Jump to content

Cheap tickets and empty stadiums


Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, Dave T said:

The counter to that is that Saints have played as many games as anyone, maybe more due to making both finals, so that argument is flawed. 

Maybe proper rest periods and bye weeks is what that supported.

Saints have a greater quality squad so have been able to rest players. Others haven’t. If we want the best quality product and build up to games, we need less of the turgid week after week repetitiveness. It’s not rocket science 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 420
  • Created
  • Last Reply
On 25/09/2019 at 22:52, Chris22 said:

I'm not sure I buy that removing loop fixtures = bigger crowds.

If we expand to 14, and London, Toronto and Toulouse all come up, those games would attract lower crowds than loop fixtures for Saints against Wigan, Warrington and Leeds, for example. 

For that reason, they very well may stay. Short-termism though I accept.

I'm also not persuaded that reducing fixtures would lead to bigger crowds for the remaining games. It's the same argument as for play off crowds. The vast majority of regular season crowds are made up of season ticket holders.

Would reduced fixtures lead to larger walk up crowds and non-season ticket holder pre sales? I don't think it would.

We have a base figure for crowds and it's a really tough task to increase that significantly no matter what action we take.

In terms of potential new fans / casual fans, we are fishing in a very small pond.

It's not just about the actual crowds in the short term, including Toronto, Toulouse and London has other positives that most chippy Northerner die-hards simply can't understand or even comprehend could be a thing.

But to the point you saying that loosing loop fixtures won't increase attendances at other matches. Well you only need to read what fans say about the loop matches, at Hull we've noticed drop offs when we've played HKR too many times in a season, made even worse when we've had a 'magic' weekend.

Loop fixtures most definitely has a negative on the casual/walk up fans were it hits the most, 'fan fatigue' is certainly a thing and whilst three games isn't that big a deal when you chuck in a fourth, fifth and even sixth game (due to play-offs/cup and your usual 'derby' friendly + loop fixture) then that certainly does have a negative effect.

If you look at attendances we've had more exciting games and more minutes mattering but where have attendances gone, downward and playing the same team multiple times is a part of that.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, DoubleD said:

Saints have a greater quality squad so have been able to rest players. Others haven’t. If we want the best quality product and build up to games, we need less of the turgid week after week repetitiveness. It’s not rocket science 

Maybe. I'm not convinced.

We did cut the number of games with the advent of SL. Pre-SL we had more league games, more cup games, more internationals (generally) and we played mid-week. I'm not sure we should just cull some games every 20 years.

Secondly, I'm not sure what we are aiming for. Is it a utopia where every game is great and every team is primed for every second. It ain't gonna happen and chasing unrealistic goals is problematic.

Finally, I'm not sure of the tangible benefits. I dont see a modest improvement in playing standards bringing in loads of new fans, sponsors and £££s from broadcasters.

At some stage I think RL fans should stop asking for less Rugby.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Dave T said:

Maybe. I'm not convinced.

We did cut the number of games with the advent of SL. Pre-SL we had more league games, more cup games, more internationals (generally) and we played mid-week. I'm not sure we should just cull some games every 20 years.

Secondly, I'm not sure what we are aiming for. Is it a utopia where every game is great and every team is primed for every second. It ain't gonna happen and chasing unrealistic goals is problematic.

Finally, I'm not sure of the tangible benefits. I dont see a modest improvement in playing standards bringing in loads of new fans, sponsors and £££s from broadcasters.

At some stage I think RL fans should stop asking for less Rugby.

We’ve been increasing the number of games in recent years. A reduction back to what it was is all I’m asking for. It would be great if we had a 2 week mid season international window too but that’s probably asking too much 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

I watched a little bit of the Athletics World Championship, the stadium seemed half empty but the BBC still give it wall to wall coverage, they also get a massive amount of lottery funding, how do they manage it with such little physical support?

World Championships are held in a place called "Outside the UK", you may have heard of it. It is in an oil rich state in the Middle East (Not Nottingham, the oil there is just from their chips), National Lottery funding covers the British Athletics Team, and has nothing to do with either the BBC coverage or anything to do with the stadium, and any profits, or not from ticket sales, neither does the BBC.

