King's Lynn Stars 2014

[BWitcher]

Drop a Cog always digs up the 1993 Wolves V Belle Vue clash..

 

He reminds us what a great crowd it was, fantastic atmosphere and so nerve wracking as both sets of fans knew the league title would be decided that night.

 

However, what he fails to realise is, he's simply promoting the virtue of the playoffs.. as rather than experience such an occasion every 20 years or so... we can now enjoy it every single season in the play off final.

 

1996 Wolves won the league, I went to every single meeting home and away.. it was a brilliant season. However the night we clinched the league, it was something of a let down, sure we celebrated, we enjoyed it, but it was missing any form of tension.

 

The play off wins in 2002 and 2009 were a completely different feeling and the excitement and tension on those nights was comparable to the 1993 Wolves/Belle Vue clash.

 

I do see his overall point in that when you have seasons such as this one, where the race to finish 1st is going down to the wire, under the old system you WOULD have had bigger crowds for those matches on the run-in. Nowhere near the Wolves/Belle Vue crowd however which was unique as the two teams clashed in the final meeting.

 

It's balanced by Orion quite correctly pointing out that the playoffs keep the season alive for other teams for much longer.

 

As for blaming the playoffs for declining crowds, that doesn't tally up as the crowds were declining before the play offs came along. There are far bigger reasons for the sports decline... one of them being stadia. Hopefully the new Belle Vue stadium can help arrest that decline in Manchester.

Edited September 17, 2014 by BWitcher

[BWitcher]

 

Somebody touched on it earlier in the thread but I've no doubt Birmingham's demise has been accelerated by what happened last season as there MUST have been some fans who realised the early season just isn't worth the time and money and they did to bother. Who knows, there may be another reason why fewer fans turned up this season.

 

Birmingham fans realised early on their team was poor and wasn't even going to challenge for the play-offs.

 

According to you, they'd have been more likely to show up with the even more remote possibility they would challenge for the league. Your logic is completely flawed, it doesn't matter how many times you say it.

 

Speedway attendances are down for many reasons, the sport lost a hell of a lot more fans BEFORE the play-offs were introduced than after, so to blame it for the decline is ludicrous. One thing you can say is it hasn't reversed the decline.

 

Your argument is also totally flawed as other countries run playoffs and don't suffer attendance issues. The question to be asked is, what do they do differently to us.. it's not play offs so the answer lies elsewhere.

[orion]

I agree, there are arguments for and against. It is impossible to argue against the drama and excitement generated by the semi finals and final of a good cup competition, particularly if the prize is worthwhile.

 

What sky have done is take away the prize for the league and 'give' it to the pokc to make their competition better at the expense of the league and only because they ballsed up and missed the Champions being crowned one season.

 

The problem is everyone (except the most intelligent of us) fell for it hook line and sinker.

Ha ha, you only have to take Belle Vue v Coventry out which is actually an excellent example.

 

Covemtry were not certain of a pokc place (good spot, I've already given you credit for that but it is worth mentioning again lol!) but there were no extra fans. You keep telling us that this would have been a meaningless meeting had it not been for the pokc, why did nobody extra turn up, that means you are talking bollox again doesn't it.

 

Anyway, YOU said you could 4 or 5 examples of meetings made worthwhile by the pokc for every meeting rendered meaningless by the pokc, so far you've managed one.

 

Is there a problem, ha ha!

Your have to takeout more than Cov ..as Lakeside ,Swindon and Eastie also could still make the play offs and all were on your list .. as I said go back and do the list the again take your time and get it correct . Must a reason you keep trying to duck out of it .

[BWitcher]

No, you have not only missed the point but then assumed that something must follow on from a related statement.

 

For example, 'you support IS then you are a Muslim (99.999% accurate?) That doesn't mean 'if you are Muslim then you support IS' (0.00001% accurate?) but some people will read the first statement then claim 'logically' the second follows.

 

Best bet is just stick to what's written and don't try and second guess the authors logic.

 

As far as Brummies attendances, who knows, (I did say that but you seem to have missed that bit?) but I bet at least one Brummies fan who went to the majority of their home meetings last season didn't bother at least once this season for the reason I suggest and I reckon it is probably more than one fan who missed one meeting.

 

Anyway, the point is meaningless fixtures generate smaller attendances and the pokc generates more meaningless fixtures that were traditionally 'top' fixtures involving the top teams. However the fixtures involving teams trying to qualify for the pokc are obviously a bit more meaningful than they would have been without the pokc, sadly nobody is that bothered anymore. The best (only lol!) example given so far has claimed an extra 100 through the gate. Just taking those two facets of the pokc produces a net reduction in attendances unless you believe mid table teams are more likley to get bigger attendances for pokc qualifiers than top teams chasing the League Championship. Possible but unlikely.

