Talking Footy

Im not sure what section to put this in, but the footy ratings on this site are flawed and heavily bias towards the AFL.

1. No regional figures are given . An area the NRL/ARL strongly dominates.

2. New Zealand are part of the ARL/NRL yet no Sky figures are included.

3. The figures for FTA matches telecast on Nine and also shown on PTV are not both included. If a game is telecast on 7/10 and also on Fox, even if on delay, both rating figures are given.

So I suggest in future the ratings section should have a asterisk beside it saying 'Talking Footy TV Ratings for the AFL and partial ratings for the ARL/NRL in capital cities within Australia'.

pussycat wrote:

Im not sure what section to put this in, but the footy ratings on this site are flawed and heavily bias towards the AFL.

1. No regional figures are given . An area the NRL/ARL strongly dominates.

2. New Zealand are part of the ARL/NRL yet no Sky figures are included.

3. The figures for FTA matches telecast on Nine and also shown on PTV are not both included. If a game is telecast on 7/10 and also on Fox, even if on delay, both rating figures are given.

So I suggest in future the ratings section should have a asterisk beside it saying 'Talking Footy TV Ratings for the AFL and partial ratings for the ARL/NRL in capital cities within Australia'.

1. Regional audiences are not evenly counted across the country, but heavily swayed towards the east coast. The 5city figures count each codes city heartland audience evenly. Both codes have 7million population in their cities. The finals last year are a classic example. One AFL final only scored 90k regional ratings and well over 1mil city audience. Yet the AFL states have about 3mil regional population and 7mil city heartland. That's just bs! The NRL effectively match their city ratings with their regional ratings yet the city audience is about 40% larger! Again, bs! Come GF day the AFL almost match the NRL for regional figures. Why not for the rest of the year?

2. NZ is not part of Australia last time I checked

3. Expand on this

pussycat wrote:

Didn't lose last year, according to the dodgy stats on this site.

Hence I said almost every year.

Ratings for shows in prime time have a huge advantage over those in the middle of the day. why do you think the NRL moved their GF to Sunday afternoon/evening? The tennis open final moved to Sunday evening. People are home and the shows rate far higher. Compare ratings for NRL on Friday night to Sunday afternoon.

Xman wrote:

pussycat wrote:

Im not sure what section to put this in, but the footy ratings on this site are flawed and heavily bias towards the AFL.

1. No regional figures are given . An area the NRL/ARL strongly dominates.

2. New Zealand are part of the ARL/NRL yet no Sky figures are included.

3. The figures for FTA matches telecast on Nine and also shown on PTV are not both included. If a game is telecast on 7/10 and also on Fox, even if on delay, both rating figures are given.

So I suggest in future the ratings section should have a asterisk beside it saying 'Talking Footy TV Ratings for the AFL and partial ratings for the ARL/NRL in capital cities within Australia'.

1. Regional audiences are not evenly counted across the country, but heavily swayed towards the east coast. The 5city figures count each codes city heartland audience evenly. Both codes have 7million population in their cities. The finals last year are a classic example. One AFL final only scored 90k regional ratings and well over 1mil city audience. Yet the AFL states have about 3mil regional population and 7mil city heartland. That's just bs! The NRL effectively match their city ratings with their regional ratings yet the city audience is about 40% larger! Again, bs! Come GF day the AFL almost match the NRL for regional figures. Why not for the rest of the year?

2. NZ is not part of Australia last time I checked

3. Expand on this

Regional Australia is (in your very best case) 2 to 1! A few extra tune in Grand Final day that normally wouldn't. After the capital G, Coast, Newcastle, Illawarra, Canberra etc are the biggest cities and they all have ARL teams in them. Regional viewers are **** the most passionate.

NZ may not be Australia but there part of the ARL/NRL competiton and there viewers should be counted.

(for example) live/delayed St Geoge V Parramatta is shown on 9(ratings Counted) , a delayed telecast is shown on fox(ratings not counted).

(for example) live/delayed telecast of collingwood v St Kilda shown on 10 (ratings counted) a live/delayed telecast is shown on Fox(ratings counted).

Also, 9 will be showing matches on there digital channel, so make sure that they are counted just as the AFL's are.

pussycat wrote:

Xman wrote:

pussycat wrote:

Im not sure what section to put this in, but the footy ratings on this site are flawed and heavily bias towards the AFL.

