Well spotted.Wasn't the Royal Wedding on that night?? I dare say nearly every female in the country had control of the remote that night...
The NRL was way down on that night too.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Well spotted.Wasn't the Royal Wedding on that night?? I dare say nearly every female in the country had control of the remote that night...
NO AFL supporter is saying that the AFL will"take over" western Sydney any time soon
Its about choice for the coming generations and growing marketing share.
The only people that seem to think that the AFL is waging War on RL is the thugby types on LU and the Murdoch press.
.Shotties. said:I thought given I'd used 08 as a basis for comparison previously you'd have gathered who I was discussing when I talked about the best player in the league at the time playing for his new team.
.Shotties. said:I'm aware of it's place in history, (although in fairness, I doubt how much you could tell me, for example, about Freo's entry or even Port's entry which arguably had a lot more history and prestige around it than the Giants') however I don't subscribe to the varying levels of build up and hype I've seen put forth as a means to describe what a failure the first Derby was.
Thought the ratings were poor and here we are. Please let me know when it's ok for me to pass on any negative comment on the game without any finger pointing.
The AFL are pinning future prosperity on popularity in Sydney/NSW, yes? That being the case, only Sydney ratings count. Through other factors, like inflation, if ratings/crowd figures dipped in VIC/SA/WA/TAS in the next five years, the AFL will still get more for TV rights than what they got last time. On top of that, the NRL have never committed to a huge presence in Melbourne (often it comes across a token) in the same way the AFL does in Sydney/NSW. They're not as fussed about TV ratings in Melbourne. As a result, those ratings hold less value.This comment perplexes me.
1.Why is this "the only thing that counts"?
It may be 5x higher, but does that mean it's still an accepted mainstream sport over there?2. AFL ratings in NSW/QLD are 5 times higher than NRL in WA/SA/VIC when the AFL's FTA and foxtel figures for the same game are added.
I'm assuming you meant "the NRL is in it's"? All that means is that the AFL is more popular in VIC than the NRL is in NSW and nothing else. It's just a reflection of culture or something we are not yet aware of, rather than one thing being better or more accepted than another overall.3. So far the ratings indicate the AFL is more popular in it's homeland than NRL is its.
I'm not convinced that attendances are as obvious and measurable as an indicator, as what you are. I mean, Cricket isn't more popular or more accepted in Victoria because a huge crowd turns up to Boxing day, compared to the attendances of tests in other states.This doesn't even take into account the more obvious and measurable indicator being attendances.
.Shotties. said:You're becoming hysterical.
.Shotties. said:To borrow a tack, I never said you couldn't say anything negative, I just disagree with your statement of how hyped / historical the game was. I provided a game that would mean more to most people who followed the game and I provided a basis for saying that just because a team was entering, doesn't mean the game is a big, memorable or historic one.
I actually have all the time in the world for your input on discussions of this nature as I know you're not one to trash either code or get petty about it, I just feel your statement was off this time.
The AFL are pinning future prosperity on popularity in Sydney/NSW, yes? That being the case, only Sydney ratings count. Through other factors, like inflation, if ratings/crowd figures dipped in VIC/SA/WA/TAS in the next five years, the AFL will still get more for TV rights than what they got last time. On top of that, the NRL have never committed to a huge presence in Melbourne (often it comes across a token) in the same way the AFL does in Sydney/NSW. They're not as fussed about TV ratings in Melbourne. As a result, those ratings hold less value.
It may be 5x higher, but does that mean it's still an accepted mainstream sport over there?
I'm assuming you meant "the NRL is in it's"? All that means is that the AFL is more popular in VIC than the NRL is in NSW and nothing else. It's just a reflection of culture or something we are not yet aware of, rather than one thing being better or more accepted than another overall.
I'm not convinced that attendances are as obvious and measurable as an indicator, as what you are. I mean, Cricket isn't more popular or more accepted in Victoria because a huge crowd turns up to Boxing day, compared to the attendances of tests in other states.
100,000 odd turn up to the GP (despite all the negative publicity it gets), even when the race clashes with the first week of the AFL. Which is more than any game of Aussie rules. Carlton, Collingwood, Essendon and Richmond aren't racing teams in the GP. But no one is going to say F1/motorsport is more popular than footy in VIC despite this fact.
I can use other comparisons but, do I have to?
37k only for the Gold Coast Suns? I know it's a digital channel, but still very disappointing.
I'm not convinced that attendances are as obvious and measurable as an indicator, as what you are. I mean, Cricket isn't more popular or more accepted in Victoria because a huge crowd turns up to Boxing day, compared to the attendances of tests in other states.
100,000 odd turn up to the GP (despite all the negative publicity it gets), even when the race clashes with the first week of the AFL. Which is more than any game of Aussie rules. Carlton, Collingwood, Essendon and Richmond aren't racing teams in the GP. But no one is going to say F1/motorsport is more popular than footy in VIC despite this fact.
I can use other comparisons but, do I have to?
The AFL are pinning future prosperity on popularity in Sydney/NSW, yes? That being the case, only Sydney ratings count. Through other factors, like inflation, if ratings/crowd figures dipped in VIC/SA/WA/TAS in the next five years, the AFL will still get more for TV rights than what they got last time. On top of that, the NRL have never committed to a huge presence in Melbourne (often it comes across a token) in the same way the AFL does in Sydney/NSW. They're not as fussed about TV ratings in Melbourne. As a result, those ratings hold less value.
