2025 Attendance Thread

[Archie Gordon]

15 minutes ago, RayCee said:

I used to divide the attendance for double headers. It did seem odd though if 20,000 saw your team play but they could only count 10,000. So I changed my calculations to 20,000 for each 'home' team.

It does get more complicated when four games are played as in Vegas, well three club competition games. Do you divide it by three, four or give the attendance to no one? Dividing it by 3 or 4 doesn't make sense to me. It's either counted fully or not at all, in my way of thinking anyway. 

I mentioned Barcelona earlier which I didn't explain well. I meant that game, which was taken on the road, produced a figure well in excess of the Dragons normal match figure but it was counted. Wigan took a game to Vegas and were rewarded with a larger than normal figure. Should that be denied them because other teams were there?

That's the reward for taking games away from home. If Salford took a home game to Amsterdam and got 20,000, good on them. It inflates their average but that's how many people saw them play.

If the 45k Vegas figure is counted, this week's round of SL crowds totaled 90,000 or a 15,000 average per match. Is that a record? That's something to celebrate whether it's counted as the official figure or not. 

The women's Cup final at Wembley receives an attendance based on folks who have entered the stadium before the game finishes (or similar). That ought to be the way a number is assigned to Wigan-Wire if you really wanted to get it right. 

But call it 45k for publicity purposes, I am fine with that. Just not in favour of calling it 45k for grading purposes.

[langpark]

On 03/03/2025 at 22:06, Archie Gordon said:

The women's Cup final at Wembley receives an attendance based on folks who have entered the stadium before the game finishes (or similar). That ought to be the way a number is assigned to Wigan-Wire if you really wanted to get it right. 

But call it 45k for publicity purposes, I am fine with that. Just not in favour of calling it 45k for grading purposes.

Publicity is one thing, the history books is another.  It would be unfair on the true record-holders.

[RayCee]

The article below covered attendance figures for SL last week. Interestingly it said:

It’s believed there were actually between 11-12,000 in the venue when Wigan and Wire played their clash out, but the attendance officially goes down as over 45,000. 

From that it seems the actual attendance is an estimate and officially it's the full figure. I assume when they say officially, they have checked. 

To read the article, click on the link below. 

Link to article

[Eddie]

12 hours ago, RayCee said:

The article below covered attendance figures for SL last week. Interestingly it said:

It’s believed there were actually between 11-12,000 in the venue when Wigan and Wire played their clash out, but the attendance officially goes down as over 45,000. 

From that it seems the actual attendance is an estimate and officially it's the full figure. I assume when they say officially, they have checked. 

To read the article, click on the link below. 

Link to article

If there were 10-11,000 over from the NW and you assume they were all in the ground for the SL match, other than anyone who got too ###### on Friday night, the crowd was definitely over 12,000. 

[Exiled Wiganer]

In a way it’s just as well Wigan are the home side, as 10k or 45k is neither here nor there for us, but for another club this could be a very important factor. If, say, Salford were deemed to be the home team, 45k could nearly double their aggregate (and hence average) for the season… 

[Damien]

2 hours ago, Exiled Wiganer said:

In a way it’s just as well Wigan are the home side, as 10k or 45k is neither here nor there for us, but for another club this could be a very important factor. If, say, Salford were deemed to be the home team, 45k could nearly double their aggregate (and hence average) for the season… 

Yeah to me the obvious solution is just not to count it in the average.

On the other side we also need to be careful not to punish team for taking a game on the road like this and trying something new. Even on a bad day Wigan are getting 15k+ for this game and hopefully nearer 20k. Why should Wigan get lumbered with a 10k average when they would do far better just staying at home. Like you said for Wigan it doesn't really matter but it will for some clubs.

Edited March 5 by Damien

[Exiled Wiganer]

1 hour ago, Damien said:

Yeah to me the obvious solution is just not to count it in the average.

On the other side we also need to be careful not to punish team for taking a game on the road like this and trying something new. Even on a bad day Wigan are getting 15k+ for this game and hopefully nearer 20k. Why should Wigan get lumbered with a 10k average when they would do far better just staying at home. Like you said for Wigan it doesn't really matter but it will for some clubs.

Or, I suppose have a rule in the average spectator test. For instance, you could argue that it is “likely” that Wigan’s home crowd against Wire would vary by the same percentage as the overall percentage increases/decreases from like for like games and deem that to be the figure. 
 

So, if Wigan increase their crowds against all the other clubs we played last year by 10% and the Wire game last year had a 15k crowd (I haven’t checked as I couldn’t face being reminded of that night…) then they could deem a 16.5k crowd. Of course nothing is ever like for like in life, but that could work. 

