2024 attendance thread

[haskey]

It seems like IMG are getting £750,000 , for , from the fans point of view doing absolutely sod all, except getting rid of some of the RFL hangers on , as quoted in the LE today, which incidentally has just gone up by 25%n to buy.

[M j M]

4 hours ago, RugbyLeagueGeek said:

So the only thing going for the Championship is the prospect of getting out of it? 

You can say this stuff as many times as you like but you can't make people who actually watch the sport believe it or feel it. And they're the ones who we need to believe in these clubs and come through the turnstiles.

[Wakefield Ram]

13 hours ago, Trojan Horse said:

It’s so easy to blame on IMG when not even the first year has been completed. 
 

There’s many reasons from funding, coverage, media, promotion and it all stems from the governing body. Not IMG. 
 

 

IMG have had 2 years

[RugbyLeagueGeek]

43 minutes ago, M j M said:

You can say this stuff as many times as you like but you can't make people who actually watch the sport believe it or feel it. And they're the ones who we need to believe in these clubs and come through the turnstiles.

I just think that it's an overly simplistic outlook on how sport actually engages people. P&R undoubtedly creates excitement amongst the fans, and I've no doubt that the removal of it could impact attendances. But to say that no promotion would result in "a season of glorified friendlies" is just hyperbole - it isn't reality. Statements like that essentially completely devalue the Championship as a competition in its own right. FWIW I think the Championship is a really good standard of RL and winning it should be regarded as a great achievement in its own right. The RFL needs to make that competition feel much more important, and reinstating a Championship Grand Final at a higher profile, neutral ground would help to make it feel like more of an occasion. The rebranding to the 'Million Pound Game' has always been awful and made it look/sound cheap, and the fact that it's played at the home of the highest placed team doesn't make it a big enough occasion IMO. You only need to look at the buzz that the 1895 Cup creates when teams are within reach of getting to Wembley to be reminded that ultimately people still want to win things that feel important, even if there isn't the carrot of promotion at the end of it.

[Tommygilf]

I'm pretty sure we've been told that the forgone conclusion seasons with Toronto in, or Leigh or Fev or now Wakefield made the rest of the league glorified friendlies too.

[Trojan Horse]

12 hours ago, dboy said:

Didn't we fans (wrongly), begin with the notion that the B grade club winning the Championship, would replace the B grade club who finished bottom of SL, regardless of actual IMG points??

Doesn't that actually seem more palatable now?

A lot didn’t but some just didn’t read up when IMG released the plan.

 

Thats just promotion and relegation with the ability to block the championship team from coming up. People would only be moaning they earned it on the field yet were denied opportunity of SL. 
 

There’s nothing wrong with the current method. Some people just don’t like change. 

[Trojan Horse]

9 hours ago, Wakefield Ram said:

IMG have had 2 years

The majority of which is discussion and planning. The actual format changes were discussing regards the clubs and who will be in the top 12 has only been implemented this season and not yet actually been enforced after the competition has ended yet. Until you have this and next year over with it will be hard to review the impacts good or bad. 

[Gooleboy]

4 minutes ago, Trojan Horse said:

The majority of which is discussion and planning. The actual format changes were discussing regards the clubs and who will be in the top 12 has only been implemented this season and not yet actually been enforced after the competition has ended yet. Until you have this and next year over with it will be hard to review the impacts good or bad. 

Those Championship attendance figures tell you that fans are voting with their feet. That should make the RFL and IMG realise that the game below SL is just as important, but at the moment the fans don't think that is the case.

[Trojan Horse]

10 minutes ago, Gooleboy said:

Those Championship attendance figures tell you that fans are voting with their feet. That should make the RFL and IMG realise that the game below SL is just as important, but at the moment the fans don't think that is the case.

Has that ever been the case? 
 

A number of clubs fan base have been steadily decreasing in championship over a couple of years I’d suspect. 
 

Featherstone because they’ve imploded a little and their off field dramatics is the reason for them. 
 

Aren’t Oldham? seeing a dramatic rise in attendances his season in league 1? Is that because they are buying into IMG? The increase in Trinity attendances is down to IMG? 
 

