Leaderboard

The last player I can remember in a Rovers shirt is Colin Daniel

Barca are back

Be careful out there everyone. My sister had two Bristol Rovers tickets on the dashboard, and last night someone broke into her car and left four more. A terrible crime.

Attendance: 6,005 (286 away). Thank you to the travelling Latics fans who have made the journey tonight.

To be fair, you'll find alot of lower league club supporters also pick a 2nd team to follow, in a higher division. ?

My original post was in response to somebody who didn't know who Chris Lines was, and I said it's pretty much the same for me with current City players, because the two clubs have not played each other for a long time, so I have no reason to be up to date with who is in your squad. I could probably name your complete team which got promoted to the old Division One, along with a lot of players from the 1980's, 1990's, and maybe a bit later. These days there is nothing in common, unless we get drawn together in a cup again. I do spend quite a lot of time on here, I've said before that there are some interesting debates, and the humour is generally good. I'm mainly in this thread or the mental health one, along with any more general football related threads which may catch my interest. Sorry if I have offended you with my lack of knowledge - I'm just being honest. I wouldn't expect many people on here to know our current (or recent) players.

I'm at that age where I can remember players from the 1970's, but couldn't tell you what happened yesterday! ?

Yep, that bloke who has just played in the quarter final of the Euros & against England no one has ever heard of him. Or the one who faced Germany, France & Portugal.. Or Andi Weimann, Chris Martin, Andy King, players with loads of Prem games behind them.. Gas always come out with this shit, let’s face it most of their team arrived this summer, in the latest 10 in, 13 out shitshow that happens in BS7 most seasons. Most people don’t know who fourth division footballers are but I do know their goalie (genuinely don’t know his name) was in the Finland squad, though.

The aggregate attendance of the Gash’s three home games this season (Cheltenham, Stevenage, Oldham) still falls short of the crowd we got in our single home game against Blackpool. T-I-N-P-O-T

Last season or so we have been poor but over the last 5 years the profile of Bristol City and its players have never been higher since the 70s . To say you are in our shadow in an understatement. , you team is on the dark side of the moon in footballing terms. I’ve worked around the country and if you weren’t a avid football fan you would not be aware that Bristol had two clubs . Bristol Rovers is on par with Barnet , Wycombe, York City , that is your level. The only similarity between Bristol City and Bristol Rovers is that we both have Bristol in our name.

You spend a hell of a lot of time on here as a Gashead, have been a member of this forum for 14 years and yet you can’t name any of our players past or present apart from Scottie Murray? Hmmmm ok then!

So it's only fair to remind you I lent you £50 yesterday, charged at an interest rate of 1000% per day. Don't let me down.

Agreed. Agreed. Agreed. I would prefer - "Didn't realise the extent to which clubs would go to bend the rules" - clearly none of them had kids! The problem is that until the end of the season, you can't tell what the FFP position actually is, so this fails on the 'Theoretically good, practically impossible' test. Two points here. Firstly the new crowd are better than the old crowd. Secondly the EFL did tighten up significantly on accounts submission with the soft embargos, moving to hard embargos for such failures. The extended failure for Derby simply harms them, not anyone else. This is a commonly quoted problem, but it does not really exist. No club can take legal action through the courts against the EFL or another club. What they can do is go to arbitration on a relevant dispute. That is a perfectly valid position and regulatory system to adopt. Agreed, and I think that, contrary to an awful lot on here that Steve Lansdown is an excellent owner.

I've rectified a couple typos in your post. ?

Apologies, I do know of Massengo, he came from Monaco (I think) and made a generous donation to one of the fundraising efforts. Rumour was that you were "babysitting" him for Chelsea, until their transfer ban ended - but obviously not!

I don’t even take a great deal of interest in domestic football these days (apart from City). On the odd occasion I watch MOTD and Everton or Palace or Watford etc are playing, I’m thinking “who the **** are these players?” then you find out they signed pre season for £50 million from River Plate or somewhere? ?

