Clearly I'm not saying it is the only thing.
I have to say we did all right when we dropped down but that of course was because we were heading for promotion and winning games.

What I'm saying is there is a ceiling for attendances in the lower league no matter what, because of the standard of the game, there is then probably a ceiling for a team in Super League playing in a small or under standard stadium. Good team will drag them in, but new stadium will then build on that.
They are intrinsically linked if you want the very big crowds.

BUT some places will never get there. Wakefield is lucky that we have a big untapped market that if we ever get it right could be encouraged to come to watch.
Some communities that used to be thriving towns are no longer so, and will always struggle. its a shame but true.

Why ?

History proves it to be so.

I'm not saying they can't get over a particular number, but they will always be less if they are playing at a perceived lower level.
Same in every sport.
and I take the point that while ever there is no chance of getting to the top level, the crowds will always stay lower.

All history proves is that clubs have been run as sporting charities for decades rather than proper businesses , there is no logical reason any club cannot fill its stadium for every match , if it decides it wants to and looks at ways of making it happen

This Grand Final Attendance thread is interesting!

I'll go for 71k

Of course it is , only in RL would the fans even care about such a subject , as a sport we are a very disfuntional one

The total mix of what does or doesn't attract fans should be a matter for the clubs. The people running the clubs want big crowds just like everyone else so if certain standards are required to achieve good attendance they'd be sensible to aim for those standards.

Incidentally, speaking as a Wigan fan, I think Headingley is the "best" ground in the League, brilliant atmosphere and why I nearly always get off my backside to make the trip there. But nobody would rate it technically as high as the DW ( which often has a very flat atmosphere ).

Why should the League be best placed to decide on behalf of the clubs what is the best way to attract fans? Leave it to the clubs. As the other poster said, safety and access are the only things that ought to be imposed. Less "central planning" - especially when the talent of the central planners is so limited. Same applies to the cap. Get rid. All the League needs to do is impose tough squad limits to stop a hyper-rich club stuffing the bench and the squad with top players to deprive the rest of the comp of their services.

Because clubs don’t exist in isolation.

What hogwash.

A RL club is in the business of selling leisure services. This idea of yours that if every club were only run "as a proper business" then the grounds would all be full is pure nonsense. People just don't have that much leisure dollar and what there is, there's fierce competition to get. Everyone's struggling.

Richard Branson tends to run "proper businesses" and even he, before the recession, couldn't remotely begin to fill London's ground so don't give us this rubbish.

I said ' logical ' reason , thats why you didnt understand it

Exactly. Spot on.

What about doing away with the cap but keeping the 20/20 rule or whatever it is these days? or making it like a 13/20 so that clubs must play youth?

Central Planning by officials at Red Hall is not needed. Scrap the salary cap, 1 up, one down, points deduction for going into Admin and relegation to bottom league if you go bust.

Then just leave it to clubs to do whatever they think will bring them success without going bust.