BWitcher

No, conclusion is, it isn't crap. But you want it to be.

I go back further than that to the 90's when I remember the racing as being the best ever. However.. I've got every single match from that era on dvd. When I put the highlights dvd in I think wow, it was so much better back then.. but then I put in full matches and riders are quite literally on the back straight when the winner crosses the line. The racing in many races was more strung out than ever. Natural wastage occurs in every sport, they don't just stop going due to circumstances, they stop because they aren't enjoying it as much as they used to. I have three uncles, all were long term season ticket holders at the Molineux. Two no longer go, they still follow Wolves, can still afford to go, they just stopped and that's it. There are many others slightly older than me that I know are the same. There are clearly many thousands given the number of youngsters who attend matches, they must be replacing someone as crowds tend to hover around the same amount. I'll agree to an extent with Wolverhampton but then I think much of that is us having been spoilt with some of the riders we were watching. The Karlssons in their prime, Lindgren etc. The silencers you often mention have had some impact but the issues were there long before that. You say if all those who have been lost in the last ten years came back, but ten years ago the conversations were exactly the same, dwindling crowds, nowhere near as many as ten years prior, but the racing was still good at that point you say.. so your argument doesn't totally add up. You're right about the crowds at Wolverhampton. Being away for much of the year and then coming back it's so apparent the bigger gaps on the terraces, the utter lack of atmosphere. Like you, it's the social side that makes the night enjoyable. The overall experience isn't as enjoyable as it was though, which is very sad. Now if I'm feeling like that, someone who is hungry for live action that's a very bad sign. Throw in the constant dumbing down of the league which has driven more fans away or make them feel it's not worth it anymore. There are lots of factors that combine , but the overwhelming one is, as crowds continue to fall, more and more will find it less enjoyable regardless of the racing., I think on that we can agree.

Re-starts and a bit of tension at the start line are two very different things. I agree on the re-starts issue, far too many of them and very often good gates are being penalised.

When I was a teenager and allowed to attend meetings for first time by myself I had to be on 10pm bus home or no chance of going the following week. 10 min run to bus station from Monmore but I missed it quite a few times. Most meetings I attend at Wolverhampton are done with between 9:00 and 9:15 these days which is fine. Christ how boring it would be if riders just came round, all settled down immediately at the start and away they went. If you're not happy with a rider pulling back from the start, fiddling with goggles, etc, let him know.. create a bit of atmosphere.

No it isn't. Doesn't matter how many times you say something when the evidence to prove your statement false is available to view on a number of platforms. I've already explained it numerous times. An average race in a big crowd will seem like a great one. The exact same race in front of a sparse crowd will seem poor. THAT is the problem now, lack of crowds, atmosphere and the racing doesn't seem as good as a result to most.

Really. Remind me what has changed in the 'core product' of Darts.

Exactly. Except that was a long time ago, so the point stands, the racing isn't the cause. It's the gradual decline in crowds due to lost fans due to natural wastage not being replaced by new ones. As the crowd dwindles, the atmosphere dwindles, the same race seems less exciting.. any newcomer is greeted by a less good atmosphere and doesn't get hooked into it.

Good post Steve. What I mean by too much like the seventies is the overall package. Presentation wise, very little has changed. The racing itself doesn't need changing.

