Bath

Restricted by the Rec. 

For a full explanation of the source of and rationale behind these figures please refer to The Figures Explained.

2003/4 Season

Of all the clubs with ground capacity problems the situation is most acute at Bath. One of the great rugby dynasties of the 80s and 90s on the field, their performances faltered in the latter part of their second decade of dominance, and the early part of this. For a few seasons they were faced with the prospect of relegation, although it is questionable whether, had they finished last in the ZP, this would really have happened. Having recruited expensively and well after their ‘great escape’ of the 2002/3 season, they have performed well in 2003/4, coming top of the ZP and securing a much-valued Heineken cup place.

The simple fact however is that their crowds cannot grow. Until such time as they seriously address the issue of their capacity problems at The Recreation Ground, no amount of success on the field, or England or other international stars playing for them, will impact on their crowd numbers. The slight variances in crowd figures shown above disguise the fact that Bath have been turning people away at the gate over the entire period covered. This problem became most acute in the 2002/3 season, ironically one where on-field performances were at their lowest ebb. In eight out of their eleven home games they recorded a capacity attendance of 8,200.

Bath’s home is the Recreation Ground. The stadium complex is owned by the council, while the land it stands on is common land managed in part by the Charity Commission. There is little doubt but that Bath have had the financial resources to develop the ground, but any desire to do this has faced vociferous local opposition and a mire of planning and legal restrictions. Recognising this, the city council allowed them to use temporary seating to increase the capacity of the Rec. from 8,200 to 9,980 for the 2003/4 season. Such was the latent demand for tickets that this was immediately taken up. In the season just past they have recorded seven capacity houses in their eleven home Zurich games.

There are some in the Bath supporter community who talk about the Rec. being developed to 20k capacity. Frankly, given the restrictions in place, this is a pipe dream. There has been a proposal on the table for over two years now to build a 16k stadium. In the by no means likely event that this were to get the go-ahead from the Charity Commission, there would probably still be years of legal wrangling before a stadium could be built. By that stage even 16k might well be too small for their requirements.

Bearing in mind the growth of rugby in general and the overall popularity and brand awareness of Bath Rugby in particular, they would almost certainly now be playing in front of average gates of 15k probably closer to 20k, had they moved five years ago to a ground with greater capacity. This is the great dilemma that Bath face. Yes they own the Rec. Yes, they are profitable, with their roots firmly in that historic and beautiful town. But there comes a time when all these positives have to be measured against the loss of potential customers.

Were Bath to move to a 20k capacity stadium anywhere within a thirty mile radius of the Rec. I have little doubt that they would be filling it within a few years. In the unlikely event that they were ever allowed to develop the Rec. further, given its town-centre location, it could only ever be to a maximum of 16k. Put bluntly, their choice is to move or to continue a decline relative to the crowd growth of other clubs.

Assuming a move within the next five years is on the cards the club then has two options: Build a new stadium in or around Bath or move to a stadium which can already provide the capacity required. The former, whilst it would be the preferred option of many current supporters, seems highly unlikely. Leaving cost aside, there do not appear to be any suitable sites in or around Bath. A 20k stadium requires much more than just land. Road links and a cohesive transport infrastructure are just two other key requirements.

Much though this will upset die-hard Bath supporters, I can foresee no alternative to them having to think the unthinkable, to their club moving to an existing facility. The prime candidates for this would be Swindon or Bristol. My money would be on Ashton Gate in the latter city.

It will come as little consolation to Bath supporters to learn that they are not alone in this dilemma. Harlequins will, before long, face an almost identical situation.

If we project their average growth thus far forward another five seasons, this is what we see.

Season  -  Attendance

Four years ago London Irish, faced with the same problem, were forced to move some thirty miles out of London to Reading FC’s ground. Whilst this was a very reluctant move at the time, the club has since thrived. Is it not conceivable that Bath Rugby Club could also do so outside Bath itself?  

The next article in this series will take us to the London, as we look at another club with serious capacity problems, Harlequins.

View a Printer Friendly version of this Story.

Bookmark or share this story with:

• Digg
• Delicious
• Facebook
• Reddit
• Stumbleupon