Bristol R*vers dustbin thread

[Bristol Rob]

45 minutes ago, Rich said:

What a load of Bollocks. When BRFC approached  the city council about Hengrove, they were told it wasn't a good idea because of it's location within the BCFC heartland. They never questioned that and never submitted an application. If they did, it would have had to be accompanied by a financial plan, end of application.

The Severnside plan as such was suggested by Rovers with them agreeing in principle to buy the council owned land for £1. They employed consultants to carry out a feasibility study, at a cost of £100k. At the end of that study, the "expert" consultants asked the environment agency if the site was suitable for a stadium due to the close proximity of chemical works and other industrial sites. The Environment Agency informed them that it was not a suitable site. Who's at fault for not asking that question first? According to BRFC, the council, end of application.

All they ever want to do is pass on the blame to somebody else, they always have done it's in their make up.

The difference with the two clubs is, we'd pay for our new ground, they want someone else to pay for their new ground.

As for the council, they bent over backwards and the rules to allow the development of the rugby ground for BRFC. As far as BCFC were concerned it appears they did their very best to hinder the clubs plans, from supermarket refusals to appointing QCs with a history of upholding TVG applications.  

Heartland....

Pretty much applies across Bristol these days.

A few pockets of more-gas-than-city dotted about, but even within those areas, you'll find a more than healthy contingent of City fans.

The days of a river dividing support is long gone.

Other than a match day, I don't think I have seen a Rovers shirt when out and about on Gloucester Road in the last few years. (Granted, a lot of people only wear their colours to games), but even in and around the pubs, very few pledge any allegiance to the Fewers, and when you do find one, generally they are delighted to be talking to another Bristol football fan, rather than an armchair Premier League fan who doesn't have a clue.

That's been my experience anyway.

 

[Rich]

3 minutes ago, Bristol Rob said:

Heartland....

Pretty much applies across Bristol these days.

A few pockets of more-gas-than-city dotted about, but even within those areas, you'll find a more than healthy contingent of City fans.

The days of a river dividing support is long gone.

Other than a match day, I don't think I have seen a Rovers shirt when out and about on Gloucester Road in the last few years. (Granted, a lot of people only wear their colours to games), but even in and around the pubs, very few pledge any allegiance to the Fewers, and when you do find one, generally they are delighted to be talking to another Bristol football fan, rather than an armchair Premier League fan who doesn't have a clue.

That's been my experience anyway.

 

I agree about their support and how it's gone in more recent years, however, my statement was referring to a time in the distant past, when there was a greater divide within the city boundaries.

[Bristol Rob]

12 minutes ago, Rich said:

I agree about their support and how it's gone in more recent years, however, my statement was referring to a time in the distant past, when there was a greater divide within the city boundaries.

I remember those days well, grew up in Longwell Green, so Kingswood wasn't alien to me.

It just seems that bar a few unfortunate children who have been forced to go to Rovers out of family loyalty, there isn't that natural progression of kids being influenced by their classmates that Rovers are the way to go.

Can probably break that down to three key reasons.

1 - Sky. When I was growing up, live football on the telly happened a few times a season, FA Cup final being a 'big event' and if there was a British team playing a European game, you would watch it and hope that the British team won.

2 - Gaming. Kids these days seem to have so much access to football (see point 1 also) they have next to no interest in watching lower league cloggers playing hoofball, not when they have FIFA on the GamesBox and Football Manager on the XStation.

3 - City/Rugby/Cricket - we have done a lot better than they have for close to 20 years, we have facilities they do dream of by have yet to achieve, we have international players who have played for countries people have actually heard of, players with domestic European cup experience, and are playing in a league where Rafa might be the opposition manager, or Rooney might be playing for our opponents. Added interest. Add to that the Sky-hype around other sports and where are you going to go to watch live games? Ain't with Billy Smart, that we can be sure of.

My nephew loves the City, and they are his number one side. But he also likes sides in Spain, Germany and Italy. Because he'll watch anything and play anything.

Rovers are going through a long, drawn out, slow and painful death. And with each passing year, their chances of closing the gap (not just in terms of league football) but as an entire offering diminishes.

Their best chance was when they had the Rugby club with them, they could have done something together that would have been viable but they saw the rugby club as a necessary evil who paid a few quid and ruined the pitch, not as someone they could partner with.

Oh well. Shit happens.

[Ska Junkie]

The thing they don't seem to be able to grasp is that, even if they did stumble their way into the same division as us, they are unlikely to survive whereas we have the clout, facilities, crowds, and soon to be class 1 training facilities to have a go at getting to the highest level. They wouldn't stand a prayer at this level let alone the top table. They're an obsession that can never happen like I'll never smash the granny out of Dannii Minogue, I have the tools but not the opportunity, that, in essence, is the gas, a total dream!

[Lanterne Rouge]

46 minutes ago, Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan said:

Haha, no.

We've never been ‘them’ even before SL came along.

They often claim that the only difference between us and them is Steve Lansdown but it’s not, our mentality and ambition has always been on a different, much higher level than Rovers. That’s why we get the Dolmans and the Lansdowns and they get the Wallys.

