Scottish Football Attendances

[HibeeJibee]

Top division average:

42,229     Germany
39,942     England
29,581     Spain
28,901     Italy
23,828     France
18,046     Netherlands
16,772     Scotland
13,109     Switzerland
12,610     Turkey
11,736     Portugal
10,396     Russia
   9,958     Sweden
   9,688     Denmark
   9,618     Belgium
   9,347     Scotland with Celtic + Rangers home crowds removed
   9,302     Poland
   8,615     Israel
   7,055     Austria
   6,886     Greece
   5,721     Norway
   5,457     Romania
   5,348     Czech Rep
   4,197     Ukraine*
   4,066     Croatia
   3,410     Kazakhstan
   3,135     Hungary
   2,722     Eire
   2,594     Cyprus*
   2,403     Serbia
   2,153     Slovakia
   2,083     Bosnia & Herzegovina
   1,894     Finland
   1,764     Bulgaria*
   1,604     Northern Ireland
   1,521     Azerbaijan
   1,433     Georgia*
   1,426     Belarus
   1,259     Slovenia
       805     Macedonia*
       779     Moldova
       776     Iceland
       534     Montenegro
       433     Faroe Islands*
       425     Luxembourg
       371     Lithuania
       358     Latvia
       325     Wales*
       300     Estonia

*incomplete or previous figures

[HibeeJibee]

Top division average per 1,000 of population:

8.187     Faroe Islands
3.067     Scotland
2.095     Iceland
2.084     Cyprus
1.710     Scotland with Celtic + Rangers home crowds removed
1.654     Denmark
1.508     Switzerland
1.140     Portugal
1.058     Norway
1.031     Netherlands
1.001     Croatia
0.951     Sweden
0.915     Israel
0.850     Montenegro
0.842     Northern Ireland
0.828     Belgium
0.790     Austria
0.707     England
0.664     Luxembourg
0.659     Greece
0.636     Bosnia & Herzegovina
0.623     Spain
0.594     Slovenia
0.545     Eire
0.508     Czech Rep
0.506     Germany
0.487     Italy
0.395     Slovakia
0.382     Macedonia
0.381     Georgia
0.369     France
0.342     Finland
0.329     Serbia
0.322     Hungary
0.282     Romania
0.256     Bulgaria
0.254     Moldova
0.242     Poland
0.225     Estonia
0.191     Latvia
0.177     Kazakhstan
0.148     Belarus
0.148     Turkey
0.147     Azerbaijan
0.133     Lithuania
0.099     Wales
0.096     Ukraine
0.071     Russia

[PauloPerth]

6 hours ago, Theyellowbox said:

 

Had Aberdeen and Utd had their golden spells 10 years prior, they'd have built up such an advantage financially, we'd have had a much more level playing field. Even 10 years later where league titles came with all the CL monies they wouldn't have racked up debt, would have grown clubs off pitch and would have increased the commercial appeal of the whole league.

As soon as Rangers and Celtic got far enough ahead financially, they became unmatchable on and off the pitch.

That said, I can see a slightly different future. Hearts are showing how well you can do when you get the finances right. Retain assets, bring in better quality and grow the club. Yes, they are not miles ahead in terms of points, but in every other way, they are now in a wee section of their own (in my opinion) between the top two and the others.

I'd argue that if they had a few years being the best of the rest and can build on the current squad, then if the conditions were right that they had a particularly good season and the other two cancel each other out, Hearts could challenge.

I also think that if you get Hearts, Hibs and Aberdeen all pulling away, then they grow that gap too.

Attendances, coupled with non mental owners is the route to that.

Also, attendance wise, I think Rangers and Celtic have peaked. If you are a glory hunter kid in Inverness/Dundee/Perth. You are more likely now to not bother with either of them and go for a man city/Chelsea/PSG etc. Just as accessible to the 'viewer' as Rangers or Celtic. That will translate to bums on seats in a few years. Conversely, other clubs become more appealing as time goes on.

Anyone with kids who go to football coaching, will see that compared to 10 years ago, you see much less Rangers and Celtic kits, more other sides and in my case significantly more St Johnstone kits. 

You make some interesting points, and I really like your positive outlook.

