NRL v AFL.. are people serious?

[Ronin]

it was shown on foxtel, people who cared would not have waited until 10:30 to watch it. It is a pity that League couldn't show finals live into Melbourne, but maybe there is no demand for it

Of course there isn't demand for NRL in Melbourne, but I am not deluded like some here that think that there is this massive groundswell of support for AFL up here.

 

[Refried Noodle]

The reason it was shown so late is because they knew it would get spanked anyway.

Despite that, being screened at 10.30pm for a major game is an issue? Hell, people got up at 2am to watch the WC.

How do you account for 25,000 in Brisbane and 71,000 in Sydney?

Mate, if you're not gonna listen to us then what's the bloody point?

He made his point - delayed telecast.

If it was live the figures would be much higher, but not as high as showing a friday night movie for Ch10 so yes it would lose out to the League.

I hope they televise the Adelaide vs WC match live.
I'd be spewing if I didn't get finals (other than Swans) footy live.

 

[Sir_Adrian84]

Of course there isn't demand for NRL in Melbourne, but I am not deluded like some here that think that there is this massive groundswell of support for AFL up here.

there must be some demand for AFL in the north if foxtel showed the game live

 

[akazie]

Whats wrong with using Domino's?

They asked 600 people from every state, not 1000 people in 1 state, the Domino's report is more real than the so called sweeney report, you guys just don't like it because it paints League in a favourable manner.

accept that.

RL has over a Million players in Australia, that's great news, I can't believe they don't shout these things from the roof tops.

And before anyone says it's not Rugby League, yes it is, just like our RL 7's, 9's, 13's Mini-Mod-Tag, it's a bigger sport than any of you people here will ever admit too.

If any of you watched the ABC show this morning, Offsiders, the AFL's two media mouthpieces came out looking you like you drongos, absolutely bizar how their thinking works, oh it's 100 million, no sport can stand a chance blah blah blah, Brian Waldron made them look like complete gooses.

Affiliated States (Up 11%) in 2005, I bet it increases again.

Pretty good when you consider the ARL doesn't pump much money into these States.

All this talk from Vlad lately sounds very desperate, he knows how bad it is, he'll say anything to get the Rugby League fans listening about the AFL, 1st it was the out of the blue mentioning of the Storm final during the build up of an AR Semi, then he comes out with this take over joke, he knows no one's watching, he's crawling up the NRL's bum looking to get noticed.

Sorry, but he comes across as a tool, you guys can keep him, good luck.

 

[Refried Noodle]

Can we have the link fixed. It's sounds fairly bias, like the Sweeney report.

 

[Hoops]

Where is the Sweeney report based? Where are the majority of their rag publication sold? Are you guys that stupid and blinkered?

The sweeney report correlates data for accurate figures based on Sample size and population. Dominoes- when you ring to order a pizza asks "whats you're your favourite footy code? oh yeah do you want anchovies with that?"

And OZTam is based in Sydney. I think you are showing how stupid and blinkered you are.

 

[Refried Noodle]

The sweeney report correlates data for accurate figures based on Sample size and population. Dominoes- when you ring to order a pizza asks "whats you're your favourite footy code? oh yeah do you want anchovies with that?"

And OZTam is based in Sydney. I think you are showing how stupid and blinkered you are.

Someone fix the link please, I wanna find out how exactly they survey people.

Personally the Sweeney report is bias towards capital cities by only surveying metropolitan people, but it is still representative of the capital cities of Australia - no-one can say it isn't, it's just not representative on the entire country.

 

[Ronin]

The sweeney report correlates data for accurate figures based on Sample size and population. Dominoes- when you ring to order a pizza asks "whats you're your favourite footy code? oh yeah do you want anchovies with that?"

And OZTam is based in Sydney. I think you are showing how stupid and blinkered you are.

OzTam is owned by Seven, Nine and Ten.

Sweeney is a privately owned bucketshop that is trying to flog off their reports to however will buy them.

 

[Hoops]

Someone fix the link please, I wanna find out how exactly they survey people.

Personally the Sweeney report is bias towards capital cities by only surveying metropolitan people, but it is still representative of the capital cities of Australia - no-one can say it isn't, it's just not representative on the entire country.

