"Tend"? You whinge on as if we had been introducing new clubs by the dozen for centuries, and there were statistical conclusions to be drawn.

"Why should?" - Better ask on what basis what happens in London would have any relevance to what happens in South Wales. Or for that matter the south of France.



I don't care what you "can't see happening any time soon". Whatever team is at the bottom of the table is likely to be getting the smaller crowds, it's life.

If you think 2857 is an exciting crowd for a brand new club when the novelty value is still there and if you think it's a viable crowd to run a SL club on then that's your view, but I judge all clubs by the same standard as expansion clubs are more likely to fold, not less, if things don't go to plan. It is clear that the higher crowds from the novelty value have dropped off due to the team losing every game.

And yes what happened in France isn't relevent as people actually want to watch Catalans and the club are actually good enough to win games in SL. As for London they actually started well, but noone wants to watch now they're Harlequins, but they certainly wouldn't have got a crowd this low in their first season. Either way the assumption that crowds in expansion areas go up over time is totally baseless and the limited information we have if anything suggests the opposite

depends how many are paying to get in at Brewery Field, Gateshead had a lot of freebies.

I think 8,007 at Warrington, 5,521 at Wakefield (against Wigan no less) and 4,165 at Salford should be a bit more of a concern than the attendance at Celtic.

All 3 of the above clubs have been around over 100 years, compared with the 3 years of Celtic, who started with no kind of history whatsoever.

[url=http://www.slstats.org/t44/Les%20Catalan%20Dragons/2006/Summary.htmlfirst year stats for the froggies[/url
6,542 average year 1.

In 2006 they never have a crowd below 4000 and have gone upwards from there.

Their lowest crowd was 4197 against Quins.

You can hardly blame folk for focussing on the area that the RFL have decided is the single most important area of assessment for clubs looking to renew their licence. At least 2, arguably 3, of the 10 criteria are directly related to attendance. Its naive to think in those circumstances discussion of attendance won't happen or indeed isn't valid.

It doesn't, of course, mean that the criticism is necessarily valid.

I think the point that the original poster was making was the fact that people were very quick on RLfans to jump at slating Salford's attendances... yet slow on the uptake of Celtics.

Salford haven't had much luck in the opening games to do anything to bump up the attendances.... of the 5 home games so far.... we played 2 of the 3 most poorly represented away followings with the visits of Celtic and Harlequins.... A decent crowd against Wigan.... A Good Friday game against a Warrington team who's following would have been much more should they have been winning (plus the weather was shocking)... and a game against Hull... when the Champions of Europe were playing round the corner at the same time... and Hull City were at home to Liverpool an hour or so earlier which I'm sure took a couple of hundred of their away following.

I'm not too worried about the attendances under the circumstances.

the acid test is the quins and Catalan game, could it be under 1000

Think you may need to check your facts...

Not really because the first one is easily high enough to run a SL club off, the second one probably is and the third one is borderline but not low enough that they're at risk of folding.

Celtic Crusaders v Harlequins Rugby League April 19th 2009.
Attendance 3,009. HTH

God damn the facts.

well without looking at the criteria (cant be d right now) i would imagine the rfl would have the sense to put things into context. first thing: attendances over 3 years which is fair enough but also the extra press coverage, the juniors, samuels dosh, the wales team, just the whole presence of rugby league in a new market. Its unfair that we have these advantages over the smaller heartland teams buts that life and i think for the health of the game overall these things need to be taken into account.
Its worth noting (not knowing how this works with other clubs) but the crusaders really do underpin the development of the code in wales. i mentioned the junior teams being put out. it was a pilot scheme last season and now its going full blown this season. These are the teams:
* Blackwood Bulldogs
* Bridgend Blue Bulls
* Cardiff Demons
* Dinefwr Sharks
* Neath Port Talbot Steelers
* Newport Titans
* Penallta Storm
* Pontyclun Panthers
* Rhyl Coasters
* Swansea Dragons
* Torfaen Tigers
* Tydfil Wildcats
* Valley Cougars
* West Wales Wild Boars
So in two years we have gone from no junior teams to 14 (although rhyl are doing there own thing) x2 or 3 (under 13s, under 15s and under 17s i think). All part of a pyramid of development with the crusaders at the apex with a ton of the coaching done by crusaders players and coaches. So thats what around 600 kids playing rugby league who were not beforehand. Seems like decent numbers to me.