I know it may seem strange to you to have a World Championship competition outside of Yorkshire, but there is more to the World than one small county. The BBC also has a commitment to send their presenters to cover major sporting events wherever they are, if GB&NI are competing, even if this means a Country with an abominable Human Rights record, (Qatar, not GB&NI, although....).

As the World Championships (as we call it) include Athletes from the United Kingdom in most events, I think it is only fair we cover them all, not just the ones where we win medals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's also player welfare and fatigue/injury to consider, more games equals more injuries/greater fatigue which has a negative effect on the games at the back end of the season quality wise. Additionally more games/injuries means having a bigger squad to pay for.

people seem to think quantity is more important than quality as well as dismissing player welfare, frankly the Easter weekend is a disgrace to the sport with regards to player welfare, especially when you're asking some players to play 4 matches in the space of 15 days (this was the case for Hull this season including travelling to France) and followed up with another game 5 days later, so 5 matches in 20 days which is frankly perverse!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

Maybe. I'm not convinced.

We did cut the number of games with the advent of SL. Pre-SL we had more league games, more cup games, more internationals (generally) and we played mid-week. I'm not sure we should just cull some games every 20 years.

Secondly, I'm not sure what we are aiming for. Is it a utopia where every game is great and every team is primed for every second. It ain't gonna happen and chasing unrealistic goals is problematic.

Finally, I'm not sure of the tangible benefits. I dont see a modest improvement in playing standards bringing in loads of new fans, sponsors and £££s from broadcasters.

At some stage I think RL fans should stop asking for less Rugby.

I agree. I also don't think that just because we have less games we suddenly become the NFL and fill every stadium every week. 

Saints v Wigan 3/4 times a year is still the more popular game in attendance, viewing figures and column inches than Wigan v London. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mattrhino said:

I agree. I also don't think that just because we have less games we suddenly become the NFL and fill every stadium every week. 

Saints v Wigan 3/4 times a year is still the more popular game in attendance, viewing figures and column inches than Wigan v London. 

I don't think that anyone is saying that reducing the calendar will turn us into the NFL. It's specious reasoning to suggest as such. Nothing would succeed in isolation.

And whilst it's true that Wigan v St Helens will get more column inches than Wigan v London, I'd counter that by arguing that the first and second edition of Wigan v St Helens would get far more than the third, fourth, fifth and sixth edition. 

Twelve teams playing each other could provide:

  • 22 weeks of regular season games.
  • 1 Magic Weekend round.
  • 3 Play-off weeks.
  • 3 CC Cup weeks.
  • 1 week off for player rest, internationals or whatever else we want to fill the time with. 

That would fit into the 30 weeks of British Summer Time and I don't think that's "too little" RL. It gives us room in the calendar to give our players a proper off-season, proper time to prepare for end-of-season Tests / tours and some room for trying new things if we wished to do so. We're a summer sport - we shouldn't be starting our season in January. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, DoubleD said:

Anyone who watched the Saints vs Wigan game has proof there that less is more. The quality of performance that Saints put in having had a weeks rest was sensational, particularly in that first half. We want to see a higher quality product, well your argument is right there

So what are you suggesting ? , We only play every fortnight ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Bleep1673 said:

World Championships are held in a place called "Outside the UK", you may have heard of it. It is in an oil rich state in the Middle East (Not Nottingham, the oil there is just from their chips), National Lottery funding covers the British Athletics Team, and has nothing to do with either the BBC coverage or anything to do with the stadium, and any profits, or not from ticket sales, neither does the BBC.

I know it may seem strange to you to have a World Championship competition outside of Yorkshire, but there is more to the World than one small county. The BBC also has a commitment to send their presenters to cover major sporting events wherever they are, if GB&NI are competing, even if this means a Country with an abominable Human Rights record, (Qatar, not GB&NI, although....).

As the World Championships (as we call it) include Athletes from the United Kingdom in most events, I think it is only fair we cover them all, not just the ones where we win medals.

Another reason for the empty stadium seats could be that Qatar is a Shariah Islamic country, and as Friday was the Holy day for prayers, it could have kept many locals away before 9pm, local time after prayers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, DoubleD said:

I’ve already stated what I think a number of times on this thread 

Mmmm , had a quick look and see what you are suggesting , but not solving the financial issues 

Ultimately though Saints earned the week off , just as Wigan earned the right to be at home again next week against Salford 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Bleep1673 said:

World Championships are held in a place called "Outside the UK", you may have heard of it. It is in an oil rich state in the Middle East (Not Nottingham, the oil there is just from their chips), National Lottery funding covers the British Athletics Team, and has nothing to do with either the BBC coverage or anything to do with the stadium, and any profits, or not from ticket sales, neither does the BBC.

