Page 2 of 2
Re: Greed is God
Posted: Thu Jun 21, 2012 12:34 am
scottish wrote:Yes, I was. My mistake. Sorry. And yes I understand Hearts performed much better than Hibs between 1983-1998 but the reverse is true for 1975-83. Even taking everything on board that you say, the drop still looks pretty drastic.
Ah well, I guess it's just a difference of interpretation. I'm loth to attribute genetic differences to supporters of different clubs, but there is at least an environmentally acquired trait in Hibs supporters to expect attractive attacking football from their team. I can only suggest that this is responsible for the considerable indifference they have displayed towards their club over the largely fallow years of 83-98, particularly the flair-free ones supervised by Bertie and Lexo, and more recently by Bobby and Colin. We have been 'treated' to a good deal of rather pointless football over those years and whilst hope springs eternal in the breast of the football supporter you can't help wondering if we have developed an allergy to success. We have no difficulty in procuring 30,000 fans when there's a piece of silverware at stake, but on a weekly basis it's sometimes hard to generate enough enthusiasm to fill a single decker bus.
Re: Greed is God
Posted: Sun Jun 14, 2015 4:42 pm
We're three years on from this thread and with Rangers gone, the voting structure changed and (perhaps most importantly) prize money distributed a bit more equitably, I'm curious to see any major differences in crowds from 2011-12 to 2014-15. Certainly I think the last three years have been good for Scottish football, all things considered, but has that resulted in more through the gate at most clubs?
I think signs are quite good. Even without the Edinburgh clubs or Rangers, top flight average wasn't too far below 9,000 last season. Only League One saw a collapse in attendances (not just due to Rangers' promotion but also poor seasons, comparatively, from DAFC and Morton.) There's reason for a cautious optimism thanks to the playoffs, I think.
Re: Greed is God
Posted: Mon Jun 15, 2015 1:38 am
It’s a bit of a tricky one, insomuch that the drop in attendances cannot be solely attributed to a Rangers not being in the Premier Division. The television scheduling must be taken into account especially for those clubs that did not compete in any capacity. Also you have to take into account a traditional better-supported club dropping out to be replaced by a poorly supported club, for example Hamilton Academical replacing Hibernian.
That being said, of the 7 clubs (excluding Celtic) that have remained in the Premier League in the 3 seasons there has been no Rangers (2012), 3 have increased their attendances and 4 have not. Indeed this season finished, Aberdeen posted their best aggregate for 10 years.
The first figure shown is the last season a Rangers were in the Premier League: -
Aberdeen: 176,637 – 182,606 – 235,525 – 253,816.
Dundee United: 142,151 – 143,396 – 144,389 – 154,151.
St.Johnstone: 75,054 – 70,535 – 72,793 – 87,251.
Inverness Caley has declined by over the same period by only 9,000 so the “no Rangers” effect has been pretty negligible. However Kilmarnock (down 37,000), Motherwell (31,000) and St.Mirren (12,000) have suffered the worst but much of that has to do with a poor performance the season just finished coupled with stupid TV scheduling.
Arguably Celtic has come off the worst overall (down 108,000 on 4 seasons ago) but only the season just finished can any close correlation be made to a loss of two home games against a Rangers.
New Rangers aggregate is down over 300,000 on old Rangers. Now the conventional spin is to blame off field woes for the decline rather than poor performances on the field and although neither is exclusive to the other, poor performance usually has a worse effect on attendances than anything else.
The media and Ibrox myth that everything in Scottish football will improve when a Rangers is back in the Premier League is complete nonsense. They cannot strengthen competition – they could not compete with the second worst team in the Premier League and the massive investment they need to even hold their own in the top division is beyond their reach. Nor is there any evidence that significant sponsorship and TV money will flood into the game if and when Rangers (2012) do get back up.
Re: Greed is God
Posted: Mon Jun 15, 2015 8:34 pm
Swampy wrote:We're three years on from this thread and with Rangers gone, the voting structure changed and (perhaps most importantly) prize money distributed a bit more equitably, I'm curious to see any major differences in crowds from 2011-12 to 2014-15.
I'm pretty sure the voting structure hasn't changed. Aberdeen, for some mysterious reason, sided with Celtic in rejecting changing it and I'm sure it just carried over into the 'new' structure (and it was never really explained why a 'new' company was suddenly needed).
For other 'mysterious' reasons, the biggest hit in the financial redistribution was for the team finishing in 2nd position in the SPL - losing nearly £700,000 compared to the winners only losing £300,000. Again, the biggest beneficiaries of this are Celtic. A normal redistribution model would see the 1st placed team taking the biggest hit, then 2nd, then 3rd, and so on. Only people inside Parkhead will be able to tell you why that didn't happen.
Swampy wrote:I think signs are quite good.
That's one way of looking at it, I suppose. Personally, I think the game stinks but I'm just a humble, old-fashioned bigot.