Mitre 10 Cup Attendance



  • So I see a massive 1967 went to watch Waikato beat Taranaki yesterday.

    That would have been impacted by the All Blacks playing for sure but what are the crowds like for the other teams? Canterbury seems to get crowds and I think I've seen a few at BOP games as well.

    I don't see this comp surviving in this form.

    Or perhaps a couple of teams won't survive (like Waikato)



  • The crowd did seem lower than the previous Waikato home games.

    And we were in lockdown briefly after the game due to an incident nearby.



  • At our last home game (Magpies v Taranaki) there was a 6,698 crowd. That was a Friday night game. Don't know about the other games.



  • despite our shit results, our attendance had been reasonable for most of this season, had over 6k turn up to watch us get wopped by Hawkes...although not sure there will be more than a couple of thousand there this weekend, I'll be heading along for one last chance to watch my team lose for 2019



  • It's all relative though isn't it - The All Blacks are about the only sporting team that is guaranteed to attract a big crowd - possibly due to supporters virtually guaranteed a win. Super Rugby doesn't get big crowds and that's the next tier down and the M10 Cup is next tier down again. Warriors get ok crowds but considering they're one team in that comp and some of the good promotions they do on tickets they should get more. Phoenix struggle unless it's a finals game. Hard to point out exactly why it is because ticket prices are normally cheap compared to overseas. Drink and food on the other hand is a different matter...



  • I think you will find that the best attendances in the M10 Cup are in the provinces that don't have regular SR games. Basically that is the top level of rugby for them. We have people in our group who go to Chiefs games but not Waikato games.



  • @Duluth What are the Auckland crowds like this season? I don't understand (if small) how they can afford to operate that stadium.



  • I'd guess Canterbury are averaging around 5,000 or so. Not wonderful but not financially disastrous you'd think. I don't think we've seen big crowds at provincial games here since the mid 2000's. Ever since then the All Blacks have been as rare as rockinghorse shit and people simply aren't very interested in below strength teams.

    If there's a correlation between non SR bases and decent crowds I'd suggest it also has a bit to do with the teams in those cities being less affected by AB availability ie they're nearer full strength.



  • In Otago vs Canterbury on the weekend - which I expected to be a bigger occasion than it was, for various reasons - Otago were 'missing' Coltman and Ben Smith while Canterbury were 'missing' Taylor, Laualala, Moody, Sam Whitelock, Scott Barrett, Todd, Read, Mo'unga, Crotty and Bridge. That game is a much bigger deal if these teams are at full strength.



  • @shark

    Kieran Read - Counties Manukau
    Nepo Laulala - Counties Manukau
    Scott Barrett - Taranaki



  • @shark said in Mitre 10 Cup Attendance:

    In Otago vs Canterbury on the weekend - which I expected to be a bigger occasion than it was, for various reasons - Otago were 'missing' Coltman and Ben Smith while Canterbury were 'missing' Taylor, Laualala, Moody, Sam Whitelock, Scott Barrett, Todd, Read, Mo'unga, Crotty and Bridge. That game is a much bigger deal if these teams are at full strength.

    We will never see that though anymore.

    We can only go by what we currently have and that is an essentially AB-less NPC.

    I honestly think it would be better if they had two distinct pools with promotion/relegation in both pools (I think the '3rd' div top team would be able to compete with the lower leave '2nd' div teams)



  • @Hooroo said in Mitre 10 Cup Attendance:

    I honestly think it would be better if they had two distinct pools with promotion/relegation in both pools (I think the '3rd' div top team would be able to compete with the lower leave '2nd' div teams)

    I disagree; IMO the difference between the Championship and Heartland is way too big. Heartland teams would be hammered, even by teams like Northland and Southland. They're amateur teams, with amateur facilities and an amateur organisation (and I say that with respect).



  • @Stargazer said in Mitre 10 Cup Attendance:

    @Hooroo said in Mitre 10 Cup Attendance:

    I honestly think it would be better if they had two distinct pools with promotion/relegation in both pools (I think the '3rd' div top team would be able to compete with the lower leave '2nd' div teams)

    I disagree; IMO the difference between the Championship and Heartland is way too big. Heartland teams would be hammered, even by teams like Northland and Southland. They're amateur teams, with amateur facilities and an amateur organisation (and I say that with respect).

    I think the delta between the two divs would get closer in time. In the first season, sure but in time with migration of players wanting to play in Div 1 and the release of players when teams fall into div two etc, it would eventually balance out.



