Title: Punching above / below their weight Post by: Red Frog on Tuesday, June 11, 2013, 22:33:45 Shamelessly nicked this from Peter Gibbons' post on the Bristol/Swindon topic, as it throws up a few surprises, for me at least, about the non-linear relationship between the size of an urban area and its club's support. Is Bournemouth really a sleeping giant, as the wealthy Russian who was shown this table must think, or is it just a napping granny? Ipswich really does do well for support, and Sunderland amazingly, but Southend and Aldershot really need to pull their fingers out. And where in hell is the Dearne Valley and its 200k inhabitants?
Rank Urban Area - Population 1 Greater London Urban Area - 8,278,251 2 West Midlands Urban Area - 2,284,093 3 Greater Manchester Urban Area - 2,240,230 4 West Yorkshire Urban Area - 1,499,465 5 Greater Glasgow - 1,199,629 6 Tyneside - 879,996 7 Liverpool Urban Area - 816,216 8 Nottingham Urban Area - 666,358 9 Sheffield Urban Area - 640,720 10 Belfast Metropolitan Urban Area - 579,554[7] 11 Bristol Urban Area - 551,066 12 Brighton/Worthing/Littlehampton - 461,181 13 Portsmouth Urban Area - 442,252 14 Leicester Urban Area - 441,213 15 Edinburgh - 420,893 16 Bournemouth Urban Area - 383,713 17 Reading/Wokingham Urban Area - 369,804 18 Teesside - 365,323 19 The Potteries Urban Area - 362,403 20 Coventry/Bedworth Urban Area - 336,452 21 Cardiff Urban Area - 327,706 22 Birkenhead Urban Area - 319,675 23 Southampton Urban Area - 304,400 24 Kingston upon Hull - 301,416 25 Swansea Urban Area - 270,506 26 Southend Urban Area - 269,415 27 Preston Urban Area - 264,601 28 Blackpool Urban Area - 261,088 29 Plymouth - 243,795 30 Aldershot Urban Area - 243,344 31 Derby Urban Area - 236,738 32 Luton/Dunstable Urban Area - 236,318 33 Medway Towns Urban Area - 231,659 34 Dearne Valley Urban Area - 207,726 35 Northampton Urban Area - 197,199 36 Norwich Urban Area - 194,839 37 Aberdeen - 193,379 38 Milton Keynes urban area - 184,506 39 Wearside (Sunderland Urban Area) - 182,974 40 Crawley Urban Area - 180,177 41 Wigan Urban Area - 166,840 42 Warrington Urban Area - 158,195 43 Mansfield Urban Area - 158,114 44 Dundee - 157,808 45 Swindon - 155,432 46 Burnley/Nelson - 149,796 47 Oxford - 143,016 48 Slough Urban Area - 141,848 49 Ipswich Urban Area - 141,658 50 Newport Urban Area - 139,298 Title: Re: Punching above / below their weight Post by: Peter Gibbons on Tuesday, June 11, 2013, 23:52:37 Shamelessly nicked this from Peter Gibbons' post on the Bristol/Swindon topic, as it throws up a few surprises, for me at least, about the non-linear relationship between the size of an urban area and its club's support. Is Bournemouth really a sleeping giant, as the wealthy Russian who was shown this table must think, or is it just a napping granny? Ipswich really does do well for support, and Sunderland amazingly, but Southend and Aldershot really need to pull their fingers out. And where in hell is the Dearne Valley and its 200k inhabitants? I guess one point to make is that you dont have to be from an urban area to support the club, so ipswich has cornered the suffolk market, and norwich the norfolk market. Swindon ought to do better for the same reasons, but maybe wiltshire doesn't appeal in the same way? Although.... Norfolk 859,400 Dorset 745,400 Suffolk 730,100 Wiltshire 684,000 Title: Re: Punching above / below their weight Post by: cheltred69 on Wednesday, June 12, 2013, 07:38:05 As PG says the size of catchment area will be relevant as well as size of urban area. Also, take into account level of competition nearby and tradition (e.g. Burnley). It also depends how urban area is defined. Cheltenham & Gloucester with Churchdown form an almost contiguous urban area that combined would place in the top 30 of this table and I would guess there are other examples.
Title: Re: Punching above / below their weight Post by: DMR on Wednesday, June 12, 2013, 07:39:17 I thought this thread was going to about blokes and their birds. Instead it's a gay attendance thread. For shame.
Title: Re: Punching above / below their weight Post by: Red Frog on Wednesday, June 12, 2013, 07:40:22 I thought this thread was going to about blokes and their birds. Instead it's a gay attendance thread. For shame. But feel free to hijack it. Title: Re: Punching above / below their weight Post by: 4D on Wednesday, June 12, 2013, 07:41:00 Surely the Swindon one is out of date?