But I don’t agree about the gap between the top two and the rest ever diminishing or the chances of all of Hearts, Hibs, Utd and Aberdeen becoming permanent ‘level just below’ clubs.

Probably pessimistic, but throughout Scottish football history others have emerged and had their spells but always sink back down and go through cycles of success and failing. I think as Hibs fan says, hearts are doing well just now, but under Romanov they were challenging for the title, and even split the OF, yet 16 years on and they’ve been bust and relegated twice. Aberdeen under mcinnes were clear second best, last season they were third(?) bottom. I won’t even go into uefa cup finalists and European cup semi finalists Dundee Utd’s recent ’achievements’.

I think it’s just hard to comprehend how far away from the rest the OF are in terms of fanbase, which knocks onto income, tv appeal, sponsorship money, success, European money etc etc

Even a short term emergence by some other club will not be sustained. They are just too big and sadly always will be.

Our great hope in my opinion is a european league where the two of them leave us behind (probably for the euro second division). Our league would become brilliant.

But that is the time when every other club in the land would have to remain strong and not allow their B teams into the SPFL, otherwise a decade on and we’ll be right back to where we are now.

[PauloPerth]

1 hour ago, HibeeJibee said:

Top division average:

42,229     Germany
39,942     England
29,581     Spain
28,901     Italy
23,828     France
18,046     Netherlands
16,772     Scotland
13,109     Switzerland
12,610     Turkey
11,736     Portugal
10,396     Russia
   9,958     Sweden
   9,688     Denmark
   9,618     Belgium
   9,347     Scotland with Celtic + Rangers home crowds removed
   9,302     Poland
   8,615     Israel
   7,055     Austria
   6,886     Greece
   5,721     Norway
   5,457     Romania
   5,348     Czech Rep
   4,197     Ukraine*
   4,066     Croatia
   3,410     Kazakhstan
   3,135     Hungary
   2,722     Eire
   2,594     Cyprus*
   2,403     Serbia
   2,153     Slovakia
   2,083     Bosnia & Herzegovina
   1,894     Finland
   1,764     Bulgaria*
   1,604     Northern Ireland
   1,521     Azerbaijan
   1,433     Georgia*
   1,426     Belarus
   1,259     Slovenia
       805     Macedonia*
       779     Moldova
       776     Iceland
       534     Montenegro
       433     Faroe Islands*
       425     Luxembourg
       371     Lithuania
       358     Latvia
       325     Wales*
       300     Estonia

*incomplete or previous figures

Really impressive figures, though I suppose the OF are still having a big influence through their large away supports, especially at certain grounds. 
 

 

I don’t suppose there are figures for no rangers and Celtic matches at all are there?

[RandomGuy.]

19 minutes ago, PauloPerth said:

Even a short term emergence by some other club will not be sustained. They are just too big and sadly always will be.

It could be, but its a tiny absolute miniscule chance i think.

If, if, a team could finish 2nd in the next few years it gives them the chance to reach the Champions League groups.

£10m+ straight in their bank while one of Rangers/Celtic misses out.

Would then require that club spending that wisely and surviving the likely feeding frenzy that happens to their squad.

Manage that 2/3 times in a row and youre £30m+ up on one of them. Which should negate any crowd difference comfortably?

Its a fools hope though, really.

[Theyellowbox]

28 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

It could be, but its a tiny absolute miniscule chance i think.

If, if, a team could finish 2nd in the next few years it gives them the chance to reach the Champions League groups.

£10m+ straight in their bank while one of Rangers/Celtic misses out.

Would then require that club spending that wisely and surviving the likely feeding frenzy that happens to their squad.

Manage that 2/3 times in a row and youre £30m+ up on one of them. Which should negate any crowd difference comfortably?

Its a fools hope though, really.

I think that is the challenge. When I say hearts are in thar little gap, it's not as if they are equally as far apart from top two as they are the others. They are still absolute miles behind them, but they are pulling away a bit from the others.

You need an other team to be consistently building, while not having all their players sold on the cheep and then have to start again. I think a few teams are now in as good a position to do thst now than they ever have been. Hearts, Hibs and Aberdeen have all managed to hold onto players for much longer than they used to and when the do go, they go for much more.

