Cheshiregas
Global Moderator
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 2,975 
|
Post by Cheshiregas on Dec 7, 2014 13:34:20 GMT
Have edited to remove offensive term. People have differing opinions and arguments will get heated but can we kindly respect other Gasheads without getting abusive? Season of goodwill and all that! Thanks Well, different things offend different people. You seem to think it's ok to say stuff like, '[if you don't agree with Westcountrygas...] "then we deserve to rot in this league for many years to come."' That's just so utterly stupid and self-righteous, that offends my sense of decent conversation. I asked if he could remove the constant ridiculous self-righteous moralising from his posts, and got a stupid, cop-out reply. If he's happy to non-debate on such a crappy level, I don't really see how calling him a name is beyond the purview of this implicit rhetorical domain. Of course, you should also feel free to moderate the forum however you wish. Antonio I have replied to your pm. As you have posted your response for the sake of good order I post my reply to you: Antonio
I simply removed an offensive term. I don't want to discuss semantics, life is too short.
You are big enough, old enough and articulate enough to argue your point of view.
If you feel that any poster is abusing you or misusing the forum then please feel free to complain to the moderators.
If you are unhappy that I removed the word then please feel to complain to the administrators and I will be happy to stand down as a moderator.
Regards Cheshire
|
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Dec 7, 2014 13:38:46 GMT
No, I'm perfectly happy that you removed the term. Sorry if I gave the opposite impression. I was just explaining why I used it.
Yeah, not sure whether we were supposed to be doing this in the thread or by PM, so I replied to both.
|
|
c13
Rickie Lambert
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 424
|
Post by c13 on Dec 7, 2014 14:41:05 GMT
I think we're missing the point here, no one should be saying that a draw away is THE END OF THE WORLD, but it is not something we should take too kindly as well. All I'm trying to say is that it's (in very childish terms to make it easier to understand) a major bummer that we didn't win a game that was closer to us than for their side. That's all, really. No need to rot in any league forever or anything.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2014 15:22:11 GMT
We have now racked up 35 points from the last 18 league games.You can dress it up or strip it back any way you choose but a continuation of nigh on 2 points per game will be good enough for a play off place as a minimum.If we were sitting in Barnets position would we be thinking were home and hosed as champions? Nope,still all to play for in my view and we should all take note of that well known financial disclaimer - Past performance is no guarantee of future results. But 14 points from the last 10 games is not promotion form.I have been saying for quite some time that we have no creativity in the side,yesterday we had Clarke and Mansell both defensive midfielders and Sinclair,no matter how you look at it despite the fact he works hard and covers acres of ground he is not a creative player.Then we bring in 3 loan strikers whe ,being generous,are nowhere near the prolific goalscorer that is needed,addede to that the top scorer has 7 goals including 3 penalties in 27 games it shows the problems. This time last week everyone was saying how if we win our game in hand we would be only 4 points behind Barnet,so we have played the game in hand,we go to Welling and cant score in 15 attempts whilst Barnet go to Torquay and score 2 in 7 attempts,so instead of 4 points behind we are now 9,and if the games this week go to form we will not be second but 4th and teams below us have games in hand so it could be 8 th.So much for wcg,s attempts to talk thing up they are far from rosie |
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Dec 7, 2014 15:56:40 GMT
It could be worse. We could be Sixth in the Prem:
|
|
GasMacc1
Les Bradd
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,423
|
Post by GasMacc1 on Dec 7, 2014 16:21:12 GMT
It could be worse. We could be Sixth in the Prem: Let's hope our milk doesn't go stale. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2014 17:19:23 GMT
We have now racked up 35 points from the last 18 league games.You can dress it up or strip it back any way you choose but a continuation of nigh on 2 points per game will be good enough for a play off place as a minimum.If we were sitting in Barnets position would we be thinking were home and hosed as champions? Nope,still all to play for in my view and we should all take note of that well known financial disclaimer - Past performance is no guarantee of future results. But 14 points from the last 10 games is not promotion form.I have been saying for quite some time that we have no creativity in the side,yesterday we had Clarke and Mansell both defensive midfielders and Sinclair,no matter how you look at it despite the fact he works hard and covers acres of ground he is not a creative player.Then we bring in 3 loan strikers whe ,being generous,are nowhere near the prolific goalscorer that is needed,addede to that the top scorer has 7 goals including 3 penalties in 27 games it shows the problems. This time last week everyone was saying how if we win our game in hand we would be only 4 points behind Barnet,so we have played the game in hand,we go to Welling and cant score in 15 attempts whilst Barnet go to Torquay