ExiledAjax

20 minutes ago, exAtyeoMax said:

 

 

It depends a little on how that board of 8 approve decisions. If the chair has a casting vote then it's possible that all 4 EFL members voted no, but the decision was carried with the 4 PL members voting yes, and the Chair breaking the deadlock with his casting vote.

If that was the case though I'd have thought the EFL/Parry et al would have put out a statement noting their dissent. 

Just now, Davefevs said:

Sounds like you’re the man for the job…assuming you’d take a pay cut!

3 days a week for £130k...it's tempting  

If anyone is keen for a new job. Would be great to have a City fan in there:

Role details – Independent Football Regulator - Chair – Apply for a public appointment – GOV.UK (apply-for-public-appointment.service.gov.uk)

9 hours ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Tranmere mentioned the regulator so they must feel the regulator would intervene in something like this if it came up in some manner. 

Tranmere's statement mentioned the regulator, but it didn't invoke it as a solutuon to this particular issue of "fixing" the FA Cup Rules. Tranmere (which is essentially Mark and Nicola Palios) said "It [the decision to scrap replays and the way it was taken] is yet another eloquent example of the 19th-century governance that means that football simply cannot regulate itself and needs the Independent Football Regulator to have real teeth." Chester FC also mentioned the regulator saying "This [the decision to scrap replays and the way it was taken] demonstrates an alarming lack of respect for the wider game and its fans, and reinforces the urgent need for a strong Independent Football Regulator.".

It's important to note here that these statements use this incident to encourage the Regulator's existence, but they don't actually say that they think the regulator would fix this particular issue.

9 hours ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Whilst they may not be involved in the calander you'd expect them to be involved in changes to competitions surely? So if the prem wanted to change to a 10 team league they'd be involved in that? 

As it is currently drafted the Football Governance Bill does not purport to empower the regulator to directly alter, approve, or otherwise influence changes to a competition's rules.

However. A "specified competition organiser" such as the FA in the case of the FA Cup would need to consult the regulator before adding, removing, or varying a specified competition rule unless the variation is not material. There is also a particular clause that says that this covers rule's that are relevant to the regulator's functions - which include maintaining the financial sustainability of the pyramid, and the financial soundness of clubs. So there's no power for the regulator to actually dictate or stop the FA/PL from making changes, but it has to be told about them and the word "consult" implies that it's concerns would at least to be noted, and if ignored, then there would need to be a justification for that.

I think as well that the regulator would be able to make adjustments to the financial distribution agreement between the PL/EFL/FA/National League in order to compensate for any revenue lost through the lsoss of replays. That would be an indirect way of addressing the ripple effects of this decision. Although that power will require amendments to be made. to the current draft of the Bill.

9 hours ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

I don't like how the Fa and the PL have done this. It smells rotten. Gives me very similar feelings to the SL. 

I agree with this. It stinks. I've written to our Club asking them to make a statement.

2 hours ago, cityexile said:

Thinking in hindsight it but might have been better to just let the buggers go to the super league and have been done with it.

No.

1 hour ago, BigTone said:

100% agree. Let them all **** off and allow British football to return to sustainable reality. You've got my vote.

Sorry, my opinion is that this is the easy way out, and is a replication of the attitude of the Football League in the early 90s. 

Don't let them go. They're part of the pyramid, part of the ecosystem, and they are part of the UK's football heritage whether they like it or not. Even if they did "**** off" the big PL teams would still take our youth players, still force loanees on us, and they'd still dictate the schedule with their mates at Sky. The only difference is they'd be outside of even the slightest bit of control in their own shitty gold European pond.

They made this bed that clubs like ours are lying in and they can ******* well lie in it with us.

2 hours ago, wendyredredrobin said:

2023/24 Attendances courtesy of transfermarket.com:

City    22,784

Sags     8,152

Still, they are the bigger club with the best support (Gas logic).

BCFC Women - 7,384

32 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

The cynical side of me thinks this was quickly pushed through before the regulator is introduced. 

An interesting angle to it. The regulator won't have any direct influence on the calendar or on the rules of any competition, but I guess if the PL were going to try and use this extra £33m as leverage in a financial distribution negotiation then maybe they'd want it done before the Bill is passed?

What was your reasoning here?

4 minutes ago, Robbored said:

Shows how much interest I take in the FA cup EA.

You should apply for a job at the Premier League. You'd fit in well.

