irishrover
Global Moderator
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,372
|
Post by irishrover on Mar 30, 2015 21:34:14 GMT
Not sure there have been many teams relegated who've retained a 6,000+ average home gate (and the income which goes with that) and not started off in dire financial states &/or with a points deduction? Grimsby's football club wages last season was £1.5m on a turnover of £2m ours was something like £3.5m on £4m turnover, even if you knock a £1m off both those figures they still drawf even Grimsby's. That's more than enough of that. If you could just pick up some pom-poms and join the line please. There is something in the fact that there was downward's inertia, but we now seem to have arrested that, albeit at a very low level. Maybe Mad Dog won't get his team promoted, but with the resources at his disposal he's done a pretty good job. Only once this season has their home crowd exceeded 2100, and that was when Grimby brought more than half of the crowd with them. It's hard not to think that had we gone after him last summer we would already be promoted. I have to disagree with that. I don't think Allen is the worst manager in the world and there are certain circumstances over the years where I'd have welcomed him as Rovers manager but I'm pretty positive that if he'd have been appointed for this season it would have been a total car crash. The guy is sandpaper. He liked to create friction, that's part of the reason he's stuck anywhere for any length of time his methods are deliberately divisive. That's fine I think (at least in the short term) if you're dealing with a squad you've put together at a club which is expecting an 'us against the world mentality'. Rovers in this division have a sense of entitlement so I don't think that approach would work particularly well with us. But also we were coming off a catastrophic relegation and were stuck with a load of players who took us down - coming in and creating the kind of havoc Allen does in his own squads would have been a disaster. We had players we couldn't get rid of but still had to play - they needed their confidence built back up and that's not Allen's thing. Plus he'd never have had any kind of benefit of the doubt if he made a bad start. I could see that situation rocketing out of control very quickly. Credit where it's due to Clarke; he held everything together after a poor start and turned this season into something productive. I thought this season was going to be a write off in September. Allen could easily have gotten off to the same poor start because the same fundamental recruitment issue were there all offseason (because O'Toole and other pissed us about) and I don't see him being able to turn that around. I didn't agree with appointing Clarke manager at the time but I'd never have advocated for Martin Allen in that situation. I would have done last February.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2015 21:48:46 GMT
my point is bg only comments when the team lose or draw,if we go up he will go missing for a while Presenting opinion as fact, well done. an observation actually
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2015 22:04:47 GMT
That's more than enough of that. If you could just pick up some pom-poms and join the line please. There is something in the fact that there was downward's inertia, but we now seem to have arrested that, albeit at a very low level. Maybe Mad Dog won't get his team promoted, but with the resources at his disposal he's done a pretty good job. Only once this season has their home crowd exceeded 2100, and that was when Grimby brought more than half of the crowd with them. It's hard not to think that had we gone after him last summer we would already be promoted. I have to disagree with that. I don't think Allen is the worst manager in the world and there are certain circumstances over the years where I'd have welcomed him as Rovers manager but I'm pretty positive that if he'd have been appointed for this season it would have been a total car crash. The guy is sandpaper. He liked to create friction, that's part of the reason he's stuck anywhere for any length of time his methods are deliberately divisive. That's fine I think (at least in the short term) if you're dealing with a squad you've put together at a club which is expecting an 'us against the world mentality'. Rovers in this division have a sense of entitlement so I don't think that approach would work particularly well with us. But also we were coming off a catastrophic relegation and were stuck with a load of players who took us down - coming in and creating the kind of havoc Allen does in his own squads would have been a disaster. We had players we couldn't get rid of but still had to play - they needed their confidence built back up and that's not Allen's thing. Plus he'd never have had any kind of benefit of the doubt if he made a bad start. I could see that situation rocketing out of control very quickly. Credit where it's due to Clarke; he held everything together after a poor start and turned this season into something productive. I thought this season was going to be a write off in September. Allen could easily have gotten off to the same poor start because the same fundamental recruitment issue were there all offseason (because O'Toole and other pissed us about) and I don't see him being able to turn that around. I didn't agree with appointing Clarke manager at the time but I'd never have advocated for Martin Allen in that situation. I would have done last February. No manager has achieved more promotions out of this dire division, you call that 'havoc' if you like, I kind of thought it was the object of the exercise. There probably is a sense of entitlement on the terraces, but there is precisely 0% chance of Allen allowing that to permeate the dressing room. But you can relax, Mad Dog would stand in front of our directors and tell them some home truths, they know that, so he won't be arriving any time soon.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2015 22:08:48 GMT
Blissett for me and many others I talk to has been a major disappointment he has no physical appearance and by his own admission in a recent Rovers interview in the programme conceded he is not an aggressive forward. The coaching staff have told him he needs to be more physical but he said it is not his nature ! The Conference and league two is full of big central defenders not particularly talented but stoppers and he must compete with them. Which frankly I doubt if he is capable on the evidence of the games he has played in. Harrison is by far a more physical presence and deserves to start ..again he was one of those responsible for our relegation and needs to prove to us he can handle it by starting rather than an impact player from the bench.
