The Daily Telegraph’s headline “NRL obliterates rival codes in TV war” caught my eye. I don’t usually read the Daily Rupert, but was looking for another article someone had talked to me about.
Sydney viewers were “analysed” as follows:
Tigers v Roosters (Nine) – 471,000
Titans v Warriors (Nine) – 441,000
Panthers v Raiders (Nine) – 254,000
Bledisloe Cup (Seven) – 152,000
Swans v Bulldogs (Ten) – 129,000
A nice little kidney punch from the terror with the quip: “The biggest shock was saved for the Australian Rugby Union, whose showpiece event, the Bledisloe Cup, wooed just 152,000 Sydney viewers.”
Of course, sneaking in later were some facts like: “However, the Wallabies did have more than 70,000 people watching them live at ANZ Stadium, and 181,000 tuned into Fox Sports – traditionally the preferred telecast over Seven for rugby fans.”
Hmmm, so when you combine the Seven and Foxtel numbers, which you need to so as to calculate the actual number of people watching the game on TV, you get 333,000. Not paltry, better than the Panthers-Raiders game, and smashing the Swans (in the context of the Sydney market). Hardly “obliterated”.
Let’s not get into whether we count the actual crowds, which can swing both ways. The NRL’s three crowds would match rugby one, I’ll give that up.
And note we are dealing with Sydney viewers. So again it is worth noting the little fact for AFL numbers sneaking in towards the end: “Meanwhile, just 129,000 fans watched Swans skipper Brett Kirk and coach Paul Roos’ AFL farewell against the Western Bulldogs, despite 500,000 die-hards glued to the box in Melbourne.”
500,000 Melbourne viewers? So we’ll stay away from national numbers because they might not look so obliterating. It would have been far more interesting to see what the numbers in the various different TV markets were, and the overall national numbers. Assuming we could get an actual like-for-like comparison, which is difficult given both Nine and Seven often don’t show codes not involving a Sherrin at a decent time in southern states.
I wonder what the Sydney FC v Phoenix ratings were on Foxtel. The Daily Terror probably doesn’t pay attention to football unless the Socceroos are involved.
I have to shake my head at this jingoistic flag waving from News Ltd, with selective use of statistics. As they say, there are lies, damned lies, and statistics.
Further, it is even funnier that News Ltd owns the rights to the NRL, rugby union and AFL (and football!) through Foxtel. So this article is essentially crowing about one subsidiary or product line of News “obliterating” another (incorrectly I would argue).
And the media wonders why it is held is such low regard. Christian Nicolussi has missed his true calling, in advertising (or propaganda).
Redb
Roar Guru
Yes you are right about the attendance culture as well in AFL, you can simply live without Foxtel especially when you factor in the 4 FTA games. You could even argue that AFL club memership of 600,000+ (not all full membership but 80-90% are) is the alternative for many in Vic, SA and WA to a Foxtel subscription. This is what Foxtel are up against and are trying to change.