1. No regional figures are given . An area the NRL/ARL strongly dominates.

2. New Zealand are part of the ARL/NRL yet no Sky figures are included.

3. The figures for FTA matches telecast on Nine and also shown on PTV are not both included. If a game is telecast on 7/10 and also on Fox, even if on delay, both rating figures are given.

So I suggest in future the ratings section should have a asterisk beside it saying 'Talking Footy TV Ratings for the AFL and partial ratings for the ARL/NRL in capital cities within Australia'.

1. Regional audiences are not evenly counted across the country, but heavily swayed towards the east coast. The 5city figures count each codes city heartland audience evenly. Both codes have 7million population in their cities. The finals last year are a classic example. One AFL final only scored 90k regional ratings and well over 1mil city audience. Yet the AFL states have about 3mil regional population and 7mil city heartland. That's just bs! The NRL effectively match their city ratings with their regional ratings yet the city audience is about 40% larger! Again, bs! Come GF day the AFL almost match the NRL for regional figures. Why not for the rest of the year?

2. NZ is not part of Australia last time I checked

3. Expand on this

Regional Australia is (in your very best case) 2 to 1! A few extra tune in Grand Final day that normally wouldn't. After the capital G, Coast, Newcastle, Illawarra, Canberra etc are the biggest cities and they all have ARL teams in them. Regional viewers are **** the most passionate.

NZ may not be Australia but there part of the ARL/NRL competiton and there viewers should be counted.

(for example) live/delayed St Geoge V Parramatta is shown on 9(ratings Counted) , a delayed telecast is shown on fox(ratings not counted).

(for example) live/delayed telecast of collingwood v St Kilda shown on 10 (ratings counted) a live/delayed telecast is shown on Fox(ratings counted).

Also, 9 will be showing matches on there digital channel, so make sure that they are counted just as the AFL's are.

I have never said I totally agree with the ratings on this site.

1-2 what?

Even you would have to agree that the regionals look very dodgy. How can an AFL final get 1m from 7m heartland but only 90k from 2.5m regional (who are just as if not more passionate)?

Then the NRL gets 600k for on Friday from 7m, but the regional ratings come in at 600m from 5mil regional audience.

So an AFL final rates at less than 3% for regional AFL states (when the city rated at 15%), yet a regular NRL games rates at 12% for regionals (when the city rated 8%).

The city ratings are very predictable and vary a little with the matchup etc. the regional figures I showed are just absolute rubbish!

They are not rubbish at all , the only reason there not counted is it doesn't suit your or the AFL's Agenda. The AFL would be embarrased if all league fans were counted and just not the ones the AFL want counted.

Back to point 3, There are plenty of people with pay TV who , dont like the commentators on 9 or dont like all the adds or whatever and whatch the game on Pay TV . These people simply arn't being counted .

pussycat wrote:

Im not sure what section to put this in, but the footy ratings on this site are flawed and heavily bias towards the AFL.

Like TV Tonight, the SMH's Who Are We, The Throng and other tv ratings sites?

pussycat wrote:

1. No regional figures are given . An area the NRL/ARL strongly dominates.

Regional ratings as has been discussed here over and over again, are flawed as they don't count all markets and are heavily biased towards RL. For that reason they aren't provided other than a few comparisions such as Grand Finals or SoO.

pussycat wrote:

2. New Zealand are part of the ARL/NRL yet no Sky figures are included.

This is Australia not New Zealand

pussycat wrote:

3. The figures for FTA matches telecast on Nine and also shown on PTV are not both included. If a game is telecast on 7/10 and also on Fox, even if on delay, both rating figures are given.

Point taken and I'll endevour to include replays on PTV where available.

pussycat wrote:

So I suggest in future the ratings section should have a asterisk beside it saying 'Talking Footy TV Ratings for the AFL and partial ratings for the ARL/NRL in capital cities within Australia'.

Whatever

pussycat wrote:

Xman wrote:

pussycat wrote:

Im not sure what section to put this in, but the footy ratings on this site are flawed and heavily bias towards the AFL.

1. No regional figures are given . An area the NRL/ARL strongly dominates.

2. New Zealand are part of the ARL/NRL yet no Sky figures are included.

3. The figures for FTA matches telecast on Nine and also shown on PTV are not both included. If a game is telecast on 7/10 and also on Fox, even if on delay, both rating figures are given.

