2024 attendance thread

[dboy]

1 hour ago, Tommygilf said:

So places can be rugby towns if you ignore all the important metrics that say they aren't...

I'd say more people actually attending RL than another sport, in our communities, is rather important. IMG think so with their catchment score - though as many clubs and HarryS, mention, it doesn't seem to be scoped properly.

[dboy]

2 hours ago, Bedfordshire Bronco said:

And I've since clarified that there may be the odd metric that may prove RL is biggest (like which is the most popular oval shaped ball game etc) 

You haven't acknowledged this or accepted the fact that football overall is more popular in Cas than RL 

Therefore you haven't accepted the fact that Cas is more a football town than a RL one ... Even though it is a town where RL is popular 

We're all in agreement then.

I referenced Wakefield rather than Cas, but it's the same everywhere - soccer is more popular if you measure it by participation.

Or casual interest. Or watching on TV.

Just wait 'til the Euros start!!

[Tommygilf]

2 hours ago, JonM said:

2741 Widnes v Whitehaven 

2234 Bradford v Sheffield E

That's pretty poor for Bradford in a league game against a top 3 rival.

[Harry Stottle]

1 hour ago, dboy said:

I'd say more people actually attending RL than another sport, in our communities, is rather important. IMG think so with their catchment score - though as many clubs and HarryS, mention, it doesn't seem to be scoped properly.

Moved.

Edited May 20 by Harry Stottle

[Taffy Tiger]

18 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Especially when top marks are given for 7,500 attendances dboy, why is that figure set in stone for all clubs when catchment thresholds are open ended? On reflection a fairer way to award attendance points would be to score attendances for acheiving say 7.5% of the catchment score then penalise clubs for not attaining it.

There are clubs who acheive the full 1.5 points for catchment of over 260,000 courtesy of having a big local authority what's the point of that if they can't get just 7.5% of those in attendance.

Big city clubs in both the UK and France seem to be the main beneficiaries of this catchment scoring system.

Hi Harry

 

I do agree that there should be some kind of ratio measurement for catchment area to attendances , and I would also add fandom (ie fan engagement) to that as well , otherwise , and as it stands , teams with a larger catchment area , are being rewarded twice just for having more people to target .

 

However , there is a caveat to this . I don't think you can say 7.5% for top marks , as this isn't possible in many cases because of the size of the stadium.

 

To say 7.5% would mean Leeds would have to get around 60k average attendance.

I don't think it is possible to impose a one size fits all percentage scale in this instance.

That said , I do strongly agree that some sort of scaling should be used to qualify for the full 1.5 points available in catchment area , and this scaling should also allow clubs not achieving the full 1.5 points for catchment area to increase their score in a smilar way , up to 1.5 points.

 

In effect , every club should at least have the opportunity to score the maximum points in each of the IMG criteria , however unlikely that may be in some cases.

Edited May 20 by Taffy Tiger

[JonM]

52 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

That's pretty poor for Bradford in a league game against a top 3 rival.

It seems a bit on the low side. Figure from the Eagles' match report rather than Bradford themselves.

[Harry Stottle]

24 minutes ago, Taffy Tiger said:

Hi Harry

 

I do agree that there should be some kind of ratio measurement for catchment area to attendances , and I would also add fandom (ie fan engagement) to that as well , otherwise , and as it stands , teams with a larger catchment area , are being rewarded twice just for having more people to target .

 

However , there is a caveat to this . I don't think you can say 7.5% for top marks , as this isn't possible in many cases because of the size of the stadium.

 

To say 7.5% would mean Leeds would have to get around 60k average attendance.

I don't think it is possible to impose a one size fits all percentage scale in this instance.

That said , I do strongly agree that some sort of scaling should be used to qualify for the full 1.5 points available in catchment area , and this scaling should also allow clubs not achieving the full 1.5 points for catchment area to increase their score in a smilar way , up to 1.5 points.

 

In effect , every club should at least have the opportunity to score the maximum points in each of the IMG criteria , however unlikely that may be in some cases.

Hi Taffy thanks for the reply but after posting I moved this to the IMG thread, you were far to quick for me, perhaps you could copy and paste it on there please.

[Taffy Tiger]

3 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Hi Taffy thanks for the reply but after posting I moved this to the IMG thread, you were far to quick for me, perhaps you could copy and paste it on there please.

Thanks Harry , will do

[Hanover XIII]

3 hours ago, JonM said:

2741 Widnes v Whitehaven 

2234 Bradford v Sheffield E

I think Klopp's last game could have cost Widnes a few, but the gates are holding up at a decent level. Be good to break 3,000.

