Rugby TV ratings 2015

[Antony]

Maybe this has been posted previously, but apparently 20 million people in Japan watched the Japan v Scotland game. Crazy numbers.

Edit: I just clicked back a page and saw the earlier post. Ehhh it's worth hearing twice.

Edit Edit: It was posted twice on the preceding page. Ehhh it's worth hearing three times.

 

[papabear]

The last thing the AFL needs is to make money - they are rolling in it right now.


The only reason that they ever do anything internationally is out of boredom - or to give their army of in-house media people something a bit different to write about.

another reason to question why they haven't run a proper professionally organised Australian Football League World Cup over the summer, lots to write about

 

[terry j]

I am surprised Wales England was so low! Admittedly I didn't hear anyone else in my neighbourhood screaming when Wales scored the equaliser. Considering that would have to be close to the most anticipated game of the Tournament. Although 5am on a Sunday is only attracting tragics - and Tom Jones fans like my Mum.

thought the same thing too. tells my gut that means only 'wallabie coat tail hanger-onerers' are watching. a proper rugby fan would have watched.

real sad, shows how few genuine rugby fans there are in australia (if my hypothesis is correct)

 

[The_Wookie]

Wookie, Wookie, Wookie..

This post is garbage and you know it, if the AFL could have made money out of a world cup they would have done so already.

I mean really couldnt they just compete in the recently held gaelic football world cup? considering the international credibility the game holds there.

I never said anything about them making money from it. I said they could boost their profile from it overseas, much as league did doing the same dodgy ancestry eligibility.

WTF does the gaelic world cup have to do with the AFL anyway.

 

[Braveheart81]

WTF does the gaelic world cup have to do with the AFL anyway.

Aussie Rules and Gaelic Football are the two sports that resemble each other the most from each perspective. Australia plays Ireland in International Rules (a hybrid of both games) every year or two.

 

[Strewthcobber]

Thought I'd have a quick look at the SBS football world cup numbers for a comparison.

Thanks to the wookie for the numbers
http://www.talkingfooty.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=4654

8am game England Italy 1,028k
5am game Uruguay v England 349k (compared to 71k combined for EngvWales in the rugby)
2am game Costa Rica v England 35k

8am Chile v Australia 2,276k
2am Netherlands v Australia 769k
2am Spain v Australia 515k

Kickoff time makes a massive difference - and why I don't think this rugby world cup will make much of a ratings impression at all.


Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

[Antony]

A useful comparison is the RLWC in 2013.

The Grand Final between Australia and NZ at 1:30am got 201K (on 7mate, with the games not screened on Foxtel).

The same Aus v NZ fixture in the RL Four Nations in 2014 got 691K.

Off that single point of data, we can deduce with 100% certainty that a bad time-zone gives you an attrition rate of ~70%. So the Australia v Fiji figure of 85K reflects a 'good time zone' figure of ~283K, which sounds about right.

That analysis obviously doesn't account for: world cup audience premiums in either sport; the fact that additional people would have watched the Four Nations game, had they not been in the stadium; or any differences between RL and RU audiences and their respective 'stickability' in respect of international rugby.

But there you go...

 

[jason08]

England v Wales draws biggest TV rugby audience in eight years

Rugby World Cup clash attracts average of 10.4 million viewers during the game, with a peak of 11.6 million

 

[TOCC]

England vs Australia will smash that record.. its make or break for the Poms

 

[The_Wookie]

A useful comparison is the RLWC in 2013.

The Grand Final between Australia and NZ at 1:30am got 201K (on 7mate, with the games not screened on Foxtel).

The same Aus v NZ fixture in the RL Four Nations in 2014 got 691K.

Off that single point of data, we can deduce with 100% certainty that a bad time-zone gives you an attrition rate of ~70%. So the Australia v Fiji figure of 85K reflects a 'good time zone' figure of ~283K, which sounds about right.

That analysis obviously doesn't account for: world cup audience premiums in either sport; the fact that additional people would have watched the Four Nations game, had they not been in the stadium; or any differences between RL and RU audiences and their respective 'stickability' in respect of international rugby.

But there you go.

This might help you further.

 

[papabear]

I never said anything about them making money from it. I said they could boost their profile from it overseas, much as league did doing the same dodgy ancestry eligibility.

WTF does the gaelic world cup have to do with the AFL anyway.

The grandfather rule which is used in league union and soccer. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grandfather_rule

League uses it the most because it has the smallest international pool of players to pick from of the above three. Oddly enough you will probably find that union uses it more then soccer for the same reason.

The issue with your post is that inferring that the AFL using the Grandfather rule could have as successful world cup as rugby league, imo is garbage and you know it.

Just because League is light years behind union on the international scene doesnt mean it isn't well out in front of AFL in terms of international scene grandfather rule or not.

 

[The_Wookie]

The grandfather rule which is used in league union and soccer. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grandfather_rule

League uses it the most because it has the smallest international pool of players to pick from of the above three. Oddly enough you will probably find that union uses it more then soccer for the same reason.

