Reds vs Cheetahs, Rnd 4.

[USARugger]

If Genia moved the ball to the left it was probably try time on the left wing, or through the 5m wide hole Aidan was running into, or at least large meters made and more quick ball against a defense literally scrambling to get back and realign.

Execution in this instance is a moot point as far as I'm concerned because it was probably the 3rd or 4th option he should have even considered given the circumstances, regardless of if there was a Cheetahs player offside or not.

I'm not all that confident we will match up with the Sharks up front next week so who is playing halfback might not even really matter as we don't have anyone close to a Du Preez or Pichot who can control a game from 9.

 

[Scrubber2050]

great win by the boys and an exciting game to watch - reckon the 27,000 would have gone home content not only with the win but the seesawing aspects.

Cooper's wayward passes are just crap - he seems to chuck more bad ones than good ones that actually come off and put another player into space.

The box kick should be fucking outlawed by QLD. (certauinly by Genia)

Those 4 or 5 mistakes cost plenty. The difference is probably 40-50 metres in field position. Glad I'm not a piggie on the dfield because I'd be filthy.

 

[RedsHappy]

You do realise the first game against the force was the Reds first home game after winning the title the previous year? So there's a huge influx of people who bought tickets to see the current champions play.

The second game was against the Tahs which has always been one of the Reds biggest games.

More importantly, you're comparing numbers that aren't the same. I would dare say there are less Cheetahs fans over in Brisbane than there are New South Welshmen and Perthites. By playing Australian teams you're going to have a larger draw card than a lowly African team that a majority of rugby following Brisbane residents know or care about.

I would also dare say, a lot of people who bought three match memberships haven't turned up as they booked them for the three weeks in a row we have in a month. Rather than using the odd game here against a crappy team.

So I'm afraid to say, you're really grasping at straws here, numbers may have been down compared to other matches but statistically speaking your data pool is so limited that you can't infer anything.

Instead of searching for a rushed put-down and lots of piecemeal arguments for it, please read the post carefully that you refer to and then dismiss.

Should you care to read it carefully, you will see clearly that is has nothing whatsoever to do with any of the observations you make in refuting some other line of argument entirely that you have invented for me so as to dismiss my post (for some obscure reason).

The relevant post of mine that you quote was solely to reflect upon another poster's contention that (a) 6:40pm starts intrinsically dampened Reds' crowd numbers and (b) early season crowd numbers were always comparatively weaker than later season numbers and built up from there. I purely extracted the figures I did so's to show that IMO these were debatable propositions. End of story.

 

[RedsHappy]

Just a few facts that might have effected those previous crowd numbers:-

In 2012 the Reds V Stormers game was not until Round 9. on 20th April.
Up until then the Stormers had only lost one game to the Crusaders (24 - 31 in NZ. & the Reds had lost 3 games (one against the Bulls 8 - 61).

So the crowd turned out in numbers that night to see the Reds toss the Stormers, but alas the Stormers won 23 - 13, but the fact it was well into April would account for the higher numbers, against a side that was No 1 at the time.

And as for the Hurricanes game - it's obvious that half the crowd were expatriate Kiwis. and there are always large crowds when a Kiwi side is in town.
Sorry to blow your theory to bits, but a bit of research helps.

Two points to this:

(a) your apparently detailed 'research' is essentially a personal contention of yours re why the whole, or large parts of, that 2012 Stormers game Reds crowd came to the game. For a crowd size that big, short of some detailed professional market research, that is mere personal speculation on your part. It may apply to some parts of the crowd granted, but equally large tracts of that crowd may have come simply to continue their interest in watching and supporting the 2011 champs, whomever they were playing in 2012. (And that 'half the crowd was expat Kiwis' in that 'Canes game, I'd respectfully refute from my time at that game. Yes, there were some 'Canes flags flying in spots, but the obvious Kiwi contingent was nothing like it is for Cru games and I certainly doubt it was more than say 15%-20% of that crowd.)

(b) I clearly stated that I knew I was playing with isolated bits of data re those game selections and that they may mean nothing too significant.

But I stand by my theory you referred to above (and I stated it as just that, a theory unproven) that the Reds need to go on winning a lot at home and mostly in an entertaining manner and further get into S15 home SFs and Fs in order to ultimately hold on to and perhaps build current levels of QRU $ income and Suncorp crowd levels.

You seem to refute this: '....blown to bits....'. In which case I'd be most interested in knowing why you think (say) 2008-2010 Reds crowd levels and QRU income from them were very materially lower than has been the case since 2012. In fact, those key performance parameters up to 2009 had become so deeply and consistently poor, the QRU by 2009 was essentially bankrupt.

 

[gel]

@Redshappy isn't.

 

[emuarse]

Two points to this:

(a) your apparently detailed 'research' is essentially a personal contention of yours re why the whole, or large parts of, that 2012 Stormers game Reds crowd came to the game. For a crowd size that big, short of some detailed professional market research, that is mere personal speculation on your part. It may apply to some parts of the crowd granted, but equally large tracts of that crowd may have come simply to continue their interest in watching and supporting the 2011 champs, whomever they were playing in 2012. (And that 'half the crowd was expat Kiwis' in that 'Canes game, I'd respectfully refute from my time at that game. Yes, there were some 'Canes flags flying in spots, but the obvious Kiwi contingent was nothing like it is for Cru games and I certainly doubt it was more than say 15%-20% of that crowd.)

(b) I clearly stated that I knew I was playing with isolated bits of data re those game selections and that they may mean nothing too significant.

But I stand by my theory you referred to above (and I stated it as just that, a theory unproven) that the Reds need to go on winning a lot at home and mostly in an entertaining manner and further get into S15 home SFs and Fs in order to ultimately hold on to and perhaps build current levels of QRU $ income and Suncorp crowd levels.

You seem to refute this: '..blown to bits..'. In which case I'd be most interested in knowing why you think (say) 2008-2010 Reds crowd levels and QRU income from them were very materially lower than has been the case since 2012. In fact, those key performance parameters up to 2009 had become so deeply and consistently poor, the QRU by 2009 was essentially bankrupt.

RH,
As this is not a court case, I have no intention of going further into a dissertation as to the forecasting of Suncorp numbers for the Super 15 season.
Suffice to say ' a swallow a summer doth not make'. Translation: The attendance to the first home game does not transmute to reliable predictions for the season.
From what I have emboldened of your text, you yourself have said it is insignificent - so be it!

 

[liquor box]

RH,
As this is not a court case, I have no intention of going further into a dissertation as to the forecasting of Suncorp numbers for the Super 15 season.
Suffice to say ' a swallow a summer doth not make'. Translation: The attendance to the first home game does not transmute to reliable predictions for the season.
From what I have emboldened of your text, you yourself have said it is insignificent - so be it!

Add to that the three game memberships.

The memberships figures would not indicate which games are the three that people would select.

I would hazard a guess there would be plenty of people who would prefer the Kiwi games, the local derbies or the Saffa games.