Talking Footy

Xman wrote:

Finally, if the NrL is so much more popular, why does the NRL GF lose to the AFL GF repeatedly?

Why is it that whenever this question is put to RL fans, the response is silence?

Says it all really.

I recall posting a few posts back and including some links about how it doesn't. I also recall earlier in this thread me & Dave posting the final series results - the real ones - and it cleary showed league won the vast majority of them. The Grand Final is more of a spectacle and many viewers often tune in to watch, hence boosting the ratings.

pussycat wrote:

I recall posting a few posts back and including some links about how it doesn't. I also recall earlier in this thread me & Dave posting the final series results - the real ones - and it cleary showed league won the vast majority of them. The Grand Final is more of a spectacle and many viewers often tune in to watch, hence boosting the ratings.

On a fair comparison it does, and by fair I mean when both GF's involve teams from the same state. When the game involves a team from 2 states the ratings usually get a boost. If the NRL had a TV audience advantage they would win most of these games. They dont.

You mention finals cummulative figures but again neglect to mention the fact that the AFL's second biggest market does not get these games until a number of hours later. I wonder how the NRL figures would go if Brisbane got every game on 3 hours delay.

You also fail to understand that a single game can involve you entire heartland. This is not possible with the AFL as out game is played in more states.

Xman wrote:

pussycat wrote:

I recall posting a few posts back and including some links about how it doesn't. I also recall earlier in this thread me & Dave posting the final series results - the real ones - and it cleary showed league won the vast majority of them. The Grand Final is more of a spectacle and many viewers often tune in to watch, hence boosting the ratings.

On a fair comparison it does, and by fair I mean when both GF's involve teams from the same state. When the game involves a team from 2 states the ratings usually get a boost. If the NRL had a TV audience advantage they would win most of these games. They dont.

You mention finals cummulative figures but again neglect to mention the fact that the AFL's second biggest market =D> does not get these games until a number of hours later. I wonder how the NRL figures would go if Brisbane got every game on 3 hours delay.

You also fail to understand that a single game can involve you entire heartland. This is not possible with the AFL as out game is played in more states.

2nd biggest market? =D> =D> =D> Regional figures are so that small fo the AFL they rarely ever register. You have 1 or 2 regional teams


Why isnt it possible? actually if anything its the reverse. Pretty much all your teams are in the capitols citiels, half our teams are in regional areas.

Qld & NSW get 1 live FTA game a round. How many do you get?


I miss your point, why do you feel its only fair when both teams come from the one state? Last years Grand Final involved the Warrior . So naturally there was far more interest from NZ and far less from those that missed out.

The year before our GF just happend to coincide with the Commonwealth closeing ceremony.

The year before(despite what this site claims) we won.

http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/10/05/nrl ... s-the-AFL/

Xman wrote:

pussycat wrote:

I recall posting a few posts back and including some links about how it doesn't. I also recall earlier in this thread me & Dave posting the final series results - the real ones - and it cleary showed league won the vast majority of them. The Grand Final is more of a spectacle and many viewers often tune in to watch, hence boosting the ratings.

On a fair comparison it does, and by fair I mean when both GF's involve teams from the same state. When the game involves a team from 2 states the ratings usually get a boost. If the NRL had a TV audience advantage they would win most of these games. They dont.

You mention finals cummulative figures but again neglect to mention the fact that the AFL's second biggest market does not get these games until a number of hours later. I wonder how the NRL figures would go if Brisbane got every game on 3 hours delay.
You also fail to understand that a single game can involve you entire heartland. This is not possible with the AFL as out game is played in more states.

its a 2 hour delay wombat
& VFL is still shown in prime time in Perth ....at 7.30pm

its a non issue

VFL finals are a fail .. when stacked up against ours
definitive proof our game is more popular

pussycat wrote:

Xman wrote:

pussycat wrote:

I recall posting a few posts back and including some links about how it doesn't. I also recall earlier in this thread me & Dave posting the final series results - the real ones - and it cleary showed league won the vast majority of them. The Grand Final is more of a spectacle and many viewers often tune in to watch, hence boosting the ratings.

On a fair comparison it does, and by fair I mean when both GF's involve teams from the same state. When the game involves a team from 2 states the ratings usually get a boost. If the NRL had a TV audience advantage they would win most of these games. They dont.

You mention finals cummulative figures but again neglect to mention the fact that the AFL's second biggest market =D> does not get these games until a number of hours later. I wonder how the NRL figures would go if Brisbane got every game on 3 hours delay.

You also fail to understand that a single game can involve you entire heartland. This is not possible with the AFL as out game is played in more states.

2nd biggest market? =D> =D> =D> Regional figures are so that small fo the AFL they rarely ever register. You have 1 or 2 regional teams


Why isnt it possible? actually if anything its the reverse. Pretty much all your teams are in the capitols citiels, half our teams are in regional areas.

Qld & NSW get 1 live FTA game a round. How many do you get?


I miss your point, why do you feel its only fair when both teams come from the one state? Last years Grand Final involved the Warrior . So naturally there was far more interest from NZ and far less from those that missed out.

The year before our GF just happend to coincide with the Commonwealth closeing ceremony.

The year before(despite what this site claims) we won.

What does Perth having delayed telecasts by 3 hours got to do with regional figures???

As I said, Imagine if the NRL's second biggest market had every game on delay by 3 hours. Heavens knows they rate like shit on Friday night for their 9.30pm game. Well perth get those conditions every single week.

Having the Warriors benefitted your last GF. I guarantee there are way more NZers in Australia than supporters of sinle NRL clubs, especially in melbourne.

