What's new

Attendances - the good, the bad and the ugly

I should just say one more thing, I haven't addressed the Scouse objection that our ground was bigger and that this helped our average attendances be higher. There is probably some truth in this and I admit I haven't fully checked it out myself yet. I will get around to it though but it might take some time. However, I will say this, my suspicion is that it doesn't affect things that much at least not as much as one might think. 

There are two reasons for this. Firstly, we only got those mega-high attendances (70k +) about once a season and certainly not every year. They weren't a regular occurrence, it wasn't like it happened three, four or five times a season and skewed our average upwards.

Secondly, the way you work out how this affects average attendances between two teams is by looking at your rivals maximum capacity, taking the numbers above that maximum that Chelsea got and dividing that number by the number of games that season. i.e. Arsenal got 72,500 against Spurs in 1921 so Highbury could hold that many (at least). Given that they could get that number in their ground the advantage we had over them was only the difference between 72,500 and whatever we got. Obviously, in this case, we wouldn't gain much advantage over Arsenal with a crowd in the 70,000s. It's not our fault they couldn't squeeze that many in again until 1935 when they got 73,295 against Sunderland. So if we got 76k against Spurs in 1920 it only gave us an advantage over the season of somewhere between 2,705 (76k - 73,295) and 3,500 (76k - 72,500). This is only 167 or 128 people per match (21 home games in those days).

It's true that Anfield didn't have a very high capacity (it's highest crowd was 58,757 against us in 1949/50 though I don't know if that was its absolute maximum) so any seasons with attendances higher than this at the Bridge would have to be subject to checking how this affected our average compared to theirs but, again, I don't think it would destroy the obviously higher attendances I outlined above. I guess we shall see. Sometime. Later. I've done enough for now.

 
Great stats lads, in a previous post it says 88/89 we had a blip, for the record the first 6 home games we had the terraces shut & an away fan ban after the Boro play off tear up & our gates were 6k to 8k for those games, once the terraces re-opened we got 12k v Plymouth.

To be honest seats back then wernt that much more expensive than the shed terrace, i sat up in the west for most of those games so it baffles me why so many went awol(again) 

 
Cobham said:
Another good way of looking at it Englishman. A lot of the clubs that sing the "where were you when you were s**t" song have never even been in the top ten themselves in any year. It really shows that, relatively speaking we weren't that much worse than anyone else.
Click to expand...
Given how many other top clubs have had their share of ropey attendances, perhaps the riposte should be "where were you when we were sh*t?"

 
Cobham. The quickest way to do the average is take the the big number ie 35,895 put down 35 and so on. Unless my calculator is on the blink we averaged higher crowds than both arsenal and spurs between 1905-1978. Despite our comparable lack of success.

 
Also as well to consider i am sure arsenal and spurs shared white hart lane around about the war period which im sure bumped up both teams attendances.

 
Bjl6yVbIAAArAkL.jpg


 
In fact, our average was pulled down by a period lasting about 15 years from the early eighties, when we averaged 12,000 one season, 13,000 another and generally had very poor attendances.

The rest of the time, our crowds were very healthy.

where were we when we were sh*t ?.......at home or down the pub !!

 
Ripostes to "Where were you when you were sh*t?"

"Beating you, beating you, beating you" 

" We were here, there and every f**king where, 

where were you, where were you?"

 
"Where were you when you were sh1t?"

Most early games in the benches or later games in Gate 13.

Plus of course memorable away matches at the giants of football like Rotherham, Shrewsbury, Cambridge...

 
Backbiter said:
Yes, superbly researched thread, and some excellent posts by Fillery and CB. This bit from Flllery puts everything into context:

Those of us who go back to the 60s know we were a huge club who just didn't win much, but younger fans just don't see that - they see the way Fillery so accurately puts it. And while people point to the massive crowds we managed to draw in our unsuccessful years, others can correctly highlight the pitiful attendances either side of the bumper crowds as proof our our fickle fans.
Click to expand...
All these younger fans have to do is get a book (I did) and they would see what was going on. I did that last year. I would love to see an updated version of the Chelsea Biography, though.

 
IF they ask me, I was in America, where football really didn't catch on until 1994 (when the World Cup was held here). Also, the only league I had real access to was the MLS.  I just got into the Premier League (second season), but it's been Chelsea since then. 

 
Thanks to a mate of mine its come to light that we're not the only club to have suffered poor gates,

It seems our rivals from N17 also had just as poor gates as us at times although not as many times as us, but lets not forget 85/86 was the time of the so called top five clubs involving Man Utd/Liverpool/Arsenal/Everton & Tottenham, imo its shocking that they only got 10k v WBA & 9k v Bham in that season, I haven't got a clue why that was no doubt Spurs fans will have an excuse but the next time you get grief about our gates just show them this.

