: Tue Mar 24, 2009 8:30 pm  

Wigan Bull wrote:

If you ask me, it's about time other clubs started swelling our gates as we have done for other SL clubs for years.

It seems to have been consigned to the memory hole that just a few years ago we were the opposition for most other SL clubs' rrecord attendances in the summer era. We know people will go given the right circumstances.

: Tue Mar 24, 2009 9:49 pm  

Let's look at the same fixtures for the teams we've played so far this year, see what we got last year and see if there up or down. That's a true indication of whether crowds are changing

I'd be interested to see the results

: Tue Mar 24, 2009 10:11 pm  

Code: Select all    2009       2008 KR 12,141 -->  9,741 & 10,353 HG 10,186 --> 10,124 FC 11,327 -->  9,511 & 9,181

Code: Select all    2009       2008 KR 12,141 -->  9,741 & 10,353 HG 10,186 --> 10,124 FC 11,327 -->  9,511 & 9,181

: Tue Mar 24, 2009 10:16 pm  

Watch this thread go dead quiet now...

[Durham Giant]

: Tue Mar 24, 2009 10:25 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote
I sometimes despair at people's knee-jerk urge to kick out at any positive, or reach for the bucket of icy water.

The fact is that, for once, we have had weather for our opening few games that has been less than apocalyptic, and this has made a difference. And given our start to the season, our fans have done a decent job of turning out. Of course if we'd been 5/5 the gates would have been even more. You don't need to be a rocket scientist for that one.

The fact that we have played Hull and Hull KR is irrelevant, because they always do bring a decent amount of support, and only did this year what they would do any year. In fact, against Hull, if anything it was a slightly more attractive fixture than at other times due to them being league leaders, so a few extra could have been anticipated on both home and away fans, as long as the weather was kind, which it was.

Huddersfield brought very, very few, as sadly seems the norm, but again, they brought very few last year so I don't see the relevance, but if it is relevant that the Hull clubs brought a lot, why isn't it equally relevant that Huddersfield didn't?

It matters because you are speaking BULLSH!T. you can talk down Huddersfield as much as you want. But you are lying either that or you had left before the end of the game and did not see over 1000 Giants fans applauding our team at the end after getting our first win at Bradford in 40 years. It was the biggest following we had taken to Bradford in years and was our biggest away support of the season.

But dont worry i am sure if you keep putting down your rivals you can make yourself feel better particularly as you are a team on the way down whilst we are a team on the way up.

: Tue Mar 24, 2009 10:25 pm  

Adeybull wrote:

Watch this thread go dead quiet now...

Good that they're up from last year.
However, there are other circumstances to consider
1. Weather
2. Relative success of the opponents

A useful comparison would be % of each set of supporters for those fixtures

The Hull game especially would be heavily skewed
I'd guesstimate a 70-30 split this year, 2008 probably nearer 90-10.

: Tue Mar 24, 2009 10:30 pm  

: Tue Mar 24, 2009 10:43 pm  

We also need to take into account, inter alia...

1. The state of the traffic
2. The state of the nation
3. Whether City were at home
4. Whether City were playing crap or not
5. The average number of speccies with a lurgy
6. The price of beer
7. The price of coal
8. What was on TV at the time
9. What was in the oven at the time
10.The average strength of hangovers being suffered
11.The number of speccies whose kids were playing sports that day
12.The number of speccies whose kids had nicked the car that day
.
.
.

3121.How many speccies could not go cos they did not have any clean underwear
3122. How many speccies could not go cos they had no underwear
3123. How many speccies were otherwise engaged removing someone else's underwear
3124. How many speccies were otherwise engaged in wearing someone else's underwear
.
.
.

Well come on now!

: Tue Mar 24, 2009 11:26 pm  

Adeybull wrote:

We also need to take into account, inter alia...

1. The state of the traffic
2. The state of the nation
3. Whether City were at home
4. Whether City were playing crap or not
5. The average number of speccies with a lurgy
6. The price of beer
7. The price of coal
8. What was on TV at the time
9. What was in the oven at the time
10.The average strength of hangovers being suffered
11.The number of speccies whose kids were playing sports that day
12.The number of speccies whose kids had nicked the car that day
.
.
.

3121.How many speccies could not go cos they did not have any clean underwear
3122. How many speccies could not go cos they had no underwear
3123. How many speccies were otherwise engaged removing someone else's underwear
3124. How many speccies were otherwise engaged in wearing someone else's underwear
.
.
.

Well come on now!

I am merely trying to point out that a higher %age of away fans have swelled our gates this year v's last

: Wed Mar 25, 2009 12:45 am  

Wigan Bull wrote:

I am merely trying to point out that a higher %age of away fans have swelled our gates this year v's last

And the weather...as you said?

Look, your argument is very probably valid, and yes the commendable increase in FC and HKR fans was clear for all to ses. But my point is do we really need to spend so much time trying to find and emphasise the negatives in everything? Hell, its even afflicted a normally positive guy like you now! This is surely the corrosive effect of the Negative Tendency?

I'm just glad that its extra funds in the club's coffers.