Talking Footy

AFLcrap1 wrote:

Yes we can . We won the ratings battle for the year.

Keep telling yourself you lot won if that makes you feel better. The rest of us will just continue to laugh at how pathetic and desperate you lot sound. :_<>

Beaussie wrote:

AFLcrap1 wrote:

Yes we can . We won the ratings battle for the year.

Keep telling yourself you lot won if that makes you feel better. The rest of us will just continue to laugh at how pathetic and desperate you lot sound. :_<>

Wow!!!!!! The ignorance is breathtaking!!!! You just can't tell bald faced lies and get away with it pal. Read Wookies ratings post from before the GF's - "RL is 8 million in front and can't be beaten". You fumbling zealots seriously have issues that need attention.

The war is over pal. If you can't bare it get back to the jungle and keep fighting the battle already lost!!!

NlolRL wrote:

leeroy*NRL* wrote:

NlolRL wrote:

leeroy*NRL* wrote:

NlolRL wrote:

AFLcrap1 wrote:

The gnashing of teeth & the stamping of feet are sure signs that when reality intrudes into the AFL propaganda bubble the brainwashed tools just can't accept it .
The but but but but but but buting is great entertainment .

No nashing of teeth at all, you're completely misreading me. I'm absolutely comfortable with the AFL winning almost every ratings direct comparison but ending up with a little less in the season tally. The direct comparisons show popularity, the tally merely the most content

You are only stating half the story..

AFL have a lot more FTA Air games - meaning a lot more viewers.
Home States get there Home Teams
And Melbourne get there blockbusters on FTA

We only have 23 more FTA games, all being on Saturday arvo, and delayed into Melbourne our biggest audience. This doesnt come close to the advantage the NRL have by showing every game in isolation

Yes you have 23 more FTA games per season..
What about a Saturday night game, when its the crows v Port
I don't think Melbourne would be interested much in watching these teams

so they get on the same night a Melbourne blockbuster.

THE NRL however if they show Canberra v Broncos on FTA
that is the only game we can watch.. therefore lots of viewers will not watch
because they don't really care for these teams..
it works both ways.

FOX is limited to 30% of population.
NRL FTA game rates 1 mill AVG
FOX 300k ---- that is 700k difference.
NRL has 5 exclusive FOX games..

it does work both ways. But the biggest fact is the AFL have 5 games per round due to concurrent scheduling to the NRLs 8. 3 more games at 250k each on STV is a big difference. Yes you only show one game per FTA session, but when that one game is the Broncos every week you maximise ratings due to their far higher following than your other clubs

Yes while the broncos do have 60%-70% of there games on FTA

So does the ADELAIDE CROWS AND WEST COAST EAGLES> / FREO / PORT /

getting max ratings in the home states.

the AFL do concurrent scheduling for a reason..
No one in Melbourne wants to watch WA and SA teams
so it is shown live in there states
and Melbourne get there Victorian Teams.

do u think the Melbourne public would give a flick about LIONS V PORT ------ NO
so QLD AND SA get that game.

While Melbourne get there big game - CATS V PIES
getting FTA exposure into each state for the main team..
works great.

The fumble excuses are getting beyond the pathetic level now

Lol still no where near as pathetic as your tinfoil hat mob but buts.

Its like every figure of fact OCDazza spazza you'll pick one rub with it and ignore the actual facts that make up that figure

leagueiscrap wrote:

Lol still no where near as pathetic as your tinfoil hat mob but buts.

Its like every figure of fact OCDazza spazza you'll pick one rub with it and ignore the actual facts that make up that figure

Can anyone believe this loonie????????? He says we ignore the 'actual facts' lololololololololol. Totally delusional lolololol. Back to the jungle for you as well pal......keep fighting the war that was lost by 8 million.....lolololol

leeroy*NRL* wrote:

NlolRL wrote:

leeroy*NRL* wrote:

NlolRL wrote:

leeroy*NRL* wrote:

NlolRL wrote:

AFLcrap1 wrote:

The gnashing of teeth & the stamping of feet are sure signs that when reality intrudes into the AFL propaganda bubble the brainwashed tools just can't accept it .
The but but but but but but buting is great entertainment .

No nashing of teeth at all, you're completely misreading me. I'm absolutely comfortable with the AFL winning almost every ratings direct comparison but ending up with a little less in the season tally. The direct comparisons show popularity, the tally merely the most content

You are only stating half the story..

AFL have a lot more FTA Air games - meaning a lot more viewers.
Home States get there Home Teams
And Melbourne get there blockbusters on FTA

We only have 23 more FTA games, all being on Saturday arvo, and delayed into Melbourne our biggest audience. This doesnt come close to the advantage the NRL have by showing every game in isolation

Yes you have 23 more FTA games per season..
What about a Saturday night game, when its the crows v Port
I don't think Melbourne would be interested much in watching these teams

so they get on the same night a Melbourne blockbuster.

