Huddersfield Giants

[Blind side johnny]

12 minutes ago, Les Tonks Sidestep said:

They don't need to tell him how to spend his money, they just need to say that Huddersfield can't use The Shay as their home ground.

That isn't what MS was saying, which is what I was responding to.

Edited January 21 by Blind side johnny

[Tommygilf]

4 minutes ago, Blind side johnny said:

OK. In my opinion there should be plenty of potential sites along the Leeds Rd corridor - not as central but certainly accessible.

I think that would make sense, but there ostensibly doesn't seem to be loads and loads, certainly not before Mirfield.

At least not those already in use as some sort of sporting facility. Perhaps that is what council support is most needed for, conversion of an amateur pitch into a pro facility.

[daz39]

On 20/01/2025 at 11:59, M j M said:

I suspect they are the club which has grown its attendances, % wise, the most over the past 40 years.

Indeed, i still remember the first four figure crowd i saw at Fartown, the crowd seemed huge compared to what i'd seen before but it was literally double the last game i went to at the time, it was around 1,400 i believe but from 704 or whatever it was a massive crowd, and that was only 35 years ago or something too.

[Blind side johnny]

On 21/01/2025 at 10:36, Tommygilf said:

I think that would make sense, but there ostensibly doesn't seem to be loads and loads, certainly not before Mirfield.

At least not those already in use as some sort of sporting facility. Perhaps that is what council support is most needed for, conversion of an amateur pitch into a pro facility.

I am no expert at all in such matters but the old Huddersfield sewage treatment site is now standing pretty well idle, for one example. I don't intend this to rush down the usual rabbit hole but is just an example of a lot of potential sites that most people might be unaware of. To simply say, as some with little knowledge of the area do, that "there is nowhere" is quite dismissive, in my view.

Edited January 23 by Blind side johnny

[Hopping Mad]

17 hours ago, daz39 said:

Indeed, i still remember the first four figure crowd i saw at Fartown, the crowd seemed huge compared to what i'd seen before but it was literally double the last game i went to at the time, it was around 1,400 i believe but from 704 or whatever it was a massive crowd, and that was only 35 years ago or something too.

Crowds from three games at Arena '84 (sorry, Fartown) I attended during the second half of the 1980s:

6/4/86 v Blackpool 382

17/4/86 v Keighley 303 (the lowest ever for a first team home game)

31/1/88 v Whitehaven 336

Huddersfield RLFC have come a long way from that nadir!

Edited January 22 by Hopping Mad

[M j M]

4 minutes ago, Hopping Mad said:

 

17/4/86 v Keighley 303 (the lowest ever for a first team home game)

Remarkable that less than a decade later this same fixture in the same division would attract 5,365 (I remember it in particular as it was my first visit to the new stadium, New Year's Eve 1994). Huddersfield put a lot of effort into attracting fans, occasional and neutral, to that game.

[Blind side johnny]

21 minutes ago, Hopping Mad said:

Crowds from three games at Arena '84 (sorry, Fartown) I attended during the second half of the 1980s:

6/4/86 v Blackpool 382

17/4/86 v Keighley 303 (the lowest ever for a first team home game)

31/1/88 v Whitehaven 336

Huddersfield RLFC have come a long way from that nadir!

Going slightly off-track, some people have attributed those very fallow years as a real reason for the difficulties in attracting large crowds back to the Giants. They represented a lost generation where, in previous eras dads and uncles would take their sons (and daughters) along to the rugby and initiate them into that tradition. Those youngsters never became RL fans and trying to convert them now is a hard hill to climb.

I have been at Fartown when fewer than 500 were present as well. If folk think the atmosphere at the John Smiths is poor with 4500 there then they haven't lived that sad reality.

Edited January 22 by Blind side johnny

[Just Browny]

Huddersfield probably shouldn't be pitting forward a case for a Super League IMG rating if they think their chances of attracting reasonable crowds were scuppered by a low period during the mid 1980s.

I agree that finding a location in Huddersfield is not easy, but there might be more options than you can see just by looking at Google Maps for green areas. Presumably the ideal site is one that is flat and not suitable for housing, because houses are flying up all over the region to meet council targets.

[Tommygilf]

4 minutes ago, Just Browny said:

Huddersfield probably shouldn't be pitting forward a case for a Super League IMG rating if they think their chances of attracting reasonable crowds were scuppered by a low period during the mid 1980s.

I agree that finding a location in Huddersfield is not easy, but there might be more options than you can see just by looking at Google Maps for green areas. Presumably the ideal site is one that is flat and not suitable for housing, because houses are flying up all over the region to meet council targets.

Brownfield sites are there, indeed the Gasworks Street site is just that, however that has been earmarked for commercial development hence why the Giants can't progress there. Knocking down existing and in use sites would be even more difficult potentially, and is perhaps why there is an effort to gain some leverage over the council here.

