Re: 4,839 : Mon Jul 27, 2015 6:46 pm  

meast wrote:

do people want a team that competes and is seen as serious challengers for the end of season honours and will adapt their game to suit, or do people want a team that plays exciting, basketball style rugby league?

because IMO you can't have both, i wouldn't say we play "boring 1 up dumb rugby", we play to our strengths and to negate our opponents weaknesses i should imagine, sometimes it's attractive to watch sometimes not.

as a fan though i want us to win, i want to cheer and celebrate wins rather than feel satisfied that despite us losing we played some exciting stuff.
i appreciate people want value for money and such, but it's sport, sport used to be about winning, and if it was entertaining too then it was a bonus.
it seems these days people won't accept a team winning unless they are been entertained at the same time, we all want to see our teams win with flair and style etc but personally i would rather have a team that is winning that entertaining.

I totally understand what ur saying but if we carry on playing this boring rugby the fans ain't gonna come watch I've never been as bored in my life as I was at yesterday's game

Re: 4,839 : Mon Jul 27, 2015 7:18 pm  

People i know who don't come anymore cite cost as a reason, especially if they are a family and can go and do something much cheaper for longer.
I also think a lot of people that came on the back of cheap ST and a hint of success only came to see trophies and when they didn't come they decided to not bother anymore and that's why we're back to the diehards we had pre-2009 !!

Re: 4,839 : Mon Jul 27, 2015 7:21 pm  

i agree that yesterday's game lacked intensity and excitement but i suppose it depends what you like about a game that defines it as boring, my 14 yo nephew thought it was a cracking game for example.

i could watch a high intensity, 6-6 draw and not think it was boring, if you just want fast flowing open games with lots of tries being scored then most games would be boring.

and to be honest i think most fans who go most weeks wouldn't be swayed by the style of rugby we play as to whether they attend, hopefully as jools and other have said, it was that poor because it is the start of the holidays for lots of people.

Re: 4,839 : Mon Jul 27, 2015 7:59 pm  

meast wrote:

i agree that yesterday's game lacked intensity and excitement but i suppose it depends what you like about a game that defines it as boring, my 14 yo nephew thought it was a cracking game for example.

i could watch a high intensity, 6-6 draw and not think it was boring, if you just want fast flowing open games with lots of tries being scored then most games would be boring.

and to be honest i think most fans who go most weeks wouldn't be swayed by the style of rugby we play as to whether they attend, hopefully as jools and other have said, it was that poor because it is the start of the holidays for lots of people.

What's wrong with fast flowing open games, It's usually a sign of good ball handling skills carried out at pace, I thought that was what the game was supposed to be like.

You must have loved the old winter unlimited tackles game.

You could be right about most fans not being swayed by the style of rugby we play, Probably why there are so few of them. I don't know that of course but they have never been able to pull a crowd in while I have been watching the game, except an odd game against Leeds or Bradford.

I have seen you make reference to the number of fans in Huddersfield who became Bulls or Rhino's fans, Why have they not come back now that we are a top four team.

I really don't have any answers, But I think style will have as much to do with it as start of Holidays

Re: 4,839 : Mon Jul 27, 2015 11:10 pm  

meast wrote:

do people want a team that competes and is seen as serious challengers for the end of season honours and will adapt their game to suit, or do people want a team that plays exciting, basketball style rugby league?

because IMO you can't have both, i wouldn't say we play "boring 1 up dumb rugby", we play to our strengths and to negate our opponents weaknesses i should imagine, sometimes it's attractive to watch sometimes not.

as a fan though i want us to win, i want to cheer and celebrate wins rather than feel satisfied that despite us losing we played some exciting stuff.
i appreciate people want value for money and such, but it's sport, sport used to be about winning, and if it was entertaining too then it was a bonus.
it seems these days people won't accept a team winning unless they are been entertained at the same time, we all want to see our teams win with flair and style etc but personally i would rather have a team that is winning that entertaining.

