TheReds

3 minutes ago, HOZDA said:

Swansea gone Infront Vs Preston - we are now 8th!!

You sure, I thought we were going to be in 17th and relegation battle about half hour ago.

Has something happened?

He has hardly been touched and threw himself to the ground from what I seen

How is he even allowed to run a shop? Sounds like HMRC and the law should/will be after him. I can only imagine how easily he wouldn't be able to spot just the 62,000 illegal vapes that his shop workers bought and sold without his knowledge....


Mr Jamal apologised for the breaches to the alcohol licence and the illegal disposable vapes found at the store each time and acknowledged he was responsible for what was being sold in the store, although he said that he had recently taken on a second store in Bedminster and was concentrating on that, claiming his staff had continued to buy the illegal vapes to be sold, even after he’d already been warned once this year. A police officer at the hearing told the councillors that he had already been given an official police caution for selling alcohol without any licence at all at that other store in nearby Bedminster.
 

After the January concerns about underage drink sales, Trading Standards officers from Bristol City Council got involved, and visited the shop on April 12. Trading Standards officer Emma Hennessey told the hearing they found multiple issues. A search of the premises found a total of 62,761 illegal disposable vapes. Vapes can only be sold in this country if they contain enough vape liquid for 600 puffs - but Ashton Gate Mini Market was selling vapes that contained 9,000 puffs.

Officers also found tobacco that had not been through UK Customs and Duty, and police present also found a mattress in a back room and a store worker there who turned out to be an illegal immigrant, the committee heard. The illegal tobacco and vapes were confiscated and Mr Jamal was warned, but a second visit in September again revealed more illegal vapes were being sold there.

9 hours ago, phantom said:

You mention two completely different scenarios, one was completely fabricated by some Rovers fantasist the other actually happened. 

You are mixing up your information, between the police etc

Information will come public but everything takes time before being made public 

I am mentioning two scenarios from what I have seen no evidence of either. Both are said to have happened, one was dismissed due to no evidence and one is deemed to have so bad but there also seems to be no evidence at the moment..

The Villa statement itself states Villa have asked authorities to investigate, so how am I mixing up my information - it is actually the first post on this thread "we ask the authorities to investigate this incident to find this individual. Zero tolerance to abuse in football". So where are you getting your information from? I have only seen what has been put on here, and in todays World of all the muppets filming absolutely everything bar watching the game, I am hugely surprised there aren't multiple videos from multiple people from multiple angles etc. Plus this must have all happened in the front few rows if the player has heard it all game, there would be even more video of the incidents from other stands as plenty would see it kicking right off.

Has something happened, probably. Has something happened for a full game with fan fights, walk outs as reported etc, doubtful imo. Probably no different that us fans saying "we don't get given penalty decisions all the time", said to make it look worse than what it actually is.

Slightly off topic, as for their zero tolerance to abuse in football, I wonder what they call abuse? Are they going to ban thousands of their fans when they abuse the referee in their next game - pretty much a guarantee?  

14 minutes ago, phantom said:

I'm not sure why you feel the need to see a transcript? 

Those involved know what was said, it certainly doesn't need to be made public just because someone doesn't like Villa supporters, when you say "clear it up for everyone" you're the only person persistently posting about it 

For information the police contacted Villa, there was no complaining done by the club. 

Surely the way it has been reported including on their podcast, then people should at least be told exactly what has happened with some actual evidence. They are saying it's disgusting abuse that lasted for 90 minutes, that had fans fighting etc. 

When a City fan got accused of abusing one of our own supporters (by the Gas liar) everyone seemed to want evidence and proof.

The statement from Villa states they asked Authorities to investigate, not the other way around. So where are you getting your information from exactly? Villa are saying one thing and you are saying another.

I wouldn't mind seeing exactly what happened just to see how much has actually been added to the actual event, to the story of a full game of horrendous abuse and fans fighting, walkouts etc.

Abuse all game from one fan, crowd fights, actual fans walking out in disgust, so why isn't there multiple videos on here of all of this? There must be multiple videos from multiple people capturing all of it seeing as it was sustained through the whole game?  

My guess is "all game" means a couple of times in 90 minutes. 

Villas statement says "investigate this incident", wouldn't that mean it happened once, or is it a 90 minute incident?

1 hour ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

You're really scraping the barrel there. I don't think many would agree. Maybe a point or 2 but that's it. 

Yeah a point or 2 extra every 6 games won't make any difference whatsoever to where a club finishes and how a table looks, and then brings more confidence to players etc etc. 

