The Roosters' bandwagon

[OVP]

:lol:

Can't match up with figures and stats, so you have to drag this f**king pathetic crowd sh*t into another thread?

Keep it where it belongs. This thread is about the poor level of support shown for the Roosters.

32k plays 12k, that's THIS weekend just gone.

Didnt your disgusting fans even draw a worse crowd against the Storm last year than 10k ? I know it was someone ... possibly Nth Qld.

 

[m0j0]

Didnt your disgusting fans even draw a worse crowd against the Storm last year than 10k ? I know it was someone ... possibly Nth Qld.

Which one of the following Bulldogs home games are you referring to:
a) Bulldogs vs Souths, Round 13 2005 - Crowd: 8911
b) Bulldogs vs Canberra, Round 15 2005 - Crowd: 8496
c) Bulldogs vs Melbourne, Round 17 2005 - Crowd: 7414

or are you referring to the year before:
d) Bulldogs vs Melbourne, Round 18 2004 - Crowd: 7252

or maybe even you mean 2003:
e) Bulldogs vs Cowboys, Round 20 2003 - Crowd: 7091
f) Bulldogs vs Melbourne, Round 22 2003 - Crowd: 9819

 

[m0j0]

In fact, of all of the Storm's away games last year, only one game drew a worse crowd than the Dogs game, and that was Souths. In 2004, they were the third worst after the Tigers and Souths.

 

[Timmah]

Roosters Average Home Crowds, 1995-2006
1995 - 9367
1996 - 17060
1997 - 9430
1998 - 10809
1999 - 12842
2000 - 12177
2001 - 12535
2002 - 11449
2003 - 16100
2004 - 18514
2005 - 16039
2006* - 10841
12 season average - 13096

Bulldogs Average Home Crowds, 1995-2006
1995 - 10593
1996 - 7544
1997 - 8815
1998 - 8363
1999 - 16298
2000 - 12886
2001 - 13327
2002 - 10849
2003 - 21117
2004 - 19693
2005 - 18038
2006* - 25044
12 season average - 14380.

A clear 1,300 higher average in the last 11 years. Ironically, away crowds for the Roosters have outsripped home crowds in every year since 1997, with the exception of 2004.

Oh, can I bring ladder positions in 2006 into this too?

Are you sure?

 

[m0j0]

FFS dodge. What's your point? If it makes you feel better about yourself, then by all means bring the ladder positions in 2006 into it. I don't care if you bring in opposition crowd casualty rates as well - I know you guys are killing us in that department.

 

[OVP]

Which one of the following Bulldogs home games are you referring to:
a) Bulldogs vs Souths, Round 13 2005 - Crowd: 8911
b) Bulldogs vs Canberra, Round 15 2005 - Crowd: 8496
c) Bulldogs vs Melbourne, Round 17 2005 - Crowd: 7414

or are you referring to the year before:
d) Bulldogs vs Melbourne, Round 18 2004 - Crowd: 7252

or maybe even you mean 2003:
e) Bulldogs vs Cowboys, Round 20 2003 - Crowd: 7091
f) Bulldogs vs Melbourne, Round 22 2003 - Crowd: 9819

hahaha thats GOLD, Mojo !! LMAO

You just got OWNED HARD, Dodge ... but you're too frigging stupid to get it so you quote averages. Pathetic ... like the vermin scum from hell that equates to being a Filthy Dogs fan these days.

Your club is filth Dodge, and you know it, and it hurts doesnt it ?

 

[m0j0]

It gets better. His figures include 2 double headers in 2003 and 1 in 2004 which he has quite happily claimed all for the Dogs. So, we'll split them all down the middle, and then we come up with:
2003 - 18048
2004 - 16252

Not quite the 21117 and 19693 that he claimed. And we're getting accused of twisting figures...:roll:

 

[Danish]

Bulldogs drew 80,000+ to their Grand Final against the Roosters, and won 16-13.

The Roosters made 4 GRAND FINALS in the five year period between 2000 and 2004, yet managed only to win once, and haven't managed to garner the support akin to that of Brisbane or North Queensland. Don't even try to tell me it's because of the stadium.

By the way, HMS's stats don't support your claims anymore... ;-)

Couldnt be because Nth QLD and Brissy are 1 team towns could it??

No of course not :roll:

Also.......

Easts crowds > Dogs crowds in 2004.

Easts average: 17671

Dogs average: 15876

That is of course unless you want to take the entire 40000 for the double header into account........ but thats just grasping at straws

 

[J.D]

Well Dodge considering 2006 season hasn't finished, it's not exactly fair to include those numbers as "Season Home Crowds" is it?

No, so in actual effect over the past 11 years the real FULL season home crowd average looks more like this:

Roosters: 13,302
Bulldogs: 13,411
There's a difference between 109, and the 1300 you claimed.