Are you seriously suggesting that a team who play open rugby can't win things, That they can't be" serious challengers for end of season honours".

"Sport used to be about winning",
It didn't used to be about winning at Huddersfield, not since 1962 and I doubt you were there to see that.
" To be entertained is a bonus", you have got to be having a laugh.

I suspect you have had a few cans.

Re: 4,839 : Tue Jul 28, 2015 8:42 am  

Poor attendance, but we have had this long enough. The core base is roughly the same as it has been the last 5 years. It's got to improve as Ken Davy States if we want a team that is competing out numbers have to increase to keep it financially viable.

Problem is no body seems to have the answer to get bums on seats! More surely can be done in the firm of marketing. On our part we need to look at friends, nephews, nieces ect.

On field we are winning or competing in 99 percent of games. the team we have got/ tactics we play can call for middle domination and good defence which may not look as eye catching as Leeds with there fringe attack and flowing play but is working for us.

Re: 4,839 : Tue Jul 28, 2015 9:00 am  

I think £24 walk up price is too high. I know you can pre book but even £21 is what Wigan charge on the day. Not sure who is higher than us (I know it's sometimes £22 for a terrace but as we don't have a terrace I think it is fair to compare the lowest price you can get into a ground for not necessarily like for like facilities.

I think a fair few Huddesfield fans got in at Catalans for £14 (20 euros) on the day so expecting them to pay a tenner more a week later shows why prices may be off putting. And I know most who went to Perpignan would have season tickets but I think the comparison is valid.

Would dropping the price increase the revenue by getting more through the gate???

A competitive price would probably boost away support so it might just work but in truth we are where we are and £16, £20 or £24 might be neither here nor there and we just have to get in with it.

Re: 4,839 : Tue Jul 28, 2015 9:26 am  

I think the converted will pay what ever the price is as we love our rugby and our team! However we need to get body's in and convert them....that's down to price.
Shouldn't have a game day or ore book price just a price! Would have the behind the posts at a tenner and main stands at 20.
We need to get the body's in, have a good effort from the singers at the back and the band to get the atmosphere going and a good spectacle on the field. To get people to keep coming it must be fun and entertaining

Re: 4,839 : Tue Jul 28, 2015 10:00 am  

adamhuddsgiant wrote:

I think the converted will pay what ever the price is as we love our rugby and our team! However we need to get body's in and convert them....that's down to price.
Shouldn't have a game day or ore book price just a price! Would have the behind the posts at a tenner and main stands at 20.
We need to get the body's in, have a good effort from the singers at the back and the band to get the atmosphere going and a good spectacle on the field. To get people to keep coming it must be fun and entertaining

I think your right in the hard-core though Challenge Cup and play off crowds in the past show the size of that contingent is quite small.

Totally agree on pre day/ game day prices it seems far more prevalent in RL than other sports and is something we could do without especially as it penalised casual fans and those that can not get to a ground on non match days.

It has been said before but £24 for the Fantastic Media stand is madness and perhaps a membership stand where you can get in for say £15 or a family for £30 could be a way to go. The amount of on the day money that stand takes must be tiny and it could surely be better utilised and hopefully get new people in.

Re: 4,839 : Tue Jul 28, 2015 11:01 am  

Jo Jumbuck wrote:

Are you seriously suggesting that a team who play open rugby can't win things, That they can't be" serious challengers for end of season honours".

"Sport used to be about winning",
It didn't used to be about winning at Huddersfield, not since 1962 and I doubt you were there to see that.
" To be entertained is a bonus", you have got to be having a laugh.

I suspect you have had a few cans.

i'm suggesting that by being successful, teams usually have to play conservatively at times, and have to resort to boring 1 up rugby to win games, i can't think of many times who just throw the ball around for 80 minutes who were succesful, warrington did it a few years ago and got found wanting when they had to adjust the way they played.

my point was that if people want to see us just play open rugby all the time then they shouldn't complain when we fall short of winning things.