Who would want that.

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

No what's bizarre is that you're not undersmy point. 

I shall make it very clear. 

He attempted to use data to say "im not doing such a bad job as people think" 

In the same interview he then said he doesn't use data to make subs. 

I'm saying every single approach should include using different methods.

It really is very clear. 

Is he not allowed to use some data he has (or even say) that shows we may be creating more chances, we may be creating more chances that should be/should have been converted, which in the longterm should yield rewards? I guess he is trying to say the data is showing we should have had more points than we currently got, and I think many would agree with that. Therefore the points we have gained are under what we should really have had with the overall performances.

He then says he doesn't use data to make subs - so what, that's great according to your original conclusions. You've said he should be using his eyes and other things for subs, and that is what he is actually confirming isn't it. But that isn't correct now.

"Every single approach should use different methods"? Well that is what he has confirmed, or do you want him to use some data for subs as well?

It really isn't clear, because I really wouldn't be asking.

1 minute ago, spudski said:

She is pleasant on the eye for sure. 

Unlike Paddy McGuiness who I loath. I actually don't know anyone who likes him. 

I bet he's made some serious money basically because of being a mate of Peter Kay. I actually seen him down the Colston Hall for a stand up gig and he was pretty poor, not surprised he knocked that career on the head. Decent in the comedies with Kay, but as a presenter he certainly does seem an odd choice to keep getting roles.

1 hour ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

No. What I'm saying is it should be a combination of things. So when making a sub it should be done on eyes, feelings and data. 

When talking about performances it should be the same. 

The fact he says he doesn't use any data at all for one thing but then relies upon it for something else is just a bit all over the place. 

You seem to be criticising your own criticisms!!

If he isn't using data for his subs then that means he is using his eyes doesn't it and a combination of other things, so what has he done wrong here exactly? You're saying he should be doing what you are suggesting, but he is already doing (if he isn't using data), then somehow criticising him for it.

If he is only using data for some things he isn't using it for everything, and you have said he shouldn't rely on data for everything.  He isn't.

You are criticising him for things that you have actually said he should be doing.

I think you are all over the place, not Manning (and I am certainly not saying I am convinced by him yet at all, but at least willing to give him some time).

Having to go massively out your way because you feel the need you "have to" criticise him. Very bizarre imo.

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

No I get that but its just a bit all over the place isn't it? 

One minute he doesn't use any data for subs and then he's relying on data to get a message across. 

It's just not really consistent. 

I don't think no manager should not use data, but then I also think no manager should simply rely upon data. 

What we're seeing here is an inexperienced Manager learning his craft on the job. 

Eh?

So in your analysis he uses data to get some sort of message across (implying he is wrong), but he doesn't use data to make subs (implying that is wrong)? So the conclusion is that he is all over the place.

Then you seem to complain and make a point that a manager should use some data, but then no manager should simply not rely on it.

Well that is exactly what he is doing isn't it going by your first part. He isn't relying on data because his subs aren't driven by data.
 

5 minutes ago, prankerd said:

Is it me or is it unplayable right now, just buffering.

Fine for me, not  single buffer all game and a minute in front of what was on my stick

3 minutes ago, And Its Smith said:

So if the data says he’s got an hour in him you want him risked for longer ?

Where is this data exactly? 

1 minute ago, Lew-T said:

Resting our most creative player after an hour?

Against Huddersfield? After two losses in a row. Sorry, doesn’t make sense to me.

It's the data, get with the program.

We now have ready made excuses for a poor team selection and any subs. The data said that man couldn't run another 10 yards or 5 minutes without risking a non contact injury. 

3 minutes ago, BS3rich said:

Not working for me but cheers 

https://sports-10.com/huddersfield-v-bristol-city/

1 hour ago, frenchred said:

:laugh:, happy days indeed, I started FF in 1976, I don't think they were even in a league then, the HML followed a few years later. Our managers were the character Bob Clifford and Harry Peacock, his son Darren went on to play for Newcastle amongst others!

I worked with a Bob Clifford a few years ago, he liked his football and think he had trials or played for Crystal Palace, just wondering if it was the same bloke? He was from over Knowle way when I knew him, he died a few years ago (if it's the same one). 

17 minutes ago, Globe Trotter said:

Upton Park the last time we went midweek, 0-0, was chaos after the game 

Will never forget the Hammers fan giving it the big 'un in the stand to our end, and then what seemed like the huge majority of City fans singing "there's only one James Corden" at him, and him losing it even more and then getting booted out. Comedy gold.

