2024 attendance thread

[Gooleboy]

19 hours ago, Dave T said:

It is no coincidence that the % of population stat is consistently used by fans of clubs like Leigh, Cas and Fev who are towns sitting within the boundaries of other clubs. It's a metric that means nowt - and it is ridiculous to see some people champion the idea that Cas be rated higher than Leeds for crowds because of this weird metric. 

If it makes you feel good to criticise clubs like Warrington then crack on, but don't be surprised when it gets called out as small-minded - trying to justify how clubs with smaller crowds, less turnover, and less success are performing better than them is weird. If you don't position these weird arguments - people won't bring up that you are trying to make your small club more relevant by creating artificial KPI's that suggest they are doing better. It's unnecessary, Leigh are going great, I have a lot of respect for your club - it's your argument I have little time for. You'll also see from my posting history that I don't arrogantly position my club in a shining light - you just believe that so you don't have to address the points in question. I am very critical of clubs like mine, and other bigger clubs like Wigan, Saints and Leeds etc. 

I am most certainly not coming round to your way of thinking on your final points - your conclusion is massively flawed. There is no evidence to suggest that the people of Warrington or Leigh are wired so differently to the people of Leicester that means that they won't take to the sport of RL. In fact the evidence is quite clear that if the people of Leicester were given a big Rugby club to support at a high level, with plenty of funding, a player pathway, local rivals and media profile, then they would succeed. See the Leicester Tigers. If we want to understand whether the game can spread past Wigan or Bradford, we can look at Sydney, Brisbane, Port Moresby, Perpignan, Auckland and various other places around the world.

The reason RL hasn;t spread further isn't because people don't really take to RL, it's because RL doesn't take to them. 

Leeds Rhinos fans didn't watch Leeds Tykes, Wigan fans didn't watch Orrell. So why would Union fans in the likes of Leicester watch a League team? Newcastle Falcons fans didn't.

[Tommygilf]

8 minutes ago, Gooleboy said:

Leeds Rhinos fans didn't watch Leeds Tykes, Wigan fans didn't watch Orrell. So why would Union fans in the likes of Leicester watch a League team? Newcastle Falcons fans didn't.

His point was that there is nothing about Leicester etc that precludes them from supporting a good well funded Rugby team. They happen to play union, but the point remains that these aren't all "football people" etc.

Your examples are clear, that where one successful large rugby club already exists it's going to be hard to get that support for a newcomer team. Not impossible though it must be said.

[Dave T]

5 minutes ago, Gooleboy said:

Leeds Rhinos fans didn't watch Leeds Tykes, Wigan fans didn't watch Orrell. So why would Union fans in the likes of Leicester watch a League team? Newcastle Falcons fans didn't.

I'd argue that they don't because they have their Rugby needs fulfilled. That's my point. People in Leicester have their rugby needs met by the Tigers, those in Wigan have them met by Warriors. It's irrelevant really whether those Rugby's are being played to different rules.

This is the place where I share some of Harry's reservations around expansion markets. I don't think we can hope to be huge in places that are having their Rugby needs well and truly met. Setting a team up in Leicester for example would be silly, but that isn't because they just won't take to it, it's because their is no real major gap for us. Toronto was probably a great example of us going into virgin territory that isn't saturated by Rugby of any kind and being able to cultivate a decent sized market.  I don't think the answer to expansion is to think we can just grown anywhere - we need to be targeted, consistent and invest substantially. 

Where I differ from Harry is that I believe there are huge parts of the country and indeed world that aren't served by Rugby Union and we have the opportunity to tap into them. There are also those huge population centres (major cities) that would be able to support multiple sports and teams - for example, just because London has some Union teams, it doesn't mean we couldn't have a strong presence there. The reason we haven't is because we have been really, really poor in our efforts.

[Dave T]

9 minutes ago, Tommygilf said:

His point was that there is nothing about Leicester etc that precludes them from supporting a good well funded Rugby team. They happen to play union, but the point remains that these aren't all "football people" etc.

 

Yes, I thought I was clear on that, but that is exactly it. Had Leicester split with the Northern Union back in 1895, there is a good chance that the Leicester Tigers fans would have been watching 6 tackle Rugby.

[Harry Stottle]

3 hours ago, Click said:

Reading your posts Harry, I often wonder if there must be something wrong with me as someone who isn't from any of those counties you mention and loves RL. 

It's amazing how "fans" like to say that we are the greatest game, but really only for those that were born into it. The others just "won't get it".

What I have said all along Click, is there are not enough numbers of devotees from outside of those counties, the more the merrier.

As for the term The Greatest Game has always been applied to Rugby League by its fans for as long as I can remember and that is going back to 1960, I think albeit not certain was originated by the trade weekly 'Rugby Leaguer' corrections welcome.

[Gooleboy]

3 hours ago, Dave T said:

I'd argue that they don't because they have their Rugby needs fulfilled. That's my point. People in Leicester have their rugby needs met by the Tigers, those in Wigan have them met by Warriors. It's irrelevant really whether those Rugby's are being played to different rules.

