Attendances (Multiple Merged Threads)

[Cumbrian Fanatic]

1 hour ago, Jughead said:

For most of recent history, people knew it was at Wembley on the August Bank Holiday weekend. Attendances then were still what they were. 

While that turned out out to be true, for the last few years before they moved the timing, the date for the following years game was not confirmed before the final was held. 

I know this to be accurate because I have run a trip for several years and book the tickets and hotels as early as possible so as to get the best prices 

[Eddie]

23 minutes ago, Hopping Mad said:

York did host Leeds, in a Challenge Cup tie, in January 1989. The game was switched to Bootham Crescent from Clarence Street, owing to capacity issues at the rugby ground. The official attendance was 11,347.

Great attendance, though that was 33 years ago so not indicative of what would happen now. 

[Eddie]

33 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

I think you have managed to skirt around the edge of the fact that that the fundamentals have most probably changed.

When the cup was first started, indeed arguably till about 30 years ago, Knockout Cups were the most attractive competitions for punters of most sports in the UK. Now, they just aren't that popular in the same way in sports like Football and Rugby League. The Cup was created, as the sport of RL was to some extent, to respond to a demand

Agreed, the FA Cup for example was massive until it was devalued by the Champions League money, I’d say fans back then would almost have taken an FA Cup win over a league title. 

[Spidey]

SL could just have 14 clubs to get rid of loop fixtures instead of dicking around with the challenge cup

[Tommygilf]

40 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

It's further back. I started watching sport seriously 35 years ago and the league - in every sport I watched and talked about - was the title to win. The cup(s) definitely had more import than they do now but they were definitely secondary.

Obviously you'd know more than me about 25+ years ago

It was more a date to coincide with TV sport like the Premier League, Champions League and Super League in RL. Naturally I bet it was building on an existing trend.

[Jughead]

15 minutes ago, Spidey said:

SL could just have 14 clubs to get rid of loop fixtures instead of dicking around with the challenge cup

That neither addresses the problems with the Challenge Cup or Super League and only resolves to end loop fixtures. 

[Mumby Magic]

1 hour ago, Tommygilf said:

I think you have managed to skirt around the edge of the fact that that the fundamentals have most probably changed.

When the cup was first started, indeed arguably till about 30 years ago, Knockout Cups were the most attractive competitions for punters of most sports in the UK. Now, they just aren't that popular in the same way in sports like Football and Rugby League. The Cup was created, as the sport of RL was to some extent, to respond to a demand

I get that completely. We have 2 showpiece events. They should be near to full. No excuses. 

[gingerjon]

49 minutes ago, redjonn said:

maybe before your period but did any fans really care who where the premiership winners.

I remember it being a good day out - I couldn't tell you how seriously other people took it.

[Scubby]

1 minute ago, gingerjon said:

I remember it being a good day out - I couldn't tell you how seriously other people took it.

This. It was a gala feel to the end of the season. I was there for the first double header at Old Trafford as a kid and loved it. I'd never been to a premiership final before that as a standalone.

Nice to be in and win but good day out in mid-May for all.

[Spidey]

19 minutes ago, Jughead said:

That neither addresses the problems with the Challenge Cup or Super League and only resolves to end loop fixtures. 

It’s SL arrogance to fix their problem by impacting other clubs. Isolate the issues to the completion date involved. There are two problems come up with two plans

[GUBRATS]

It would help if we all didn't know who was going to win it

[Scubby]

11 minutes ago, GUBRATS said:

It would help if we all didn't know who was going to win it

True, Fev are particularly strong this year.

[GUBRATS]

4 minutes ago, Scubby said:

True, Fev are particularly strong this year.

Wrong thread

[Scubby]

1 minute ago, GUBRATS said:

Wrong thread

This is a multiple merged thread. Harry could probably slip a new Leigh signing in here too!

[Toby Chopra]

I think the reason the cup is less prestigious than it used to be is that until the early 90s the difference in strength of the top 20 or so clubs wasn't that huge, regardless of division, so the cup was a genuine measure of success in the game which those 20 or so clubs could aspire to. 

