TheReds

26 minutes ago, NickJ said:

If he fronted up when we’re Ona losing run rather than only ever on a winning streak, I’d agree with you.

Whoever the interviewer surely the main question has to be, given that JL said we had a top 6 squad, does he agree switching managers was a failure?

I don't think too many have a great deal of time for the ones at the top at the moment, but do you really expect Chairmen/Owners from clubs to come out and give interviews multiple times per season after every losing and winning run?

It is the end of the season and if he didn't come out and speak he'd get criticised, now he is doing an interview he's getting criticised for that.

1 hour ago, Mallorcan Red said:

https://www.bettingoffers.uk/articles/identity-checks/

"The UKGC has stated that it plans to set limits on customers based on the information provided to the casino or bookie. This implies that, at some point, the companies will need to ask their customers more questions to determine whether or not they are gambling safely. These questions have already started to roll out. They are based on a number of factors, but they are used to determine if gambling is causing any harm, either financially or mentally, to the customer in question. This helps to identify problem gamblers. Examples include: Financial indicators to assess whether people are gambling beyond their means. This will likely look at the amount of money they earn and then compare it to what they are spending"

"Identify checks are here to stay, so the best bit of advice that we can give is learn to accept it and be prepared with all the information that you think might be needed, remembering that this is for the best – short term pain for long term gain."

All that sounds great for protection, but the bookies don't ask for any of that when you open a new account and deposit and lose time after time, then when/if you win they miraculously make you jump through hoops to get paid. Skybet are notorious for asking for a bank statement but only when you want to withdraw to prove you have funds etc, and then they ask for other bank statements of the people on that statement who has sent you any money, that third person then has to send their statement to them or they refuse to pay you out. 

They should be asking for proof of funds, earnings all before a single bet has been placed, and it should apply to everyone. They simply don't and do whatever they can to maximise profits and to get people onto their online casino where losses are easily racked up quickly, but as long as a message pops up saying you've played for so long they seem to be covered. 

30 minutes ago, Sleepy1968 said:

If you search youtube, you find out how crocked the gambling industry is.

Put it this way, the best you can hope for if you are a winning punter is that they restrict your bets.

But it seems to be common for them to investigate you, and demand your bank account details, and find loopholes to substantiate cheating allegations so they can refuse to pay out big wins/balances

The bookies (most of them) have never been as bad as they are now. If you are anyone with half a clue about gambling and can beat their prices, you won't last very long with any of them, and you will either be restricted to betting pennies or banned completely by them. All they want now is people on their online casino, and in the shops they want people on the machines where they have cash cows for guaranteed incomes. They simply play by their own rules and the regulator do absolutely nothing with them when they are breaking the Gambling Commission rules. Have a Google for the new kid on the block in the UK (MGM bet), some of the things they have done over the Cheltenham Festival is shocking, but they now have their new lot of gullible online Casino players after ripping off loads of punters with impunity. 

11 hours ago, Cole Not Gas said:

Do what? What would have impressed you in any manager having to take over a Pearson (basket) case 6 months ago? The summer will go well because the club (ie owners & senior, respected managers will back Liam) so you have no reason to have a bad feeling. And what the hell do you mean by regression? Since when, since Cotts or since Johnson? There has been zero regression since Pearson lef; the players are happier, the cup run, we beat or draw with top teams, we smash poor teams etc etc - sometimes the negativity of you (and others) posts is simply baffling. What regression can you possibly mean?

Please give me some attention, pretty please.

1 hour ago, Pip King said:

Hopefully when they're playing in the Gloucestershire  County League where they belong 

And they shall be known as "The Barcelona of the Gloucestershire County League" .

1 hour ago, 1960maaan said:

Ignoring who it is for the moment, they need some continuity . They need to give someone the chance to get foundations in place, to start to build. `A little like Nige did with us, get the Club set and start to build with an eye on the future . They need to start thinking about 2/3 years time and begin getting a squad together and improve over a season or two.

That's if the new owner isn't going to throw mi££ions at them and buy a new squad in one go . 

Exactly. That's the issue though, loads of them couldn't even see past what Barton was doing because now and again they would play a bit of entertaining football. The issue though was it was with other clubs players. Multiple loans season after season will not do you much good, but that didn't seem to matter. It seems hardly any of them can see anything longterm (quite surprising really when the main man is know to say "these things take time", it is about the now. 

