BTRFTG

I was thinking exactly the same myself. Even though its not very substantial the baseplates should be on sole boards or sills, the standards vertical or inclined slightly inward as opposed to outwards in this case - I wonder what might happen if the singer pushes outward on the end standard and its not properly coupled in at the top? No front footboard protection and given its fairly lightweight I reckon it would only take one or two 'lifts' from the rear to topple the whole thing over.

So true. My paternal family were a stone's throw from AG & though City through and through happily went to Eastville if City weren't at home as 'away' travel was strictly high days & holidays & in a lifetime of support could be counted on the fingers of two hands. It was also the case that most of City's core support worked Saturday mornings (in my old man's case on the tugs Saturdays whenever the tides dictated,) hence football was an 'afternoon activity' after work. Its for that reason football thrived in the industrial north, where when the various 'Workplace Acts' gave folks Saturday afternoon's off it came at the price of shops, pubs and clubs being closed until early evening such there was little else to do other than watch or play football.

Imagine standing next? guy every week ?

Indeed we did. Houston, despite being near the centre circle, sounded all around the ground as well. Truly horrible.

Happened right in front of me and when his leg broke it sounded like a shotgun going off. St Johns left one of the greatest entertainers of his generation on a stretcher awaiting an ambulance and during the wait a number of City F'wits filed past abusing him.

He went down in agony because he couldn't stand as his achilles had snapped. Extremely painful and that's why he was writhing around in agony. Whilst his first pleading was toward the ref to inform his serious injury thereafter it was all directed at his bench. Perhaps you'd be so kind as to issue guidance to players as to how players should react to specific injuries? I'm uncertain how many players are able to contort themselves to quietly hold a snapped achilles? Few I reckon. I'm less certain players in agony give any consideration as to how to act to appease F'wits in the stands. Nor ever should they. The ref played on as that was his judgement. In this case he was right, but there are numerous 'non head' related injuries that require urgent attention and 'head' must never be used as sole consideration as to whether or not to suspend play.

No. He got that reception because far too many of our so-called supporters are ill-educated, lowlife F'wits. I don't recall anybody going off on a stretcher at AG to make such recovery but assuming one once did so I suppose you'd consider it OK to abuse all future opposition players seriously injured on the field on the basis they might be play-acting?

They're Laws, not rules. The difference is important. When considering careless or reckless behaviour (in this case one might debate which it is but it's certainly one or the other given the unnatural position of the foot and the lack of control in the challenge,) Law 12 requires no contact to be made, only intention to be there. Only should the official have considered Wells to have been impeded in the challenge, altering his position to avoid injury, would this not have been a penalty, though in such case Law 12 requires the award of an indirect free kick.

Matters not who started it. Its personal responsibility and shouting at others to maintain silence is equally as disrespectful. You don't do it. From where I was it was far from a small minority. As if that wasn't bad enough we then witnessed the disgraceful scenes of so-called supporters cheering, chanting, shouting and mocking at sight of a professional footballer who'd clearly suffered a serious injury. When Gosling went down, from his position on the park in relation to other players, from his anguished cry, his dropping like a stone, his immediately imploring assistance from his bench and his obvious anger when that didn't arrive immediately, it was evident to anybody who'd ever watched football he'd suffered a serious injury. How respectful then to berate him, to cheer the signal for a stretcher and its arrival. "Cry in a minute, he's going to....." Do you really have to be taught such behaviour is abhorrent and disrespectful? The F'wits will backtrack claiming they wouldn't have so acted had they realised he'd ruptured his achilles and couldn't stand. But they did, because they do. Its their nature as that's the type of folks they are.

Both incidents were pens from where I was sitting in The Dolman. I'm fairly sure the reason they weren't given was only minutes earlier Wells (and others) spent ages berating the referee for two claimed infringements (one also inside the box,) that were nothing of the sort. Doesn't make it right but we make a rod for our own back. Officials have cottoned on to the fact Weimann, Wells, Scott, Sykes & Pring all have a propensity to throw themselves over then vigorously complain when not given the decision they've decided they deserve, or in Scott's case get penalised for the inevitable handball given as he's out to grab the ball even before hitting the deck. Yes its cheating, yes other teams do it, but they do it better than us. Stop crying wolf and I think we'll start to get that we deserve.

Its not a small thing for many of us. It's yet another example of the ill-educated F'Wits who follow City. Those so stupid as to be unable to show respect by following a simple instruction. Both sets of players and the officials breaking ranks when they should have stood firm was equally disrespectful. The instruction broadcast was clear. Following The Last Post there was to be a quiet period of reflection during which the names of City personnel who'd paid the ultimate sacrifice would be displayed on the big screen, the reflection ending on the referee's whistle. Not difficult to follow.

