Riyadh, Saudi Arabia — Gerwyn Price has offered a starkly different perspective on the Saudi Arabia Darts Masters atmosphere, praising the crowd as “engaged” and “itching for big things to happen” just hours after Nathan Aspinall suggested spectators “weren’t all there of their own accord.”
The contrasting assessments from the two players have highlighted the complexity of the PDC’s inaugural venture into Saudi Arabia, with opinions split on whether the debut event successfully captured the spirit of darts or exposed fundamental challenges in expanding to new markets.
Price’s Positive Assessment
Speaking after his dominant 6-0 whitewash victory over Philippines’ Alexis Toylo on Monday evening, Price offered glowing praise for the Global Theater crowd in Riyadh—a marked contrast to the skepticism expressed by his compatriot Aspinall.
“They were watching and engaged in the darts,” Price said. “A couple of times when I walked back after my visit, I just looked out into the crowd and they were all fully focused, watching and engaged in the darts.”
The former world champion drew comparisons with traditional darts venues, suggesting the Saudi crowd’s sobriety actually enhanced their attention: “Sometimes in other arenas they’re there for a good drink and a party atmosphere and sometimes they’re not even watching the darts. Here they were more involved in watching the darts.”
Price’s most telling observation came when discussing his spectacular 170 checkout—one of the highlights of the opening night. “I think the crowd are itching for big things to happen and for them to get involved,” he explained. “That’s probably the reason why I went for the 170 rather than set it up.”
“Usually, if the opponent’s not on a short out, I set it up, but it just felt nice to try and get the crowd involved,” Price added, suggesting he actively played to engage the audience rather than simply execute his usual tactical approach.
The Aspinall Controversy
Price’s comments come less than 24 hours after Aspinall sparked controversy with his candid assessment of the opening night atmosphere.
“I’m not stupid. I feel like they weren’t all there of their own accord, shall we say, and it was quite a small venue,” Aspinall told YouTube channel Darts Now after his 6-1 victory over Lourence Ilagan.
Aspinall’s remarks implied that at least some attendees had been compelled or incentivized to attend rather than choosing to be there as genuine fans—a claim that immediately raised questions about the authenticity of Saudi Arabia’s interest in darts.
The world number 14 also noted the crowd’s unfamiliarity with darts etiquette: “You would throw a dart at treble 20 and they would clap when you still had another two darts in your hand. Or you would throw at double six and miss on the outside, and then they would clap. That is why I kept laughing the whole game.”
The Professional Darts Corporation swiftly issued a statement defending the event, insisting that “all spectators attended as ticket holders or guests” while acknowledging it was “a first-of-its-kind darts event in the region.”
Different Experiences, Different Interpretations
The divergent views from Price and Aspinall raise intriguing questions about whether the two players genuinely experienced different crowds, or whether their contrasting perspectives reflect different expectations and playing styles.
Price’s comments about the crowd being “fully focused” and “watching and engaged” don’t necessarily contradict Aspinall’s observation that they “weren’t all there of their own accord.” Both could be true—attendees who didn’t voluntarily choose to be there could still pay close attention once present.
The Welshman’s positive interpretation may also reflect his performance on the night. Price delivered one of the strongest displays, averaging over 100 and hitting a perfect 6-0 victory with the spectacular 170 finish lighting up the venue. It’s perhaps easier to appreciate a crowd when you’re dismantling your opponent.
Aspinall, while also winning comfortably, spent much of his match “laughing” at the crowd’s mistimed applause and unfamiliarity with the sport’s conventions—potentially coloring his overall impression of the event.
The Atmosphere Question
Price’s most intriguing comments addressed the pre-tournament concerns about how darts would work in an alcohol-free environment.
“I thought it was quite good,” Price said. “You could hear the individuals now and again. It felt different, but in a good way. People have said they don’t think it would be any good because there’s no alcohol in the crowd and the atmosphere would be no good. But I disagree. They were itching to get involved.”
This assessment directly challenges the widespread skepticism about whether darts can thrive without its traditional beer-fueled rowdiness. Price suggests the quieter, more focused atmosphere wasn’t necessarily inferior—just different.
However, he acknowledged that the format played a role: “If it was a World Championship and people were hitting big scores over a longer format, giving time for the crowd to get involved, I think it would be good.”
This caveat is significant. The Saudi Arabia Darts Masters features best-of-11-legs matches in the early rounds—relatively short affairs that don’t allow much time for momentum to build or crowds to warm up. Whether this model can sustain interest over multiple days and longer matches remains uncertain.
The 170 Moment
Price’s decision to attempt the 170 finish—rather than playing tactically to set up a more comfortable out—reveals his conscious effort to create a crowd moment.
