Dave T

One full round over the whole weekend, all televised is how I'd go.

Any increase is positive. But even the things you have highlighted show how hard it is to do like for like, particularly when we are talking such modest numbers. Your averages suggest we increased the numbers by 8.2k over the 2 rounds - the Wigan and Hull derbies added 12k just by being staged at the bigger grounds this year. But then we lost the benefit of having Widnes instead of London. It looks like we were 8k aheahd of last year, but 5k lower than the year before. So a pretty normal Easter period.

Interesting watching the NRL game live now against this backdrop of NRL ref love in. There was a penalty at the ptb given just on half time. The attacker certainly moved forward, but the defender had his foot in, penalty. However not a single replay by the broadcaster. Not one. Over here we would have seen at least 3 or 4 in super slow mo HD. The replay they did show was of an earlier break where the refs both missed the most blatant obstruction that got the Roosters in that position. In this country our attitudes are different, the fan culture is far less relaxed about referees and people are obsessed. I think a lot of that comes from the football culture tbh, but every play fans are appealing for offside, forward passes, high tackles, time wasting etc. Whilst this generally looks positive, we need to be very careful of unintended consequences (as that is exactly the reason we are where we are) and there will soon be something else along that becomes the hot topic.

Apart from the first one, which seems too vague, that seems positive. Will need to monitor for an increase in players in the ruck, but it does look like it should add some balance to the ruck.

I agree with the 2nd paragraph and that is the conclusion I came too, that we can't pick up every offence from defenders but ignore attacker discrepancies. But I do think we need to penalise defenders in the ruck before the acting half feels he needs to throw it at a player to milk a penalty. Often they are sitting there not even trying to get out of the way. Saints have been masters of having a man in the ruck for years. The whole ruck needs to be more balanced, we shouldn't ignore defenders in the ruck, but we shouldn't ignore things like moving off the mark and untidy ptb's either.

You seem a good sort.

I'm pretty confident that SL fans in general won't support the NRL approach of ignoring stuff. Once their team are involved, they go crazy appealing for every slight holding down, and if we allow players in the ruck without penalising them, there will be hell to pay. It's a little like the NRL approach of ignoring the late shots and just banning them afterwards. Just keeping the game flowing may be a sound principle, but I'm not sure a) it is the right thing to do, ignoring offences, or b) that it is what fans here want. On threads all the time here we see fans wanting refs to penalise every offence, not coach players, bin them, send them off etc.

This is a tough problem to solve. We wanted a cleaner ruck, so we penalise offences. The problem is that due to the importance of penalties, it is in the ball carriers interests to make the ptb messy - as it is more likely that they will get a penalty. So whereas we may see less messing about by the defence, the penalties still come because the attackers are all over the place. I do however have a real issue with some of the interpretations of some fans here - these defenders should not be in the ruck - a clear way of stopping this is for the ref to penalise them first, but if the acting half doesn't do this, the ref ignores it - so the defender wins. I think we should not go down the Aussie route of just ignoring loads - whilst that may calm attackers down from trying to get a penalty, I'm not sure the fans would accept the more controlled holding down and flops that we see in the NRL. I am happy for the penalties to continue, but they need to be more balanced. Defenders should be penalised if they are in the ruck and not trying to get out of the way, attackers should be penalised if they move off the mark, aren't stood up and play it more controlled. The penalties have all gone one way, but let's not be fooled into thinking it is only the attack trying it on - it is an intentional tactic from some teams to be lying in and around the ruck.

Not one to stick up for Saints in anything really, but we do have a nice direct comparison here. Last year, Saints hosted the Good Friday game and got the high crowd this game brings (18k capacity iirc). Wigan then hosted the lesser of the Hull teams on the Monday and attracted...... 10,977 - lower than Saints did this year for a crowd that is being mocked.

It does suggest the hotels targeted are used by tourists. Horrible attacks, it never ends does it?

I'd love to see them be really bold and aim for 100k soon. Wigan v Saints 24k Hull derby 24k Leeds 19k Wire 15k Catalans 10k Case 12k Over 100k, that would send a message.

Nobody is moaning about those crowds, just questioning the London one. As part of my research earlier in this thread I looked at historic crowds, London v Cats on a Thurs has never hit this level.

Yes, thought that was an easy way to smash it tbh.

It is, but not a record, and the pre-prepared release would go in the bin.

It is pretty rare to get full attendance figures now. One thing I did find strange was that I don't think Wire announced theirs on Twitter during the game like normal. It got announced as part of the coordinated press release. But Hulls and Wigans were announced live so there may be nowt in that.

Was the London crowd announced last night?

No, the targets I had written were just the Good Friday records. They beat the record they were going for by 260ish. That London crowd on a Thurs would be outstanding.

Unfortunately, I'm with MoK here. They had set themselves a target of the 78k in the article and it looks like they have manipulated the numbers to beat it. Had they managed to get another 1 or 2k across other games they probably wouldn't have bothered. It is a great result though, and the pleasing thing is there is room for growth with the same fixtures.

If only....

Taking a hammering. I must admit to being a bit nervous about this one. This may bring us back to earth a little and re-focus our performances.

This stadium at Hull looks and sounds excellent with this kind of crowd on.

Thought the Sky tribute show was an excellent one. Always liked Eddie and thinks he gets some unfair stick. He is excellent at the moment as he appears to have a weight lifted from his shoulders since he announced his retirement. It is funny that he highlighted his regret as not being there for this year's Grand Final, suggesting maybe the timing wasn't 100% his choice.

A quick look at the Good Friday games during the Super League Era. Averages: Across 6 games - 9,800 Across 7 games - 11,094 Last 5 years - 10,630 First year of SL - 7,724 High - 12.636 in 2012 (7 games) Cumulative: Across 6 games - average of 58,802 High of 72,670 (2015) Low of 46,345 (1996) Across 7 games - ave - 77,661 High - 88,455 (2012) Low of 56,344 (1999) So if we end up with Wigan (22,000), Hull (20,000), Leeds (12,500), Wire (11,500), Cas (9,300), London (1,000) - that would give us 75k, which would be the highest crowd ever across a 6 round Good Friday. 72,670 is the number to beat from 2015.

Yep, just looks like more of the same doesn't it?

Aye, but it is an SLE target. Had we sold out Wigan, Hull, Cas and Wire, which are all a stretch, but achievable, then that would have been 75k over 4 games.