36 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Would be interesting to hear the EFL’s part in this (if at all), or at least their view.

I think it gets the potential of an ugly problem re the new EFL tv deal and now there won’t be any potential for too many games close together.

@ExiledAjax - I recall you have concerns about this on the tv deal thread.

Can't imagine Rick Parry was allowed in the room tbh.

I can't remember my earlier concerns tbh. May not have been me?

I'd say btw, I'm not actually entirely against the concept of scrapping replays for the right reasons and with other changes made to ensure that lower league clubs still benefit from it. This is just such a transparent decision that they've not even tried to spin it or hide it

43 minutes ago, Robbored said:

If you want to be cynical - try this. To ease the financial plight of many lower league clubs the draw ‘randomly’  selects the PL clubs home to a lower league club……….. 

Cynical? The FA literally say the changes are driven by changes to the European calendar.

"In its current format, the FA Cup has no replays from the fifth round onwards, but the FA says the move to eliminate them from an earlier stage has been made "in light of changes to the calendar driven by the expanded Uefa competitions"."

No cynicism needed at all mate.

40 minutes ago, Robbored said:

The competition has to have the same regulations in every round. It wouldn’t be acceptable to introduce ‘no replays’ in round 3 when the big boys join in.

Are you serious? It's had no replays from 5th round onwards for the past few seasons.

Just now, Robbored said:

I’m sure that was taken in consideration when the ‘no replays’ was decided. Ultimately it’s a ‘swings and roundabouts’ dilemma.

I'm 99.99% sure it wasn't considered at all.

If PL clubs are truly concerned about fixture congestion then they could have said something against the Champions League going from 6 group games to 8.

But no. Obviously they'd like to trade a nasty FA Cup replay against a side like Port Vale for a nice little earner in UEFA competition.

23 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said:

Yeah - I'm not sure anything has fundamentally changed since January. He presumably knew we were a mid-table Championship club when he signed and we're a mid-table Championship club now. 

And if he was after a mid-table championship club then oh boy has he made a great decision.

The fact that it's announced in conjunction with a £33m contract between the FA and the PL tells you exactly which clubs have asked for the changes.

PL clubs don't want fewer fixtures. They want fewer non-profitable, unwatched fixtures. 

Scrapping replays delivers greater certainty over the winter fixture list, and should allow a little expansion of say the UEFA conference league or some other manner of helping a couple more PL clubs squeeze into Europe.

5 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

Pub options near Kennilworth Road are woeful. And to be honest it isn't much better at Stamford Bridge!

Griffin Park - now you're talking! And even the new ground has an easy walk to some lovely old pubs in Kew Village. 

My favourite away ground - although I won't be travelling there this visit - is Carrow Road. Near the city centre and not too far from the station, nice waterside pubs nearby and some cracking bars and restaurants. Far away enough to be a real jaunt. I usually stay over as I'm a big fan of the city and Norfolk on general. 

They don't all tick every box.

I've made a late decision to see if I can get the wife's approval for a Carrow Road visit this Saturday. My Best Man lives in Norwich and we do a little lunch/beers/football day every now and then. It's been too long.

3 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Good OP.

Funny how fans perceptions change too…sometimes when the player is missing, sometimes when they’re in the team.

I think the “Steady Eddies” have shone through this season, Tanner, O’Leary, Jamo (6 or 7 out 10 every week).  Dickie has been steadily excellent (7, 8, 9)

But we’ve also had some world beater / panel beaters too.  Pring has had some very good games, but some bloody awful games too.

And then some that fall in between, not always consistent, generally decent, but the odd shocker.

Bristol City in a nutshell.

And Mehmeti. He's also a player.

51 minutes ago, Phileas Fogg said:

I also like The Valley

Ah yeh another excellent stadium with an unusual element where you enter the away end half way up the stand.

2 hours ago, Robbored said:

My views exactly PF. The one stadium that impressed me in recent years was the Ricoh. Its ‘D’ design was particularly unique - plus of course that City usually did pretty well there.

Fair enough if the Ricoh impressed you. For me it's an out of town bowl stuck between a bunch of A roads. I don't think there's a single pub within a 10 minute walk from it.

Then inside theres that massive white wall down one side that kills any chance of an atmosphere coming from all sides. It's a dead stadium in my opinion and can't hold a candle to some of the others being discussed in this thread.

9 minutes ago, Phileas Fogg said:

I think we've done relatively well with the AG rebuild in balancing both, it's not perfect but given the limitations I think it's pretty good.

