Monkey Tennis Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 25 minutes ago, Tartantony said: 46 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said: Celtic's average gate rose from 44,965 in 2015/16 to 55,581 the following season, the one that saw Rangers join the top flight. This represented an increase of almost 24%. You still trying to push this myth? You've been told before you were talking nonsense Yes, you were wrong then too. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomGuy. Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 48 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said: Celtic's average gate rose from 44,965 in 2015/16 to 55,581 the following season, the one that saw Rangers join the top flight. This represented an increase of almost 24%. Only if you believe the attendance figures Celtic push out. Celtic reported just shy of 50k for a match against County in 2012, official police report had the crowd at 35k 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverWolfe Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 Yes, you were wrong then too.Was I?2 questions for you then 1. What was the average attendance for season 2009/2010?2. What year did Rangers die? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 Just now, RandomGuy. said: Only if you believe the attendance figures Celtic push out. Celtic reported just shy of 50k for a match against County in 2012, official police report had the crowd at 35k Not really. Unless they radically altered whatever method they use in summer 2016, the point stands. It's not about how big the gates were in absolute terms. It's about the relationship between the figure for a top flight season devoid of Rangers, and for one that includes Rangers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 2 minutes ago, Tartantony said: Was I? 2 questions for you then 1. What was the average attendance for season 2009/2010? 2. What year did Rangers die? As you say, we've done this. You've cherry picked one very unusual season. They were dreadful under Mowbray and that one season bucks an undeniable trend. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverWolfe Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 As you say, we've done this. You've cherry picked one very unusual season. They were dreadful under Mowbray and that one season bucks an undeniable trend.Nah, you're talking pish and letting your hatred get in the way of the facts. Attendances are shown below since the stadium became 60,000.It's pretty clear attendances dived in 2009 and recovered in 2016. Just so happens that period falls between two managers who were financially backed. The fans stopped going due to downsizing and uninspiring appointments, it quite clearly had nothing to do with Rangers being in the league or not. You just keep making up stories to suit your sad agenda though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomGuy. Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 16 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said: Not really. Unless they radically altered whatever method they use in summer 2016, the point stands. It's not about how big the gates were in absolute terms. It's about the relationship between the figure for a top flight season devoid of Rangers, and for one that includes Rangers. My point was Celtic fans always point to the official attendances as "proof" crowds didn't dip, despite the fact it's a stone cold fact Celtic heavily fluff their attendances. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 Just now, Tartantony said: Nah, you're talking pish and letting your hatred get in the way of the facts. Attendances are shown below since the stadium became 60,000. It's pretty clear attendances dived in 2009 and recovered in 2016. Just so happens that period falls between two managers who were financially backed. The fans stopped going due to downsizing and uninspiring appointments, it quite clearly had nothing to do with Rangers being in the league or not. You just keep making up stories to suit your sad agenda though. Seriously? Are you actually claiming that Rangers' absence had no bearing on those figures? My God! That's extraordinary. The figures absolutely and unequivocally back what I'm saying. It's very clear that 2009/10 is the big outlier. You'd be on firmer ground had gates not got up again before Rangers met their 2012 fate. We then have a steep drop that continues, taking gates even below that outlying figure. We than have that huge leap of almost a quarter that accompanies a version of Rangers joining them in the top division. Clearer evidence of the 'pining' I mentioned earlier, would be hard to envisage. I'm prepared to admit that several factors can contribute to fluctuations in attendances. To seriously suggest that the correlation between Celtic's gates dipping and Rangers not being there is merely incidental however, is complete lunacy. It's actually quite amusing to see someone making a genuine attempt to say such a thing. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PauloPerth Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 1 hour ago, RandomGuy. said: McFadden got longer spent on him giving Hamilton the GIRUY than match highlights. They spent longer showing Graham diving than match highlights too. We also had the bizarre scenario of them having multiple angles, and zoomed in clips, of Frazer Wright "elbowing" a Celtic player at a corner, an incident that didn't see the player react, and wasn't mentioned at all in any report, by any opposition player, or by the opposition manager. He got a ban despite the footage being grainy as f**k with no clear evidence. Sure that was the same season Wanyama had Frazer Wright by the throat, and it didn't get brought up at all, despite being brought to the BBCs attention on twitter.. And the Lee Croft challenge v Ross County that I don't think was even in the match highlights, they just decided to do a separate feature on the tackle! