2008 Crowd Watch - Final Totals in Post #3778

[mark123]

Don't call me an idiot, or fool, or whatever names you have for me roosters supporter.

I am sorry my view clashes with yours.

However, you may want to get out into eastern sydney (or even other parts) and start handing out tickets.

My club got 50,612 to a game this weekend.

If your club is to survive into the future and be capable of being a benifit to RL, then i suggest you work out ways to get your club getting as many people to attend and support them.

You had 100 years to do it, but you have failed. 12K. You are blind. The second least of Sydney teams, just in front of Manly. In a city that everyone knows currently has about 4 too many teams for the amount of people who care enough to pay to see sporting teams play!

Oh dear!!... Hello!!? Want to get back into the habit of helping out the falling perception of rugby league in your city!? Drop off the grapevine....cut the team!

ITS OBVIOUS NOOO OOONEE WILLL MIIIISSSS THEMMMM!!

 

[t-ba]

What falling perception?

Crowds are as good as they have been since the 1960's...The game is streets ahead of where it was attendance wise in the 1980's and 1990's...

It wasn't that long ago YOUR club was having trouble averaging 20k in a city of 1.8 million people. Pot, kettle, black.

 

[Karmawave]

What falling perception?

Crowds are as good as they have been since the 1960's...The game is streets ahead of where it was attendance wise in the 1980's and 1990's...

I think it's being greatly boosted from at least a couple of teams pulling crowd figures out of their ass and adding 4 or 5K to the " official attendance ".

The Knights have been for one. The Roosters crowd this weekend has to be highly questionable. Everyone ( radio/TV who were at the ground also said it was a small crowd ) bar defensive Roosters fans thought their crowd was nowhere near 12,000. I mean if one side ( the broadcast side ) was completely packed ( which it wasn't ) and the other 3 sides of the ground are practically empty - and the capacity of the ground is 44,000 - I just cant see the figure being 12,000 - and nor could radio and television broadcasters at the ground who commented on the announced attendance as being questionable.

It's not like the Roosters have been squeaky clean in recent years in regard to fudging crowd figures.

It's not just them though, I've been to Newcastle games this year, where there was no way the crowd was the official attendance listed.

In the end, crowd figures mean bugger all. The bottom line profits in the clubs will be the true indicator of where our game/clubs are at attendance wise, because an attendance figure that looks good in the paper cannot compensate for the true reality of the situation - the accountants balance sheet at the end of the day.

Clubs can kid themselves all they want, but it comes out in the end in the annual reports.

 

[t-ba]

Crowd Fudging is an ancient tradition. It's not something brand new at all.

Alot of these clubs that are apparently 'fudging' the figures also don't rely too heavily on attendances as an income stream. And for a lot of them, lying about the crowd figures would incur costs on them from Stadium, so they would need to be in on the act as well. It'd be pretty hard to pull off tbh.

 

[Karmawave]

The Newcastle Knights who have inflated their first couple of crowd figures rely completely on home attendance for their yearly profits. They rely on gate profits more than any other team. ( to be fair a few Knights fans don't believe that the crowd figures had to be wrong, but they live in a red and blue bubble )

In the end regardless of what attractive figure the club puts out for the newspapers, its only truly going to be seen in the final profit balance sheet. A club can kid themselves all they want that 19,000 went through the gate, but if their bank balance shows 14,000 paying fans - it doesnt mean much in the end.

 

[t-ba]

big claim. I'd like to see the proof.

 

[Babyface O'reilly]

It's not like the Roosters have been squeaky clean in recent years in regard to fudging crowd figures.



The SCG trust run the ground and announce the figure and if you're referring to that crowd figure of 8k that the Penrith club took photos of, well it's old news now that the pic was taken at midday.

 

[Brutus]

I went to the Chooks game yesterday and 12k was about right.

The side opposite the tv camera view had plenty of people, even the top deck was 75 percent full.

Nobody wants to sit on the side that faces the sun and the sun was out at the start of the game.

 

[Brutus]

The ABC (Craig Hamilton) are claiming there's only about 10k at the Dogs v Tigers' game.

Piss poor.

Should be 25k at that game.

 

[Brownie.Kougari]

The ABC (Craig Hamilton) are claiming there's only about 10k at the Dogs v Tigers' game.

Piss poor.

Should be 25k at that game.

disgraceful...

has a cyclone suddnely hit Sydney? That'd be the only excuse I'd take

 

[yakstorm]

Pre-Sales for the game were 14K, plus the Wests Tigers members (3K) and Bulldogs members (4K), there should be at least 20K there...

 

[Brutus]

disgraceful...

has a cyclone suddnely hit Sydney? That'd be the only excuse I'd take

Looking at the channel 9 coverage I'd say between 18 and 22k

 

[Brutus]

21,057 at the Dogs & Tigers.

Fair...sort of.

It's more than the Swans got I think.

 

[JW]

See, this is why talk about weekly 30-35K+ crowds at ANZ should be barred, lol. It just doesn't happen, except for unusually special circumstances.

From what i've seen on the box i'd say late teens, possibly higher. Anything over 20K, as I said before, is a decent crowd if we're going to be realistic. And it's a number that clubs should be aiming for in the short term.

EDIT - Just saw Brutus' post. IMO that's a fair turnout. Naturally we'd expect and hope for much more, but realistically that's not too bad.

 

[yakstorm]

21,057 at the Dogs & Tigers.

Fair...sort of.

It's more than the Swans got I think.

Up from 18,066 last year, an encouraging increase.

 

[kkingston]

21,057 at the Dogs & Tigers.

Fair...sort of.

It's more than the Swans got I think.

Swans got 24, 700

 

[wittyfan]

Swans' crowds are slipping.

 

[Brutus]

Up from 18,066 last year, an encouraging increase.

But down from the 33k in 2005.

 

[t-ba]

See, this is why talk about weekly 30-35K+ crowds at ANZ should be barred, lol. It just doesn't happen, except for unusually special circumstances.

From what i've seen on the box i'd say late teens, possibly higher. Anything over 20K, as I said before, is a decent crowd if we're going to be realistic. And it's a number that clubs should be aiming for in the short term.

EDIT - Just saw Brutus' post. IMO that's a fair turnout. Naturally we'd expect and hope for much more, but realistically that's not too bad.

imo, it's a floodgate situation. Once it happens, it's going to start occuring frequently. But we're just not there yet.

 

[Brutus]

Swans got 24, 700

The below report says 20,700, but you could be right.

http://sportal.com.au/afl-news-display/swans-overpower-port-45746