Murray V Djokovic draws highest TV audience since 2007

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by batz, Sep 12, 2012.

  1. batz

    batz G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Messages:
    14,565
    #1
  2. tank_job

    tank_job Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2012
    Messages:
    991
    Murray's longstanding close-but-no-cigar problem resonated with the Americans in a big way.

    It was clear that the crowd also wanted to be a part of his break-through.
     
    #2
  3. DragonBlaze

    DragonBlaze Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2008
    Messages:
    3,649
    Interesting, I wonder why? Rafa is clearly a bigger name than Nole/Murray??

    Also according to that article only 6 million or so tuned in to see Rafa win the Career Slam in 2010 :-|.

    Anybody got any explanations??

    Highest since 2007 makes sense since that was the last Sunday final.
     
    #3
  4. mistik

    mistik Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2010
    Messages:
    1,752
    Murray reaching a GS final and going for his 1 is still a big news.People are used to see the likes of Nadal and Djokovic win.Even my grandmother was curious if Murray in the end win a major title.That says it all.:)
     
    #4
  5. tusharlovesrafa

    tusharlovesrafa Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    May 21, 2011
    Messages:
    2,395
    Location:
    Lucknow to kolkata
    Makes no sense to me..I remember watching the news after 2008 wimbly finals,where nearly 1.1 million people watched that final only in INDIA.So the total audience all over the world would be a lot higher..Bogus numbers..
     
    #5
  6. nereis

    nereis Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2008
    Messages:
    545
    Murray presents a hugely compelling underdog story. He's a scrappy boy from a 'working class' background in a sport full of sons of bankers, businessmen and slick operators.

    It's the same secret to why Rocky movies have a cult following.
     
    #6
  7. Cup8489

    Cup8489 Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2007
    Messages:
    9,189
    Location:
    Silvis, IL
    Highest USO audience since 2007. Many people watch 2008 wimbledon. it was a sunday, and it was Fedal.
     
    #7
  8. CMM

    CMM Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2009
    Messages:
    6,713
    #8
  9. jt1224x0

    jt1224x0 Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2007
    Messages:
    226
    the women had 18 million :)
     
    #9
  10. tennisMVP

    tennisMVP Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2011
    Messages:
    507
    The reason is that Djokovic's 2011 has propelled him into star status in America. Djokovic's 2011 has been hailed as the greatest year ever or one of. His hype level grew since then, so now in 2012 he's a big star. Whereas in 2010 and 2011 the final was "Nadal vs that Serbian guy". 2010 and 2011 were considered a "let-down" because people had been hoping for Nadal vs Federer. This year Djokovic isn't a let down, he's a star.
     
    #10
  11. tacou

    tacou Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Messages:
    6,999
    I don't get it. Worldwide?
     
    #11
  12. lendlmac

    lendlmac Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2009
    Messages:
    309
    Location:
    san diego, ca
    it's a brand new day folks in men's tennis...it's a brand new day. :)
     
    #12
  13. batz

    batz G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Messages:
    14,565
    No - just USA.
     
    #13
  14. Clarky21

    Clarky21 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2011
    Messages:
    12,686


    Total bs. If I walked up to a stranger on the street and asked them who Novak Djokovic is they would look at me totally bewildered. Especially because tennis is a fringe sport in the US. And Cvac isn't even that popular world wide outside of Serbia. Recently,less than 25 people showed up to his press conference while there were more than a hundred at Fed's at the same tournament. He's a dud plain and simple.
     
    #14
  15. krz

    krz Professional

    Joined:
    May 23, 2007
    Messages:
    889
    Location:
    Concrete Jungle Where Dreams are Made
    They don't call him ****** for nothing :p
     
    #15
  16. krz

    krz Professional

    Joined:
    May 23, 2007
    Messages:
    889
    Location:
    Concrete Jungle Where Dreams are Made
    so you're saying people don't skip work to watch tennis? STOP THE PRESSES!
     
    #16
  17. tacou

    tacou Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Messages:
    6,999
    those are pretty big numbers, especially for a program that started Monday at 4pm....
     
    #17
  18. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,263

    "CBS Sports says 16.2 million viewers caught all or part of Murray's 7-6 (10), 7-5, 2-6, 3-6, 6-2 win. It was an increase of 4.4 million from Djokovic's victory against Rafael Nadal in the 2011 final and 10.3 million more than Nadal's victory over Djokovic two years ago, according to Nielsen numbers provided by the network."