Thats how the Survey works it's basically a question asked when the ring up for a pizza.

 

[Dan26]

You can't use figures from a delayed telcast of the AFL in Sydney and Brisbane, after the game (which didn't feature Sydney or Brisbane) was shown on Foxtel first. Who would bother staying up to watch it at 10:30, when they would have already watched it on Foxtel, and if they didn't have Foxtel would have found out the score anyway?

I remember a non-Lions final (the 2004 Preliminary Final between St.Kilda and Port) being shown live into Brisbane with no Rugby League competition, and it rating about 240,000.

When Sydney got a live telcast of the Collingwood-Bulldogs final last Sunday it averaged 115,000 in NON prime time, without the Swans even being involved.

When looking at these figures, you have to compare apples with apples. You've got to look at the Rugby League competition on Channel 9, whether the telecast was delayed, and if there were local teams playing.

Everyone is always looking to manipulate the numbers to suit their own code, and the worst offenders are the Rugby League fans who see television ratings as the one thing they can use to "talk up" their game, given that attendances are not comparable to the AFL.

 

[1908]

Of course the Sweeney report is accurate, rugby union is stronger than league according to them. It's true, they got 8000 to their grand final and no free to air coverage whilst the league will get 82,000 and massive coverage.
Hang on a minute............

 

[akazie]

The pizza report is more accurate than Sweeney, as hoops says, they ask you, so 600 from every state and RL is the majority winner, easily.

Oh my.

 

[Ronin]

You can't use figures from a delayed telcast of the AFL in Sydney and Brisbane, after the game (which didn't feature Sydney or Brisbane) was shown on Foxtel first. Who would bother staying up to watch it at 10:30, when they would have already watched it on Foxtel, and if they didn't have Foxtel would have found out the score anyway?

I remember a non-Lions final (the 2004 Preliminary Final between St.Kilda and Port) being shown live into Brisbane with no Rugby League competition, and it rating about 240,000.

When Sydney got a live telcast of the Collingwood-Bulldogs final last Sunday it averaged 115,000 in NON prime time, without the Swans even being involved.

When looking at these figures, you have to compare apples with apples. You've got to look at the Rugby League competition on Channel 9, whether the telecast was delayed, and if there were local teams playing.

Everyone is always looking to manipulate the numbers to suit their own code, and the worst offenders are the Rugby League fans who see television ratings as the one thing they can use to "talk up" their game, given that attendances are not comparable to the AFL.

Mate, I have put up games that satisfy your criteria, but the blinkers still stay on. Before last weeks Swans final, their highest rating game this year in Sydney was around 158k, which is rubbish considering they are the holders of the flag.

Just for you, here are the numbers for Saturday night, where it was shown LIVE:

What Australia watched, Saturday
Total Sydney Melbourne Brisbane Adelaide Perth

AFL FINALS 2006: 1ST SEMI FINAL WEST COAST V BULLDOGS
1,144,000 69,000 457,000 61,000 172,000 386,000

RUGBY LEAGUE FINAL SERIES SF 2
788,000 387,000 30,000 350,000 14,000 7,000

So around 60,000 each in Sydney and Brisbane. This is an AFL final. No one cares, just as with the NRL the other way around.

As I argued before, where NRL is played (NSW, QLD, VIC), more people watched the NRL game vs AFL game.

EDIT (Link)
http://blogs.smh.com.au/entertainment/archives/the_tribal_mind/006221.html

 

[cos789]

You really have to wonder about these ratings figures .
The Sydney Swans Vs Fremantle Dockers looks like being a sellout .
So 80k people are prepared to fork out a motza and make their way to Telstra Stadium for about a four hour excursion , but they can't be bothered turning on their TV sets ?
You got to be joking .

 

[akazie]

The support base that goes to the matches doubled would be about right, hence the sellout.

Won't be much watching on TV, you'd better hope the Swans don't go head to head with RL, it could be bad.

Do you think if the Swans go head to head with RL, they will average 200,000 in Sydney or Brisbane?

 

[cos789]

Do you think if the Swans go head to head with RL, they will average 200,000 in Sydney or Brisbane?

Actually I never think about ratings .
I think about the big crowd at a big event watching a great game .
Should be awesome .

