Bristol R*vers dustbin thread

[Barrs Court Red]

6 minutes ago, 54-46 said:

That's a long old jaunt. Lucky they don't have jobs to get up for in the morning 

Just saw we took 1300 in our promotion year, so maybe not so great after all.

[Super]

long trip home with nothing to show! Ha ha ha.

[bristolborn_and_red]

More delusion from a Gapper on Slagchat:

"It's disappointing because they clearly were not on that good a run and that's what concerns me about now having to play so many teams at the bottom as we are almost a "cup-final" to some."
FFS

[Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan]

7 minutes ago, Barrs Court Red said:

Just saw we took 1300 in our promotion year.

That's a proper following for that distance when you're battling for promotion.

 

 

[BS2 Red]

4 minutes ago, bristolborn_and_red said:

More delusion from a Gapper on Slagchat:

"It's disappointing because they clearly were not on that good a run and that's what concerns me about now having to play so many teams at the bottom as we are almost a "cup-final" to some."
FFS

Yeah, I'm sure the likes of Portsmouth look at a team from the conference as being a cup final.  

[Lanterne Rouge]

7 minutes ago, bristolborn_and_red said:

More delusion from a Gapper on Slagchat:

"It's disappointing because they clearly were not on that good a run and that's what concerns me about now having to play so many teams at the bottom as we are almost a "cup-final" to some."
FFS

That`ll be the team currently two points behind Accrington Stanley will it?

[HoldenBall]

2 minutes ago, Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan said:

That's a proper following for that distance when you're battling for promotion.

 

 

And more importantly we won.

[Port Said Red]

38 minutes ago, Barrs Court Red said:

I'm told they took 700 today. Joking aside that's a tremendous effort.

it also means 700 very miserable journeys home, delicious.

651 listening  to Radio Bristol, on an Easter Monday and as a percentage of their usual home gate it's pretty good. I would imagine all but one would not have made that journey if they werent in the top 3 though.  

[Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan]

22 minutes ago, bristolborn_and_red said:

More delusion from a Gapper on Slagchat:

"It's disappointing because they clearly were not on that good a run and that's what concerns me about now having to play so many teams at the bottom as we are almost a "cup-final" to some."

Presumably it's this kind of humble, 'down to Earth' attitude that makes Bristol Rovers so loved and respected by the rest of the football World....at least, that's what some of the deluded morons keep telling anyone who will listen.

[BS15_RED]

Yep, they're so far up their own arses it won't be long before they all turn themselves inside out.

[BigTone]

8 minutes ago, BS15_RED said:

Yep, they're so far up their own arses it won't be long before they all turn themselves inside out.

Not a pretty sight

[Jack Dawe]

32 minutes ago, Port Said Red said:

651 listening  to Radio Bristol, on an Easter Monday and as a percentage of their usual home gate it's pretty good. I would imagine all but one would not have made that journey if they werent in the top 3 though.  

They like to "trumpet" this, their percentage of home crowd that goes away, I've read on here (if these are accurate accounts. It's probably just one bloke on their forum).

So, 651 out of an average home crowd of - it must be 7000 odd, I would guess. 

In comparison: 

Accrington took 156 to Newport today (average home gate 1600 the last 3 seasons)

Hartlepools took 359 to L. Orient today (average gate 3,700 last two seasons).

 

I don't have this season's ave attendances but imagine Stanley and Pools ave are about what they always are. And the percentage those two took away today, Pools journey as long as Rovers, Stanley's not far off, looks to be roughly similar to Rovers, if not slightly better? Someone else can do the math(s).

In addition, Hartleppol are not chasing promotion, or even seriously involved at the bottom now. Not much riding on their game.

 

So Rovers, with home gates double that of Hartlepools, fail to take twice as many for their game travelling an almost identical distance, whilst winning games and chasing promotion. I make it their "percentage" is broadly speaking, about the same as Accrington Stanley's and Hartlepools's.

It's no more or no less "special" than the support of Accrington or Hartlepools, but I don't anticipate that stopping them talking themselves up so much and continuing to build the myth of an "enviable" and "special" fanbase. I wonder why they feel the need to do this so much?

 

 

[BS15_RED]

16 minutes ago, BigTone said:

Not a pretty sight

No worse than they normally do!

[HoldenBall]

18 minutes ago, Jack Dawe said:

They like to "trumpet" this, their percentage of home crowd that goes away, I've read on here (if these are accurate accounts. It's probably just one bloke on their forum).

