Jump to content


TotalRL.com Shop Alert: Last Ordering Date for Free Pre-Xmas Delivery within UK: 2pm Thursday 18th December!!
Rugby League Yearbook 2014/15 The Forbidden Game League Express League Express Gift Card Rugby League World Rugby League World Gift Card
Buy Now £14.99 / Kindle Buy Now £14.99 / Kindle Print / Digital Subscription Gift Cards Print / Digital Subscription Gift Cards



Photo
- - - - -

Sport England Participation Numbers


  • Please log in to reply
31 replies to this topic

#21 Impartial Observer

Impartial Observer
  • Coach
  • 472 posts

Posted 13 December 2013 - 04:13 PM

I suspect they take a very small sample of the population at random and multiply up the numbers. I would like to know how significant (in the statistical sense) the figures are.


That is exactly how it is done.
Say for example Hull has 100,000 people living in it, they ring 100 people in Hull and ask if they participate in RL, if 1 person
out of the 100 says they play RL, Sport England say that 1% of the Hull population play RL which in this simplistic case Hull would have a figure of 1000 participants.
It is by no means an ideal way to find out figures but it the one used and all sports have to live with it. I know the RFL do submit there own figures based on how many games are played each week and how many player registrations there are.
I wonder if anyone on here has been contacted and asked to take part in a survey?
Problem is a lot of people just refuse point blank to take part in phone surveys.

#22 redjonn

redjonn
  • Coach
  • 1,061 posts

Posted 13 December 2013 - 04:16 PM

sport england url explains the survey:

 

http://www.sportengl...-people-survey/



#23 MidlandsRugbyLeague

MidlandsRugbyLeague
  • Coach
  • 996 posts

Posted 14 December 2013 - 07:50 AM

Its 200 people per local authority.

#24 ehbandit

ehbandit
  • Coach
  • 706 posts

Posted 14 December 2013 - 07:57 AM

would it not be simpler to ask the governing bodies for a number of registered participants?

#25 MidlandsRugbyLeague

MidlandsRugbyLeague
  • Coach
  • 996 posts

Posted 14 December 2013 - 08:02 AM

would it not be simpler to ask the governing bodies for a number of registered participants?


No, the survey is about the frequency of participation not who's data can be presented.

Example a Gym member who goes once per month. They arent doing 4x 30mins per month so dont count on active people.

#26 Impartial Observer

Impartial Observer
  • Coach
  • 472 posts

Posted 14 December 2013 - 10:13 AM

would it not be simpler to ask the governing bodies for a number of registered participants?


There may be some sports who would make their numbers up!!

#27 barnyia

barnyia
  • Coach
  • 434 posts

Posted 14 December 2013 - 10:33 AM

I played in a touch beach rugby tournament this summer in France, we all had to sign up to the French rugby union to participate,
Which increases the number of people playing union even though it was just for one day and we played a three tackle rule,
You signed up for the day but it still counts as a license to play union,

#28 redjonn

redjonn
  • Coach
  • 1,061 posts

Posted 14 December 2013 - 01:21 PM

That is exactly how it is done.
Say for example Hull has 100,000 people living in it, they ring 100 people in Hull and ask if they participate in RL, if 1 person
out of the 100 says they play RL, Sport England say that 1% of the Hull population play RL which in this simplistic case Hull would have a figure of 1000 participants.
It is by no means an ideal way to find out figures but it the one used and all sports have to live with it. I know the RFL do submit there own figures based on how many games are played each week and how many player registrations there are.
I wonder if anyone on here has been contacted and asked to take part in a survey?
Problem is a lot of people just refuse point blank to take part in phone surveys.

 

Isn't it a trend that is being looked for - that is whether increasing or decreasing and by what percentage.  Thus providing the surveys are done using a consistent methodology then you get a accurate trend within the bounds of statistical error for the methodology chosen.  It at least tells you if participation is on the increase or not which is the goal of the survey.



#29 GoBroncos

GoBroncos
  • Players
  • 15 posts

Posted 15 December 2013 - 09:54 AM

The results are in for October to October and we are now at 53,500 people aged 16+ playing rugby league once a week

This is up from the April to April figure but well down from the first collected figures from 2006.

Link


Great stuff

Edited by GoBroncos, 15 December 2013 - 09:55 AM.


#30 jannerboyuk

jannerboyuk
  • Coach
  • 4,990 posts

Posted 15 December 2013 - 12:33 PM

Isn't it a trend that is being looked for - that is whether increasing or decreasing and by what percentage. Thus providing the surveys are done using a consistent methodology then you get a accurate trend within the bounds of statistical error for the methodology chosen. It at least tells you if participation is on the increase or not which is the goal of the survey.

absolutely hence the silliness of the reporting and fan reaction when they changed the methodology, overall numbers will always be dodgy but trends are the most helpful
PROUD TO BE A MEMBER OF http://www.rugbyleaguecares.org/ and http://www.walesrugb...-wales-for-2013
Predictions for the future -
Crusaders RL to get a franchise for 2012 onwards -WRONG
Widnes Vikings also to get a franchise - RIGHT
Crusaders RL to do the double over Widnes and finish five places ahead of them -WRONG
Widnes Vikings NOT to dominate rugby league in years to come! STILL TO COME

http://www.pitchero.com/clubs/cardiffdemonsrlfc/
http://www.walesrugbyleague.co.uk/

I promise to pay �10 to the charity of Bomb Jacks choice if Widnes Millionaires finish above the battling underdogs Crusaders RL. I OWE A TENNER!
http://www.jaxaxe.co...89/Default.aspx

#31 jannerboyuk

jannerboyuk
  • Coach
  • 4,990 posts

Posted 15 December 2013 - 12:38 PM

Mind you looking at those figures it's hard to accept that football lost 100,000 participants in a year! They don't mention the margin of error either, to be honest I would guess that leagues increase and unions decrease is well within a reasonable margin of error.
PROUD TO BE A MEMBER OF http://www.rugbyleaguecares.org/ and http://www.walesrugb...-wales-for-2013
Predictions for the future -
Crusaders RL to get a franchise for 2012 onwards -WRONG
Widnes Vikings also to get a franchise - RIGHT
Crusaders RL to do the double over Widnes and finish five places ahead of them -WRONG
Widnes Vikings NOT to dominate rugby league in years to come! STILL TO COME

http://www.pitchero.com/clubs/cardiffdemonsrlfc/
http://www.walesrugbyleague.co.uk/

I promise to pay �10 to the charity of Bomb Jacks choice if Widnes Millionaires finish above the battling underdogs Crusaders RL. I OWE A TENNER!
http://www.jaxaxe.co...89/Default.aspx

#32 Cowardly Fan

Cowardly Fan
  • Players
  • 16 posts

Posted 15 December 2013 - 05:30 PM

Mind you looking at those figures it's hard to accept that football lost 100,000 participants in a year! They don't mention the margin of error either, to be honest I would guess that leagues increase and unions decrease is well within a reasonable margin of error.

 

Sorry for the stat attack, but looking at the statistically significant changes from 2006, I'd expect Union's decrease to be outside the margin of error and League's will be at least approaching it.  People get too attached to margin of error though, it uses an arbitrary value of confidence.  Even if both were within the margin of error it still means it is more likely than not that more people are playing league and less playing union.  






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users