Accounts as those published in the UK hide nothing and if they attempt so to do you can easily spot where things don't add up. Indeed I remember Enron, perhaps a tad to much. Clearly you don't as you'd understand how the toxic mixtures of SPVs and jurisdictions not requiring open disclosure allowed that scam to flourish. As for the rest of your delusion, its not worthy of comment.

He does, but from where does one source a goal 10m wide by 6 m high?

It was said that data gave scouts players to review who otherwise weren't being discussed but also allowed the club to empirically reject some players who scouts were adamant should be acquired. Not rocket science but allowed them to ask the not unreasonable question, what does 'x' bring that we already don't have? I can only think had we done likewise we wouldn't have ended up with 8 midfielders all in their manager's likeness.

Had an interesting conversation once with one of their more respected supporters. He explained that whilst others considered it a waste of money Brentford invested (not cheap,) in DATA, not ex pros who thought themselves knowledgeable in the game. As mirrored at Leicester, Man City & Liverpool the data threw up a number of 'bargains' that weren't then high on anybody's radar.

The more deluded the funnier this gets. Do you know how to read accounts? In case not let's keep it simple. If you took EVERYTHING OWNED by (OR DUE) the various enterprises wrapped up in the holding company (that's nothing in respect of Ashton Vale,) and SUBTRACTED ALL LIABILITIES OWED, including shareholder capital and loans at base, issue price, then..... Ta Da ..... You be IN DEBT to the tune of £170m & counting. If that's a cash cow, who'd want to be a farmer?

Why is it a ridiculous response? You said there are other ways in which the club could have been run. Both the failed and underperforming Chelsea and Man City pretty much adopted the model I proposed when purchased and that surely brought them success? Premier clubs these days largely buy talent they want when needed rather than develop, so what's ridiculous?

You signally miss the point. You might well have said scrap the academy and buy the best 22 players covering each position in the world each season. We all see the mistakes that have been made, but its his club, his money, his mistakes not ours. If fans want to act as though they own the club and have a say in the matter, then they should fund it.

SO WHY DON'T YOU DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT? The puzzling thing for me is why SL bothers in the first place? I've watched us since 65 and if I had his wealth would I invest in the club? Like hell would I give thankless and potless idiots the chance to abuse me for funding their hobby to the tune of several thousands of pounds each per season.

I'm going through in order but all you've said is there are other ways in which the club might have been run. No Sh*t Sherlock. As per the OP, what stopped any of those criticising SL from buying the club and running it how best they think fit to achieve the success they believe City merit? And if the answer is lack of money, de facto SL's clearly demonstrated he's far more suited to the task given he's managed to clear that first hurdle.

Clearly SL. Players are paid in £ not sentiment. Were players and suppliers happy to be paid in sentiment you'd have a point save that's not how the world works Am I 'more committed' travelling to AG than a supporter living on Duckmoor Road? Of course not, my choice where I live and if that requires a far greater commitment in time and resource that's a matter for me and me only.

Great point. Did SL supposedly ever play keyboards in some long-forgotten, one-hit-wonder pop band in which only fans of Popmaster might hold an interest? No and for that lack of charisma alone he's a failure and should go.....

Ok, calculate that **** all. Its important as contracts and bills aren't paid with goodwill nor percentage of disposable income. I could compound up all my 'coppers' admittances since 65 and STs thereafter, the 1/15th of my annual student income in share investment to keep them going, the pies and beers I've consumed over the years and do you know what? It wouldn't cover one week's wages for Kalas. I'm uncertain from where your assumptions derive, save they're all flawed? In 82 SL was still sitting around a kitchen table getting the nascent HL off the ground, so uncertain what monies he might have had to invest? As for my thinking SL is some type of Messiah I certainly don't and never have, certainly not since he refused to answer my shareholder question re the funding of Tony Pulis' High Court action. You assume I think his investment a success. Well, in respect of the fact the club still exist, that it has use of safe and high quality training and playing facilities, that development of women's and community diverse football related activities are up there with the best (where once there were none,) that there's a vision of attempting to make Bristol an attractive sporting destination - yes, they're all successes of which SL should be proud. But I'm a realist. We were mid table second tier when started in 65, pretty much where we are now. In the interim we've had 4 years in the top flight but plenty in leagues lower. I'd argue we're today in our rightful place in the pyramid. The fact we aren't higher - i don't think SL has anything to be proud or ashamed of in that respect.

Since when did a percentage of disposable resources fund a football club? That's the argument deployed by our wilderness brethren in explaining how they're the 6th biggest club in the country, tents and all......

Possibly, but its his club and his money to do with as he wishes.