THE NRL however if they show Canberra v Broncos on FTA
that is the only game we can watch.. therefore lots of viewers will not watch
because they don't really care for these teams..
it works both ways.

FOX is limited to 30% of population.
NRL FTA game rates 1 mill AVG
FOX 300k ---- that is 700k difference.
NRL has 5 exclusive FOX games..

it does work both ways. But the biggest fact is the AFL have 5 games per round due to concurrent scheduling to the NRLs 8. 3 more games at 250k each on STV is a big difference. Yes you only show one game per FTA session, but when that one game is the Broncos every week you maximise ratings due to their far higher following than your other clubs

Yes while the broncos do have 60%-70% of there games on FTA

So does the ADELAIDE CROWS AND WEST COAST EAGLES> / FREO / PORT /

getting max ratings in the home states.

the AFL do concurrent scheduling for a reason..
No one in Melbourne wants to watch WA and SA teams
so it is shown live in there states
and Melbourne get there Victorian Teams.

do u think the Melbourne public would give a flick about LIONS V PORT ------ NO
so QLD AND SA get that game.

While Melbourne get there big game - CATS V PIES
getting FTA exposure into each state for the main team..
works great.

well the Crows/ Power are two teams in a city half the size of Brisbane. The Eagles/Dockers are 2 teams in a city smaller than Brisbane. Combined they probably get less FN games than the Broncos

The AFL do concurrent scheduling because a 3 hour telecast doesnt doesnt fit into FN/SA/SUN. 27 hours of content just cant fit into this time in a practical way that makes viewing convenient

I'm not complaining about the way the AFL is scheduled, I'm saying the ratings dont show the true story when the scheduling isnt the same

Terry wrote:

leagueiscrap wrote:

Lol still no where near as pathetic as your tinfoil hat mob but buts.

Its like every figure of fact OCDazza spazza you'll pick one rub with it and ignore the actual facts that make up that figure

Can anyone believe this loonie????????? He says we ignore the 'actual facts' lololololololololol. Totally delusional lolololol. Back to the jungle for you as well pal......keep fighting the war that was lost by 8 million.....lolololol

you ignore the fact the AFL has the highest rating GF, the highest rating finals (all of them), the highest rating H&A game on FTA and highest rating game on STV. All you want to talk about is the most irrelevant stat, the tally.

So yes, you are blatantly ignoring the facts

NlolRL wrote:

Terry wrote:

leagueiscrap wrote:

Lol still no where near as pathetic as your tinfoil hat mob but buts.

Its like every figure of fact OCDazza spazza you'll pick one rub with it and ignore the actual facts that make up that figure

Can anyone believe this loonie????????? He says we ignore the 'actual facts' lololololololololol. Totally delusional lolololol. Back to the jungle for you as well pal......keep fighting the war that was lost by 8 million.....lolololol

you ignore the fact the AFL has the highest rating GF, the highest rating finals (all of them), the highest rating H&A game on FTA and highest rating game on STV. All you want to talk about is the most irrelevant stat, the tally.

So yes, you are blatantly ignoring the facts

Well the lunacy continues lolololololol. When will the excuses stop???? Apparently the aggregate tally is 'the most irrevelant' stat lolololololololololol. Can anyone other than a fumbling zealot believe that idiocy???? Tell that to the broadcasters and advertisers ya dill lolololololololo.

So if Coles have more sales in a given year Woolies can just say 'that's irrelevant because X, Y & Z of our products sold more, so we win" just blindly ignoring the bottom line lolololololol. Doesn't cut it pal, back to the jungle lolololololol.

I'd say we're approaching 30 different excuses in two days lololololololol.....give it up fumblers.........you're looking like fools.

Yep I used the Decathlon to explain it .
Like talking to a plank of wood .

Maybe try a horse racing explanation

I was in front after 200m
I led most of the race .
I got passed by another horse down the straight .
He beat me by 8 lengths ..

But I still won ..because I led for a long way .
I ran the first 1000m in 58s ..far quicker than the others ...


It's sheer utter lunacy the crap they are going on with l
They lost
Deal with it .

Terry wrote:

NlolRL wrote:

Terry wrote:

leagueiscrap wrote:

Lol still no where near as pathetic as your tinfoil hat mob but buts.

Its like every figure of fact OCDazza spazza you'll pick one rub with it and ignore the actual facts that make up that figure

Can anyone believe this loonie????????? He says we ignore the 'actual facts' lololololololololol. Totally delusional lolololol. Back to the jungle for you as well pal......keep fighting the war that was lost by 8 million.....lolololol

you ignore the fact the AFL has the highest rating GF, the highest rating finals (all of them), the highest rating H&A game on FTA and highest rating game on STV. All you want to talk about is the most irrelevant stat, the tally.

So yes, you are blatantly ignoring the facts

Well the lunacy continues lolololololol. When will the excuses stop???? Apparently the aggregate tally is 'the most irrevelant' stat lolololololololololol. Can anyone other than a fumbling zealot believe that idiocy???? Tell that to the broadcasters and advertisers ya dill lolololololololo.