Now, only the 12 full time clubs can realistically expect to prosper in the cup, in fact probably only about 10 of them.

And we all know that the league is the best measure of who are the top clubs of those 10, so the cup becomes a sideshow. It's not really a measure of anything. 

I don't see how you resolve this without undermining the basis of our full time tier - which we absolutely shouldn't do - so I think muddling along with what we have is the best we can hope for with the cup. 

[Eddie]

1 hour ago, GUBRATS said:

It would help if we all didn't know who was going to win it

A lot of European football Leagues (Bundesliga being the prime example) get huge crowds, even when the winner is certain before the season kicks off. 

[Harry Stottle]

1 hour ago, Scubby said:

This is a multiple merged thread. Harry could probably slip a new Leigh signing in here too!

You will know about it has it happens, oh yes you are not interested in who "Rugby Leigh" sign, but just like @Davo5curiosity will keep you pressing the link.

[Jughead]

Since shorter routes to the final were brought in for the 2015 Challenge Cup competition, we’ve had nine different finalists in the seven finals, which could be ten if Huddersfield beat Hull KR in a couple of weeks. Since the start of the 2015 season, we’ve had sixteen different clubs in Super League of which Toronto never saw out the season and Toulouse choose not to compete in the Challenge Cup, so we could be looking at 10 out of 14 “elite” clubs over an eight year period having competed in a Challenge Cup Final. For all of the stick the cup’s early rounds get, the positive, IMO, is the variety of clubs we see in the final. We could well also be looking at a sixth different winner in the past six years should Wigan beat Saints at Elland Road. 

I also don’t really care much for the finals being a forgone conclusion, either. Cas lead at half time last year and were good value for their lead, Leeds only in beat Salford by one point the year before that, Warrington the year before were underdogs and beat Saints, Catalans were the underdogs and beat Warrington the previous year and Hull were quite possibly underdogs against both Warrington and Wigan, going back-to-back. 

I think the cup gets some unwarranted stick and we often focus on the crowds when the action on the pitch is exciting and entertaining throughout all rounds. 

[Josef K]

How are the ticket sales going for the Good Friday games i know Saints/Wigan HKR/FC have sold out, the Cas/Wakey match should have a decent turnout ?. 

[HawkMan]

1 hour ago, Eddie said:

A lot of European football Leagues (Bundesliga being the prime example) get huge crowds, even when the winner is certain before the season kicks off. 

Only really Germany and France, the other leagues are quite competitive,  particularly Italy that now seen a resurgence in both Milan teams. Anyway in football there's European places to play for not just the title. 

More pertinent comparison is the worrying Huddersfield Giants situation. Doing great this season,  very entertaining,  but crowds disappointing compared to HTFC, who got 18, 379 last night. Don't know why, I tried watching it but it was very poor and dull.

[Dave T]

1 hour ago, Jughead said:

Since shorter routes to the final were brought in for the 2015 Challenge Cup competition, we’ve had nine different finalists in the seven finals, which could be ten if Huddersfield beat Hull KR in a couple of weeks. Since the start of the 2015 season, we’ve had sixteen different clubs in Super League of which Toronto never saw out the season and Toulouse choose not to compete in the Challenge Cup, so we could be looking at 10 out of 14 “elite” clubs over an eight year period having competed in a Challenge Cup Final. For all of the stick the cup’s early rounds get, the positive, IMO, is the variety of clubs we see in the final. We could well also be looking at a sixth different winner in the past six years should Wigan beat Saints at Elland Road. 

I also don’t really care much for the finals being a forgone conclusion, either. Cas lead at half time last year and were good value for their lead, Leeds only in beat Salford by one point the year before that, Warrington the year before were underdogs and beat Saints, Catalans were the underdogs and beat Warrington the previous year and Hull were quite possibly underdogs against both Warrington and Wigan, going back-to-back. 

I think the cup gets some unwarranted stick and we often focus on the crowds when the action on the pitch is exciting and entertaining throughout all rounds. 