    And 10.3 million more than the 2010 final when Nadal beat Djokovic. That means only 5.9 million tuned in for that match, only about 1/3 as many as this year's final.

    The numbers don't lie. Apparently very few people are interested in watching Nadal play and even fewer want to watch Nadal win. :shock:
     
    #18
  19. Homeboy Hotel

    Homeboy Hotel Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2011
    Messages:
    2,781
    Location:
    London
    Anyone care to take a stab in the dark to what the worldwide stats were?
     
    #19
  20. El Diablo

    El Diablo Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2004
    Messages:
    3,536
    .....and.....the Dow just hit its highest level since.....2007! Coincidence? I doubt it.
     
    #20
  21. jt1224x0

    jt1224x0 Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2007
    Messages:
    226
    are you mad?
     
    #21
  22. The-Champ

    The-Champ Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2007
    Messages:
    6,541
    Location:
    Sweden
    Many people want to see Murray succeed. I've mentioned in another thread that he will reach the popularity level of Fedal, maybe exceed it. Andy is a global superstar now which he truly deserves. Also celebrities support him.
     
    #22
  23. Homeboy Hotel

    Homeboy Hotel Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2011
    Messages:
    2,781
    Location:
    London
    This is true. More big names expressed their emotion when Murray lost Wimbledon/AO's etc and when he won USO than a Djokovic win/Fed #18/Nadal career grand slam.
     
    #23
  24. cork_screw

    cork_screw Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    2,569
    I think some of it might be the day and time it was scheduled. There was another USO that was scheduled for monday and that might have been overshadowed by the difference in the subtraction of nadal and fed, but I do believe that people tend to stay home more on monday evenings rather than sunday noon time where more people are out and about, especially in the fall season. But yes, many were probably also brits. Monday night is a popular night to have programming because it's a night people don't schedule things on. Just a little side point.
     
    #24
  25. Feña14

    Feña14 Legend

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    5,315
    Location:
    England
    Have you managed to find the stats for the UK?

    I'm guessing with it being on Sky and so late, they won't be that high. Even so, would be interesting to know.
     
    #25
  26. ledwix

    ledwix Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2010
    Messages:
    3,113
    The Murray final lasted longer than Djokovic's victory, which lasted longer than Nadal's victory. So that's also a factor since it says they measured how many people watched "all or part" of the match.

    Also, Djokovic is still not well-known in America, because no tennis players are known here except Federer and Nadal, plus whatever American players get mentioned on ESPN. In fact my friend met a Rafael who went by Rafa yet had *never* heard of Nadal when mentioned in comparison to him. Another friend of mine who is an average American sports junkie had never heard of Djokovic when I mentioned him in the middle of 2011. To be well known as a tennis player here you have to be a legend. To be well-known in football you just need to get injured so you can be part of the endless injury reports and slowmo replays they broadcrast.
     
    Last edited: Sep 12, 2012
    #26
  27. tennisMVP

    tennisMVP Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2011
    Messages:
    507
    How many Americans knew anything about Djokovic in 2010/2011? Since then, Djokovic has produced one of the top 3 years in the Open Era. In 2012, the media focused on Djokovic because of the amazing 2011. That tends to make you a star in America. That is the difference, not Murray.
     
    #27
  28. oneness

    oneness Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2009
    Messages:
    663
    Twitter conversation.

    Jon Wertheim ‏@jon_wertheim
    Hey @richarddeitsch : tennis fans are asking you to make sense of these us open finals ratings: Good? Bad? Misleading?

    Richard Deitsch ‏@richarddeitsch
    @jon_wertheim Little misleading because of lateness of the match. Peaked at 9-9:15 pm so casual tune-in factor. Still, a lot of viewers..

    Not sure if this related.

    @linzsports: "Who ever invented tennis can SUCK IT right now I wanna watch How I Met Your Mother!!!" http://deadsp.in/RPYXPM
     
    #28
  29. 90's Clay

    90's Clay Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    Messages:
    7,195
    Im surprised there are so many people fans of murray's game.
     
    #29
  30. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,263
    But all three finals ('10, '11, '12) were at the same time and day - Monday at 4:00pm EST.

    Nadal was favored to win in 2010 in his amazing year - thus, only 5.9 million people tuned in.

    Djokovic was favored to win in 2011 in his amazing year -so the number of people tuning in doubled to 11.8 million.

