your analogy is stupidAFLcrap1 wrote: Sat Oct 14, 2017 9:24 amAs has been posted before
I'll put it in simple terms for the AFL fans....still they'll have massive trouble understanding
In a horse race ...say the Melb cup.. (just to make the southern inbred folk feel good).
It's not what horse is in front past the post the first time .
It's not what horse is leading by 5 lengths at the 1400
It's not what horse is in front at the 200.
It's not what horse ran an exceptional 400 m sectional time .
All that matters is what horse was in front past the winning post .
You dumb hicks are jumping up & down waving your ticket around saying you won the race because of most of the above..except the highlighted bit .
Go to the TAB & try to collect when you got beaten ...beaten easily & argue that you were leading around the corner .
That means you won ..lol
Sadly that's what you're arguing here.
You just can't understand that you lost .
In the Melbourne cup race there are no rewards or acknowledgements for anything but the finish line.
In a battle for ratings there are clear rewards and acknowledgements for different aspects to ratings through the season. The benefits for the cumulative total are massively dependant on the scheduling, how many hours of TV footage is involved, when it's shown, etc etc It renders the cumulative ratings victory as basically irrelevant
On the other hand, do you think Ch7 benefit from having 25 stand-alone AFL games rate more than Ch9's NRL game shown at the same time?
Do you think Ch7 benefit from having 8 stand-alone AFL finals rate more than Ch9's NRL finals?
Do you think Ch7 benefit from having the AFL GF rate more than Ch9's NRL GF despite being shown in a ratings dead time?
Do you think Foxtel benefit from the huge ratings the AFL acheive every stand-alone game or final?
liar extraordinaire 
