2026 TV and Streaming Ratings thread

[stratocaster]

It wasn't really two games, there was only one game broadcast into each market.
The Cats v Dogs match was a fizzer with the home side building an insurmountable lead early in the game.
The Swans v Giants derby was a great spectacle played in front of a sold out SCG. Unfortunately, lightning near the field caused a lengthy delay at half time which impacted ratings. I switched over to watch the 2nd half of Dolphins v Panthers which went into Golden Point. Many NSW viewers may have done likewise.

It was two games on at the same time. Days ago when I said that this was because the AFL and 7 had little faith that Swans vs Giants would rate on TV nationally if it was aired on its own, you said yourself that the choice to have two games on at the same time was done deliberately to maximise TV audiences.

This was the result though: 1 NRL game > 2 AFL games combined.

No conspiracy theories. Just reality.

 

[stratocaster]

For regular season games:

2025 NRL season:
48 games played on a Thursday or Friday night on Channel 9
12 involved only Sydney teams (excluding Newcastle) - 25%
28 involved one non-Sydney team (including Newcastle) - 58%
8 involved two non-Sydney teams - 17% (6 if you exclude Newcastle - 12.5%)
Those 6 games (12.5%) were shown nationally and did not compete against games in the same timeslot.

2025 AFL season:
51 games played on a Thursday or Friday night on Channel 7
22 involved all Melbourne teams (excluding Geelong) - 43%
21 involved one non-Melbourne team (including Geelong) - 41%
8 involved two non-Melbourne teams - 16% (6 if you exclude Geelong - 11.8%)
And of these 6 all non-Victorian games, 3 were shown on Fridays when there was an all Victorian game on at the exact same time.

So the AFL only had the confidence to air 3 non-Victorian games nationally last year on a Thursday/Friday - only 5.9% of all games, compared to the NRL's 12.5%.

Who shows more games with interstate teams that are non old VFL or NSWRL match ups? NRL > AFL.

Who shows more wholly non-Sydney/Melbourne games nationally? NRL > AFL.

AFL is a Victorian dominated sport.

 

[storm1999]

This was the result though: 1 NRL game > 2 AFL games combined.

A narrow win by 3,000 viewers yes. This doesn’t mean the strategy of target markets didn't work, some games are just one-sided and viewers tune out. Like the Cowboys v Manly game on Thursday. Also the lightning delay which affected both the Swans and Waratahs games in the Moore Park district didn't help, there are some things no sporting league can control.

About the AFL national coverage, of course it favours Victorian teams. Because every non-Victorian team gets guaranteed FTA coverage of every game they play into their home market, so why would Seven "waste" its picks on them? It's a very differently structured TV deal to the NRL, and it maximises local coverage for non-Victorian teams.

 

[i0Nic]

For regular season games:

2025 NRL season:
48 games played on a Thursday or Friday night on Channel 9
12 involved only Sydney teams (excluding Newcastle) - 25%
28 involved one non-Sydney team (including Newcastle) - 58%
8 involved two non-Sydney teams - 17% (6 if you exclude Newcastle - 12.5%)
Those 6 games (12.5%) were shown nationally and did not compete against games in the same timeslot.

2025 AFL season:
51 games played on a Thursday or Friday night on Channel 7
22 involved all Melbourne teams (excluding Geelong) - 43%
21 involved one non-Melbourne team (including Geelong) - 41%
8 involved two non-Melbourne teams - 16% (6 if you exclude Geelong - 11.8%)
And of these 6 all non-Victorian games, 3 were shown on Fridays when there was an all Victorian game on at the exact same time.

So the AFL only had the confidence to air 3 non-Victorian games nationally last year on a Thursday/Friday - only 5.9% of all games, compared to the NRL's 12.5%.

Who shows more games with interstate teams that are non old VFL or NSWRL match ups? NRL > AFL.

Who shows more wholly non-Sydney/Melbourne games nationally? NRL > AFL.

AFL is a Victorian dominated sport.

Great post.

It really cuts to the chase of how Victorian centric AFL really is and how ludicrous their claims of being the “national” game are. it’s heavily dependant on their Victorian teams for eyeballs and support. Just because they’ve stuck a couple teams in the northern states and pushing shit up that hill doesn’t make them a more national game.

Based on your tv data above, plus other data points such as national google search trends and social media followers, one could easily make the case that it’s rugby league that’s the national game. It certainly gets more viewers and interest beyond its nsw based teams.

unlike afl where most of the country tunes out of suns, gws and even swans games.

 

[storm1999]

one could easily make the case that it’s rugby league that’s the national game

That ceased to be the case once the Adelaide Rams and Perth Reds were kicked out of the comp. The NRL instead chose to support suburban Sydney teams like the Dragons and Sharks which attract minuscule crowds to their games. The fact that PNG is being prioritised over Adelaide speaks volumes.

Australia is a federation of six states. Any truly national league has teams in all six states, regardless of population size.

 

[The_Wookie]

AFL is a Victorian dominated sport.

Of course it is, more than half the clubs are from the one state.

Its got less to do with AFL confidence and more to do Sevens confidence and with the simple fact that the market for prime time television dictates matches should favour the largest market with the largest revenue potential for the broadcaster. This is sweetened by the fact the AFL deal specifically allows for all non victorian teams to get free to air coverage all year round whereas Victorian clubs have no such guarantee.

