This is not true. We want lots of things to change, but we disagree about how to best effect this change. Some people, including myself, think that an AIL will not address any of the core problems of football in this country.
The simple reason why we don't get 20,000 at games is because not enough people are interested in domestic football. The number of occasions where fans have been turned away due to attendance having reached capacity is virtually nil. And the situation would remain the same even in an AIL in my opinion.
The fact remains that even in an AIL, most of the games will be in the same grounds against the same teams as now. The fact that most clubs are tightening their belts and some are talking about part-time football seems to indicate (to me at least) that we are not going to see any great improvement in the standard of football. So what reason is there to believe that more people will go to watch (for example) Bohs versus Derry, or Cork versus St. Pats, than currently go?
People talk about increased attendances but apart from Linfield, I don't think any of the IL teams would attract any more spectators than we currently get.
Also, increased TV money is often mentioned, but who will pay to cover the AIL? Considering RTE don't want to cover the LOI, and the BBC provides little more than minimal coverage of the IL, I'm not sure that an amalgamation of the two will suddenly have channels vying to cover it.
I'd actually like to see an AIL, but I think that without some serious measures taken to force clubs to be more sensible in their approach to spending, any AIL would have the same problems that the LOI does at the moment (can't really say I know that much about the IL).
Agreed. I've been saying this for a long time.