 

Not only that but clearly if the winners of the competition only need to win around half their fixtures when previously they needed to win more than three quarters then there must be more meaningless, or at least less important meetings.

 

These are not opinions, they are facts.

 

Here's the logic bit, lol!

 

While attendances overall are down the net position solely due to the pokc is negative.

 

No facts there, just a load of waffle. I haven't missed any 'point' as there wasn't one. Just you concocting some wild theory to try and suit your argument.

 

You have NO idea what the net position is down to the playoffs. Absolutely none. Just your own opinion.

 

However these are facts.

 

Speedways attendances were declining long before playoffs were introduced.

Speedways attendances continued to decline after the playoffs were introduced.

The other major speedway countries have play off systems. They, particularly Poland, are able to attract good crowds all season long.

 

As you do every year you dig yourself a deeper and deeper hole, get more and more desperate and provide us with some jolly good amusement.

 

Before I go though, you told us another thread that crowds are up at Belle Vue this season? How's that happened then?

Edited September 17, 2014 by BWitcher

[Midland Red]

You could be right!

A lot of the old school, Sunday dinner, beef and Yorkshire with all the trimmings fans who don't like the pokc have gone and probably won't come back.

The pokc, burger and fries, slice of pizza and coke fans will stop coming.

It's like an alcoholic, she knows it isn't doing her any good but she can't do without it.

pokc? What's that?

[Star Lady]

Any chance you could go and have your play off somewhere else.

 

This is supposed to be a Lynn thread.

[BWitcher]

It is a fact that meaningless fixtures attract lower attendances isn't it?

 

Already your first statement "no facts there" is proved wrong.

 

The pokc creates meaningless meetings for the reasons given, another fact.

 

Incidently a meaningless meeting is one with nothing to race for a bit like a challenge. Some challenge fixtures are quite good though but are rarely well attended.

 

The opinion, as you put it, is the logical conclusion you reach when comparing pokc qualifiers featuring mid table sides to meetings involving teams at the top of the league vying for the Championship when the best team becomes Champions. I did say that it was the 'logical bit', maybe you don't understand what that means, in fact, logically you don't know what logical means, lol! I did say 'who knows' when drawing a conclusion in an earlier post which you appear to have taken as a fact rather than an opinion, shame.

 

Anyway, apparently the ratio between those two groups is 5:1 (remains to be seen lol!) and up to now the best figure is an extra 100 on the gate for a pokc qualifier. In my experience when the top team were champions and my team was involved the title race gates grew exponentially through the season and even after the title was clinched the high gates continued until the end of the season.

 

Some of your statements of fact are based on anecdotal evidence, if you want to follow up your facts then feel free but claiming my facts aren't facts and yours are is just hypocritical isn't it? Polish crowds may be 'good' but so are ours compared to Germany or even Denmark so a bit of meat on the bones, not conjecture by the way, would help.

 

As for Belle Vue, well I don't know if you heard but we signed the 7 time British Champion in the winter, along with another British rider who had put a couple of points on his average every season since first getting on a speedway bike and also included one of the best young British riders in the country. When you add that to one of the top GP riders in the world then there was some optimism around. The change to the fast track rules did spoil it a bit but, and this is probably been the main reason, we have been on the telly a bit (not sky, proper local news that everyone watches) because we are having a new stadium. There is quite a bit of excitement and people who had never even heard about speedway have started turning up. I was explaining how to fill a programme in to a young lad and his dad at a recent meeting.

 

That little lot might have something to do with it?

 

You're hilarious.

 

You even defeat your own argument.

 

By your fact that meaningless meetings produce smaller crowds, there are far more meaningless meetings in a system with no playoffs than there are with. That is a FACT. So thanks for proving yourself wrong.

 

You're quoting a few end of season meets, I can give you fixtures involving Eastbourne, Lakeside, Swindon, Wolverhampton for much of the season. All clubs who would have known very early on they had no chance of winning the league, rendering the rest of their season 'meaningless' but had something to race for for much of the season. Once it was apparent Wolves weren't going to make the play-offs and they had nothing to race for, their crowds tumbled.

 

As for Belle Vue, thanks for confirming what I already knew.. they had a decent team, thus the fans were interested. They remained interested until the team could no longer realistically make the playoffs and then the crowds plummeted. With no playoffs it would have been apparent by end of April they had no chance of winning the league and the crowds would have dropped off even quicker.

 

It's a shame though, that with these alleged increased crowds, all this excitement that they don't pay their riders....

Edited September 17, 2014 by BWitcher

[orion]

Yea you have to laugh at Drop a cog ..he makes a list of matches that try to back up his point but then get most of them wrong As bw said he only poster i know who proves himself wrong

[orion]

 

 

Ha ha! Yawn. I'll keep it simple.

