Rugby League surges further ahead in South-East Queensland

sandyhill · **Posted:** Sat Mar 19, 2005 10:59 am

Russ, your comments doubting the value of academies and schools are valid. In Victoria, the major source of AFL draftees is the elite state under 18 comp. As well as the metro teams, there are also some country based (Ballarat, Bendigo, Geelong & Latrobe Valley) and also some interstate (Tasmania, Albury and Canberra).

While selected juniors go to the AIS or have school scholarships at the elite private schools, in the end its how they perform in the under 18 comp and also at national championships (where Victoria has both metro and country teams - with metro more often the better) that will be the ultimate criteria to get drafted. Older players are also sometimes drafted from VFL or VAFA based solely on performance out on the ground, regardless of if they went to an academy or not.

However, as this is not an option for Queenslanders, an acadmey is considered necessary for the specialist coaching required to get to elite level (such as the they would get at the under 18 teams in Vic). They would still have to compete in the QAFL - probably at senior level. There is debate about the merits of exposing young players to senior comp, rather than just under 18's. This seems to happen more in SA (SANFL) and WA (WAFL), but its probably because Victoria's Under 18 comp is a higher standard than SA or WA. It probably is better for some players to play in open age comp, but not for others who may physicaly mature later.

As mentioned previously, Division 1 QAFL is now a strong, high standard comp, and will play WA in state of origin this year, which was unthinkable 5 years ago (I still don't expect them to win!). BTW, Queenslander Nick Riewoldt has become the youngest captain in the AFL, is the (pre-season) Brownlow Medal favourite, and with endorsements etc, about the highest earning footballer in Australia.

I noticed that Melbourne Storm have just announced they want to set up a similar academy, as they confront much bigger problems in Melbourne (refer to NRL 2005 thread).

russ13 · **Joined:** Tue Feb 24, 2004 9:09 pm **Posts:** 167

I posted this on another site but it is relevant to the title of this thread.

Quote:

From today's Media section of the Australian it has the season opening live game for the AFL with 245,000 viewers (in Brisbane). This event came about 15th for the week.

The RL match came 4th. Its viewing audience was some where between 285,000 & 336,000. (between the 5th rated show & 3rd rated show which were the Sunday Channel 7 News & Sunday Channel 9 news respectively).

I noted the program that took over from Burke's backyard 'Better Homes & Gardens' rated 219,000 in Brisbane. As the RL game probably rated over 100,000 more than this it shows football does not have to rely on other programs to bolter their audience.

Just imagine what the audience would have been if the game was shown live.

The top 5 programs in Brisbane were as follows:

CSI: Miami 337,000
CSI Crime Scene Inv 336,000
National 9 News (Sun) 336,000
FNF Broncos & Roosters (not available)
7 News Sunday 285,000

The AFL game nation wide came 13th with a total of 1,235,000 viewers. So much for Leigh Matthew's boast that the game would be the most watched in the game's history.Laughing

The Capital City audience for the AFL was:

Sydney 45,000
Melbourne 561,000
Brisbane 245,000
Adelaide 193,000
Perth 190,000

The NRL game did not feature in the top 50 because the game was not shown in the southern capitals or it was shown late at night or early in the morning. This is something the NRL must address.

Incidentally the 50th rated program (capital city aidiences only) was 'My wife & kids' whose audience was 926,000. It really not a lot of difference (Australia wide) from the AFL figure of 1,235,000 which came 13th.

Also of interest was the ATR figures for the opening round of the NRL. The NRL game came 10th with an audience of 553,000. This is not to far behind the combined opening AFL figures for Brisbane, Adelaide & Perth 628,000. (193,000 +190,000 +245,0000)
http://www.atraustralia.com.au/docs/rep ... t_reg.html
It is certainly better than the combined Adelaide & Perth figure of 383,000. (193,000 + 190,000).

Ozabyss · **Posted:** Thu Mar 31, 2005 10:27 pm

The above certainly does not support the claim the RL is "surging ahead in SE Queensland" a claim I have refuted from day 1. RL and AFL are in a stand off where at best it would be a 60/40 split. For the AFL to draw 245,000 viewers against a live gate attendance of another 35,000 fans in Brisbane (total watching 280,000 in Brisbane) is exceptional for the sport in this Northern RL "stronghold" No disputing thet RL is still the dominant sport in Brisbane, but in no way is it "surging ahead".........

Simmo79 · **Posted:** Fri Apr 01, 2005 10:33 am

To me the entire concept of "RL surging ahead in SE QLD" is a real misnomer. This is one of RL's traditional territories and any suggestion that the game might be "surging ahead" implies that it has been on the back foot in the recent past.

Just imagine if AFL people were talking about Aussie Rules "surging ahead" in SA, WA, or god forbid, Victoria? Wouldn't RL people be taking heart from that situation?

Being way ahead of the other codes in your home territory is something that should simply be taken for granted. Isn't the fact that we're even having this argument a bad sign for RL??