    This year, no Nadal at all, so the number of people tuning in skyrocketed to 16.2 million, which is almost triple the number of viewers watching in 2010 when Nadal won.

    The conclusion is clear - no Nadal means highest ratings. Nadal winning means lowest ratings. People don't want to tune in to watch Nadal play and even fewer want to watch Nadal win. I guess most people find his game, bolo forehand, loud grunting, butt picking, etc. just too annoying?

    BTW, these rating have nothing to do with Brits tuning in because there are American TV ratings only.
     
    #30
  31. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,263
    I'd say the difference is more likely the absence of Nadal. :)

    People obviously knew about Nadal in 2010 (he already won the French and Wimbledon that year, remember?), yet only 1/3 as many people watched his match as compared to Murray's match.
     
    #31
  32. tennisMVP

    tennisMVP Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2011
    Messages:
    507
    I think in 2010 and 2011 it was like "Legend Nadal vs the Serbian".

    Whereas in 2012, Americans knew who Murray was because he's been the symbol of Great Britain for some time now, he's like part of the Royal Family almost, especially after the Olympics. And like I alluded to earlier, America know who Djokovic is NOW because of the huge hype that followed 2011.

    I think in 2012 it is like "Legend Djokovic vs Symbol of Britain Murray".

    So I think Nadal vs Murray would have an audience just as big as Djokovic vs Murray.

    And now Nadal vs Djokovic would have a big audience too as Djokovic's stardom has arrived.

    Either way, nobody knows the exact reasons for anything. I'm just speculating. And I doubt we've seen the last US Open final with Nadal in it, so we'll judge in future (assuming he plays STAR Djokovic or Murray).
     
    #32
  33. CMM

    CMM Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2009
    Messages:
    6,713
    Dude, can't you read?

    http://www.theatlanticwire.com/entertainment/2010/09/cbs-espn-abandon-u-s-open-final/18911/
    There's also a comment on that article
     
    #33
  34. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,263
    #34
  35. CMM

    CMM Legend

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2009
    Messages:
    6,713
    It was posted on the previous page.

    I don't think they measure how many people started to watch it.

    The AO slugfest was very popular.
    http://twitter.com/#!/AFraser/status/164368913642160128

     
    #35
  36. BreakPoint

    BreakPoint Bionic Poster

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    43,263
    ^^^^^

    Djokovic was favored and won that match. He had beaten Nadal like 6 times in a row already in finals. People tuned in to see another beatdown of Nadal. :)

    That's why the ratings for the US Open doubled in 2011 when Djokovic beat up on Nadal than in 2010 when Nadal won. :shock:
     
    #36
  37. Fedex

    Fedex Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2009
    Messages:
    4,634
    Location:
    Dundee
    Shocking it wasn't on BBC.
    Probably the single greatest British sporting moment missed.
    I had to watch it in a pub then got chucked out at quarter past midnight then the rest on a stream on my laptop at home.
    Sky have got a lot to answer for monopolising significant sporting events like this.
    Britain wants to promote tennis and they can't show a Brit winning the final of a slam!
    It's really pathetic.
     
    #37
  38. tennisMVP

    tennisMVP Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2011
    Messages:
    507
    That Australian audience is the most incredible thing I've ever heard in my life. A peak audience of 4 million, in a population as small as Australia. And so late into the night, incredible.

    Nadal-vs-Djokovic was more popular than the Melbourne Cup (biggest horse race in Australia).
     
    #38
  39. SempreSami

    SempreSami Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2007
    Messages:
    3,627
    Location:
    UK
    That scripted "thank you" he gave to Sky when he joined them in their studio was pathetic. You never get anyone saying thank you to the BBC at Wimbledon.
     
    #39
  40. DRII

    DRII Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    6,406

    Dream on...

    perhaps Nole's 'tight shorts', that you're obsessed with, attracted plenty of viewers like yourself.
     
    #40
  41. DRII

    DRII Legend

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    6,406


    Exactly!

    People were tuning in for CBS primetime, which is the most watched channel in the U.S.

    Hopefully some will become more interested in tennis and watch on a regular basis; doubt it though...
     
    #41
  42. Mainad

    Mainad G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2011
    Messages:
    12,761
    Location:
    Manchester, UK.
    I totally agree. I've had Sky and Eurosport for years so I guess I've becoome a bit spoiled. I tend to forget not everyone has access to these channels. It is bad form that the BBC were not able to show Murray winning his first Slam. Was it purely for contractual reasons? Surely they could have come to some arrangement.