I know it may seem strange to you to have a World Championship competition outside of Yorkshire, but there is more to the World than one small county. The BBC also has a commitment to send their presenters to cover major sporting events wherever they are, if GB&NI are competing, even if this means a Country with an abominable Human Rights record, (Qatar, not GB&NI, although....).

As the World Championships (as we call it) include Athletes from the United Kingdom in most events, I think it is only fair we cover them all, not just the ones where we win medals.

Well this weekend that would be incorrect, World Championships in cycling has being held in Yorkshire and has been massively supported/popular.

Given the drugs cover ups in athletics, the shady goings on with Seb Coe and his supposed none knowledge of the drugs situation and that the athletic world championships are being held in a country simply because they paid the powers that be an absolute ton of money to hold it there, more corrupt goings on. I won't watch it for the simple fact that Qatar has massively poor human rights, the Sharia law there is horrendous, also there have been huge illegal payments that likely influenced Doha getting the championships in the first instance https://www.occrp.org/en/daily/9811-psg-chief-charged-in-qatar-championship-corruption-scandal

The BBC are utterly reprehensible and will not ever mention this on air during the athletic championships because they'd get tossed out the country for exposing the corrupt lot.  There's not a single article on the BBC website that I can find despite the matter going much further, Coe himself is clearly delusional (or a liar) when he says he knows nothing, for someone so far up the tree he seems to know a great deal of nothing when it comes to corruption, bribery and doping in his sport! https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/37755845

Athletics is merely a business and a corrupt one at that, just like soccer, it directly puts money into the coffers of human rights violating countries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Wanderer said:

World Athletics Championships: Empty stands damaging athletics - Darren Campbell

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/athletics/49875718

 

Its happening in other sports too.

Maybe they should just watch the action haha

This is an extreme example of what can happen when you lose focus and just chase the money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Dave T said:

This is an extreme example of what can happen when you lose focus and just chase the money.

This is so true. Sydney NRL attendances are an example of this. Super League has around 1800 fans per game less than a decade ago. That should be the highest priority. What do fans want in order to attend fixtures? How are new people drawn to attending RL games?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Scubby said:

This is so true. Sydney NRL attendances are an example of this. Super League has around 1800 fans per game less than a decade ago. That should be the highest priority. What do fans want in order to attend fixtures? How are new people drawn to attending RL games?

There is so much more sport on tv, live streams and social media about now than there was 10 years ago which will have an effect on crowds. Why get off your backside and go to a game when you can sit at home and watch it on your phone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Eddie said:

There is so much more sport on tv, live streams and social media about now than there was 10 years ago which will have an effect on crowds. Why get off your backside and go to a game when you can sit at home and watch it on your phone. 

Other sports have seen crowds increases over the last decade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Eddie said:

There is so much more sport on tv, live streams and social media about now than there was 10 years ago which will have an effect on crowds. Why get off your backside and go to a game when you can sit at home and watch it on your phone. 

How much RL content is actually streamed? One men's game a week?

Football crowds in both England and Scotland have grown despite those sports having much bigger profiles on social media and streaming platforms. The fans aren't staying at home to watch a stream. Rugby Union Premiership averages are showing upward trends (admittedly helped by one-off 'big event' games), whilst cricket has used T20 to pack-out games across the country. People will leave their house for the right event and the right experience. 

Streaming and social media isn't the reason SL crowds are falling. They're falling because the clubs and the league aren't providing what anyone but a dwindling core of diehard fans believes is worth their while. We aren't offering the product they want and the experience they want, and the declining crowds is evidence of that. 

Streaming isn't the enemy to bums on seats, and its equally an opportunity to get more eyeballs onto RL. We shouldn't be measuring bums on seats, but eyeballs on the game - wherever they are. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 28/09/2019 at 14:43, DoubleD said:

We’ve been increasing the number of games in recent years. A reduction back to what it was is all I’m asking for. It would be great if we had a 2 week mid season international window too but that’s probably asking too much 

To play ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...