So, 651 out of an average home crowd of - it must be 7000 odd, I would guess. 

In comparison: 

Accrington took 156 to Newport today (average home gate 1600 the last 3 seasons)

Hartlepools took 359 to L. Orient today (average gate 3,700 last two seasons).

 

I don't have this season's ave attendances but imagine Stanley and Pools ave are about what they always are. And the percentage those two took away today, Pools journey as long as Rovers, Stanley's not far off, looks to be roughly similar to Rovers, if not slightly better? Someone else can do the math(s).

In addition, Hartleppol are not chasing promotion, or even seriously involved at the bottom now. Not much riding on their game.

 

So Rovers, with home gates double that of Hartlepools, fail to take twice as many for their game travelling an almost identical distance, whilst winning games and chasing promotion. I make it their "percentage" is broadly speaking, about the same as Accrington Stanley's and Hartlepools's.

It's no more or no less "special" than the support of Accrington or Hartlepools, but I don't anticipate that stopping them talking themselves up so much and continuing to build the myth of an "enviable" and "special" fanbase. I wonder why they feel the need to do this so much?

 

 

The average home % to away gates is an absolute bollox comparison. If that's how we compare away attendances the likes of Liverpool and Man utd have a worse away following than York and Oldham.

[BS4 on Tour...]

2 hours ago, Barrs Court Red said:

Just saw we took 1300 in our promotion year, so maybe not so great after all.

That can't be true because they have the most loyal fans in the country, they are a unique club, they've suffered hardships that no other club has ever experienced yet they still turn up in their thousands (usually only seven of those thousands at home though), they are 'world famous' now they are owned by a multi billionaire who 'owns his own bank,' the whole country loves them and despises us, they are the family club whereas we are just followed by thugs and villains, every time there is trouble at their shitey little camp they claim 'there were 'teds in the away end,' they are Bristol's only genuine club whereas SL has turned us into 'a franchise in a horrid stadium,' their kit is 'unique' so they are 'unique,' they are now  going to overtake us and leave us trailing in their wake yet their filthy rich owner doesn't seem to have spent much yet.......

Soooo, given all that, how could we have possibly taken almost double the number of fans to a game than they did?!

It's just not possible.....

I had a letter printed in the Bristol Evening Post in the early '80s when their chairman at the time was quoted thus: "...as Bristol's leading football club....(blah, blah, blah)"

He based his claim on the crowds at our respective games the week before, and they were a division above us at the time.

So I pointed out that if he'd subtracted the 3,000 free tickets they gave away to school kids for their game then we'd have had a bigger crowd despite being in div 4 at the time.

And it doesn't look like many of those 3,000 kids have stuck with them.

Also, for the record, at the time I thought that was good PR on their part and a wise move to try to attract the future life-long fans with free entry - but to then boast about their crowd on the back of that was classless...and the Evening Post seemed to agree by printing my rant - word for word...

 

[weepywall]

To be fair the support they take away is not bad and you  can't compare  to Liverpool  and Utd as a percentage as those clubs won't get offered the same amount of tickets as a percentage  of their home support, if you look at percentage of home v away they probably  out do us, I think most clubs average away support of 5 to 10 % of home gates, we are in that area but not towards the higher end, they probably  are,but their home gates are and always  will be abysmal 

[zippycar]

10 hours ago, BigTone said:

Mornington Crescent

Sorry Big Tone, but I haven't a clue what you are on about and you have failed to take into account the Tudor Court Rules

 

[Robbored]

error!  Wrong thread! 

Edited March 28, 2016 by Robbored

[54-46]

2 minutes ago, Robbored said:

Haven't scrolled through the entire thread but has anyone mentioned Liam Robinson?  Who? no doubt you ask...

The striker who couldn't score jog any memories?

Ex player?  Who cares?  Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[54-46]

7 minutes ago, Robbored said:

error!  Wrong thread! 

Must be your age old boy!

[Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan]

2 hours ago, weepywall said:

if you look at percentage of home v away they probably  out do us, I think most clubs average away support of 5 to 10 % of home gates, we are in that area but not towards the higher end, they probably are

but their home gates are and always  will be abysmal 

If they out do us it's only because their home gates are, on average, much smaller than ours. I'm not sure why so many of them take so much pride in this?