This is the place where I share some of Harry's reservations around expansion markets. I don't think we can hope to be huge in places that are having their Rugby needs well and truly met. Setting a team up in Leicester for example would be silly, but that isn't because they just won't take to it, it's because their is no real major gap for us. Toronto was probably a great example of us going into virgin territory that isn't saturated by Rugby of any kind and being able to cultivate a decent sized market.  I don't think the answer to expansion is to think we can just grown anywhere - we need to be targeted, consistent and invest substantially. 

Where I differ from Harry is that I believe there are huge parts of the country and indeed world that aren't served by Rugby Union and we have the opportunity to tap into them. There are also those huge population centres (major cities) that would be able to support multiple sports and teams - for example, just because London has some Union teams, it doesn't mean we couldn't have a strong presence there. The reason we haven't is because we have been really, really poor in our efforts.

I would love RL to be successful in new areas, but history tells us the opposite. Sheffield, Carlisle, Mansfield, Nottingham, Scarborough, Celtic Crusaders, Chorley, Runcorn, and the list goes on throughout the games existence. Also, a big issue is players. You only have to look at the transfer merry-go-round to realise there isn’t enough quality to serve the clubs we already have.

[Dave T]

41 minutes ago, Gooleboy said:

I would love RL to be successful in new areas, but history tells us the opposite. Sheffield, Carlisle, Mansfield, Nottingham, Scarborough, Celtic Crusaders, Chorley, Runcorn, and the list goes on throughout the games existence. Also, a big issue is players. You only have to look at the transfer merry-go-round to realise there isn’t enough quality to serve the clubs we already have.

Expansion doesn't need to be just about clubs at the top of the pyramid. True expansion would be about adding to those player pathways, development at grassroots etc. 

[Gooleboy]

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

Expansion doesn't need to be just about clubs at the top of the pyramid. True expansion would be about adding to those player pathways, development at grassroots etc. 

We had it with the Summer Conferences which spawned loads of new clubs in new areas. What is left of that?

[LeeF]

It’s almost like long term development officers should be in situ. Now if only someone who had great financial acumen (sic) hadn’t stopped the funding for them

[Dave T]

1 hour ago, Gooleboy said:

We had it with the Summer Conferences which spawned loads of new clubs in new areas. What is left of that?

Neglected areas will struggle - we have many many examples in the heartland as well. 

Edited July 18, 2024 by Dave T

[Josef K]

Saints/Wire pulled in 14,800 last season. For tonight’s match i think Saints will be lucky to get 12,500. 

[Click]

17 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

What I have said all along Click, is there are not enough numbers of devotees from outside of those counties, the more the merrier.

As for the term The Greatest Game has always been applied to Rugby League by its fans for as long as I can remember and that is going back to 1960, I think albeit not certain was originated by the trade weekly 'Rugby Leaguer' corrections welcome.

Not sure you have mentioned "devotees" before. You regularly describe RL as a sport that if you were born into, then you're in. But if you weren't... You just won't really understand it. 

I brought up TGG as a phrase as you used it earlier in the thread, but I am not sure how you could believe that RL is TGG when you have to be born into it to get it.

[langpark]

Anyone know how many this stand holds? 

 

 

[JonM]

46 minutes ago, langpark said:

Anyone know how many this stand holds? 

 

 

It holds 2340.

Their attendance today was 2,572 – biggest since 2008.

[JonM]

15 764 for Wigan v Warrington

8 021 for Leigh v Saints

[Eddie]

8 minutes ago, JonM said:

15 764 for Wigan v Warrington

8 021 for Leigh v Saints

Two very respectable crowds. 

[Harry Stottle]

On 27/07/2024 at 08:07, JonM said:

15 764 for Wigan v Warrington

8 021 for Leigh v Saints

I would have thought that it would have been higher than the Wigan v Leigh game considering both teams being 1st and 2nd, but no, 16053 for Wigan v Leigh on the 5th July both Friday night games.

[Dave T]

22 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

I would have thought that it would have been higher than the Wigan v Leigh game considering both teams being 1st and 2nd, but no, 16053 for Wigan v Leigh on the 5th July both Friday night games.

Summer holiday effect I'd expect. 

[Harry Stottle]

Just now, Dave T said:

Summer holiday effect I'd expect. 

That would still have affected the Wigan v Leigh game.

[Dave T]

2 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

That would still have affected the Wigan v Leigh game.

Kids hadn't broken up on that date. 

[sweaty craiq]

1 hour ago, Dave T said:

Kids hadn't broken up on that date. 

It has a huge influence on crowds over the 6 weeks as a large amount of fans will have either been away are away or about to go away, Leigh allow season ticket swaps so the casual sales suffer.

[Dave T]

1 hour ago, sweaty craiq said:

It has a huge influence on crowds over the 6 weeks as a large amount of fans will have either been away are away or about to go away, Leigh allow season ticket swaps so the casual sales suffer.

Yeah, we do always see a real tail off over these months, but tbh they were both decent crowds. 

[Leyther_Matt]

It also means families tend to have a bit more time to dedicate to leisure activities or purely on the lookout for things to do (exactly why The Hundred is scheduled for this time of year), so swings and roundabouts. 

[Jill Halfpenny fan]

Widnes v Bradford 3,065

[Eddie]

9 minutes ago, Jill Halfpenny fan said:

Widnes v Bradford 3,065

If Widnes got into SL now, what do you think they’d average?