As pointed out, it's the consistency that allows this. Back in 80/90, I'm sure United had a mental record for number of years in a row in Europe. Someone replicates that with today's finances and they will do very well.

As for closing the gap to Rangers and Celtic. While they can spend multiple millions on players, relative to the market as a whole, they are at the lower end. The gap between a £500k player to a £5m player isn't what it would have been years ago. £5m doesn't get you much (relatively). A few bad recruits by one and some exceptional recruits by others and you never know. 

[Monkey Tennis]

12 hours ago, RandomGuy. said:

This is the interesting thing, and nails an important point, for me. Feels like the amount of kids you see with Rangers tops on in Perth has absolutely plummeted in the past decade. I rarely even see anyone older wearing them either now, apart from a brief flurry after their league win.

Celtic feels more common but still not as much as i remember.

On the other hand Man U/Liverpool tops are common. I know theres a whole chunk of kids being brought up to support Saints + EPL side just like their parents. The bizarro timings of most EPL kick offs, for the bigger teams, means they can watch both every weekend too.

Not sure how much clubs should play into that, but if they could then a whole generation of fans could be retained who would previously be stolen by Rangers/Celtic.

I can only guess that's related to St Johnstone's success over recent seasons.  Obviously, it's very good to hear.

However, I'm afraid I've observed nothing similar in recent years. I think the OF problem down here is getting progressively worse.

[RandomGuy.]

4 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

I can only guess that's related to St Johnstone's success over recent seasons.  Obviously, it's very good to hear.

Yeah its maybe that and our U12s go free policy now showing benefits?

Guess the hope is once you break that particular wheel in a place and get a chunk of a generation turning away from the OF, it can continue on.

[Monkey Tennis]

9 hours ago, RandomGuy. said:

It could be, but its a tiny absolute miniscule chance i think.

If, if, a team could finish 2nd in the next few years it gives them the chance to reach the Champions League groups.

£10m+ straight in their bank while one of Rangers/Celtic misses out.

Would then require that club spending that wisely and surviving the likely feeding frenzy that happens to their squad.

Manage that 2/3 times in a row and youre £30m+ up on one of them. Which should negate any crowd difference comfortably?

Its a fools hope though, really.

How much was everybody "up" on Rangers in recent years?

It still couldn't prevent the duopoly reasserting itself, despite the absolute arse the Rangers rebirth made of the ascent.

[coprolite]

On 03/03/2023 at 10:55, The Other Foot said:

Scottish game is doomed. It's bent, it's broken, it's beyond salvage.

The fans will get jaded, they'll depart, they'll f**k off to the rugby. 

ARMAGEDDON. 

 

Except......

 

"The Scottish Professional Football League continues to top the match attendance per capita table across Europe. New figures show the SPFL had 21.3 attendees per 1,000 people at matches across its top four divisions, and a weekly average support of 117,700 fans."

 

"Last season, over four million fans turned out to watch matches across the Scottish Premiership, Championship, League One and League Two."

"[Scotland's attendance per capita] is 65 per cent higher than second-placed country the Netherlands, which has 12.9 attendees per 1000 people."

 

 

65%..........

  Hide contents

 

 

Good to see Doncaster getting the credit he deserves here. 

[The Other Foot]

7 minutes ago, coprolite said:

Good to see Doncaster getting the credit he deserves here. 

Knighthood incoming.

[coprolite]

15 hours ago, HibeeJibee said:

Top division average per 1,000 of population:

8.187     Faroe Islands
3.067     Scotland
2.095     Iceland
2.084     Cyprus
1.710     Scotland with Celtic + Rangers home crowds removed
1.654     Denmark
1.508     Switzerland
1.140     Portugal
1.058     Norway
1.031     Netherlands
1.001     Croatia
0.951     Sweden
0.915     Israel
0.850     Montenegro
0.842     Northern Ireland
0.828     Belgium
0.790     Austria
0.707     England
0.664     Luxembourg
0.659     Greece
0.636     Bosnia & Herzegovina
0.623     Spain
0.594     Slovenia
0.545     Eire
0.508     Czech Rep
0.506     Germany
0.487     Italy
0.395     Slovakia
0.382     Macedonia
0.381     Georgia
0.369     France
0.342     Finland
0.329     Serbia
0.322     Hungary
0.282     Romania
0.256     Bulgaria
0.254     Moldova
0.242     Poland
0.225     Estonia
0.191     Latvia
0.177     Kazakhstan
0.148     Belarus
0.148     Turkey
0.147     Azerbaijan
0.133     Lithuania
0.099     Wales
0.096     Ukraine
0.071     Russia

