- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #26
So chucking matches on a channel with an already (massive) established viewer base would have absolutely no effect on ratings?
If you say so.
If you say so.
-
LIVE: Sydney v Brisbane Lions - 2:30PM AEST Sat
Squiggle tips Lions at 61% chance -- What's your tip? -- Ticketing Buy, Sell -- Teams on Thurs »
-
Weekly Prize - Join Any Time - Tip Grand Final
The Golden Ticket - MCG and Marvel Medallion Club tickets and Corporate Box tickets at the Gabba, MCG and Marvel.
Round PF Winner: Still Me
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 4 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Fox Sports gives AFL a mark
- Thread starter Aucklander
- Start date
- Tagged users None
I think its funny how Roy Masters looks like an idiot and feels he needs to defend his earlier comments. He has said that the AFL on fox sports dosn't rate and rugby league's money was paying for the AFL contract, but the ratings have come out and he has egg on his face because the AFL ratings are just as good as the NRL ratings.
Here's a handy reference about the respective TV audiences of last year's GFs
BTW from memory Tasmania's AFL GF TV audience was about 130,000.
I think a lot depends on who plays in the GF determines which code gets the most TV viewers. Take Melbourne out of the NRL GF & Sydney out of the AFL GF & there could be a dramatic change.
BTW from memory Tasmania's AFL GF TV audience was about 130,000.
I think a lot depends on who plays in the GF determines which code gets the most TV viewers. Take Melbourne out of the NRL GF & Sydney out of the AFL GF & there could be a dramatic change.
Correction: Melbourne viewers get zero to one AFL matches a week live on free to air.
An update on the NRL/ Fox Sports war guys:
"NRL chief David Gallop has slammed Fox sports for what he says is blatent favourable coverage of the AFL at the expense of the NRL.
The criticism comes after a Saturday night Fox Sports news bulletin spent more time covering the latest AFL results and news than that of the NRL.
The bulletin, which dedicated 3 minutes to it's AFL headlines and only 2:59 minutes to the latest NRL headlines, aired it's AFL segment as the first item and NRL as its second, a move which also drew stinging criticism from Gallop, as well as Rugby League journalists and fans.
"It is extremely galling to witness the AFL, a rival code getting such favourable bias at the expense of rugby league, a game that has made Fox sports what it is today" Mr Gallop said. "Of course normally we don't comment at all about the AFL, a rival code, and the coverage it gets. But when you consider that Rugby League goal posts are being ripped down all over Sydney and replaced with the AFL equivalent it's hard not to see a link to this"
Rugby League Journalist Roy Masters was just as scathing of the 1 second difference.
"The Crusaders and their war on Jerusulam had nothing on the AFL, a rival code, and it's current march into rugby league heartland. This one second difference is just a huge slap in the face for the NRL" Masters said.
Rugby league fanatic Phil Smith was also unimpressed.
"Awww, I think it's a bloody disgrace" said Smith. "I mean who's even heard of the Austrian Football League? Certainly none of my mates, and they're sports fanatics who are into everything from Rugby league to rugby union. Maybe give a 10 second wrap up of this 'gAFL' right at the end after you've covered all the other foreign sports, but the other 29 minutes should focus on the game that's followed nation wide from Sydney to West Sydney. This country was founded on League"
More to follow
"NRL chief David Gallop has slammed Fox sports for what he says is blatent favourable coverage of the AFL at the expense of the NRL.
The criticism comes after a Saturday night Fox Sports news bulletin spent more time covering the latest AFL results and news than that of the NRL.
The bulletin, which dedicated 3 minutes to it's AFL headlines and only 2:59 minutes to the latest NRL headlines, aired it's AFL segment as the first item and NRL as its second, a move which also drew stinging criticism from Gallop, as well as Rugby League journalists and fans.
"It is extremely galling to witness the AFL, a rival code getting such favourable bias at the expense of rugby league, a game that has made Fox sports what it is today" Mr Gallop said. "Of course normally we don't comment at all about the AFL, a rival code, and the coverage it gets. But when you consider that Rugby League goal posts are being ripped down all over Sydney and replaced with the AFL equivalent it's hard not to see a link to this"
Rugby League Journalist Roy Masters was just as scathing of the 1 second difference.
"The Crusaders and their war on Jerusulam had nothing on the AFL, a rival code, and it's current march into rugby league heartland. This one second difference is just a huge slap in the face for the NRL" Masters said.