I am going to bang on about Blissett again. When he played against us at the Mem he picked the ball up 35 yards from the penalty area and ran with pace towards goal which always worries defenders. On Saturday he was playing on the edge of the area 'off the shoulder of defenders' which does not suit him. At the Mem he has been played on the edge of the area, which does not suit him. He is not able to be the 'big target man' for the increasing long balls from our half either.
i think you have a good point here,nathan is more suited to running in behind or at defences rather than back to goal against powerfull centre backs
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2015 22:20:16 GMT
Ah, the old attendance chestnut again. So the Rovers budget is 6 times more than Forest Greens and Eastleigh then based on that assumption? We all know that is not correct due to the bankrolling by their chairman. The opposite to Rovers as no one is putting their hands in their pockets form the board. reducing debt and costs, and rightly so. And that back four you keep harping on about, how much of the budget do you think they take up by themselves? And why are certain Rovers players on £6/700 a week? Never mind Rovers finally being run correctly and within their means, starting from the bottom and working their way up. Lets sack Darrel Clarke and go back to the bad old days. Its not that hard to see what Rovers are doing but the instant success at all cost brigade are always out in force.
Last I heard, we were set to make a tidy loss again this season. Where did I say that we should live beyond our means? In fact, more than once I've lamented the day that the Agenda For Change wasn't implimented, that was all about structuring the club to run efficiently. Mike Turl is broadly implimenting it at Sollihull Moors FC, average gate just over 400, price to stand on the terrace £9, loads of offers, especially to attract supporters of local League teams along on days when their team is playing away so they don't even pay £9, they have an active community dept, a reserve team and an U18 team, and sit confortably mid-table just 1 division below Rovers. And make a small profit. So you tell me why Rovers, with both hospitality areas sold out for most games and crowds of over 6000 all season, shouldn't have blown this division away, or at very least, shouldn't be sitting clear of Barnet who have only had a gate over 2100 on one occasion this season? Edit. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me to learn that the Share Scheme money was almost as much as Sollihull survive on. You and your attendances LOL. Newcastle United for example. The third highest average attendance in the premiership for years and where do they finish every season? Third place and a champions league place? Of course not. They are even miles behind Southampton and Stoke whos average is less than half of newcastles. Why is that? They should be blowing those minnows away!!
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 30, 2015 23:21:18 GMT
Last I heard, we were set to make a tidy loss again this season. Where did I say that we should live beyond our means? In fact, more than once I've lamented the day that the Agenda For Change wasn't implimented, that was all about structuring the club to run efficiently. Mike Turl is broadly implimenting it at Sollihull Moors FC, average gate just over 400, price to stand on the terrace £9, loads of offers, especially to attract supporters of local League teams along on days when their team is playing away so they don't even pay £9, they have an active community dept, a reserve team and an U18 team, and sit confortably mid-table just 1 division below Rovers. And make a small profit. So you tell me why Rovers, with both hospitality areas sold out for most games and crowds of over 6000 all season, shouldn't have blown this division away, or at very least, shouldn't be sitting clear of Barnet who have only had a gate over 2100 on one occasion this season? Edit. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me to learn that the Share Scheme money was almost as much as Sollihull survive on. You and your attendances LOL. Newcastle United for example. The third highest average attendance in the premiership for years and where do they finish every season? Third place and a champions league place? Of course not. They are even miles behind Southampton and Stoke whos average is less than half of newcastles. Why is that? They should be blowing those minnows away!! What jolly good sport, someone deliberately trying to misunderstand. Sollihull are a great example of what can be achieved on very limited resources. As are plenty of the teams in this division. There are also teams in L2 getting by on a fraction of the income Rovers have. Don't you wonder even for a second why that is? It sounds as if you are actually trying to excuse the pitiful return Rovers manage with the resources at their disposal. Comparing Newcastle to Stoke is a weak argument at best, in the PL gate receipts are a tiny fraction of total income.
