Not sure if this is the correct forum but I though it was interesting none the less -
Opinion - AFL vs NRL - the TV war
By Daniel Green
15 September 2009
For over one hundred years in this country, one certainty on the sporting landscape is that the battle of the football codes will be ongoing. Two sports, Rugby Union and Soccer like to spruik their worth to Australia, usually by announcing their importance based on the number of countries that play them. Fair point. Although, upon closer examination of some key statistics, there are only two football codes that can claim to be the biggest and most important in Australia - Rugby League and Australian Rules Football. Whilst the Socceroos enjoy large TV ratings and media exposure during important World Cup play-offs and other friendlies against big nations, and the Wallabies, have enjoyed similar exposure in the past, particularly during 2003, this is not an accurate reflection of those sports cultural importance The club game, which is the bread and butter of sport, is always the more accurate guide to a sports local popularity. Even in the money driven world of English Soccer, the club game is what drives Soccer as England's biggest sport. It is, after all, a tribal affair. If Soccer ceased to exist in every country in the world bar England, I hazard a guess, we would still see the English supporting their club sides as if nothing had happened.
So, it becomes apparent, that only two sports in Australia have the cultural power to command free-to-air TV exposure for club football - Australian Football, and Rugby League. An examination of the A-League and Super-14's ratings on Pay-TV indicates a wide gap between those games and those of the AFL and NRL. Many Super 14's games fail to reach 100,000 on Pay-TV, with some games being only one third of many AFL and NRL games. The A-League, is a similar story.
So, which is the biggest in Australia - the AFL or the NRL? With the AFL averaging 36,225 in 2009, compared to the NRL's 16,065, the AFL is, has been, and forseeably will be the biggest crowd drawer. Those whose loyalties lie in the land of uprights would argue that Aussie Rules gets the crowds but the NRL gets the people where they count - in their loungerooms, watching their TV sets. And it's with much frustration, that those whose sympathies lie with the NRL bemoan the fact that the AFL's TV deal is worth about 50 million more per year than the NRL. It's not fair, they argue. We should be getting just as much, if not more than the AFL, they say.
So, how do the figures stack up in 2009? Using the official Oztam readings, the average weekly audience for the AFL in 2009 was 2,956,000 per week, compared to the NRL's 1,548,000.
Over the entire season, the AFL was watched by a total of 65,023,000 and the NRL by 40,272,000. But what many fail to take into account is the three hour running time of an AFL telecast compared to the two hour running time of it's NRL rival. When this is taken into account, the AFL is viewed 2.4 times as often as the NRL on free-to-air according to Oztam figures. 195,069,000 cumulative hours were viewed for the AFL compared to 80,546,000 for the NRL. With advertisers able to slot in commercials every time a goal is kicked, the commercial value would also appear to be far greater than the NRL, which has far fewer opportunities to slot in ads of their own. It should also be noted, that the NRL's flexible schedule where they choose games several weeks out for its various timeslots, gives it what should be a ratings advantage. Friday night football in the NRL is selected as the highest rating match and is shown live, from 7:30 to 9:30, with Sydney and Brisbane usually getting different matches featuring local teams to maximise ratings. The AFL meanwhile, on Friday nights has a one hour delayed telecast in Melbourne, 90 minutes in Adelaide, and 3 hours delayed in Perth of one match set in stone from the previous October. Looking at these circumstances, and comparing the heartlands of the two codes, one would think that in Sydney, the NRL would rate higher than Melbourne for the AFL. Interestingly, the AFL averages 451,000 in Melbourne on Friday nights and the NRL averages 386,000 in Sydney, with the AFL figures going through to 11:30pm. The NRL figure only goes to 9:30, at which time a delayed (and lower rating) telecast of another NRL match begins.
It would appear that the AFL is more passionately supported in its heartland. Or maybe this is a reflection of the indifference of Sydenysiders since the Brisbane NRL ratings (which regularly feature the Broncos on Friday nights) are strong and impressive.
The above figures, of course, only take into account the capital cities, with Oztam ratings - being the currency by which television programs are bought and sold - only measuring the capitals. Most of the Rugby League persuassion would argue that the NRL has a far greater representation in the regional areas than the AFL. This is undoubtably true, with the decentralized states of NSW and Queensland encompassing large regional areas of Rugby League loving folk. But is this regional area, which, in Television terms makes up approximately 30% of the market, enough to claw back the 25 million viewer deficit (and a deficit in viewing time of 115 million hours?) Not by a long way.
One area the NRL has always held a traditional edge is the viewership on pay television network, Foxtel. With the NRL having five games to the AFL's four, and the AFL having a flexible arrangement whereby Foxtel games for local teams get shown on free-to-air in all cities bar Melbourne, the take up for pay-tv in New South Wales and Queensland is far greater than any other state. Consequently, NRL programs in 2009 have accounted for 60 of the top 100 programs on pay-tv, with their average rating per game being higher than the average AFL figure. However, when one takes into account the "reach" of the programs, a different story emerges. The reach measures the cumulative audience that watches a program (including when it was replayed at various times during the week) for any length of time. The reach of the average AFL home and away game on Foxtel was 562,000 to the NRL's 546,000.
The conclusion we can draw from all this, is that the AFL's television deal, which amounts to 780 million dollars over five years appears well justified in comparison to the NRL. Rugby League does, of course have its separate State of Origin series, which draws enourmous ratings and no doubt helps the code bridge the gap with Australian Rules Football who doesn't have an equivalent. Even taking the ratings for these games and adding them to the NRL's club fixtures, the figures still come up significantly below that of the AFL. Australian Rules Football, clearly commands its position at the top of the sporting landscape of Australia, with the NRL considerably, but not enormously behind. It is certainly food for thought when those from the land of uprights claim their favourite code of football deserves the same financial reward as the AFL. It's noticeably obvious that it doesn't.
http://www.talkingfooty.com/tv_ratings_2009.php