Rugby league fanatic Phil Smith was also unimpressed.
"Awww, I think it's a bloody disgrace" said Smith. "I mean who's even heard of the Austrian Football League? Certainly none of my mates, and they're sports fanatics who are into everything from Rugby league to rugby union. Maybe give a 10 second wrap up of this 'gAFL' right at the end after you've covered all the other foreign sports, but the other 29 minutes should focus on the game that's followed nation wide from Sydney to West Sydney. This country was founded on League"
More to follow
People always forget that NRL is played live against the gate in virtually every game:
NRL:
Friday:
Game 1 Live FTA (into Syd & Bris),
Game 2 delay (game in other city)
Saturday:
Game 3 Live Fox
Game 4,5 Live Fox (simultaneously on viewers choice)
Sunday
Game 6 Live Fox
Game 7 Delay (1hr) FTA (only game not Live against the gate)
Monday
Game 8 Live Fox
charliemurphy
Senior List
- Mar 27, 2006
- 167
- 0
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Well I've already ruled out staying at few hotels because they don't have fox 3.
Stayed at the Medina on Flinders this weekend, no Fox 3.
The London in Richmond also refused to put on the league on fox 3.
Stayed at the Medina on Flinders this weekend, no Fox 3.
The London in Richmond also refused to put on the league on fox 3.
- Banned
- #33
Very good.
But you are way off the mark, last week I watched foxsports news and the AFL went for 16 mins, when the NRL was on, it was on for 5, then they went back to AFL.
All other sports added up to **** all.
If you can't see it, you're blind.
Are you trying to say that the higher AFL ratings are due to confused rugby league fans
But wasn't this established viewer base made up of Rugby League fans (after all don't you guys shove the 78 out of top 100 Pay TV shows last year were NRL matches figure down our throat) anyway?? So therefore wouldn't the majority of the viewer base of FS1 move across to FS3 (because 78 of the top 100 Pay TV shows last year were NRL matches) out of loyality and the fact RL is the better product (or so you keep telling AFL fans).
But could it be the fact that MORE people are watching FS1 and FS3 COMBINDED this year than there were watching FS1 and FFC last year and most of the new viewers to Foxtel are tuning in to watch AFL on FS1 (hence the AFL's huge Pay TV ratings rise) with the established viewers from FS1 last year switching to watch the NRL on FS3 (hence the small rise).
Which one is it?
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #36
Are you trying to say that the higher AFL ratings are due to confused rugby league fans
Is that a yes or a no?
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #37
robbieando said:
I think you have me confused with someone else. I don't think I've ever shoved anything down my fellow fans throats.
robbieando said:
Again you seem to have me confused with someone else. I don't recall ever telling my fellow fans that, Rugby League was better than Aussie Rules.
robbieando said:
What ever keeps you mellow bro. Clearly having the games on a channel with the greatest following has had absolutely no effect at all on AFL ratings.
Auckmel, are you saying having the NRL GF on channel 9 artificially raises the popularity of the code when compared to AFL GF ratings on channel 10?
- Banned
- #39
You go into some places and all they ever have on Pay TV is FS 1, they never change the channel.
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #40
I don't think I've said that anywhere.
Is it really too hard to believe that, by having a code on a FS's main sporting channel that it may just have an effect on ratings?
To completely write off the idea would be silly.
Here is last week's Pay TV ratings:
http://www.tvtonight.com.au/2007/04/ratings-archive.html
Note figures are only for metropolitan regions.
Total NRL 569K (4 games) v AFL 564K (5 games)
Some other AFL games that were shown on Pay TV (if any) would have rated under the 24K cutoff for the Top 100
Out of interest here is Saturday night's AFL & Soccer ratings:
http://www.tvtonight.com.au/2007/04/ratings-archive.html
Note figures are only for metropolitan regions.
Total NRL 569K (4 games) v AFL 564K (5 games)
Some other AFL games that were shown on Pay TV (if any) would have rated under the 24K cutoff for the Top 100
Out of interest here is Saturday night's AFL & Soccer ratings:
ClassicThe NRL supporters are upset because the only thing that they could claim over the AFL is that it had higher PayTV ratings now that's gone
Ah yes, state of origin time. The time of year where nswelshmen and queenslanders go into a frenzy and afl trolls need to vent their insecurities.