[Jill Halfpenny fan]

41 minutes ago, JonM said:

It seems a bit on the low side. Figure from the Eagles' match report rather than Bradford themselves.

Saw some highlights last night, it looked pretty sparse on the terracing.

[Bedfordshire Bronco]

2 hours ago, dboy said:

We're all in agreement then.

I referenced Wakefield rather than Cas, but it's the same everywhere - soccer is more popular if you measure it by participation.

Or casual interest. Or watching on TV.

Just wait 'til the Euros start!!

Fair enough. On all sensible criteria football is the biggest sport in Cas and the wider Wakey area 

Edited May 20 by Bedfordshire Bronco

[Coggo]

Just heard it said Huddersfield took an estimated 600 to the Cup semi. That can’t be right, can it?

[Exiled Wiganer]

I think we should have semis at the ground of the team drawn first and that season tickets should at least have an option to automatically include a home cup game (I would pay a bit extra). Every combination of those semis would have had bigger crowds and better atmospheres than we saw. 

[Eddie]

6 hours ago, Coggo said:

Just heard it said Huddersfield took an estimated 600 to the Cup semi. That can’t be right, can it?

Yes it sounds like a lot. 

[Eddie]

6 hours ago, Exiled Wiganer said:

I think we should have semis at the ground of the team drawn first and that season tickets should at least have an option to automatically include a home cup game (I would pay a bit extra). Every combination of those semis would have had bigger crowds and better atmospheres than we saw. 

Not a bad idea that, many European countries do the same in their football cup. 

[Archie Gordon]

Ticket sales going very well for CCFs I was told yesterday when scooping up a batch for our club. Obvious caveats aside, those available on general sale seem to have been disappearing fairly swiftly this week. 

[Ovenden Grunt]

15 hours ago, JonM said:

It seems a bit on the low side. Figure from the Eagles' match report rather than Bradford themselves.

Don't fret. It'll soon get 'adjusted'.

[daz39]

10 hours ago, Coggo said:

Just heard it said Huddersfield took an estimated 600 to the Cup semi. That can’t be right, can it?

No it isn't, we had 1,800 which is about half of our Season card holders.

Slightly better than the 84 we had at the same ground a couple of weeks earlier.

[LeytherRob]

 

[lemmy xaan]

looking at the Wembley seating plan, you could be forgiven for thinking that we are very nearly sold out of the "open" areas and will soon have to release the greyed-out south stand. Or is this some kind of Rl ticket office fake news again?

[Dave T]

23 minutes ago, lemmy xaan said:

looking at the Wembley seating plan, you could be forgiven for thinking that we are very nearly sold out of the "open" areas and will soon have to release the greyed-out south stand. Or is this some kind of Rl ticket office fake news again?

The clubs will be holding thousands yet, or the RFL will be holding them to release to the club's. 

[Worzel]

Apparently Hull KR have sold 700 for the London trip on Sunday, not bad. I'm definitely looking forward to my first trip to the new ground at Wimbledon, looks like a great facility... behind-the scenes pictures to follow!

Also confirmed by Paul Lakin today that Rovers are putting a 1,000 seat temporary stand into the space at the south end of the East Stand for the 2025 season. That'll take Craven Park to 11,400 capacity whilst preserving the Craven Streat food, drink and entertainment space. The club wants to see that those extra spaces can be sold regularly before committing to a permanent build. Makes sense I think, one step at a time.  

[Josef K]

11,368 at Saints last night which must be close to being 4,000 down on last year. Going on some of the people i know who are pay on the gate, with my brother being one of them if he isn’t on nights. Even he couldn’t be arsed going last night, he said “he wasn’t wasting £26 to be bored stiff by Wellens tactics”. He went on to say “if the likes of Davies & Royle are regulars in the first team i won’t even watch it on Sky”.

A lot of the pay on the night fans are disenchanted with the tactics and lack of flair so are staying away. 

[Leyther_Matt]

4,300ish at Huddersfield v Leigh (800ish away fans at a guess)

[daz39]

31 minutes ago, Leyther_Matt said:

4,300ish at Huddersfield v Leigh (800ish away fans at a guess)

Surprised it was that many to be honest, my Facebook feed was full of people who have been regulars over the last 2-30 years doing other stuff last night and not even mentioning the rugby, quite sad really.

Next week vs FC could be horrific attendance wise, i'd be surprised if there's 2,000 home fans next week unless something happens during the week.