|
|
Post by laughinggas on Mar 26, 2016 13:21:15 GMT
But why the discussion, if the old regime it would have been a crime, with the new one it's a discussion. Ever since watching Rovers since the 70's seems attendances have been examined and theorised over.
The only thing to learn is how to maximise attendance for home fans for remaining games. If that means giving a small number of tickets in the tent so be it. Pack the enclosure
|
|
Angas
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 2,068
|
Post by Angas on Mar 26, 2016 14:48:12 GMT
But why the discussion, if the old regime it would have been a crime, with the new one it's a discussion. Ever since watching Rovers since the 70's seems attendances have been examined and theorised over. The only thing to learn is how to maximise attendance for home fans for remaining games. If that means giving a small number of tickets in the tent so be it. Pack the enclosure I was simply offering a suggestion as to why there were so many empty spaces, yet we were told it was a sell out. I agree with you, under the old regime that would have been a fair topic for suspicious discussion. Under this regime I suspect there's more likely to be an above board explanation - hence my theorising that perhaps we no longer include non-attending ST holders in the attendance figure. I can't think of any other reason, can you? If there is one then I'd suggest it's something that needs looking at if we're to achieve your desire of maximising home attendance. |
|
Bridgeman
Alfie Biggs
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 3,549 
|
Post by Bridgeman on Mar 26, 2016 16:00:56 GMT
But why the discussion, if the old regime it would have been a crime, with the new one it's a discussion. Ever since watching Rovers since the 70's seems attendances have been examined and theorised over. The only thing to learn is how to maximise attendance for home fans for remaining games. If that means giving a small number of tickets in the tent so be it. Pack the enclosure I was simply offering a suggestion as to why there were so many empty spaces, yet we were told it was a sell out. I agree with you, under the old regime that would have been a fair topic for suspicious discussion. Under this regime I suspect there's more likely to be an above board explanation - hence my theorising that perhaps we no longer include non-attending ST holders in the attendance figure. I can't think of any other reason, can you? If there is one then I'd suggest it's something that needs looking at if we're to achieve your desire of maximising home attendance. I'm assuming it was announced as a sell out to prevent people arriving on the day and then being disappointed when all available tickets left had been sold at the ticket office/turnstiles. Just imagine if you had travelled a fair distance only to find all tickets had been sold when you had got there. I'm sure there may have been regular supporters who normally just walk up on the day and pay on the turnstiles who lost out due to the sell out notice going up. Presumably we won't experience those sort of problems once we've built our 30,000 seater stadium ?  |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2016 16:16:19 GMT
Which given it was "sold out" is quite disappointing. Before we demand increased capacity, we should manage away allocation better. Cambridge should have been in the South Stand today. So 10,200 odd is a 'sellout' - what am I missing here? Couldn't see how many cambridge from the east terrace but plainly we don't have a 11,800 capacity which was what I thought it was... You have to guarantee the away side 10% of capacity regardless of if they take it up,unless a prior agreement can be made whereas the away club decide they only want a smaller percentage,hence for rovers fans it was a sell out |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2016 16:18:37 GMT
So 10,200 odd is a 'sellout' - what am I missing here? Couldn't see how many cambridge from the east terrace but plainly we don't have a 11,800 capacity which was what I thought it was... Maybe the new owners don't include non-attending ST holders in the figures like the old lot used to. It would be nice to think that's another wrong that's been righted. Ann on all ticket games the attendance is judged on the number of tickets sold not the number going through the turnstikes,FL rules |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2016 16:22:59 GMT
What is the official capacity. You have to factor in another 600/700 empty spaces in the away end we cant sell According to Wikipedia it's 11,916, (3,000 seated). I think that should read 10916 so if that is the case then take 10% off for away fans Rovers have sold out their share |
|
brizzle
Lindsay Parsons
No Buy . . . No Sell!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,293
|
Post by brizzle on Mar 26, 2016 16:31:39 GMT
According to Wikipedia it's 11,916, (3,000 seated). so if that is the case then take 10% off for away fans Rovers have sold out their share No Wikipedia is still saying 11,916, well at least is was until some wag changed it to 2,500.  |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2016 16:57:47 GMT
According to Wikipedia it's 11,916, (3,000 seated). I think that should read 10916 so if that is the case then take 10% off for away fans Rovers have sold out their share why would the capacity suddenly be 1000 short? |
|
Bridgeman
Alfie Biggs
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 3,549
|
Post by Bridgeman on Mar 26, 2016 17:12:06 GMT
The licensed capacity for the Stadium by the Local Authority is 11,916.
