Talking Footy

1.025 doesnt include digital rights which the AFL figure does.

AFL is over 3 hours with more breaks (played in quarters) nrl is over 2

if theres so many participants then why did the NRL GF in victoria outrate AFL GF in Sydney with teams from the opposite state not playing? not even taking into account the extra 0.7 million people sydney has.

okay, nrl is not national. so? still had 150k in perth watching the GF and probably more for SOO. in a city of 1.7 million without a team it's not too horrible. and will be a lot better when they do have a team. and don't come in with 2013 AFL gf figures for perth cause im pretty sure they were in the gf if im not mistaken.

pHyR3 wrote:

love how all the AFL posts are about crowds, 2009-2012 NRL > AFL in tv ratings 1.3 billion deal even though the games only go for 2 hours.

Well that's just wrong sorry re deal and ratings

pHyR3 wrote:

1.025 doesnt include digital rights which the AFL figure does.

AFL is over 3 hours with more breaks (played in quarters) nrl is over 2

if theres so many participants then why did the NRL GF in victoria outrate AFL GF in Sydney with teams from the opposite state not playing? not even taking into account the extra 0.7 million people sydney has.

okay, nrl is not national. so? still had 150k in perth watching the GF and probably more for SOO. in a city of 1.7 million without a team it's not too horrible. and will be a lot better when they do have a team. and don't come in with 2013 AFL gf figures for perth cause im pretty sure they were in the gf if im not mistaken.

Again you didn't answer the question - you went back to TV ratings - you don't even mount an argument against me when I said they are far from accurate - is that because you have none? Yes - you don't even mount an argument against me that ALL factors need to be considered - I feel like I'm talking to Baldrick from Black Adder! I have also said this many times (maybe not to you though) Melbourne people support ANY team that is in their state - when the Storm had their salary cap issue the local radio stn SEN (AFL OWNED) ran a campaign to get as many people to buy memberships in the club - because the Storm weren't in this years GF there was a substantial drop! This doesn't indicate support for RL but support for the Storm! In Perth they do have a large RU following which may account for the interest - yet their participation rate for actually playing the game is about 2700 whereas RU has about 22k! As for the media rights deal the AFL will make about 425 mil in total revenue - the NRL 284mil - so you tell me if you can face the truth who is the number one code ..........the AFL!

Phelpsy wrote:

pHyR3 wrote:

love how all the AFL posts are about crowds, 2009-2012 NRL > AFL in tv ratings 1.3 billion deal even though the games only go for 2 hours.

Well that's just wrong sorry re deal and ratings

no its not once you include SOO and international footy since it indicates interest in RL.

and 1.3 is correct after NZ and digital rights (i.e. streaming on computers/tablets) 150mil and 100mil.

Swans4ever wrote:

pHyR3 wrote:

1.025 doesnt include digital rights which the AFL figure does.

AFL is over 3 hours with more breaks (played in quarters) nrl is over 2

if theres so many participants then why did the NRL GF in victoria outrate AFL GF in Sydney with teams from the opposite state not playing? not even taking into account the extra 0.7 million people sydney has.

okay, nrl is not national. so? still had 150k in perth watching the GF and probably more for SOO. in a city of 1.7 million without a team it's not too horrible. and will be a lot better when they do have a team. and don't come in with 2013 AFL gf figures for perth cause im pretty sure they were in the gf if im not mistaken.

Again you didn't answer the question - you went back to TV ratings - you don't even mount an argument against me when I said they are far from accurate - is that because you have none? Yes - you don't even mount an argument against me that ALL factors need to be considered - I feel like I'm talking to Baldrick from Black Adder! I have also said this many times (maybe not to you though) Melbourne people support ANY team that is in their state - when the Storm had their salary cap issue the local radio stn SEN (AFL OWNED) ran a campaign to get as many people to buy memberships in the club - because the Storm weren't in this years GF there was a substantial drop! This doesn't indicate support for RL but support for the Storm! In Perth they do have a large RU following which may account for the interest - yet their participation rate for actually playing the game is about 2700 whereas RU has about 22k! As for the media rights deal the AFL will make about 425 mil in total revenue - the NRL 284mil - so you tell me if you can face the truth who is the number one code ..........the AFL!

whats the question?

