Which is bigger The World Cup or Olympics?

shakeitoff

And where does the rugby world cup stand on the list of reputable international events(up there with badminton and lacrosse I guess)

valoren

It has to be the summer Olympics.

It is the 'World Championship' of each sport condensed into a 2 week schedule, a festival of sport.
The main ones in athletics, swimming, cycling, gymnastics. There's even a football tournament wedged in.

The world cup is two weeks of sorting the wheat from the chaff until the final two weeks with the business end of the knock out stages where **** get's real, a festival of the most popular sport on the planet.

shakeitoff

valoren wrote: »

It has to be the summer Olympics.

It is the 'World Championship' of each sport condensed into a 2 week schedule, a festival of sport.

The world cup is two weeks of sorting the wheat from the chaff until the final two weeks with the business end of the knock out stages where **** get's real, a festival of just one sport.

I think why the Olympics is so revered has obviously to do with its ancient history but I also think America's success in it is a reason it has such as the pinnacle of sport.

The Olympics is full of sports that nobody cares about from one year to the next(in fact the majority of them) yet the World Cup is every 4 years and is the pinnacle of the most popular sport in the world. However, the fact that the actual games itself is truly global with all countries represented give it a leg up over football. But if FIFA have their way we'll get there eventually.

Hurrache

The World Cup obviously. It won't fit on most people's mantelpiece, whereas you just get a small medal, maybe some flowers, for the Olympics.

2smiggy

the Olympics, some thing great to watch every day.

today at the world cup you have costa rica vs brazil, nigeria vs iceland and serbia vs switzerland. Most days just really crap fixtures. they want to increase it to 48 teams also. imagine how bad it will be then !

Adamocovic

Hurrache wrote: »

The World Cup obviously. It won't fit on most people's mantelpiece, whereas you just get a small medal, maybe some flowers, for the Olympics.

It really depends. If we are talking one Olympic medal then easily the World Cup is bigger.

But if you combine all the Olympic medals for one event, probably bigger than the World Cup.
Can't confirm this though.

satguy

1. World Cup
2. Olympics
3. Rugby World Cup
4. UEFA European Championship
5. ?

Ken.

Olympics by a mile. Every country in the world will have at least one athlete representing them in some sport or other with a chance of winning a medal. In the world cup you only have 32 nations with an interest and realistically only about 4-6 of them with a genuine chance of winning the thing. Ditto for rugby. 20 teams with only 3-4 with a chance of winning.

Boom_Bap

I think that the World Cup Final is the most viewed sporting event globally.

Tom Mann Centuria

The World Cup, because once you've won your medal you keep it. The Olympics is all about finishing 4th and waiting by your phone for subsequent doping violations.

Cina

2smiggy wrote: »

the Olympics, some thing great to watch every day.

today at the world cup you have costa rica vs brazil, nigeria vs iceland and serbia vs switzerland. Most days just really crap fixtures. they want to increase it to 48 teams also. imagine how bad it will be then !

The World Cup has already had plenty of great matches involving smaller nations. Just look at Croatia vs Argentina so far. A part of its allure is smaller, lesser known nations going up against the big boys and succeeding. Just look at Iceland.

Imo the World Cup is the pinnacle of sport. Football is by far the most played sport in the world and it gets higher viewers than anything else, too, Olympics included.

There is also an awful lot of crap at the Olympics people can win medals for.

meeeeh

Olympics. There are countries which wouldn't have huge football following but have interest in some sports that are part of Olympics. World Cup is in my opinion bigger than Winter Olympics. I would guess Rugby WC is somewhere at the level of handball or volleyball in global terms.

shakeitoff

Putinbot wrote: »

Olympics by a mile. Every country in the world will have at least one athlete representing them in some sport or other with a chance of winning a medal. In the world cup you only have 32 nations with an interest and realistically only about 4-6 of them with a genuine chance of winning the thing. Ditto for rugby. 20 teams with only 3-4 with a chance of winning.

The Rugby World cup, where a tournament is held in France but games take place in Wales

branie2

Definitely the Olympics

sabat

Putinbot wrote: »

Olympics by a mile. Every country in the world will have at least one athlete representing them in some sport or other with a chance of winning a medal. In the world cup you only have 32 nations with an interest and realistically only about 4-6 of them with a genuine chance of winning the thing. Ditto for rugby. 20 teams with only 3-4 with a chance of winning.

211 countries entered this world cup, probably more than the Olympics...

rickis tache

Ploughing Championships.....

Ken.

rickis tache wrote: »

Ploughing Championships.....

Mod-Winner alright.

