I agree with this. People who don’t attend are often the biggest critics. However, playing Devils advocate for a minute, if IL invested in the squad like Warrington appear to be, perhaps they’d turn out more often? I can understand people watching a televised game at home if they’re not excited by what they encounter on game day.

It's interesting to note that the three most 'entertaining' teams over the last decade well known for playing expansive and exciting rugby throughout each season are the ones who regularly fold when it comes to the big stage.

St Helens
Warrington
Castleford

Saints are the exception with one GF win over ten years (which we would have won with thirteen on the pitch).

Lots of nice pretty league leaders shields to wave around like.

*I do expect one of the above three to win the GF this year however.

Are suggesting that by watching a game on the TV, it disables any sort of opinion because you're not in the ground?

That is certainly a very strange argument.

I'm going to assume an awful lot of us on here can't regularly get to any NRL games... Yet the rumours thread on here points to players nobody (very few) have seen 'in the flesh'.

Bateman and Sutton appear to be going well at Canberra, but personally having never been to Canberra, your argument suggests I shouldn't have made this comment.

In certain scenarios like criticising our crowds or investment from the owner, I think Rogues would have a point in saying a person who watches ‘every game’ in the pub or at home (when they have the means and ability to get down to the stadium) shouldn’t be commenting unless they’re prepared to put their hand in their own pocket and support the club but fans regardless of being an armchair fan or a fan who attends games will always be entitled to views on individuals form, team performance etc.

I commented on the new Sky commentary set up but that’s not because I watch many Wigan games on the box but I watch plenty of others.

What have Wigan done to promote the game vs London?

Wire promotion went up a gear to ensure some catchment success and commercial sales enterprise during the game. It's was probably Wires biggest match day earner this season.

I highlight the post I made above...
Isn't there a matter of urgency here?

was Wires game on a Thursday?

No it was a Friday evening with a similar kick off time.
But going back to the point why Wigan didn't do some marketing.
So 'because it's a Thursday let's not bother'!!
Officially the attendance wasn't that far off last home game that wasn't on a Thursday.

Saints had 900 fewer fans at their home game with London on a Friday night, in a non televised game.

Is that not just because we have more ST holders?

Possibly but the point stands doesn’t it? There are people bemoaning the lack of fans turning up on game day yet last night, we had 900 more on the official attendance than the team at the top of the league, on a Friday when their game wasn’t televised. I’m merely trying to bring some context to this discussion is all.

Not if theirs turned up and ours didn't. They could read the crowd out as 10,000 but if only 7,500 bother to turn up then it's a bit of a false flag.

Let's face it a Thursday night match against a bottom side which is televised is never going to attract a big crowd.

Why?...or is it just 'that's that' attitude?

Wigan average around 10,000 home fans on a Friday which is always lower on a Thursday if not in the school holidays. London bring no away fans. Not hard to work out really.

Of course if we were winning matches like you guys then we might bring in some glory hunters (although surely none of them still reside in Warrington) with a light show or the chance to meet a bloke in a costume but instead we're just stuck with the regular 8,000-9,000 we get every week win or lose.