The National Rugby League’s vision is to be “the most entertaining, most engaging and most respected sport”.
This was the guiding statement in the code’s strategic plan that was released at the end of 2012, which was to be a blueprint for the five-years following until the end of the record broadcasting-rights deal it had just signed.
As one of six main objectives’ areas in the strategic plan, the “rugby league objective encompasses four key focuses: Fans, Members, Volunteers and Code of Conduct”.
The 2017 ‘Fans’ objectives are listed as:
• An improved game-day experience will have driven growth in average elite game attendance by 4 per cent to 20,000;
• Fan satisfaction will be measured at record levels;
• A coordinated plan will have improved supporter facilities at all levels.
From these goals, the NRL outlines initiatives they will pursue in order to reach these targets. One of these is to ‘grow our fan-base’ in which they outline how they will ‘consolidate the current fan-base and generate new fans’.
• Improving the game-day experience;
• Directly engaging with members and fans;
• Targeting specific marketing initiatives at potential fans;
• Delivering a five-year membership plan (400,000 members by 2017 end);
• Pursuing a stadium strategy that places matches in optimal locations.
With such professionalised organisational targets and one of the highest paid executive teams across Australian sport, you’d think these objectives would be attainable for the NRL across a five-year period.
However, after three years NRL crowd figures have tumbled with season averages down by almost 8.2 per cent over Rounds 1 – 26, and 6.86 per cent over the regular season and finals series combined from 2012 until 2015.
While these figures might not resonate with those of you reading this, they are alarming. The average crowd in 2012 was 16,423 for the regular home-and-away season, today that figure is down to 15,074 – only just clearing a respectable 15,000 mark.
But why have crowds decreased? Not only do these figures show the NRL is yet to gain any new fans, they can be interpreted to show that fans they already had in 2012 stopped attending games.
Over the last three years, the NRL has gone about boosting their average fan attendance by playing the ‘right game at the right venue’, a strategy that understandably involved moving blockbuster games to bigger stadiums. The plan was designed to ensure fans weren’t put off attending by having to watch the game from a muddy patch of grass on hill.
It was a twenty-first century idea that you have to give some credit for, as it has achieved some minor success. Many fans have enjoyed a big-game experience on Easter weekend, at derbies, or during rivalry rounds. But this hasn’t got the results the administrators’ were looking for.
The root of the crowd problems for the NRL goes much deeper, and to understand it one must look at three important events that have occurred during Dave Smith’s tenure.
Firstly, the Australian Rugby League Commission banned the shoulder charge from the game. They did so at the end of 2012 on the advice of a recommendation made from a detailed report into the effects of the shoulder charge.
The ARLC acted to protect players and reduce the risk of cooperate liability, which at the time was under much scrutiny in the National Football League.
While you cannot label this a bad move, especially considering some of the recent happenings surrounding the tackle, it’s one of the key reasons behind a reduced ‘live’ atmosphere at NRL games today. Nothing was better than a ‘big hit’ that had the visual aesthetics to excite the crowd, the potential to turn a match.
Secondly, midway through the 2013 season, the NRL announced it would take a zero-tolerance approach to on-field punching following Paul Gallen’s one-two on Nate Myles.
In other words, they banned punching. The politically correct will list this as a win and it’s hard to argue against when your talking about mum’s letting their boys take up the sport.
Punching died because of the time it got banned in. Around the same time as the ban, many ‘king-hits’ in Sydney had tragic consequences.
But the game was for 100 years built on toughness, and those who didn’t want to be involved in some argy-bargy, didn’t play the game.
The banning undoubtedly took some of the excitement away. You used to go to a game knowing in the back of you mind that something could possibly erupt, and everyone was out of their chair as soon as it happened.
Take the ‘Battle of Brookvale’ as an example, the atmosphere that night following the brawl was incredible. Again, we’ve lost that, and we’ve lost another critical element that adds to the ‘live’ experience.
Last but not least, the live NRL experience has been ruined by the constant referrals to the video referee by on-field-officials. Time and time again we are subjected to decisions being sent up to the man in the box.
The fans are sick of it. No longer can you celebrate a length of the field try with a high five among the group behind you who have annoyed you for the last 65 minutes.
It is taking away from the atmosphere at the ground – the feelings, emotions and acts you get to experience and take part in.