If Taylor is given hardly any money then how is he meant to build for the future. I honestly don't see him given a lot, and then they won't be challenging next season, unless he is a miracle worker. I'd give it 10 games and if they haven't had a great start he will be gone and it's back to square one again. Their season ticket sales is going to be terrible as well imo, ground improvements (if any) will be budget stuff, and they will still all be saying how great their support is and how they need a minimum 20,000 stadium. 

I am sure one day it will hit home, but unsure when that day is.

51 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

Realistically thinking , most of that budget will go on just getting a squad together, let alone one to challenge .

"12 permanently contracted players have deals that are set to expire this summer while there are also six first-team loanees"

So possibly losing 18 members of your squad and wanting to recruit one to challenge ? I thought Taylor was a good appointment, but he has his work cut out. 

The issue here is that it has been going on for years, my deluded Rovers mate still thinks all these loans and freebies is the way to go. I told him it will hit them hard at one point sooner or later with no planning and no youngsters coming through. They all just seem to bury their heads in the sand.

The majority seem to want Taylor gone, but what are they expecting any new bloke to come in and do? They have a full rebuild, and if there isn't any money they will be struggling next season, lose a few at the start and will all be Taylors fault because they want him gone, and then another one comes in and inherits the same mess.

The only way a lot of them will see any sense is if Taylor walks and says it how it is, and you can bet they will still say they are massive and will be on for promotion next season though.

27 minutes ago, Back of the Dolman said:

You’d think at least Dickie and probably Vyner are back in the squad if Knight-Lebel is with the under 21s

Is Vyner possible? I thought I read somewhere he was out for a few weeks.

2 hours ago, spudski said:

There is truth in that...but the opposite also happens.

I inherited a vast collection of signed vinyl and memorabilia. 

I had people report that it was fake...only one person, and it was taken down immediately. Even though I provided evidence of the autographs being signed in person.

There are a lot of self proclaimed experts in collectors circles, that often haven't got a clue. 

And sometimes people are just spiteful as they can't afford it and want it in their collection. 

 

That must be a rarity, and guess it is pot luck who receives the complaint their end and removes a listing?

I used to go on an art forum and loads of the eBay fake stuff got highlighted on there, multiple listings got reported and I never seen a single thing get taken down. One seller had made thousands selling the same fakes multiple times, and even got reported to Action Fraud for months on end by multiple people, still nothing was done about it.  

People claim what they want on eBay and eBay don't care as they will take their slice of the pie after an unsuspecting buyer has basically been ripped off. You only have to look at all the Banksy fake stuff that gets sold through there (and plenty of "auction" houses"). Even if you report something that is 100% fake they will rarely remove it.

3 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Goals and Assists both count, given he isn't a pure striker 30 in a season is remarkable but I reckon his all-round contribution has been solid enough in recent times even before this 

22/23 - 34 games, 5 goals, 2 assists
21/22 - 36 games, 6 goals, 1 assist
20/21 - 42 games, 15 goals, 8 assists (League one)

I reckon a few people would have moaned if we signed him in the last couple of years, yet he's being talked of now that we let some World beater go who has been doing it week in week out the moment he left us. He's having an amazing season, everything seems to have clicked, good luck to him, but it all seems a bit odd on here blaming whoever they can for letting him go.

Am I the only one who sees this Szmodic obsession (maybe the wrong word) as a little bit OTT?

The majority of the comments I read on here reads like he left us at the end of last season and he's suddenly tearing it up straight after he's left us. He left over 4 years ago, his record up until this season hasn't been exceptional whatsoever, and there is a strong possibility he wouldn't even be here now regardless.

3 minutes ago, spudski said:

Land of hope and glory seems a bit random...

 

If that smoke was blue you could easily be mistaken and think it was the Memorial after they beat Scunthorpe.

3 minutes ago, phantom said:

I would get him to call the club, it sounds like they may be confused with what they have etc

He told me it is the same as the digital season ticket, there is no QR code at all.

If that is what you meant, apologies if not.

3 minutes ago, Ian M said:

I'd have thought Screenshots would work unless they are planning to do away with the barcode/QR code scanner?

If they are planning to go to NFC only, that would mean going from 100% of people can enter with some form of paper ticket atm to a percentage far smaller than that. At the present time, 15m people in the UK use NFC for payments from their phone (the technology involved if abandoning bar-codes).

He told me he couldn't just forward a screenshot as it won't work, there is no QR code.

I had this issue not long ago at a gig and had to go back out to get someone else entry as he couldn't get there at the same time as the rest of us and a screenshot wouldn't work. At least at gigs/venues I have been to where it is paperless it is someone with a hand held scanner, so no issues if you have 8 tickets as they just scan all 8 mobile tickets and count you all in. Definitely not as quick and easy with barriers. 