The often forgotten fundamental problem with the EFL Championship is that it is a Member's Club that everyone wants to leave. A quarter of the members will every year. Governance of any such organisation will be problematic regardless of how it is done. No system is perfect and all will appear to be biased in some way or another. The EFL needs to take the vast majority of clubs with it on any changes. With the ever changing membership and differing priorities that will never be easy. As regards FFP specifically, I know that there are a range of views out there. My view is that a Member's club which last season takes action which results in one club being relegated (Sheffield Wednesday) and another having a seriously close relationship with potential relegation (Derby County) and this season has three clubs Transfer Embargoes of one sort or another cannot be doing a bad job. The FFP rules are signed up to and agreed as are the sanctions and information requirements as part of becoming or remaining a member of the EFL. The level of resistance from various clubs as been problematic, as has the EFL's Board inconsistent 'prosecution' of the offences, however the previous powers that be were to condoning of bad behaviour. That said I would rather look forwards than backwards. I would say that there are two recently good signs that matters are improving. Firstly the published Embargo List, and secondly the announcement that all clubs were missed the filing deadline for their statutory accounts last season were on a soft embargo. I appreciate that it had no real impact, but it was a sign if intent. It also made it much easier to put clubs on stricter embargos if the failure continued, which did happen. As to improvements I would make it compulsory for each club (or relevant group to have a 31 May accounting date, submit their audited financial statements and final FFP statements by mid June, with any disciplinary action to be taken by the end of June. Failure to comply would mean automatic expulsion. Football clubs are not inherently complex as regards their accounts, so the deadline would be easily achievable.

Thank you. As to my points around the sustainability of the whole FFP process though, given that the PL, L1 & L2 seem to have given up? What's your take on it? Plus are the rules around FFP actually legally applicable? As per the points around HMRC,VAT,NI. In my view, it boils down to probably a bullying culture by Derby behind the scenes. The EFL itself is probably not a big organisation in terms of finance. If the billy big QC's of this world (engaged by Derby). They throw a load of legal arguments at the EFL, who themselves have to engage expensive legal counsel. It's all reminiscent of the Ashton Vale fiasco. Where Bristol City Council cocked up. The judicial review found against them (not City). But the Council couldn't afford to find the legal ruling; so folded like a pack of cards. Either FFP is rigorously applied fairly across the division or it's not fir for purpose in my book.

I can sympathise with that. I can name entire teams say Holland 74 etc, but nowadays....forget it

Sorry but this is complete rubbish unless you never watch , listen or read any other football content at all , on any platform. you’ve never heard of any of our players ? you’ve never heard of Andi Wiemann or Nahki Wells . You didn’t watch the Czech Republic in the euros & see Tomas Kalas. I think you’re bending the truth ITN

Apart from your manager, the only person at BCFC that I could name or recognise is Scott Murray. When we haven't played each other for a fair number of years, there's no reason for either set of fans to be aware of who plays for the other team. Whereas going back to the days of regular derby matches, I could still probably name around 75% of your players.

Reynard the Fox … Julian Cope (apologies for an nightmares that link may create for City fans who remember 1998-99)

It was against Oldham... Context.

Legend!

Brilliant ???

FFS. Taking no prisoners there mind?

I hear that, even the 1970's stuff is becoming a bit of a stretch, no hope. ?