As 'Jack Dawe' correctly points out a few posts above, if you use away numbers as a percentage of home numbers their figures will be no better than Accrington or Hartlepool.....I bet fans of those two clubs don't constantly bang on to their neighbours and the wider football world about how great and loyal they think they are.

[Up The City!]

On 3/4/2016 at 22:30, Smaller than a flea said:

On 3/4/2016 at 23:17, Andy082005 said:

On what basis do you think you will get 8,500-9,000?? 18,000 in the Championship?!?! Haha...

You didn't get close to 8k or 9k that last time you were in League One a few years back

Your clutching at straws at just guessing.  

Yes there is a gap. Take away the two divisions, take away the fact we have a better stadium, better training facilities, more fans, and more money....then yeah...take away all that, and that gaps not that much . 

You plonker 

 

I don't think there's much doubt that Rovers attract away attendances on a par with City.  The question is why their home crowds are so much lower.

Clearly being in the Championship City attract more fans.  Rovers average about 7,000 recently.  City about 15,000, but constrained by the rebuild.  I would guess if the ground was complete, and for sake of fairness, City were doing pretty well in the Championship, there would be about 22,000 there. 

If Rovers are in League 1 next season, the crowd would increase to about 8,500 - 9,000, and if (bear with me) they get to the Championship, maybe 11,000, or nearly a sell-out every week at the Mem.  I base my opinion on recent attendances, not those from decades ago.

If the UWE actually gets built (and there's no evidence yet that it will), I would expect Rovers in the Championship to up their crowds from my 11,000 projection to 18,000 or so, which is modest compared with how Brighton did.

There is a gap, but place both teams in the same league with modern stadiums and it's not much

[CyderInACan]

6 hours ago, Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan said:

If they out do us it's only because their home gates are, on average, much smaller than ours. I'm not sure why so many of them take so much pride in this?

As 'Jack Dawe' correctly points out a few posts above, if you use away numbers as a percentage of home numbers their figures will be no better than Accrington or Hartlepool.....I bet fans of those two clubs don't constantly bang on to their neighbours and the wider football world about how great and loyal they think they are.

They are a prowed bunch though. 

[Nogbad the Bad]

In my experience there are a lot of pro Rovers Bristolians who rarely, if ever, attend games.

For example, the only 2 football fans in my road (BS3) that I talk football with - I haven't found a fellow City fan in 25 years - are 'lifelong Rovers fans' who might attend one game every 5 years.

They are very much anti -Bristol City though, although unusually, again in my experience of Rovers fans, fairly good natured and jovial about the rivalry, which they currently view in a detached sort of way.

I see my parents in law as typical of the older generation of non committed Bristolians. They have little interest in football generally and have never actively supported either team but have a soft spot for Rovers, underscored by their perpetual underdog reputation and the sympathetic way they are always reported in the EP, Radio Bristol and Points West, all of which the older generation still take notice of.

They will often mention 'poor old Rovers - aren't they doing well!', but have little or no interest in BCFC (although both standpoints might just be to irritate me of course!) and don't seem to notice their poor seasons or any negative aspects associated with Rovers.

Due to this supportive and non critical way Rovers have been consistently covered by local media for decades - quite a contrast to City - they, and no doubt many like them, have been indoctrinated to always wish Rovers well, and want them to be successful.

No such sympathy or wider goodwill seems to exist for City however, and although crowd figures show we obviously have far more match attending fans it seems there are huge numbers of Bristolians who would a) never attend a game at Ashton Gate, and b) would always favour Rovers over City.

Despite attendances I doubt there are significantly more City supporting Bristolians out there than those who would say Rovers is their team, and should they ever start to do well in a decent stadium, many of those thousands of latent gasheads, like my neighbours, may just decide to end decades of near hibernation and attend games regularly.

Who knows in what numbers, but unfortunately they are out there, and our currently far superior attendances and dominance in Bristol should certainly never be taken for granted by those in charge at BCFC imo.

 

 

[richwwtk]

36 minutes ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

In my experience there are a lot of pro Rovers Bristolians who rarely, if ever, attend games.

For example, the only 2 football fans in my road (BS3) that I talk football with - I haven't found a fellow City fan in 25 years - are 'lifelong Rovers fans' who might attend one game every 5 years.

They are very much anti -Bristol City though, although unusually, again in my experience of Rovers fans, fairly good natured and jovial about the rivalry, which they currently view in a detached sort of way.

