Talk:List of sports attendance figures/Archive 1

message: How did you people manage to make a listing of sports attendance figures without including badminton? It's widely regarded as the second most popular participant sport in the world after soccer. I came here hoping to find that fact confirmed but a simple text search shows you meticulous fact finders completely glazed over any mention of badminton in the record books. When this sport was added to the Olympics in 1992 it was the first event to sell out. This is a massively popular sport world wide and there is no mention of attendance figures here.
You missed a spot people. Sorry to break the news.
I really doubt badminton is the second most popular sport--Thugchildz 04:52, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Ever hear of Badminton?

message: I have attempted to reuse the data in this page, presenting it in a way that is easier to analyze. This includes dividing up the page by country, and changing the stats used. Added stats are "teams", "total attendance per round", "popularity" (see link for meaning), "number of rounds" and "Visits per person per season". The temporary home of this work is User:Evan_Roberts/Sandbox. --Evan Roberts 01:27, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Useful stats and good presentation

message: The correlation between revenue and attendance is quite weak. For example NFL is on a par with Major League Baseball financially despite having less than one quarter of the total attendance because it charges much higher ticket prices and has a larger television contract. 
Uh...no. The reason is that NFL teams play 16 regular season games each, while MLB teams play 162 regular season games each. —Wrathchild (talk) 19:24, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, that's the reason why the total attendance is lower, and it is the lack of correlation between total attendances and revenue that was being commented on. CalJW 00:24, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Doesn't make it any clearer. And, besides, it reads like original research. Any cites? —Wrathchild (talk) 15:34, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems perfectly simple to me. All the facts mentioned are very well known and indisputably true. I don't think cites are necessary for every single statement of fact, as the footnotes could get longer than the articles, which looks awful, but if you want to find some for this, go ahead. There are Wikipedia articles on the relevant TV contracts, and there is plenty of info about ticket prices on the net. CalJW 04:43, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NFL vs. MLB 

message: Published (on the net anyway) attendances are very spotty, which has me wondering if there is actually any official record keeping being done. --Paul 08:44, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Let's wait and see if they put out a press release at the end of the competition. If it can't be added due to lack of data, it won't be the only missing competition, or the biggest. ReeseM 00:49, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Seems like each national union releases figures. From the ARU 2004 Annual Report attendances in Australia totalled 472,058 and the average was 25,981. Source:http://www.rugby.com.au/verve/_resources/ARU_2004_Annual_Report_-_Marketing_Report.pdf
According to NZ Rugby World total attendances for New Zealand in 2005 were 675,500. Source: http://www.nzrugbyworld.com/article.aspx?articleid=1547
Maybe if we can get some decent sources from each country the total would be a good estimate. Soundabuser 14:35, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Considering it is the first season with 14 teams, I'm quite sure they will be keen to let everyone know what the average crowd was. So will just wait and see. Cvene64 03:55, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Super 14

message: Does the chart strike anyone else as being unwieldy?  It is difficult to pull out the information you want for a specific entry.  Perhaps it should be reorganized by sport to help pull the data together into a format that would help assist those looking for one particular league?  Personally, I think that sorting by average is of greater use than sorting by total attendance.  I would be willing to reorganize the chart if nobody has any objections. Resolute 16:33, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd agree with the sort by averages. Most of the leagues listed have a decent amount of games, so it's not as though averages will be inflated by a small sample. Whereas now they are favouring, to some degree, competitons that have a huge amount of games. --Charlie The Wonder Dog 09:40, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

text: It's a toss up which is best. Obviously in an ideal world Wikipedia would provide sortable tables. The reorganised version ranks NFL Europe, which has 30 games a season and has been pretty much of a  failure, above the NBA. Calsicol 02:03, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sortable would be best, but the old table had a bunch of nothing baseball/ice hockey leagues with very low attendances outweighing a number of national leagues, just by sheer weight of games played.--Angry mob mulls options 08:14, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Chart organization

message: On reading the section about "leagues to be added", particularly, "Australian rules football: Victorian Football League, Northern Territory Football League, Northern Tasmanian Football League, Southern Football League (Tasmania)", I thought I would help out with the last two.  The only information I can find is that the average crowd at an NTasFL regular season game is under 1000, and the grand final for the SFL(Tas) last year was about 5000.  As such I thought they wouldn't be big enough and planned to delete them, but there are others listed that are smaller - it is really worth adding leagues of this size to the table? -- Chuq 10:05, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I say - it couldn't hurt. But there is a case for reorganisation, say the elite level in the main table, then minor leagues elswhere. Or division by sport, or by nation, etc. --Angry mob mulls options 12:41, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If Appalachian League and Norwegian Premier League are counted, then even the smallest Tasmanian Australian rules football leagues seem quite large in comparison, and they do matter enough for their respective leagues to publish attendances.  I guess if the league is too small to publish attendances, then it is not noteworthy enough to be included.  The exceptions are the VFL which is one of the larger state leagues, but can't publish all attendances due to a few being curtainraisers for AFL games.--Rulesfan 03:34, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  How small is too small? 