47 minutes ago, Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan said:

“Some of the best supporters in the League”

That Marquis bloke said the same the other night after arguing with them at the end of the game....

1 hour ago, ExiledAjax said:

"His cousin at the time". What!?!? 

Cousin back then, but may be his husband now. Or he could no longer be his cousin as he could be dead.

My money is on Joey just being a bit dim though.

1 minute ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Quite frankly I am absolutely appalled and disgusted to be reading this. Tossers like that deserve to be banned. They are not Bristol City fans. I hope the young boy is OK this morning. 

But hey, because it's an away day @Lewisdabaron

Why are you insinuating the poster seems to think it was ok because it was an away day? @Lewisdabaron even put the word (sadly) at the end of if his post, emphasising a regular would be used to it because we have plenty of idiots at away games. Nowhere has he said it was ok as people are making out.

Weird how people are slating some idiots for having a go at other fans at a match, then basically having a go at a poster on here for something they haven't even said.

The actual irony.

As for the OP, hope your old man is ok, I'm afraid we have plenty of morons at away games.

I hope nobody reports them to the FA/EFL......

1 hour ago, bcfc01 said:

They'll never sell out the ground on a regular basis.

The support just isn't there and has been declining since the 1950s and its now ageing as well, I would like to see the breakdown of their supporters by age group as it seems the current and future generations are now City.

They are dependent on away support numbers boosting their 7k supporters. That could rise on promotion, but not by much.

My Saggie mate who is up there with the most optimistic and deluded you will ever find, even admits their fan base is very old and no new kids down there coming through. The fans just aren't there for them for a massive upturn, even if they managed to somehow go up. We've had the majority of the next generation coming to the gate, they suddenyl aren't going to get a load of new kids showing up in that shitehole. Times have massively changed, but they cannot even see it, and will bang on about their mythical Wembley crowd they have to make up.

15 hours ago, Silvio Dante said:

In a lot of ways, Mannings walking into a hiding to nothing.

- Performs at the same level as Pearson (so bobbing around 10th this season) - doesn’t meet the remit of kicking on

- Performs better than Pearson but is allowed to add players - board are seen as even more complicit in sabotaging Pearson and he gets little credit

- Performs worse than Pearson - nuff said

The only way Manning will get credit (and in turn justify JL and BTs decision) is to significantly outperform Pearson in results and performance with the same squad - and even then for some it’ll be tempered by the fact he’ll have injured players back.

I want him to do well, and am cautiously optimistic. But I also fear that the way the clowns in charge have handled things have left him in a position where he can’t win unless he does something spectacular.

 

Exactly this, also if he does really well it will be "because Pearson done all the groundwork" from many fans.

Everything points to the board wanting Pearson gone, and the way they handled it has been atrocious.

Not me personally, but I do know one of the blue few who refuses to get anything red, refuses to shop in Sainsburys (because it was all their fault why they haven't got a new Stadium), and he also refused to go to Ashton Gate for his Covid jab! Nuts

46 minutes ago, Ghost Rider said:

To give credit to JL, he isn't presenting this as his personal opinion (even though it could have been taken like that). He explicitly states that what the team is doing with these extended breaks is quite unconventional in the league. So, it's not just JL's perspective; it's evidently shared by everyone else as well. When you consider that we have more injuries than any other team in the league, it makes his viewpoint on this matter quite valid. It's a concern we should all share, especially because whoever is responsible for the team's fitness seems to be falling short. It's one thing to claim that the team is the fittest we've ever had, but that statement becomes meaningless when half the players are sidelined with injuries. 

 

Unless JL can actually prove a number of the injuries we currently have (or previously had) was due to players not being conditioned correctly, Rennie has done something wrong or Pearson shouldn't have risked someone who then got injured, then the point on the number of injuries is meaningless. As there seems to be very valid reasons why the huge majority of our injured list are injured - through contact.

Add in the fact he made a point of saying they had longer breaks than other teams to try and make a point of why he went with Pearson too, and yet Fleming told us yesterday that these longer breaks is something they have always done, so why not sack them back then?

Maybe, just maybe this is the way to handle players with the way they play? I simply don't know, but I would trust a bloke who is highly thought of, rather than a bloke who has simply been told "others don't do it that way". It seems to me he has heard that from one/some others, and came to the conclusion that was the reason why we had all the injuries, without actually looking or asking the questions why we had all the injuries.