Edited March 5 by Exiled Wiganer

[RayCee]

4 hours ago, Eddie said:

If there were 10-11,000 over from the NW and you assume they were all in the ground for the SL match, other than anyone who got too ###### on Friday night, the crowd was definitely over 12,000. 

You would think so but that figure is an estimate and it seems no official count is available for the first game.

Taking a broader view on the attendance, all the clubs that went had supporters who traveled to see their team. They all contributed to the 45k peak attendance. It then became a lottery as to how many watched a game depending when a game was played. The earliest match was at a disadvantage as the crowd built up during the day. Should the first up teams be penalised for that, while other sides benefited from supporters of those early bird teams? All the teams contributed to the success of the event.

[The Alchemist]

5 hours ago, RayCee said:

You would think so but that figure is an estimate and it seems no official count is available for the first game.

Taking a broader view on the attendance, all the clubs that went had supporters who traveled to see their team. They all contributed to the 45k peak attendance. It then became a lottery as to how many watched a game depending when a game was played. The earliest match was at a disadvantage as the crowd built up during the day. Should the first up teams be penalised for that, while other sides benefited from supporters of those early bird teams? All the teams contributed to the success of the event.

Way more than 12k in the stadium at the start of the game, the crowd built up as the match went on as the Raiders and Wahs fans turned up, peak must have been reached at the start of that second game from what I saw in the stadium.

[langpark]

 

[Damien]

 

[Leyther_Matt]

3 hours ago, langpark said:

 

Surprised it was as low as that, looked decent in the ground. And the Hull crowd are the loudest of the lot when they’re in the mood. They’d be such a force in the game (with gates to match) if somebody can figure out how to stop them being such a basket case!

[DoubleD]

9 hours ago, langpark said:

 

Thought Sky said there were over 11k there?

[MZH]

29 minutes ago, DoubleD said:

Thought Sky said there were over 11k there?

They said before the match that there was going to be 11,000 in.

Bit disappointing but a few more games like that and the crowds will flood back.

[langpark]

So far in NRL Round 1, Vegas aside:

Rooster vs Broncos - 23,226
Tigers vs Knights - 13,160
Rabbitohs vs Dolphins - 6,738*

* for those that don't know, this match was relocated to Sydney only 72 hours prior, due to the cyclone approaching Brisbane, and I believe Rabbitohs then had less than 48hrs to sell tickets.  

Tigers vs Knights on the other hand, is quite disappointing.

 

[Just Browny]

6,295 at Cas

[dboy]

9 minutes ago, Just Browny said:

6,295 at Cas

Hmmm, didn't look like that on TV.

Virtually empty in the Princess St stand.

Ok Cas, we believe you.

[OMEGA]

8 hours ago, dboy said:

Hmmm, didn't look like that on TV.

Virtually empty in the Princess St stand.

Ok Cas, we believe you.

Even so, without checking that seems low for Cas

[Barley Mow]

2 hours ago, OMEGA said:

Even so, without checking that seems low for Cas

Cas fans must have been wary of buying tickets when there was no guarantee Salford were going to be able to put a team out until quite late on.

[Josef K]

11,438 at Saints down 2,150 on last year. The Saints fans i know who have stopped going because of the dross wellens has served up in his two and a bit years in charge, told me “they’re pleased they have stopped paying at the gate or buying season tickets”. 

[DoubleD]

14 minutes ago, Josef K said:

11,438 at Saints down 2,150 on last year. The Saints fans i know who have stopped going because of the dross wellens has served up in his two and a bit years in charge, told me “they’re pleased they have stopped paying at the gate or buying season tickets”. 

I think they’re called glory supporters

[sweaty craiq]

30 minutes ago, Josef K said:

11,438 at Saints down 2,150 on last year. The Saints fans i know who have stopped going because of the dross wellens has served up in his two and a bit years in charge, told me “they’re pleased they have stopped paying at the gate or buying season tickets”. 

Hope McManus doesn’t do the same then. Some RL fans take no ownership for the well being of the club they love

[Click]

2 hours ago, Josef K said:

11,438 at Saints down 2,150 on last year. The Saints fans i know who have stopped going because of the dross wellens has served up in his two and a bit years in charge, told me “they’re pleased they have stopped paying at the gate or buying season tickets”. 

Some fans really don't know how good they really have it.

[ricky]

2 hours ago, DoubleD said:

I think they’re called glory supporters

30 years ago this week, 1379 people coughed up to watch KR at home to Leigh. Does that mean that the current crowds at Craven Park include 10,000 glory supporters?

[DoubleD]

3 minutes ago, ricky said:

30 years ago this week, 1379 people coughed up to watch KR at home to Leigh. Does that mean that the current crowds at Craven Park include 10,000 glory supporters?

What were they coughing up? Sounds nasty