NRL has proven results for the networks

Sorry Whites, Both are wrong. there are two organisations who take the ratings. OZTAM and AC Neilson, both operate independently. AC Neilson look after regional ratings but don't take regional WA, SA, Tas or NT figures, they do however include the Gold Coast, gosford and certain other area. Unfortunately these areas are also considered part of OZTAM Metropolitan Ratings which means they are double counted. The two companies stats were never supposed be added together as it gives an innacurate figure heavily biased to the two Northern States. Unfortunately, organisations don't bother with the accuracy if it suits their own needs. The TV Networks only bother with the OZTAM ratings as they are the closest they c an get to accurate with no genuinely national figures available.

"The people of the Central Coast and the North Shore of sydney deserve their own team and I am 100% behind the CENTRAL COAST BEARS to be granted an NRL licence..." QUOTE St george/illawarra coach Wayne Bennett.

Yes 54% are with the Rugby League dominated area. Thats the dilema for AFL it is NOT the strongest where the most people are. The states of WA and SA cover a lot of area but not much people. The the Rust bucket state of Tasmania (with all respect) has less people that North Coast NSW. So, the AFL is the game that has to expand otherwise whilst it says its our national game it isnt. The TV Rights will be interesting. Packers aim for blast one out of the Sports Box is the save Fox. One will be converted to a 1970's re run station. Thats okay I guess. But the NRL has a great product and must m ake sure it takes it away from NINE. Eddie in Melbourne (Macguire) will never let League do well against AFL.

Sunday twilight is a crowd failure in the AFL, probably costing the home club 10% off a normal Sunday afternoon gate, but a pay-TV winner. I doubt that would be any better in Sydney with its worse road and public transport systems. Then again, a Rugby League game takes less time than an Australian Football one, so some of the issues with having to get the kids to school the next day are mitigated.

yes I read Roys article today..interesting and sad for FTA sport on their network if this is the case.I'm enjoying my NFL.. but Stokes could up the ante now..

Packer is another player in the market.More players,more competition ,more chance of better money. Packer sees 10 as an underperforming TV station by comparison to the other networks.He may well be looking at obtaining a major football code to add to the offerings and the demographic split,and then flog it off agin at a big profit down the line.Echoes of his dad. For starters why the need for 2 presenters on the 5pm news,it looks like each is unable to handle the job on his/her own.Rationalise,get rid of one.That's a saving of $150,000 a year min. FWIW Hooplah Darwin is about 50/50 AFL/ RL, to add to your out of left field argument.That of course has zilch to do with TV negotiation rights.Time to find a new demographer.

2009 AFL GF: Sydney-309,000 Melbourne-1,426,000 Brisbane-254,000 Adelaide-403,000 Perth-312,000 QLD-153,000 NNSW-161,000 SNSW-127,000 VIC-383,000 TAS-145,000 Total=3,673,000 The AFL may have added the regional WA and SA figures for the AFL GF. Who knows what they did with the NRL figures? But the short answer is they are wrong. Links for the AFL GF(not sure about the difference between the regional totals)- http://www.agbnielsen.net/Uploads/Australia/e2_20090920.pdf http://www.tvtonight.com.au/2009/09/week-39-2.html http://www.thinktv.com.au/media/Media_Releases/Week_39_2009-Ratings_Report.pdf Links for the NRL GF(regional totals are consistant for the NRL GF) http://www.agbnielsen.net/Uploads/Australia/e2_20091004.pdf http://www.tvtonight.com.au/2009/10/week-41-2.html http://www.thinktv.com.au/media/Media_Releases/Week_41_2009-Ratings_Report.pdf Considering the only unavailable regional markets, SA, WA and NT, are AFL markets it is likely the AFL GF slightly outrated the NRL GF in 2009.

That's absolutely fair enough :) And I think all of the ratings we've mentioned have been FTA.. I'm sure a significant number of people watch the games on PayTV too but I can't seem to find figures for that. But anyway with those figures the NRL should definitely get a better TV deal.. Though whether that involves broadcasting games in Victoria, SA and WA at decent times is yet to be seen.

Update on Tasmania. It is not included because the market has composite affiliations. WIN is affiliated with CH9 while Southern Cross is affiliated with both CH7 and Ch10. I think CH10 is now a seperate digital channel half owned by WIN and Southern Cross. You can find the breakdown for the regional ratings for Tasmania and the other 4 regions here: http://www.agbnielsen.net/whereweare/dynPage.asp?father=223&lang=english&id=228&country=Australia

Whites, I touched on this topic a few weeks back in a column, and my understanding is that while the review and changes to the ASL is due by the end of this year, the changes wouldn't take effect until 2012 from memory, with the current list expiring at the end of next year. Existing TV deals that would be affected by any changes running longer than this would be allowed to run their course. The Socceroos, for eg, already announced as being added to the ASL in 2013, won't take effect until after the current Fox Sports deal ends.

Maybe because you got them from AFL.com? But seriously, that is one of the difficult things about quantifying TV ratings - there are so many different measurement techniques and sources - regionals v five cities etc. But either way, the fact that RL has four 3m+ programs per year (potentially five as the gap between Aus v NZ narrows and the ANZAC test grows in popularity), shows that it has significant value as a TV product, and justifies the call for a bigger TV deal next time around.

Yep Hooplah, League is very popular in the biggest population corridor in the country - good point, that should definitely assist the TV deal, thanks for contributing

I have found figures which disagree with those.. And I don't even know what sort of figures you are using. But I have these ratings which are slightly different: 2009: AFL Grand Final: 3,848,813. (higher than the listed figures you have.. Possibly including payTV?) NRL Grand Final 3,537,613. (lower than the figure you gave.. I don't know why that would be.) ANZAC Day clash: 1,578,000. (higher than the Aust v NZ test of that year) source: http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/85886/default.aspx

You know your stuff "nrl on tv". This is what we need to aim at, send this straight to the commish. :)

we need more day games, not night games. bring back saturday afternoon football.

Not sure about Tasmania but all the other areas are still paper based diary markets. The population of these areas(Tasmania-500k, regional WA-500k, regional SA-200k, NT-230k and other remote areas) is roughly 1.5-1.8million people. Most of these areas would add to the AFL figures far more then the NRL. Although except for the NRL GF and possibly SOO all the rugby league games are generally broadcast after midnight in these areas.

Considering the current deal where the NRL gets around 66% of the AFL's deal, 80% would be a good target, especially considering the two extra teams that the AFL will have. The main variable that has come into place since the last deal is the digital channels - not sure what effect these will have on negotiations, but the extra channels may somewhat water down the effect of the anti-siphoning arrangements, especially for the AFL. The AFL's strategy of contracting the rights to ensure prime time coverage in NSW/Qld will be less effective if the networks are allowed to screen them on the digital channel 2 or 3. As for the NRL, currently we have nothing south of the border in prime time, so anything would be better.

Sorry to burst your bubble Hooplah, but those two states + the ACT contain 54% of the population, Australia's largest city, Australia's fastest growing city, Australia's fastest growing state, and the national capital. More than just dots on a map.

Yeah I have heard that too and as a Formula 1 fan it terrifys me!!!!!

Hooplah your comment has got nothing to do with this article. If you want to argue about whether AFL or NRL is better you need to find another place to do it. This article is clearly about the new NRL deal, it is NOT about the NRL being better then the AFL. Please don't try and turn this is into the peeing competition that is all over the other stories on this site.