There are many reasons and you can’t just broadly assume that every lost fan is a direct result of IMG. 

I do agree that the RFL are guilty of undervaluing and not investing in the championship as a league in its own right. Visiting a lot of the Champ grounds this season it’s plain to see that the clubs are doing their best but the RFL are just not making any attempts to grow that league within its own right. 

Look at the TV deal offered to championship clubs. Equals roughly a few hundred pounds a game. Absolutely shocking, but if a low financial deal was necessary short term then I’d expect some initiatives and free marketing of the clubs and competition at the very least to increase its value over a few years. There just appears very little forward thinking for the Championship as its own league and its future. 

The RFL for me are the issue here. They should treat the Chsmpionship as its own competition and source the sponsorship, funding, attribute media and market the Chamoionship star players in its own right. It’s as your alluding to an after thought. 
 

That’s not new though due to IMG. That’s a problem that’s existed and been allowed to fester for years. 

 

Edited August 6 by Trojan Horse

[Wakefield Ram]

7 minutes ago, Gooleboy said:

Those Championship attendance figures tell you that fans are voting with their feet. That should make the RFL and IMG realise that the game below SL is just as important, but at the moment the fans don't think that is the case.

IMG have no interest in RL. Their only interest is to make as much money for themselves as possible. If the Championship and L1 folded, it would make no difference to IMG. 

[Trojan Horse]

2 minutes ago, Wakefield Ram said:

IMG have no interest in RL. Their only interest is to make as much money for themselves as possible. If the Championship and L1 folded, it would make no difference to IMG. 

But equally it wouldn’t be their fault. It would be the fault of the sports governing body. IMG aren’t going to provide the investment or actually invest resources. That’s down to the sport and incidentally something as a sport we are incredibly poor at.

 

Look at the farcical international calendar and even worse marketing. Hard to imagine how a worse job can be done. 

[Roughyed Rats]

17 minutes ago, Trojan Horse said:

Aren’t Oldham? seeing a dramatic rise in attendances his season in league 1? Is that because they are buying into IMG? The increase in Trinity attendances is down to IMG? 

 

Absolutely not.

[Dave T]

I think a better question is whether those clubs who are increasing crowds are doing it due to increased off field effort and performance. 

History has generally shown that it's off field stuff that grows crowds materially - and we have seen that recently with Hull KR, Leigh and Wakey - I don't know enough about Oldham. 

[Anita Bath]

26 minutes ago, Trojan Horse said:

Has that ever been the case? 
 

A number of clubs fan base have been steadily decreasing in championship over a couple of years I’d suspect. 
 

Featherstone because they’ve imploded a little and their off field dramatics is the reason for them. 
 

Aren’t Oldham? seeing a dramatic rise in attendances his season in league 1? Is that because they are buying into IMG? The increase in Trinity attendances is down to IMG? 
 

There are many reasons and you can’t just broadly assume that every lost fan is a direct result of IMG. 

I do agree that the RFL are guilty of undervaluing and not investing in the championship as a league in its own right. Visiting a lot of the Champ grounds this season it’s plain to see that the clubs are doing their best but the RFL are just not making any attempts to grow that league within its own right. 

Look at the TV deal offered to championship clubs. Equals roughly a few hundred pounds a game. Absolutely shocking, but if a low financial deal was necessary short term then I’d expect some initiatives and free marketing of the clubs and competition at the very least to increase its value over a few years. There just appears very little forward thinking for the Championship as its own league and its future. 

The RFL for me are the issue here. They should treat the Chsmpionship as its own competition and source the sponsorship, funding, attribute media and market the Chamoionship star players in its own right. It’s as your alluding to an after thought. 
 

That’s not new though due to IMG. That’s a problem that’s existed and been allowed to fester for years. 

 

Oldhams crowds are up because they are winning and that will give them promotion where they will not be playing newcastle, cornwall and goole(?) but widnes, bradford and featherstone.

[Harry Stottle]

On 05/08/2024 at 08:20, Trojan Horse said:

It’s so easy to blame on IMG when not even the first year has been completed. 
 

There’s many reasons from funding, coverage, media, promotion and it all stems from the governing body. Not IMG. 
 