 

Very well put. I`ve often said that while our ambition is to be the best we can be, their`s is to be one place better than us and they wouldn`t care if we were both in the conference when it happened (which it won`t!). They would happily give up any chance of success if, in return, it meant we had failed.

[Ska Junkie]

10 minutes ago, TomF said:

They’d also have 3 years (assuming they stay up) to covert the ground to all seater...

Tents are us? It's not like they would get dispensation a la Brentford with their track record plus they would go down like a stone anyway. Imagine a Championship standard player seeing their 'facilities' and wages? He'd be gone like a shot!

I wonder what their capacity would be if they bolted seats to their existing terraces, 6K?

Edited April 19, 2020 by Ska Junkie

[Lanterne Rouge]

30 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

Tents are us? It's not like they would get dispensation a la Brentford with their track record plus they would go down like a stone anyway. Imagine a Championship standard player seeing their 'facilities' and wages? He'd be gone like a shot!

I wonder what their capacity would be if they bolted seats to their existing terraces, 6K?

Still be more than enough for what they get.

[Ska Junkie]

Anyone remember what the standing capacity of the old East end was? IIRC seated capacity was around 4K wasn't it? 

[BS2 Red]

1 hour ago, Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan said:

Haha, no.

We've never been ‘them’ even before SL came along.

They often claim that the only difference between us and them is Steve Lansdown but it’s not, our mentality and ambition has always been on a different, much higher level than Rovers. That’s why we get the Dolmans and the Lansdowns and they get the Wallys.

 

The difference between us is that we want to be the best we can be. All they want is to be one place above us.

[Lanterne Rouge]

3 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

Anyone remember what the standing capacity of the old East end was? IIRC seated capacity was around 4K wasn't it? 

Whatever it was I think it was treated more as a suggestion rather than a regulation most of the time.

[Ska Junkie]

15 minutes ago, Lanterne Rouge said:

Whatever it was I think it was treated more as a suggestion rather than a regulation most of the time.

I appreciate that LR, just wanted to know the standing / seating ratio. Has to be what, 3 to 1?

According to wiki, their capacity is 12300 with 3000 seats so their all seater capacity would be 3000 + (9300/3)= 6100. Nowhere near enough to sustain Championship football.

Shame eh? 3 of our stand hold more than their entire stadium would hold and one's not far off double.

OTIB

Edited April 19, 2020 by Ska Junkie

[miser]

16 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

Anyone remember what the standing capacity of the old East end was? IIRC seated capacity was around 4K wasn't it? 

Don't know for sure  but in the 1st division days, we had a capacity of 37,000 with 7,000 seats. So 30k for the terraces. Not unreasonable to assume 10-11 K. Not sure they would all have a view.

[Ska Junkie]

5 minutes ago, miser said:

Don't know for sure  but in the 1st division days, we had a capacity of 37,000 with 7,000 seats. So 30k for the terraces. Not unreasonable to assume 10-11 K. Not sure they would all have a view.

I was thinking around that figure miser. Mad to think we stood in a crowd of over 38,000 in the old Gate back in the day.

Backs up the 3 standing  to 1 seat I guess.

[Rich]

2 hours ago, Ska Junkie said:

Anyone remember what the standing capacity of the old East end was? IIRC seated capacity was around 4K wasn't it? 

Originally built for 15k in I believe 1923. It was tested and reduced to 12k in the old 1st div days and again down to 10k. The old uncovered end was set at 10k initially. I think eventually 7k.

They actually put 6,500 seats into the old EE including the corners but, about one thousand were useless  as they were at the back and too low, just as the terracing was.

So we had, 12k 10k, 7k enclosure, 5.500 Dolman and 2,500 Grandstand =37k. Briefly the capacity was increased with approx. 2,500 standing in front of the Dolman, this disappeared with the next assessment and safety cert.

[miser]

The last game versus Liverpool certainly tested those limits.

[wendyredredrobin]

6 hours ago, Ska Junkie said:

The thing they don't seem to be able to grasp is that, even if they did stumble their way into the same division as us, they are unlikely to survive whereas we have the clout, facilities, crowds, and soon to be class 1 training facilities to have a go at getting to the highest level. They wouldn't stand a prayer at this level let alone the top table. They're an obsession that can never happen like I'll never smash the granny out of Dannii Minogue, I have the tools but not the opportunity, that, in essence, is the gas, a total dream!

You should be so lucky (Oh sorry, that was Kylie) 

[Swede]

The 37 or 38,000 was for the early 70's. I believe the capacity was 31,990 in the First Division days.

[Shaun Taylor]

4 hours ago, Swede said:

The 37 or 38,000 was for the early 70's. I believe the capacity was 31,990 in the First Division days.

I watched both Leeds & Man Utd at Ashton gate when you were in the top flight 76/77 and I think capacity for them was around 36000 but I may be wrong 

[slartibartfast]

Half way through our stint in the first division out capacity was cut to 26000 by the powers that be .