I agree that AG strikes a very good balance between quality of stadium, location, size, facilities. It's not perfect, it's not what it once was, and it's not the absolute best that it could be. But you'll never build something that please everyone.

My understanding is that away fans often compliment it and TV companies like it (boo hiss, but this is important). Basically it seems popular with outsiders of all persuasions.

50 minutes ago, SecretSam said:

News of Portsmouth's promotion, and comments about 'a proper ground' lead me to wonder: exactly what is a 'good ground' these days? There's still apparently a lot of love for old grounds, despite drawbacks (legroom, facilities, accessibility) because they are deemed to offer a better 'atmosphere'. Or maybe it's the classic British disease of nostalgia?

For me, I like a ground where I can see, there's reasonable comfort (I'm paying solid money, so expect my 173cm frame to be accommodated), the loos are OK and the stands are tight to the pitch. I'm genuinely not bothered about standing at my age (55) unless the tickets are very cheap.

What are your thoughts?

I'll be honest and say that in addition to the factors you point out - sight lines, comfort, tight to the pitch -  a huge part of it for me is the area surrounding the ground.

Stadiums that are set in the heart of a city, surrounded by characterful pubs and bars, a variety of food options, within an interesting walk from a railway station, those are special. Places like the old Griffin Park, Kenilworth Road, St James Park (both Exeter and Newcastle), the City Ground, even somewhere like Stamford Bridge or the Emirates. The atmosphere at these grounds begins outside the gates and it's often wonderful.

It's because Liam Manning, Howard Webb, and Nigel Pearson are actual involved in a bitter and twisted love triangle involving a piece of Mendip woodland, David Moyes' holiday home in San Sebastian, and Mark Clattenburg's box at the Gladiators filming set.

It's messy, and I've already said too much really, but the long and the short of it is Pearson doesn't get penalties and Manning gets them like confetti.

13 minutes ago, fisherrich said:

We might hear something this summer?

It depends how long any negotiations and legals take. Generally I'd expect the sale of a business of the value and complexity of Bristol City/Sport to take around 6 months to complete.

If the hypothetical deal has already been hypothetically agreed then completion before next season kicks off is possible if people pull 80 hour weeks, don't piss about, and the EFL is happy with the new owner/investor.

If not...well go look at Everton and 777 for an indication of how long things can take!

On 11/03/2024 at 09:20, ExiledAjax said:

I might have been a bit harsh here and I'll give some alternative KPIs.

1. Over the final 9 games I want to see:

1.a. an average of 13 shots per game (current average is 11.5); 12 so far. Better than the 11.5, but not quite where I want it.

1.b. an average of 4 shots on target per game (current average is 3.6); 4.83. Excellent. and

1.c. average xG from open play of 0.9 per game (current average is 0.71) overall xG average is 1.38 which is very good. Take off 3 penalties and you get an average of 1.02. So success here as well so far.

2. Name a full subs bench in every game. The season's done in terms of competition, so let's blood some youngsters. Fail. I'm not sure on the bench point, but he's definitely not been blooding the youth.

3. Let's target 3 clean sheets in the final 9 games. Achieved with 3 games to spare!

As I say, this season is gone, done, all but finished, so let's focus on improving and finishing on an upward trajectory. That will lay good groundwork for whoever is in charge in 2024/25.

@Numero Uno yeh he's ticking most of your boxes isn't he.

I looked at mine as well as above.

2 ticks, one cross, one looking good, one tick so far but could drop off potentially.

Not bad really.

I can't imagine he's got much love for Bristol City. 

12 minutes ago, Street red said:

Still pretty pants for the size of Bristol we should be hitting 20k season ticket holders at least. But I'm not sure where you got that figure from can't see it myself.

I think we'd start a waiting list before we got to 20k.

20k, plus needing to allow for a maximum away allocation of about 3,000, leaves only about 3,000 for POTD.

I reckon at around 18.5k we'd start taking about waiting lists, loyalty points etc.

3 minutes ago, Barrs Court Red said:

The thought did cross my mind, but in respect to an investor rather than a sale. 

Sure, that's an option too. My original statement would still apply.

1 minute ago, Barrs Court Red said:

Is it seriously up for sale though? The language used by Jon during the Pearson debacle suggested not to me. 

Absolutely is. I have a suspicion that Steve's presence at a few recent games isn't just about him wanting to see how Manning is getting on.