|
|
Bridgeman
Alfie Biggs
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 3,549
|
Post by Bridgeman on Mar 31, 2015 0:00:50 GMT
You and your attendances LOL. Newcastle United for example. The third highest average attendance in the premiership for years and where do they finish every season? Third place and a champions league place? Of course not. They are even miles behind Southampton and Stoke whos average is less than half of newcastles. Why is that? They should be blowing those minnows away!! What jolly good sport, someone deliberately trying to misunderstand. Sollihull are a great example of what can be achieved on very limited resources. As are plenty of the teams in this division. There are also teams in L2 getting by on a fraction of the income Rovers have. Don't you wonder even for a second why that is? It sounds as if you are actually trying to excuse the pitiful return Rovers manage with the resources at their disposal. Comparing Newcastle to Stoke is a weak argument at best, in the PL gate receipts are a tiny fraction of total income. Comparing Newcastle with the likes of Stoke or Southampton isn't probably the best of comparisons, I mean even Swansea are continuing to do well on around an attendance of 22,000 but it does suggest that a better run club despite a low level of support can in some circumstances be more successful than a club with a higher level of support. Walsall appear to be existing on relatively low levels of support but are making a small profit each year but then bring in income from their motorway advertising signs. I'm not really sure we can really compare our situation with any other club whether it's with Newcastle or Swansea or with Solihull or Walsall. I like many others want better than we have and grow frustrated probably like yourself that we have stalled in our development with last season culminating in our relegation. I question as I did at the Q&A sessions about the ability of those who manage this club and whether they are really prepared to challenge themselves why we have landed up in the Conference other than the usual glib responses we get. I've decided I can only do what I do now and go and support the team, players and manager however limited they might be compared to others who have gone before in slightly more 'successful' periods in our history.
|
|
faggotygas
Byron Anthony
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,862
|
Post by faggotygas on Mar 31, 2015 7:43:15 GMT
You and your attendances LOL. Newcastle United for example. The third highest average attendance in the premiership for years and where do they finish every season? Third place and a champions league place? Of course not. They are even miles behind Southampton and Stoke whos average is less than half of newcastles. Why is that? They should be blowing those minnows away!! What jolly good sport, someone deliberately trying to misunderstand. Sollihull are a great example of what can be achieved on very limited resources. As are plenty of the teams in this division. There are also teams in L2 getting by on a fraction of the income Rovers have. Don't you wonder even for a second why that is? It sounds as if you are actually trying to excuse the pitiful return Rovers manage with the resources at their disposal. Comparing Newcastle to Stoke is a weak argument at best, in the PL gate receipts are a tiny fraction of total income. Personally I completely agree that Rovers have historically got a poor return on income. What I do disagree with, is your assertion that this is the present manager's doing. I think he's done as well as could be expected, given the circumstances.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 31, 2015 11:37:50 GMT
What jolly good sport, someone deliberately trying to misunderstand. Sollihull are a great example of what can be achieved on very limited resources. As are plenty of the teams in this division. There are also teams in L2 getting by on a fraction of the income Rovers have. Don't you wonder even for a second why that is? It sounds as if you are actually trying to excuse the pitiful return Rovers manage with the resources at their disposal. Comparing Newcastle to Stoke is a weak argument at best, in the PL gate receipts are a tiny fraction of total income. Personally I completely agree that Rovers have historically got a poor return on income. What I do disagree with, is your assertion that this is the present manager's doing. I think he's done as well as could be expected, given the circumstances. I think we are in danger of confusing issues here. 1. Clarke should have been shown the door after last season's Torquay farce, it was obvious that he was going to take us down. The Mansfield game alone should have been enough to get him sacked. Nothing that he has done since has convinced me otherwise. The part of the team that he inherited is OK, the rest of it struggles by at a very low level but is far from convincing. 2. I don't blame Clarke for the lack of planning or the shambolic way that the club is run. 3. Responsibility for the return on investment is divided between the manager and the BoD. I accept that Clarke has a reduced budget to work with and several of the high earners from last season are still here, but does anyone think that he could be getting more out of this group of players?