No, but I did early 80's so pretty close. However, it's not particularly relevant. Here is my view, to explain it in more details. A race will always seem better the bigger the crowd and the better the atmosphere. A good race becomes a brilliant race. An average race becomes a good race and so on. The same principle by definition applies to the meeting as a whole. The perfect example of this is the 81 Wembley Final at which the racing was overall average. Yes a couple of great heats but many poor one. BUT.. the atmosphere was fantastic and as such it's remembered (rightly so) as one of the best meetings to have been at ever. Had the very same meeting taken place in front of 1000 people it would get called a poor meeting in reality. So, in the 70's and into the early 80's there were good crowds packing stadiums across the country. The atmosphere was great, local derbies and rivalries were aplenty. Even poor meetings seemed good because of the crowd. Then came a series of events.. Penhalls retirement, the death of Sanders/Carter, the troubles of Lee.. and most importantly the race fixing scandals which killed off a lot of press coverage and caused a lot of fans to walk away. As the decade went on, the age demographic of the sport continued to rise. As with ALL sports as fans grow older they can lose interest, stop attending as regularly (even in football I know of many who were season ticket holders not so long ago but now as they get older have stopped attending). Of course sadly fans also pass away. The sport failed for the most part to attract a younger fan base. The image of it began to be one of mostly 'older' people and it became less trendy for youngsters. Throw in the loss of a number of popular tracks and their support base (not to mention the rivalries they had) and the problems became worse. As we continued into the 90's and then the 21st century most sports realised they were fighting new battles against other attractions. Many re-invented themselves to an extent.. whereas speedway just carried on with the same old, same old. However now, as the crowds began to fall.. good meetings seemed like average meetings, average meetings became poor meetings. The age of fans continued to rise, the number of youngsters attending continued to fall. Then throw in the weakening of the top league season on season to drive yet more fans away. The 'dodgy' (being polite) way the sport has been run with regards to the implement of certain rules.. all contributed to driving ever more fans away.. which again adds to the cycle. Now what were previously good meetings to have attended become poor and so on. Speedway is still a fantastic sport, it just doesn't feel like it often enough anymore.

Long rambling post which offers no evidence to back up the claims. Whereas I can point to every available piece of evidence to back mine up. Gates and 'quality of racing' quite simply aren't linked to any great level. Otherwise Belle Vue would be sold out every week. Scunthorpe, Peterborough and other tracks that we hear have fantastic racing week in, week out would be attracting big crowds. They aren't. The reason the sport is in the mess it is quite simply is it is TOO much like the 70's.

No they weren't. Every available piece of evidence shows that to be the case. Why do you think it's ALWAYS been said first from the gate wins. Hoping the clowns finalise things and announce it soon.

Early season crowds are always 'encouraging'.. there are 'big' crowds across the Easter period for example.

Yeah I understand, just think it's easier to organise such a thing when the team is struggling.

And if Dortmund were riding high and challenging for the Bundesliga like they were in the not too distant past do you think they would be boycotting?

No, because it is impossible to prove. I know of a number of people who have started attending the sport since TV coverage came in. What I will say is that the way the tv coverage has been used has not been anywhere near as beneficial to the sport as it should have been in terms of attracting new fans. It's not TV coverage itself that is the problem, simply the way it has been used.

A very small minority.

Baffling you say, yet the evidence is already there from the thousands who drifted away prior to TV coverage and were quite simply lost. It really isn't rocket science. If the customer was happy with the product they wouldn't be deciding to skip it to watch another team on TV instead. TV is just providing them with the excuse to break that 'habit'. It is also keeping that waning interest alive so they do attend some matches still. Without TV they'd have continued attending regularly for a little longer but those underlying issues would still have been there and the more regular exposure to them would have eventually caused them to stop entirely.. and with nothing on TV to rekindle the flame, they are lost to the sport. As said, the first thing people say as a reason for not buying something is very often not the real reason.

Actually I do. Fortunately TV has kept the interest of these people for a longer period so they still attend occasionally. Without TV the actual issues that have caused them to skip meetings and watch 'other' clubs on TV would have simply meant they stopped going to the sport altogether. TV is the tip of the iceberg you can see, it's not what sinks the ship. Dig deeper and you'll find the real reasons.

FA Cup crowds have been way down for a long time, regardless of TV.

No, I just know about general human nature. TV may have given them an excuse to stop going, but the reasons they stopped going lie elsewhere. Those reasons would have stopped them going altogether at some point.. tv is simply keeping their interest alive.

Not proof at all, highly likely they wouldn't be going as much anyway. Simple iceberg theory.

Yes I know, but the claim was that TV was causing the crowds to fall..

They were falling long before TV came along.

Not all, but it would some. The sheep factor.

Is that really surprising?