Tonic · **Posted:** Fri Apr 01, 2005 10:55 am

russ13 wrote:

The NRL game did not feature in the top 50 because the game was not shown in the southern capitals or it was shown late at night or early in the morning. This is something the NRL must address.

this has nothing to do with the NRL 'addressing' anything. Quite simply the networks make their decisions based on what will rate. NRL does not rate down south - period... therefore it will perennially be broadcast in the irrelevant hours of the morning forever more particularly in Adelaide as an example;
NWS9 in Adelaide is the only channel 9 in the capitals not owned by Packer's PBL - they are owned by Southern Cross therefore are completely independent in making scheduling decisions in relation to NRL. i.e. NRL will never be shown in an hour of interest in a place like Adelaide because the viewers find it boring so people don't tune in - simple... some people just don't get it.
If the NRL was a series, it would have been axed by now.

russ13 · **Joined:** Tue Feb 24, 2004 9:09 pm **Posts:** 167

Ozabyss wrote:

The above certainly does not support the claim the RL is "surging ahead in SE Queensland" a claim I have refuted from day 1. RL and AFL are in a stand off where at best it would be a 60/40 split. For the AFL to draw 245,000 viewers against a live gate attendance of another 35,000 fans in Brisbane (total watching 280,000 in Brisbane) is exceptional for the sport in this Northern RL "stronghold" No disputing thet RL is still the dominant sport in Brisbane, but in no way is it "surging ahead".........

I think it is a fair claim RL is surging ahead because the TV audiences were about equal a couple of years ago over the Easter break.

Don't forget you are comparing a game 'live' with a game shown on delay riddled with adds. The RL TV audience was 302,000 btw.

This means that in all likelyhood the AFL will not have any games in the top 10 TV programs until the finals.

Tonic

I may be wrong but I think you will find that Channel 9 in Perth is not owned by Packer.

The AFL can not not get their games on TV stations in regional & country areas in Queensland & NSW at reasonable hours because they don't rate. These regions have a much bigger population than SA & WA combined.

The combined AFL TV audience in two states was 383,000 whereas the TV audience for the first RL game of the season in regional & country NSW & Queensland was 553,000. -See ATR site.

DH · **Posted:** Fri Apr 01, 2005 12:11 pm

This is also on the back of the fastest sell out in history for Origin one at Suncorp Stadium - something like 1 hour, rediculous, I really underestimated that one, especially with only around 1000 seats remain available for game three which usually don't sell until people know whether it is a decider or not.

Think this shows League is surging... AFL is plateuing. Saints game (biggest of the year) wasn't even a sell out... tickets were available in Category 1 and 2 mainly due to the ludicrous prices on tickets ($52 and $42 respectively) to sit in some of the worst seats in the ground, people are definately turning against that.

russ13 · **Joined:** Tue Feb 24, 2004 9:09 pm **Posts:** 167

Quote:

...Nine Darwin approached us for a live NRL feed weeks before the Seven/Ten announcement."

Have the Channel Nine Darwin people sniffed the wind correctly?

Last year, AFL chief executive Andrew Demetriou huffed and puffed about the AFL beating the NRL over Easter in Brisbane, a century-long rugby league stronghold, when a Thursday night Lions match outrated a Broncos match on Good Friday.

It didn't matter that most Queenslanders were XXXX'd out by Friday night and the once golden Broncos were looking at a gelded season.

This Easter, the AFL's much-trumpeted season opener on Thursday between the Lions and St Kilda averaged a rating of 192,000 in Brisbane, while the next day's 301,000 watching a delayed Broncos and Roosters match resulted in a bad Friday for Demetriou.

OK, rugby league's Easter rising does not mean it is guaranteed to ascend to a national-ratings heaven, but indications are the AFL has lost its chance.

The Lions have played in the past four AFL grand finals.

In that time, their big game has never beaten, in Brisbane, a NRL grand final that hasn't included the Broncos, nor have they gone close to State of Origin ratings.

The AFL talks world conquest, yet last year's grand final drew fewer viewers in Sydney (313,000) than the NRL grand final did in Melbourne (389,000).

OK, the NRL grand final is an evening telecast and was on a week after the AFL season had ended but there's an extra one million people in Sydney.

Basically, that's what everything comes down to - people.

More than half Australia's population lives in NSW and Queensland.

The AFL likes Channel Ten because it televises the game in prime time in these two states on Saturdays and Sundays, despite ratings which rival the ABC's test pattern.

But unlike Seven and Nine, which are ratings driven, Ten prefers dollars and demographics to total audience figures.

Yet Ten only has to look at its own experience with basketball to see the long-term folly of this.

Seven once showed NBL games in the capital cities of the teams at 9.30pm and the ratings were satisfactory.

Ten offered the NBL the same money as Seven but promised to telecast it in prime time for three years.

But after one-third of one season, it was shifted to 11.30pm, then went to Channel Two and is now off free-to-air TV. And like rugby league, it is a made-for-the-box sport. Australian football is not.

