Eddie Hitler

What a generous offer @SecretSam. I know we have some keen collectors on here so it will be going to a good home.

Spot on. People get hung up on the headline numbers but fail to bring into account the multiple adjustment factors that have to brought in in order to transform that headline number into a correct, albeit theoretical, attendance figure. When correctly adjusted, as you have just done, they have a genuinely awesome away support. We are very much not worthy.

The fatal, 34 people died, 1952 Lynmouth flood was thought to be caused by hamfisted attempts at cloud seeding by the RAF. The rebuttal at the end doesn't entirely convince me. A theory has spread that the flood was caused by secret cloud seeding experiments carried out by the Royal Air Force (RAF) between 1949 and 1952.[6][7][8] The theory was fuelled by a 2001 BBC Radio 4 documentary, which suggested that the events of 1952 were connected to Project Cumulus. The programme alleged that "the infamous Lynmouth flood disaster came only days after RAF rain-making experiments over southern England", and that secret experiments were causing heavy rainfall.[6] According to the programme, "classified documents on the trials that Project Cumulus contributed to the conditions that caused this flood have gone missing".[6] A few days before the disaster a seeding experiment was carried out over southern England. Alan Yates, an aeronautical engineer and glider pilot who was working with the operation, sprayed salt in the air and was "elated" to learn of a heavy rainfall in Staines shortly after.[9] "Survivors tell how the air smelled of sulphur on the afternoon of the floods, and the rain fell so hard it hurt people's faces."[6] Meteorologist Philip Eden has said the experiments could not have caused the accident: "it is preposterous to blame the Lynmouth flood on such experiments".[10] Eden also said "The storm which caused the 1952 disaster was not confined to the Lynmouth district."[10] while in reality "The East and West Lyn rivers, which drop rapidly down from Exmoor, were swollen even before the fatal storm https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynmouth_Flood

I used to know a few Germans from work and they loved English football grounds for their atmosphere because their grounds had a running track between the stands and the pitch so that they weren't close to the action. A decent amount of terracing for those who wish to stand always adds to the atmosphere. Good stewarding. If you leave your seat you keep w\lking, you don't stop and block either the view of those sitting or the exit.

Good to finish on a reasonable position from each.

Look at the tone of your post and your fellow travellers. You are painting people who disagree with you as the extremists when all the unreasonable posts are from those who think we should all be taking interest in the women's team. The reasonable position is actually that it should be optional.

Which for most people comprises the the men's first team with some interest in the U23s and youth as reserves or players of the future. I know those of us who aren't interested in women's football, which is a clear majority, are often painted as being the extremists but I would say on this thread that it's the women's football fans who are throwing their toys out of the pram that people have the sheer temerity not to share their interest.

There don't seem to be any examples of anyone "vehemently against" women's football, just a lot of people who are not interested in it. As I am also not interested in Formula 1 racing. I would also object if Formula 1 was covered in SOTC.

Hardly that. Rather objecting to tuning in to hear about one team and then being told about another one in the middle of it. Though I have cherry picked from what is a very balanced post with which I mostly agree. As an analogy I think a lot of us were fed up with hearing about Yeovil on Saturday afternoons or TTB on the RB frequency when they were in the league because they are a Somerset club and should instead be covered on BBC Radio Somerset, leaving RB for Bristol clubs. I'm not against Yeovil, but I don't support them so am not much interested in their day to day activities.

Out of reactions but yes. It's easy to do: 6.00 - 6.45 Sound of the City - men's first team 6.45 - 7.00 Sound of the City - women's first team Radio Bristol isn't a commercial broadcaster so it doesn't matter what the listening figures are and they won't be disclosed. I usually listen on Sounds so have to skip the women's football segment which is an inexact science given that there are no chapters.

Yes, but to be fair the men's team is far more commercially unviable unless and until it breaks into the Premiership and stays there.

And also during the last war when there many very successful women's teams. It's a proper sport with its own support, it's the passing off by the media that irriates me.

But if you have no interest in that team then you don't want it mixed in with the coverage, either in Sound of the City or online news, of the team in which you are interested. You are welcome to support both of course but most people do not and this should be recognised, on here by having a separate subforum now that the "Ignore threads" functionality doesn't work.

They are, but nobody minds that, and as I have said on a previous post I don't mind the women's team being funded as it probably costs less than half a first team player's wages. What they are not however doing is passing themselves off as Bristol City.

Because the listening figures, like the gate receipts, would be miniscule. I am all for women's football becoming successful in its own right but at present it is parasitically leeching money and press coverage from the well supported football team that has been going for over a century. It should stand, or fall, on its own two feet instead of the current situation of mixing in (women's players in the men's calendar) and passing off: "Bristol City" beat "Arsenal".