  • @Hooroo said in Mitre 10 Cup Attendance:

    @Stargazer said in Mitre 10 Cup Attendance:

    @Hooroo said in Mitre 10 Cup Attendance:

    I honestly think it would be better if they had two distinct pools with promotion/relegation in both pools (I think the '3rd' div top team would be able to compete with the lower leave '2nd' div teams)

    I disagree; IMO the difference between the Championship and Heartland is way too big. Heartland teams would be hammered, even by teams like Northland and Southland. They're amateur teams, with amateur facilities and an amateur organisation (and I say that with respect).

    I think the delta between the two divs would get closer in time. In the first season, sure but in time with migration of players wanting to play in Div 1 and the release of players when teams fall into div two etc, it would eventually balance out.

    How many Taranaki playeres moved to a Premiership team after they were relegated to the Championship in 2018? And why would they? And why would that be a good development? Premiership teams creaming the top of the Championship (or Heartland teams if they'd join the professional ranks) would be detrimental to the lower ranked teams and prevent them from moving (back) up.

    At the moment, the best players - regardless of province and division - will get a shot at Super Rugby. They don't need to play for Premiership teams to get SR contracts, so there's no need to move to Premiership teams. Why would that change?



  • @Hooroo said in Mitre 10 Cup Attendance:

    I honestly think it would be better if they had two distinct pools with promotion/relegation in both pools (I think the '3rd' div top team would be able to compete with the lower leave '2nd' div teams)

    The proposed 2008 reforms would have resolved a lot this slow rot.



  • @Stargazer said in Mitre 10 Cup Attendance:

    @Hooroo said in Mitre 10 Cup Attendance:

    @Stargazer said in Mitre 10 Cup Attendance:

    @Hooroo said in Mitre 10 Cup Attendance:

    I honestly think it would be better if they had two distinct pools with promotion/relegation in both pools (I think the '3rd' div top team would be able to compete with the lower leave '2nd' div teams)

    I disagree; IMO the difference between the Championship and Heartland is way too big. Heartland teams would be hammered, even by teams like Northland and Southland. They're amateur teams, with amateur facilities and an amateur organisation (and I say that with respect).

    I think the delta between the two divs would get closer in time. In the first season, sure but in time with migration of players wanting to play in Div 1 and the release of players when teams fall into div two etc, it would eventually balance out.

    How many Taranaki playeres moved to a Premiership team after they were relegated to the Championship in 2018? And why would they? And why would that be a good development? Premiership teams creaming the top of the Championship (or Heartland teams if they'd join the professional ranks) would be detrimental to the lower ranked teams and prevent them from moving (back) up.

    At the moment, the best players - regardless of province and division - will get a shot at Super Rugby. They don't need to play for Premiership teams to get SR contracts, so there's no need to move to Premiership teams. Why would that change?

    I don't know? 7? or is it a rhetorical question?

    It doesn't matter what div you're in at the moment as you play against teams in both divisions but you play for two separate trophies which is such a farce of a tourney.

    I honestly don't care what div Waikato are in as we still get to play Auckland which is the team we have the most rivalry with.



  • There has been two attempts in the last four/five years to do away with the Premiership/Championship split and just have one competition with playoffs for the top eight.

    They did not happen because the same three unions have been against it both times - Northland, Manawatu and Southland.



  • @Number-10 said in Mitre 10 Cup Attendance:

    There has been two attempts in the last four/five years to do away with the Premiership/Championship split and just have one competition with playoffs for the top eight.

    They did not happen because the same three unions have been against it both times - Northland, Manawatu and Southland.

    3 of the 4 most rubbish unions! Excellent!! Way to be hamstrung by the muppets of the comp



  • @Hooroo The difference between Premiership and Championship teams just isn't big enough for a complete separation. The Magpies drew with one Premiership team, and beat 2 others. We'll probably only lose only one cross-over game. The Steamers and Otago also won two out of four.



  • @Stargazer said in Mitre 10 Cup Attendance:

    @Hooroo The difference between Premiership and Championship teams just isn't big enough for a complete separation. The Magpies drew with one Premiership team, and beat 2 others. We'll probably only lose only one cross-over game. The Steamers and Otago also won two out of four.

    This would create a real difference and it would start to matter if your team was about to get relegated.

    At the moment it is a grey splurge of a mickey mouse cross comp.



  • @Number-10 What was their rationale for voting against it? Being last in a competition with 7 or 14 teams is the same isn't it?



  • We've talked about this quite a lot this season amoungst our season ticket group.

    Essentially we have 7 season tickets in a group, most NPC games only 3 or 4 of us show up and it's bloody hard to give away the seats.

    I reckon all NPC games should be held on Saturday and Sunday afternoon, I doubt it's going to make a huge difference to the numbers watching on TV if you play 2 games at the same time. Afternoon rugby is a far better schedule and better for those with young families.