And they are, its just that the RFL has decided that nothing, individually, is more important than attendance. The context the RFL has decided to put it in is that all that development work and new teams is worth, at most, 1 point and even then only when all those teams you list start to produce players for you and attendance is worth at least 2, maybe more.

So if anyone is pi$$ed off at constant talk about attendances then direct your ire at the body who decided that attendance was so important.

To repeat what I said in my original post, the above is not to say that any criticism contained within said 'discussion' is necessarily valid, imho.

To save you the hassle:

Capacity of 12,000 +
Premier competition standard ground
Average crowd of 10,000+
Operating at 40 per cent full
Turn over £4million +
Solvent
Contribution to competition
Junior development
No salary cap breaches
No club within 20 miles

"exciting"? Wait a minute. Where did you get "exciting" from? I don't tend to find a counted number of people "exciting"?


It's not a "novelty", though. Silly choice of word.


"If I think"? Where did I refer to what is a "viable crowd to run a SL club on", at any point? Much less whether the latest crowd of CC is it? I mean come on, what are you on? And if that crowd was give or take a handful the same as every crowd they ever got, or was their average, then it might be worth assessing, but you seem to be saying that the litmus test is what crowd they got for that single fixture. Which is with respect barking.




You "judge" them? Do they quake?
What is your salary for this task?


Mmm. A business is more likely to fold if things do NOT go to plan, than if things DO go to plan. I see. Do you also make money publishing these blinding revelations? You ought to.


It isn't.


Hang on again. It was me who corrected you on the point that it isn't relevant! Catalans may have some relevance in the sense of how they performed in their first season, but even you must surely be able to tell that there is a difference between the Perpignan area which is a hotbed of RL, and South Wales, which, er, isn't?


As it is irrelevant, stop banging on about it!


Whose assumption? Is this an assumption you invented, so that you could then say it is wrong? I repeat, what are you on?





"We"? This the royal "We"? Look, I'm afraid you're just rambling on in meaningless banalities and non sequiturs now, so I'll leave you to it.

Thanks for covering my laziness

I personally only see two points there that are crowd related and as with everyone else we are on an exciting stadium promise which will take care of point one.
But anyway i think you are mistaken. I think the criteria is designed so that plenty of clubs end up on the same level (grade c?) making a few points difference irrelevant so that the rfl can then bring to bear judgement. Its when its deciding between say 6 cubs for 4 licenses that our development work becomes the key. I dont think the rfl will throw it all away for the sake of a few thousand extra speccies.
Anyway as a season ticket holder im not decrying crowds, although i've enjoyed all the games so far in terms of atmosphere i want to see bigger and bigger crowds and i think we have the potential to do that. Its just as much a reaction to sad little muppets who first thought is to jump to sportinglife.com to check the attendances so they can slag off whoever they want to slag off this week.

If this swine flu spreads to the UK i'm going to hide out at Brewery Field, at least I will be safe from coming into close contact with other people.

It's always difficult promoting a team that has lost 10 Super League games on the bounce. The success will come definately you guy's down in South Wales are doing a fantastic job. This season was always going to be very difficult to say the least.
As for the crowd, Salford Quins, and Wakey hardly set the world alight. The Wakey v Wigan crowd only managing 5000 ish and that's with Wakey being in blistering good form. NOT good.

Give it a wee while yet, couple of wins under the belt and of course when all these welsh youngsters get their chance in the first team squad.

Crowds will obviously come with a few wins and just to add the Welsh teams in union hardly have massive attendances!

Totally agree. Their youth set up is coming on well, the wins will come. Le Cats success didn't happen overnight.

What's that got to do with the home turn out?Wasn't the huge Salford/Manchester conurbation with 3 million people on the doorstep a trump card played in the licence application?

You need to START with a strong franchise and build from there. Not start with a weak franchise and hope it builds. Samuel needs to pump some money in, get some marquee international quality players, sort the stadium and market the club. I cant believe how little people care about just how poor the 2 new franchises are. The Aussies would be screaming blue murder if the NRL behaved like this.

Club won`t be around much longer I`ve heard .