NRL attendances : Wed Feb 11, 2009 4:56 pm  

In a previous topic Dally Messenger suggested the average attendance for the Rhinos for 2008 only bettered one side in the NRL.

I was puzzled at this claim so I thought it worth investigation to see if his claims stacked up.

Here are the average attendances for all the NRL clubs for 2008:

Brisbane Broncos 33,426
Gold Coast Titans 21,618
Newcastle Knights 18,750
N Q Cowboys 18,102
West Tigers 16,386
Canterbury Bulldogs 15,352
South Sydney 14,644
Roosters 13,970
Manley 13,694
Parramatta 13,528
Cronulla 12,965
St George 12,596
Melbourne 12,474
Canberra 11,913
Warriors 11,440
Penrith 10,899

The Rhinos average for 2008 was 17,042 which would place them 5th on the NRL list?

It is interesting to note the average attendances in Sydney were nearly 7% on the previous season.

The people at Penrith should be upset - let's face it there isn't anything else to do out there!!

Perhaps more of a concern is the average attendance for the Sydney ARL team the Swans who have an average of 31,901 – obviously there is only one ARL team in Sydney. Compare the attendances for the ARL teams in Melbourne compared to the NRL teams in Sydney and the majority of the ARL outnumber their NRL counterparts 2 to 1.

No wonder the authorities are looking at ways to improve the current turgid nature of the NRL.

Of the 12 highest attendances 10 were at Brisbane!!

: Wed Feb 11, 2009 5:34 pm  

More worrying is that of Melbourne who despite 3 consecutive grand finals still only manage 12,000.

If Quins made 3 consecutive Grand Finals in SL then they could surely get something similar. This is supposedly the greatest sporting city in the world.

Proof of the boring nature of the NRL?

: Wed Feb 11, 2009 5:37 pm  

Proof that Melbourne is an AFL city more like.

: Wed Feb 11, 2009 5:46 pm  

Terrible stadium as well. New stadium being built, that should see crowds go up http://www.mopt.com.au/desktopdefault.aspx/tabid-22//243_read-247/

Terrible stadium as well. New stadium being built, that should see crowds go up http://www.mopt.com.au/desktopdefault.aspx/tabid-22//243_read-247/

: Wed Feb 11, 2009 7:12 pm  

Maximus Decimus wrote:

More worrying is that of Melbourne who despite 3 consecutive grand finals still only manage 12,000.

If Quins made 3 consecutive Grand Finals in SL then they could surely get something similar. This is supposedly the greatest sporting city in the world.

Proof of the boring nature of the NRL?

Proof the lack of your knowledge of the NRL and Australian sporting landscape.

Olympic Park in Melbourne is a dump in Australian RL standards. Next season should see a marked rise for the Storm. They are still 10 years off hitting their potential crowd and corporate wise (similar to the Sydney Swans who took 20 years to take off in Sydney

NRL boring? While last year I felt was the worst football I've seen played in recent memory (wrestling taking to much control of the game) the standard of play, skill level and closeness of competition makes it tough to watch most SL games. Deluded buddy.

: Wed Feb 11, 2009 7:16 pm  

Maximus Decimus wrote:

Proof of the boring nature of the NRL?

Absolutely.

: Wed Feb 11, 2009 7:20 pm  

I've been to Olympic park and I've followed the NRL for quite a few years so I do have a good knowledge of it.

Whether the ground is a hole or not plenty of clubs do well with a rubbish ground. It wasn't that bad a ground that it stopped Melbourne Victory eventually outgrowing it. The Sydney Swans were a growing side and one that didn't compete in 4 or 5 Grand finals in the first 13 years of their existance.

The fact is that their crowds are no better than they were almost 10 years ago despite that level of success. Whenever they tried to take games out of the rubbish stadium they still hardly got amazing support.

Maybe its because of the way they play RL is basically dull.

: Wed Feb 11, 2009 7:20 pm  

hindyscrack wrote:

NRL boring? While last year I felt was the worst football I've seen played in recent memory (wrestling taking to much control of the game) the standard of play, skill level and closeness of competition makes it tough to watch most SL games. Deluded buddy.

The Premier League has been more exciting than La Liga and Serie A for years despite not necessarily having the same standards of skill or play. Being more technically efficient is no substitute for excitement in sport.

: Wed Feb 11, 2009 7:25 pm  

McClennan wrote:

The Premier League has been more exciting than La Liga and Serie A for years despite not necessarily having the same standards of skill or play. Being more technically efficient is no substitute for excitement in sport.

Who cares!

: Wed Feb 11, 2009 7:26 pm  

McClennan wrote:

The Premier League has been more exciting than La Liga and Serie A for years despite not necessarily having the same standards of skill or play. Being more technically efficient is no substitute for excitement in sport.

You may be right.... But tell me how SL is more exciting, continualy dummy half darts, constant dropping of the ball, poor decision making and lack of skill and 5 champions in the last 20 years makes super league a better competition to follow?