 

I doubt you have much choice .

[E I Addio]

Ha ha! Yawn. I'll keep it simple.

 

Meetings between mediocre mid table teams have NEVER attracted big crowds even with the chance of a place in pokc.

 

Meetings involving the top teams chasing the title, especially towards the end of the season used to attract huge crowds when the top team was crowned champions.

 

Agree or disagree?

 

 

Disagree.

 

Lakesides biggest crowd of the season is always the Good Friday local derby with Eastbourne, and I daresay most local Derbys bring in the biggest crowd irrespective of position in the league.. The second biggest crowd of the season at Lakeside is usually Coventry because they come on a Saturday rather than the usual Friday fixture , which seems to be a more attractive night for many fans especially those with long journeys,. Nothing to do with league position.

 

Jon Cook wrote about attendance patterns in the Lakeside programme a year or two back. They tend to be reasonably good in the first few meetings of the season then slowly drop off until the start of the school holidays (which obviously

co-incides with better weather) when they pick up again. Other tracks may be the same, or they may not but I would think that general pattern applies most places to a degree.

 

You are putting forward a puerile argument.. There are so many factors that influence attendances, and not always the same factors at each track that it is impossible to sustain your argument unless you have carried out a detailed survey of attendance patterns at every track every track. The weather seems to affect the size of the crowd far more than league tables.

 

I think you are mistaken about the excitement of top teams chasing the title. Sometimes it was close other times one team had a clear lead by halfway through the season. I can also remember occasions when the League title wasn't decided by a match involving the eventual winners. Quite often a match between two other teams would mean one of them could no longer take the title. FWIW I would prefer a straight league in a perfect world because I think it is fairer but I wouldn't say that one system is necessarily a bigger crowd puller than the other taking all teams into account.

 

You said in an earlier post that it was your opinion. If it seems that way to you as an opinion that's fair enough but there I no way of proving factually that the plays-offs are responsible for crowds being smaller over a season than would have been the case anyway.

[Steve0]

Only one point needed to secure top spot and then to pick their opponents for the semis... Who will it be?

 

Whoever finishes top (KL or Poole) will surely pick Coventry.

[Nellie]

Only one point needed to secure top spot and then to pick their opponents for the semis... Who will it be?

I think KL need a draw to finish top of the table, as Poole have a better points difference.

[orion]

You said it, lol!

 

 

How are you doing with the challenge you set yourself the other day?

Fair play from 11 matches you pick out you change it to one to is truly amazing I never saw that many mistakes to be honest thou the little you know about speedway it's to be expected I guess

 

Any how in the last Weeks I guess Swindon v Wolves would have meant nowt without the play offs Leics v Swindon ,Wolves v Eastie any match with Lakeside I could go on but I guess it's to many to put on here

[orion]

OMG! Ppttthhhhogghhth!

 

That has to be the biggest WHOOOOOSSSSSSHHHHHHH I've ever seen, even from you!

 

Brilliant, thanks for coming, lol!

The biggest whoosh was you list going from 11 to 1 in a couple of hours ...As I said even by your low standards it was truly amazing

[orion]

Look, I know you're not the sharpest tool in the box but you are probably a nice fellow which is why I don't take the pee too much but do you know what RTFQ means, lol!

Anyone who makes a list like you do and nearly gets everyone wrong really should really not be talking about sharpest tool in the box etc . People take the mickey out of you all the time on here ,the trouble is your so stupid you can't see it .

 

It's no wonder over the years you have been re named drop a clanger on here as yet again you dropped another one today ...

Edited September 17, 2014 by orion

[foreverblue]

There are no meaningless meetings for the teams trying to achieve top spot or trying to get into the top four.

What happens when a team wins the league easily, there are no meaningful meetings in the last few weeks of the season.

[E I Addio]

I had assumed it was taken as read that factors such as the weather, derby meetings, school holidays, day of the week etc would have a dramatic effect on attendances. Most if not all are pretty much fixed and we have to work around them unlike the pokc which we don't need.

 

Specifically my 'puerile argument' is that the pokc doesn't 'bring fans in' when the whole season is taken into account. The pokc sycophants have been brainwashed by the uber hype from sky and the slightly bigger gates (not last season or the season before though) for the pokc semis and the big gates for the pokc final.

 

You can either take on board a theory and work with the available data or you can debunk the theory on the basis that accurate data isn't available. It's the difference between being open minded (the Earth is round) and 'I'll believe it when I see it' (the Earth is flat). I can see the merits of both (because I'm open minded lol!) but don't leave yourself open to criticism for having double standards.

 

The post that engaged me in the pokc debate this year was the claim that 'it brings fans in'.

 

I've given my theory explaining why I think the opposite.

