so i did, was looking at the initial post. They have and that will have had some effect, but it's not just keighley who are struggling. fans ARE disappearing and it's worrying, particularly with the new 'twinning' rules as the more fans stop watching*, the more championship chairmen are going to have to lower budgets and cut costs meaning more DR/loan/'year long signing but still train with the former club' players from superleague youth teams which in turn will drive more away from the game, and before you know it we're the valvoline cup by another name.

*i should point out that this isn't necessarily the reason for fans turning away, but fans turning away will cause this

I genuinely feel sorry for the fans of whichever club gets the boot in the next round of licencing when they have to come down and watch their crowds evaporate around them, i wouldn't wish it upon anyone

I initially took you on your word on that, but after a bit of digging here's the first half of keighleys 93/94 season

Barrow A 2341
London H 3260
Rochdale A 2001
Dewsbury H 3120
Hunslet A 1898
Doncaster A 2359
Whitehaven H 3157
Swinton H 3092
Nottingham(RT) H 2283
Carlilse A 1230
Halifax(RT) A 7347
Batley A 1789
Highfield H 2836
Workington H 3728

RT=Regal Trophy

We are talking pre Cougar-mania years, so before 91.

Does anybody have the stats for the 1950's



Dont be bloody stupid , the ' argument ' as such is the last few years

The bottom line is that the Championship attendance figures are poor , and getting poorer , now if we want to see a sport with 1 professional tier and essentially amatuer below that , then carry on devaluing the ' Vibrant , worth winning in its own right ' competition Mr Wood , and I agree with Gutterfax , the clubs themselves are more culpable than the RFL in this , however they need leadership and help , neither of which is forthcoming from Red Hall

no it wasnt you silly ar5e. The figure he started with was more than a decade old.

Having a game which has 1 professional tier and is essentially amateur below that is a marked improvement on what we had previously, which was a game with 1 semi-pro tier and essentially amateur below that.

It a good point Smokey, many people think that we have been a pro sport "forever" but the reality is quite different and it wasny until Wigan became a full time outfit in the 80's that other clubs started to follow.
On this basis, it would be difficult to argue that the game has moved on significantly and more interestingly, the games peak in popularity has nothing to do with its level of professionalism ?
Lessons to be learned maybe ?

And the reason for this ' Improvement ' is bugger all to do with the RFL or the clubs , and all to do with the introduction of pay to view satelite TV , because without that we would still have essentially a semi pro sport

Oh look, the old myth is rolled out again.

Yes, the improvements in attendances and sponsorship and facilities have nothing to do with the clubs or the people who run them, and the switch to summer rugby and pay tv had nothing to do with RFL.

We all just woke up one day in 1996 and it had all magically happened, which was a lovely surprise for all of us.

wanted something to fill their summer schedules , thats what they pay for

Since the change to summer rugby? Massively.
Any years.

Saints, Widnes, Warrington, Leeds, Hull KR, Les Catalans. With Hull FC and Wigan moving into multi-use facilities.

and the RFL are responsible for packaging a product they could sell, that pay tv wants to buy.

Wow, someones feeling a bit sensitive on the other side of the hill.
It was a perfectly valid point in relation to the sport going full time pro and quite frankly, had Wigan not gone down this route, we may not have "super league"

Valid but factually incorrect.

I can't help but fear we're going to disappear down into another Wigan parallel universe. But please, do tell us more about what you think happened.

So not the first club to go full time pro then, suckking in an elite squad of top players and then uncle Mo helping broker a deal with Sky.
(we wont mention the move from Central Park

)

What's the point of picking out one sound bite of good news from last year and trying to use it to prove this year is worse.
Different season, difefernt games, different economic situation.

There is no value in it apart from giving you some text to moan about.

If the same is the case after 5-6 rounds then maybe it's something to talk about.

Not in the 80's.

UPDATE...
[uSL Round 6 attendances - comparison to same fixtures last year[/u

Hull V Castleford in 2013 = 11,852
Hull V Castleford in 2012 = 11,607
Percentage increase in attendance = +2.11%

Leeds V Huddersfield in 2013 = 15,013
Leeds V Huddersfield in 2012 = 15,408
Percentage drop in attendance = -2.56%

Warrington V St Helens in 2013 = 13,381
Warrington V St Helens in 2012 = 15,000
Percentage drop in attendance = -10.79%

Widnes V Bradford in 2013 = 5,861
Widnes V Bradford in 2012 = 5,687
Percentage increase in attendance = +3.06%

Wigan V Catalan in 2013 = 12,149
Wigan V Catalan in 2012 = 14,464
Percentage drop in attendance = -16.01%

28 out of 39 SL fixtures in 2013 have now registered a fall in attendance compared to the same fixtures between the same teams last year.

That 2012 Warrington crowd looks suspicious !

Well done Widnes and Hull for bucking the trend

Nearly all the Saints and Salford home Fixtures are going to show a drop for opposite reasons.

Salford having to sell half their squad in the off season. Saints because last year had the novelty factor for some new fans, who where lets say fly by nighters.

In the end we can count numbers each and every year, but lets say there is a drop this year, does that make a difference. Next year it may go up again. Surely the overall improvement since the start of SL is what we should be concentrating on.

To take a financial point of view, the stock market fell between March 2008 and 2009, there have been ups and downs since then but over all the last 5 years the stock market has gone up.

SL may take a downward turn this year as things like the new stadia, are less novel and as other teams improve or get worse. But so long as the long term trend is stable or up, that's all that matters.

Round 6

2012 = 66,171
2013 = 58,256 (so far)

7,915 to beat 2012

With Wakefield and London home games to go.......

2013 Average so far......Wakey (8,852) and London (2,371) = 11,223

Hull FC's attendance no doubt artificially boosted by their [url=http://www.thisishullandeastriding.co.uk/Hull-FC-fans-Bring-friend-fiver/story-18286578-detail/story.html#axzz2N2RQBTmb[ubring a friend for a FIVER offer[/u[/url.

In truth irrelivant william, you dont have to look for excuses

The question of the appropriate time window over which to assess how things are going is a good one. Clearly comparing one week to the next is too short for useful info, but then I'm not sure of the useful value of comparing with the start of SL either ( its interesting, but not practically useful). I mean, sure, we can say its better or worse than year X ( take anything between 1895 and 2012) but really all that matters is "how are we doing now?, are we doing the right things to make sure the curve is in the right direction? Are we doing any wrong things that are holding back growth?" People call this pessismism, I don't know why, but my attitude to it is: if attendences seem, on reasonable evidence, to be drifting a bit lower, we should be on it in a flash to get it fixed, and if they're higher, we should be asking what we need to do to make them even higher - including of course identifying those positive factors which are working and seeing if they can be further enhanced.

In other words, the exact opposite attitude to that of: making excuses for falls, and resting-on-laurels when things rise. Its not pessimism, its wanting the game to be the best it can be.