|
|
faggotygas
Byron Anthony
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,862
|
Post by faggotygas on Mar 31, 2015 11:56:24 GMT
Personally I completely agree that Rovers have historically got a poor return on income. What I do disagree with, is your assertion that this is the present manager's doing. I think he's done as well as could be expected, given the circumstances. I think we are in danger of confusing issues here. 1. Clarke should have been shown the door after last season's Torquay farce, it was obvious that he was going to take us down. The Mansfield game alone should have been enough to get him sacked. Nothing that he has done since has convinced me otherwise. The part of the team that he inherited is OK, the rest of it struggles by at a very low level but is far from convincing. 2. I don't blame Clarke for the lack of planning or the shambolic way that the club is run. 3. Responsibility for the return on investment is divided between the manager and the BoD. I accept that Clarke has a reduced budget to work with and several of the high earners from last season are still here, but does anyone think that he could be getting more out of this group of players? Ok, my rebuttal:
Regarding the end of last season - 1,2, or 8 games are too few to judge a manager by, especially when it is not a team that he has put together. One more goal in the Torquay or Mansfield game and we would have stayed up. That is too random an event to judge by.
The part of the team that he inherited had been put together had been put together at a high cost, over a number of seasons. Clarke had to put the rest of the team together at a much lower cost, from only those players looking for moves, to or within the Conference, at that time. A much smaller pool.
Its not like somebody signed Parkes, Brown, McCrystal and Mildenhall all at once. There is more trial and error in building a team than you seem to think, and that's true at all levels.
I'm sorry but you seem to think that building a team is easy. At any one time there are a finite number of players available at the ability you want, the cost you can afford, that will fit well together, and can be persuaded to come your club. You can't just go and sign whoever you want. On top of that, a Manager has to select those members using incomplete data, and also consider how those players will develop over time. I know that's the mangers job, but for me your expectations of walking the league at the first opportunity are unrealistic.
|
|
|
Post by mehewmagic on Mar 31, 2015 12:12:43 GMT
is this a personal thread or can anyone join in?
|
|
faggotygas
Byron Anthony
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,862
|
Post by faggotygas on Mar 31, 2015 12:20:23 GMT
is this a personal thread or can anyone join in? Depends if you agree with me
|
|
|
Post by michaelb on Mar 31, 2015 12:48:25 GMT
But the real problem for us this season is far too many drawn games Exactly. 15 draws. Of course it doesn't always work out as you expect, but if we had pressed on it those 15 games, still drawn 5, lost 5 but also converted 5 into wins we would have the champagne on ice already. But of course we could have pressed on in those games we may have lost 10, as Brian clough used to say "if my Auntie had a c0ck she would be my Uncle"
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 31, 2015 13:01:26 GMT
I think we are in danger of confusing issues here. 1. Clarke should have been shown the door after last season's Torquay farce, it was obvious that he was going to take us down. The Mansfield game alone should have been enough to get him sacked. Nothing that he has done since has convinced me otherwise. The part of the team that he inherited is OK, the rest of it struggles by at a very low level but is far from convincing. 2. I don't blame Clarke for the lack of planning or the shambolic way that the club is run. 3. Responsibility for the return on investment is divided between the manager and the BoD. I accept that Clarke has a reduced budget to work with and several of the high earners from last season are still here, but does anyone think that he could be getting more out of this group of players? Ok, my rebuttal:
Regarding the end of last season - 1,2, or 8 games are too few to judge a manager by, especially when it is not a team that he has put together. One more goal in the Torquay or Mansfield game and we would have stayed up. That is too random an event to judge by.
The part of the team that he inherited had been put together had been put together at a high cost, over a number of seasons. Clarke had to put the rest of the team together at a much lower cost, from only those players looking for moves, to or within the Conference, at that time. A much smaller pool.
Its not like somebody signed Parkes, Brown, McCrystal and Mildenhall all at once. There is more trial and error in building a team than you seem to think, and that's true at all levels.