The issue with your post is that inferring that the AFL using the Grandfather rule could have as successful world cup as rugby league, imo is garbage and you know it.

Just because League is light years behind union on the international scene doesnt mean it isn't well out in front of AFL in terms of international scene grandfather rule or not.

Again I didnt infer any such thing. I said if the AFL wanted to raise its profile it could have done so using the same means League did at the last world cup. I never said it would make lots of money and I never said that it would have been successful. And I never once have implied that the AFL is anywhere near any other football code in terms of the international scene.

The issue I have with your posts is that you are flatout making up stuff I never said.

I literally wrote originally

I think the AFL could boost its international profile if it wanted to by turning its international cup into something like the last Rugby league world cup, by extending the country eligibility rules to include ancestry.

From this you inferred

If the AFL could have made money out of a world cup they would have done so already.

and now

The issue with your post is that inferring that the AFL using the Grandfather rule could have as successful world cup as rugby league, imo is garbage and you know it.

None of which is even mentioned or inferred in the post you took issue with.

 

[Highlander35]

The issue with Leaguies ancestry rule is that it readily allows switching to another nation, so players are free to represent Scotland or Tonga or whomever on the basis of their Granny as an 18-23 year old, give their prime years to Kiwis, Aussies or England, then switch back to the minnow at the end of their career.

I think that takes away from the legitimacy of the game. I don't like it in Cricket either, but I stomach it because the have and have-nots are clearly defined through all the bureaucracy, in spite of its cheating, its insipidity, and money grubbing nature.

 

[papabear]

Wookie, since you have taken the battle to semantics.

Why, on a rugby union website refer to the ancestry rule in a rugby league context, when the rule is used across both codes (and through out a lot of other codes and organisations throughout the world), if it is not to conveniently try and infer the difference between rugby league and afl is the ancestry rule. Otherwise why bring rugby league into at all.

Your post could have simply been to note that the afl could have / start / improve an international competition of sorts if it embraced an ancestry rule.

Why bring rugby league into it at all, unless you are trying to push your agenda at the cost of rugby league.

 

[papabear]

The issue with Leaguies ancestry rule is that it readily allows switching to another nation, so players are free to represent Scotland or Tonga or whomever on the basis of their Granny as an 18-23 year old, give their prime years to Kiwis, Aussies or England, then switch back to the minnow at the end of their career.

I think that takes away from the legitimacy of the game. I don't like it in Cricket either, but I stomach it because the have and have-nots are clearly defined through all the bureaucracy, in spite of its cheating, its insipidity, and money grubbing nature.

TBH I agree with you.

Once you choose a nation you should have to stick to it, atleast for a number of years. Although I imagine the governing body are looking at something like that.

The problem is two fold:-
1 - the depth of international talent isn't there to keep matches competitive against tier 1 nations.
2 - the game itself lends itself to absolute blowouts imo more then union (and definately soccer) with different professional / fitness levels.

Not much you can do about 2, but 1 is sort of self perpetuating, sooner or later if rugby league is serious about the international game it has to let international sides play with less heritage sides get flogged and put money into developing these nations.

I don't think it is anything that will be solved any time soon though.

 

[The_Wookie]

Theres a difference between wanting something and actually putting their money where their mouth is.

AFL had its moments of trying to expand the game internationally but it seems to be rather fleeting interest, It occurred in South Africa around 2007-2008 where they sent a number AFL teams overto put on demonstration matches and training camps, but its been a few years since any more AFL teams have toured.

Then AFL tried the move to China, spent $1.5million building a new oval in Tianjin, and again after initial fanfare the AFL lost interest. This is the Oval today:

Any thought of international expansion for the AFL has been put on the back burner as they focus on the new expansion teams within Australia, which is chewing up a significant amount of resources and funding.

This Oval wasnt funded by the AFL. it was funded by the Melbourne City Council. There are no chinese AFL sides anywhere near it.

 

[The_Wookie]

Wookie, since you have taken the battle to semantics.

Why, on a rugby union website refer to the ancestry rule in a rugby league context, when the is used across both codes (and through out a lot of other codes and organisations throughout the world), if it is not to conveniently try infer the difference between rugby league and afl is the ancestry rule. Otherwise why bring rugby league into at all.

Your post could have simply been to note that the afl could have / start / improve an international competition of sorts if it embraced an ancestry rule.

Why bring rugby league into it at all, unless you are trying to push your agenda at the cost of rugby league.

I never took the battle to semantics. I took the battle to someone who is flatout lying about anything i said. As such, its pointless for me to discuss it further.

keep on inventing crap for all your worth. Ive already wasted enough time here talking AFL on a union forum. its not why i come here.

 

[papabear]

Good to see the Melbourne city council using its money wisely then.

 

[Beer Baron]

so the AFL convo is over...

Bets on Aus v Eng game ratings?? Are nine doing any ads??

 

[Antony]

It's really tough to predict isn't it? 6am is a reasonable time and it's a huge game, but since it shares the weekend with the AFL and NRL grand finals it'll struggle to get much coverage. You'll probably end up with a situation where a million people watch it in New Zealand and 400,000 odd in Australia.