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverWolfe Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 Seriously? Are you actually claiming that Rangers' absence had no bearing on those figures? My God! That's extraordinary. The figures absolutely and unequivocally back what I'm saying. It's very clear that 2009/10 is the big outlier. You'd be on firmer ground had gates not got up again before Rangers met their 2012 fate. We then have a steep drop that continues, taking gates even below that outlying figure. We than have that huge leap of almost a quarter that accompanies a version of Rangers joining them in the top division. Clearer evidence of the 'pining' I mentioned earlier, would be hard to envisage. I'm prepared to admit that several factors can contribute to fluctuations in attendances. To seriously suggest that the correlation between Celtic's gates dipping and Rangers not being there is merely incidental however, is complete lunacy. It's actually quite amusing to see someone making a genuine attempt to say such a thing.Wow! There aren't really any words for you. It's actually embarrassing reading some of your posts at times. The facts speak for themselves so I'll just leave it at that and let you get on with it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 27 minutes ago, Tartantony said: Wow! There aren't really any words for you. It's actually embarrassing reading some of your posts at times. The facts speak for themselves so I'll just leave it at that and let you get on with it. I think it's very wise of you to leave it there. Still not really embracing the Dumbarton thing, are we? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverWolfe Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 I think it's very wise of you to leave it there. Still not really embracing the Dumbarton thing, are we?Haha Do i have to have an irrational hatred of Celtic now that i go to Dumbarton. Am I doing it wrong? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSU Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 Looking at the average attendances from 2006, it looks to me like the drop off was Tony Mowbray inspired in 2009/10 where below 50,000 crowds were maintained until Sevco saved Scottish football by returning to the top flight in 2016/17. The orange line is the average from 2006 to 2019 (to date). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 5 minutes ago, Tartantony said: 19 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said: I think it's very wise of you to leave it there. Still not really embracing the Dumbarton thing, are we? Haha Do i have to have an irrational hatred of Celtic now that i go to Dumbarton. Am I doing it wrong? Of course you're doing it wrong(ly). All of it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 2 minutes ago, MSU said: Looking at the average attendances from 2006, it looks to me like the drop off was Tony Mowbray inspired in 2009/10 where below 50,000 crowds were maintained until Sevco saved Scottish football by returning to the top flight in 2016/17. The orange line is the average from 2006 to 2019 (to date). Shoosh. That big drop, then huge leap that bookended the years without Rangers, are not in any way related to the fact that they involved the years without Rangers. No siree. No way. Just because it looks exactly like that doesn't mean that it is. Alright. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverWolfe Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 Of course you're doing it wrong(ly). All of it.Go on then, explain it to me 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 1 minute ago, Tartantony said: 6 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said: Of course you're doing it wrong(ly). All of it. Go on then, explain it to me You're drawing ludicrous conclusions from the figures you provided yourself. Following your local diddy team is the antithesis of following either bit of the OF. It would make more sense to follow both bits together, than it would to harbour affection for one of them, while supporting a diddy. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSU Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 4 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said: Shoosh. That big drop, then huge leap that bookended the years without Rangers, are not in any way related to the fact that they involved the years without Rangers. No siree. No way. Just because it looks exactly like that doesn't mean that it is. Alright. The numbers look like the huge jump was very much Sevco related. The drop off the cliff less so. Seven consecutive years below 50,000 is tricky to ignore. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverWolfe Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 You're drawing ludicrous conclusions from the figures you provided yourself. Following your local diddy team is the antithesis of following either bit of the OF. It would make more sense to follow both bits together, than it would to harbour affection for one of them, while supporting a diddy.You're all over the place as usual. Your outlook/ opinions make no sense at times 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted February 20, 2019 Share Posted February 20, 2019 9 minutes ago, Tartantony said: 27 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said: You're drawing ludicrous conclusions from the figures you provided yourself. Following your local diddy team is the antithesis of following either bit of the OF. It would make more sense to follow both bits together, than it would to harbour affection for one of them, while supporting a diddy. You're all over the place as usual. Your outlook/ opinions make no sense at times That they make no sense to you does not, I'm afraid, render them senseless. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.