Quote: Ferocious Aardvark "Well obviously to some extent it would, because then those who can't attend games couldn't listen either, and its easy to get out of the habit of going, /watching / listening - hard to get people back into the habit.
Come again? Tests? You set tests? Failed? Wow, bet he won't sleep now! Surely only existing Bulls fans - or I expect a handful of opposition fans, or bored general sports fans - who can't go, are ever going to constitute the audience? That much seems clear, and if he was the best broadcaster since John Arlott, the number wouldn't materially change, so I'm struggling to understand the point, or more to the point, whether there actually is a point.
There IS a different point though, and that is, it's a decent commentary, it's reliable and it's free. If I didn't go, I'd choose to listen to that. What else is so important to you?'"
The point was about hyping things up. For listening figures see cryptic tweets or vice versa. The "test" was whether he'd choose to back up his claims as the FM figures were clearly bunkum (and for what it's worth 4,000 streaming listeners seems very optimistic). Therefore, you take things with a pinch of salt.
I like the commentaries, they would be missed but certainly not by 10,000 people.