Why didn't they just wait 3 more games and then roll it out fully for next season with people getting some notice about it?

Mate of mine has bought 6 for the Rotherham game, I can guarantee he will get in a panic with a queue behind whilst trying to scroll through them one by one to get in each individual. Also needs to have everyone with him at the same time to go in, as a screenshot forwarded to someone else won't work apparently.

7 minutes ago, And Its Smith said:

Show me where I agreed with them telling you to **** off please 

You gave flames to the comment of **** off, doesn't that mean you agree with it? 

6 hours ago, Robbored said:

I thought of that but it’s not just my phone tho. I have an I-watch and an iPad - alerts come up on them as well.

Not sure if you know, but you can actually take your watch off and put it with your iPad in another room to the TV. 

7 minutes ago, Northern Red said:

I actually thought the one on Wells at the end was the most clear cut, just shoved him over with absolutely no thought of playing the ball.

I don't understand how or why they just let these fouls go. Why does it make any difference if it is in the box or not? If that was by the touchline he would have went flying into the hoardings/crowd, and it would have been a foul and a definite yellow, yet in the box it's nothing at all. Same with Dickie, I can see why it wasn't given as both doing the grabbing and even with one player doing the grabbing on corners they are hardly ever given, but anywhere else it is a foul to us or to the other side, depending on who initiated it..

Any reason why the OP never chose 15 games? 

What were the 3 games before those 12, I just had a look.....  Watford - won, Hull - won, Sunderland - won, so add those 9 points and where would we be?

As much as I am certainly not convinced by what has happened, and probably agree that it actually seems we have regressed, it does show that plenty on here will choose what to present to suit their own stance (both sides too).

44 minutes ago, transfer reader said:

Back up your bullshit or **** off and stop lying.

Just go and read your own posts on the match day threads, any chance of a dig at Max and you seem to be there.

My initial post basically shows exactly how it is, I've mentioned how you say its a "Max fan club" and your own reply to @italian dave is calling anyone who refuses to give him anything but praise are his "lead cheerleaders". Plenty of your posts are along the same lines. If he makes a save and gets a bit of praise you are on it with "he should save that", "it's straight at him", "awful strike" etc etc, and then start calling people cheerleaders and his fan club. Reality imo, is in general people are saying he has done something decent, as he gets plenty of flak on here (something which you seem to have missed). He's probably a standard Championship keeper, not the best and not the worst.

5 minutes ago, italian dave said:

Why do you say that you know I'm "one eyed" with Max?

My comment above wasn't about Max at all; it was about the English language!

And, aside from the very rare comment about his performance in a particular game, I don't have a very strong view on him either way and I'm not aware that I've said very much about him at all.

The poster thinks anyone who has one single good thing to say about Max is "one eyed", but cannot see he is exactly what he is describing you as, but just the other way around. 

24 minutes ago, transfer reader said:

However, I also know you're so one eyed with Max

Said with no irony whatsoever. 

How many negative posts have you made about Max in the last few match threads?

Any person who has the audacity to say he's a fairly decent Championship keeper gets shot down by you every single time to be part of a mythical "Max O Leary fan club". Yet say nothing about the same group of people constantly having a dig at anything he does get wrong. He's made some mistakes, he's made some great saves, he's probably won us more points than he has cost us imo, but the chance to get a dig in at any slight error is just tiresome.

4 minutes ago, TV Tom said:

I'm talking out and out centre forwards not wide strikers who rarely score (with the exception of Sykes) That leaves us the three centre forwards you've mentioned of which Cornick never played that roll at Luton, Wells is well passed it which leaves us with the still very young and inexperienced Conway, we were well under-cooked in the CF department going into the new season

So do tell, who was available to Pearson for free, because he didn't have any money to spend did he? Or let's pretend he had some cash, who should he have bought?

7 minutes ago, transfer reader said:

Only because the rest have been incredibly poor.

Leeds have had 6 shots.

2 off target, 1 blocked.

One of the saves was right at him, the other was a very good bit of reactions, but very fortunate for the ball to bounce over the bar from that position and was also right at him.

The other save I genuinely don't remember- in fact it just came up in the highlights and guess what... it was straight at him.

I realise this won't go down well with his fan club who can't bare anything other than effusive praise for him, but saying the shots were at him isn't a knock on Max (though it will probably be claimed as such), it's the reality of them.

He's done all he needs to do right, and so is doing well, but the reason Leeds aren't ahead is down to poor finishing rather than good goalkeeping.

Good grief, the desperation simply to not to give Max any credit.