 

Considering you mention IMG Trojan so as not to hijack this thread I will answer you on the IMG thread.

[Roughyed Rats]

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I think a better question is whether those clubs who are increasing crowds are doing it due to increased off field effort and performance. 

History has generally shown that it's off field stuff that grows crowds materially - and we have seen that recently with Hull KR, Leigh and Wakey - I don't know enough about Oldham. 

After 25 years of managed decline, Oldham’s improved crowds is of course partly due to the excitement of a promotion push. However, to Dave’s point, more crucially a massive re-engagement with the local RL community. It’s great to see so many young kids in Oldham shirts at the games, curtain raisers involving all the local amateur clubs, the club hosting regular training nights at amateur clubs like St Anne’s, Waterhead, Saddleworth with mini fans forums afterwards. I could go on. Most of that work doesn’t score any IMG points but the club have been very clear that their plan was formulated well before IMG came along and in their opinion (and that of us supporters) is simply just the right thing to do.

[redjonn]

9 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I think a better question is whether those clubs who are increasing crowds are doing it due to increased off field effort and performance. 

History has generally shown that it's off field stuff that grows crowds materially - and we have seen that recently with Hull KR, Leigh and Wakey - I don't know enough about Oldham. 

do you really think that if the clubs are not performing well on the pitch that the clubs would still increase crowds.

Of course the overall club efforts off field enables the club to invest in the playing side, whether coaches or players, which in turn improves performance on theo pitch, thus encouraging people to attend/look again. Then the marketing, communications and stadium initiatives can help turn more to actually attending.

I know I am stating the obvious but felt need to remind that successful teams are a big factor.

[Dave T]

7 minutes ago, redjonn said:

do you really think that if the clubs are not performing well on the pitch that the clubs would still increase crowds.

Of course the overall club efforts off field enables the club to invest in the playing side, whether coaches or players, which in turn improves performance on theo pitch, thus encouraging people to attend/look again. Then the marketing, communications and stadium initiatives can help turn more to actually attending.

I know I am stating the obvious but felt need to remind that successful teams are a big factor.

No, I didn't say that. 

But pretty much all examples of substantial growth have seen off-field stuff underpinning it. 

The problem with relying on on-field success is that it is tempremantal, so that can't underpin a clubs efforts. 

I can list many efforts where clubs increased crowds led by off field efforts, there are far fewer that substantially increased by just starting to win. 

Warrington is one of the best examples of this. 

[redjonn]

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

No, I didn't say that. 

But pretty much all examples of substantial growth have seen off-field stuff underpinning it. 

The problem with relying on on-field success is that it is tempremantal, so that can't underpin a clubs efforts. 

I can list many efforts where clubs increased crowds led by off field efforts, there are far fewer that substantially increased by just starting to win. 

Warrington is one of the best examples of this. 

relying solely on on field success is not quite what I said either...

another way would have been for me to say you need a foundation of relative success for the off field marketing efforts or stadium initiatives to build upon...

[Dave T]

7 minutes ago, redjonn said:

relying solely on on field success is not quite what I said either...

another way would have been for me to say you need a foundation of relative success for the off field marketing efforts or stadium initiatives to build upon...

I think that goes without saying, and in fact people frequently make the claim that you grow crowds by winning games. Yet the evidence does suggest that it is other fa tors that make the biggest impact. 

That's my whole point here. And I suspect it's why the sport has always flirted with the point of off field setup being most important. IMG seem to agree. 

[redjonn]

5 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I think that goes without saying, and in fact people frequently make the claim that you grow crowds by winning games. Yet the evidence does suggest that it is other fa tors that make the biggest impact. 

That's my whole point here. And I suspect it's why the sport has always flirted with the point of off field setup being most important. IMG seem to agree. 

well yep clubs through their off field activities need to have financial sustainable but for sure successful team helps.. for the sport as a whole whilst I agree with IMG approach for longer term sustainability of the sportI am not sure its going to move the dial much.

At the risk of going off piste so to speak I think the product on the pitch needs work.. to attract a greater buzz and interest.

Unless we can have a Caitlln Clark situation.... and even then the existing product wouldn't help create those moments.