I'm sorry but you seem to think that building a team is easy. At any one time there are a finite number of players available at the ability you want, the cost you can afford, that will fit well together, and can be persuaded to come your club. You can't just go and sign whoever you want. On top of that, a Manager has to select those members using incomplete data, and also consider how those players will develop over time. I know that's the mangers job, but for me your expectations of walking the league at the first opportunity are unrealistic.
You make some good points, however, Can anyone say that the performances against Torquay and Mansfield were well organised and executed in the way most likely to secure League survival? The Clarke apologists also conveniently overlook 2 things. 1. He wasn't shipped in under cover of night for the last 8 games, he was part of the management team all season. 2. The standard of this division is dreadful. We see it every week, players who hold down other full time jobs are competitive at this level, that's how poor the quality is. It's not exactly going to take a squad full of Bergkamps and Messis to blow away rubbish like Macclesfield. Meyhew. Join in matey, I could do with someone else who doesn't want to celebrate mediocrity.
|
|
faggotygas
Byron Anthony
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,862
|
Post by faggotygas on Mar 31, 2015 14:26:27 GMT
Ok, my rebuttal:
Regarding the end of last season - 1,2, or 8 games are too few to judge a manager by, especially when it is not a team that he has put together. One more goal in the Torquay or Mansfield game and we would have stayed up. That is too random an event to judge by.
The part of the team that he inherited had been put together had been put together at a high cost, over a number of seasons. Clarke had to put the rest of the team together at a much lower cost, from only those players looking for moves, to or within the Conference, at that time. A much smaller pool.
Its not like somebody signed Parkes, Brown, McCrystal and Mildenhall all at once. There is more trial and error in building a team than you seem to think, and that's true at all levels.
I'm sorry but you seem to think that building a team is easy. At any one time there are a finite number of players available at the ability you want, the cost you can afford, that will fit well together, and can be persuaded to come your club. You can't just go and sign whoever you want. On top of that, a Manager has to select those members using incomplete data, and also consider how those players will develop over time. I know that's the mangers job, but for me your expectations of walking the league at the first opportunity are unrealistic.
You make some good points, however, Can anyone say that the performances against Torquay and Mansfield were well organised and executed in the way most likely to secure League survival? The Clarke apologists also conveniently overlook 2 things. 1. He wasn't shipped in under cover of night for the last 8 games, he was part of the management team all season. 2. The standard of this division is dreadful. We see it every week, players who hold down other full time jobs are competitive at this level, that's how poor the quality is. It's not exactly going to take a squad full of Bergkamps and Messis to blow away rubbish like Macclesfield. Meyhew. Join in matey, I could do with someone else who doesn't want to celebrate mediocrity.
Maybe, maybe not. Clarke's not perfect, he's a young manager who is learning. I do seem to remember the Mansfield game as being one in which we dominated and were unlucky to lose, against a team that were much higher than us in the table. Does no-one but me remember some wonder saves from the Mansfield keeper, Clarkson hitting the bar?
Unfortunately we'd knocked on the relegation door so often in the past, it was bound to open eventually.
1. Being an assistant manager is totally different to being a manager. It wasn't Clarke that failed to sign a decent striker all season. 2. the relevance? We are where we are. By and large Conference teams can only attract Conference players, and if the Conference standard is dreadful, then those players must be too. He can't magic league 2/league 1 standard players, that are available, want to come play in the Conference, and are affordable, out of his rear end. The players aren't that much better because you can pay them a bit more, or because we are the Mighty Bristol Rovers.
I don't celebrate mediocrity - I am desperately unhappy the we sleepwalked into the Conference. But nor do I expect the extremely unlikely. We live in the real world matey.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 31, 2015 15:12:13 GMT
Unfortunately we'd knocked on the relegation door so often in the past, it was bound to open eventually.
