MATCHWATCH : Burnley (h)

[Crusader Royal]

Attendance a lot more than 7089 the east stand takes 7286 and Burnley brought 2000 at least 9000 present

100% agree with this.

James Earnshaw said 7,039 total with 1,314 from Burnley and this is what the Burnley website says.

Felt significantly higher than 5,725 home fans with how packed the East Stand was and the overspill into the North Stand. The East Stand has a capacity of around 7,000.

It also looked like more than 1,300 fans from Burnley - maybe 1,800.

I suspect this was a turnstile count, which would have missed all those going through the side doors.

The question is why has access through the turnstiles got so much slower, that meant those side doors needed to be opened? Even people with cards seemed to be having trouble getting them to register.

They announce tickets sold, not actual attendance.
Slower access could be down to having fewer staff to help with problems. Often if someone’s ticket doesn’t let them in they stand in the gate trying multiple times. If you have enough staff to monitor gates you can get people out of the way and let the flow continue.
It could also be that they aren’t updating software or hardware so it’s taking longer for the system to respond and the whole thing slows down.
In the past we’ve had 24,000 crowds and while there could be queues they moved quickly and everyone got in on time. Unless everyone turned up 10 mins before kick off getting 5000 into the East Stand really should not be a problem. If they allowed entry through the emergency gates that sounds like a breach of the safety certificate as they no longer had a count of numbers . Years ago we had an issue at a Liverpool cup game where the Dolan stand turnstiles failed and the one thing we couldn’t do was just open the gates and let people in. Took until after half time to get everyone in that night.

[Snowflake Royal]

A fair and respectful challenge - thank you. So rare on here that I'm getting it printed out and framed.

I was watching in real time and haven't seen any replays, so obviously my assessment is flawed. With individual players, some things they do come to your attention, other you miss. I saw lots of good things from him, and seemingly missed the bad.

The drifting inside point you make is an interesting one. I saw the big gaps being left for their winger, but think that wasn't the fault of Kanu's positioning, but more the way the defence is set up. I see it all the time - you're thinking "why doesn't someone mark that winger stood in acres of space who keeps getting the ball?" I figured that's how you keep your back four close to each other, then move to challenge the winger as they move in. Go to the too early and they can just run past you.

I'll watch the goals though. I guess these days the coaching staff will be going through them with Kanu as well. Hopefully he'll address his weaknesses and improve.

Full backs starting narrow and leaving space is a consistent issue all season, I agree its a tactical choice, rather than individual player error.

I do think we're late and slow to get out and close down.

Like you I thought Kanu started badly but got much better as the game went on. I didn't really see him individually do a lot wrong for the goals, but I wasn't looking that closely. That's not to say he didn’t make mistakes after the first 10-15.

The whole defence just stopped on the first one. Second was good striker movement and finish, third was good striker improvisation with Button a bit slow to smother.


I thought Rushesha looked decent after the first 15 minutes. And Abrefa continues to look promising, though certainly not a winger.

Osho didn't really do anything. Holzman, I thought, looks far better at CB than RB. Wareham's pace surprised me a couple of times and he looked ok.

I think Wing (and us in general) goes long too often.

The positioning of the full-backs certainly looked like a tactical decision, same for how deep the wingers came back. Did leave us completely open down the wing though - particularly the left side.

Agree we're too slow to get out and press. We conceded a lot of goals last season (and some this season) because of it. Also agree Kanu grew into the game.

IIRC, the first goal was the defence trying to play offside and failing. The second was certainly a good move and the third was a one of those awkward scrambled flicks that just so happened to go in. By extra-time, they had some of their better players on too and we were too tired to really compete.

Rushesha looked decent; Abrefa looked better than I remember him from before his injury, but as you say not a winger; thought Osho was okay, but didn't really do anything to stand out (don't know what his actual position is, but played RW rather than full-back as he has in the past); Holzman looked a decent option at CB; Wareham was incredibly poor in the first half hour (even just ball control), but got a bit better as the game went on - also not a winger.

Obviously with the players on the wing, they're only there because of injuries and lack of depth.

I wouldn’t mind seeing more of Wareham on the wing. Certainly over defenders like Abrefa, Ahmed, whatever Osho is, maybe even Garcia.

Garcia's quick and talented, but to me doesn't really look like he k ows how to hurt teams that far forward. Overlapping as a fullback, yeah fine.

Obviously it would be best to have Campbell, Ehibhatiomhan, Camara and Akande fit, rather than all four injured.

It's pretty impressive to have all your wingers out and still be doing ok.

[tmesis]

100% agree with this.

James Earnshaw said 7,039 total with 1,314 from Burnley and this is what the Burnley website says.

Felt significantly higher than 5,725 home fans with how packed the East Stand was and the overspill into the North Stand. The East Stand has a capacity of around 7,000.

It also looked like more than 1,300 fans from Burnley - maybe 1,800.

I suspect this was a turnstile count, which would have missed all those going through the side doors.

The question is why has access through the turnstiles got so much slower, that meant those side doors needed to be opened? Even people with cards seemed to be having trouble getting them to register.

They announce tickets sold, not actual attendance.