Title: Re: Punching above / below their weight Post by: DMR on Wednesday, June 12, 2013, 08:04:52 Well the obvious starting point would be Peter Crouch who has had a quite sensational touch.
Title: Re: Punching above / below their weight Post by: Paolo69 on Wednesday, June 12, 2013, 08:16:00 Well the obvious starting point would be Peter Crouch who has had a quite sensational touch. Very true. So tell me Abi what first attracted you to the millionaire football Peter Crouch? Title: Re: Punching above / below their weight Post by: Ardiles on Wednesday, June 12, 2013, 09:17:10 Urban Area stats are generally a lot more meaningful than local government population figures. They better represent how big a place is - how big a mark it makes on the map - and do not get messed about by arbitrary political divisions. A good example is Reading, where the local authority controls only a fraction of the urban area (with probably half of the overall urban area controlled by Wokingham Borough and West Berkshire), so the quoted population of Reading itself sometimes looks artifically small. These stats are better.
You do get a few oddities though. Aldershot just happens to be a part of a wider connurbation that stretches from Sandhurst in the north to Farnham in the south and takes in Farnborough, Camberley, Frimley and a stack of smaller villages. The overall urban area (often referred to as the Blackwater Valley area) taken together is quite a bit bigger than Swindon, but none of the individual towns are anywhere near the same size. And I can't see Aldershot attracting much in the way of support from most of those places. Loyalties are too fragmented and everyone seems to support Chelsea anyway. Mansfield is another surprise. Really larger than Swindon? Bournemouth is massive (when you include Christchurch and Poole), and yes...the football club really could benefit from a large local population if they continue to succeed (and not blow up). But the real dunce of the pack has to be Bristol. Top 10 city, huge population and consistent underachievement. Long may it continue. Title: Re: Punching above / below their weight Post by: Reg Smeeton on Wednesday, June 12, 2013, 09:31:50 And where in hell is the Dearne Valley and its 200k inhabitants? I think Rotherham...could be wrong though. Title: Re: Punching above / below their weight Post by: Ticker45 on Wednesday, June 12, 2013, 14:02:04 Surely the Swindon one is out of date? Depends as last population figure I saw was around the 209,000 mark but not sure how that relates back to urban area? :hmmm: Title: Re: Punching above / below their weight Post by: Matt71 on Wednesday, June 12, 2013, 14:46:11 sorry but that table is very misleading. Swindon's urban area population is 180,000 ( 2012 census) with the borough of Swindon being 209,000.Preston's urban population is about 140,000 so the figure in that table must include every village and small town in a huge council controlled area spread over half of Lancashire which is very misleading.
Title: Re: Punching above / below their weight Post by: jutty274 on Wednesday, June 12, 2013, 15:08:27 Well the obvious starting point would be Peter Crouch who has had a quite sensational touch. I love his quote from when he was at Liverpool. He was asked what he would be if he wasn't a footballer & he answered " A Virgin "Title: Re: Punching above / below their weight Post by: Peter Gibbons on Wednesday, June 12, 2013, 18:10:28 sorry but that table is very misleading. Swindon's urban area population is 180,000 ( 2012 census) with the borough of Swindon being 209,000.Preston's urban population is about 140,000 so the figure in that table must include every village and small town in a huge council controlled area spread over half of Lancashire which is very misleading. I believe all the figures are urban area (so nothing to do with councils) but I agree that the figures appear to be out of date. The Preston Urban Area includes Chorley, Euxton, Leyland, and Bamber Bridge (and Preston, obviously) which does not appear unreasonable - as best I can find online, an "urban area" can involve two built up areas joined by a road, provided they are less than 200 metres apart (source attached, third tab entitled 'notes'). I've bored myself with this but you did cast aspersions upon my meticulously copy/pasted table :) Title: Re: Punching above / below their weight Post by: Exiled Bob on Wednesday, June 12, 2013, 18:40:47 Punching above their weight....? Yeovil, Bournemouth and Doncaster next season.
Title: Re: Punching above / below their weight Post by: Dr Pierre Chang on Wednesday, June 12, 2013, 19:00:48 Chris Coleman
Title: Re: Punching above / below their weight Post by: mystical_goat on Wednesday, June 12, 2013, 19:36:37 Mark Hughes
Title: Re: Punching above / below their weight Post by: Peter Gibbons on Wednesday, June 12, 2013, 19:46:57 Reece Mastin :badmood:
|