I see my parents in law as typical of the older generation of non committed Bristolians. They have little interest in football generally and have never actively supported either team but have a soft spot for Rovers, underscored by their perpetual underdog reputation and the sympathetic way they are always reported in the EP, Radio Bristol and Points West, all of which the older generation still take notice of.

They will often mention 'poor old Rovers - aren't they doing well!', but have little or no interest in BCFC (although both standpoints might just be to irritate me of course!) and don't seem to notice their poor seasons or any negative aspects associated with Rovers.

Due to this supportive and non critical way Rovers have been consistently covered by local media for decades - quite a contrast to City - they, and no doubt many like them, have been indoctrinated to always wish Rovers well, and want them to be successful.

No such sympathy or wider goodwill seems to exist for City however, and although crowd figures show we obviously have far more match attending fans it seems there are huge numbers of Bristolians who would a) never attend a game at Ashton Gate, and b) would always favour Rovers over City.

Despite attendances I doubt there are significantly more City supporting Bristolians out there than those who would say Rovers is their team, and should they ever start to do well in a decent stadium, many of those thousands of latent gasheads, like my neighbours, may just decide to end decades of near hibernation and attend games regularly.

Who knows in what numbers, but unfortunately they are out there, and our currently far superior attendances and dominance in Bristol should certainly never be taken for granted by those in charge at BCFC imo.

 

 

i think in past years, back in the day when there was never more than a division between us etc then this kind of reporting by the media did indeed do the gas a lot of good and created a lot of latent support for them in the city.

I like to think that the larger gulf between us of the past few years has seen the gas sympathisers as an aging bunch and the younger generation increasingly more drawn towards City.

In Weston at least, you see a lot more City attire being worn than you did even four or five years ago, especially by kids at school where the only English club I see represented these days is City, although RM & Barca still have their adherents. Anything rovers is only ever worn by people over 50 and it always looks a little weatherbeaten to say the least!

A few more years of the gap and it could well become a difference in support that would be insurmountable for a generation at least. Fortunately for the gas the takeover has happened just in time and, should they begin to close the distance, then things will return to what they were. Fingers crossed it all goes tits up

Finally, as a bit of a straw poll I was at Slimbridge on Good Friday, and the football clothing count in my head that day was City 4, Manchester City 1, Arsenal 1,  the rest 0 so not too bad a result

 

Edited March 29, 2016 by richwwtk

[Red-Robbo]

17 minutes ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

In my experience there are a lot of pro Rovers Bristolians who rarely, if ever, attend games.

For example, the only 2 football fans in my road (BS3) that I talk football with - I haven't found a fellow City fan in 25 years - are 'lifelong Rovers fans' who might attend one game every 5 years.

They are very much anti -Bristol City though, although unusually, again in my experience of Rovers fans, fairly good natured and jovial about the rivalry, which they currently view in a detached sort of way.

I see my parents in law as typical of the older generation of non committed Bristolians. They have little interest in football generally and have never actively supported either team but have a soft spot for Rovers, underscored by their perpetual underdog reputation and the sympathetic way they are always reported in the EP, Radio Bristol and Points West, all of which the older generation still take notice of.

They will often mention 'poor old Rovers - aren't they doing well!', but have little or no interest in BCFC (although both standpoints might just be to irritate me of course!) and don't seem to notice their poor seasons or any negative aspects associated with Rovers.

Due to this supportive and non critical way Rovers have been consistently covered by local media for decades - quite a contrast to City - they, and no doubt many like them, have been indoctrinated to always wish Rovers well, and want them to be successful.

No such sympathy or wider goodwill seems to exist for City however, and although crowd figures show we obviously have far more match attending fans it seems there are huge numbers of Bristolians who would a) never attend a game at Ashton Gate, and b) would always favour Rovers over City.

Despite attendances I doubt there are significantly more City supporting Bristolians out there than those who would say Rovers is their team, and should they ever start to do well in a decent stadium, many of those thousands of latent gasheads, like my neighbours, may just decide to end decades of near hibernation and attend games regularly.

Who knows in what numbers, but unfortunately they are out there, and our currently far superior attendances and dominance in Bristol should certainly never be taken for granted by those in charge at BCFC imo.

 

 

I think there's also the Somerset hinterland effect on City's support.  