and score 2 in 7 attempts,so instead of 4 points behind we are now 9,and if the games this week go to form we will not be second but 4th and teams below us have games in hand so it could be 8 th.So much for wcg,s attempts to talk thing up they are far from rosie Thanks for confirming my point about spinning the figures any way you like.I always see Sinclair as a defensive midfielder as well and we start all games with a 7 man defensive unit.Things were looking up while we had LDV as one of our attacking 4 but were well short on quality in that dept without him.The thing is from all evidence that I've witnessed myself we don't need 2 defensive midfielders as the opponents attacking ability has generally been s**te and getting a creative player in midfield is very much worth risking just the 1 defensive midfielder.If we stick with the 7 man defence then we need 2 proper wingers to supply the chances because our current midfield can't do it.Solve the conundrum and we will be promoted. |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2014 18:58:39 GMT
Welling had a 10th of our last home gate without our away following, surely like Alfreton that suggests their wage bill is less than a quarter of ours, it's shocking we can't manage one goal against teams made up of postman & builders etc. You keep banging on about our attendances. Why do you think that our wage bill must match those figures? The Rovers are in cost cutting and rebuilding mould I thought. Back to basics and cloth cut accordingly, Or I hope so. And you do realise that we have 4/5 players on big money from our league days which get counted in Darrel Clarkes`budget`? There seems to be some myth that Darrel Clarkes budget does not include the big earners for some strange reason. The rebuilding of Bristol Rovers is not a quick fix. It will take seasons. Not one year. But we all know that, right?
I see it took a 91st winner for the big earners of Bristol City to put the mighty Telford to the sword. Players on £10-15,000 a week having a hard time against part timers, who would have thought that?? Football hey?
|
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Dec 7, 2014 22:51:34 GMT
Isn't it fairly obvious we have a decent wage budget when we can bring in LDV, Goldberg, Wall & Blisset on transfer deadline day? Didn't TW suggest our wage budget was set at 6,000+ attendences also this season.
Finally if the attendance income is not going on players wages where the hell is it going, or NH's new car?
|
|
|
|
Post by lostinspace on Dec 7, 2014 23:50:23 GMT
Isn't it fairly obvious we have a decent wage budget when we can bring in LDV, Goldberg, Wall & Blisset on transfer deadline day? Didn't TW suggest our wage budget was set at 6,000+ attendences also this season. Finally if the attendance income is not going on players wages where the hell is it going, or NH's new car? thought the figure quoted was 9,000, which was about the best joke of the year, specially if he bothered to look at the season's matchday attendances |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2014 0:21:38 GMT
of course but the league is tight and every games a battle,,,we beat and lost to barnet both games were very fierce and competitive,,we beat and drew with welling both games were hard fought,,,if we want to catch barnet we need to nick wins at welling/alfreton because we have better players,i just feel to always drone on about part time is pointless as we sadly happen to be in a rare league where nearly half the teams happen to be part time Yes I understand the argument that when the two teams get on the pitch it's a hard fought battle 11 v 11. We have a bigger income and a higher football profile than all the other clubs in this league so we should be able to sign better players and if we manage them properly we should, over 46 games, be able to win the majority of those battles against teams with inferior players. I guess the issue is about how big that "majority" is and whether it is good enough to win the league or at least get us in the play off's. If we don't get in the play off's is it because we didn't spend enough of our income, because we did spend enough but we didn't spend it wisely or because we did spend enough and spent it wisely but we didn't manage the players well enough ? In my view these are the key issues for Rovers and have been for many years. Talk about abuse of FFP rules or clubs with sugar daddies or bad luck with injuries or players not trying or bad choice of manager or the crowd getting on the players back or any of the other excuses are just red herrings. At the end of the day it all boils down to how we as a club manage our assets. well in recent times the club have managed there assets very badly but its not this group of players fault whats gone before and there making a good go at getting back up so far imo |
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Dec 8, 2014 1:44:53 GMT