- Banned
- #44
The NRL supporters are upset because the only thing that they could claim over the AFL is that it had higher Pay TV ratings now that's gone
I must be going blind or something, because you said "The NRL supporters are upset because the only thing that they could claim over the AFL is that it had higher Pay TV ratings now that's gone"
Care to show me and everyone else where the afl has been #1 for the week on pay TV ever?
Yet RL is on a channel that doesn't go to everybody and RL's biggest supporters are not counted, you know the people hoops?
Yes, all those people living outside of the big cities in the regional areas, the people who added up easily account for WA and SA.
So it' looking good for RL on pay, once all people are counted, no other sport comes close.
Very good ratings for the soo too huh hoops, wouldn't that be another thing over afl rl has?
And internationals.
- Banned
- #45
With regionals added.
without.
Kenny Hunter
All Australian
Hey ParraeelsNRL I know that Foxtel and Austar must be happy with their NRL ratings
BUT
For AFL fans and the AFL , the AFL tv ratings are far better than the NRL tv figures
By your figures AFL is quite clearly the winner
By your logic if u have 2 holidays
1/a free trip to Tasmania for 2 weeks but you have to pay for all the expenses except the airfare
2/ the other trip is a free 2 week holiday all over Europe with all expenses paid for at the top hotels , all food thrown in , a free rental car and 20,000 spending money thrown in
And by your logic with the NRL and the AFL ratings you would prefer the Tasmania holiday
BUT
For AFL fans and the AFL , the AFL tv ratings are far better than the NRL tv figures
By your figures AFL is quite clearly the winner
By your logic if u have 2 holidays
1/a free trip to Tasmania for 2 weeks but you have to pay for all the expenses except the airfare
2/ the other trip is a free 2 week holiday all over Europe with all expenses paid for at the top hotels , all food thrown in , a free rental car and 20,000 spending money thrown in
And by your logic with the NRL and the AFL ratings you would prefer the Tasmania holiday
Kenny Hunter
All Australian
OK
Let's just use last Saturday as a example
By the metro figures
3 NRL games
Sharks v Roosters 97,000
Titans V Sth Syd 188,000
Manly v Melb Storm 193,000
Total 478,000
Compared to AFL
Collingwood v Bris 137,000
Channel 10 FTA 710,000
Plus there was another game live on Paytv for NSW and Bris No figures
Total 847,000+
So there was 847,000 people watching AFL compared to NRL's 478,000 on Sat night
Winner AFL
Remember the Paytv figures are misleading because 710,000 people didn't need to watch or don't need to get Paytv because they have it on FTA tv on Sat night
Other ways the Paytv figures are misleading
Collingwood V bris 137,000 on PayTV but there was also 102,000 watching it in Bris Metro Live on FTA , that totals 239,000
The Carlton v Adelaide match had 110,000 viewers on Paytv but there were 145,000 watching it on FTA in adel also , which totals up to 255,000
But the AFL figures look even better if you take in the whole of Saturday games
Again you had 478,000 people watching the NRL on Sat (3 games)
And with the AFL you had 3 games
Sat afternoon on FTA 674,000
Sat night on FTA 710,000
2 games on Paytv 247,000+
Total 1,631,000
Thats over 1.63million watching AFL for the whole of Sat comared to the NRL'S 478,000
The AFL wins in a beatdown
You can jump up and down how good the NRL figures are on Paytv but the real fact is AFL fans have it on FTA and don't need to get or watch Paytv
Like i said before Foxtel and Austar would be happy with these NRL figures on their boxes but the real fact is the AFL and their fans must be over the moon because they are slaughtering the NRL
But why did you choose to put it up against Metro figures and not regional figures...with a rough summing up in my head doesnt the NRL add up to 802,000 on the Saturday night? Thats no FTA games v 2 FTA games wtih some paytv ones also.
802k v 1.6 mill in a market where we have a presence in half the states you do sounds like a break even to me.
Anyway whats with all the picky shit.
Why cant somebody do the ratings head to head, all 8 games for the week of each code up against each other, metro, regional and paytv figures all combined.
802k v 1.6 mill in a market where we have a presence in half the states you do sounds like a break even to me.
Anyway whats with all the picky shit.
Why cant somebody do the ratings head to head, all 8 games for the week of each code up against each other, metro, regional and paytv figures all combined.
