20 hours ago, Diamond_Jim said:

that number is a mere 20-30,000 .. perhaps 50k. In the ratings system that is irrelevant

we are talking about overall ratings ... I suggest they would be line ball

Frankly I expected no better but it is a good example of the difficulty faced by a "lesser" team.

As well as when certain rounds were fixed so as the lesser teams don't win....ie 2017

1 minute ago, Sir Why You Little said:

It’s actually the high end of technology, right on the edge. 

But my old man raced Albert Park in the 1950’s, so it is in my blood

Daniel Ricciardo is a great sportsman flying the Australian Flag ?? on an International Stage

So often the Demons first game is on at the same time. 

Sick of it

Fairy Nuff, then. Understand the duality. Remember the 60s footy broadcasts on 3UZ on Saturdays?  '...the Demons are 3pts behind in time-on in the last quarter. Alves passes to Bourke who handballs to himself and taps the ball forward, running onto the ball just 3 feet from the goalmouth with Collingwood players streaming in from at least 20 feet away and yes, Bourke is lining up the goal ...'  'THEY'RE RACING AT MOONEE VALLEY IN THE 6TH, WITH CHEWING GUM STICKING TO THE RAILS...' 

13 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Viewing audience. Around 90000 on actual race day with maybe 324000 over the weekend.

Its stupid that we have to deal with the this for 2 years running. The GP is an expensive event and there would no doubt be some cross-over that means people would choose one or the other. But for us to have a clash two years in succession is appalling scheduling as usual bythe AFL.

So right jnrmac

The myopia of some posters worries me. It's not me complaining about the need for Foxtel or similar to watch games.

MFC competes in a sports market for its very existence. Continual scheduling in low rating FTA spots if at all is deadly to our brand.

Success alone will not breed more members. Look at North if you want a case study. We need to put our product in front f as many people as we can and then we need to deliver an exciting product.

F1 is a technically exciting sport and cutting edge in TV coverage. It has suffered in recent years from the dominance of one team be it Mercedes and before that Red Bull. They now have new American owners that are committed to increasing the brand.

Edited March 20, 20187 yr by Diamond_Jim

14 minutes ago, Deemania since 56 said:

I watch no-one but the DEMONS. If the Dees are not on the TV telecast, it is not worth watching. That has been my petty little protest for all these years ... it infiltrated my Foxtel telecasts, too, and radio broadcasts ... and I only attend Demons' games. One-eyed, inflexible and stubborn. HOOtfCares? The idea of DV8 to enact a ban on telecasts is a very good one. 

Not precluding being half whacked......

8 minutes ago, Deemania since 56 said:

Fairy Nuff, then. Understand the duality. Remember the 60s footy broadcasts on 3UZ on Saturdays?  '...the Demons are 3pts behind in time-on in the last quarter. Alves passes to Bourke who handballs to himself and taps the ball forward, running onto the ball just 3 feet from the goalmouth with Collingwood players streaming in from at least 20 feet away and yes, Bourke is lining up the goal ...'  'THEY'RE RACING AT MOONEE VALLEY IN THE 6TH, WITH CHEWING GUM STICKING TO THE RAILS...' 

It was always poor old Don Hyde who was lumbered with the 3UZ call. I hated it when we were on 3UZ for the exact reason you illustrated so nicely.

"So it's correct weight at  Mudsville. Correct weight. Winner was no 5 who paid $2 the win and $1.35 the place. Daily double $5, trifecta $16 and quadrella $80. (etc, for about 2 minutes) Let's cross back to Don at the MCG."

"Thanks Laurie. There's the bounce and Walker gets the tap, it's straight to--"

"They're off at Dimboola. Glue Factory gets a good jump followed by The Knackery and Mug's Paradise ..."

 

(repeat 125 times throughout the afternoon)

30 minutes ago, Deemania since 56 said:

Fairy Nuff, then. Understand the duality. Remember the 60s footy broadcasts on 3UZ on Saturdays?  '...the Demons are 3pts behind in time-on in the last quarter. Alves passes to Bourke who handballs to himself and taps the ball forward, running onto the ball just 3 feet from the goalmouth with Collingwood players streaming in from at least 20 feet away and yes, Bourke is lining up the goal ...'  'THEY'RE RACING AT MOONEE VALLEY IN THE 6TH, WITH CHEWING GUM STICKING TO THE RAILS...' 

Yes. With Don Hyde

21 minutes ago, Mazer Rackham said:

"So it's correct weight at  Mudsville. Correct weight. Winner was no 5 who paid $2 the win and $1.35 the place. Daily double $5, trifecta $16 and quadrella $80. (etc, for about 2 minutes) Let's cross back to Don at the MCG."

