Talking Footy

cos789 wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Rugby League watched by 132.7 Million people in 2011

I'm sure that helps you sleep at night but there's only 22 million people in Australia.
That one person watching 132.7 million games of rl does mean anything except there's some mighty stupid people running around.

132.7 Million watch the 200 odd games of RL played in Aust you dimwit
it aint rocket science buddy

Topper wrote:

It has already been established that the correct cumulative numbers are 85 millions for the AFL and 72 millions for the NRL in 2011.

no

its already been established ... the correct figure is 132.7 Million for League
some 12 Mill more then AFL

K

cos789 wrote:

Topper wrote:

It has already been established that the correct cumulative numbers are 85 millions for the AFL and 72 millions for the NRL in 2011.

Yes, thanks for that. I'm not a great fan of cumulative figures especially when applied to ratings.
In this case, because the seasons are of similar duration there is some validity in comparison however a simple weekend snap shot of attendances or ratings should be sufficient for any independant observer that the number one football code in Australia is Australian Football.

snap shot ....


the cumulative figures are the weekly snap shots added up
theres no joy here for AFL fans either .... sure .. they may win a week here .. a week there

but overall
RL is watched by more people then AR .. in Australia
cased closed

Raiderdave wrote:

RL is watched by more people then AR .. in Australia

You might want to seek some psychiatric help because just saying so doesn't make it happen.

Australian Football comes first in the world for attendances per head of population.
That's what you call real watching.
Australian Football clearly is the best rated football in Australia but you keep insisting that there is some weight in your cumulative figures. Even forgetting that this assertion is incorrect , cumulative figures only show just that, the cumulative figures. They definitely don't show an entity is watched by more people they can only show the total amount of viewing which is only of interest to commercial people.
Baseball is the most watched sport in America because it has a ridiculously high number of season games but American Football easily has the most number of people watching it in it's short 16 game season.
Comprendez ?

He won't. He's too stupid.

cos789 wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

RL is watched by more people then AR .. in Australia

You might want to seek some psychiatric help because just saying so doesn't make it happen.

Australian Football comes first in the world for attendances per head of population.
That's what you call real watching.
Australian Football clearly is the best rated football in Australia but you keep insisting that there is some weight in your cumulative figures. Even forgetting that this assertion is incorrect , cumulative figures only show just that, the cumulative figures. They definitely don't show an entity is watched by more people they can only show the total amount of viewing which is only of interest to commercial people.
Baseball is the most watched sport in America because it has a ridiculously high number of season games but American Football easily has the most number of people watching it in it's short 16 game season.
Comprendez ?

132.7 Million watched RL on TV in 2011
3.5 Million watched it at grounds
136.2 Million in total

120 Million watched AFL on TV in 2011
7 Million at grounds


do the math
cased closed

Topper wrote:

He won't. He's too stupid.

Apparantly.

Seemingly the test for insanity is continually repeating the same procedure and expecting a different result.

No matter how times he repeats his figures the truth is by measure Australian Football is by far the most dominant code in Australia.
Probably rl's number one problem is that rl doesn't work within this scenario.

cos789 wrote:

Topper wrote:

He won't. He's too stupid.

Apparantly.

Seemingly the test for insanity is continually repeating the same procedure and expecting a different result.

No matter how times he repeats his figures the truth is by measure Australian Football is by far the most dominant code in Australia.
Probably rl's number one problem is that rl doesn't work within this scenario.

well apparently your calculator doesn't work
the truth is in the numbers

RL.. 136.2 Million veiwers in 2011
AFL... 127 Million

wot other scenario is required .... thats right
none

Yeah it's quite simple really. More people watched Rugby LEague in 2011.

I agree the AFL is very popular and has great attendences though, but as Raider highlights, its quite a simple equation to realise which code was viewed by more people. Best to stop confusing the situation by making up terms like "real watching" cos789, its only making you look like you didn't learn math. Comprehende?

You comprehend the fact that 85 million watched AFL and only 72 million watched NRL, King-Eliagh.

I dont know exactly where you got those figures Topper? But I have seen raider provide fairly detailed info before on how he amassed his. Seemed reputable to me so for now I'm going with his figures.

King-Eliagh wrote:

I dont know exactly where you got those figures Topper? But I have seen raider provide fairly detailed info before on how he amassed his. Seemed reputable to me so for now I'm going with his figures.

yes E

I wouldn't trust tipsy with numbers

he had GWS with more members then South Sydney ... even after I gave them to him

Souths 15,000
GWS 1,700

I think he thought it was not possible for an AFL club to have less members then an NRL one
& he went into a state of ... well ... delusional hysteria

hes a funny little fellow ... I liken him to a dancing bear
hup hup hup .... few taps with the stick ..... hup hup hup

King-Eliagh wrote:

I dont know exactly where you got those figures Topper? But I have seen raider provide fairly detailed info before on how he amassed his. Seemed reputable to me so for now I'm going with his figures.

We didn't expect anything less from you.
But we'll stick with the truth.
If you go to the ABS, that's the Australian Bureau of statistics, you'd trust them as an independant organisation wouldn't you ?Well they show rl in quite a poor light. Lot's of interesting graphs and breakdowns. It'd be nice to paste a few of those.

cos789 wrote:

King-Eliagh wrote:

I dont know exactly where you got those figures Topper? But I have seen raider provide fairly detailed info before on how he amassed his. Seemed reputable to me so for now I'm going with his figures.

We didn't expect anything less from you.
But we'll stick with the truth.
If you go to the ABS, that's the Australian Bureau of statistics, you'd trust them as an independant organisation wouldn't you ?Well they show rl in quite a poor light. Lot's of interesting graphs and breakdowns. It'd be nice to paste a few of those.

Yes indeed

According the ABS' last count, Australian Rules has the most players in Australia with a whopping 268,700 compared with rugby league's pathetic 91,200.

Source: http://www.thepowerindex.com.au/sport/w ... han-gallop

King-Eliagh wrote:

I dont know exactly where you got those figures Topper? But I have seen raider provide fairly detailed info before on how he amassed his. Seemed reputable to me so for now I'm going with his figures.

You'd be wrong to do so. The figures I provided are the totals of the ratings provided on this website.