Jump to content

RLWC Attendance-O-Meter


Recommended Posts

42 minutes ago, Exiled Wiganer said:

It was made up by me completely. Thanks for acknowledging my original thought. Though it did come with a caveat that I hadn’t checked it. The “problem” this runs into is how to count double headers, but having been at pretty much all of the matches in question, I am happy enough with the NZ figure looked at any which way. The Australia figure is a lot more doubtful as 10s of thousands left before they started and there weren’t many left by the end. 
 

And - I hesitate to write this in case it’s considered to be a made up stat - how many watched the women’s final?

 I'm happy to count the official announced attendance for any comparisons (but not to add them together to double count). 

Using that methodology, 67k was the crowd for the women's final. But if you won't count the Aussie men's 2013 semi final (and I agree with your approach) then we can't count 67k for the women yesterday. 

And this is ultimately why we have to go with the announced crowd in reality, because otherwise the women's attendance is just a guess. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


6 minutes ago, Dave T said:

 I'm happy to count the official announced attendance for any comparisons (but not to add them together to double count). 

Using that methodology, 67k was the crowd for the women's final. But if you won't count the Aussie men's 2013 semi final (and I agree with your approach) then we can't count 67k for the women yesterday. 

And this is ultimately why we have to go with the announced crowd in reality, because otherwise the women's attendance is just a guess. 

 

And hence one answer to the question “how many attended the women’s final” could be 67k, and the aggregate women’s World Cup figure could include that, eg in an overall made up figure of 130k.

But it would be wrong to argue that 550k attended the men’s and women’s world cups. 

Figures can be slippery!

how about this as a made up fact: far more people watched Samoa play than any non big 3 team in any tournament… 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Exiled Wiganer said:

And hence one answer to the question “how many attended the women’s final” could be 67k, and the aggregate women’s World Cup figure could include that, eg in an overall made up figure of 130k.

But it would be wrong to argue that 550k attended the men’s and women’s world cups. 

Figures can be slippery!

how about this as a made up fact: far more people watched Samoa play than any non big 3 team in any tournament… 

Sort of, I don't think it is difficult to come up with sound methodology and be consistent around it. But that doesn't mean methodology is the same for each metric. 

Your star on Samoa is interesting, I think it shows that there is interest in other teams, but I think it is difficult to argue that the other teams weren't higher. 

But irrespective of any methodology discussions, the point here is that Samoa played in the three biggest games of the tournament - and I fear that in Oz the crowd would probably have been half of what tgey were here for those three. That suggests we have a market of some sort! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Dave T said:

And this is ultimately why we have to go with the announced crowd in reality, because otherwise the women's attendance is just a guess. 

The Hundred (spit) who have pretty much every game as a double header base the first game's attendance on how many people have entered the ground by a set point during it (it's actually quite late because they're on the side of the forces of darkness but it is consistent and, it seems usually, reflective of how many eye balls are watching at that point).

  • Like 1

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, gingerjon said:

The Hundred (spit) who have pretty much every game as a double header base the first game's attendance on how many people have entered the ground by a set point during it (it's actually quite late because they're on the side of the forces of darkness but it is consistent and, it seems usually, reflective of how many eye balls are watching at that point).

Yep. That would require some desire to accurately reflect crowds. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I spoke to my little Staffordshire granddaughter this morning to see if she had enjoyed the final and she loved it. She got a half&half scarf and one of those bloody annoying horns. But what was also really good was two of her friends went as well, they had never been to a sporting event before and probably had never heard of RL before. But they also had half&half scarfs and England RL bob-hats, which they needed as i thought it was freezing. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There were 68,000 people there yesterday and England weren’t even in it. What sport in Europe other than football and Union would get anywhere near that? We’re a regional sport in the UK played in an area of around 4-5m people, that attendance is incredible. 

  • Like 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Hanover XIII said:

These days, electronic entry systems will tell you by the minute how many people have entered so getting a figure for the women's game wouldn't be a problem. Just choosing which point you decide to take it from would be the issue. 

I would've guessed around 40K at the start and mid-high 50K by the end. It was only really the expensive seats in the Bobby Charlton stand that were empty for the women's game and full for the mens. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Eddie said:

There were 68,000 people there yesterday and England weren’t even in it. What sport in Europe other than football and Union would get anywhere near that? We’re a regional sport in the UK played in an area of around 4-5m people, that attendance is incredible. 