 Spurs results in the 85/86 season, 16k v Liverpool, 10k v WBA, 9k v Bham.

http://www.topspurs.com/8586.htm

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Carshalton Blue said:
Thanks to a mate of mine its come to light that we're not the only club to have suffered poor gates,

It seems our rivals from N17 also had just as poor gates as us at times although not as many times as us, but lets not forget 85/86 was the time of the so called top five clubs involving Man Utd/Liverpool/Arsenal/Everton & Tottenham, imo its shocking that they only got 10k v WBA & 9k v Bham in that season, I haven't got a clue why that was no doubt Spurs fans will have an excuse but the next time you get grief about our gates just show them this.

 Spurs results in the 85/86 season, 16k v Liverpool, 10k v WBA, 9k v Bham.

http://www.topspurs.com/8586.htm
Click to expand...
79 Arsenal won the fa cup, 80 West Ham won the fa cup and Arsenal got beat in the cup winners cup final. 81 Spurs won the fa cup and West Ham got beat in the lge cup final replay. 82 Spurs won the fa cup why Chelsea was a poor div 2 side going through its worst period All 3 had european football so they were wat ahead of Chelsea in this period. Strange that in 83/84 Chelsea averaged 23k in div 2 why West Ham averaged 18k in div 1. But come 85/86 the avearge gates were Arsenal 23,824, Chelsea 21,984, Tottenham 20,859, West Ham 21,179, QPR 12,664. So Chelsea for all its low gates and in the main poor football the previous few years didnt hold up to bad yet this is not remembered now. This was West Ham best ever season coming 3rd in div 1 yet Chelsea got a higher average gate. Just for the record Liverpool did the double yet averarged 35,271 why Man Utd who had won the lge for years averaged 46,323.

 
Simon Maskell said:
79 Arsenal won the fa cup, 80 West Ham won the fa cup and Arsenal got beat in the cup winners cup final. 81 Spurs won the fa cup and West Ham got beat in the lge cup final replay. 82 Spurs won the fa cup why Chelsea was a poor div 2 side going through its worst period All 3 had european football so they were wat ahead of Chelsea in this period. Strange that in 83/84 Chelsea averaged 23k in div 2 why West Ham averaged 18k in div 1. But come 85/86 the avearge gates were Arsenal 23,824, Chelsea 21,984, Tottenham 20,859, West Ham 21,179, QPR 12,664. So Chelsea for all its low gates and in the main poor football the previous few years didnt hold up to bad yet this is not remembered now. This was West Ham best ever season coming 3rd in div 1 yet Chelsea got a higher average gate. Just for the record Liverpool did the double yet averarged 35,271 why Man Utd who had won the lge for years averaged 46,323.
Click to expand...
Yet all that is forgotten when it comes to Chelsea ffs.

 
Carshalton Blue said:
Yet all that is forgotten when it comes to Chelsea ffs.
Click to expand...
Its always made me chuckle, and the other London clubs won't admit it but they have always had a chip on their shoulders when it comes to us.

the facts are: we came into being after the other major London clubs but very quickly started getting higher average home attendances, back in the day I bet that iritated the others.

Our name says it all, glamour. My wife who hates football, but will admit that anything with Chelsea on it just looks and sounds so much better than the wording Arsenal or Tottenham.

Our location in London, again just think what the pikeys and y*ds must think when they come here compared to the sh*te holes they are located("you've had your day out, now f**k off home").

The dreaded word, brand! over the last 15 years the club from a standing start practically, has driven all over the other London clubs brands especially world wide. shirt sales etc ( i bet that winds the gooners up )

I remember back in the late 90's early 2000's before Roman arrived and I used to take my two sons to football clubs even then the little lads there were all decked out in their football kits and chelsea kits would out number Arsenal shirts at least 3:1 and that was when Arsenal were at the height of their powers.

Back in the late 70's and 80's whether you like it or not  our team wasn't its best ,but the fans held a notoriety and fame that got lots of press, that especially the pikeys hated!!!

I remember when I was about 18 I had been to a game, came back to my local pub in deepest west sussex and older guys who weren't that much into football knew all about and asked what was the shed like! no one ever asked other mates of mine who supported gooners and y*ds what the north bank or shelf were like, they probabley had never heard of them!

once again when we were having one of our worst moments in our history in the late 70's and 1980's our away support would at worst equal the other London sides and on many occasions swamp there away supports.;

And Finally:

Saturday May 19th 2012

Munich

The chip on their shoulder is fully complete!!!

That completes my party political broadcast for Chelsea Football club!

 
A thought that occurs is that Chelsea did play some games behind closed doors which would have brought average attendances down.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top