Darren Jolly of Collingwood celebrates a goal during the 2010 Toyota AFL Grand Final replay between the Collingwood Magpies and the St Kilda Saints at the MCG, Melbourne. Slattery Images
The AFL must be delighted with the television ratings generated in both Sydney and Brisbane from the replayed 2010 grand final. With two Victorian teams going head-to-head in the AFL and two NSW teams in the NRL, this removed the parochial factor that so often clouds the debate between AFL and NRL over grand final TV ratings.
In the five capital city ratings, the AFL averaged 2.69 million compared to the NRL’s 2.09 million. Much of the difference was made up in the AFL’s expansion states of NSW and QLD where the GF averaged 405,000 viewers in Sydney and 375,000 in Brisbane.
This is in stark contrast to the NRL which only managed 221,000 in Melbourne, 33,000 in Adelaide and 75,000 in Perth.
TV executives make their decisions on TV rights dollars based on the five capital city market. The regional TV ratings are secondary to the equation. In fact, regional TV ratings double count certain areas like the Gold Coast and often totally exclude areas such as regional WA and SA.
Do the above TV ratings quantify the benefits of expansion?
The AFL expanded before the NRL (apart from the failed SuperLeague experiment) and established teams in all five capital cities.
The presence of a team creates interest. When that team does well the TV ratings skyrocket, but it’s difficult to separate real interest from parochial interest.
The Melbourne TV ratings for the NRL in 2009 was a clear vase of parochial driven ratings, the same with the Swans in the AFL driving up past Sydney TV ratings.
It should be noted that even with Melbourne Storm in the NRL GF, the NRL ratings were approximately the same as the AFL with two Victorian teams. When the Sydney Swans appeared in the AFL GF, TV ratings nationally were by far the biggest achieved in the two codes ever.
The 2010 GF ratings in each code make the picture much clearer. The penetration of AFL is greater than the NRL nationally, due to expansion.
The NRL GF really struggled in its non-traditional markets despite its TV friendly timeslot of late Sunday afternoon.
In Melbourne, where a team exists and games such as State of Origin and Tests have been played, a niche market has been created but it was still almost only half of the Sydney ratings for the AFL GF.
In Perth, where the NRL is mooting a future team, and has a heavier influx of mining related expats from NSW/QLD, the game attracted 75,000. However, in Adelaide where the NRL has little presence other than a game or two a year, the ratings were a paltry 33,000.
Thus the case for the AFL expanding with second teams into NSW and QLD draws strength.
NSW and QLD represent approximately 55 per cent of the Australian population. By increasing the presence of Australian football in these states, this ensures at least one game a week is played. The AFL, therefore, continues to entrench itself into the sporting psyche and builds on the interest in those states.
The other advantage of expansion with two teams in each non-traditional market is the odds of one of them making the grand final doubles.
As we have seen with traditional markets, they will watch the grand final regardless of who is playing, but there is a much bigger parochial interest in non-traditional areas. Another argument for expansion.
Boomshanka
Guest
I'd have no problem with that! In fact the main thrust of my post is an attempt to demonstrate the irrelevance of this article which appeared after last years AFL Grand Final reply (which distorted the viewing figures), and the AFL cheer leading brigades attempts to use these figures as justification for all sorts of expansionist theory's. This years figures happen to be a reverse of last years (ie Sydney - Melbourne figures are swapped for there respective anti codes) despite maintaining the "parochial factor". If anything it demonstrates just how regional and Victorian based the Aussie rules code is. I note Redb took great delight in coming back on in April (some six months after the last posting) to comment how pathetic a last minute programming change by Channel Nine brought a low NRL viewing audience in Melbourne.
Ray
Guest
So its now Australasia not Australia. Does that mean an All Blacks match shown both here and in NZ will be add up as one?
Boomshanka
Guest
2011 Figures Metro 2.16m (Syd 1.08m Bri 567k Mel 363k) + Regionals 1.097m + NZ 514k (Subscription TV) + NZ FTA (177k) All in 4M across Australasia. NRL 363k in Melbourne AFL 258k in Sydney Sort of nullifies the claims made last year by this article. The parochial factor that so often clouds the debate between AFL and NRL over grand final TV ratings was well and truly missing here. Weakens the case for the AFL expanding with second teams into NSW and QLD as well.
clipper
Guest
Does that mean it was out rated by the Iron Chef?