Thread locked:D

Billy86

satguy wrote: »

1. World Cup
2. Olympics
3. Rugby World Cup
4. UEFA European Championship
5. ?

I'm a big rugby fan, but the RWC is light years behind the euros or CL for how big an overall event it is. NFL and NBA would also be a good deal ahead, if I'm correct the superbowl is typically the most watched sporting event in the world almost any year there isn't a world cup on.

CalamariFritti

World Cup is bigger. No doubt. Most people don’t give a sh1t about most of the disciplines in the Olympics.
Same with rugby. It’s biggish in the Anglo sphere but outside that no one cares.

meeeeh

sabat wrote: »

211 countries entered this world cup, probably more than the Olympics...

206 countries were in Brazil. UK for example was one team, it's 4 in football. Besides playing qualifiers is not the same as being prepared to pay for dignitaries to spend month in some scenic location.

I would say (too lazy to look up actual numbers) world cup final is biggest single sporting event but as whole Olympics are bigger.

valoren

Tom Mann Centuria wrote: »

The World Cup, because once you've won your medal you keep it. The Olympics is all about finishing 4th and waiting by your phone for subsequent doping violations.

If you are Dutch and played in the 2010 final, you'd be waiting for that medal 'upgrade' call as well.

Tom Mann Centuria

The Rugby League World Cup. Where 3 teams battle it out to get beaten in the final by Australia. Tens of people watch it every 4 years.

Franz Von Peppercorn

Billy86 wrote: »

I'm a big rugby fan, but the RWC is light years behind the euros or CL for how big an overall event it is. NFL and NBA would also be a good deal ahead, if I'm correct the superbowl is typically the most watched sporting event in the world almost any year there isn't a world cup on.

Naw. That’s rubbish. It’s rebroadcast to a few countries but most people outside the US don’t watch it live.

OneOfThem Stumbled

CalamariFritti wrote: »

World Cup is bigger. No doubt. Most people don’t give a sh1t about most of the disciplines in the Olympics.
Same with rugby. It’s biggish in the Anglo sphere but outside that no one cares.

Rugby isn't big in China, India, or Germany. While that's pretty significant, neither China nor India care about the Football much either. Even with the Olympics, India doesn't care all that much.

Billy86 wrote: »

I'm a big rugby fan, but the RWC is light years behind the euros or CL for how big an overall event it is. NFL and NBA would also be a good deal ahead, if I'm correct the superbowl is typically the most watched sporting event in the world almost any year there isn't a world cup on.

How many countries take part in the superbowl?

murpho999

Billy86 wrote: »

I'm a big rugby fan, but the RWC is light years behind the euros or CL for how big an overall event it is. NFL and NBA would also be a good deal ahead, if I'm correct the superbowl is typically the most watched sporting event in the world almost any year there isn't a world cup on.

No way I would agree about the RWC. It's definitely smaller than the CL or Euros.

The CL or Euros is watched all over the world whilst Rugby is only watched in traditional Rugby nations.

I would say most Japanese people don't even know the next Rugby World Cup is being held there.

Franz Von Peppercorn

The figures I see for live viewership are


1) cricket WC ( 2015) 1.5B
2) football WC = 1B
3) rugby WC = 120 M
4) NFL final = 111M (us)
5) Euro final = 110M (Europe)

I know the last two are limited to the US and Europe only but that’s what mr google told me.

As for the NFL there may be some interest outside the US for the live transmission but not much.

These are one off events. You can’t compare the Olympics because there’s no one event (100 metres aside) that attracts lots of viewers. If you are going to add up all the Olympic viewers across all the tournament then why not sum all the World Cup games.

That’s apples and oranges.

selwyn froggitt

The Tour de France is well up there with TV audiences.

Not only that, it is also the best-attended annual sporting event on the planet.

Franz Von Peppercorn

selwyn froggitt wrote: »

The Tour de France is well up there with TV audiences.

Not only that, it is also the best-attended annual sporting event on the planet.

Apples n oranges too.

They claim 4B but that’s the sum total of all the viewership across 3 weeks. That’s hardly individually unique people. Divide by number of days.

shakeitoff

NFL is a niche interest. Nobody on mainland Europe gives a **** about it and only a few lads here feign interest every February. Tom Brady would walk down a street in Paris and nobody would have a clue who he was. Similar to every single rugby player. Although NFL is far bigger than rugby simply due to America culture being the most prominent world culture. Rugby will probably die out over the next few decades, in Australia its popularity is severely waning and when the full extent of the damage it incurs on the body that will be rugby's time over.

