Talking Footy

pussycat wrote: Mon Nov 27, 2017 6:18 pm

There was around 250 games LOL, we won more, attracted more viewers and got higher ratings.....What part of that do you have trouble understanding?

The majority of those 200 games were shown at different times under different scheduling conditions. When they were shown head to head under similar conditions the AFL triumphed EASILY.

You ignore this part like the plague yet its the most relevant part.

pussycat wrote: Mon Nov 27, 2017 6:18 pm

There was around 250 games LOL, we won more, attracted more viewers and got higher ratings.....What part of that do you have trouble understanding?

But but but
That’s because of the fixtures and scheduling pissy cat

Why is it similar times head to head the AFL murders the nrlol nearly every time

Do AFL people think that the AFL will try and schedule matches in isolation. Also, if the nrl eventually do expand to 18 teams, which is well over due, will they be able to maintain games being aired in isolation.

Fred wrote: Tue Nov 28, 2017 1:20 pm

Do AFL people think that the AFL will try and schedule matches in isolation. Also, if the nrl eventually do expand to 18 teams, which is well over due, will they be able to maintain games being aired in isolation.

not sure if they will increase games insolation >> I know they have made more slots for the
Thursday night timeslot over the last 2 - 3 years..

Currently with the NRL with 8 teams playing have these timeslots free.
9:30pm (if a perth team came in) Saturday night
1pm Saturday for day footy
and they have the occasional 6:30pm game which is played currently but only a few a year.

depending who comes in (which is only a matter of time) there could be Primetime double header
at the same time (into NSW AND QLD)

if another NZ team comes in (it again opens up another timeslot) so there is still options out there

Fred wrote: Tue Nov 28, 2017 1:20 pm

Do AFL people think that the AFL will try and schedule matches in isolation. Also, if the nrl eventually do expand to 18 teams, which is well over due, will they be able to maintain games being aired in isolation.

With League already playing Thursday and looking at moving into Saturday , The only possible time that the AFL could have an isolated match would be Monday night. Face it, AFL is a long boring game , hours of sheer boredom and the worst thing they ever did was move from 16 to 18 teams.

And Fred you might like to know the last NRL expansion was only 10 years ago about 3 or 4 years prior to the suns!

Fred wrote: Tue Nov 28, 2017 1:20 pm

Do AFL people think that the AFL will try and schedule matches in isolation. Also, if the nrl eventually do expand to 18 teams, which is well over due, will they be able to maintain games being aired in isolation.

no, because our games go for too long. Playing them all in isolation would be 27 hours of football over a weekend. How would you schedule it making sure it's shown at a decent hour for all markets?

Maybe we see games start earlier? Finish later ?

Lol AFL has 27 hrs of games broadcast most weekends
RL has 16 hrs
Yet we smash you in the ratings .
Oh my .
Each week fumbles has 11 more hrs yet gets less viewers per year.

AFLcrap1 wrote: Wed Nov 29, 2017 8:43 am

Lol AFL has 27 hrs of games broadcast most weekends
RL has 16 hrs
Yet we smash you in the ratings .
Oh my .
Each week fumbles has 11 more hrs yet gets less viewers per year.

Due to scheduling, games over lapping and shown in isolation...

It’s why a simple example place the games shown at similar times and or head to head.

Oh wait you don’t like that as the AFL flogs the nrlol nearly every time

AFLcrap1 wrote: Wed Nov 29, 2017 8:43 am

Lol AFL has 27 hrs of games broadcast most weekends
RL has 16 hrs
Yet we smash you in the ratings .
Oh my .
Each week fumbles has 11 more hrs yet gets less viewers per year.

When considering ratings that scheduling time difference is in your favor idiot

Bullshit
Once again
You & your not so bright mate Link have a rant about the negatives of your broadcasts
Yet continually ignore the positives

Whatever you lose in an overlap is compensated by broadcasting into a home market .

Then there is the fact that for half the season we only have 3 FTA games .
Please tell me how many you have each week .that can be watched by 100% of the population .

So 5 of our games per week for half the season can be watched by only 30% of the population ..
A huge advantage to AFL
Plus you have one more game per week to count viewers .
So stop with the fucking woe is me we have it so bad bullshit .




All,the but but but bullshit can't change these facts

I think the AFL rating suffer by broadcasting directly into home market. That’s why I got Foxtel as couldn’t watch the match the rest of the country was getting cause suns or lions were on. Maybe the negative impact is confined to qld though.

Fred wrote: Wed Nov 29, 2017 4:02 pm

I think the AFL rating suffer by broadcasting directly into home market. That’s why I got Foxtel as couldn’t watch the match the rest of the country was getting cause suns or lions were on. Maybe the negative impact is confined to qld though.

though in QLD AND NSW you get up to 5 FTA games a week

though the positives far out way the negatives..
that u may sometimes miss out on a Good Game and be stuck with the suns..

(feel for the fan that loves league but does not have fox) misses out on 5 games per week.

AFLcrap1 wrote: Wed Nov 29, 2017 12:58 pm

Once again
You & your not so bright mate Link have a rant about the negatives of your broadcasts
Yet continually ignore the positives

Whatever you lose in an overlap is compensated by broadcasting into a home market .

That's a different argument, which I will address later in this post. Firstly, I was responding to your suggestion 27 hours of coverage is an advantage in ratings over 16 hrs. That's just ridiculous. If YOU watch 16hrs of NRL over a weekend you are counted 8 times. If I watch 16 hours of AFL over the weekend I am counted only 5.3 times. Therefore the NRL have a 'false' advantage by having a shorter game.

Furthermore, our longer telecast means we MUST show games concurrently because there is not enough reasonable viewing time over a weekend to show 27 hours in isolation. You raise the point about targeted games, which is reasonable, but you ignore the fact the NRL do it with the Broncos every weekend too! Also, concurrent games never achieve an audience twice a single game, therefore the average ratings of each concurrent game will ALWAYS be less than a single game shown nationally. EG: Coll v Ade may get 500k in Melb/Adel, and WC v Swans 300k in Perth/Syd/Bris = 800k metro for 2 games. Yet Melb v Adel shown nationally on its own would get 600-700k nationally. Therefore the average per game is far lower for concurrent games

Then there is the fact that for half the season we only have 3 FTA games .
Please tell me how many you have each week .that can be watched by 100% of the population .

we have 88 FTA games to our homeland states(22 effective rounds x 4) compared to your 72 (24 x 3), so the difference is only 16 FTA games. Many of these extra FTA games are mid afternoon which rate lowest. Around 65 of our FTA games are shown directly against another AFL game on STV. NONE of your 72 games are shown against another NRL game.

So 5 of our games per week for half the season can be watched by only 30% of the population ..
A huge advantage to AFL

more than accounted for by showing our games concurrently

Plus you have one more game per week to count viewers .

you have more rounds.....plus SOO

RL Ratings = more.That's a straight forward fact. Anyone that argues with facts is a fool.

Length of your telecast, Length of our telecast, overlapping/isolation, 3 FTA /4 FTA doesn't change facts.

Rugby League attracted more rating/viewers - Game, Set, Match.

The End. Amen. ....Enjoy that Silver