It said on tv that 10,058 turned up! From the TV screen there looked about It looked like a max of 7,800 e.g. East stand there was about 2,500 max and South stand had about 2,000 at the back! to stay away from the rain! and West about 2,000 and about 200-300 in the North from Cas fans So my calculator says 7,000 ish I think they include the season ticket holders, even if they don't show up

ST holders are always included, as their seat was sold for the game.

It amazes me that this still amazes people, after all these years.
Every professional sport club in the land count ST holders regardless of attendance

Which of course is the right thing to do but just once I’d love to know who was actually in the stadium,just out of curiosity I suppose,terrible day so it was always going to be a tough sell

The weather put most people off a lot of seats near me who are season ticket holders were empty .It was on tv a lot of people stayed at home.

Well here's one ST holder who didn't go. I figure, I support the Club by buying an ST, I'm not obliged to go to every game. And I went to Cas just the other week.The combination of lousy weather, lousy kick-off time, and the fact that it was on the telly made it a pretty easy decision to watch it with the lads down the pub and a few beers.

I generally only do that one or twice a year at most, though.

Why do people think that supporters should go to the game rather than watch it on the TV,its each to there own as far as I'm concerned i myself nearly didn't go it was a last minute decision if your a ST they already have your money

Yourself and moto are missing the point. Yes people have a right not to attend, and I can't get to every match, generally for family or holiday reasons. However I wouldn't dream of commenting about a game, a player or the crowd when I wasn't actually there to see it.
It's generally the same people who are sitting in the pub or at home commenting on Lenagans lack of investment. Either put up or shut up!

You don't need to justify yourself on here pal.

Bang on. There's a thread on here at the moment where the armchair fans are complaining about the new commentator.

You’ve commented on plenty games you haven’t attended, as has everyone else. What about non Wigan games on TV or times when you’ve been on holiday when Wigan have played? Also, how do you think, for example, that John Bateman came to Canberra’s attention? It’s easy to scoff at the TV audience but without them/us where would the sport be?

I'd guess that the 2017 RL World Cup performances or even scouts/player agents opinions would've been more instrumental in bringing Bateman to Canberra's attention than their chairman catching him on Sky's coverage.

Sky, BBC, Fox, whoever. The point I was making to RG is that TV fans are very important to the health of the sport (the Bateman reference was rather clumsy on my part). The sudden vast increase in wealth in the NRL is directly attributable to their TV deal not those who turn up every week.
Fans who turn up in all weathers whatever the level of performance they witness are to be applauded imo but not at the expense of those who prefer to watch on TV. The sport needs both.

I'm not sure what point you think I'm missing, Rogues: I didn't mention commenting on the game at all either way. I merely said that i didn't go on Saturday.

Personally I feel a lot more confident commenting on the game after I've seen it (all) on TV. Watching live, plenty can be missed, players misidentified, etc.

If what you are saying, Rogues, is that people should really attend games to qualify for commenting on them, then I am going to say I absolutely disagree (as would most posters here, I imagine). But as I said above, you should have watch the full match really, whether on TV or live or, ideally, both.