Usually, yes, but there's no way there were only 5500 Reading fans there yesterday. We wouldn't have opened up the north stand if there were still 2000 unsold seats.

You do get the odd game which is the actual turnstile count. An obvious one that stands out is the gate of 6700 in Stam's 2nd season, which would have below the number of season ticket holders at the time.

Slower access could be down to having fewer staff to help with problems. Often if someone’s ticket doesn’t let them in they stand in the gate trying multiple times. If you have enough staff to monitor gates you can get people out of the way and let the flow continue.
It could also be that they aren’t updating software or hardware so it’s taking longer for the system to respond and the whole thing slows down.

Almost every single person seemed to be having trouble getting their card to scan. It worked, but it took several seconds each time. I've noticed that before this seaon, but with the lower crowds usually there, it doesn't have such an impact.

[Crusader Royal]

I suspect this was a turnstile count, which would have missed all those going through the side doors.

The question is why has access through the turnstiles got so much slower, that meant those side doors needed to be opened? Even people with cards seemed to be having trouble getting them to register.

They announce tickets sold, not actual attendance.

Usually, yes, but there's no way there were only 5500 Reading fans there yesterday. We wouldn't have opened up the north stand if there were still 2000 unsold seats.

You do get the odd game which is the actual turnstile count. An obvious one that stands out is the gate of 6700 in Stam's 2nd season, which would have below the number of season ticket holders at the time.

Slower access could be down to having fewer staff to help with problems. Often if someone’s ticket doesn’t let them in they stand in the gate trying multiple times. If you have enough staff to monitor gates you can get people out of the way and let the flow continue.
It could also be that they aren’t updating software or hardware so it’s taking longer for the system to respond and the whole thing slows down.

Almost every single person seemed to be having trouble getting their card to scan. It worked, but it took several seconds each time. I've noticed that before this seaon, but with the lower crowds usually there, it doesn't have such an impact.

Seems bizarre to randomly announce a figure based on different criteria. Was the Stam game league or cup ?
I used to have access to both sets of figures (rugby and football) and the difference was quite eye opening - rugby more than football to be honest.

[tmesis]

Seems bizarre to randomly announce a figure based on different criteria. Was the Stam game league or cup ?
I used to have access to both sets of figures (rugby and football) and the difference was quite eye opening - rugby more than football to be honest.

There were two games in a row, both league games. One got 6700, the other about 8500. The next lowest was 14500.

[Crusader Royal]

Seems bizarre to randomly announce a figure based on different criteria. Was the Stam game league or cup ?
I used to have access to both sets of figures (rugby and football) and the difference was quite eye opening - rugby more than football to be honest.

There were two games in a row, both league games. One got 6700, the other about 8500. The next lowest was 14500.

I have absolutely no explanation for that.
Perhaps I’ll just invent something ! Oddly if you add the numbers together they give a seeming credible attendance.

[Snowflake Royal]

Seems bizarre to randomly announce a figure based on different criteria. Was the Stam game league or cup ?
I used to have access to both sets of figures (rugby and football) and the difference was quite eye opening - rugby more than football to be honest.

There were two games in a row, both league games. One got 6700, the other about 8500. The next lowest was 14500.

I have absolutely no explanation for that.
Perhaps I’ll just invent something ! Oddly if you add the numbers together they give a seeming credible attendance.

Normal person who provides the info is on holiday or sick, back up person announces actual attendance rather than tickets allocated, by mistake.



If it was cup vs league, I'd wonder if there are different rules on announcing attendance. But thay doesn't seem the case.

[Clyde1998]

Seems bizarre to randomly announce a figure based on different criteria. Was the Stam game league or cup ?
I used to have access to both sets of figures (rugby and football) and the difference was quite eye opening - rugby more than football to be honest.

There were two games in a row, both league games. One got 6700, the other about 8500. The next lowest was 14500.

I have absolutely no explanation for that.
Perhaps I’ll just invent something ! Oddly if you add the numbers together they give a seeming credible attendance.

IIRC, that lowest one was Sheffield United. Snowed heavily and many couldn't make it. I think my sister got married that day, so I couldn't go anyway.

[Crusader Royal]

There were two games in a row, both league games. One got 6700, the other about 8500. The next lowest was 14500.

I have absolutely no explanation for that.
Perhaps I’ll just invent something ! Oddly if you add the numbers together they give a seeming credible attendance.

Normal person who provides the info is on holiday or sick, back up person announces actual attendance rather than tickets allocated, by mistake.



If it was cup vs league, I'd wonder if there are different rules on announcing attendance. But thay doesn't seem the case.

Tickets sold was always the easier number to get, you don’t get actual attendance till after half time . There’ll be a reason but frankly we’re never going to work out what it is !
Once you sink a few levels lower in the pyramid the whole things of what the attendance is becomes really quite bizarre. Discussion around whether we should count the dogs that turn up (probably 7 or 8 each game) for example ( I think we should !). There also a fairly well known Southern League team who announce attendances so far above what they actually get it has become a joke across the league. Their chairman ons a car dealership (probably a chain of them) and includes a ST with every car sale. Those then all go on the attendance figures and he puts the equivalent money into the club.