Couldn't agree more. For any faults the comp may have overall, the finals have generally been great, had plenty of variety and some great moments with underdog victories. 

[fighting irish]

3 hours ago, Jughead said:

Since shorter routes to the final were brought in for the 2015 Challenge Cup competition, we’ve had nine different finalists in the seven finals, which could be ten if Huddersfield beat Hull KR in a couple of weeks. Since the start of the 2015 season, we’ve had sixteen different clubs in Super League of which Toronto never saw out the season and Toulouse choose not to compete in the Challenge Cup, so we could be looking at 10 out of 14 “elite” clubs over an eight year period having competed in a Challenge Cup Final. For all of the stick the cup’s early rounds get, the positive, IMO, is the variety of clubs we see in the final. We could well also be looking at a sixth different winner in the past six years should Wigan beat Saints at Elland Road. 

I also don’t really care much for the finals being a forgone conclusion, either. Cas lead at half time last year and were good value for their lead, Leeds only in beat Salford by one point the year before that, Warrington the year before were underdogs and beat Saints, Catalans were the underdogs and beat Warrington the previous year and Hull were quite possibly underdogs against both Warrington and Wigan, going back-to-back. 

I think the cup gets some unwarranted stick and we often focus on the crowds when the action on the pitch is exciting and entertaining throughout all rounds. 

Hear hear! 

[meast]

3 hours ago, HawkMan said:

Only really Germany and France, the other leagues are quite competitive,  particularly Italy that now seen a resurgence in both Milan teams. Anyway in football there's European places to play for not just the title. 

More pertinent comparison is the worrying Huddersfield Giants situation. Doing great this season,  very entertaining,  but crowds disappointing compared to HTFC, who got 18, 379 last night. Don't know why, I tried watching it but it was very poor and dull.

Can't compare football to rugby league, can't compare football to anything really.

But Huddersfield just isn't a big rugby town, it's a student and commuter town now, and most casual sports fans in and around the town are only interested in football.

Add into that, a team doing well, looking to get into the top flight for only the 2nd time in 50 years and it was £10 a ticket, which for casual football fans is an absolute bargain, they're also charging £10 for tickets for their next game and have had a few games recently as little as £5.

The Giants would be hammered as usual if they made games £5 and £10.

[Sir Kevin Sinfield]

7 hours ago, meast said:

Can't compare football to rugby league, can't compare football to anything really.

But Huddersfield just isn't a big rugby town, it's a student and commuter town now, and most casual sports fans in and around the town are only interested in football.

Add into that, a team doing well, looking to get into the top flight for only the 2nd time in 50 years and it was £10 a ticket, which for casual football fans is an absolute bargain, they're also charging £10 for tickets for their next game and have had a few games recently as little as £5.

The Giants would be hammered as usual if they made games £5 and £10.

You often hear about places that aren’t Rugby towns, I mean it’s an odd argument to make about Huddersfield who have been around since the sports very beginning and is literally the town Rugby League was invented in and sits slap bang in the middle of the M62 Super League. But when Toronto could attract 7000+ fans and Cornwall got over 1400 for their opening fixture fans clearly can be attracted to go games in places that are not big Rugby towns. 

[meast]

5 hours ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

You often hear about places that aren’t Rugby towns, I mean it’s an odd argument to make about Huddersfield who have been around since the sports very beginning and is literally the town Rugby League was invented in and sits slap bang in the middle of the M62 Super League. But when Toronto could attract 7000+ fans and Cornwall got over 1400 for their opening fixture fans clearly can be attracted to go games in places that are not big Rugby towns. 

And what happened to Toronto? what will happen to Cornwall? Remember how London, Carlisle, Cardiff, Kent, etc attracted good numbers early on in their short lived expansion dreams? that argument is a rubbish one!

Huddersfield is the birthplace of the game, but that was out of convenience and geography not because it's a hotbed of the game, again, people using that argument to suggest Huddersfield should be pulling bigger crowds is a rubbish one!

Come up with something a bit more substantial and thoughtful.