Maximus Decimus

Some of the badges are incredibly tacky and unprofessional looking. Leeds and Bradford don't befit amateur sides, never mind SL sides.

There's far more of them but they attend games less often. I've already explained the season ticket difference. Take this for example, Wests Tigers averaged 19,000 this year with approximately 4,500 ST holders. Wigan however averaged 15,700 yet have something like 10,000 ST holders. Therefore we have far more regular fans attending games through season tickets. We are comparing ourselves with the NRL when the reality is that the NRL does poorly for it's size. They get barely double what we do despite much higher viewing figures and exposure. The AFL shows what crowds they should be getting. They tend to have a walk up culture where fans pick and choose the games. This inevitably means that come the finals time they are more likely to attend.

Quality over quantity and yet you're suggesting we have an advantage over the Aussies? They have something like 4 times more registered RL players than we do.

They are two very different competitions. The reality is that we do extremely well to get the numbers through the gates that we do, especially in comparison to the NRL. However as somebody has pointed out they do a relatively poor job. The biggest difference between the two is season tickets and the NRL are only starting to wake up to this. Often in SL season tickets can make up to 2/3rds of the attendance. I'd be surprised if it was 1/3 in Australia and in some cases a lot less. As a result attendances fluctuate a great deal between big games and small games. South Sydney can get less than 10,000 but more than 30,000 for games. Compare this to Wigan who fluctuate between 12,000 and 20,000 or Wire who fluctuate between 8-14,000. The NRL has a lot more floating fans and they have a history of attending the big games rather than going to all games. Take the NRL grand final, in Sydney a city of 3million people, 1 million might watch it on FTA TV. In the UK around the same number will watch the Challenge Cup final in a country of 65m people. So when finals comes around more of these latent fans are likely to get on the bandwagon and go when they don't usually, whereas in the UK, a large number of our fans are ST holders who are being asked to pay for games that they have usually already paid for.

This is a simplistic argument and one that I dislike. Whilst the first RUWC was 'tinpot' it quickly caught on because there were a good core of sides that were competitive and could have hopes of winning it. Rugby League has never had this, we have 3 competitive sides and another 3/4 credible sides at a push. I'm not saying that we shouldn't have a more regular and thought out World Cup but it's not as simple as put one on and it will work. Our problems run far deeper.

There would be on average 60-70,000 RL fans watching a game of Super League each week compared to maybe 3,000 watching a Championship 1 game. That does look like a fair comparison in my opinion.

I'm a bit of a Union novice but there is certainly more to the scrum than just winning the ball. I always thought it was similar to the way a forward pack gets on top in RL. If your forward pack are dominant then you stand a much better chance of winning. One of the ways they get dominant in Union is through the scrum. I remember seeing a match where England's scrum dominated Australia and effectively won the match because they couldn't compete. Hardly riveting but it's not necessarily the same thing. We need to sort out our scrum, if not just to stop people unfamiliar with the game going on about it all the time. I twittered during Challenge Cup final and there were 3 types of comments, those praising the game, those saying it was awful and those saying what is the point in the RL scrum.

The only problem is if people ignored you they'd still know what you're saying, blah blah money men blah blah money men blah blah money men...

Since Widnes dropped out of Super League, Rugby Unions crowds have gone through the roof. If you want to believe that's coincidence it's up to you. Since I read Ricky Hatton's book he's been battered twice and found out as a Cokehead, coincidence? Again that's up to you. Since Jbd left the board, the number of posts from you has massively increased, coincidence....

Did they? Because if you look at the facts they used to attend in less numbers than they do now for the regular season games despite everything resting on the League table.

It is but it's something that we're going to have to accept. If you have 10,000 ST holders and they aren't included then the only way is down regarding how many of them will turn up.

[monotone]Oh no we might not stand a chance now....[/monotone]

You're living in a dream world. Are you seriously suggesting that 5,000 people in Leeds are more interested in watching them in Super League against the Crusaders than play Wigan in the Challenge Cup? It's all about season tickets and just because it doesn't fit your argument you ignore it. People pay out at the beginning of the season and then it is effectively free to go for around 10,000 fans. When you hit knock out competitions there are 10,000 people who now have to pay. Inevitably there will be people who cannot afford it and choose not to because it's on TV. They also often take people to games. If you're argument made any sense then the Challenge Cup attendances wouldn't have gone up massively when season tickets were allowed but they did. You've also ignored how I pointed out the viewing figures go up by around 33% during the playoffs. You've also ignored how I pointed out that the last time we didn't have a playoffs we had lower crowds than we do now. We didn't have several large crowds that you point out. Even in 1990 the average of the league was lower than it is now. You say we've always attended finals, well the last Premiership was dying and was finally attended by 33,000 at Old Trafford. The first Grand Final got 43,000 just 2 years later, it quickly rose to sell out because people do care. Just because you don't like the playoffs doesn't mean that you are in any way in the majority. Just because you keep repeating it on numerous threads doesn't make it true either. You can't simply ignore the facts.

Hull KR-Wigan (9,007) regular season 2009. Sky 174k Hull KR-Wigan (8,162) first round playoffs 2009. Sky 224k Saints-Wigan regular season 2009 (15,563). Sky 218k Saints-Wigan (13,087) playoff semi-final. Sky 296k. Why are these viewing figures way higher if people aren't supporting the concept? Crowds are lower because take today's Wigan game, they have already sold 10,000 tickets before the regular season game kicks off. Today they are starting from scratch and sad as it is, people don't want to pay.