I reckon England is so low on this because of the relative lack of importance of attendance to finances, directly. The best supprted clubs aren't in the top division as much as in Scotland and presumably most other countries. Means that Brighton and Brenford, with mid SPL size fanbases (assuming their premiership attendances are above their "normal" attendances") can be in the top division while the championship and even league one have averages around ours. 

[RandomGuy.]

4 hours ago, Monkey Tennis said:

How much was everybody "up" on Rangers in recent years?

It still couldn't prevent the duopoly reasserting itself, despite the absolute arse the Rangers rebirth made of the ascent.

It wouldnt be £10m+ up.

Whoever finished 2nd would be about £1.5m up in prize money which is likely swallowed up by the attendance difference and i dont think any ever reached the group stage of Europe?

Champions League money has killed the game up here, but its also the main thing that could help a club break the duopoly. 

If someone could finish 2nd and get some huge luck in the qualifiers, its almost £14m they get. That probably doubles the revenue of most, if not all, clubs.

I do worry the "best case" scenario, ignoring Celtic/Rangers leaving the league, is simply 3 dominant clubs rather than 2 though, which probably makes it worse in terms of the domestic trophies being shared out. 

[Monkey Tennis]

33 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

It wouldnt be £10m+ up.

Whoever finished 2nd would be about £1.5m up in prize money which is likely swallowed up by the attendance difference and i dont think any ever reached the group stage of Europe?

Champions League money has killed the game up here, but its also the main thing that could help a club break the duopoly. 

If someone could finish 2nd and get some huge luck in the qualifiers, its almost £14m they get. That probably doubles the revenue of most, if not all, clubs.

I do worry the "best case" scenario, ignoring Celtic/Rangers leaving the league, is simply 3 dominant clubs rather than 2 though, which probably makes it worse in terms of the domestic trophies being shared out. 

Yes, even if someone did break the stranglehold, then I don't think it would be sustained due to all the other elements of imbalance.  If it was though, that wouldn't really be particularly desirable either.

Unless there's some genuinely huge steps taken to even out the financial playing field across many clubs - something I can't for the life of me see happening - then it really needs the OF to disappear elsewhere.

[HibeeJibee]

7 hours ago, coprolite said:

I reckon England is so low on this because of the relative lack of importance of attendance to finances, directly. The best supprted clubs aren't in the top division as much as in Scotland and presumably most other countries. Means that Brighton and Brenford, with mid SPL size fanbases (assuming their premiership attendances are above their "normal" attendances") can be in the top division while the championship and even league one have averages around ours. 

England has far more strength in depth: literally dozens of big clubs and hundreds getting decent figures.

If you measured it over the national levels or similar rather than just the top tier they'd rocket up the rankings.

Here are the lower division averages where reported. England is like another world. Look at how few even break into 4 figures:


TIER 2
21,285     Germany
18,357     England
   9,573     Italy
   9,275     Spain
   7,923     France
   5,280     Netherlands
   3,448     Poland
   3,271     Belgium*
   2,777     Russia
   2,184     Switzerland
   2,121     Norway
   2,088     Scotland
   1,776     Ukraine*
   1,517     Sweden
   1,498     Denmark
   1,097     Romania
       954     Austria
       923     Hungary
       906     Portugal
       790     Finland 
       711     Czech Rep
       658     Serbia
       587     Eire
       562     Slovakia
       560     Kazakhstan
       428     Belarus
       362     Croatia
       332     Georgia*
       266     Bosnia & Herzegovina
       285     Azerbaijan
       270     Bulgaria*
       220     Slovenia
       195     Wales*
       170     Moldova
       167     Lithuania
       122     Estonia
       122     Latvia

