You tell 'em Smokey - yer big girl's blouse



Up the Fax!! Half time in Blackpool. Great atmosphere here at Bloomfield Rd. Lovely day out and whatever anyone says about crowds and fans - it's wonderful to see Fax and Leigh fans mingling together and generally engaging in jolly banter.

Indeed, up the Fax. The Whinging from a certain quarter should Leigh qualify for and apply and not get in again would be unbearable.

That and I have money on Fax

You have proof it happened? I thought not, now STFU.

Hey don't worry Graeme.

'it never happened'

Makes leighs victory a lot sweeter

They covered the spread so its all ok, there is no need to worry.

Because I watched both games, and the ground was substantially more full for the game with the attendance of 3,000 than it was for the one with the attendance of 1,500.

Apart from the stand underneath the cameras, which is where the vast majority of home supporters sit. The fact that you are trying to use Wrexham FC fans to back you up pretty much nullifies your argument. Obviously it is possible to estimate a crowd from TV images. However, to then continue to assert that the announced crowd is wrong with no basis other than that estimate is just stupidity.

So loyal that about 1000 of this figure could be bothered to turn out last weekend when we visited? I have never been to a ground with so few home fans in it since we last visited Rochdale back in 2006.

You have never visited the Stoop have you

Bigger gobes than you have failed to come up with proof so I'm not surprised.
Unless you have that proof then jog on.

There is also motive for not doing it since if they announce a higher official attendance HMRC will start getting interested as to why their tax take is lower than it should be.

Having done a bit of research, your assertion is indeed correct. Must have been my memory playing tricks.
The actual story, however, was much more unsavoury than any backhanded financial bail-out from the RFL.

[urlhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2005/mar/05/rugbyleague.superleaguex[/url

Yes, like any club which goes into administration they didnt pay back certain debts, which is kind of the reason for going into administration.

How many other RL clubs have made the calculated and, quite frankly, despicable decision to liquidate themselves and leave businesses £3million out of pocket?

Do they not do this in Australia as well? After all there is definite proof that the Melbourne Storm used to fudge the figures.

Even for you this is hypocritical.

First of all you make out that it is easier to tell the difference between bigger number than smaller numbers (debatable anyway) and then you try to make out like my margin of error which was in your words 1000 out in a crowd of 8500 (actually only 500 from my top estimate anyway) is the same as being 1000 out in a crowd of 3000. In reality being 1000 out in a crowd of 8500 is a 12% error when 1000 out in a crowd of 3000 is a 33% error.

The camera showed every single angle at different times. I actually presumed that the popular side was below the camera but then the camera showed what was on the other side. You would usually argue black was white but are you really suggesting that Sky don't show the whole crowd at different times?

True, but I have no idea what Australia's tax laws are but even if they're the same as here then Melbourne, with their rich owners, were either prepared to pay the extra tax or take the risk of it not being spotted.

accepted.

How do you not see the contradiction in this comment? I've seen hundreds of RL games and noted the size of the crowd in most of them, including Crusaders games. For all but 4 years since 1995, Widnes have played in front of crowds at home that were give or take 3,000 most of the time in a stadium of about 12,000. The difference between Saturday and those games is marked.



Like I said to SmokeyTA, it showed that side. Also, 90% of Crusaders fans currently are probably Wrexham FC fans and their most popular board is on a Wrexham FC board.

Salford are not particularly a popular club that post small crowds however I can't think of a single example where somebody has questioned their crowd figures no matter how small they have been announced. I would even suggest that people rarely question the crowd figures given of Harlequins. I made an estimate based on prior knowledge and so it happens many others made a very similar estimate on twitter and from numerous different sources to. You can convince yourself it's some anti-Crusaders conspiracy but in reality people don't question crowds nearly as often as you think they do.

Quote ="Him"True, but I have no idea what Australia's tax laws are but even if they're the same as here then Melbourne, with their rich owners, were either prepared to pay the extra tax or take the risk of it not being spotted.'" The Melbourne CEO not only accepted that crowd figures were inflated but suggested that many other clubs do the same. This was his quote, 'It was brought to my attention that most sporting clubs do that in terms of adjusting their numbers' Read more: www.theage.com.au/rugby-league/l ... zz1SV20o83 I can't see that their tax laws would be that much laxer than ours.

Quote ="Him"True, but I have no idea what Australia's tax laws are but even if they're the same as here then Melbourne, with their rich owners, were either prepared to pay the extra tax or take the risk of it not being spotted.'" The Melbourne CEO not only accepted that crowd figures were inflated but suggested that many other clubs do the same. This was his quote, 'It was brought to my attention that most sporting clubs do that in terms of adjusting their numbers' Read more: www.theage.com.au/rugby-league/l ... zz1SV20o83 I can't see that their tax laws would be that much laxer than ours.

Quote ="Maximus Decimus"The Melbourne CEO not only accepted that crowd figures were inflated but suggested that many other clubs do the same. This was his quote, 'It was brought to my attention that most sporting clubs do that in terms of adjusting their numbers' Read more: www.theage.com.au/rugby-league/l ... zz1SV20o83 I can't see that their tax laws would be that much laxer than ours.'" Well he could be correct, or he could be trying to make their recent attendances look better and trying to suggest everyone does it to make himself look better. He offers no evidence for his assertion and the NRL obviously don't agree with him.

Quote ="Maximus Decimus"The Melbourne CEO not only accepted that crowd figures were inflated but suggested that many other clubs do the same. This was his quote, 'It was brought to my attention that most sporting clubs do that in terms of adjusting their numbers' Read more: www.theage.com.au/rugby-league/l ... zz1SV20o83 I can't see that their tax laws would be that much laxer than ours.'" Well he could be correct, or he could be trying to make their recent attendances look better and trying to suggest everyone does it to make himself look better. He offers no evidence for his assertion and the NRL obviously don't agree with him.

But it does add weight to the prospect that teams inflate crowd figures. We also know that some teams have in the past included season tickets whether they turned up or not. Then you have examples such as the Halifax crowd against Batley when they were able to include free tickets given out in their final figure despite almost all fans accepting that the crowd figure was nowhere near that.

Just because a figure is announced doesn't mean that that is how many are actually at the game watching it.

I understand that. But this doesn't mean you have some sort of divine ability to determine the attendance at any event simply from looking at a TV pitcture. Like I said, the Cup game that had an attendance of 1,500 looked a significantly lower crowd on TV than yesterday's game. There's no contradiction in that, because it's not based on me attempting to estimate attendances and then passing them off as fact. There's absolutely no reason to suspect that they are lying about either figure.

No they aren't, and no it's not. Do some research.

I've already stated that no other clubs have their crowds scrutinised in the way Crusaders do. If anything, what you have just said backs up my previous posts entirely.

The crowd at Odslum was given at just over 14,000 but i would show my in Woolies window if they were more than 8,000 there

Your margin of error was 1000. You estimated between 7 and 8k. It was wrong even giving yourself that margin of error. Whilst you were only 500 away from your top estimate you were 1500 from your lower estimate. Now you seem to be accepting that 500 was an acceptable margin from your estimate of between 7 and 8k which means that your lower estimate wasnt 7k but 6.5k and you in fact needed a margin of error of 2k, or as would be easier and simply to explain, you guessed at the attendance, gave a fairly wide range and still got it wrong because you dont really know and cant really estimate that well the attendance from tv pictures.


No, im arguing its a pretty special gift for you to see the differing angles, remember them, and put them together and come up with a good estimate on an attendance, a gift you have proved today you dont have.