Nobody is disagreeing with that.

The issue is that only in RL do you get an event like that, then do nothing to follow up on it.  A lot of fans who went to the semi and final where not RL fans, but first timers.  So where does the RFL hold the next international ?  In warrington

Edited by crashmon
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, crashmon said:

Nobody is disagreeing with that.

The issue is that only in RL do you get an event like that, then do nothing to follow up on it.  A lot of fans who went to the semi and final where not RL fans, but first timers.  So where does the RFL hold the next international ?  In warrington

Now this i agree with, the announcement of a test against France - great, the announcement that it was a cheap event in Warrington - rubbish

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, crashmon said:

Nobody is disagreeing with that.

The issue is that only in RL do you get an event like that, then do nothing to follow up on it.  A lot of fans who went to the semi and final where not RL fans, but first timers.  So where does the RFL hold the next international ?  In warrington

 

37 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

Now this i agree with, the announcement of a test against France - great, the announcement that it was a cheap event in Warrington - rubbish

Warrington in itself isn't an issue. It's a modern 15k ground. We need to regularly fill it and then there is a case for growing the event. 

The poor part is having the women's game as pre-match ebtertainment. 

I think having this at Wire and the women's test at York would have been sound, and a wheelchair event in London, Liverpool/Manchester/Leeds. 

However I would say that maybe we don't need to tie these things together at all. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Dave T said:

 

Warrington in itself isn't an issue. It's a modern 15k ground. We need to regularly fill it and then there is a case for growing the event. 

The poor part is having the women's game as pre-match ebtertainment. 

I think having this at Wire and the women's test at York would have been sound, and a wheelchair event in London, Liverpool/Manchester/Leeds. 

However I would say that maybe we don't need to tie these things together at all. 

I would say a wheelchair rematch is a must and think that they could get a bigger crowd than the 4500 that attended the final. 

I agree with you on the other points too

  • Like 1

100% League 0% Union

Just because I don't know doesn't mean I don't understand

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Cumbrian Fanatic said:

I would say a wheelchair rematch is a must and think that they could get a bigger crowd than the 4500 that attended the final. 

Have to be looking at the Copper Box then really?

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

Have to be looking at the Copper Box then really?

Games were originally scheduled for the Liverpool Arena. Does this mean that games can be staged at standard arenas? 

If so, we have a fair amount of options. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Dave T said:

Games were originally scheduled for the Liverpool Arena. Does this mean that games can be staged at standard arenas? 

If so, we have a fair amount of options. 

Someone who knows a lot more than me would be able to say but I think the short answer is "yes" but the longer answer is "yes, but it's likely to a better option to use a venue that requires less to be configured for a one off game".

Plus, you'd be falling into the same over saturation trap if you chose Liverpool over *anywhere outside the northwest* given where our only confirmed internationals of 2023 are being played.

  • Like 1

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

 

Warrington in itself isn't an issue. It's a modern 15k ground. We need to regularly fill it and then there is a case for growing the event. 

The poor part is having the women's game as pre-match ebtertainment. 

I think having this at Wire and the women's test at York would have been sound, and a wheelchair event in London, Liverpool/Manchester/Leeds. 

However I would say that maybe we don't need to tie these things together at all. 

It does feel like we are butchering crowds when possibly we could have got 10k and 5k for separate events if marketed separately and might struggle for 10k on the day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, gingerjon said:

Someone who knows a lot more than me would be able to say but I think the short answer is "yes" but the longer answer is "yes, but it's likely to a better option to use a venue that requires less to be configured for a one off game".

Plus, you'd be falling into the same over saturation trap if you chose Liverpool over *anywhere outside the northwest* given where our only confirmed internationals of 2023 are being played.

Aye, I only refer to Liverpool as it was previously in plan. 

If these games can fit into any arena, then it is a really exciting opportunity imo. Many major cities have an arena. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Leonard said:

It does feel like we are butchering crowds when possibly we could have got 10k and 5k for separate events if marketed separately and might struggle for 10k on the day.

I think pushing for 15k for men, 8k for women would be a couple of very successful events. 

We really need to be getting away from double headers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...