My understanding of ffp is relatively basic and like you I continue to be both baffled and amazed at the amount of complex information and analysis the likes of @Mr Popodopolous@Hxj and @Davefevs produce. With the benefit of hindsight I have a number of thoughts about ffp. The concept was well intentioned, in trying to protect clubs from themselves in the quest to gain promotion to the premier league and avoid the Portsmouth situation, when an owner was no longer willing and/or able to support the club’s debts. However, it is now clear that the set up was fundamentally flawed, for a number of reasons: 1. Daft as it sounds, I think there was an element in the EFL's thinking that ,when the ffp rules were introduced, and with effectively a 3 year lead time until the first “day of reckoning” , all member clubs would use this time to make the necessary adjustments to their finances, in order to ensure compliance. Following on from this the EFL seems to have had the (now clearly naive) belief that all clubs would follow and adhere to the rules. 2. The people drafting the rules were just not good enough, as evidenced by failing to include a rule that prevented fixed assets ( stadia) being “sold” to other of the club owners companies as a means of adjusting profits. That rule did exist in the financial rules that preceded ffp. I know a few have questioned Harvey’s involvement and if there was any ulterior motive behind this. 3. The rules provided that in the third year projected accounts would be provided ( by the end of March I think?) so that full assessment could be made before the end of the season. This means that any club breaching ffp limits could have penalties applied during that season and accordingly if, say , a club had flouted ffp and secured promotion, then a points deduction could be immediately applied to potential stop that promotion. 4. Most crucially, in their actions ( or more accurately inaction) the EFL seem to have completely failed to address the fact that they have completely failed in their responsibility to all the other championship clubs ( including ours) that took appropriate action, at the right time to ensure compliance, even if such actions compromised their on field competitiveness - selling players to reduce wage bills and bring in transfer fees to balance the books. However, since then it seems that the date for submission of accounts has become a moveable feast, with Derby and others appearing to stretch the point further than Mrs Downend’s knicker elastic ! 4. When , surprisingly, clubs have breached ffp we have then seen the tail wagging the dog, with the EFL appearing to be continually on the back foot under the threat of legal action from clubs and I suspect the majority of fans feeling that clubs have been “getting away with it”. Many will argue “why shouldn't owners be allowed to spend what they want/can”. Derby’s situation tends to prove why, as when the sale of Pride Park broke I read many comments by Derby fans along the lines of “Mel Morris is a lifelong Derby fan and would never let the club go to pot”. We’ve seen the same man struggling to sell the club and players not getting paid during that period, which only goes to prove that things can change and why the concept of ffp is the right thing if we want clubs protected for fans and against some of th owners out there.

You’ll be OK as long as you don’t write it down anywhere.

There was a gashead who worked in a pub. I made a point of going in there wearing my City top. Sadly the Horse & Groom is now demolished and I've no idea of what became him. Meanwhile there's about a dozen City fans with either a PE (Pboro) or CB (Cambridge) post code.

Firstly, if the 100 can inspire youngsters, boys and/or girls, to take up cricket then that can only be a good thing. When I was a young boy growing up in Bristol, I was fortunate in that my father was keen on cricket so we would often play in the garden; in the local park or even, during annual summer holidays, on the beach. In addition, cricket was frequently available on free to air television, BBC 1 and/or 2, so we (as children) became accustomed to watching Test Matches on weekday evenings or, on Sunday afternoons, what was then the John Player 40 over competition. At the close of play, we would replay some of the shots in the garden, just as one used to see young children playing tennis in the local parks (or even in the street!) during Wimbledon, also available on free to air television, and we developed an interest. Unfortunately, if I understand correctly, cricket has not been available on free to air television in the UK for several years, nor, indeed, is it any longer played in many schools: how then, can a child be inspired to take an interest in cricket or take up the game? To this end, a game of quick bash cricket, played by both men and women, on free to air television showing colourful outfits and fireworks cannot fail to attract children's interest and, as I say, this has to be a good thing. Of course, the 100 is not 'traditional' cricket, but, then again, to be fair, nor is 20 over cricket. My gripe with the 100, for I am most certainly not a fan, is the detrimental effect it appears to be having on the traditional tournaments and, more importantly, on the traditional county teams - not to mention our Test team, but that is another story!. I have not the slightest interest in the 100 per se, and certainly not in London Spirit or Welsh Hula Hoops, but I may well tune in later this evening to watch Tom Banton, just as I have tried previously to catch a bit of Will Smeed. On the odd occasion I have watched snatches of the games, I have seen a high standard of cricket, but none of the teams are my team, and that, I suppose, is my point: I truly do not care who wins or loses and, surely, that is what sport is all about, competing but also trying to win, for both players and supporters. I thoroughly enjoyed watching Somerset reserves/youth competing in the Royal London 50 over cup, even though we failed to qualify for the quarter finals, because I had a genuine interest in both the match itself and the result. Roll on 26 August and 30 August.

