Re: Opening SL weekend sees attendances tumbling by 12.66% : Mon Mar 04, 2013 9:11 am  

robt90 wrote:

well that one individual (same word) club out performs pretty much every club in the championships this year. Obviously it'll take more than that though so tomorrow night i'll have a look through some more and post it on here. Of course i know before i even look how they'll compare to the post franchising era and i suspect even you do too

And Cas figures in 2007 massively outperformed those Keighley figures. Are we supposed to pretend that the structure in 2007 was fundamentally better than that in 2001 because one club, got one season of good attendances?

Didn’t Keighley get relegated, under a P+R system at the end of the 2001 season as well? Having gone into administration 2 times in the previous 5 years whilst chasing promotion. And weren’t Keighley getting sub 400 crowds back in the 80’s early 90’s

Re: Opening SL weekend sees attendances tumbling by 12.66% : Mon Mar 04, 2013 9:25 am  

RLBandit wrote:

But it shouldn't be about giving the game marks out of ten. It doesn't matter whether we grew by millions over the last decade - if only. The point is that a ten percent drop in one season ( and yes, I don't know for sure that will happen, but I'm more and more confident in that guess as rounds go by) is really alarming, no matter what position you start from. If you believe the start position was really good, then you should at least be concerned about undoing the good work. People are raising a genuine issue. Some people indeed will already have their pet preconceived idea why its an issue ( 8 teams, P&R, Nigel Wood, the price of fish ) and you can call that an agenda if you like, but what's the point of just trying to pretend there's no fall in attendance?

That is quite possibly be the most naive interpretation of a set of numbers I have ever seen.

Let me help you. We have an underlying trend of steady growth, we have done for over a decade. This is a very good thing, it is healthy and shows a sport which is growing.

In ONE of those years we saw a very big rise. The whole reason your new bromance has started this thread is retaliation (as stupid a concept as that is) to Nigel Wood using this abnormally large rise to get good PR for the game. Mr Eve didnt like that because it showed the game in a good light. It is very good that we saw this rise, it is somthing to celebrate, but there were reasons behind that. Reasons Mr Eve said at the time but was dismissed, because well what is the point of them? Something good happened why would someone who loved the game do everything they could to downplay that?

What has happened since is that in 2013, unlike 2012, we havent had two new stadiums opening. So we havent had the specifically high attendances we did when fans visited new stadiums, and they have fallen back somewhat. Bradford dont have their cheap tickets deal, they also dont have that sence of urgency which they did for obvious reasons last year. This has resulted in a slight fall back. We have fallen back, by less than we grew. Which is completely understandable, and still fits in with the long-term trend of growth in attendances.

Re: Opening SL weekend sees attendances tumbling by 12.66% : Mon Mar 04, 2013 10:33 am  

SmokeyTA wrote:

That is quite possibly be the most naive interpretation of a set of numbers I have ever seen.

Let me help you. We have an underlying trend of steady growth, we have done for over a decade. This is a very good thing, it is healthy and shows a sport which is growing.

In ONE of those years we saw a very big rise. The whole reason your new bromance has started this thread is retaliation (as stupid a concept as that is) to Nigel Wood using this abnormally large rise to get good PR for the game. Mr Eve didnt like that because it showed the game in a good light. It is very good that we saw this rise, it is somthing to celebrate, but there were reasons behind that. Reasons Mr Eve said at the time but was dismissed, because well what is the point of them? Something good happened why would someone who loved the game do everything they could to downplay that?

What has happened since is that in 2013, unlike 2012, we havent had two new stadiums opening. So we havent had the specifically high attendances we did when fans visited new stadiums, and they have fallen back somewhat. Bradford dont have their cheap tickets deal, they also dont have that sence of urgency which they did for obvious reasons last year. This has resulted in a slight fall back. We have fallen back, by less than we grew. Which is completely understandable, and still fits in with the long-term trend of growth in attendances.

At last. You accept that we've fallen back (your desperate bleating about the numbers was getting more ridiculous by the day). The reasons are a matter of opinion, and you're more than welcome to believe whatever gets you through the day. I look forward to your explanation of how well the Championship is doing.

And by the way, I think attendance will turn around and go up - I also think the future looks bright. This is because I'm confident that Koukash will turn Salford around, which in itself isn't going to change the world, but, both a) the required changes that he'll need, and b) the end result, will have the wider effect of waking people up to a different way, rather than the current path. Apparently, his arrival was "single-handedly" down to Nigel Wood. If that's true, well, he can chalk that one down in the positive column.

Re: Opening SL weekend sees attendances tumbling by 12.66% : Mon Mar 04, 2013 10:57 am  

RLBandit wrote:

At last. You accept that we've fallen back.

I have never, at any stage disputed that.

The reasons are a matter of opinion, and you're more than welcome to believe whatever gets you through the day.

This isn’t my opinion, this is what the evidence shows.

I look forward to your explanation of how well the Championship is doing.

Relative to what?

