NRL Finals Fail To Make OzTam Top 20

[dr nick]

its pretty obvious that night GF's will rate better by virtue of their timeslot - to query otherwise shows a complete lack of common sense.

And expanding on the ratings if we're gonna pluck countries you might also note that the AFL GF is being shown in much of Asia, the USA, England etc, and the NRL one probably is being shown in some of those countries too. I'd be surprised if the NZ audience surpassed 1-200k for the NRL, given the size of the entire country is half the size of NSW, the proportion of people that are into rugby league and the time of night it is on.

 

[Hurbie]

Rates pretty well in NZ. I'd say it's important for the NRL because it negotiates a seperate contract worth substantial $$$.

Buuut... that has jack to do with this argument! Besides, everyone knows the showpiece of RL on TV is SoO...Which is oddly better covered in Virginia than it is in Victoria...

 

[dr nick]

You could be more specific Mr Pantsless,

The AFL GF will comprehensively outrate the NRL GF across the 5 metropolitan capitay city audience (ie Oztam)..
The NRL GF will slightly outrate the AFL GF once the regional audience (and therefore the entire country) is included..
The NRL GF will comprehensively outrate the AFL GF once the NZ audience is included proving that the NRL GF remains as the most popular GF in Australasia..

I'm not sure where you pull your assumptions from, certainly not last year.

Having said that i think the AFL audience will be down this year due to Port + Brisbane playing, as opposed to a victorian team.

 

[pcpp]

The NRL GF will slightly outrate the AFL GF once the regional audience (and therefore the entire country) is included..

Actually the NRL GF will also significantly outrate the AFL GF in regional areas. In "AFL heartland" if you could call it that, a large majority live in the capital city.

QLD Regional = 2.2 million
NSW Regional = 2.6-3 million
VIC Regional = 0.5 million
SA+WA Regional = Around 1.2 million

 

[robbieando]

Actually the NRL GF will also significantly outrate the AFL GF in regional areas. In "AFL heartland" if you could call it that, a large majority live in the capital city.

QLD Regional = 2.2 million
NSW Regional = 2.6-3 million
VIC Regional = 0.5 million
SA+WA Regional = Around 1.2 million

I think you need to check your figures. For starters there is more than a million people living in regional Victoria and I doubt regional Qld is that close to regional NSW (But I could be wrong on that point)

Anyway, going by last years figures the NRL GF was outrated by the AFL GF

 

[robbieando]

Just for the record, last years Grand Final Ratings for both the AFL and NRL

2003 AFL Grand Final - Collingwood vs Brisbane

5 Cities Total - 2,965,000
Regional Victoria/NSW/QLD Total - 1,045,000

http://www.atraustralia.com.au/docs/reports/weeklys/regional/top20/regtop20030921.pdf

2003 NRL Grand Final - Penrith vs Sydney Roosters

5 cities total - 2,315,000
Regional Victoria/NSW/QLD Total - 1,427,000

http://www.atraustralia.com.au/docs/reports/weeklys/regional/top20/regtop20031005.pdf

This is before we add in regional totals for SA, WA, Tasmania and NT.

 

[littleduck]

No-one else uses NZ ratings to justify anything, so I reckon you shouldn't either, but saying that I'm only generalising.

Surely they're relevant for claims of being the most popular GF in Australasia.

You can't agree with me about the Sat v Sun thing, and then say it's mythical!

I do agree with you completely about the Sat arvo/Sun night thing, I'm just saying it would be helpful if we knew how many thousand higher the ratings are at night compared to the old arvo grand finals. I'm saying it would be interesting if somebody knew what the ratings were for the last few sunday arvo grand finals so we can use them for some comparison.

And any increase in ratings does not necessarily mean it is a newfound audience, altho some of it might be. It's well known more individual tv sets are tuned in at night time as the traditional social gathering is removed. If so, that's not a bigger audience, it's just changing the nature of your existing audience to maximise ratings.

The fact is you can use statistics to prove anything. 75% people know that!

yeah true. what about the other 25%?

 

[littleduck]

its pretty obvious that night GF's will rate better by virtue of their timeslot - to query otherwise shows a complete lack of common sense.

Nobody said they didn't rate better..

And expanding on the ratings if we're gonna pluck countries you might also note that the AFL GF is being shown in much of Asia, the USA, England etc, and the NRL one probably is being shown in some of those countries too.

Probably.

I'd be surprised if the NZ audience surpassed 1-200k for the NRL, given the size of the entire country is half the size of NSW, the proportion of people that are into rugby league and the time of night it is on.