The NRL can never go near the AFL for crowds, but the TV dollar is proportionately the greater source of revenue.

Nine's bid for the AFL last time came when it was unconvinced the NRL would recover from Super League. It needed insurance in case the war Packer fought resulted in too much damage to his favourite winter product.

Crawley admits the Darwin move will only mean "an audience of an extra 100,000 people".

"But it's the first time in history the NRL is in front of the AFL in Darwin."

http://www.smh.com.au/news/League/Darwi ... 34893.html

Tonic · **Posted:** Fri Apr 01, 2005 12:20 pm

russ13 wrote:

The AFL can not not get their games on TV stations in regional & country areas in Queensland & NSW at reasonable hours because they don't rate. These regions have a much bigger population than SA & WA combined.

well i live in regional Qld and i get to see 3 live games most weeks (2 if Lions are not playing at night which is rare)... not too bad when factoring in i don't even subscribe to pay-tv.

in Adelaide the nrl coverage and interest is quite literally poorer than that of the English Premier League, FA Cup and UEFA Champions League and lets not forget about the SANFL.
and the telecast coverage is still poorer than that of cycling, netball and lawn bowls.

i was in adelaide last week and there was more coverage about US College basketball than nrl

russ13 · **Joined:** Tue Feb 24, 2004 9:09 pm **Posts:** 167

Sturday & Sunday afternoons are not prime time (for TV) audiences.

Simmo79 · **Posted:** Fri Apr 01, 2005 2:27 pm

In response to Roy Masters' column....

Roy has a habit of taking small pieces of evidence and building too big an argument around them. TV ratings for one rd of AFL can not possibly prove a trend such as the AFL's encorachment into Qld stalling. As the saying goes "one sparrow does not a summer make". Andrew Demetriou made the same mistake last year when boasting that the Lions were the most popular team in Brisbane. Anyone with a clue would say the Broncos are, but the Lions have done extremely well for themselves.

I think the greater point within this whole debate is that the AFL has done for better in enemy territory (QLD & NSW) by any measure (crwods, tv ratings) than RL has in Vic, SA, Tas & WA over (and this is an important point) the last 10 years. That is the long term trend that the NRL has to counteract. They have made SFA progress in advancing the interests of their game south of the Murray.

DH · **Posted:** Fri Apr 01, 2005 3:02 pm

Simmo79 wrote:

I think the greater point within this whole debate is that the AFL has done for better in enemy territory (QLD & NSW) by any measure (crwods, tv ratings) than RL has in Vic, SA, Tas & WA over (and this is an important point) the last 10 years. That is the long term trend that the NRL has to counteract. They have made SFA progress in advancing the interests of their game south of the Murray.

I don't think anyone disputes that...

The topic is proving to be correct though... League is surging and AFL is platueing in SEQ.

Simmo79 · **Posted:** Fri Apr 01, 2005 4:01 pm

DH wrote:

The topic is proving to be correct though... League is surging and AFL is platueing in SEQ.

I'm not banging the AFL's drum, but I do think it is simply too early to say whether the code has plateaued in SE QLD. The season has only just begun after all...

And if things do slide over the next few years, the AFL will aggressively promote the game and support the Lions with financial aid (salary cap exemptions etc). I don't think that this wealthy league will be satisfied with just reaching the heights they already have.

I think the SE Qld sporting landscape is far from settled

DH · **Posted:** Fri Apr 01, 2005 4:21 pm

I don't think the AFL could do much more than what they've done in SEQ... they've saturated it as much as they possibly can. I think they think they've done their job and are happy with how the AFL is going in SEQ for the meantime. They'll probably wait until the Lions side doesn't not have one resemblance of one of the greatest sides of all time before they will have to get people motivated to go to the Gabba again.

To increase the crowds when the redevelopment is complete they'll have to drop ticket prices too. The Easter Thursday match has been the biggest AFL night for the past three years and to see it not be a sellout this year I think definately shows that it has platued and not increased in popularity.

Simmo79 · **Posted:** Fri Apr 01, 2005 4:52 pm

I understand your points but I'm still not convinced that the Lions have plateaued. If the prices for the StKFC match were too high then that would go a long to explaining the failure to sell-out. Combine more reasonable ticket prices with the extended capacity of the Gabba and that means there is still some room to grow.

But on the other hand, there is no way they can be more successful than they are now. And the Broncos have demonstrated over the last two seasons that they are the only club in the NRL which can pull AFL size crowds - and they haven't won a premiership. If they do...

And if the Reds have a season of S12 which is not embarassing...

And if the Lions were to become Richmond-esque on and off the field...
then in that combination of situations the AFL would be pretty weak in QLD.

I suppose my final position would be:
- the Lions and the AFL still have potential to grow but that depends largely on the 2 indigenous codes not having a series of stellar seasons.

Rugby League surges further ahead in South-East Queensland

Who is online