[Guest]

17 hours ago, Lanterne Rouge said:

Very well put. I`ve often said that while our ambition is to be the best we can be, their`s is to be one place better than us and they wouldn`t care if we were both in the conference when it happened (which it won`t!). They would happily give up any chance of success if, in return, it meant we had failed.

Definitely. I know a couple of Sags who are more interested in our result than theirs, when I questioned them and sais how bizarre it was I got the reply "yeah, but we know we're sh1t". 

[Ska Junkie]

9 hours ago, Swede said:

The 37 or 38,000 was for the early 70's. I believe the capacity was 31,990 in the First Division days.

How did we get 38K+ v Liverpool in the first division in 1977 then Swede? Not disputing it just wondered how they managed it? 

Edited April 20, 2020 by Ska Junkie

[Bristol Oil Services]

16 hours ago, miser said:

Don't know for sure  but in the 1st division days, we had a capacity of 37,000 with 7,000 seats. So 30k for the terraces. Not unreasonable to assume 10-11 K. Not sure they would all have a view.

The Leeds and Liverpool cup ties in '74 were all-ticket, and both had 37,000 crowds. I don’t know if the Liverpool game in the league in May '77 was all ticket - I'm thinking it wasn't - but the official attendance for that was 38 000 plus. More than should've been allowed in, maybe. Maybe, it was a bit of a melee that evening.

In his programme notes for the first home game the following season, in August '77, Alan Dicks informed us that the club had had to spend £100k on ground improvements over the summer to comply with the recent Safety of Sports Ground Act. He said that this had cut the ground capacity to 30,000. A big cut from 37 (or was it 38) thousand. 

However, a quick glance at the programme for Man United at the end of the 77/78 season, shows that we attracted two crowds during that season of more than 31,000! (v Forest and Liverpool).

Did we let more in than we were supposed to? Could we add up properly? Did Dicksy get his sums wrong? Did we - the club - know what was going on? Did we - the crowd - know what was going on?

 

[RedRock]

7 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

How did we get 38K+ v Liverpool in the first division in 1977 then Swede? Not disputing it just wondered how they managed it? 

Rumour was that it was 41,000! 

‘Ramming’ was the method that achieved that number. 

Managed to get in earlyish,, so wasn’t too bad in that part of the East End I was stood. Late comers were the one’s who suffered I think. Know a few that were turned away when the gates were closed before the start of the match. 

[Bristol Oil Services]

2 hours ago, slartibartfast said:

Half way through our stint in the first division out capacity was cut to 26000 by the powers that be .

But we pulled in 27,000 v Liverpool in March 1980, just weeks before we bid top class football a sad adieu. Who could make any sense of the numbers down AG in the 70s and 80s?

[Galway Red]

42 minutes ago, RedRock said:

Rumour was that it was 41,000! 

‘Ramming’ was the method that achieved that number. 

Managed to get in earlyish,, so wasn’t too bad in that part of the East End I was stood. Late comers were the one’s who suffered I think. Know a few that were turned away when the gates were closed before the start of the match. 

For us kids it was so easy to sneak in in any part of the ground and 100's of us did regularly, that Liverpool game had far more in attendance than the official 37,000 sell outs of that era, gives me goose pimples just thinking about standing in the East/Park End during those big games

[Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan]

1 hour ago, wood_red said:

Definitely. I know a couple of Sags who are more interested in our result than theirs, when I questioned them and sais how bizarre it was I got the reply "yeah, but we know we're sh1t". 

Yep, they’re actually proud of it.

No wonder they play their games in a ground made up of sheds and tents.

[Bristol Rob]

16 minutes ago, Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan said:

Yep, they’re actually proud of it.

No wonder they play their games in a ground made up of sheds and tents.

Maybe that's the big plan....

If they ease the lockdown and garden centres get to reopen, they can capitalise. 

[Ska Junkie]

5 hours ago, RedRock said:

Rumour was that it was 41,000! WOW, didn't know that!

‘Ramming’ was the method that achieved that number. 

Managed to get in earlyish,, so wasn’t too bad in that part of the East End I was stood. Late comers were the one’s who suffered I think. Know a few that were turned away when the gates were closed before the start of the match. 

I was in the enclosure, stood on my metal tube stool that dad made me, right by the wall of the tunnel. At one point dad said he put me on the wall but I can't remember that. It must have been stupidly rammed and i was there but can't remember it, the old man must have been aware of it though. I'll have to ask him.

Edited April 20, 2020 by Ska Junkie

[slartibartfast]

7 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

I was in the enclosure, stood on my metal tube stool that dad made me, right by the wall of the tunnel. At one point dad said he put me on the wall but I can't remember that. It must have been stupidly rammed and i was there but can't remember it, the old man must have been aware of it though. I'll have to ask him.

Must have been about 5 yards away from you !

[Ska Junkie]

11 minutes ago, slartibartfast said:

Must have been about 5 yards away from you !

Stood there through all the Div 1 years Slarti. Surrounded by the same people every week too.