[gingerjon]

7 minutes ago, Just Browny said:

Huddersfield probably shouldn't be pitting forward a case for a Super League IMG rating if they think their chances of attracting reasonable crowds were scuppered by a low period during the mid 1980s.

I agree that finding a location in Huddersfield is not easy, but there might be more options than you can see just by looking at Google Maps for green areas. Presumably the ideal site is one that is flat and not suitable for housing, because houses are flying up all over the region to meet council targets.

The 1980s is now close to being 50 years ago.

It is, very much, time to move on.

[Blind side johnny]

8 hours ago, Just Browny said:

Huddersfield probably shouldn't be pitting forward a case for a Super League IMG rating if they think their chances of attracting reasonable crowds were scuppered by a low period during the mid 1980s.

I agree that finding a location in Huddersfield is not easy, but there might be more options than you can see just by looking at Google Maps for green areas. Presumably the ideal site is one that is flat and not suitable for housing, because houses are flying up all over the region to meet council targets.

You are misinterpreting my statement - I never said that Huddersfield attribute their attendances to this. What is clear is that, in RL in general, the habit of going to the game doesn't just emerge but was unknowingly nurtured. Simply having a relatively successful team doesn't automatically pull in the punters.

You may have noticed, for example, the massive crowds that Sheffield used to get in their SL days. No doubt MS will say this was just down to poor marketing on their part.

[daz39]

On 22/01/2025 at 10:48, Blind side johnny said:

Going slightly off-track, some people have attributed those very fallow years as a real reason for the difficulties in attracting large crowds back to the Giants. They represented a lost generation where, in previous eras dads and uncles would take their sons (and daughters) along to the rugby and initiate them into that tradition. Those youngsters never became RL fans and trying to convert them now is a hard hill to climb.

I have been at Fartown when fewer than 500 were present as well. If folk think the atmosphere at the John Smiths is poor with 4500 there then they haven't lived that sad reality.

Spot on, while people compare our crowds to Cas, Wakey, Salford and more recently Hull Kr etc what they always forget is those clubs had a 25 year head start on us who only began to attract fans around the mid 90's in any kind of number, other clubs, like you say, had that religion of going to the rugby passed on, we had no one to pass it on!.

[The Masked Poster]

2 hours ago, daz39 said:

Spot on, while people compare our crowds to Cas, Wakey, Salford and more recently Hull Kr etc what they always forget is those clubs had a 25 year head start on us who only began to attract fans around the mid 90's in any kind of number, other clubs, like you say, had that religion of going to the rugby passed on, we had no one to pass it on!.

But that's not exactly true. Huddersfield had several 30k+ gates in the late 40's and 50's. It obviously had dipped to the levels mentioned in the 80's but to suggest that there were never any crowds and Cas etc had a big start over Huddersfield just isn't the case. In fact I don't think Cas (or Fev) actually joined RL until the 1920's. Which if anything, would put them at a disadvantage.

Edited January 23 by The Masked Poster

[daz39]

1 minute ago, The Masked Poster said:

But that's not exactly true. Huddersfield had several 30k+ gates in the late 40's and 50's. It obviously had dipped to the levels mentioned in the 80's but to suggest that there were never any crowds and Cas etc had a big start over Huddersfield just isn't the case. In fact I don't think Cas (or Fev) actually joined RL until the 1920's. Which if anything, would put them at a disadvantage.

I doubt anyone from the 40's would have been around in the 400 or so in the 80's let alone introducing new people to the game then!!!

And we never had sustained big crowds, we had big crowds for big games but even then generally our crowds rarely topped 10,000.

[The Masked Poster]

2 minutes ago, daz39 said:

I doubt anyone from the 40's would have been around in the 400 or so in the 80's let alone introducing new people to the game then!!!

And we never had sustained big crowds, we had big crowds for big games but even then generally our crowds rarely topped 10,000.

I too doubt that anyone from the 40's is still going to games. But the claim was that Cas etc have a 25 year advantage because they have always had rugby league fans and Huddersfield never have. But this is not the case. 

[daz39]

1 minute ago, The Masked Poster said:

I too doubt that anyone from the 40's is still going to games. But the claim was that Cas etc have a 25 year advantage because they have always had rugby league fans and Huddersfield never have. But this is not the case. 

I was referring to the period from the mid 80's, as in they had that chain going were as we didn't, it was mentioned how we have grown our crowds over the last 40 years, hence the mid 80's.

[The Masked Poster]

7 minutes ago, daz39 said:

I was referring to the period from the mid 80's, as in they had that chain going were as we didn't, it was mentioned how we have grown our crowds over the last 40 years, hence the mid 80's.

Which I agree with. Just not the other claim. 

[Barley Mow]

33 minutes ago, daz39 said:

I doubt anyone from the 40's would have been around in the 400 or so in the 80's let alone introducing new people to the game then!!!

And we never had sustained big crowds, we had big crowds for big games but even then generally our crowds rarely topped 10,000.