It's a weird one @NcnsBcfc thanks btw, do try- it's interesting stuff. All these cases are similar yet different and I'll try and offer a little on each. Birmingham 2018 one, the EFL did move relatively quickly- the question is why. I make the timeline Accounts to 30th June 2018 ie Projected and a Soft Embargo to hold their position in place, before any Transfer Revenue to offset the Projections. Said Revenue did not arrive, but the updated or finalised Draft Accounts did maybe a week into July 2018- EFL Statement 2nd August 2018, possibly the final charges on 14th August 2018- they can move quickly and set the ball rolling. Still need to do better but this as a starting point is positive. They got -9 points, a soft Embargo into EFL approval needed and an EFL Business Plan for 2018/19 and perhaps beyond. Derby Where to begin? The EFL seemed not to substantially challenge their Amortisation policy or Stadium Sale under Shaun Harvey- whereas under Rick Parry, doubtless nudged by Gibson and post Bury collapse, the EFL now seemed to take a different stance hence the charges in January 2020...Covid seems to have made an impact of course into speed of Hearings etc? There have been lengthy Embargoes and restrictions but the EFL are oddly slow off the mark at times. Would have failed had the Stadium Profit rule not weirdly changed in 2016 and only been adjusted out again in 2021. Reading This is a big mystery to me. Their losses in 2018, 2019 and 2020- 2020 and 2021 are added and halved and Covid losses stripped as well as the usual deductions, one period so it's 2018, 2019 and then 2020 and 2021 combined average. Their P&S losses looked pretty terrible in 2018, 2019 and 2020 and this was despite sale of Stadium and sale again under new Parent presumably, sale of old Training Ground, sale of land around the Stadium and Aluko £3m loan fee counting as Revenue- they must have breached to 2021...indeed their Embargo conditions are due to this- it explicitly states due to Breach of Profit and Sustainability Regulations- therefore Charges must follow, whether it's an overspend, a breach in other ways or maybe more than one issue. Would have failed had the Stadium Profit rule not weirdly changed in 2016 and only been adjusted out again in 2021. Rot started under Harvey's tenure at the EFL and a lack of early intervention probably made matters worse... Sheffield Wednesday Failed and was clear they had failed to Summer 2018- they planned to sell and leaseback Hillsborough but under tough embargo conditions as lack of Accounts etc- not quite tough enough though. EFL launch investigation in Summer 2019- after Harvey departs- charged in November 2019 under Parry. Between times bits came out, such as asked to explain why discrepancy on Land Registry, Company formation and date it was suitable for the Accounts. There is an argument that they shouldn't be allowed to include it at all for FFP and it disappears after this season anyway, all depends then on how the FFP between League 1 and the Championship should join up. Stoke Odd one. On the one hand there is a significant Impairment in 2019/20 Accounts attributed to Covid- about £30m in Player Registrations but on the other hand there clearly were from 2019/20 efforts at downsizing beginning...see the loans out and especially from Jan 2020 onwards- Covid came at a very good time for them however and I'd be surprised if the EFL aren't looking very closely at each and every player whose value was Impaired yet there could be some justification for their claims as I believe that in a non Covid world their plan was to loan and loan and loan...and then sell final year of contract, and given a number of their players are based or went to 2nd tier European Leagues I have a certain amount of sympathy for their argument in some ways. Selling Collins for £12m absolutely helped as well- of course if they've sold the Ground on top of this, then the dial can move badly. I have to say though, as a collective their fans are up their own arse- a lot of them, Derby I mean- weird sense of entitlement, pretty loathsome lot like Mel Morris and was he even seriously unwell or was this a figment of imagination- you can tell he's one of their own. Vile club too. Onto the differences between the divisions EFL and Clubs Wanted a hard salary cap ie £xm per year with certain exemptions and probably Promotion bonuses, like in Rugby ie £m per year and within a 24-25 man squad IIRC. PFA and some clubs e.g. Sunderland, Ipswich, Portsmouth IIRC objected though I'd be surprised if EFL and Clubs at some point didn't try and rework it- fell away in the bottom 2 divisions which knocked back any ambitions for it at our level. The PL Have the same P&S regs as we do, except the loss limits differ greatly- £105m per 3 years as opposed to £39m in a 3 year period, between the two divisions it's -£22m per Championship season. I have to wonder if they are as hot on Embargoes in a pre-emptive sense- Everton seem to be under some kind of restrictions but it's unclear, I also have had my q's about Aston Villa too but selling Grealish for £100m may have fixed it all. e.g. Championship-PL-Championship, that's £13m + £35m + £13m=£61m. Covid has complicated this, naturally Now it'd be 2017/18 Championship. 2018/19 Championship, 2019/20 PL and 2020/21 Championship- say Norwich? £13m + £13m + £35m + £13m=£74m. £74m/4 x 3=£55.5m. 2 of each would give you £72m, 3 of PL and one of our level would give you £88.5m. 4 x Championship or 4 x PL would keep it at £39m or £105m respectively. Is there some weird punishment for compliance ongoing? We and others are definitely being punished in a sense for trying to do the right thing, see Blackburn as well- yes they were pushing it but selling Armstrong and a clutch of players released will have eased things but will they reinvest some? Middlesbrough got hit especially badly in 2019/20 by trying to stay in, arguably- Nottingham Forest seem to have released a reasonable number, loanees ended, regularly sell academy products but signed only a free and 2 youngish loanees. Swansea too maybe to an extent? Seem to have at least one big sale per season and wages were dropping more than say Stoke in 2019/20 and 2018/19. Both dropped in the same season. Parachute Payments Arguments for and against. Need to be given a better type of Accounting Treatment perhaps- as in loans or cash flow to help with solvency which immediately ups the FFP pressure on Clubs. Some clubs trade and are happy to do so, likely comply in Year 1 without Parachute Payments but some use them to gain a significant and immediate competitive advantage- Cardiff were one, Fulham definitely are one. Imagine that just an amount equal to the PL Solidarity Payment goes through P&L or counts towards FFP- and the rest is for Cash Flow etc- that retains solvency but gives a huge pressure to comply that's added...you're suddenly talking about a £35-40m hole in Year 1 which won't bankrupt the club but will give them serious FFP issues or will force them either to sell/loan out higher earners, ie better players or subsidise their wages elsewhere maybe, show more restraint in the market or perhaps a bit of each.