And by the way, I think attendance will turn around and go up - I also think the future looks bright. This is because I'm confident that Koukash will turn Salford around, which in itself isn't going to change the world, but, both a) the required changes that he'll need, and b) the end result, will have the wider effect of waking people up to a different way, rather than the current path. Apparently, his arrival was "single-handedly" down to Nigel Wood. If that's true, well, he can chalk that one down in the positive column.

Among the numerous other improvements the game has seen since he conducted the strategic review under Sir Rodney Walker in 2001.

Re: Opening SL weekend sees attendances tumbling by 12.66% : Mon Mar 04, 2013 10:57 am  

Football attendances in the lower leagues are dropping. RU is attended by mostly people who are less affected by the economy etc. and is less affected.

Re: Opening SL weekend sees attendances tumbling by 12.66% : Mon Mar 04, 2013 12:00 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

This isn’t my opinion, this is what the evidence shows.

In your opinion.

Re: Opening SL weekend sees attendances tumbling by 12.66% : Mon Mar 04, 2013 12:10 pm  

RLBandit wrote:

In your opinion.

In the opinion of anyone who is able to read both words and numbers. I accept there is a possibility this excludes you.

Don't worry Im sure Mr Eve will be here soon to put together a cogent sentence and you can cheer it from the sidelines.

Re: Opening SL weekend sees attendances tumbling by 12.66% : Mon Mar 04, 2013 12:59 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

In the opinion of anyone who is able to read both words and numbers. I accept there is a possibility this excludes you.

Don't worry Im sure Mr Eve will be here soon to put together a cogent sentence and you can cheer it from the sidelines.

An interpretation of "what the evidence shows" can only be an opinion. By definition. Get yourself a dictionary and thesaurus, clown.

Re: Opening SL weekend sees attendances tumbling by 12.66% : Mon Mar 04, 2013 1:26 pm  

To say there is a clear correlation between a new stadium and increased attendances is not an opinion. It is what the numbers show
To say there is a clear correlation between a cheap ticket deal and increased attendances is not an opinion. It is what the numbers show.
To say Salford had a new stadium and increased attendances is not an opinion. It is what the numbers and evidence shows.
To say St Helens had a new stadium and increase attendances is not an opinion. It is what the numbers and evidence shows.
To say Bradford had a cheap ticket deal and increased attendances is not an opinion. It is what the numbers and evidence shows.

When we have a clear correlation between two factors, there is a point at which causality is proven and when those factors are present in subsequent datasets and the correlation continues, it is down to the previously established causality, we don’t have to establish the causality again and again and again. It is established as fact.

For example: there is a clear correlation between objects being dropped from a height and hitting the floor. It has previously been established the cause of this is the force of gravity. If I were to take an object, and drop it from a height, and it were to hit the floor. I can put that down to gravity. I don’t need to prove Newtons Universal law of Gravitation and Einstein’s theory of general relativity again.

If we establish that there is a causal link between new stadiums and cheap ticket deals and increased attendances, and we subsequently see a correlation in a dataset between new stadiums and cheap ticket deals and an increase in attendances, we can rely on the previously established causal link. We don’t need to establish it all over again.

If you think that any interpretation of evidence is an expression of opinion, then I think you need much more help than a dictionary, thesaurus, or even a clown could give you. Maybe some sort of cognative behavioral therapist? Because i dont know how you are getting through the day.

Re: Opening SL weekend sees attendances tumbling by 12.66% : Mon Mar 04, 2013 2:26 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

To say there is a clear correlation between a new stadium and increased attendances is not an opinion. It is what the numbers show
To say there is a clear correlation between a cheap ticket deal and increased attendances is not an opinion. It is what the numbers show.
To say Salford had a new stadium and increased attendances is not an opinion. It is what the numbers and evidence shows.
To say St Helens had a new stadium and increase attendances is not an opinion. It is what the numbers and evidence shows.
To say Bradford had a cheap ticket deal and increased attendances is not an opinion. It is what the numbers and evidence shows.

When we have a clear correlation between two factors, there is a point at which causality is proven and when those factors are present in subsequent datasets and the correlation continues, it is down to the previously established causality, we don’t have to establish the causality again and again and again. It is established as fact.

For example: there is a clear correlation between objects being dropped from a height and hitting the floor. It has previously been established the cause of this is the force of gravity. If I were to take an object, and drop it from a height, and it were to hit the floor. I can put that down to gravity. I don’t need to prove Newtons Universal law of Gravitation and Einstein’s theory of general relativity again.

If we establish that there is a causal link between new stadiums and cheap ticket deals and increased attendances, and we subsequently see a correlation in a dataset between new stadiums and cheap ticket deals and an increase in attendances, we can rely on the previously established causal link. We don’t need to establish it all over again.

If you think that any interpretation of evidence is an expression of opinion, then I think you need much more help than a dictionary, thesaurus, or even a clown could give you. Maybe some sort of cognative behavioral therapist? Because i dont know how you are getting through the day.

Ah, philosophy. You know nobody has ever produced a convincing justification for the principle of induction, despite it seeming 'obvious'? But anyway, diversions aside, I'm afraid you need much stronger evidence than that to establish causation. I hope you're not in medical research.