Crosscoder
Roar Guru
RedB Free advertising by Foxtel,no more for the NRL than for the AFL.There is plenty of contra involved for both codes.As a matter of fact,the AFL is on Fox sports 1.Why is this so,when for years rl is the dominant viewing code on Foxtel.Remove rl from Foxtel and that medium would just about wither .For some time the dopes had the NRL on Fox sport3 ,and when I visited Port Macquarie on one occasion could not see a NRL semi.Really doing the nRL a favour NOT. Foxtel is not a charity organisation they have a responsibility to make profits for News,the NRL gets no more favours now than other codes.Else they would have been on fox Sports 1.In fact on many occasions on the Fox Sports News,AFL is the lead in sport. Justifying what happened in 95/96 when News tried to take over rugby league and subsequently got their fingers burnt,and thereby suggesting now Foxtel is the NRL, is crazy.Yes it is their no1 viewed code overall,but the organisation must cater for all codes in its viewing mix. Yes news ATM part owns the major comp(not the game) and naturally wants it to grow in line with Foxtel. Conversely News is fully aware of the strength of the AFL in Vic/SA/WA and want to grow that subscriber base,and thereby wants the AFL to grow liikewise. I disagree on the point of stories on Fox News,the stories are much the same for the NRL as for the AFL,injuries,who is in ,who is sacked.The analysis is left to the code specific programs.There is SFA analysis of NRL games on the News ,execpt in both cases AFL and NRL they have someone from that code discussing issues.They do it for the ru and soccer. Foxtel does not hold back in reporting offfield atrocities by NRL players,neither does its print stablemate.. For a code that is their bread and butter,Foxtel are hardly bending over further than the other codes . The code AFL has had ample opportunity via Foxtel to increase vastly its penetration into the southern markets.The nRL not having a WA and SA team has had one hand ATM tied behinds its back .Maybe this is due to the fact people would rather attend than view in Vic. You can rightly argue the penetration aspect, however one can also argue the "taking for granted"aspect by Foxtel, as News is really selling the game( which it part owns) to itself as part owner of Foxtel.Works both ways champ. Rugby league has and continues to rate the strongest for Foxtel,yet the contract deal suggests otherwise.You don't have to be a marketing guru to figure rl was ripped off. No one has to subscribe to Foxtel,it isn't cheap .You need to be a sports nut and have the disposable income to do so. There are plenty of people in country and city areas,who do not have Foxtel for this reason,you hear them on radio,and they are rl supporters.You and I both know there is a "churn'rate,added to the mix,where people find it not worth it or too expensive to continue. The other unknown is based on News Ltd being out of the NRL partnership,and an independent body involved in negotiations. There is a general feeling out in sportsland,that News does as much negative stories as they do positive on rl.The pro bias is really a furphy,ask Brett Seymour when he staggered(tipsy) up the Cronulla mall and made front page news.They didn't hold back on Carney justifiably so. Who do we blame when News is out of the equation,we look for another patsy for bias.
jimbo
Roar Guru
My wife brought home a Daily Rugby League Telegraph with the shopping today to my great surprise as we never buy that newspaper. She said they were giving them away at the checkout at the supermarket - obviously because they weren't selling. I took a look at it and here's a summary: Front Page: 3 rugby league stories. Back Page: 2 rugby League stories. "Sports" Section: 12 pages of Rugby League, 1 page AFL, 1 page Racing, 2 pages athletics and a promotion on Usain Bolt. Rugby Union: zilch, zero coverage A-League: zilch zero coverage - not one word about the A-League game tonight Champions League: zilch, zero coverage EPL: zilch, zero coverage Is media coverage of sport by the Daily Rugby League Telegraph biased?
ibika
Guest
god i need a latte
Mr Cool
Guest
Sorry mate, I am just an innocent dumb RL supporter who has read that Sydney is the worlds showpiece for our lovely gay community. To all the guys that may take offence, "I am poor and cannot pay the press not to hound me. for my drunken ramblings!!. " I believe that's the standard get out for politically incorrect comments!!.
JF
Guest
You two should catch up for a latte.
Lorry
Guest
Sounds like your a left-wing Rugby Union supporter, just like myself! There's not many of us... Go Peter Fitzsimmons and Mike Carlton!!! As I've said before, how awful is Foxtel's "The Back Page" since Fitzy's departure? For example, today the whole panel were saying how "Andrew Johns just made a stupid comment, just like Stephanie Rice, they've been so unfairly treated". Fitzy would've eaten them alive! Maybe Rice was a little harshly done by, still she should no better. As for Johns though, it's not even in the same boat. He deserved all the backlash he received... I guess it's no surprise when one considers that the show is led by the Tele stalwart, 'Gibbo'. What a joke.