But, to be fair to the roosters fans I'll include mojo's modifycations, and it actually looks like this:
Roosters: 13,302
Bulldogs: 12,819

Correct me if I'm wrong, but that seems to me the roosters are in front by 483 :shock:

Either way, the number's are pretty even Dodge!

 

[Timmah]

Yet again, you can twist stats any way you want - but how you show them isn't how the record books do so. So have fun with your personally modified stats. They're great fun. In the meantime, I'll read the record books and LMAO at you.

:lol: @ all of you for thinking the Roosters are better supported than the 'Dogs...

 

[Renowned League Expert]

Would it be premature to publish a death announcement for the demise of the Roosters' bandwagon?

I know the Storm aren't a big drawing team and it was a hot, humid day (Really? Forgive my scepticism) but are there any other excuses for drawing only 10,841?

Huh? Roosters have averaged just on 11,000 for the last 50 years, since records were kept. Some years more, some years less. But always an average of about 11,000, which is slightly higher than the overall average for all teams.

 

[Timmah]

Huh? Roosters have averaged just on 11,000 for the last 50 years, since records were kept. Some years more, some years less. But always an average of about 11,000, which is slightly higher than the overall average for all teams.

:lol:

Just on 11,000 - 10,417 is almost 600 short of that figure ;-)

Still twisting...

 

[J.D]

Does this record book have the season home crowd average for 2006? If it does I'd sure like to have a look at it, next week's lotto numbers might be there too!
Nothing was "twisted" mate. I simply took out the 2006 numbers which shouldn't have been there in the first place (but I have a sneaking suspicion you knew what you were doing when you added them). That's called being fair and honest. A season is not made in two games!

And as for the double header games, it's a fair call. You can't go claiming ownership over all those fans, unless you honestly believe there were two seperate teams' fans there to watch the dogs? I think your the one twisting the stats trying to do so.

Anyway even without that change, as I said, there isn't much in 109 people. It's a pretty damned even result.

 

[Timmah]

Again, what do the record books say?

Nothing else matters, my figures are what gets printed and recorded.

 

[MEATWAD]

This thread is pure, logical, gold! Dodge, the record books show the Bulldogs and Roosters crowd are for all practical purposes the same numbers! So when you "my (dodges') figures" you simply must be referring to some strange parallel universe where your fantasies are given measure over actually measured reality? You are totally pwned. Everything you say about the Roosters supposed pathetic crowds are equally true of the Bulldogs crowds because they are numerically very similar. Except one thing; the Roosters home crowds are not being considered by either the NRL or police for special attention.

 

[Timmah]

I obtained the home crowd averages from official NRL Statistics. How am I owned if they are the records published. Numerically similar? Over the past 12 years there is an average 1,300 more 'Dogs fans. You can whinge Double Headers and whatever all you want. The figures are just that.

Either way, the Roosters bandwagon is dead ;-)

 

[m0j0]

I'm having difficulty believing one person can be so anal about another teams crowd figures. What's with the obsession dodge? Do you feel you (or the Dogs for that matter) have some point to prove? I don't see you running around comparing the figures with Penrith, or Manly, or any other team for that matter. Have you misplaced your security blanket by any chance?

 

[MEATWAD]

Dodge +/-10% is practically statistical variation, especially for the BIG claims you made about the Roosters crowds; one would expect an order of magnitude difference! Yeah so the Bulldogs have a slight advantage with the crowds (less if you take into account double header figures which boost (i.e. double) each 'home' teams crowd for that round), but it's nothing to boast about. If the Roosters crowds are 'pathetic' then so are the Dogs. :roll:

Of course the Dogs bandwagon is properly referred to as a paddywagon.

 

[Timmah]

Yeah so the Bulldogs have a slight advantage with the crowds (less if you take into account double header figures which boost (i.e. double) each 'home' teams crowd for that round), but it's nothing to boast about.

:lol:

Double header crowds effectively double the crowd :lol:

Yes they increase the figure buddy, but they hardly "double the crowd" You raved on about order of magnitude in the first line and contradicted yourself bluntly seconds later.

As for the final line of your post, good to see you can stick to the topic at hand without going below the belt ;-) well done.

As for the crowd figures, I don't really care all that much - I just think it's fun to rile you Rorter fans up. It's what we do ;-)

 

[MEATWAD]

Doubling is nothing like an "order of magnitude" dodge. Just shows how much you know about what you're argueing, i.e. nothing. Can you explain what an "order of magnitude" is?

Then the final cop out of the well and truly beaten internet nuffy; 'oh i don't care if i'm right or wrong i love to troll'. FYI dodger the rodger, I am not "rile(d) up", mildly amused is closer.