TIER 3
10,452     England
   7,816     Germany
   3,134     Spain
   2,736     Italy*
   2,027     France
   1,475     Scotland
       876     Netherlands*
       834     Poland
       781     Ukraine*
       746     Russia
       709     Denmark
       437     France
       424     Sweden
       334     Norway
       319     Switzerland*
       250     Slovakia
       247     Croatia
       235     Czech Rep
       135     Slovenia
          71     Estonia

TIER 4
   5,527     England
   1,320     Germany
       852     Spain
       518     Scotland
       263     Switzerland*
       213     Denmark

TIER 5
   3,247     England
       306     Germany

TIER 6
       928     England

TIER 7
       469     England

TIER 8
       296     England

*incomplete or previous figures

[FairWeatherFan]

5 minutes ago, HibeeJibee said:

England has far more strength in depth: literally dozens of big clubs and hundreds getting decent figures.

If you measured it over the national levels or similar rather than just the top tier they'd rocket up the rankings.

Here are the lower division averages where reported. England is like another world. Look at how few even break into 4 figures:

 

Population wise and interest in the sport would probably still see them top in most tiers, but it helps quite a bit that the top 5 tiers in England are single divisions. While most countries by the 3rd/4th tier start regionalising quite a bit.

[ahemps]

On 04/03/2023 at 12:11, RandomGuy. said:

It wouldnt be £10m+ up.

Whoever finished 2nd would be about £1.5m up in prize money which is likely swallowed up by the attendance difference and i dont think any ever reached the group stage of Europe?

Champions League money has killed the game up here, but its also the main thing that could help a club break the duopoly. 

If someone could finish 2nd and get some huge luck in the qualifiers, its almost £14m they get. That probably doubles the revenue of most, if not all, clubs.

I do worry the "best case" scenario, ignoring Celtic/Rangers leaving the league, is simply 3 dominant clubs rather than 2 though, which probably makes it worse in terms of the domestic trophies being shared out. 

Finishing 2nd for someone other than Rangers would mean 2-3 qualifying games as the unseeded team. There are only 2 places from teams that this year included Fenerbache, Dynamo Kiev, Monaco, PSV, and Benfica. Even the lesser teams Midtjylland, AEK Larnaca, Sturm Graz and Union St Gilloise. I think Hearts would be extremely lucky to draw 1 home tie against the lesser sides never mind negotiating 3 rounds and knocking out 2 of they bigger sides.

Also I think we are on the last year of 2 CL places, Scotland is sliding down the rankings, we were around the 26th best nation this year, we need to be top 10 for 2 CL places. 

[RandomGuy.]

4 minutes ago, ahemps said:

Finishing 2nd for someone other than Rangers would mean 2-3 qualifying games as the unseeded team. There are only 2 places from teams that this year included Fenerbache, Dynamo Kiev, Monaco, PSV, and Benfica. Even the lesser teams Midtjylland, AEK Larnaca, Sturm Graz and Union St Gilloise. I think Hearts would be extremely lucky to draw 1 home tie against the lesser sides never mind negotiating 3 rounds and knocking out 2 of they bigger sides.

Also I think we are on the last year of 2 CL places, Scotland is sliding down the rankings, we were around the 26th best nation this year, we need to be top 10 for 2 CL places. 

Aye it was a "massively unlikely" scenario but its the only one i can see which breaks the duopoly. 

[Ranaldo Bairn]

On 04/03/2023 at 20:07, FairWeatherFan said:

Population wise and interest in the sport would probably still see them top in most tiers, but it helps quite a bit that the top 5 tiers in England are single divisions. While most countries by the 3rd/4th tier start regionalising quite a bit.

But wait, isn't the received wisdom (by people that don't really understand lower league football) that increased regionalisation is a good thing? That more local matches would increase interest?

[FairWeatherFan]

16 minutes ago, Ranaldo Bairn said:

But wait, isn't the received wisdom (by people that don't really understand lower league football) that increased regionalisation is a good thing? That more local matches would increase interest?

It's more that the increased numbers operating at equivalent tiers drag down the average. There's 24 teams in the English 5th Tier and in Spain it's 288 and Germany over a 100.

If you squeezed Germany into 1-1-1-1-1 then by the 5th Tier there wouldn't be a 10x advantage to England.