So I suggest in future the ratings section should have a asterisk beside it saying 'Talking Footy TV Ratings for the AFL and partial ratings for the ARL/NRL in capital cities within Australia'.

1. Regional audiences are not evenly counted across the country, but heavily swayed towards the east coast. The 5city figures count each codes city heartland audience evenly. Both codes have 7million population in their cities. The finals last year are a classic example. One AFL final only scored 90k regional ratings and well over 1mil city audience. Yet the AFL states have about 3mil regional population and 7mil city heartland. That's just bs! The NRL effectively match their city ratings with their regional ratings yet the city audience is about 40% larger! Again, bs! Come GF day the AFL almost match the NRL for regional figures. Why not for the rest of the year?

2. NZ is not part of Australia last time I checked

3. Expand on this

Regional Australia is (in your very best case) 2 to 1! A few extra tune in Grand Final day that normally wouldn't. After the capital G, Coast, Newcastle, Illawarra, Canberra etc are the biggest cities and they all have ARL teams in them. Regional viewers are **** the most passionate.

NZ may not be Australia but there part of the ARL/NRL competiton and there viewers should be counted.

(for example) live/delayed St Geoge V Parramatta is shown on 9(ratings Counted) , a delayed telecast is shown on fox(ratings not counted).

(for example) live/delayed telecast of collingwood v St Kilda shown on 10 (ratings counted) a live/delayed telecast is shown on Fox(ratings counted).

Also, 9 will be showing matches on there digital channel, so make sure that they are counted just as the AFL's are.

so damn true pussycat
case in point

Foxtels ratings for the Warriors V Manly replayed game yesterday
94K ... probably quite common across the season
but
bearsy doesn't add those anywhere to the NRL tally does he .....

yet the 91K who watch the AFL preseason game yesterday get a jersey no probs


very inconsistent
inconsistent indeed

Imagine how far infront the NRL would be if they showed all our ratings.

pussycat wrote:

Imagine how far infront the NRL would be if they showed all our ratings.

Imagine how far the AFL would be in front if they counted all our ratings!

Xman wrote:

pussycat wrote:

Imagine how far infront the NRL would be if they showed all our ratings.

Imagine how far the AFL would be in front if they counted all our ratings!

what ratings would they be ?

about 500K in SA .. WA & NT
& Tassie's 500K ...

they add next to nothing ...
nothing at all

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

pussycat wrote:

Imagine how far infront the NRL would be if they showed all our ratings.

Imagine how far the AFL would be in front if they counted all our ratings!

what ratings would they be ?

about 500K in SA .. WA & NT
& Tassie's 500K ...

they add next to nothing ...
nothing at all

1Million people rating at 10% is an extra 100k per game. 4 FTA games per round = 400k extra per round. 24 rounds plus finals = 10 Million extra viewers per year.

Take the SOO away from the NRL's cumulative figure (since it isnt the NRL anyway) and the AFL win the didgy cumulative figures even with the rubbish regionals.

[-o<

pussycat wrote:

They are not rubbish at all , the only reason there not counted is it doesn't suit your or the AFL's Agenda. The AFL would be embarrased if all league fans were counted and just not the ones the AFL want counted.

Back to point 3, There are plenty of people with pay TV who , dont like the commentators on 9 or dont like all the adds or whatever and whatch the game on Pay TV . These people simply arn't being counted .

So you accept the regional figures showing AFL regional fans rate at 3% for AFL finals and NRL regional fans at 12% for home and away games?

You're seriously deluded.

There are only about 400k South Australia living outside of Adelaide and many of those a picked up in Oztam South Australia survey. The pityful 1000's you talk about pale into insignificance alongside the millions in leagues regional areas.

3%?

Just read an article in the adelaide mail that ratings have fallen 25% in the last few years.

pussycat wrote:

There are only about 400k South Australia living outside of Adelaide and many of those a picked up in Oztam South Australia survey. The pityful 1000's you talk about pale into insignificance alongside the millions in leagues regional areas.

3%?

Just read an article in the adelaide mail that ratings have fallen 25% in the last few years.

Regional AFL audiences are over 2.5Mil. Victoria alone is 1.6Mil.

Yet an AFL final last year registered 90k, or 3% when the city regions registered near 15%. Are you saying this is reasonable, especially when NRL home and away games are counted at 12% of their population while the city registers less than 8%?

NRL regional figures are clearly overstated and probably due to double counting. AFL regions are excluded.