The big checkout came when Price was already cruising at 3-0 up, putting him in position to make the strategic choice between securing the leg methodically or taking a risk to wow the audience.
“It just felt nice to try and get the crowd involved,” Price explained, suggesting he was actively trying to give the Saudi spectators something memorable rather than simply grinding out a professional victory.
This approach contrasts with Aspinall’s experience, where the crowd’s unfamiliarity with the sport’s rhythms created awkward rather than electric moments. The difference may lie in Price’s willingness to actively court the crowd versus Aspinall’s more passive assessment of their behavior.
Cultural Considerations
Price’s charitable interpretation of the crowd also reflects greater cultural sensitivity about Middle Eastern sporting audiences.
His observation that “sometimes they’re not even watching the darts” in traditional UK venues versus the focused attention in Saudi Arabia acknowledges different cultural norms around spectatorship. Japanese and Middle Eastern sports crowds are often quieter and more respectful than their British counterparts—a difference that’s not necessarily negative.
Luke Humphries made similar points before the tournament, noting that “when you go to places like Saudi or Japan, these countries are respectful people. They don’t cheer out, they don’t jump out of their seats. They’re just going to be really satisfied to sit back and enjoy a great sport.”
Price’s comments echo this perspective, suggesting the quieter atmosphere reflected cultural norms rather than lack of interest or engagement.
The Genuine Interest Question
What remains unresolved is Aspinall’s central accusation—that spectators “weren’t all there of their own accord.”
Price’s positive assessment of crowd engagement doesn’t address whether attendees chose to be there. The PDC’s statement acknowledged both “ticket holders” and “guests”—corporate hospitality and invited attendees being common practice for inaugural sporting events in new markets.
The question isn’t whether the crowd paid attention once there—Price’s observations suggest they did. The question is whether that attention reflects genuine grassroots interest in darts, or whether it’s the polite engagement of people attending an event for professional or social reasons unrelated to personal passion for the sport.
This distinction matters enormously for the PDC’s long-term strategy in Saudi Arabia. Events can succeed with manufactured attendance for a while, but sustainable growth requires authentic fan development.
Looking Ahead
The quarter-finals continue Tuesday at the Global Theater, with Price set to face Luke Humphries in what promises to be a compelling match-up.
Whether the crowd maintains the engagement Price praised—or displays more of the unfamiliarity Aspinall noted—will provide further evidence about darts’ prospects in Saudi Arabia.
Price’s willingness to give Saudi Arabia the benefit of the doubt represents the more diplomatic approach most players have adopted. His focus on what worked—the attention, the focus, the potential for involvement—rather than dwelling on what differed from traditional venues offers the PDC a positive narrative to counter Aspinall’s skepticism.
“I think the crowd are itching for big things to happen,” Price repeated, emphasizing potential rather than problems.
The Broader Picture
The Price-Aspinall disagreement encapsulates broader tensions about sportswashing and the PDC’s expansion into controversial markets.
Critics of the Saudi venture argue that any positive assessment ignores the regime’s human rights record and treats sport as separable from politics. Aspinall’s blunt observation that attendees “weren’t all there of their own accord” feeds into concerns about manufactured interest designed to legitimize Saudi Arabia’s international image.
Conversely, Price’s focus on the sporting experience reflects most players’ preferred approach—engage professionally with the events they’re asked to play, avoid political judgments, and focus on growing the sport globally.
“Every sport in the world is competing there. So why not darts?” Michael van Gerwen said before the event, articulating the prevalent view among players that they’re not responsible for the PDC’s commercial decisions.
The Verdict
What’s clear from the contrasting Price and Aspinall assessments is that the Saudi Arabia Darts Masters defied simple categorization.
It wasn’t the disaster some predicted—crowds did attend, they did pay attention, and moments like Price’s 170 finish did generate excitement. But nor was it the authentic darts atmosphere the PDC might hope to cultivate long-term.
Price’s generous interpretation—”they were itching to get involved”—offers hope that repeated exposure could develop genuine interest. Aspinall’s skepticism—”they weren’t all there of their own accord”—acknowledges the reality that this interest hasn’t developed organically yet.
The truth likely lies somewhere between the two perspectives. The crowd Price praised and the crowd Aspinall questioned may well have been the same people, experienced differently by players in different moods delivering different performances to different expectations.
What matters most is whether future Saudi events can convert polite, focused attention into genuine passion—and whether the PDC can develop real grassroots interest beyond corporate hospitality and invited guests.
For now, Price has given Saudi Arabia’s first darts event a cautiously positive review. Whether that optimism proves justified depends on what happens next—both on Tuesday’s finals day and in the years to come.
Comments are closed.