Also worth noting that this isnt the first time or even the first Sydney derby to be a double header. The AFL had 4 of them last year, and more are coming this year including matches from WA and SA.

 

[storm1999]

it’s heavily dependant on their Victorian teams for eyeballs and support

Could the NRL exist without any NSW teams?

 

[The_Wookie]

Great post.

It really cuts to the chase of how Victorian centric AFL really is and how ludicrous their claims of being the “national” game are. it’s heavily dependant on their Victorian teams for eyeballs and support. Just because they’ve stuck a couple teams in the northern states and pushing shit up that hill doesn’t make them a more national game.

Based on your tv data above, plus other data points such as national google search trends and social media followers, one could easily make the case that it’s rugby league that’s the national game. It certainly gets more viewers and interest beyond its nsw based teams.

unlike afl where most of the country tunes out of suns, gws and even swans games.

I could make a case either way, but reality likely is neither league nor afl is "the" national sport at the professional level. That honour likely falls to cricket, at least in summer - its the one sport many on both sides of the code war aisle migrate to from mid october.

 

[storm1999]

I could make a case either way, but reality likely is neither league nor afl is "the" national sport at the professional level.

The AFL has teams in all six states and plays games in all six states and two territories. It's hard to get more national than that. Primetime FTA coverage is a red herring as the FTA TV medium is dying a slow death anyway.

 

[i0Nic]

I could make a case either way, but reality likely is neither league nor afl is "the" national sport at the professional level. That honour likely falls to cricket, at least in summer - its the one sport many on both sides of the code war aisle migrate to from mid october.

One of those sports, cough AFL, and its fans, is constantly gloating on about being the far wider supported national code. Which is flat out incorrect and unsupported on most metrics.

Like you said if anything it’s equal, but based on many data points I’d argue that rugby league is more national than afl.

 

[i0Nic]

The AFL has teams in all six states and plays games in all six states and two territories. It's hard to get more national than that. Primetime FTA coverage is a red herring as the FTA TV medium is dying a slow death anyway.

By this logic, it should be NBL that’s the national code and pacific dominant code with teams in all states and including NZ.

Additionally the dots on a map argument is also incorrect logic because if you factor in population bases, nrl has more teams where more Australians actually live.

finally, the data points show that people are more widely interested in nrl over afl at a broader national level. Tv figures, google trends and social media support this.

Who cares how many people attend Collingwood vs Carlton games. Crowds are the red herring.

 

[The_Wookie]

The AFL has teams in all six states and plays games in all six states and two territories. It's hard to get more national than that. Primetime FTA coverage is a red herring as the FTA TV medium is dying a slow death anyway.

Putting dot points on a map isnt indicative of anything other than money and the will to spend it.

And theres almost no evidence that FTA is dying. People have been saying that for years.

 

[storm1999]

Additionally the dots on a map argument is also incorrect logic because if you factor in population bases, nrl has more teams where more Australians actually live.

Regardless of population size, you can't completely ignore three out of six states and claim to be "national". Granted the NRL are starting to address this point with the reintroduction of Perth. But killing off the Adelaide Rams was a huge backward step which occurred solely to appease Sydney-based clubs.

 

[i0Nic]

Does adding GWS giants mean that afl can now claim western Sydney? Don’t think so. Just deciding to squander money there doesn’t mean they can ‘claim’ national anything. Yet they try to get away with doing so.

 

[storm1999]

And theres almost no evidence that FTA is dying. People have been saying that for years.

OK, terrestrial linear broadcasting is slowly dying as viewers migrate to BVOD, SVOD and new forms of streaming services.

 

[Gobsmacked]

That ceased to be the case once the Adelaide Rams and Perth Reds were kicked out of the comp. The NRL instead chose to support suburban Sydney teams like the Dragons and Sharks which attract minuscule crowds to their games. The fact that PNG is being prioritised over Adelaide speaks volumes.

Australia is a federation of six states. Any truly national league has teams in all six states, regardless of population size.

PNG has 11 million people, Rugby league is the national sport and the government threw 600 million dollars on the table...

Adelaide? Honestly, ya kidding right?

 

[storm1999]

Does adding GWS giants mean that afl can now claim western Sydney?

Who said the AFL has claimed Western Sydney? They have established a presence there, although far smaller than any of the NRL clubs or the Wanderers. That much is obvious. Nobody is saying the Giants are a successful club at this stage, however the Swans clearly are.

 

[i0Nic]

OK, terrestrial linear broadcasting is slowly dying as viewers migrate to BVOD, SVOD and new forms of streaming services.

you mean BVOD, where nrl is outrating afl 2:1? Bvod shows even more viewership dominance of nrl than fta

 

[Gobsmacked]

Who said the AFL has claimed Western Sydney? They have established a presence there, although far smaller than any of the NRL clubs or the Wanderers. That much is obvious. Nobody is saying the Giants are a successful club at this stage, however the Swans clearly are.

NRL played in Darwin, do we get the Territory now?

 

[storm1999]

Adelaide? Honestly, ya kidding right?

It's an Australian capital city. Auckland and Port Moresby are not. If the NRL's main aim was to be the "national" game Adelaide would have been included before NZ and PNG, but obviously this isn't the case.