While three considerations are not meant to be the sole reasons why crowds have dwindled, they are observations made that mainstream media continue to make reference to in their discussions about NRL attendances. You can sight the meat-pie prices all you want, even the car-parking at suburban ovals, but for me, the problem lies in the changes to the product.
The game has forever been changed with the rubbing out of the shoulder charge and the much-loved rugby league ‘stink’ is no longer. The drastic increases in referee referrals’ has too, changed the way the game is experienced.
The NRL has seriously fallen behind on its objective targets. They need to improve some of the aspects of the game-day experience is now, and the in-coming CEO should be putting it at the top of their agenda.
Otherwise it will be too late. Fans are shifting, the A-League is growing, the AFL is a juggernaut.
Are any of these three considerations resonating with you? Have they been overlooked in favour of food prices and transport?
Crosscoder
Roar Guru
And it's a lot harder for Fox to retain decent revenues without the NRL.They lose the NRL when they(Foxtel) have already lost 37% in reported earnings,due higher programming and marketing costs,then it's good luck. Worth noting the usual News Ltd attack dog Darren Davidson media expert, in the Australian today,has done a 360. "With a bullish Mr Lew(Optus CEO) eyeing off the NRL's streaming rights,and perhaps even the TV rights,the cash pouring into sport from media companies and now telcos shows no sign of letting up." The platform for Optus I suggest would be Fetch.
Jimmmy
Guest
And the interest in RU ? Look at your own backyard my friend.
realityCheck
Guest
Hmm. 20, 30 years ago any moron could afford a car, a big flat and a ticket to a game. No double digit IQ required. Some of you older blokes here may just not realize that this country has been flogged off to a few rich bastards and a lot of the younger folks are struggling just to survive...
Mamma
Guest
You failed to mention Canberra and storm being handed premierships with a larger unofficial salary cap...You think they got all those stars and officials went gee that's amazing and did nothing till after the event...
Mamma
Guest
Optus still has to find someone to carry the footy signal and its hard to sell a service on EPL and NRL
Sleiman Azizi
Roar Guru
"Neanderthal stuff went out with the Neanderthals." Classic! Except that the genes intermingled with ours and, well, you get the picture...
Crosscoder
Roar Guru
It (Super League)was nothing more than mehtodology for News ltd to secure major content for its new Pay TV set up.Nothing more nothing less. The proof is in the pudding with the very first meeting at a function attended by Ribot,Porky Morgan and Rupert Murdoch in Brisbane.All were aware of Rupert's new Pay TV introduction and it was the former two who suggested rugby league as the prime force to fill demand content,with far stronger clubs. One can glibly use the term to"invigorate".In fact it was more to do with new content and club profitability. It cost News $600m est and Super league was a failure .If rugby league can \survive a SL war,they can survive the predictions of sticks and clipper. The evidence they got it wrong re support was Souths ,who were flicked later on.and yet today have the highest membership numbers and profile. Now it appears Foxtel is getting rear ended by Optus re the EPL,and Optus is looking at streaming and possibly Pay TV.The SL war coming back to bit News in the you know where.
seajay23
Guest
This is such a complex question, and as a bit of a numbers tragic as well as a league tragic I have a few thoughts. - Statistically crowd variation is not outside any significance level. Basically NRL and AFL bump around their average crowds. There has been very little statistically significant change over the last decade, except maybe the fall in Melbourne AFL crowds and the rise in Adelaide crowds due to the the revamped Adelaide oval. - Weather makes a huge difference,; a few wet weekends can kill crowd levels. - NRL is hopeless at choosing the right ground for maximising crowds and maybe they don't care. EG If you play every Manly game at Brookvale on a Sunday afternoon you will average 18000, play Monday nights and other odd times and crowds plummet. Why? Because Brookie (or Leichhardt) on a Sunday Arvo is an experience that can't be beaten. I have taken my Irish wife (who never gave a fu** about NRL) to Brookie on a Sunday arvo and she got it, a joyous assembly of working class Sydney people like you don't get anywhere else in this mad town. We shouldn't forget the heritage that our game has. Look at Belmore this year; amazing stuff that enhances community. AFL in Sydney can't match that passion and we should be proud of the history and deep cultural roots that League has in our city and state. - The whole SOO disruption of the regular season is an absolute crowd killer.A full third of the season basically shuts down due to SOO: play it as a three game exclusive over two weeks and combine it with a knock-out comp with Pacific, Maori and indigenous teams as a 'festival' of league - so much more exciting than four dud games with no rep players over multiple weekends. If the NRL were focused on maximising live crowds, they could do way much better, but their focus is on TV/Internet viewing; fair enough if that is where the revenue comes from, but they have to make a choice. Honestly, give a normal bozo like me a season draw and the chance to choose times and venues and I promise I could lift crowds by 20% within two years. But I would probably damage TV viewing by 10%. Food prices, beer prices, half-time 'entertainment' (God help us), they are meaningless; you go to see a good game with a like-minded crowd around you. It's a footy game, not a concert or a circus, don't even try to compete with such crap. And rule changes; nah, shoulder charges, punch-ups and the like don't draw crowds, trust me, you want the mums of this country to feel their kiddies are safe. Neanderthal stuff went out with the Neanderthals.