But the year before there were 2 Mlebourne AFL teams v 2 Sydney NRL teams and the AFL won again. It's a very consistent pattern.

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

pussycat wrote:

I recall posting a few posts back and including some links about how it doesn't. I also recall earlier in this thread me & Dave posting the final series results - the real ones - and it cleary showed league won the vast majority of them. The Grand Final is more of a spectacle and many viewers often tune in to watch, hence boosting the ratings.

On a fair comparison it does, and by fair I mean when both GF's involve teams from the same state. When the game involves a team from 2 states the ratings usually get a boost. If the NRL had a TV audience advantage they would win most of these games. They dont.

You mention finals cummulative figures but again neglect to mention the fact that the AFL's second biggest market does not get these games until a number of hours later. I wonder how the NRL figures would go if Brisbane got every game on 3 hours delay.
You also fail to understand that a single game can involve you entire heartland. This is not possible with the AFL as out game is played in more states.

its a 2 hour delay wombat
& VFL is still shown in prime time in Perth ....at 7.30pm

its a non issue

VFL finals are a fail .. when stacked up against ours
definitive proof our game is more popular

They are this year. They were not in previous years, except finals. How do Bribane rate for games on 2 hours delay?

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

On a fair comparison it does, and by fair I mean when both GF's involve teams from the same state. When the game involves a team from 2 states the ratings usually get a boost. If the NRL had a TV audience advantage they would win most of these games. They dont.

You mention finals cummulative figures but again neglect to mention the fact that the AFL's second biggest market does not get these games until a number of hours later. I wonder how the NRL figures would go if Brisbane got every game on 3 hours delay.
You also fail to understand that a single game can involve you entire heartland. This is not possible with the AFL as out game is played in more states.

its a 2 hour delay wombat
& VFL is still shown in prime time in Perth ....at 7.30pm

its a non issue

VFL finals are a fail .. when stacked up against ours
definitive proof our game is more popular

They are this year. They were not in previous years, except finals. How do Bribane rate for games on 2 hours delay?

on a 2 hour delay ... but in prime time .. so at 7.30pm
like a game from NZ as an example

phhhttt..... they kill it

next question ?

The game is 2 hours delay and runs until 10.30pm. We all know how poorly RL rates after 9.30pm when on 2 hours delay.

Xman wrote:

The game is 2 hours delay and runs until 10.30pm. We all know how poorly RL rates after 9.30pm when on 2 hours delay.

Why are you wingeing? As I said the NRL ,currently, has just 3 F.T.A matches one on delay 9.30-11-30.


Regioal ratings for AFL are so poor they do not register. That is the rea reasonl this site doesnt record them! Just ask Beaussie If you dont believe me.

pussycat wrote:

Xman wrote:

The game is 2 hours delay and runs until 10.30pm. We all know how poorly RL rates after 9.30pm when on 2 hours delay.

Why are you wingeing? As I said the NRL ,currently, has just 3 F.T.A matches one on delay 9.30-11-30.


Regioal ratings for AFL are so poor they do not register. That is the rea reasonl this site doesnt record them! Just ask Beaussie If you dont believe me.

Because the one game RL fans like yourself use to claim the NRL have an advantage is actually 2 games which are live, targeted and using a flexible schedule. The AFL have nothing like this! The other game you mentioned where the NRL have a delay of 2 hours rates well below the equivalent AFL game, which is also delayed by 1-3 hours. The AFL win Sundays ratings easily.

The AFL regionals register nothing do they? Interesting observation since Roy masters himself tallied the AFL regionals to be approximately 1/3rd of the NRL's regional numbers. This is despite the fact the samples are all focussed on the east coast of Australia.

If thats how yow want to work it, How many of yor states get live matches? whats the total?


As far as regional ratings go you couldnt be more wrong! There more regional Qld missing from the ratings survey then WA & SA combined.

pussycat wrote:

If thats how yow want to work it, How many of yor states get live matches? whats the total?


As far as regional ratings go you couldnt be more wrong! There more regional Qld missing from the ratings survey then WA & SA combined.

As I said, Roy Master counted the AFL as having 1/3 the regional ratings of the NRL last year anyway so the regional numbers are hardly nothing. The only reason the NRL fans get so excited about regional ratings is because you combine 2 live games at 7.30 and you get a decent total. Your other 2 games get negligible regional figures. This is why the regional figures for the AFL GF fairs so well in comparison to the NRL's. It's a fair comparison of one live game nation wide.

Live games for the AFL are rare at best, up until this year of course.

Okay will work on the assumption that AFL Regionals are about 1/3 the size. The AFL 2011 Grand Final had regional viewers of 930, 000 (according to this site) . Meaning the NRL should of had 2, 790, 000. Instead they had just slightly more than the AFL - 1,199, 000 (according to this site).

pussycat wrote:

Okay will work on the assumption that AFL Regionals are about 1/3 the size. The AFL 2011 Grand Final had regional viewers of 930, 000 (according to this site) . Meaning the NRL should of had 2, 790, 000. Instead they had just slightly more than the AFL - 1,199, 000 (according to this site).

Wrong. The AFL do not get shown into regional NSW and QLD on primary channels all year round. the NRL get shown to all these east coast markets regularly. the AFL do not.

You need to understand that the AFL have a greater presence and following in NSW and QLD than th NRL in AFL states. This comes out on GF day because they finally get decent national coverage.

Roy Masters showed these regional figures twice in the last two years and the AFL figures were about a third for the season, not just finals.