  • @SammyC said in Mitre 10 Cup Attendance:

    We've talked about this quite a lot this season amoungst our season ticket group.

    Essentially we have 7 season tickets in a group, most NPC games only 3 or 4 of us show up and it's bloody hard to give away the seats.

    I reckon all NPC games should be held on Saturday and Sunday afternoon, I doubt it's going to make a huge difference to the numbers watching on TV if you play 2 games at the same time. Afternoon rugby is a far better schedule and better for those with young families.

    Agreed. That would help.



  • One of the best things about the ancient Tauranga Domain is that games there can only be afternoon games - a solid crowd always results!



  • @SammyC I'd be seriously pissed off if I can't watch the away games of my team, because they aren't televised.



  • @Number-10 pretty sure the last 'attempt' to cull teams was about 10 years ago, and this was Northland, Southland, Tasman and Counties all on the chopping block, with Northland and Tasman looking most likely due to some arbitrary criteria that was designed for Southland to remain.

    Anyone who thinks a Heartland side would get within 50 of Northland or Southland at present is deluded.

    Edit: was 2008 the last time they were looking to make changes (publically at least)



  • @Stargazer said in Mitre 10 Cup Attendance:

    @SammyC I'd be seriously pissed off if I can't watch the away games of my team, because they aren't televised.

    When did I say don't televise them?

    Surely sky with it's 13 odd sports channels can show games at the same time.



  • @SammyC That survey earlier in the year proposed more afternoon games and not televising all games.

    I think playing and televising two or more games at the same time will reduce tv viewership as most people prefer to watch games live and are less inclined to watch recorded games or replays.



  • @SammyC I'd be ok if they did like they are in the RWC, delay the live coverage...

    This conversation comes up every other year, yet the solutions are not really workable in the current environment.

    I actually dont mind the crossover matches, and think the current format is the best one they have had since the changes made in 2008 (or was it prior when ANZ Cup was shit too)...as I have long said, bin one of the crossover matches removes the need for storm week (although dont think they had that this year?)



  • @Stargazer I would say most people already pick and choose which games they watch. I do.



  • @Bovidae Yes, but the games you pick will all be live.



  • @Stargazer said in Mitre 10 Cup Attendance:

    I think playing and televising two or more games at the same time will reduce tv viewership as most people prefer to watch games live and are less inclined to watch recorded games or replays.

    I wasn't talking about the survey, I was giving my own opinion.

    I seriously doubt television viewing numbers are very high anyway. It would be extremely low number who watch every game live on TV.



  • @taniwharugby No storm weeks anymore, this year. No more Wednesday games. It has been a lot better this year than previous years, because the competition could start earlier (due to SR finishing earlier).



  • @Stargazer The only 3 local games I saw this last weekend were all live, as I was at them. I didn't watch any of the other M10 Cup games.



  • @Stargazer for me, the Wednesday/Thursday night games are not designed to get punters to go to them, if they were, k/o would be 6pm...these are for TV viewers

    It's ok now with TR Jnr being older, but a couple of years back, 7.30 k/o was too late to take him on a school night...



  • @Bovidae Was that because of the stabbing?



  • @Yeetyaah said in Mitre 10 Cup Attendance:

    @Bovidae Was that because of the stabbing?

    Yes, but we weren't told any details other than we couldn't leave until security gave the OK.



  • @Number-10 said in Mitre 10 Cup Attendance:

    They did not happen because the same three unions have been against it both times - Northland, Manawatu and Southland.

    Northland also led the charge against a move to a single tier system early in Tew's tenure.

    Tasman were also part of that cull, but to their credit they got their act together - although a large part of their failure at that point was due to being used as a contract holding pen for the Crusaders - the changes to the Super catchment system fixed that.



  • @rotated it was a single tier comp for a period, I dont recall us having issues with that (nor can I see why we would) only getting culled, to which they were pretty vocal and anti.



  • @taniwharugby said in Mitre 10 Cup Attendance:

    @rotated it was a single tier comp for a period, I dont recall us having issues with that, only getting culled.

    I don't believe the proposal was to cull Northland entirely from NZRU competitions - simply remove them from the top division due to mounting annual losses and poor on field performances.

    Naturally no team wants to be the one that goes, but for the betterment of the competition there has to be rationalization and contraction, just as there was in the NRL and other competitions.

    I'll be the first to put my hand up and say I was wrong about 2008, I thought Tasman should go too due to the mismanagement and bailouts (far worse than Northland to be fair), but it wasn't entirely obvious how the catchment system was being used to where they were a shelf company fielding a first XV.


Log in to reply