"Thanks Laurie. There's the bounce and Walker gets the tap, it's straight to--"

"They're off at Dimboola. Glue Factory gets a good jump followed by The Knackery and Mug's Paradise ..."

 

(repeat 125 times throughout the afternoon)

Might explain why i became a punter......

11 minutes ago, binman said:

Might explain why i became a punter......

I had a flutter on a roughie in the last and the nag got up!

15 hours ago, Cards13 said:

Does anyone in Australia watch the GP?

yes, love it. most motorsport.

56 minutes ago, willmoy said:

Not precluding being half whacked......

No, not precluded, just intolerant. And you?

1 hour ago, jnrmac said:

Viewing audience. Around 90000 on actual race day with maybe 324000 over the weekend.

Its stupid that we have to deal with the this for 2 years running. The GP is an expensive event and there would no doubt be some cross-over that means people would choose one or the other. But for us to have a clash two years in succession is appalling scheduling as usual bythe AFL.

I have to record both, simultaneously.

So I can re-watch both later.

30 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Yes. With Don Hyde

Was it the adolescent Dennis Commetti who took over, impressively from Don Hyde at UZ - forging an impeccable career? He knew all the Demons players in those days, so well. Memories may be inaccurate but I think that was him on that station....

59 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

So right jnrmac

The myopia of some posters worries me. It's not me complaining about the need for Foxtel or similar to watch games.

MFC competes in a sports market for its very existence. Continual scheduling in low rating FTA spots if at all is deadly to our brand.

Success alone will not breed more members. Look at North if you want a case study. We need to put our product in front f as many people as we can and then we need to deliver an exciting product.

F1 is a technically exciting sport and cutting edge in TV coverage. It has suffered in recent years from the dominance of one team be it Mercedes and before that Red Bull. They now have new American owners that are committed to increasing the brand.

What is deadly to our brand is NOT being prime time Free to Air.

 

If we are to pickup undecided watchers of our game as supporters, we have to get the Prime-Time spots on the Free Telly.

# Forget that bloody Fox, and pay TV, that doesn't help us grow the club, actually the more of us that switch to Fox, the LESS Likely it will be that we get and keep Prime time.

And we won't really grow our supporter base as most who Pay for TV, are already welded on Members.

2 minutes ago, Deemania since 56 said:

Was it the adolescent Dennis Commetti who took over, impressively from Don Hyde at UZ - forging an impeccable career? He knew all the Demons players in those days, so well. Memories may be inaccurate but I think that was him on that station....

I only remember Dennis on Ch7 from around ‘89

i don’t think he was on Melbs Radio

1 hour ago, willmoy said:

Not precluding being half whacked......

Another refusal to partake in a battle of wits with an unarmed person, so I apologise instead, in advance.

Just now, Sir Why You Little said:

I only remember Dennis on Ch7 from around ‘89

i don’t think he was on Melbs Radio

Yes, he was for about 2 years - but it was one of those 'lesser' broadcasts away from DB who were big with Louie the Lip and Jack Dyer, with constant interruptions from racing. 

2 hours ago, Deemania since 56 said:

No, not precluded, just intolerant. And you?

Always never knew my limitations@#$%&

20 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

They have both been Powerhouses in the TV ? era

We haven’t, and a cut throat place like 7 has no faith in us at all

We have to earn it

Its not 7 who controls what gets fta coverage. It is the afl. Why? Because the afl control fixturing and almost every (eg all bar one i think this year) fta game is a stand alone night game. Sure they might have some influence on that fixturing but the afl make the call.

Take 2016. I can't remember how many fta games Carlton got but it was way more than the dees and each bar the opener against the tigers was a ratings disaster. And no doubt that game lost hundreds of thousands of viewers in the second half as iirc they got flogged. Which is no surprise becausee they were crap. And played a depressing, boring brand of football to boot.

Do you really think 7 wanted them to play in last years or this years corresponding match? As you say ch7 is cutthroat and it is all about ratings. As if they would choose carlton to play the tigers. Sure it will still rate well but if tge tigers [censored] them neutrals will turn off in droves.

I have no doubt a melb v tigers game would rate much better than blues v tigers.

Which game do you think neutral (and tigers fans for that matter) footy fans would prefer to watch? The up and coming side full of young guns, playing an attractive high scoring attacking game, hungry  and looking to beat the reigning premier. Or the reigning premiers versus a dull, defensive team with few stars in a game likely not to be close. Please. It is a no brainer. 200k more viewers would tune in and even more importantly watch to the end. Yet who do the afl choose for the coveted season opener? Carlton. Who has jnrmac has pointed out have been crap for 20 years and are probably 2-3 years from making the finals. Go figure.