That much it's impossible to disagree with. This time we didn't find Andy Rammel, we went for Gow with his gammy ankle, and allowed Exeter a clause that meant we couldn't recall young Elliot. Wycombe escaped by the skin of their teeth, that was the wake up call they needed. Our lot in Box 1, what's changed since last May? Barry can't decide if he wants solid or stripy scarves, some good people have lost their jobs, it's not entirely clear who is running first team affairs, apart from that it looks to be business as usual? Let's end with a positive thought, twice before this season we have gone on runs of 5 consecutive wins
|
|
brizzle
Lindsay Parsons
No Buy . . . No Sell!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,293
|
Post by brizzle on Mar 31, 2015 15:13:03 GMT
I was trying to be positive and fit in Well at least it does show you've got a sense of humour, a very necessary commodity when supporting the Gas Gallows humour, surely? I was introduced to it at Eastville. Marvellous stuff, character forming.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 31, 2015 15:14:04 GMT
You and your attendances LOL. Newcastle United for example. The third highest average attendance in the premiership for years and where do they finish every season? Third place and a champions league place? Of course not. They are even miles behind Southampton and Stoke whos average is less than half of newcastles. Why is that? They should be blowing those minnows away!! What jolly good sport, someone deliberately trying to misunderstand. Sollihull are a great example of what can be achieved on very limited resources. As are plenty of the teams in this division. There are also teams in L2 getting by on a fraction of the income Rovers have. Don't you wonder even for a second why that is? It sounds as if you are actually trying to excuse the pitiful return Rovers manage with the resources at their disposal. Comparing Newcastle to Stoke is a weak argument at best, in the PL gate receipts are a tiny fraction of total income. Misunderstanding what exactly? You bang on about attendances and under achieving, I have given you examples! You then bang on about Solihull Motors who do well on limited attendances and resources! Its the same thing but on a bigger scale is it not? Twist facts how you wish but they are the same. And you actually believe gate receipts etc cover their total outgoings? So in your educated mind, these small clubs with attendances of around 1,500 to 2,000 or whatever do not have millionaire benefactors bailing them out/contributing to their budgets? Of course they do. It is not a weak argument at all but your attempt at making out I am condoning the way the Rovers have been run is. But you are good at these little side swipes when someone hits a nerve are you not?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 31, 2015 15:18:13 GMT
What jolly good sport, someone deliberately trying to misunderstand. Sollihull are a great example of what can be achieved on very limited resources. As are plenty of the teams in this division. There are also teams in L2 getting by on a fraction of the income Rovers have. Don't you wonder even for a second why that is? It sounds as if you are actually trying to excuse the pitiful return Rovers manage with the resources at their disposal. Comparing Newcastle to Stoke is a weak argument at best, in the PL gate receipts are a tiny fraction of total income. Comparing Newcastle with the likes of Stoke or Southampton isn't probably the best of comparisons, I mean even Swansea are continuing to do well on around an attendance of 22,000 but it does suggest that a better run club despite a low level of support can in some circumstances be more successful than a club with a higher level of support. Walsall appear to be existing on relatively low levels of support but are making a small profit each year but then bring in income from their motorway advertising signs. I'm not really sure we can really compare our situation with any other club whether it's with Newcastle or Swansea or with Solihull or Walsall. I like many others want better than we have and grow frustrated probably like yourself that we have stalled in our development with last season culminating in our relegation. I question as I did at the Q&A sessions about the ability of those who manage this club and whether they are really prepared to challenge themselves why we have landed up in the Conference other than the usual glib responses we get. I've decided I can only do what I do now and go and support the team, players and manager however limited they might be compared to others who have gone before in slightly more 'successful' periods in our history. the comparison Bridgie was for attendance purposes as Bamber keeps banging on about ours compared to Barnet etc. The point I was making is that attendances mean nothing. Obviously the extra revenue is much more but its what you do with it that matters spot on with your last paragraph by the way. Good man.
|
|
faggotygas
Byron Anthony
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,862
|
Post by faggotygas on Mar 31, 2015 15:19:54 GMT
Unfortunately we'd knocked on the relegation door so often in the past, it was bound to open eventually.
That much it's impossible to disagree with. This time we didn't find Andy Rammel, we went for Gow with his gammy ankle, and allowed Exeter a clause that meant we couldn't recall young Elliot. Wycombe escaped by the skin of their teeth, that was the wake up call they needed. Our lot in Box 1, what's changed since last May? Barry can't decide if he wants solid or stripy scarves, some good people have lost their jobs, it's not entirely clear who is running first team affairs, apart from that it looks to be business as usual? Let's end with a positive thought, twice before this season we have gone on runs of 5 consecutive wins Bang on, old bean
|
|