 

[Dave T]

7 minutes ago, redjonn said:

well yep clubs through their off field activities need to have financial sustainable but for sure successful team helps.. for the sport as a whole whilst I agree with IMG approach for longer term sustainability of the sportI am not sure its going to move the dial much.

At the risk of going off piste so to speak I think the product on the pitch needs work.. to attract a greater buzz and interest.

Unless we can have a Caitlln Clark situation.... and even then the existing product wouldn't help create those moments.

 

If there is one thing we can learn from RU, it's that the on field product is largely secondary. For years RL fans sneered at the kickathon that was Union and mocked them for focusing on car park picnics etc. While we mocked, they saw huge growth. 

RL is a great sport imo, but it will always be subjective, but far worse sports do far better, so imo it just isn't the key area to focus. 

Edited August 6 by Dave T

[up the robins]

I don't think their can be any doubt that the excitement of potentially being promoted to super league by winning the championship increases crowds as opposed to winning a league and being told sorry you don't meet the criteria to go up.

Having spent many seasons struggling in the lower leagues with crowds at lows of a couple of thousand I will tell you now Hull kr would not of met any of the criteria needed for a shot at the big time and investment in the club would of been near on impossible, it was only once we made super league via promotion did our club manage to increase attendances significantly and attract investment with steady improvement off field over a period of time being in super league.

We are now sitting top of super league  (at time of writing) with one of the best home and away followings in super league.

Pre 2006 how many ppl running super league would have said Hull kr would of being a welcome addition to super league? None would be my guess. Hull can't sustain two clubs hull kr don't have a big enough fan base.

We had a dream, we are living that dream!.   IMG and the rfl are stealing that dream from other club's.

[Roughyed Rats]

11 minutes ago, up the robins said:

I don't think their can be any doubt that the excitement of potentially being promoted to super league by winning the championship increases crowds as opposed to winning a league and being told sorry you don't meet the criteria to go up.

Having spent many seasons struggling in the lower leagues with crowds at lows of a couple of thousand I will tell you now Hull kr would not of met any of the criteria needed for a shot at the big time and investment in the club would of been near on impossible, it was only once we made super league via promotion did our club manage to increase attendances significantly and attract investment with steady improvement off field over a period of time being in super league.

We are now sitting top of super league  (at time of writing) with one of the best home and away followings in super league.

Pre 2006 how many ppl running super league would have said Hull kr would of being a welcome addition to super league? None would be my guess. Hull can't sustain two clubs hull kr don't have a big enough fan base.

We had a dream, we are living that dream!.   IMG and the rfl are stealing that dream from other club's.

Couldn’t agree more

[Gooleboy]

1 hour ago, Trojan Horse said:

Has that ever been the case? 
 

A number of clubs fan base have been steadily decreasing in championship over a couple of years I’d suspect. 
 

Featherstone because they’ve imploded a little and their off field dramatics is the reason for them. 
 

Aren’t Oldham? seeing a dramatic rise in attendances his season in league 1? Is that because they are buying into IMG? The increase in Trinity attendances is down to IMG? 
 

There are many reasons and you can’t just broadly assume that every lost fan is a direct result of IMG. 

I do agree that the RFL are guilty of undervaluing and not investing in the championship as a league in its own right. Visiting a lot of the Champ grounds this season it’s plain to see that the clubs are doing their best but the RFL are just not making any attempts to grow that league within its own right. 

Look at the TV deal offered to championship clubs. Equals roughly a few hundred pounds a game. Absolutely shocking, but if a low financial deal was necessary short term then I’d expect some initiatives and free marketing of the clubs and competition at the very least to increase its value over a few years. There just appears very little forward thinking for the Championship as its own league and its future. 

The RFL for me are the issue here. They should treat the Chsmpionship as its own competition and source the sponsorship, funding, attribute media and market the Chamoionship star players in its own right. It’s as your alluding to an after thought. 
 

That’s not new though due to IMG. That’s a problem that’s existed and been allowed to fester for years. 

 

And do you think this upsurge in Oldham support (which is good to see) would be happening if promotion from League 1 wasn't straight forward for finishing top or winning a play off?