NF
Guest
37k in Melbourne considering it had little to no advertising and short notice it's only a start considering the promotion/advertising the AFL get in QLD it's a unfair comparison. Storm have been in midnight for a long time so it wasn't able to build a sustainable nice that the Swans/Lions manage to developed as a result of live FTA every week a luxury the Storm doesn't have.
King of the Gorgonites
Roar Guru
But onyl 12k at the game. that has to be very disppaointing for the AFL, espically as the Rebels can get crowds 50% higher then that.
Redb
Roar Guru
Storm rated 37,000 live into Melbourne yesterday. The NRL's top team. The Suns rated 75,000 into Brisbane even though they are 17th. The AFL's bottom team. :)
djfrobinson
Guest
Bee as a loyal New Zealander to both my country and my code I would never betray my lineage. Rugby Union is our game it has been for over 100 years why would we give up our code to appease a bunch of Australians
Mister Football
Guest
Ian There is a big difference between catching a ball thrown to you from 3 or 4 metres away, and marking a 60 metre kick in the hands in front of your face. And that's just for starters.. Throw in a 50 metre sprint to get to the drop of that 60 metre kick (such that your eyes are starting to water). And you also have a defender matching each of your steps who is going to put a fist past your earhole on the way to punching the ball as you get both hands to the ball. Mate - it's chalk and cheese.
Redb
Roar Guru
It's not an interesting stat Mitch, it's a selective one. :-) Seeing how Roy and RL diehards are so fanatical about cumulative ratings. What are the cumulative TV ratings for AFL in Sydney and RL in Melbourne for ALL games in 2010? Anyone? ;-)
Ian
Guest
I'm sure there are plenty of wanabie All Blacks and Kiwis who have a problem with ball retention so they could be well suited to aussie rules. One of the frustrating things about watching AFL is the lack of ball control. Even the marks are dodgy. Just having two hands momentarily on the ball is not a mark unless the refs want to even things up a bit.
Jerome
Guest
I am from NZ. Who are the Hawks? Never heard of anybody watching AFL in NZ. Union is the most prominent sport but it feels as if things are chainging with the younger demographic where soccer and league are alot more popular than they have historically been.
jimbo
Roar Guru
7.1 Million Australians watched the Italy v Socceroos game at 2am in the morning [Roy Morgan Research] and that was consistent right around Australia. It will be a very long time before Aussie Rules gets TV ratings like that for its once a year [or twice a year] showpiece. TV ratings for the Swans in Sydney this year were woeful and the worst in over 10 years. There is no money in Aussie Rules in Sydney or Brisbane, just the AFL's blind determination to "expand the game into NSW and Qld". And oh yeah. lets not forget the extra money for their TV rights . . .
Mister Football
Guest
dunno - who knows - we might one day stumble across someone who can kick a footy
djfrobinson
Guest
I guess Kermit us kiwis are odd.. Best you keep your sport in Australia and not try to convert the New Zealand population. Australian Rules is a game for Australians and should stay there. Let League, Union, and Football have their international code and let Australian Rules stay where it belongs
djfrobinson
Guest
Hay Ian That surprises me because i've asked around most of my friends. I asked the question, have you ever heard of a AFL team called the hawks. I then had to explain what AFL was, and I'm going to assume that the hawks are a AFL team. Among my friends at home the sport is unknown and thus no one cares.
Kermit is a frog
Roar Pro
Shows in part that the Swans games are usually on a 30 minute delay whilst they are broadcast live on Foxtel. Go figure. but, the AFL persists to allow this and it carves & scatters the ratings all over the shop.
Ian
Guest
djfrobinson As a kiwi you should know, the "Hawks" are the NZ AFL team. All AFLNZ teams from U/16 to senior level are officially known as the NZ Hawks from 2010 Obviously making an impression across the ditch and with Redb's conclusion out of this article, then Aussie Rules will be a top sport there very soon.
Whites
Guest
We might see NRL live on GO in the southern states next year.
Kermit is a frog
Roar Pro
ah, wasted brilliance, wasted is my definition of 'sporting backwater', wasted, wasted, where have all the flowers gone......