 

[airpoe]

Regarding to the TV ratings:

Note that NRL goes from 7:30pm-11.15pm (the game starts at 7:45 & finishes at around 10pm) SO 30 minutes of pre & post match.

AFL is 7-11pm (8pm start & finishes around 10:20pm) so 1h 10 min pre & post match.

So the figures would of been higher for the matches, eg Swans v Eagles averaged 172k but peaked around 375k, so looking at beakdowns the AFL match got around 230k which is not bad for Sydney audience. As the NRL match on the same time got around 380k for the match!

 

[Ronin]

You really have to wonder about these ratings figures .
The Sydney Swans Vs Fremantle Dockers looks like being a sellout .
So 80k people are prepared to fork out a motza and make their way to Telstra Stadium for about a four hour excursion , but they can't be bothered turning on their TV sets ?
You got to be joking .

I come down to Melbourne a few times a year to watch sports. It usually involves Derby Day and either the F1 or the Tennis. My mates come down for the whole week of the racing carnival.

If you are a Melbournian, all the sports you want to watch are across town, including the AFL. If you want to come up to Sydney to watch sport, what do you come up for? An NRL or a S14 game? No, the only thing here is when your AFL team plays the Swans.

When do the Swans have their biggest crowds? Against the big Victorian sides. It doesn't take many to come up to make a difference. If you are a Collingwood supporter, it is not as if your team travels all over the country to play.

On top of this, what sports in Sydney have the largest corporate hospitality at their regular season matches? Union and AFL. The former has about 9 games a year to choose from, the latter 12. They represent the whole city, unlike League which is fragmented along suburban lines.

Don't shoot me, I am only posting the numbers as released by OzTam.

 

[cos789]

Rooonin was there any point you were trying to make re the above ?

 

[Dan26]

Mate, I have put up games that satisfy your criteria, but the blinkers still stay on. Before last weeks Swans final, their highest rating game this year in Sydney was around 158k, which is rubbish considering they are the holders of the flag.

Just for you, here are the numbers for Saturday night, where it was shown LIVE:

What Australia watched, Saturday
Total Sydney Melbourne Brisbane Adelaide Perth

AFL FINALS 2006: 1ST SEMI FINAL WEST COAST V BULLDOGS
1,144,000 69,000 457,000 61,000 172,000 386,000

RUGBY LEAGUE FINAL SERIES SF 2
788,000 387,000 30,000 350,000 14,000 7,000

So around 60,000 each in Sydney and Brisbane. This is an AFL final. No one cares, just as with the NRL the other way around.

As I argued before, where NRL is played (NSW, QLD, VIC), more people watched the NRL game vs AFL game.

EDIT (Link)
http://blogs.smh.com.au/entertainment/archives/the_tribal_mind/006221.html

I know exactly what the figures are. I'v seen them as I have for all the other finals games too.

But as usual, they are "interpreted", in a way to be seen as postive by the NRL. But, you cannot compare, because the circumstances are different since you are not comparing apples with apples.

115,000 people in Sydney watched a NON Swans final in NON prime time last Sunday. Most of the time an AFL final rates poorly in Sydney it is due to being in competition with the NRL, which obviously is number one in NSW. But that figure (with no NRL competition and without the Swans) is reasonable in non-prime time, considering what it would be in prime time.

But, it was proven for the Swans final against West Coast, that Sydney people will watch (in reasonable numbers) as long as there is no NRL on. It averaged 170,000 AGAINST the NRL and peaked at 450,000 when the NRL was over.

More poeple watch the AFL than the NRL in Australia. The free to air figures each week is about 5 million to 2 million. That's just the way it is. I know Rugby league people LOVE their TV ratings as it the one and only thing they can bend and manipulate to suit their own agenda. They can add regional atr figures to capital city OzTam figures (even though the regional figures overlap, hence they are double counted, and even though there are 850,000 people in regioanl WA and SA who are not even counted at all), just to suit their own agenda of talking up their code.

They do this because the AFL has it over the NRL in every measurable category (TV included), but because the figures can be interpreted differently, NRL people love to use them. If the NRL is defeated in average TV figures, just use peak figures instead. If the NRL is defeated in the capital city figures, use regional figures and add them together (even though this is double counting many areas) to get the desired result. If the AFL defeats the NRL figure, just use the example of the NRL not being live in cetain areas, or having competition. Do whatever they can, as long as it portrays a positive result for the NRL.

