Can we agree???

[Cresswell]

We have all had a chance to say what went wrong on Friday night, with some arguing that it was wholly down to weather conditions; others that it was a matter of the rub of the green on the evening; others that it was shortcomings in the team, both individual and collective; and others that it was a combination of these factors. Despite the game taking place on a very windy Friday evening and despite the game being shown live on BBC television, Friday evening presented Queens with an opportunity to reach the semi-final of the Scottish Cup for only the third time in our history and yet the official attendance was only 2,833 (including a reasonable contingent of Falkirk fans) - ie a game of this importance failed to attract a crowd of three thousand. I find that hugely disappointing and, frankly, difficult to understand. Can we agree on that? Can someone tell me what the official attendance was when we played Dundee at the same stage in 2008 (although I acknowledge that that game was p

[Palmyman]

6,278 AULD YIN in a raucous atmosphere fitba should always be played at 3 pm on a Saturday but TV calls the shots. Outwith the games against the big three in the league the Palmy attendance has only once topped 2,000 and it was against the Bairns - personally cannot see regular plus 2,000 crowds ever coming back in the the forseeable future

[Cresswell]

Thanks, Palmyman. I agree that football should be played at 3:00pm on a Saturday afternoon. There was some recent reminiscing on this site about cup games against Hearts in the 1950s when the two games played at Palmerston attracted crowds of over 20,000 and the game at Tynecastle a crowd in excess of 30,000. When I first started to support Queens crowds in excess of 10,000 were commonplace, with crowds occasionally going over the 20,000 mark.
With fewer than 3,000 bothering to turn up for a Scottish Cup quarter-final tie one really must wonder how long full-time professional football can survive in Scotland.

[rjc_1988]

Yes agree.

Not that it makes any material difference I think it was pretty obvious that the crowd was about 3400 but even if that was the case that is an abysmal turnout for a game of that importance and it does beg the question what future Scottish football actually has.

I am not sure what payment BBC made to Queens for the match - £80k was mentioned but I would be very surprised if that fixture was worth anything approaching that sort of amount.

If anyone knows it would be interesting to know?

[Cpt_Blackadder]

I was very disappointed with a turnout of around 2,000 Dumfries folk to support Queens' latest attempt to get to Hampden. Yet, in 2008, a crowd of 5,000 attended Palmerston when there was no match on (after the final). Why are some people prepared to support the team when the cup run is over rather than when they can influence it?

[jardi]

Sadly, TV has killed live football in my humble opinion.

I was made utterly sick to death of televised football some years ago, and pledged only to watch the very occasional match on TV.

Live football is far more exciting, but you cannot blame the punters for opting to watch the match on TV.

1) They will save £16.00 (At Palmerston)
2) They'll be warm and dry and able to eat and drink what they like, when they like.
3) They can watch the talking points over and over again.
4) My son was coming with a friend on Friday night, but the friend decided to stay in the pub to watch the game and drink the £16.00 instead.

When you analyse it like that, you cannot really blame some people for staying away. Indeed, I was amazed at how many people actually turned out from both clubs, as many people thought "I (like many others) was off my head for paying to go to the match, when I could have watched it at home, rather than sitting or standing in what was a freezing wind"

Granted, I am 'off

[Stravaigar]

My eigh**** year old daughter made the effort of a 3 hour bus journey down from Edinburgh arriving an hour before kick off, and then repeated the journey back up the road first thing Saturday morning. Pity most of Duumfries could not be arsed coming out of the house but thats life I suppose.

[mainstandman59]

Not really surprised at the attendance, too many factors as have already been mentioned affected the turnout. The Hardcore support for Queens these days I would suggest lies somewhere between 1600-1800 which are there come rain or shine, good or bad performances. My main gripe concerning TV games is that both clubs receive a decent amount from the TV company that shows the game, ie guaranteed income. So why on earth can't the clubs agree to drop the prices significantly? Reducing the cost to say £10 would in my opinion have encouraged more people to turn out, and would have added to the atmosphere. I know it's the same old story, overpriced games, but that really is probably the main reason why people find other things to do, it's simply becoming very expensive to watch football nowadays.

[awayteam]

Have to agree with comments. I am an exile and try to go to away games at least. Was at Dumbarton on a terrible day both in weather and play terms. Queens brought the usual 3-400 travelling support.

Having the Cup game on the telly was a godsend for me to be honest...at least until the game started! But apart from another disappointing performance in unforgiving weather I was shocked at the poor attendance.

It's obvious now that Queens have 1600-1800 loyal home support no matter what level they reach. Play-offs and quarter finals...what do people really expect from the team?

Surely the economic situation in Dumfries is as bad as I can recall and has a direct effect on the attendances? Unfortunately, once people drift away from fitba they often don't return.

The problem is Scotland wide. Half of the premier league teams are averaging 3500! It's all about the economy...no jobs, zero hours, low wages and uncertainty of employment despite the lying media trying to tell us otherw