Makes no sense and because it doesnt it is easy to think perhaps its not about membership numbers - and its certainly not about ratings - but influence and power. Which im not saying it is but geez louise it is hard to think of other plausible explanation.

 

Binman, I'm not sure why you chose to assume Channel 7 would act logically. I agree that in a logical world, Channel 7 would ask for no games incorporating the bottom 4 teams on the ladder...but I still believe that Channel 7 has significant influence in the preparation of the fixture. I just also believe that Channel 7 makes bewildering decisions.

Case in point, and nothing to do with football, at least not directly is...how did Tim Worner keep his job?

2 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Binman, I'm not sure why you chose to assume Channel 7 would act logically. I agree that in a logical world, Channel 7 would ask for no games incorporating the bottom 4 teams on the ladder...but I still believe that Channel 7 has significant influence in the preparation of the fixture. I just also believe that Channel 7 makes bewildering decisions.

Case in point, and nothing to do with football, at least not directly is...how did Tim Worner keep his job?

Because they are a business. Who make their money from advertising revenue. And their profit - or lack thereof - is directly related to ratings, particularly those in key nightime slots. And because they have shareholders to answer to. I say again if they had the influence some think there is no way carlton would be playing Thursday night.

1 minute ago, binman said:

Because they are a business. Who make their money from advertising revenue. And their profit - or lack thereof - is directly related to ratings, particularly those in key nightime slots. And because they have shareholders to answer to. I say again if they had the influence some think there is no way carlton would be playing Thursday night.

However of course they have influence on when games are played.

Excellent post Binman

IIRC Carlton were justified  from the AFL power brokers by the talk of up and coming team etc etc

What a load of the proverbial.

It is a last ditch attempt to prop up a falling club. They are only 8k members above us.

The sad thing is that if they put the effort into the MFC the AFL might see a better return than propping up the old blue baggers

12 minutes ago, binman said:

Its not 7 who controls what gets fta coverage. It is the afl. Why? Because the afl control fixturing and almost every (eg all bar one i think this year) fta game is a stand alone night game. Sure they might have some influence on that fixturing but the afl make the call.

Take 2016. I can't remember how many fta games Carlton got but it was way more than the dees and each bar the opener against the tigers was a ratings disaster. And no doubt that game lost hundreds of thousands of viewers in the second half as iirc they got flogged. Which is no surprise becausee they were crap. And played a depressing, boring brand of football to boot.

Do you really think 7 wanted them to play in last years or this years corresponding match? As you say ch7 is cutthroat and it is all about ratings. As if they would choose carlton to play the tigers. Sure it will still rate well but if tge tigers [censored] them neutrals will turn off in droves.

I have no doubt a melb v tigers game would rate much better than blues v tigers.

Which game do you think neutral (and tigers fans for that matter) footy fans would prefer to watch? The up and coming side full of young guns, playing an attractive high scoring attacking game, hungry  and looking to beat the reigning premier. Or the reigning premiers versus a dull, defensive team with few stars in a game likely not to be close. Please. It is a no brainer. 200k more viewers would tune in and even more importantly watch to the end. Yet who do the afl choose for the coveted season opener? Carlton. Who has jnrmac has pointed out have been crap for 20 years and are probably 2-3 years from making the finals. Go figure.

Makes no sense and because it doesnt it is easy to think perhaps its not about membership numbers - and its certainly not about ratings - but influence and power. Which im not saying it is but geez louise it is hard to think of other plausible explanation.

 

Channel 7 has paid signifigant $$$’s to the AFL

In return they have a very large say in how the fixture is structured. 

Ch7 still make money out of Carlscum on a friday night, sadly. 

They are still a “Big” Victorian club in terms of viewers

50 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Channel 7 has paid signifigant $$$’s to the AFL

In return they have a very large say in how the fixture is structured. 

Ch7 still make money out of Carlscum on a friday night, sadly. 

They are still a “Big” Victorian club in terms of viewers

I think you have been working at the ABC too long and don't understand how commercial tv makes money. In case that is true, i'll remind you. From ratings.

Do you honestly believe a carlton v tigers game would rate better on Thursday night than a dees v tigers game, or a dogs v tigers or game or a swans v tigers game, or a hawks v tigers game. Surely not and if that is the case your argument that they would choose Carlton to play in that game (assuming of course they had that influence) does not hold water. 

 

Edited March 20, 20187 yr by binman