    Did no local tennis-loving pub landlords manage to get a licence to stay open for Murray's match? That's also a shame!
     
    #42
  43. namelessone

    namelessone Legend

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2009
    Messages:
    9,745
    Can't believe people think Nadal is a bad draw for ratings. There are tons of people that want to see him. 2010 USO and 2012 RG were rained out at times, with breaks as it were(I am a Nadal fan and I couldn't see the full matches) and they still got great ratings.

    What you need for high ratings is two stars of near equal stature. When you get a star and a more unknown guy(to the masses that is), the ratings will be lower.

    You can't take how much people love to watch a player just by the ratings on certain networks. Look at this article:
    http://observer.com/2010/09/tennis-television-ratings-tumble/

    On CBS, Fed, a player with a spectacular style, regularly features on the lowest ratings list for finals:

    WIMBLEDON MEN’S FINALS, LOWEST RATED (SINCE 1988 ):

    1. 2010, Rafael Nadal d. Tomas Berdych, 1.6

    2. 2005, Roger Federer d. Andy Roddick, 2.1

    3. 2003, Roger Federer d. Mark Philippoussis, 2.2

    U.S. OPEN MEN’S FINALS, LOWEST RATED:

    1. 2008, Roger Federer d. Andy Murray, 1.7

    2. 2009, Juan Martin del Potro d. Roger Federer, 2.3

    3. 2004, Roger Federer d. Lleyton Hewitt, 2.5
     
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2012
    #43
  44. Peters

    Peters Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2009
    Messages:
    666
    Location:
    UK
    Yes, the BBC could have forked out for the final if they wanted, everything has a price (Sky would have been compensated), but they've been throwing their toys out the pram lately due to what they perceive to be unfair budget cuts.

    Instead of cutting back on the crap that no-one watches on the likes of BBC3 and streamlining it, they've simply been sticking two fingers up to sports fans and dropping that stuff instead. Like F1 being sold to Sky, etc.

    It was in the nation's interests for the Murray match to be shown on the BBC, live to everyone. But times have changed unfortunately.
     
    #44
  45. tennisMVP

    tennisMVP Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2011
    Messages:
    507
    Also interesting to see what the ratings were for 2009 AO final, and compare it to the 2012 AO final. I suspect 2012 would have the higher rating.
     
    #45
  46. 10is93

    10is93 New User

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2012
    Messages:
    5
    Now you can replace some matches with the Nadal/ Djokovic finals
    Nadal and Djokovic Wimbledon 2011 earned a 1.8
    http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2011/07/wimbledon-wrap-slightly-more-viewers-for-nbcs-swan-song/

    And at the USO, the Delpo/Fed match did better.
    2010
    http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2010/09/they-hate-mondays-another-year-of-low/

    2011
    http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/201...-open-final-wnba-playoffs-kansas-city-royals/

    For this year the numbers of people who watched in all or part is high but the match earned a 2.2 in ratings.
    Monday finals are not good for the ratings, there is football at the same time, and I remember in 2008 many fans complained the match wasn't showed on TV where they lived in the US and had to watch on a livestream. Maybe it also happened for others monday finals.
     
    #46
  47. SempreSami

    SempreSami Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2007
    Messages:
    3,627
    Location:
    UK
    The Beeb might have cut back on a lot of things, but they did deliver the best ever coverage for the Olympics.
     
    #47
  48. batz

    batz G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Messages:
    14,565
    Sorry guys, but from a commercial perspective, Sky would need to be mental to give up their exclusive access to the USO final. They are a subscription company - it's how they make money. If they start selling their exclusive rights to free to air broadcasters every time a big event happens, then nobody would subscribe - because we'd all know that we could see it on the beeb.


    I thought it was telling that Murray spent 20 minutes in the Sky studio within half an hour of winning his first slam - he thanked Sky for all their support of tennis in the UK and said that they were a godsend to him when he has his long injury as a youngster - it allowed him to watch a lot of tennis players.
     
    #48
  49. dudeski

    dudeski Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2011
    Messages:
    4,228
    Great analysis. Fully agree.
     
    #49
  50. krz

    krz Professional

    Joined:
    May 23, 2007
    Messages:
    889
    Location:
    Concrete Jungle Where Dreams are Made
    [​IMG]
     
    #50

Share This Page