I'm not questioning your overall point about Huddersfield, but just to point out that someone who was 20 in 1940 would be 60 in 1980 and could still be attending.

It's the same time difference as 1985 to the present and I'm sure we all know people who attend RL now who were going in '85.

[daz39]

16 hours ago, Barley Mow said:

I'm not questioning your overall point about Huddersfield, but just to point out that someone who was 20 in 1940 would be 60 in 1980 and could still be attending.

It's the same time difference as 1985 to the present and I'm sure we all know people who attend RL now who were going in '85.

True but i doubt there were enough around to pass on the bug to their kids/Grandkids back then considering we were only attracting a few hundred.

That's the point someone made, we didn't have that in our town/club like has been the case with other clubs back then who's crowds we are often compared with and bracketed with today.

[The Masked Poster]

5 minutes ago, daz39 said:

True but i doubt there were enough around to pass on the bug to their kids/Grandkids back then considering we were only attracting a few hundred.

That's the point someone made, we didn't have that in our town/club like has been the case with other clubs back then who's crowds we are often compared with and bracketed with today.

Firstly, please don't take this personally as it's not about having a go at you as such. 

But the fact that Huddersfield once got gates in excess of 30k , suggests that they actually did have the support base at one point. I'm not arguing that they disappeared but they definitely did exist at one point. 

[daz39]

27 minutes ago, The Masked Poster said:

Firstly, please don't take this personally as it's not about having a go at you as such. 

But the fact that Huddersfield once got gates in excess of 30k , suggests that they actually did have the support base at one point. I'm not arguing that they disappeared but they definitely did exist at one point. 

Sorry, while i don't disagree, that wasn't the point that was raised that i was agreeing with, that was in reference to us growing in the last 40 years.

[Blind side johnny]

1 hour ago, The Masked Poster said:

Firstly, please don't take this personally as it's not about having a go at you as such. 

But the fact that Huddersfield once got gates in excess of 30k , suggests that they actually did have the support base at one point. I'm not arguing that they disappeared but they definitely did exist at one point. 

Read the thread, please.

My original point referred to a generational gap created by a long period of low gates when youngsters weren't being taken along by their dads/grandads etc. The love of the sport is handed on through generations, it doesn't simply happen.

Anyway this is well off topic (my fault, apologies). Back to ground developments in the industrial wastelands of Huddersfield. 

[The Masked Poster]

2 minutes ago, Blind side johnny said:

Read the thread, please.

My original point referred to a generational gap created by a long period of low gates when youngsters weren't being taken along by their dads/grandads etc. The love of the sport is handed on through generations, it doesn't simply happen.

Anyway this is well off topic (my fault, apologies). Back to ground developments in the industrial wastelands of Huddersfield. 

This is still on topic as it's about Huddersfield RL. And I've read it thanks and found it interesting, partly due to some of your contributions, so thanks. 

The point is that when there was gates in excess of 30k, there obviously *were* dads/grandads taking kids along. So it did happen once - but then it stopped. But that is not the same thing as something not existing in the first place. 

[daz39]

1 hour ago, The Masked Poster said:

This is still on topic as it's about Huddersfield RL. And I've read it thanks and found it interesting, partly due to some of your contributions, so thanks. 

The point is that when there was gates in excess of 30k, there obviously *were* dads/grandads taking kids along. So it did happen once - but then it stopped. But that is not the same thing as something not existing in the first place. 

As i've said the 30k was for one off big games, even during the 50's and 60's we struggled to attract regular large crowds to Fartown despite our standing in the game and success.

Our decline started in the mid to late 60's and only started recovering under Alex Murphy in the early 90's, that's almost 30 years of crowds drifting away and not passing the 'bug' on, yes there were some but not a constant number that other clubs relied on to keep the crowd numbers balanced, hence why we were down to just over 300 in 1986.

[LeytherRob]

On 24/01/2025 at 18:17, daz39 said:

As i've said the 30k was for one off big games, even during the 50's and 60's we struggled to attract regular large crowds to Fartown despite our standing in the game and success.

Our decline started in the mid to late 60's and only started recovering under Alex Murphy in the early 90's, that's almost 30 years of crowds drifting away and not passing the 'bug' on, yes there were some but not a constant number that other clubs relied on to keep the crowd numbers balanced, hence why we were down to just over 300 in 1986.

Huddersfield were averaging 6/7k for several years in the early 2010’s though, so a period of decline is around 25 years prior is not a valid excuse - which is what all these points are (80’s/90’s struggles, football town, stadium too big). They’re just excuses for an underperforming commercial department that’s one and only plan to engage the population is to devalue the product through cheap tickets and wait for people to just turn up, as if the the people of Huddersfield are sat at home googling ‘cheap sports to watch this Sunday’. 
 

Huddersfield can and should be a bigger club than they are but are hamstrung by the 20th century mindset of marketing, that affordability is a consumers only barrier.