Franz Von Peppercorn

shakeitoff wrote: »

NFL is a niche interest. Nobody on mainland Europe gives a **** about it and only a few lads here feign interest every February. Tom Brady would walk down a street in Paris and nobody would have a clue who he was. Similar to every single rugby player. Although NFL is far bigger than rugby simply due to America culture being the most prominent world culture. Rugby will probably die out over the next few decades, in Australia its popularity is severely waning and when the full extent of the damage it incurs on the body that will be rugby's time over.

Pretty sure rugby players would be recognised in Paris. Maybe pick a different European city.

Franz Von Peppercorn

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

The figures I see for live viewership are

1) football WC = 1B
2) rugby WC = 120 B
3) NFL final = 111B (us)
4) Euro’s = 110B (Europe)

I know the last two are limited to the US and Europe only but that’s what mr google told me.

As for the NFL there may be some interest outside the US for the live transmission but not much.

These are one off events. You can’t compare the Olympics because there’s no one event (100 metres aside) that attracts lots of viewers. If you are going to add up all the Olympic viewers across all the tournament then why not sum all the World Cup games.

That’s apples and oranges.

I think. You might be overstating the figures a bit, unless people on other planets are watching as well.

The IPL and cricket world cups need a mention as well, mainly due to over one billion cricket mad Indians, but still high viewing figures all the same.

Cienciano

For casual fans that never watch sports, the Olympics. I mean, who the fúck watches swimming, rowing and badminton if it's not the Olympics? Even track and field big meetings aren't that popular outside the Olympics and they're the main event for the Olympics. I think the fact that there's more people that watch football week in, week out puts the World Cup at 1. I mean, the all Ireland gaelic football championship is far bigger than the Olympics in Ireland.
Ireland get a gold medal in showjumping, it's hard to really get worked up about that.
I'm biased though, I'm a football fan. I'd rather watch Argentina Croatia which I have no connection with than an irish guy compete in the 30km walk.

s7ryf3925pivug

World cup in Europe and South America. Olympics elsewhere. Rugby world cup is only a big deal in eight countries and only bigger than the world cup in two or three.

Franz Von Peppercorn

Aegir wrote: »

I think. You might be overstating the figures a bit, unless people on other planets are watching as well.

The IPL and cricket world cups need a mention as well, mainly due to over one billion cricket mad Indians, but still high viewing figures all the same.

I’m not overstating anything - I’m reporting my google searches. There are 7B people on the planet so none of these figures is impossible.

Of course the Tour de France figure is rubbish but I explained why - they are summing up all the individual day’s viewership as unique.

Edit: ah, I see what you mean. Corrected! Also added the cricket World Cup which tops the list

shakeitoff

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Pretty sure rugby players would be recognised in Paris. Maybe pick a different European city.

Depends on the player. I wouldn't be surprised if Dan Carter was able to enjoy a quiet enough life in his time there. Depends on how flashy he was of course. You'd notice an over compensating athlete with money if they wanted you to recognise them.

There's no real rugby star right now or anyone that really transcends the sport.

s7ryf3925pivug

Cienciano wrote: »

For casual fans that never watch sports, the Olympics. I mean, who the fúck watches swimming, rowing and badminton if it's not the Olympics? Even track and field big meetings aren't that popular outside the Olympics and they're the main event for the Olympics. I think the fact that there's more people that watch football week in, week out puts the World Cup at 1. I mean, the all Ireland gaelic football championship is far bigger than the Olympics in Ireland.
Ireland get a gold medal in showjumping, it's hard to really get worked up about that.
I'm biased though, I'm a football fan. I'd rather watch Argentina Croatia which I have no connection with than an irish guy compete in the 30km walk.

Nah I only watch world cup or european cup soccer and I have zero interest in the olympics

Cienciano

Amayah Squeaking Infant wrote: »

Nah I only watch world cup or european cup soccer and I have zero interest in the olympics

One race that I genuinely like in the Olympics is the 1500m. It's the perfect length imho to have good strategy and not be boring. Having said that, I couldn't be bothered if I missed it.

Omackeral

Olympics can be held in one city, World Cup needs a full country, or two, or three.

shakeitoff

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/oct/06/japans-rugby-world-cup-success-breaks-world-tv-viewing-record

That's impressive. I think that's how many Americans watched their last 16 game against Belgium(although with matches held in stadiums and massive public parks) the number was probably way higher.

SnazzyPig

satguy wrote: »

1. World Cup
2. Olympics
3. Rugby World Cup
4. UEFA European Championship
5. ?

1. World Cup
2. Olympics
3. Rugby World Cup
4. UEFA European Championship
5. ?
? Rugby World Cup

The Cricket World Cup is almost certainly bigger in viewing figures than the Rugby world cup.