(cue some idiotic joke about comprehension skills or intelligence)

how will the media rights deal make 425 mil AFL, 284 mil nrl? source.

pHyR3 wrote:

Phelpsy wrote:

pHyR3 wrote:

love how all the AFL posts are about crowds, 2009-2012 NRL > AFL in tv ratings 1.3 billion deal even though the games only go for 2 hours.

Well that's just wrong sorry re deal and ratings

no its not once you include SOO and international footy since it indicates interest in RL.

and 1.3 is correct after NZ and digital rights (i.e. streaming on computers/tablets) 150mil and 100mil.

SOO are event/exhibition matches not club matches - you only play 3, yet your club comp is no where near where it should be - dont you think its holding the game back from expansion? Victorian kids dont grow up wanting to play for NSW in SOO or QLD for that matter - so if their good enough who do they play for - not exactly fostering the notion of pathway for kids outside NSW/QLD (does ACT kids play for NSW), or are you going to say oh thats ok - it can be like RLWC - if they can trace a grand parent or they live there now they can play for that state - (which would make a mockery of SOO), werent we talking about who is ontop in AUSTRALIA - NZ is irrelevent it only goes to total revenue stream!

pHyR3 wrote:

Swans4ever wrote:

pHyR3 wrote:

1.025 doesnt include digital rights which the AFL figure does.

AFL is over 3 hours with more breaks (played in quarters) nrl is over 2

if theres so many participants then why did the NRL GF in victoria outrate AFL GF in Sydney with teams from the opposite state not playing? not even taking into account the extra 0.7 million people sydney has.

okay, nrl is not national. so? still had 150k in perth watching the GF and probably more for SOO. in a city of 1.7 million without a team it's not too horrible. and will be a lot better when they do have a team. and don't come in with 2013 AFL gf figures for perth cause im pretty sure they were in the gf if im not mistaken.

Again you didn't answer the question - you went back to TV ratings - you don't even mount an argument against me when I said they are far from accurate - is that because you have none? Yes - you don't even mount an argument against me that ALL factors need to be considered - I feel like I'm talking to Baldrick from Black Adder! I have also said this many times (maybe not to you though) Melbourne people support ANY team that is in their state - when the Storm had their salary cap issue the local radio stn SEN (AFL OWNED) ran a campaign to get as many people to buy memberships in the club - because the Storm weren't in this years GF there was a substantial drop! This doesn't indicate support for RL but support for the Storm! In Perth they do have a large RU following which may account for the interest - yet their participation rate for actually playing the game is about 2700 whereas RU has about 22k! As for the media rights deal the AFL will make about 425 mil in total revenue - the NRL 284mil - so you tell me if you can face the truth who is the number one code ..........the AFL!

whats the question?

(cue some idiotic joke about comprehension skills or intelligence)

how will the media rights deal make 425 mil AFL, 284 mil nrl? source.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/league/833 ... not-enough

Swans4ever wrote:

pHyR3 wrote:

Swans4ever wrote:

pHyR3 wrote:

1.025 doesnt include digital rights which the AFL figure does.

AFL is over 3 hours with more breaks (played in quarters) nrl is over 2

if theres so many participants then why did the NRL GF in victoria outrate AFL GF in Sydney with teams from the opposite state not playing? not even taking into account the extra 0.7 million people sydney has.

okay, nrl is not national. so? still had 150k in perth watching the GF and probably more for SOO. in a city of 1.7 million without a team it's not too horrible. and will be a lot better when they do have a team. and don't come in with 2013 AFL gf figures for perth cause im pretty sure they were in the gf if im not mistaken.

Again you didn't answer the question - you went back to TV ratings - you don't even mount an argument against me when I said they are far from accurate - is that because you have none? Yes - you don't even mount an argument against me that ALL factors need to be considered - I feel like I'm talking to Baldrick from Black Adder! I have also said this many times (maybe not to you though) Melbourne people support ANY team that is in their state - when the Storm had their salary cap issue the local radio stn SEN (AFL OWNED) ran a campaign to get as many people to buy memberships in the club - because the Storm weren't in this years GF there was a substantial drop! This doesn't indicate support for RL but support for the Storm! In Perth they do have a large RU following which may account for the interest - yet their participation rate for actually playing the game is about 2700 whereas RU has about 22k! As for the media rights deal the AFL will make about 425 mil in total revenue - the NRL 284mil - so you tell me if you can face the truth who is the number one code ..........the AFL!

whats the question?