That is the total number of people the ground is licensed to accommodate.
The Local Authority don't distinguish between home and away fans, so if there were to be a rugby match the attendance could match the licensed capacity because of there being no segregation. The same capacity could be reached by having a non sporting event.
The only time we have reached maximum capacity I think is when we have given over the whole of the South Stand to the away team but have retained the whole of the terracing along the East stand for home supporters but I'm happy to be advised otherwise.
|
|
Angas
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 2,068
|
Post by Angas on Mar 26, 2016 18:05:19 GMT
Maybe the new owners don't include non-attending ST holders in the figures like the old lot used to. It would be nice to think that's another wrong that's been righted. Ann on all ticket games the attendance is judged on the number of tickets sold not the number going through the turnstikes,FL rules Oh right, fair enough if that's the case. I thought it was something we just adopted for no apparent reason several years ago. City did it long before we did. Looking at the highlights, the place looks packed anyway apart from the South Stand. As you say above, 10% of tickets go to the away club and it's them that didn't sell out not us. Maybe if that's the case for the last few games we can come to some arrangement with the away club. |
|
brizzle
Lindsay Parsons
No Buy . . . No Sell!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,293
|
Post by brizzle on Mar 26, 2016 18:09:37 GMT
The licensed capacity for the Stadium by the Local Authority is 11,916. That is the total number of people the ground is licensed to accommodate. The Local Authority don't distinguish between home and away fans, so if there were to be a rugby match the attendance could match the licensed capacity because of there being no segregation. The same capacity could be reached by having a non sporting event. The only time we have reached maximum capacity I think is when we have given over the whole of the South Stand to the away team but have retained the whole of the terracing along the East stand for home supporters but I'm happy to be advised otherwise. Very comprehensive reply, that is. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 26, 2016 20:30:08 GMT
I think that should read 10916 so if that is the case then take 10% off for away fans Rovers have sold out their share why would the capacity suddenly be 1000 short? To accommodate the obesity epidemic. |
|
|
|
Post by didlesknowmydad on Mar 26, 2016 22:19:15 GMT
I think that should read 10916 so if that is the case then take 10% off for away fans Rovers have sold out their share No Wikipedia is still saying 11,916, well at least is was until some wag changed it to 2,500. Well licensed capacity is 11,916 so your theory is not quite spot on. I'm not sure how many places we actually allow the away side. What's the licensed capacity of the away terrace? Then, of course, we usually give visitors the far block in the south stand and there's normally a "sterilised" area. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2016 14:05:06 GMT
I think the capacity is reduced for football matches because of segregation and health and safety,football fans are renown for being boisterous so need more space
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2016 14:14:27 GMT
I think the capacity is reduced for football matches because of segregation and health and safety,football fans are renown for being boisterous so need more space Surely 11,916 is what the capacity is after segregation and health and safety. You could probably fit 20,000 in the ground if there were no rules! |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2016 14:19:03 GMT
No that is the figure set for rugby where there is no segregation and people move around so gates between sections are sometimes left open.You have to take into account the segregated standing area and the block left between the fans in the ten,you are already looking at several hundred without other rules and regulations
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2016 14:22:25 GMT
No that is the figure set for rugby where there is no segregation and people move around so gates between sections are sometimes left open.You have to take into account the segregated standing area and the block left between the fans in the ten,you are already looking at several hundred without other rules and regulations How did we manage 12,000 against West Brom then? The Guinness Stand didn't hold more than a few hundred? |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2016 14:28:19 GMT
You must ask the club that
|
|
|
|
Post by creationblue on Mar 27, 2016 14:42:37 GMT
Maybe the total capacity took into account the stand that made way for the tractor...
|
|
GasMacc1
Les Bradd
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,423
|
Post by GasMacc1 on Mar 27, 2016 14:55:46 GMT
No that is the figure set for rugby where there is no segregation and people move around so gates between sections are sometimes left open.You have to take into account the segregated standing area and the block left between the fans in the ten,you are already looking at several hundred without other rules and regulations How did we manage 12,000 against West Brom then? The Guinness Stand didn't hold more than a few hundred? Maybe something to do with it being an FA Cup game. Don't you have to offer the visiting team 25% of your capacity for those matches? Perhaps that meant that the number of spaces lost for segregation could be kept to a minimum. (West Brom had the whole of the South Stand, plus the normal away terracing. I'm not sure how much of a gap was left in the East Terracing between Rovers and Baggie fans). The crowd that day was 12,011 - 95 (only 95) more than the maximum capacity quoted today. |
|
