English cricket sets new domestic attendance records

www.espncricinfo.com/ci/content/story/943185.html

It is nice to see that the Test match attendances received a boost over last year, though that should be expected with plumb series against Australia and New Zealand.

I'm actually quite surprised to see that as over the last few years less and less people have been attending matches and while I think that may have levelled off a bit now, to see there as been an actual increase is better news than I anticipated.

The trick is now to try and get even more people coming back to games, and for that to happen, the domestic teams need to do more to help the fans.

...most probably because Poms haven't been playing like the dog doey they've been in past years.

I don't think performances have a whole lot to do with attendances. Take for a example 2012, where just 697,124 attend England International matches. That year, England won 12, lost 5, drew 2 matches. That attendance was the lowest since 2010 - a year in which England won 15 matches and lost 6.

I also don't think that the performance on the pitch makes much difference either to the English attendances. Other factors have come into play and that's why attendances have fluctuated over the years.

I think you'll find the 'poms' as you called us will follow their team no matter what the results are, and a lot of other so called fans of other nations, should take note and follow the same route.

24 of the MLB teams had attendance this year OF MORE than 2 million.  Total MLB
attendance in 2015 was over 73 million!  So MLB baseball had more than 35 TIMES the
attendance of cricket in UK!  And USA is only five times the population of UK. 
Do we need say anything more about what a humungous boost cricket would get if
it got a foothold in USA? 

That is an unfair comparison though. There are 2,430 regular season baseball games plus the postseason, so of course the attendances are going to be astronomically higher - there are more games to attend.

Not really.  Factoring in all formats, average English first class county is playing almost as many days, if less actual fixtures, than a MLB team.  English county is usually playing at
least 5, maybe 6, days a week.  MLB team plays usually 6 days a week.  MLB season runs longer than English cricket but that's the fault of ECB.

This year, there was a potential for a maximum of 576 days of County Championship matches. There was a potential for 133 NatWest T20 Blast matches - although more than a fair number of these were abandoned without a ball being bowled. There were 79 scheduled Royal London One Day Cup matches. And finally there was 19 International matches. That all amounts to a maximum of 807 days of cricket. That is not even a third of MLB games. I think it is also unfair to compare county championship cricket to MLB. I love county championship cricket as much as anyone, but it is the equivalent to Triple-A baseball, not major league teams, so attendances are going to be much lower.

I think a fairer comparison would be simply taking International matches to MLB matches. A very quick back the envelope breakdown of attendances has the average attendance at MLB games at around 30K and the average attendance at International cricket matches at 41K. The fairest actual comparison would be International matches versus MLB playoff attendances. Last year, the average playoff game had an average of 42K.

If based on the number of days per week MLB and ECB  teams play (or have scheduled) then my comparison still remains valid.  The comparison is only "unfair"
because there's 30 MLB clubs and only 18 English first class counties. But this just goes to show the MLB competition model has
always been more lucrative than worldwide cricket models, with its combination of formats and domestic/international cricket.
If cricket actually took hold in the USA it would be like MLB, with each team playing nothing but large numbers of T20s, with playoffs, all-star
games etc.  Wouldn't be tied down to other unremunerative formats.