(cue some idiotic joke about comprehension skills or intelligence)

how will the media rights deal make 425 mil AFL, 284 mil nrl? source.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/league/833 ... not-enough

http://www.smh.com.au/data-point/AFL-le ... 2grkp.html

Swans4ever wrote:

Swans4ever wrote:

pHyR3 wrote:

Swans4ever wrote:

pHyR3 wrote:

1.025 doesnt include digital rights which the AFL figure does.

AFL is over 3 hours with more breaks (played in quarters) nrl is over 2

if theres so many participants then why did the NRL GF in victoria outrate AFL GF in Sydney with teams from the opposite state not playing? not even taking into account the extra 0.7 million people sydney has.

okay, nrl is not national. so? still had 150k in perth watching the GF and probably more for SOO. in a city of 1.7 million without a team it's not too horrible. and will be a lot better when they do have a team. and don't come in with 2013 AFL gf figures for perth cause im pretty sure they were in the gf if im not mistaken.

Again you didn't answer the question - you went back to TV ratings - you don't even mount an argument against me when I said they are far from accurate - is that because you have none? Yes - you don't even mount an argument against me that ALL factors need to be considered - I feel like I'm talking to Baldrick from Black Adder! I have also said this many times (maybe not to you though) Melbourne people support ANY team that is in their state - when the Storm had their salary cap issue the local radio stn SEN (AFL OWNED) ran a campaign to get as many people to buy memberships in the club - because the Storm weren't in this years GF there was a substantial drop! This doesn't indicate support for RL but support for the Storm! In Perth they do have a large RU following which may account for the interest - yet their participation rate for actually playing the game is about 2700 whereas RU has about 22k! As for the media rights deal the AFL will make about 425 mil in total revenue - the NRL 284mil - so you tell me if you can face the truth who is the number one code ..........the AFL!

whats the question?

(cue some idiotic joke about comprehension skills or intelligence)

how will the media rights deal make 425 mil AFL, 284 mil nrl? source.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/league/833 ... not-enough

http://www.smh.com.au/data-point/AFL-le ... 2grkp.html

Question

Like I have said MANY times you have to look at more than just TV ratings - the last NRL TV deal prior to last year was a fraction of the previous AFL deal (750 mil) the NRL got 1.025 in the AUSTRALIAN broadcast deal NZ last I looked was not part of AUSTRALIA! So for TV revenue from the AUSTRALIAN TV deal the AFL win and has always won - then we go to crowds, sponsorship, total revenue streams, memberships and lastly participation and again the AFL clearly win - before you try and tell us that TV ratings are the ONLY consideration AGAIN - tell me this would you rather that the NRL had all these boxes ticked or not? If the answer is yes than you have a paradox in your argument which is unsustainable!

So does NRL tick all those boxes BETTER than the AFL?

Denying AFL is the number 1 sport in this country is like denying rl has a bigger international presence than AFL. It's just stupid at worst .,, myopic at best.

pHyR3 wrote:

1.025 doesnt include digital rights which the AFL figure does.

Prove it!!

And leave the NZ figure OUT of your calculations! That's cheating and you should know that by now!

How is it cheating?
There is a NZ team playing in our comp.
Nz TV paid for the rights to broadcast games .

The $$$ went to the ARLC,so are a part of our deal,just as SOO & some other rep games are(tests in NZ & AUS,4 nations etc).

Just because it doesn't happen in Derpball & you have no rep AFL games then that's your bad luck.

Maybe If it was a great game like you pretend it is then you would have a REP scene,& tests against other countries.& when you do(Ha I made a funny)you can count them in your media deal.

So counting how many people watch on nz is an indicator of popularity in Australia ?
The domestic one day comp with India coming up is going to be huge then l

Phelpsy wrote:

So counting how many people watch on nz is an indicator of popularity in Australia ?
The domestic one day comp with India coming up is going to be huge then l

How do you get people watching on Tv ,when we are talking about $$$$ for TV deals.

I was replying to the braindead who says NZ tv rights should not be counted.

God Damn
you derpball fans are thick.

It's called equality, goose number 4! Australia to Australia. AFL to NRL. It's not Australia to Australia/New Zealand!! Making the comparison including NZ in the NRL deal is not a reasonable or fair comparison. The Warriors and their presence in the NRL is irrelevant to the argument!

So who's thick again? Leave NZ OUT OF IT!