Jemima
Guest
No evidence - just ranting but at least you are watching GWS and GCS games - good for you...BTW you mightn't have watched too closely as there is no sideline eye segue at the AFL as there is at NRL games which enable you to see the camera side of the ground. GWS and GCS get lower end Sydney based NRL averages and nearly the same as the Storm who have "won" 4 premierships...
Jemima
Guest
NRL had 300K memberships (average 20K) yet 100K turn up every weekend - funny...Roosters have 13K members but get 10K average and half the crowd are SFS members..
G
Guest
If you don't find League entertaining why are you reading about it and commenting on it?
G
Guest
I think you'll find every Sydney team is cared about greatly; unlike say the Titans. Axing teams with decades, even a century of tradition for some won't achieve anything but disenchantment.
G
Guest
The reasons you have listed for lower crowd attendances are the same reasons why I only find myself watching my team and usually (over past 2 seasons) no other RL of a weekend. The vidoe referee referrals wcen for the most basic of tries requires a minimum of half a dozen looks at, and they still muck them up at times. Whilst I'm not fussed about the shoulder charge, surely banning head contact only would have been enough; and I'll admit I've always loved a good footy brouhaha, but the worst thing about punching being banned is the enormous amount of niggle that now goes on in games, as players know that they won't cop a smack for their dirty play.
Vhavnal
Roar Rookie
so the author is pretty much saying to bring back everything which made this game "Barbaric" and fans will start coming?..mate, this is the professional era, companies are more worried about being sued than anything else.. NRL sponsors will not want to dish out millions to players who get 'badly' injured during a game..the rules were created to protect the sponsors, not the players..
JayBob
Guest
Those 3 points have definitely effected crowd and TV attendances, you are right. People are disagreeing because it allows them to mount their high horse. The same ppl disagreeing would have been cheering every time there was a big shoulder charge a couple of years ago. I don't think they are the only 3 reasons, but they definitely have an effect.
Wayne Lovell
Roar Guru
Total crowd numbers are a farce, 9 failing teams would still make a respectable total figure.
Cathar Treize
Roar Guru
And Sticks, since the Bears are no longer in the comp, Norths Leagues puts a hell of a lot more money into local sports including the league clubs of the region. So it would only make sense Crows Nest Hotel & Norths Leagues would be rival establishments in the hospitality game. Good on them sponsoring the union & AFL because I imagine those clubs would not have the social club presence that Norths provide. This may have something to do with them not supporting a local rugby league club!
Jemima
Guest
There aren't 2 RL games on at the same time hence maximizing ratings..
Cathar Treize
Roar Guru
So the Storm have a lower crowd average than Melbourne City & Melbourne Rebels hey? I can tell you Sydney received far more migration of people from Victoria etc particularly in the 1970's than Melbourne did from the northern states. However in the last decade or two the flow of migration from NZ & the northern states to Victoria has increased hence rugby league will only become more popular in Victoria, as well as what we are seeing in WA. I think you should give more credit to the Storm. Top club & great lot of supporters. I don't think you could say the Storm have been given anywhere near the leg up the Swans get (hence a former AFL CEO having to cheat the cap just to retain club produced stars), and now the GWS, Suns & don't forget the Lions being handed a few trophies courtesy of a larger salary cap.
clipper
Guest
As I keep pointing out, this thread is about dwindling crowds, not TV numbers. It is true that the Swans have played the finals many times, just like the Storm always seem to be near the top of the table, although the difference is that the Swans have the highest attendance in the city, the Storm the lowest.