etc. of the dominance of Aussie rules.
Pay TV is available in around 30% of homes and has much higher penetration in Sydney due RL games being siphoned on to pay years ago. You can still survive without Foxtel and be an AFL fan. So NRL gets bigger pay tv ratings, that is becuase they have more subscribers from NRL areas. Even Masters has admitted this.
None of your sources are independent. SMH is parroting 'sources' from Masters and the ARL. the actual numbers have never been released for independent verification.
Cumulative ratings numbers?? compare how many RL games to AFL games are counted? Even Masters concedes the AFL rates higher overall on FTA in its season despite being 4 rounds short in terms of games.
Did you see the GF TV ratings for 2010 in each each code?. Neutral teams no parochial factor it was telling, showing the gap overall in AFL's favour.
The NRL will improve its TV deal becuase it worked hard to get better ratings, Friday night is live with two games in its two key markets.
Why do we only look to 2010? What about all the other years where the League GF has trounced the NRL GF?
Including the year no Sydney side made the NRL GF, and no Melbourne side made the AFL GF... Storm & Swans both competing, one having been around for 8 years at the time, the other, 25..... NRL flogs the AFL game. Certainly proves one thing, one game has a far greater growth potential, and sorry kiddies.... It's not Victorian Rules. the VFL have largely maxed out their support in outpost states, RL obviously still has a way to go.
Although, it's funny. Had a mate staying with me from Newcastle last week and we were chatting about the outrageous media pandering to the AFL, and he asked me "Do people down here actually think the Swans are popular in NSW", I gave Victorians the BOTD and stated it was all pure media, then in that Canterbury thread on the main board yesterday, I read one genius Richmond fan claiming the Swans are more popular than any NRL side in Sydney. LOL is all I can say.
Why can't people just accept northerners simply do not like Victorian Rules, and Southerners just don't like RL? The best either can ever hope to gain is a niche market. Is it that hard to accept someone doesn't share your view?
Went reading some articles on the GF ratings, and the comments on one article.
I'll admit, this did make me chuckle.
Fair point he has
Including the year no Sydney side made the NRL GF, and no Melbourne side made the AFL GF... Storm & Swans both competing, one having been around for 8 years at the time, the other, 25..... NRL flogs the AFL game. Certainly proves one thing, one game has a far greater growth potential, and sorry kiddies.... It's not Victorian Rules. the VFL have largely maxed out their support in outpost states, RL obviously still has a way to go.
Although, it's funny. Had a mate staying with me from Newcastle last week and we were chatting about the outrageous media pandering to the AFL, and he asked me "Do people down here actually think the Swans are popular in NSW", I gave Victorians the BOTD and stated it was all pure media, then in that Canterbury thread on the main board yesterday, I read one genius Richmond fan claiming the Swans are more popular than any NRL side in Sydney. LOL is all I can say.
Why can't people just accept northerners simply do not like Victorian Rules, and Southerners just don't like RL? The best either can ever hope to gain is a niche market. Is it that hard to accept someone doesn't share your view?
Went reading some articles on the GF ratings, and the comments on one article.
I'll admit, this did make me chuckle.
Fair point he has
re: Adelaide - Simply put, and it was touched on above - Until they are ready, it has to be a no.
GWS are being forcefully planted into Western Sydney, and people do not like it. Forcing a RL team on a city before they want it will result in the same.
Perth deserve their spot, because they are working their arses off to prove they deserve their place, if they can get a competent business case together combined with their sheer desire to be in the comp, they must be next expansion.
There simply isn't that desire coming out of Adelaide.
GWS are being forcefully planted into Western Sydney, and people do not like it. Forcing a RL team on a city before they want it will result in the same.
Perth deserve their spot, because they are working their arses off to prove they deserve their place, if they can get a competent business case together combined with their sheer desire to be in the comp, they must be next expansion.
There simply isn't that desire coming out of Adelaide.
- Moderator
- #61
I've put this a number of times about Aussie Rules up north, but it's usually ignored and the standard reply comes back to fear, paranoia, hate and jealousy. I maintain people from Victoria around to Perth simply haven't been exposed enough to Rugby league to make a fair judgement. Even Redb has touched on this with the foxtel take up being higher in Sydney than Melbourne and as we all know, Rugby league is shunted to early hour viewing virtually all season long.
You can't judge something you can't see and that's certainly the case with Rugby league here. That simply can't be said about Aussie Rules in Sydney and Brisbane.
There was also a comment in that Canterbury thread about what a bloke had forced down his throat in his days up in Brisbane and how he knew about sports like league and union. I wondered if he'd lived in Melbourne or New Zealand because two sports are constantly shoved down your throats in those places too. At least in Sydney and Brisbane now you get a choice.
As to which gets more viewers, well I don't really care. The numbers will never be 100% accurate and both sides are guilty of spin.
I'm really looking forward to this year. The Warriors are in for a big one IMO and the Pies are a good shot at going back to back and then there's the very real prospect of EDFL rep footy for my boy. Bring it on.
- Moderator
- #62
Hoops said:
With AFL going 50% longer than a game of Rugby league, do we then double the crowd number?