So if Coles have more sales in a given year Woolies can just say 'that's irrelevant because X, Y & Z of our products sold more, so we win" just blindly ignoring the bottom line lolololololol. Doesn't cut it pal, back to the jungle lolololololol.

I'd say we're approaching 30 different excuses in two days lololololololol.....give it up fumblers.........you're looking like fools.

How is "we outrated you in all but one comparison this year" an excuse? Lol

As for the networks and the bottom line, oh they spoke loud and clear when they gave the AFL more money. Lol

Try again mate

Lol try again
This is not about media deals ,
It's a ratings thread .
& in 2016 RL outrated AFL by millions .
With less games .
There's no ifs no buts
Thems the facts .

Someday you will have to learn to accept that fact .
It's Irrefutable

NlolRL wrote:

leeroy*NRL* wrote:

NlolRL wrote:

leeroy*NRL* wrote:

NlolRL wrote:

leeroy*NRL* wrote:

NlolRL wrote:

AFLcrap1 wrote:

The gnashing of teeth & the stamping of feet are sure signs that when reality intrudes into the AFL propaganda bubble the brainwashed tools just can't accept it .
The but but but but but but buting is great entertainment .

No nashing of teeth at all, you're completely misreading me. I'm absolutely comfortable with the AFL winning almost every ratings direct comparison but ending up with a little less in the season tally. The direct comparisons show popularity, the tally merely the most content

You are only stating half the story..

AFL have a lot more FTA Air games - meaning a lot more viewers.
Home States get there Home Teams
And Melbourne get there blockbusters on FTA

We only have 23 more FTA games, all being on Saturday arvo, and delayed into Melbourne our biggest audience. This doesnt come close to the advantage the NRL have by showing every game in isolation

Yes you have 23 more FTA games per season..
What about a Saturday night game, when its the crows v Port
I don't think Melbourne would be interested much in watching these teams

so they get on the same night a Melbourne blockbuster.

THE NRL however if they show Canberra v Broncos on FTA
that is the only game we can watch.. therefore lots of viewers will not watch
because they don't really care for these teams..
it works both ways.

FOX is limited to 30% of population.
NRL FTA game rates 1 mill AVG
FOX 300k ---- that is 700k difference.
NRL has 5 exclusive FOX games..

it does work both ways. But the biggest fact is the AFL have 5 games per round due to concurrent scheduling to the NRLs 8. 3 more games at 250k each on STV is a big difference. Yes you only show one game per FTA session, but when that one game is the Broncos every week you maximise ratings due to their far higher following than your other clubs

Yes while the broncos do have 60%-70% of there games on FTA

So does the ADELAIDE CROWS AND WEST COAST EAGLES> / FREO / PORT /

getting max ratings in the home states.

the AFL do concurrent scheduling for a reason..
No one in Melbourne wants to watch WA and SA teams
so it is shown live in there states
and Melbourne get there Victorian Teams.

do u think the Melbourne public would give a flick about LIONS V PORT ------ NO
so QLD AND SA get that game.

While Melbourne get there big game - CATS V PIES
getting FTA exposure into each state for the main team..
works great.

well the Crows/ Power are two teams in a city half the size of Brisbane. The Eagles/Dockers are 2 teams in a city smaller than Brisbane. Combined they probably get less FN games than the Broncos

The AFL do concurrent scheduling because a 3 hour telecast doesnt doesnt fit into FN/SA/SUN. 27 hours of content just cant fit into this time in a practical way that makes viewing convenient

I'm not complaining about the way the AFL is scheduled, I'm saying the ratings dont show the true story when the scheduling isnt the same

SA AND WA TEAMS STILL get FTA coverage though which is over 140k avg for these teams
I guess you can say..
some games some weeks
the scheduling helps and other weeks it does not..


In terms of revenue though
the reason AFL does get more simply comes down to more Advertising opportunities..

Just so you know AFL Boys

the NRL GRAND FINAL in the 1st half had 2 adverts..

NlolRL wrote:

no idea. Tally's are irrelevant as a meaningful comparison if the scheduling and number of rounds arent similar. Of course its amazing how youve jumped of ratings for games like all 9 finals,

If RL is more popular on TV why didnt it win a single final when all 9 of the were a reasonable comparison?

The battle of Bull Run, Gettysburg, Chickamaunga. Great victories but the Southeners lost that war too.

pussycat wrote:

NlolRL wrote:

no idea. Tally's are irrelevant as a meaningful comparison if the scheduling and number of rounds arent similar. Of course its amazing how youve jumped of ratings for games like all 9 finals,

If RL is more popular on TV why didnt it win a single final when all 9 of the were a reasonable comparison?

The battle of Bull Run, Gettysburg, Chickamaunga. Great victories but the Southeners lost that war too.

Couldn't of said it better!!!!!! We lost a few battles but we clearly won the war!!!! Bravo RL !!!!!!