Yeah, just another reason why night grand finals are shocking for non-NSW fans of the game.

When the Warriors made the final, the Aust/NZ audience was about 4.5 million. Those are numbers the AFL can only dream of.

 

[littleduck]

Actually the NRL GF will also significantly outrate the AFL GF in regional areas. In "AFL heartland" if you could call it that, a large majority live in the capital city.

QLD Regional = 2.2 million
NSW Regional = 2.6-3 million
VIC Regional = 0.5 million
SA+WA Regional = Around 1.2 million

In other words..
- 4.8-5.1 million NSW/QLD RL heartland
- 1.7 million VIC/SA/WA AFL heartland

Yet robbieando wants to claim the regional GF ratings on the east coast (which consists of 5.3-5.6 mil on pcpp's figures, of which 500k is Vic) for 03 as:
- 1,045,000 Regional Victoria/NSW/QLD Total - AFL GF
- 1,427,000 Regional Victoria/NSW/QLD Total - NRL GF
I don't agree with these figures. Intuitively, they don't make sense considering the east coast regional area is dominated by NSW country which generally had SFA interest in the AFL GF.

 

[cos789]

No-one else uses NZ ratings to justify anything, so I reckon you shouldn't either, but saying that I'm only generalising.

That's fair if you're talking Australasia .LD is SUPPOSING that the figures are higher for NRL than AFL in NZ . I would presume too but who has any figures .
But let's talk about WORLD figures then . The AFL is shown live around the world to a great many countries .Take that into account then there is NO CONTEST .

 

[littleduck]

That's fair if you're talking Australasia .LD is SUPPOSING that the figures are higher for NRL than AFL in NZ . I would presume too but who has any figures .

The figures we have are from the GF involving the Warriors a few years ago, which obviously massively inflates the NZ audience for the GF. From every other year not involving the Warriors I/we dont know.

But let's talk about WORLD figures then . The AFL is shown live around the world to a great many countries .Take that into account then there is NO CONTEST .

Hardly, since AFL has no obvious market o/s, whereas RL has a well established RL market in the UK and a sizable & growing audience in NZ due to the Warriors. The AFL has none. As for the rest of the world (apart from PNG), let's just call it a draw.

 

[dr nick]

In other words..
- 4.8-5.1 million NSW/QLD RL heartland
- 1.7 million VIC/SA/WA AFL heartland

Yet robbieando wants to claim the regional GF ratings on the east coast (which consists of 5.3-5.6 mil on pcpp's figures, of which 500k is Vic) for 03 as:
- 1,045,000 Regional Victoria/NSW/QLD Total - AFL GF
- 1,427,000 Regional Victoria/NSW/QLD Total - NRL GF
I don't agree with these figures. Intuitively, they don't make sense considering the east coast regional area is dominated by NSW country which generally had SFA interest in the AFL GF.

lol this is just laughable

intuitively you make that conclusion about robbie's post, which was backed up with sources, yet you blindly accept figures (without source) stating rural victoria is 500k people all up

 

[littleduck]

lol this is just laughable

intuitively you make that conclusion about robbie's post, which was backed up with sources, yet you blindly accept figures (without source) stating rural victoria is 500k people all up

I know it sounded like I took it seriously, but I knew all along it was a gee up. I just picked up the ball and ran with it (into an open goal) and used the figures as if they were real.

 

[dr nick]

This is before we add in regional totals for SA, WA, Tasmania and NT.

in your link at the bottom there are Tas figures (which i'm assuming are separate due to including metro Hobart)

AFL GF got 189,389

NRL figures aren't there.

 

[Pantsless]

Surely they're relevant for claims of being the most popular GF in Australasia.

No other TV ratings get measured for Australasia. Advertises don't base anything on "Australasia"

Australasia isn't a country and doesn't have it's own money.

The only person who tries including Australasia is you when you realise you've lost a pathetic argument.

 

[littleduck]

The only person who tries including Australasia is you when you realise you've lost a pathetic argument.

The NRL includes a NZ-based team, surely it's not stretching to include the NZ support for RL. But I do recognise it's a classic case of spin doctoring. No argument there.

 

[robbieando]

in your link at the bottom there are Tas figures (which i'm assuming are separate due to including metro Hobart)

AFL GF got 189,389

NRL figures aren't there.

Hence the reason I didn't add in the Tassie figures because I rather deal with stated facts and without the NRL GF's ratings in Tas, I can't make it fair.