Are people not in favour of the Challenge Cup? Is that a failed gimmick?

Season tickets are the only reason. The RFL gets the money and it needs to decide whether it wants this money or it wants full stadia for its showpiece events. With ST's I've no doubt we'd have saw sellouts at Hull and Saints, with 18k odd at Wigan. Hudds would have even probably hit 8-9k. Next week we'll see 9k at Wire and probably about 10k at Wigan. It would be a fair bit of revenue lost for the RFL but surely there has to be a solution to the problem?

Whilst I'm not against the club call in principle I think it practise it won't work. I'd be very surprised if the team making the club call did anything other than pick the lowest placed side still in the competition. Saints aren't going to pick Wigan over Wire if that is what the two line ups are. Wigan have just finished top of the league. In the same way they won't pick Wire over Hull KR if they pulled off an upset. It would be great motivation for say Wigan if they were picked and it would come across as cocky. If it didn't come off they would end up looking stupid. The least controversial thing to do is to pick what it would be in the first place.

Poor game this one I'm afraid. Hull KR look too solid for Hull FC who need a new coach a la Michael Maguire. They've got the names they should be better than they are.

The strength of the game is definitely in the south. The 3 northern clubs first home games got 5,000 5,500 and 7,500. This is against the Aviva league average of 12,000. Of course it is bigger and more spread but as far as the Aviva league goes the real interest lies in the south. When you consider that Exeter are new this year and that the 3 Northern clubs are not well supported, it is a fairly regional league. Compared to the amount of press it gets, how many people do you think are genuinely interested in the results of the Aviva Premiership. I would suggest there are a handful of people in the north. League clearly deserves to be in the National press in comparison and it would be if the M62 happened to run through London.

It wasn't a high quality game but it was high in drama. Feel genuinely gutted for the Crusaders.

Why was it a low ebb when we had P&R and a league system for people to get excited by? That was my whole point, you can't attribute all the problems down to one thing and then pick and choose examples. You were pointing out how attendances will be so poor for these playoffs, yet for whatever reason they are much much better than they were the last time we had the Premiership. Anyway I'm fairly sure that the average attendance is higher now than it was in 1990. That certainly wasn't a low ebb for the sport.

I agree, I think last week will have done a lot for their season ticket sales. For getting new fans you can't beat drama and success. Rugby League can provide games that are so intense that you are literally on the edge of your seat for a whole game. From reports the Cru had one last week. Once you've seen that you'll put up with the rubbish games and the big defeats because you know that there'll be times like that again. It's the same for any sport. The problem RL often has is that people will only ever give it one chance and if it doesn't produce an absolute classic then they won't come back. The people of North Wales appear to have given them a real chance and been rewarded for it.

Very impressive and they sound really up for it. Hopefully they can hold on in this next half.

Just to condense this argument. 1997 - last year with the champions decided by the league winners, with P&R and with a Premiership. Total attendance approx 980k. 2009 - Playoff system, no P&R. Total attendance 1.9m.

I did a pretty decent job of defending it I think, take the Jenson Button example. He was the best racing driver last year but in the last 10 or so races he only got in the top 3 twice in a race. This was out of 17 races, that's hardly what I'd call a champion driver, yet a League system allows him to be called the best because he started well. The Premier League is a different kettle of fish and utterly boring anyway, especially when one team runs away with it. Football doesn't suit a Playoffs because of the nature of the game and the likelihood of upsets. Greece won Euro 2004 despite being far from the best side. This wouldn't happen in RL. My point is that you cannot look at crowds as a barometer of interest in these situations, especially one-off crowds or one-off periods. The reasons that play off crowds will not be better is because of season ticket holders, that's the main/only reason. The interest is there. However if you look at the seasons 1990-1997 the average attendance of the league was lower than it is now and by 1996 it was around 6,000. This was all under a league system with full promotion and relegation. Look at the last Premiership final, Wigan vs Saints yet the crowd was only 33,000. 8,000 lower than Widnes and Hull had managed 7 years previous. The whole competition from the quarter finals to the final was only attended by 64,000 people, less than the SL grand final will be. Wigan-Leeds got 6,400, I'm sure it will be a lot more than that tomorrow. The world changes and people don't want as many competitions, look at Football. The Carling Cup is a joke and the FA Cup is nowhere near as prestigious as it once was. So it's safe to say that a Premiership trophy nowadays would be no better. If we'd never switched we'd probably be playing the final at Huddersfield by now. So in essence not only is the league average higher than it was with a league and P&R, but we will have a playoffs system that this year will be watched by a conservative estimate of 170k, an extra 100,000 fans on the Premiership. Everybody always says the standard is poorer. It isn't. The game changes that's all. Clubs have always gone bust and always will. 2 years of licensing isn't going to change that. I'm 27, my name isn't actually Maximus and my second name isn't Decimus. I was around for 1987-1990, but that would be a totally unfair comparison anyway. The same as it would be to ask Warrington fans which period was better. The future and the present is not automatically worse either. The past was great at times but it can't easily be created when the world has changed.