In fairness, we are both fans of both games yes? We obviously prefer Rugby League but support both sports. We have also spent significant portions of our lives in NZ/Sydney as well as Melbourne.
You are never, never going to force the kind of generational change that I believe the AFL delusionals (commission not the fans) envisage. It is never, never going to happen
RL will forever remain a niche sport innthis town, as will Aussie Rules up north. Thankfully I believe the NRL accepts this.
"niche" is NOT a bad thing. Niche sports are the backbone of pay tv, particularly in the US
You are never, never going to force the kind of generational change that I believe the AFL delusionals (commission not the fans) envisage. It is never, never going to happen
RL will forever remain a niche sport innthis town, as will Aussie Rules up north. Thankfully I believe the NRL accepts this.
"niche" is NOT a bad thing. Niche sports are the backbone of pay tv, particularly in the US
- Moderator
- #64
meltiger said:
Yes, yes and yes.
meltiger said:
Niche is fine, but I don't even think we've made much effort at all to grow the game here. I think we've got plenty of room to move. All with the right support of course.
storm fan
Club Legend
Those often quoted figures about the NRL outrating the AFL is Rugby League spin. It includes all Toyota cup games all representative games plus of course the NRL games. And since they accumulated those figures by adding one to the other wouldn't it then be fair to accumulate the hours watched of each. and considering the AFL goes for 50% longer and Rugby League does not have 50% more games on TV. Than the AFL does indeed have more viewers. These figures ALSO DO NOT include Regional WA, SA and all the NT (which by the way is as much AF>RL than ACT is RL>AF) and may not even include Tasmania on FTA, plus the double counting that occurs with the FTA figures in NSW and Qld It also does not include the Main Event game on Friday night in NSW and Qld. So with all that in mind it is indeed safe to say that Aussie Rule has more viewers.
Here is more proof from a Roy Morgan survey that has a much larger sampling rate than OzTam etc. of the dominance of Aussie rules.
Sorry, i laughed my head off at this AFL spin.
The AFL out-rates the NRL, If you look only at the figures of the NRL and AFL competitions. The AFL do this in every graph or news story to give off the false impression they get more viewers.
The fact is State of Origin, Test matches, Toyota cup etc all are included when comparing TV audiences. The AFL includes the NAB cup as well (surprise, surprise that isn't shown on the graph)
The reason all those other competitions are included when comparing TV audiences is because they are ALL PART OF THE NRL TV CONTRACT. Rugby League in Australia does not split up the rights. (this may happen in the future).
When asked what is more watched in Australia, Rugby League or "Aussie Rules". The Correct answer is Rugby League is the most watched sport on Australian TV.
But this reaction is not surprising, as most AFL supporters think they are the best at everything. Pure arrogance, and what happens when the AFL is run in the same fashion to most cults.
storm fan
Club Legend
Top post.
storm fan
Club Legend
This image itself shows Rugby League is watched more.
8.1 million watch AFL overall.
10.1 Million Watching Rugby League overall.
Although the figures seems like BS to me, as i already posted the NRL is the most watched competition on Pay TV.
But here it has both A-league and Super Rugby above it, both those competition are not on FTA. Therefore all their viewers must come from Paytv. Also, the Toyota cup out rates Super rugby on PayTV. Those figures are BS although it still has Rugby League winners over Aussie Rules.
8.1 million watch AFL overall.
10.1 Million Watching Rugby League overall.
Although the figures seems like BS to me, as i already posted the NRL is the most watched competition on Pay TV.
But here it has both A-league and Super Rugby above it, both those competition are not on FTA. Therefore all their viewers must come from Paytv. Also, the Toyota cup out rates Super rugby on PayTV. Those figures are BS although it still has Rugby League winners over Aussie Rules.
Re efforts to grow the game.
Maybe the NRL should take leaf out of the Rebels book. Seen todays Herald Sun? that's how it should be done. Sure it's an advertorial but front and back page with player profiles, emphasis on point of difference to AFL (international),etc.
I also dont accept rugby league has been invisible in Melbourne, RL Origin (its best product) has been played on and off in Melbourne since the mid 1990s. That's over 15 years. Storm have been here with umpteen fluff pieces in their Melbourne owned paper (Herald Sun) for over a decade. Made premierships,etc
News Ltd/RL chose the pay TV path early days to show its product with limited FTA other than FNF (not fans choice) its been far more visible on pay TV. That Melbourne has lower pay TV rates is a result of AFL being more available on FTA, thus the NRL gets less exposure due to Melbourne's lower penetration of Foxtel.
As for Friday Night FTA coverage of NRL, you can't be serious that Ch 9 would go head to head with the AFL in Melbourne. In Sydney, the Swans never go head to head with the NRL on Friday night either.
This image itself shows Rugby League is watched more.
8.1 million watch AFL overall.
10.1 Million Watching Rugby League overall.
Although the figures seems like BS to me, as i already posted the NRL is the most watched competition on Pay TV.