 

[robbieando]

In other words..
- 4.8-5.1 million NSW/QLD RL heartland
- 1.7 million VIC/SA/WA AFL heartland

Yet robbieando wants to claim the regional GF ratings on the east coast (which consists of 5.3-5.6 mil on pcpp's figures, of which 500k is Vic) for 03 as:
- 1,045,000 Regional Victoria/NSW/QLD Total - AFL GF
- 1,427,000 Regional Victoria/NSW/QLD Total - NRL GF
I don't agree with these figures. Intuitively, they don't make sense considering the east coast regional area is dominated by NSW country which generally had SFA interest in the AFL GF.

LD, the facts don't lie. I used the ratings service that another one of your co-league fans used to bag out Beaussie for last weekend's regional figures. Fair enough you don't like the overall results however as I said my facts don't lie and prove without a doubt that the claims of regional figures helping the NRL outrate the AFL are shaky at best.

Who knows what the regional ratings might be this years for both GF's. A gap that was 400k in favour of the NRL last year could get bigger or smaller. Just depends on the teams involved in both GF'S

 

[littleduck]

LD, the facts don't lie.

Not usually, but you can spin them to be misleading.. not that you did.

I used the ratings service that another one of your co-league fans used to bag out Beaussie for last weekend's regional figures.

Hardly a winning argument

Fair enough you don't like the overall results however as I said my facts don't lie and prove without a doubt that the claims of regional figures helping the NRL outrate the AFL are shaky at best.

Who knows what the regional ratings might be this years for both GF's. A gap that was 400k in favour of the NRL last year could get bigger or smaller. Just depends on the teams involved in both GF'S

The point is that your "facts", assuming they're right, are intuitively wrong and don't make sense.

 

[robbieando]

Not usually, but you can spin them to be misleading.. not that you did.

How can anyone but a spin on those figures????

The point is that your "facts", assuming they're right, are intuitively wrong and don't make sense.

How can they be wrong????? Because they don't support the long held belief by league supporters like yourself that regional figures make the NRL GF the higher rating GF, because of the size difference between regional NRL heartland and regional AFL heartland.

Until last night I didn't have a clue about the regional figures from last seasons GF's. After using a link provided by The Executioner (who is from LU) which gave us last weekend's regional figures, I managed to track down last years regional ratings for the AFL and NRL GF's from the site. If you have different figures for last years GF's ratings in regional areas, why not provide them to prove my figures are wrong. Until then accept what the figures say.

 

[dr nick]

Because they don't support the long held belief by league supporters like yourself that regional figures make the NRL GF the higher rating GF, because of the size difference between regional NRL heartland and regional AFL heartland.

I think a few people would be in denial because because they follow the argument that NSW + Qld is half the country - therefore half the country must support RL.

 

[littleduck]

I think a few people would be in denial because because they follow the argument that NSW + Qld is half the country - therefore half the country must support RL.

There are strong pockets of support which League lacks in the 'other states' but Aussie Rules is market leader exactly nowhere in NSW & QLD.

 

[robbieando]

but Aussie Rules is market leader exactly nowhere in NSW & QLD.

You clearly haven't been to Southern NSW then have you?????

 

[robbieando]

I think a few people would be in denial because because they follow the argument that NSW + Qld is half the country - therefore half the country must support RL.

Despite the fact they have to battle Union in parts of Sydney and Brisbane and AFL in Southern NSW. AFL doesn't have to battle anyone in its heartland.

 

[littleduck]

How can anyone but a spin on those figures????

I can spin any set of 'facts'. It's still in dispute whether your figures are 'fact'.

How can they be wrong????? Because they don't support the long held belief by league supporters like yourself that regional figures make the NRL GF the higher rating GF, because of the size difference between regional NRL heartland and regional AFL heartland.

If the AFL GF rates higher in any given year once regionals are included then so be it, congratulations. That's not the issue, it's about all your other figures just appearing so far wrong it's not funny. Eg. 500k is the size of Vic country?? Eg. 1 mil east coast audience for the AFL GF with only 500k Vic audience? If it's true, the AFL GF rated massively in NSW/QLD country. Qld country I could understand a good audience coz of the Lions, but NSW country watching in massive numbers?... intuitively wrong!

Until last night I didn't have a clue about the regional figures from last seasons GF's. After using a link provided by The Executioner (who is from LU) which gave us last weekend's regional figures, I managed to track down last years regional ratings for the AFL and NRL GF's from the site. If you have different figures for last years GF's ratings in regional areas, why not provide them to prove my figures are wrong. Until then accept what the figures say.

Didn't you read the numerous articles claiming the NRL GF rated higher?