We are used to comparing football attendances across countries, as we did for top European clubs recently, or between different leagues. But what about the comparison between football and other ways of spending one’s leisure time?
We are used to comparing football attendances across countries, as we did for top European clubs recently, or between different leagues. But what about the comparison between football and other ways of spending one’s leisure time?
In fact far more people visited London theatres last year than Premier League matches. The capital’s 241 professional theatres, admittedly far more than the number of football clubs, and more than I realised, attracted audiences of 22 million generating box office revenue of £618.5m. There were 14 million fans at Premier League stadiums.
It might be objected that the comparison is an unfair one. Theatres are open six to seven days a week plus matinée performances. A number of them receive state subsidies. Attendances are also boosted by school parties studying ‘set texts.
Many football fans also attend regularly, while relatively few people go to the theatre every week. It is in many ways an apples and oranges comparison, but none the less interesting for that. Moreover, both audiences are to an extent participating in an event rather than passively watching television.
It is impressive that an estimated 54 million people visited Britain’s major art galleries and museums last year, admittedly boosted by some popular temporary exhibiions, and a further 16 million attended live music concerts with a change in the licensing laws making it easier to hold small gigs.
The total crowds at all Premier and Football League matches was 26 million last season. Horse racing was watched by 6 million, matches in the top Rugby Union premier league and Rugby League super league by 3.4 million and country cricket by just over 500,000.
It is often observed that football has become more ‘middle class’, particularly given the rising cost of attending Premier League matches. Of course, the country has become more middle class in the sense that those in non-manual jobs have overtaken those in manual jobs. If football relied just on working class or lower income supporters, it would be in dire straits, both in terms of gate money and attractiveness to sponsors.
It is probably the case that non-manual football supporters are dispoportionately first generation middle class, coming from working class backgrounds and having progressed through the state education system, especially selective schools. Various writers have observed that going to their football club is a nostalgic way of keeping in touch with their roots, even though their lives may have changed beyond recognition in other respects.
Cost is also a consideration for some cultural activities. Two good seats in a top London theatre can cost just as much as a lower price range season ticket for a League 1 or 2 club. Some museums are, of course, free. The British Museum, for example, had 6.7 million visitors last year and the National Gallery 6 million.
In any case, is it an ‘either or’ choice? When a Charlton match was abandoned last season, I headed for the National Portrait Gallery, although admittedly I didn’t see any other supporters there. But as well as supporting Charlton and my non-league team, I often go to the theatre in London, Stratford and Birmingham and I am closely involved with my local art gallery. But then I am in the fortunate position of having the money and the leisure time to do all these things.
For some fans, following their club takes all their spare time and disposable income. But then one definition of a fan is a ‘fanatic’. Certainly my football clubs form part of my identity in a different way from other leisure time activities.