But here it has both A-league and Super Rugby above it, both those competition are not on FTA. Therefore all their viewers must come from Paytv. Also, the Toyota cup out rates Super rugby on PayTV. Those figures are BS although it still has Rugby League winners over Aussie Rules.
oh dear
^ He does have a fair point on you two pooh poohing the non-NRL events though. Is Toyota Cup, SOO, Test match football not a product the game can sell? Of course it is. That's part of the AFL's problem, you have ONE competition people give a crap about. Hence their desperation in trying to get a second tier knock out comp up and running
Agreed. The Rebels have made what can only be described as a distinctively stronger effort into their promotion. At the Crusaders game (Which I didn't attend) they had a sevens comp for the local VRU teams as a lead up event, they had an event to try and get kids down playing the game. This is before they have even played their forst competition game. When has the Storm or the NRL EVER gone to such an effort? They have been blitzing on the advertising campaign, including the sponsors running a campaign.
Put simply, they are doing things better than the Storm at the moment. They will also likely average more in the first season, I do agree on that BUT that will flatten eventually and both teams will draw similar numbers.
As long as we maintain our second Friday night fixture, the Friday night carrier is simply going to have no choice, or deal with the negative publicitly and additional cost of the government fining them
Unless they cross cover two games at the same time on their secondary channels at 11.30 (Which is mad), the latest they are going to be able to kick off the first game is 9.30.
Unless they sell off to Pay like Channel 7 did.
Either scenario INCREASES our Victorian presence.
Agreed. The Rebels have made what can only be described as a distinctively stronger effort into their promotion. At the Crusaders game (Which I didn't attend) they had a sevens comp for the local VRU teams as a lead up event, they had an event to try and get kids down playing the game. This is before they have even played their forst competition game. When has the Storm or the NRL EVER gone to such an effort? They have been blitzing on the advertising campaign, including the sponsors running a campaign.
Put simply, they are doing things better than the Storm at the moment. They will also likely average more in the first season, I do agree on that BUT that will flatten eventually and both teams will draw similar numbers.
As long as we maintain our second Friday night fixture, the Friday night carrier is simply going to have no choice, or deal with the negative publicitly and additional cost of the government fining them
Unless they cross cover two games at the same time on their secondary channels at 11.30 (Which is mad), the latest they are going to be able to kick off the first game is 9.30.
Unless they sell off to Pay like Channel 7 did.
Either scenario INCREASES our Victorian presence.
Before quoting Pay TV figures remember who they are from.
ASTRA results which include regionals and are based on Reach which reflects the amount of people who have sampled a show for 5 minutes or more so picks up people who channel surf or might tune in to get a score.
OZTAM's Pay TV ratings are based on 5 city metro averages only using the same measure used for FTA ratings. This tends to lead to averages going down and not up because of Pay TV's many Replay's (which I believe in this case effect the timeshift channels).
So be careful quoting Pay TV ratings because they might not be as truthful a guide as you might think
ASTRA results which include regionals and are based on Reach which reflects the amount of people who have sampled a show for 5 minutes or more so picks up people who channel surf or might tune in to get a score.
OZTAM's Pay TV ratings are based on 5 city metro averages only using the same measure used for FTA ratings. This tends to lead to averages going down and not up because of Pay TV's many Replay's (which I believe in this case effect the timeshift channels).
So be careful quoting Pay TV ratings because they might not be as truthful a guide as you might think
"^ He does have a fair point on you two pooh poohing the non-NRL events though. Is Toyota Cup, SOO, Test match football not a product the game can sell? Of course it is. That's part of the AFL's problem, you have ONE competition people give a crap about. Hence their desperation in trying to get a second tier knock out comp up and running "
I'm not poopoohing the RL events themselves just the cumulative TV audience as a method. There are any number of comparisons that could be made using different methods. It suits the NRL/ARL to run with cumulative average TV ratings because they have more games on TV.
If you used televised hours with the average TV audience the AFL would win hands down because the game goes for much longer. More televised hours.
I agree the Foxtel Cup is partly about increasing the overall AFL footprint on TV. It is a great concept IMO.
As for the multiple digital channels they are perfect to allow access to non tradtional markets.
At the moment through, digital channels have approx 20% of the audience. eg: NAB Cup on Sat night. By 2013-14? this will be a forced change.
"I'm not poopoohing the RL events themselves just the cumulative TV audience as a method. There are any number of comparisons that could be made using different methods. It suits the NRL/ARL to run with cumulative average TV ratings because they have more games on TV.
If you used televised hours with the average TV audience the AFL would win hands down because the game goes for much longer. More televised hours.
I agree the Foxtel Cup is partly about increasing the overall AFL footprint on TV. It is a great concept IMO.
As for the multiple digital channels they are perfect to allow access to non tradtional markets.
At the moment through, digital channels have approx 20% of the audience. eg: NAB Cup on Sat night. By 2013-14? this will be a forced change.
Like Melbourne Storm?
- Banned
- #74
This image itself shows Rugby League is watched more.
8.1 million watch AFL overall.
10.1 Million Watching Rugby League overall.
.
coz nobody shows up to NRL games.....souths canterbury roosters games are all poorly attended
Bomber Bears
Cancelled
You include Canterbury in the poorly attended teams list - fail. Probably the biggest club in Sydney (despite being a bunch of *****)
- Status