 

The pokc sycophants' 'theory' is largely based on the 'logic' that if I'm right then without the pokc fans would be flocking in! Pretty much the same stupid mind set as someone who thinks every Muslim supports IS because every IS supporter is Muslim. Read the thread if you don't belive me.

 

When I said there was a risk of double standards, at what point were you planning on asking the pokc sycophants to provide a 'detailed survey of attendance patterns at every track' to back up the claim that 'it brings fans in', never mind explaining to them that the extra fans the pokc bring in are actually down to the day of the week, weather, derby meetings etc etc?

 

 

 

 

 

So now we are back to saying it is a theory. Well yes it is a theory but theory and fact are not the same thing. All we know for a fact is that the PO's generally bring in bigger crowds than normal matches and give the top clubs the chance of more income, but they are also an important carrot to the Sky contract, and whether we like it or not the Sky money is crucial to the sport in its present form. The other point we can say as a fact is that Sweden and Poland have a play-off system , so do a number of other sports, so if you are right all the TV companies and marketing men in those sports must be wrong.

 

Whether people like the play-offs or not, it is impossible to compare like with like. The difference in attendances between now and the days of the straight league vary for a whole range of reasons and attempt to compare the two systems is, for the average person , nothing more than guesswork .

 

Both systems have their advantages and disadvantages, and whichever way you go someone will not like it, but you can't make an omelette without breaking eggs.

 

You demean your own position by constantly referring to those who favour the play-offs as stupid and sycophants but your own theories are no more persuasive, and, as I said , are contrary to the thinking of the speedway authorities on the continent and those of the marketing men in other sports who presumably have some statistical information to work with.

[orion]

There are no meaningless meetings for the teams trying to achieve top spot or trying to get into the top four.

What happens when a team wins the league easily, there are no meaningful meetings in the last few weeks of the season.

Crowds go down and Teams go bust . it may not be the last weeks of the season a team might runway with it in June . Of course Fools like Drop a cog who think that it will go the wire every season and even if that was not the case the same amount fans were turn up to matches that have nothing on them .

[BWitcher]

I had assumed it was taken as read that factors such as the weather, derby meetings, school holidays, day of the week etc would have a dramatic effect on attendances. Most if not all are pretty much fixed and we have to work around them unlike the pokc which we don't need.

 

Specifically my 'puerile argument' is that the pokc doesn't 'bring fans in' when the whole season is taken into account. The pokc sycophants have been brainwashed by the uber hype from sky and the slightly bigger gates (not last season or the season before though) for the pokc semis and the big gates for the pokc final.

 

You can either take on board a theory and work with the available data or you can debunk the theory on the basis that accurate data isn't available. It's the difference between being open minded (the Earth is round) and 'I'll believe it when I see it' (the Earth is flat). I can see the merits of both (because I'm open minded lol!) but don't leave yourself open to criticism for having double standards.

 

The post that engaged me in the pokc debate this year was the claim that 'it brings fans in'.

 

I've given my theory explaining why I think the opposite.

 

The pokc sycophants' 'theory' is largely based on the 'logic' that if I'm right then without the pokc fans would be flocking in! Pretty much the same stupid mind set as someone who thinks every Muslim supports IS because every IS supporter is Muslim. Read the thread if you don't belive me.

 

When I said there was a risk of double standards, at what point were you planning on asking the pokc sycophants to provide a 'detailed survey of attendance patterns at every track' to back up the claim that 'it brings fans in', never mind explaining to them that the extra fans the pokc bring in are actually down to the day of the week, weather, derby meetings etc etc?

 

 

 

 

Your theory, as you have explained it, is that crowds are lower at meaningless matches and you've joyously highlighted a couple of end of season matches to back up your claim. However as has been pointed out to you, there are FAR more meaningless fixtures under a straight league system than a play off system. Thus, there is not even a need for 'pokc sycophants' ,as you delight in calling folk who disagree with you, to provide 'attendance figures' as you have debunked your own theory.

 

The second part of your 'theory' is that crowds are decling due to the playoffs, which again, can easily be shown to be incorrect due to the declining crowds for the 20 years prior to playoffs being introduced.

 

As E I Addio has correctly pointed out, playoffs work successfully in other countries and in other sports.

 

All of this evidence points to the fact that the problems within the sport are not play off related but caused by other factors. Factors that existed before the playoffs were introduced and have continued and worsened since.

 

Lastly, once again you've thrown something into your argument that isn't correct, namely your assertion that the 'crowds' for last years semi finals weren't any bigger than normal league meetings. You are wrong. I was at Wolverhampton v Birmingham and the crowd was a large one, far above that of a league meeting.

Edited September 18, 2014 by BWitcher

[Jive]

Do us a favour mods and close this thread yawn