It gets to be quite pathetic. The NRL internet boys are obsessed with TV ratings and interpreting the figures to suit their own code. Why? Everyone knows the AFL is number one in Australia. Interpreting a set of TV figures in a way to suit your own code won't change that.

 

[Dan26]

The support base that goes to the matches doubled would be about right, hence the sellout.

Won't be much watching on TV, you'd better hope the Swans don't go head to head with RL, it could be bad.

Do you think if the Swans go head to head with RL, they will average 200,000 in Sydney or Brisbane?

IF the AFL is live (the match needs to sell out for this to be the case) it will start at 8:00pm. the RL starst at 7:45, and will be over by 9:15-9:20-ish.

So the Swans will have the whole second half of the AFL to themselves.

Last years Preliminary Final versus St.Kilda rated 450,000 in Sydney with no competition, so a peak of 500,000 this Friday night in Sydney after the Rugby League is over is the probable result. Remembering, of course, that there will be 70,000-80,000 at the game as well.

But that all depends on the match being live or not. In 2003, the Prelim versus Brisbane was NOT live into Sydney (because it was not sold out) and it only rated in the 200,000's.

 

[Funkalicous]

Only 25,000 Queenslanders watched the Frea v Melb game, so tell me why they deserve another team?

I can see you're desperate for deflection, but the Freo vs Melbourne game didn't even start until just before 11pm in Brisbane.

But to answer your question, clubs get their money from crowd numbers, memberships, and sponsership, not TV ratings (at least not directly). - This is something that the Lions (and hence Queensland) have thrived on recently.

 

[cos789]

Totally agree, i still cant understand how they think they are getting a realistic result from them. i read in the sun one day that in melbourne for every viewer who tunes in it counts for 24,000 but you would think it would only be 5,000 if there are 4,000 of them. Maybe the AFL should by 20 or 30 of the homes and watch all of the games. it would help get a bit more in the TV ratings

The figure is 1 box for every 3000 people .
However a full loaded box (family and guests present) accounts for 24k .
Now there is one box per TV .
Most families have at least two TV's .
So that would account for 50k in the ratings .
And that's why ratings are only a guide .
Also they are only on analogue TVs at present .
So that's a big slice of the top end of the market gone .

 

[gaelictiogar]

all of this is very arcane and stat based.

look check on wiki which GF got the largest TV audience last year. it was AFL as it usually is.

All other things being equal AFL will get bigger audiences because it has more support. It really is that simple.

Put an AFL game on free to air at exactly the same time nationwide as an NRL game adn barring unusual circumstances the AFL willl draw bigger - hence the significantly larger nationwide television deal. Equally AFL will usually draw bigger in League heartland than league will in AFL heartland since it has more participants/supporters in League heartland than vive versa. It Really is that simple and any attempt to confuse that will succeeed in obsuring the truth for a while but not for long.

It is of course possible to get any stats to prove anything but all things being equal natiowide AFL > NRL and end of story. Isolating certain games in certain states shown at different time zones on different channels will never obscure the simple cultural truth in australia and the Footy has a bigger fan base than league as EVERY comparative indicator reveals adn as we all know.

 

[Refried Noodle]

Put an AFL game on free to air at exactly the same time nationwide as an NRL game adn barring unusual circumstances the AFL willl draw bigger - hence the significantly larger nationwide television deal. Equally AFL will usually draw bigger in League heartland than league will in AFL heartland since it has more participants/supporters in League heartland than vive versa. It Really is that simple and any attempt to confuse that will succeeed in obsuring the truth for a while but not for long.

It is of course possible to get any stats to prove anything but all things being equal natiowide AFL > NRL and end of story. Isolating certain games in certain states shown at different time zones on different channels will never obscure the simple cultural truth in australia and the Footy has a bigger fan base than league as EVERY comparative indicator reveals adn as we all know.

Very similar points that I stand by:

Aussie Rules is bigger in Aussie Rules territory than League is in League territory.
Aussie Rules is bigger in League territory than League is in Aussie Rules territory.