message: Isn't info available for the National League 1 (UK) crowds? although not great, they must be close to a 1,000 average. Also, the NL1 grand final has greater crowds than some already listed.
:Crowds are available on 7 of the NL1 clubs' official sites; Batley & Doncaster don't appear to publish theirs, and I can't find an official site for Rochdale. Here's the average figures I've got from the varioue sites -Batley: 976 (1 figure missing, all figures from other clubs); Doncaster: 1,303 (1 figure missing, all figures from other clubs); Halifax: 1,577; Hull KR: 3,423; Leigh: 2,461; Oldham: 1,010; Rochdale: 897 (all figures from other clubs); Whitehaven: 2,165; Widnes: 3,528; York: 1,873;... Which comes up with a surprisingly healthy average of 1,921. I can't find any sites that collect these figures so I've had to do 'em myself; I don't know if they can be included. CharlieT 21:04, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Update: Individual crowd figures are available from www.totalrl.com - the 2005 NL1 season had an average of 2,351, and a total of 207,202, including playoffs. CharlieT 13:34, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rugby League's NL1 

message: Anyone have some info on Basketball leagues outside the US? China, Italy, Spain etc. I Can't find any concrete figures googling. For a sport sometimes called the 2nd biggest on the Planet info is hard to come by.
:I'll be adding those of the Philippine Basketball Association. --Howard the Duck 15:30, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  non US Basketball 

message: I note the figures for the Australian leagues include final matches for the NRL and the A-League but not for the AFL.  If the 9 AFL finals matches are included then for 2005 the total crowds for the AFL would be 6,762,559 with an average of 36,554.  See http://stats.rleague.com/afl/crowds/summary.html.  For the sake of consistency I think the above aggregate and average should be included. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dcorri (talk • contribs) 13:49, 4 July 2006
:The finals matches should definately not be included for the NRL and A-League, as they are counted separately for all other leagues in the world.  This may be artificially inflating their respective figures.  Some minor leagues publish attendances for finals series only (such as the VFL and NTFL).--Rulesfan 03:36, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Home and away 

message: This is noted as 1,102 from a total of 184 games.  I am not sure where the 184 game figure comes from as it is not mentioned in the cited article. In fact. looking at the 2004 ladder listed at http://www.wafl.com.au/default.aspx?s=historydisplay&aid=97943, each of the 9 teams plays 20 matches during the home and away meaning a total of 90 home and away games for the competion.  There are a total of 4 final matches (see http://www.wafl.com.au/default.aspx?s=historydisplay&aid=93053).  Rather than 184 games this would mean a total of 94 games and would mean the average would be a more healthy 2157 per game.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dcorri (talk • contribs) 13:49, 4 July 2006
:It appears the contributor erroneously added all the team's games played together to get 180. Nothing stopping you from fixing them, except that I just did :p--Angry mob mulls options 14:38, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  WAFL average 

message: This list really belongs here; this is transplanted from the article:
This table is incomplete. Please help Wikipedia by adding more leagues. Notable leagues which are not yet listed include:
* Basketball: The national leagues in Europe and Latin America.
* Football (soccer): many leagues worldwide, including the top divisions in Algeria, Argentina, Mexico, Indonesia, Iran,South Africa, Uruguay, Chile, Colombia.
* Rugby league: Queensland Cup and NSWRL Premier League
* Rugby union: national leagues in South Africa and Italy.
* Australian rules football: Victorian Football League
* Volleyball: leagues in Europe and Brazil.
* Handball: leagues in Europe.
* Cricket: All English competitions except Twenty20, Australian Leagues, Indian Leagues and South African Leagues.
Notable competitions which could be added include:
:Basketball: Adriatic League
:Football: AFC Champions League; CAF Champions League; Copa Libertadores de América; Royal League
:Rugby union: Anglo-Welsh Cup.
--Spewmaster 04:18, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moved text from article 

message: Yeah, there should be a place for things like British and Irish Lions tours and related tours.--HamedogTalk|@ 14:45, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  place for events that aren't world cups but occur every four years 

message: The CHL and it's three component leagues, the QMJHL, the OHL, and the WHL are amature leagues, not professional.  I'm going to switch it unless someone has a good reason not to.  Kevlar67 00:02, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Canadian Hockey League 

message: I removed this form the attendance table because the average capacity of all the stadiums (capacity's based from the league's wiki article) is only about 46,000. So even if every stadium sold out every game, the average could only have been 46,000, not 57-some like the table said. Based on that I assume it was random vandilism, if not add it back with real numbers with a source.
Sportyguy03 19:53, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It was previously in there with about 25K, also uncited... going by this , there aren't going to be any cites.--I like pants 04:08, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Mexico Soccer League

message: What is going on here? Is this the top 16 richest Sports Clubs? If So, why aren't the Toronto Maple Leafs on it? On the Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment wiki article, they are worth 325 million CAD, (I changed it into 214.2 million Euros like the section says), so it should be #4. But It surprises me an Icehockey team is worth more than some of the NFL, MLB or Premier league teams listed. Could someone clarify this?
Sportyguy03 21:03, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Richest Sports Teams

message: Whoever wrote this list have forgotten the race that is listed by the Guinness Book of Records as the biggest one-day sporting event in the world - the 24 hours of Le Mans at 350,000, I would like to mention that but it is not garanteed to be accurate as I cannot find a source anywhere nor I have any access to the library for the time being. Willirennen 13:30, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  attendance figures for Le Mans 24 hr 

message: The figure doesn't seem to add up.  I get 15,732 ...  Going to add this year's figures anyway. --Rulesfan 23:10, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  2006 AFL NAB Cup average 

message: This article is 75KB in size, and is not going to get any smaller. Therefore, I propose splitting off the "Domestic professional leagues" section into a seperate article, entitled List of attendance figures at domestic professional sports  leagues. (Rather a long a title - please feel free to suggest something better). This would reduce the main article down to 45KB or so. What do people think? Tompw (talk) 10:35, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In view of the lack of comment, I've gone ahead and done this. Tompw (talk) 17:05, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article split