It may be 5x higher, but does that mean it's still an accepted mainstream sport over there?
I'm assuming you meant "the NRL is in it's"? All that means is that the AFL is more popular in VIC than the NRL is in NSW and nothing else. It's just a reflection of culture or something we are not yet aware of, rather than one thing being better or more accepted than another overall.
I'm not convinced that attendances are as obvious and measurable as an indicator, as what you are. I mean, Cricket isn't more popular or more accepted in Victoria because a huge crowd turns up to Boxing day, compared to the attendances of tests in other states.
100,000 odd turn up to the GP (despite all the negative publicity it gets), even when the race clashes with the first week of the AFL. Which is more than any game of Aussie rules. Carlton, Collingwood, Essendon and Richmond aren't racing teams in the GP. But no one is going to say F1/motorsport is more popular than footy in VIC despite this fact.
I can use other comparisons but, do I have to?
That's not a comparison at all you bell-end. Firstly, the F1 is a three day event with a crowd totalling 100k. The AFL is a three hour event and several times a season either hits 100k or goes close.
A fair comparison would be three days of AFL action from Thursday this week, which saw a crowd of 190,000 push through the turnstiles.
100,000 odd turn up to the GP (despite all the negative publicity it gets), even when the race clashes with the first week of the AFL. Which is more than any game of Aussie rules. Carlton, Collingwood, Essendon and Richmond aren't racing teams in the GP. But no one is going to say F1/motorsport is more popular than footy in VIC despite this fact.
I can use other comparisons but, do I have to?
Mate! Footy is bigger and will always be bigger, build a ****ing bridge!!!
Excellent figures. One question though...The FTA figures are definitely metro. I have read somewhere that the Foxtel figures are country wide. Can you confirm?ok remaining fox ratings are in thanks to mediaweek twtter
Hawks v pies 267k
Freo v Geel 122k
Melb v Bris 192k
GC v Adel 211k
North v Essendon 209k
Bulldogs v Eagles 229k
Port v Saints 260k
Total Metro ratings: 4.945 million
New ALL time metro viewing record (by a million viewers)
1.428 million more than Round 1 2011 (a 45% increase in metro viewers)
Dumb scheduling move for mine then - having both QLD teams playing so close to each other and cannibalising the audience.Actually not likely, the 37k is the Gold Coast v Adelaide game as far as Im aware, Brisbane v Melbourne was only shown in Brisbane on 7mate, so hopefully we'll get those figures later - the released figures are for saturday night afl only AFAIK
ok remaining fox ratings are in thanks to mediaweek twtter
Hawks v pies 267k
Freo v Geel 122k
Melb v Bris 192k
GC v Adel 211k
North v Essendon 209k
Bulldogs v Eagles 229k
Port v Saints 260k
Total Metro ratings: 4.945 million
New ALL time metro viewing record (by a million viewers)
1.428 million more than Round 1 2011 (a 45% increase in metro viewers)
ok remaining fox ratings are in thanks to mediaweek twtter
Hawks v pies 267k
Freo v Geel 122k
Melb v Bris 192k
GC v Adel 211k
North v Essendon 209k
Bulldogs v Eagles 229k
Port v Saints 260k
Total Metro ratings: 4.945 million
New ALL time metro viewing record (by a million viewers)
1.428 million more than Round 1 2011 (a 45% increase in metro viewers)
Freo v Geelong up against North v Essendon is interesting. both cracking games with similar combined sized supporter bases. so why did the PayTV only one have 60% more viewers. It appears that a good proportion of those with PayTV are choosing to watch the FTA coverage I guess the neutrals in WA would watch the North V Essendon game knowing the other game will be televised on delay.ok remaining fox ratings are in thanks to mediaweek twtter
Hawks v pies 267k
Freo v Geel 122k
Melb v Bris 192k
GC v Adel 211k
North v Essendon 209k
Bulldogs v Eagles 229k
Port v Saints 260k
Total Metro ratings: 4.945 million
New ALL time metro viewing record (by a million viewers)
1.428 million more than Round 1 2011 (a 45% increase in metro viewers)
ok remaining fox ratings are in thanks to mediaweek twtter
Hawks v pies 267k
Freo v Geel 122k
Melb v Bris 192k
GC v Adel 211k
North v Essendon 209k
Bulldogs v Eagles 229k
Port v Saints 260k
Total Metro ratings: 4.945 million
New ALL time metro viewing record (by a million viewers)
1.428 million more than Round 1 2011 (a 45% increase in metro viewers)
Freo v Geelong up against North v Essendon is interesting. both cracking games with similar combined sized supporter bases. so why did the PayTV only one have 60% more viewers. It appears that a good proportion of those with PayTV are choosing to watch the FTA coverage I guess the neutrals in WA would watch the North V Essendon game knowing the other game will be televised on delay.
Fantastic ratings, great for the AFL, but seriously, all this does is confirm in my mind how flawed TV ratings are, does anybody really believe that 45% more people watched the footy this year than last, its possible but highly unlikely, its possible that this many people have always watched the footy.
And if we are going to compare the AFL to the NRL, in my mind, the memberships, crowds, and respective income streams are the best ways to compare.