Let’s explain the subtle difference in language they can understand: ”A horde of Gasheads were locked out at Braintree Town.” ”They hoard crisps and Fanta long past their expiration dates.”

In the Net is a laydeeeeee ?

I think it’s more the along lines of peasants do not concern themselves with the lives of kings!

That's the social media hits sorted for the rest of the season

"Hoardes" of chances? Bet he's prowed of his vocabulary and spelling.

Ooooooooooooooooooo

Yeah I completely agree attendance is not, by itself, a way of measuring success/prestige of a team. I only did it to counter the "we're massive! Loyal gasheads! Championship level, look at how many of us there are!" rubbish that the 15ers like to spout.

Good research - @Davefevs would be proud of that! However, attendances don’t necessarily equate to standings in the football world - eg Wimbledon, Wigan, Yeovil - etc - all got to dizzy heights that their initial attendances would have deemed unlikely ... it’s the players on the pitch not the number of people in the stands - although I do note you stated your stats are a “flawed way of looking at teams” ...

I thought they said it was going to be a full house? couldn't fill a wendy house!

This bloke is clearly deluded. I’ve heard the name but couldn’t pick him out in a line up. Everything about this interview is Micky mouse.

Not many teams come here and get results.. Just the 14 teams who managed to get wins at the Mem then last season Chris? ?

Back in the day 80s/90s, a well run supporters club would provide their club with proper financial support, but with the cost of football now being huge and the losses massive the contribution these groups makes is increasingly insignificant and if they have previously been given areas of hospitality that don't work financially then it makes sense for clubs to reconsider their options.

From memory, I think that a parent complained because a coach swore at their child during a training session for one of the younger teams. The complaint was dealt with by the club, however, the SC turned it into a Child Protection matter and based their report to the EFL on this. The SC have some great volunteers, however, the hierarchy are stuck in 1975, when they got special treatment for doing the bidding of the Board. They are not open to new ideas, and it's literally a case of "repel all boarders" if somebody with fresh ideas expresses an interest in joining the Committee. They've never been a mouthpiece for the fans in the past, not wanting to upset the apple cart in case their noses were removed from the trough. They got in a huff when Wael arrived, because the Chairman of the SC was not one of the first people he arranged to meet, and they've reinforced their dislike whenever possible. I know it's not perfect, but looking in from the outside, yours Fans Trust seems much more focused on representing the views of the fanbase, and liaising with the club in a civil manner.

Does this remind one of anyone?

They forgot to mention that the SC previously reported Wael to the EFL as not being a fit and proper owner, that the Fan's Director on the Board had to be asked to stand down as he didn't respect confidentiality, that, although they had the chance to elect another fan to the position, they haven't bothered. They've never liked Wael, and now they are reaping what they have sown.