Although there are lots of City fans in the historical county of Gloucestershire, in my experience any identification with the Gas doesn't go much north of Thornbury and certainly there is virtually none by the time you get to Gloucester. 

Historical Somerset is actually a very big county - it would be pushing a million people if all its constituent parts were stitched back together - and other than Bath [rugby] and Yeovil, Wincanton, Crewkerne, Langport [all YTFC] the majority of football fans in its towns and cities are probably City.

In both counties I'm discounting the Arsenal/Man U/Chelsea "fans" who never go to matches. Sadly they ate probably the majority throughout southern England - including Bristol.

[SirColinOfMansfield]

[...]

31 minutes ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

In my experience there are a lot of pro Rovers Bristolians who rarely, if ever, attend games.

For example, the only 2 football fans in my road (BS3) that I talk football with - I haven't found a fellow City fan in 25 years - are 'lifelong Rovers fans' who might attend one game every 5 years.

They are very much anti -Bristol City though, although unusually, again in my experience of Rovers fans, fairly good natured and jovial about the rivalry, which they currently view in a detached sort of way.

I see my parents in law as typical of the older generation of non committed Bristolians. They have little interest in football generally and have never actively supported either team but have a soft spot for Rovers, underscored by their perpetual underdog reputation and the sympathetic way they are always reported in the EP, Radio Bristol and Points West, all of which the older generation still take notice of.

They will often mention 'poor old Rovers - aren't they doing well!', but have little or no interest in BCFC (although both standpoints might just be to irritate me of course!) and don't seem to notice their poor seasons or any negative aspects associated with Rovers.

Due to this supportive and non critical way Rovers have been consistently covered by local media for decades - quite a contrast to City - they, and no doubt many like them, have been indoctrinated to always wish Rovers well, and want them to be successful.

No such sympathy or wider goodwill seems to exist for City however, and although crowd figures show we obviously have far more match attending fans it seems there are huge numbers of Bristolians who would a) never attend a game at Ashton Gate, and b) would always favour Rovers over City.

Despite attendances I doubt there are significantly more City supporting Bristolians out there than those who would say Rovers is their team, and should they ever start to do well in a decent stadium, many of those thousands of latent gasheads, like my neighbours, may just decide to end decades of near hibernation and attend games regularly.

Who knows in what numbers, but unfortunately they are out there, and our currently far superior attendances and dominance in Bristol should certainly never be taken for granted by those in charge at BCFC imo.

 

 

Good post, but with a whiff of paranoia.

 

Uncle TFR

[slartibartfast]

6 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

I think there's also the Somerset hinterland effect on City's support.  

Although there are lots of City fans in the historical county of Gloucestershire, in my experience any identification with the Gas doesn't go much north of Thornbury and certainly there is virtually none by the time you get to Gloucester. 

Historical Somerset is actually a very big county - it would be pushing a million people if all its constituent parts were stitched back together - and other than Bath [rugby] and Yeovil, Wincanton, Crewkerne, Langport [all YTFC] the majority of football fans in its towns and cities are probably City.

In both counties I'm discounting the Arsenal/Man U/Chelsea "fans" who never go to matches. Sadly they ate probably the majority throughout southern England - including Bristol.

And that is why the tin-pot little club is forever holding us back !

[Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan]

I personally know loads of Bristolians who say they are lifelong Man Utd/Liverpool/Chelsea fans who suddenly claim to also support the Gas whenever they do well or City get relegated. Quiet as church mice when Rovers lose their league status of course. 

In reality they never attend games at the Mem and rarely if ever attend games at Old Trafford/Anfield/Stamford Bridge. The Gas are welcome to 'fans' like that as far as I'm concerned.

Clearly, as demonstrated by our attendance at the JPT Final, there are plenty of Bristolians who don't fall for the sob stories from actual Gas relatives /neighbours or believe the outright lies that get spread about our supporters and the supposed behaviour directed towards players and managers at Ashton Gate.

I've no doubt that if City and Rovers ever reach the Premiership both clubs would need 27k stadiums. If it did happen Im sure plenty of the previous 'Gas sympathisers' would quickly realise that 'original' Rovers fans aren't actually as marvellous and as 'class above City' as they've always claimed....possibly about the same time the first opposition black player gets hold of the ball.

No offence to Miah and In The Net of course, I'm not suggesting ALL Gasheads are racist, just that Rovers fans certainly aren't better football fans than us or anyone else.

Edited March 29, 2016 by Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan