Jump to content

Attendances; why do you care?


Recommended Posts

Let's be clear, this is about crowdwanking and trying to use the size of a club's support to 'get one over' opposition fans, as well as the seeming obsession some folk on here have over the issue. At times it seems like a wind up, but other times it seems like it's quite serious indeed.

I'm all for the signing of 'what a shitty home support' at games, but on here folk go mental over attendances. Also folk in the media seem to be obsessed about it, especially the fannies on Sportsound, and especially Willie Miller who thinks league membership should be decided on crowd size alone.

So why do you (and you know who you are) care so much about crowd sizes? Why do you give a shit what Hamilton get? Why do you care that one season your club had a couple hundred more on the average attendance than another club? Why do you do research to try and prove that historically your club had more fans going to games than another club?

Etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 89
  • Created
  • Last Reply
2 minutes ago, DA Baracus said:

Let's be clear, this is about crowdwanking and trying to use the size of a club's support to 'get one over' opposition fans, as well as the seeming obsession some folk on here have over the issue. At times it seems like a wind up, but other times it seems like it's quite serious indeed.

I'm all for the signing of 'what a shitty home support' at games, but on here folk go mental over attendances. Also folk in the media seem to be obsessed about it, especially the fannies on Sportsound, and especially Willie Miller who thinks league membership should be decided on crowd size alone.

So why do you (and you know who you are) care so much about crowd sizes? Why do you give a shit what Hamilton get? Why do you care that one season your club had a couple hundred more on the average attendance than another club? Why do you do research to try and prove that historically your club had more fans going to games than another club?

Etc.

I totally agree.

In an era when winning things is usually limited to a select few clubs it's become the next best thing for clubs in the 'who's club is bigger' argument. 

It is worrying how seriously some take it though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, DA Baracus said:

Let's be clear, this is about crowdwanking and trying to use the size of a club's support to 'get one over' opposition fans, as well as the seeming obsession some folk on here have over the issue. At times it seems like a wind up, but other times it seems like it's quite serious indeed.

I'm all for the signing of 'what a shitty home support' at games, but on here folk go mental over attendances. Also folk in the media seem to be obsessed about it, especially the fannies on Sportsound, and especially Willie Miller who thinks league membership should be decided on crowd size alone.

So why do you (and you know who you are) care so much about crowd sizes? Why do you give a shit what Hamilton get? Why do you care that one season your club had a couple hundred more on the average attendance than another club? Why do you do research to try and prove that historically your club had more fans going to games than another club?

Etc.

Get back to your diddy club in the diddy league forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Decent crowd number can actually show clubs in a bad light.

Falkirk are the best example we have in this country.  4000 odd there every home game, crowds clubs like ICT, County, Hamilton, Livi etc can only dream of.  Yet they're always the bridesmaid.  Stuck in the 2nd tier whilst clubs with far smaller fan bases wave to them on the way past.  Clearly the club isn't being run as well as it could be.  With poor management and player recruitment being miles off season after season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Crowds are a fair indicator of income and consequently, commercial potential. 

If clubs with small supports overcome this and play at a high level it presents the question, where is the money coming from to maintain this? It can't all be attributable to "good management".

Clubs and supporters  with bigger crowds being run legitimately get annoyed with this conundrum. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can see the logic of thinking that it'll be best for Scottish football for the city clubs to all be doing well and at the top the table, as noted they have the best chance of succeeding in Europe and of producing players for the Scottish national team etc.  However, I think that logic is overplayed, especially by the likes of Willie Miller.

One reason for the constant crowd wanking and snootiness about the likes of Hamilton is that a lot of pundits have a view that a misty-eyed view of Scottish football and a club with a plastic pitch and a few thousand fans don't fit into that.  You look at the way other leagues react to smaller clubs making a successful run in the top league and it's completely different, it's celebrated (Bournemouth in England, Hoffenheim in Germany, Chievo in Italy for example - not exact paralllels of course).

Also, a lot of people seem to think that having clubs with small supports in the top flight somehow denigrates Scottish football, makes us a "laughing stock" and means there's no interest in our league.  The unspoken thing here is that these people are talking about English fans and media and I can say without fear of contradiction that no-one in the English game gives a f**k about whether Hamilton Accies have 100 fans or 100,000.  It's an inferiority complex talking.

Fans crowdwank because they think it makes their club look bigger than others, that's pretty obvious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

professional sport MUST have a paying audience or it can't continue as such, a general indicator if things are going up or down is the same way any business tracks itself . also the crowd ( and away fans for that matter) are part of the experience of a football match as a spectator.

as for the pissing contest  that's just pointless

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Sergeant Wilson said:

If clubs with small supports overcome this and play at a high level it presents the question, where is the money coming from to maintain this?

In the case of Hamilton and Livingston, its laundered drug money

Spoiler

Er, only kidding guys - dinnae send big malky roond tae kneecap me, eh no?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, accies1874 said:

Away games with fewer than 100 folk are miles better than away games with a (relatively) decent number.

Dont know why, but that put me in mind of good old Terry Butchers classic "losing an early goal takes away the fear of losing an early goal" as he took us toward that playoff with you boys :wacko:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's interesting to see the effect of performances on attendances and to get a sense of the mood at the club among the fans by seeing attendances rise and fall.

 

Crowd wanking is a waste of time though, everyone comes out of that looking bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...