I genuinely don't know, but what were crowds like prior to the Nix, Kingz, Knights? Was the top domestic competition considered a success at that time?
crowds don't equal success...
Explain please.
if crowd numbers were the only measure of success then some of the best leagues in world sport would be classed as second rate.
One example is the ITM Cup:
ITM Cup (probably considered the best national rugby comp in the world) - struggling with crowd numbers http://www.3news.co.nz/sport/itm-cup-struggling-to...
If you go up to Super Rugby some of those crowd numbers are pretty poor as well - but does anyone doubt that Super Rugby is the premier non-international competition in the world.
I know the Georgie Pie super smash isn't world class but they also have problems with crowds, but that competition isn't at risk because there is a fat paycheck up for grabs with the world 20/20 champs each year
Cricket only got its self to blame 5 games in a weekend some involving teams not even from the host City, Playing in November when nights usually cooler, Playing while top 20/25 players overseas and lastly playing majority of games in Hamilton. But thats to be expected when NZC Domestic Comps manager is ex ND man......
i think the point is they realise that crowds are not funding their competitions, TV coverage is. Plus crowds were on the decline before this super smash concept.
Agreed its all for TV and that crowd numbers do seem irrelevant to NZC, Disagree that T20 was on decline though Auckland were getting 6k+ to Friday night games at Eden Park last few seasons they couldnt even top 4k for whole weekend this time although Saturdays rain out didnt help!
And having the comp in November is just stupid especially when there is some much live Cricket on at the moment which actually clashes with GPSS