Tom Mann Centuria

Amayah Squeaking Infant wrote: »

World cup in Europe and South America. Olympics elsewhere. Rugby world cup is only a big deal in eight countries and only bigger than the world cup in two or three.

Fairly sure the World Cup would be more popular than the Olympics in huge swathes of Africa too.

shakeitoff

shakeitoff wrote: »

Depends on the player. I wouldn't be surprised if Dan Carter was able to enjoy a quiet enough life in his time there. Depends on how flashy he was of course. You'd notice an over compensating athlete with money if they wanted you to recognise them.

There's no real rugby star right now or anyone that really transcends the sport.

A friend of a friend, who was pretty decent number eight in his day, was asked to coach the Richmond under 11s a few years back and when introduced to his new squad, was asking their names

First kid: Peter Williams
Friend: Any relation to JPR Williams?
First kid: no sir

Second kid: Lucas sir, Lucas Brooke
Friend: Any relation to Zin Zan?
Second kid: Yes sir, that's my father. He's the big guy over there on the touch line
friend: Bollocks

anyway, I digress, sorry.

Arghus

I don't know really what you mean by "bigger." More important? More widely watched? Harder to host? What does bigger mean?

Previously, I would have always put The World Cup on a bigger pedestal to The Olympics, but it's harder to call for me now. I think The World Cup still captures world wide attention in a way the Olympics doesn't. It's very focused, all over the world people tune into individual matches, whereas the Olympics is spread out over different disciplines and there is a lot of it that people don't follow. However...

I adore football and just love, love, love the World Cup, but after watching the Rio games night after night I've come around to the idea that the Olympics is many ways the better sporting event: I can't really deny it.

It's the hugeness of it, the sheer variety, the fact that it's the absolute pinnacle of achievement in most of these sports. And while some of these sports may be admittedly dull to the unexpert eye, some of them are absolutely mind blowing. I saw some feats of human performance, particularly in the gymnastics, that caused me to - "wahhh? Holy fuckin' shi t!..." - doubt the validity of what I was seeing with my own eyes.

The Rugby World Cup isn't even in the conversation.

meeeeh

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

The figures I see for live viewership are

3) rugby WC = 120 M

I'm pretty sure that number is either for whole RWC not just the final or from Bernie Eccelstone school of counting when F1 had more viewers that there were people on the planet.

I think it's the World Cup. It's a huge deal all round the world with people organising watching games. The Olympics is more something you throw on when you're at home and enjoy.

This is the first world cup I've ever bothered with cause the brother is here watching it. It's been great so far, and it has a continuity that doesn't exist with one off events at the Olympics.

Billy86

OneOfThem Stumbled wrote: »

Rugby isn't big in China, India, or Germany. While that's pretty significant, neither China nor India care about the Football much either. Even with the Olympics, India doesn't care all that much.



How many countries take part in the superbowl?

Well if it's about countries taking part then we can close the thread and give it to the Olympics. If we are measuring which is the biggest event, I would consider that go have more to do with the number of people/countries interested in it, than the number of countries partaking in it.

Franz Von Peppercorn

meeeeh wrote: »

I'm pretty sure that number is either for whole RWC not just the final or from Bernie Eccelstone school of counting when F1 had more viewers that there were people on the planet.

No it’s the final. I was clear to distinguish one off events from the entire competition.

https://www.rugbyworldcup.com/news/121819?lang=en

McTigs

There is no doubt that football is the most globally inclusive and popular sport. There is pretty much no barrier to participation, not geographically, not ethnically, not socio-economically. It's the great leveller in that regard with every country competing at the same level in the same sport.

so World Cup for me.

Love the Olympics too mind

Billy86

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

The figures I see for live viewership are


1) cricket WC ( 2015) 1.5B
2) football WC = 1B
3) rugby WC = 120 M
4) NFL final = 111M (us)
5) Euro final = 110M (Europe)

I know the last two are limited to the US and Europe only but that’s what mr google told me.

As for the NFL there may be some interest outside the US for the live transmission but not much.

Estimates are typically 100-110mn viewers in north America, and 50mn across the rest of the world. That's getting harder to track though since the NFL are "losing" TV viewers to their own subscription app/channel, NFL Gamepass (something I would love to see from other sports, and it seems to be catching on a little).

meeeeh

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

No it’s the final. I was clear to distinguish one off events from the entire competition.

https://www.rugbyworldcup.com/news/121819?lang=en

I saw that article earlier. It's an estimated number and I actually looked for additional source for ratings that is not rugbyworldcup.com and couldn't find it. I'm not saying you posted wrong number, I am dubious about the source material.

Eggs For Dinner

The Cricket World Cup would be watched by many multiples of the Rugby World Cup viewers