Yes I understand the argument that when the two teams get on the pitch it's a hard fought battle 11 v 11. We have a bigger income and a higher football profile than all the other clubs in this league so we should be able to sign better players and if we manage them properly we should, over 46 games, be able to win the majority of those battles against teams with inferior players. I guess the issue is about how big that "majority" is and whether it is good enough to win the league or at least get us in the play off's. If we don't get in the play off's is it because we didn't spend enough of our income, because we did spend enough but we didn't spend it wisely or because we did spend enough and spent it wisely but we didn't manage the players well enough ? In my view these are the key issues for Rovers and have been for many years. Talk about abuse of FFP rules or clubs with sugar daddies or bad luck with injuries or players not trying or bad choice of manager or the crowd getting on the players back or any of the other excuses are just red herrings. At the end of the day it all boils down to how we as a club manage our assets. well in recent times the club have managed there assets very badly but its not this group of players fault whats gone before and there making a good go at getting back up so far imo I accept what you say 1973 and my friend gasgasgas with whom I've enjoyed Rovers games up and down the country for over forty years has just posted on another thread that he is witnessing "a better attitude from the players with a greater desire to win" which I'm very pleased about. But this mini debate is about full timers versus part timers and the opinion you expressed, representing I think what you might call the Rovers "establishment" viewpoint, is that it doesn't matter whether players are full or part time it's 11 v 11 on a football pitch. This is correct IMO but if we go down that route then we should also abandon the Rovers "establishment" line that has come to the fore over the last few seasons which has been that the FFP rules, clubs with sugar daddies (Fleetwood, Crawley etc), players not trying and all the other factors which I listed in the previous post have been conspiring against us. Nothing and no one has been conspiring against us because our downfall has been caused entirely by our own inadequacies. Hopefully Henbury Gas is in bed by now so I may be safe in saying that unfortunately Nick Higgs has been a major promulgator of this "conspiring against us" line and it's done no one any good. If we want to capitalize on the enthusiasm and commitment of the manager and the players then we must put behind us the blame culture and next time something goes wrong, a couple of defeats perhaps, we must be self critical and look at our own failures before we start making excuses. In fact being self critical and being frank about our strengths and weaknesses will stand us in good stead if we do it now, before we suffer any setback, because once we get into the habit of being honest with ourselves then I think the old Rovers spirit of tolerance and good sportsmanship will return. |
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Dec 8, 2014 8:03:55 GMT
if anyone has conspired against us, it is only ourselves. We have had better resources than most for a long time and not used them well enough.
Relegation has cost us a lot. We may still have a better budget than a lot, but how much is sucked up by the remaining players from relegation and how much has been allocated to the new players.
It's okay for people to expect us to walk this division even if I would say that "Do you expect it to be that easy?"
We seem to be turning things around on the pitch slowly. We will suffer defeats to teams we in theory shouldn't (like in any division we might be in), off the field remains to be seen. This years losses will be interesting and if we don't go up well.
That said if we don't go up, but we have done a reasonable job, then the club need to be strong and stick to the course we are plotting and not go down the road of ripping it up and starting again, because as and when we do go up, we need some stability or we will be back at square one again
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2014 19:07:31 GMT
Isn't it fairly obvious we have a decent wage budget when we can bring in LDV, Goldberg, Wall & Blisset on transfer deadline day? Didn't TW suggest our wage budget was set at 6,000+ attendences also this season. Finally if the attendance income is not going on players wages where the hell is it going, or NH's new car? Have you ever heard of contingency plans? Budgeting for the unexpected?(except relegation that is)!! As for ALL the attendance income going on the playing budget, you honestly expect that after the shenanigans of the previous seasons? The club is in rebuilding mould, not that many deluded Rovers fans think its needed or happening.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2014 19:13:56 GMT
if anyone has conspired against us, it is only ourselves. We have had better resources than most for a long time and not used them well enough. Relegation has cost us a lot. We may still have a better budget than a lot, but how much is sucked up by the remaining players from relegation and how much has been allocated to the new players. It's okay for people to expect us to walk this division even if I would say that "Do you expect it to be that easy?" We seem to be turning things around on the pitch slowly. We will suffer defeats to teams we in theory shouldn't (like in any division we might be in), off the field remains to be seen. This years losses will be interesting and if we don't go up well. That said if we don't go up, but we have done a reasonable job, then the club need to be strong and stick to the course we are plotting and not go down the road of ripping it up and starting again, because as and when we do go up, we need some stability or we will be back at square one again Well said and it is plainly obvious to most but you wont be surprised to hear that will not be good enough for the masses and no doubt will demand sackings again. The ability to see further than ones nose is severely lacking, you only have to read what people think and demand on here.
|
|
