I'd rather you stuck to just the avg rd stats, far too many variables to compare game for game. NRL has a really good crowd stats website going back decades, wish we had something similar.
Good. That suits our 'agenda'. Or has it developed into a 'plot' yet. I like 'agenda' better, its suitably vague.
I blame the Highways Agency and their M62 plot keeping thousands upon thousands of Rhinos fans away from St Helens this evening.
SL attendances latest... Comparison of same fixtures between same teams...
2013 - Total SL attendances = 253,634 from 29 fixtures (Avg: 8,746) 2012 - Total SL attendances = 282,537 from 29 fixtures (Avg: 9,743) % drop in attendances = -10.23%
So even with motorway disruption it still got comfortably over the average of the last 17 fixtures.........but lets ignore that.......the agenda is 'RL IS DOOOOOOOMED'.......'8 TEAM PLAYOFFS ARE KILLING THE SPORT'!!!!!
I bet it was much better in the old days before Super League was invented...........1993 = 9,208.............or perhaps 1983 = 5,981...............oh dear
It still seems to me that whilst neither method is perfect, a comparison of viewing figures makes more sense round-by-round than it does pair-by-pair
No it doesn't make more sense round to round for TV viewing figures......in fact the complete opposite. A game involving the same 2 teams is miles better to compare than 2 completely different teams just because it was played on the same weekend (would you expect Wigan/Wire to attract the same as London/2nd season Widnes?)
It's a good comparison for actual attendance (providing no new stadium or newly promoted or cheap season tickets)......for TV figures it's quite clearly rubbish.
The only reason you say round-for-round is better is because I've shown that game-for-game is better.......but you don't want that because positivity is bad isn't it ................................................................................................................................
And for William Eve....... His stats could POSSIBLY be taken seriously if he could answer some questions, such as these ones he deliberately avoided before, simply and only because he has NO answer for them (which makes anything he writes/lists laughable and worthless)........
''And just for arguments sake lets allow you to keep your incorrect figures of 2013/2011 comparison TOTALS..... 220,648..... 232,744 (-12,096)..........I've already proven that Bradford at home are responsible for 14,217 less. So perhaps the thread should be renamed 'Bradford figures falling'.......but I've forgot, that's not the chosen agenda now is it.......so why not highlight, discuss and address that more accurate stat????''
''No, the whole reasoning behind this thread is that you think (and want others to believe too) that the regular season has become 'meaningless'.......so again quite ironic that your explaination of why the Hull/Wire crowd was so big was because several thousand extra Wire fans turned out to watch their team win the LLS.........you know, the prize you get for finishing 1st in the 'meaningless' weekly rounds. explain that dead-end you've just driven yourself into????''
Until he's able to come up with a good answer to those questions (which he won't/can't/is unable to otherwise he would've already done so) then he is nothing more than a negative troll peddling incorrect figures trying to push home a personal agenda hoping others will bow down and say ''William you're a genius'' to satisfy some personal inadequacy he clearly has in his life. Until then only the fellow 'glass half empty inadequate folk' will drink the kool-aid with him.
It still seems to me that whilst neither method is perfect, a comparison of viewing figures makes more sense round-by-round than it does pair-by-pair
No it doesn't make more sense round to round for TV viewing figures......in fact the complete opposite. A game involving the same 2 teams is miles better to compare than 2 completely different teams just because it was played on the same weekend (would you expect Wigan/Wire to attract the same as London/2nd season Widnes?)
It's a good comparison for actual attendance (providing no new stadium or newly promoted or cheap season tickets)......for TV figures it's quite clearly rubbish.
The only reason you say round-for-round is better is because I've shown that game-for-game is better <snip>
No, I woudn't expect Wigan/Wire to attract same number of viewers as London/Widnes, which is EXACTLY WHY I was as surprised as anyone that, for the same round, same day, same time, Widnes/Wakefield got a huge number more viewers than Leeds/Hull a year later. The "agenda" conclusion - the one you are so keen to assume we all leap to - would be "catastrophe". However, I didn't make that conclusion at all. I suggested that it points to the idea that viewing figures are perhaps not so correlated to the actual teams on show. This seems to make some sense to me, as the vast majority of viewers are neutrals for any given game - i.e. they turn the telly on to "watch the RL game", not the team they support. I don't buy this explanation of massive increase in viewing to see the iPitch. There's probably some explanation but I don't think that's it. It may be nothing more than a correlation with what happens to be on the other sports channels, I don't know, but I'm betting that external random (such as that) or non-random ( such as importance of game re. League or cup) factors are more relevant to viewing figures than the specifc teams on the pitch.
I *think* ( and that's all I have ) that you're wrong about live attendaces - I'd confidentally expect these to be MORE correlated with opponent, than viewing figures are. I certainly think your "miles more" assertion is totally wrong. For instance, the broadcast time is really important - even without studying the stats I can say that confidently because its true for every other programme.
In fact, there's no need to debate it - one of us is right ( and genuinely I DO NOT CARE which) and this could be worked out by a correlation analysis of previous figures. I'll try to do this and tell you the answer regardless of who it shows to be 'right'.
And for William Eve....... [b] [i]''And just for arguments sake lets allow you to keep your incorrect figures of 2013/2011 comparison TOTALS..... 220,648..... 232,744 (-12,096)..........I've already proven that Bradford at home are responsible for 14,217 less. So perhaps the thread should be renamed 'Bradford figures falling'.......but I've forgot, that's not the chosen agenda now is it.......so why not highlight, discuss and address that more accurate stat????''
The attendance figures I've provided in order to indulge SmokeyTA and his epic 2011 straw man fail are not incorrect. The attendance for the Hull V Warrington fixture was established at 16,121 and the overall SL attendances are down by -5.20% in 2013 compared to 2011. St Helens at home now account for 12,952 in extra attendances compared to 2011 so that almost cancels out Bradford's home attendances - but your agenda chooses to ignore those. St Helens had to play all their home fixtures at Widnes in 2011. Therefore, even if you wish to discount Bradford's home attendance figures in 2013 in order to oil the wheels of your desperate agenda, the overall attendance figures in 2013 are still down on 2011.
This thread does not need to be renamed because it was originally established in order to compare 2013 SL attendances with those in 2012 until it was hijacked and turned into a failed straw man comparison with 2011.
Which are the 6 matches that have seen a rise in attendance this year compared to last please ?
It's 7 out of 29 SL fixtures which have shown an increase in 2013 over 2012, not 6... my apologies. Most of them were way back in Round 1. I listed them all earlier in the thread HERE.
Tigerade wrote:
Which are the 6 matches that have seen a rise in attendance this year compared to last please ?
It's 7 out of 29 SL fixtures which have shown an increase in 2013 over 2012, not 6... my apologies. Most of them were way back in Round 1. I listed them all earlier in the thread HERE.
Firstly it isnt a strawman (we both know that what a straw man is, so i can only assume you are deliberately using it in the wrong context in an attempt to be funny)
secondly, attendances at SL grounds, on the whole, have been higher in 2013 than in 2011. This is the 2nd best attended rounds 2,3,4 in the history of the game. It is the 3rd best attended rounds 1-4 in the history of the game purely because in 2011 round 1 was the magic weekend. Other than that crowds have been better in 2013 than 2011.
And we can repeat again, (so you can add another bite to your hilarious, wonderful, intelligent trolling by repeating incorrect figures) that your figures do not include all the games played in 2011 or 2013 because this would show figures were up.