Just having a look at the SLStats.org site, and I can't believe some of the comparisons on the crowds:

Average - 2000 vs 2008
Bradford: 14,520 vs 10,287
Castleford: 7,980 vs 7,501
Harlequins: 3,431 vs 3,909
Huddersfield: 3,392 vs 7,820
Hull FC: 5,940 vs 13,432
Leeds: 12,674 vs 17,043
Saints: 8,809 vs 10,642
Wakefield: 4,621 vs 6,962
Warrington: 6,872 vs 9,500
Wigan: 10,536 vs 14,505

Halifax: 5,714 vs Hull KR: 8,623
Salford: 4,452 vs Catalans: 8,376

Can't believe how much the game has grown since I first started watching regularly.

Got to agree with you there. As a kid, i rarely saw 5 figure crowds - save for Wigan & Leeds. Now the game is getting 3 or four of them every weekend - fixtures depending. The Hull FC & Huddersfield changes are great.

Yea, but Huddersfield just gives people free tickets, thats why the crowds are so high, remember

That is a load of codswallop!

Huddersfield is getting more popular by the day. The bigger crowds reflect the growing power of the Huddersfield name.

What about Harlequins v Wigan:
2008 v 2009
8,041 v 3,883

I can't believe how much the game has shrunk in London in the past 12 months.

Think Cas is like that because they don't give out many free tickets unlike certain other clubs

Or mabye it's because it's £18 to go watch last years bottom club !

I think the crowds are a relfection of a product that people enjoy watching. It's entertaining and competitive, more so than it was in 1996. It's the right strategy for our competition to pursue i.e. competitiveness. People will go and watch entertaining and competitive games irrespective of what people think about the game itself.

I can't think of a better way to improve crowds than to make every game feel that it's going to be close. The only thing that I can see as a negative is the increasing of the league to 14 clubs because, as has been stated by me and many others, we don't have a strong enough playing pool to support that many teams. Celtic and Salford's results are starting to provide evidence that that assumption is correct.

I would like nothing better than for both of the newly promoted teams to prove us wrong and I'm holding out hope for both that their lack of success is more attributable to them getting used to the step in intensity and quality because that can be overcome more quickly than a lack of reliable players.

You're such a great ambassador for your club!

well thats blown the secret - aren't we supposed to get poor crowds?
who only need to open 1 side of our ground ?
who are a disgrace to SL for our poor crowds?


obviously not!!,maybe people ought to look at that before they decide to spout rubbish in future.


interesting to see that 5,000 people have absconded form the succesful bradford side of that time and their now succesful close neighbours in leeds have gained 5,000 - not that i am suggesting anything.
just wonder how many of them 5,000 at leeds were celebrating at odsal in 1997

SL crowds used to be embarrasing.

you would see them in Big League magazine and see 3000 here, 3800 there and say why are the crowds so s**t.

the most promising thing is clubs like huddersfield who have been very consistant with their crowd growth. i think they can get to 15,000 in a few years. as their crowds are growing they are becomming a stronger club on the field by having higher revenues.

Hull and warringon show clearly what a new stadium can bring, as does the fall in bradfords crowds that people will show up when winning titles but be less loyal once the team doesnt

wigans crowds are simply brilliant, theyll break through 20,000 when they take a SL title