Brissie Kid
Guest
Just this week another NT poll. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ According to the survey, 38 per cent of Territorians said AFL was their favourite football code. But a healthy 23 per cent are mad about rugby league. Just 9 per cent of more than 800 respondents said soccer was their favourite brand of footy, with even fewer (5 per cent) rugby union fans. Twenty-three per cent of Territorians said they didn't follow any brand of football. http://www.ntnews.com.au/article/2010/09/14/179131_ntnews.html ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Ted Skinner
Guest
So what is the population of rural SA? Next to zero!! Don't kid your self that NT population is 100% AFL. It's not. BTW hugh areas of Queensland & NSW aren't covered in the Regional Ratings either.
beaver fever
Guest
Brissie Kid said "People can move from Queensland to NSW". No way, unheard of !!.
ibika
Guest
ha ha.. very funy Mr Cool...and maybe very true..( but I clarify that statement by saying that the words and throughts expresed here are not intended to express any opinion..Im not agreeing with Mr cool's statement about sydney being "the heart of Gaydom". I am merely stating that he may ( or may not ) be true. but be careful Mr Cool. in these very politically correct times..the thought police will be after you. you may be called up on that comment and crucified throughout the australian media.. and you will have to make a tearfull retractment on the statement on live television. peter fitzsimmons will call you a national disgrace and you will banned from the the roar!
Mr Cool
Guest
I thought NSW was the heart of Gaydom galaxy. not Rugby or Leaguem Soccer or AFL.
Redb
Roar Guru
Average v peak. AFL fans watch whole games, at least 500,000 did on Friday night in Melbourne alone for a delayed coverage.
Redb
Roar Guru
"Getting in the way"?
Redb
Roar Guru
Oikee, That demonstrates my point even further about Foxtel. If AFL injuries are all they report and tribunal results that is 'basic news fodder'. No in depth analysis pre or post game, no highlights of great goals or marks, well rarely. There is a sizeable difference between AFL shows and Fox Sport News reporting of real AFL news. Up to date stuff.
Brissie Kid
Guest
You're mistakenly making the assumption that they know about NRL or that they are all NRL experts! Even if the AFL stories are superficial and lack quality in the eyes of the AFL fan, they are still getting in the way of the NRL and rugby news of match reports.
Brissie Kid
Guest
People can move from Queensland to NSW. The radio news media here won't double the amount of AFL coverage (unless it is paid coverage of course!). All they will do is split the current AFL air space between the two teams. Same as they do now with the nine NRL clubs in Sydney. The Swans get heaps of mentions here in comparison to the Sydney NRL clubs. The news radio media divides the bulletin up by code, not by the clubs. So each of the NRL clubs is fighting for that one mention, while the Swans are fighting no one to fill the AFL spot. We get one NRL story, one AFL story, sometimes a rugby story. We all know that doesn't equate to the public's interest though. If it was done based on each club getting an equal share of air time, then the Swans would get not get more of a mention than each of the Sydney NRL clubs and the Waratahs and Sydney FC.
Redb
Roar Guru
Well as a matter fact yes I watch a lot of Foxtel, and FSN. They may lead with AFL but the stories are superficial any detail stuff is "lets tranfer to our Melb studio" - to that foreign code... Backpage? - classic example. It may well be that Foxtel has woken up to its bias and is now introducing more AFL talk shows. But it's still based in Sydney and as expected is Sydney centric. Most of the FSN presenters know little of AFL and it shows.
DB
Guest
When comparing ratings for Pay TV between the AFL and NRL, here are some things worth considering, *The ratings do not include those from regional WA SA and all of the NT. *If you take the formula of viewers multiply by time watched for an AFL v NRL match the AFL match tends to come out on top *Of the 5 city ratings fro Pay TV the AFL outrates the NRL on a per game basis. This is despite the housholds with PayTV in Bris/Syd making up about 55% of all households with Pay TV in the 5 city market (now where have I seen that percentage before?) *For AFL often games on PayTV are up against a game on FTA which is unusual for the NRL *The 4 "worse" AFL games are given to PayTV whereas PayTV get to choose the 3rd "best" game for the NRL
beaver fever
Guest
I thought you were a brissie kid !!, soon you can really go off your rocker, when reports will entail the Swans and GWS, ...... i mean really, how dare they !!, not in my country.