TheReds

4 hours ago, Rob said:

This whole conversation with this hot air person reminds me of arguing with my friend Steven at school, who was an unfortunately a Sag. However much you pointed out the obvious about City vs them, it never really sank in to his small gas filled brain.

Lost touch with him years ago. Wonder why

His surname wasn't Phillips was it....

He was on here not long ago, and sounds just like your old friend.

1 hour ago, Dredd said:

Are we soulless because we have a roof and actual seats? Someone willing to put their hand in the pocket so we don't turn into an embarrassment? Or are you just horrendously jealous. 

Nailed it.

20 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

Also if they went up, I dont think they would be allowed to play at the mem as it doesn't meet championship standards

Aren't you forgetting something, it must surely be finished by then.... 

 

8 hours ago, Midlands Robin said:

Oh no, Barton's no longer talking to the Post. 

How will Saggy fans get their fix of his wisdom now? 

If only he offered some sort of subscription service on his Twitter they could sign up to for exclusive content. That would fill the void from his lack of communication in the local press wouldn't it? 

Wait a minute....... 

And they will lap it all up and then blame the Post on why people have to pay poor old Joey for information on their club. 

I cannot believe what he is doing hasn't been stopped by their club, but they seem so scared of him that he does whatever he wants. Why are they not up in arms about this? If they weren't so tinpot this would make National news (or a few more headlines) with a manager blatantly ripping off its own fans. But as usual they just all take it and say nothing.

2 minutes ago, BS3 Ark at Ee said:

Joeys at it again......

Poor old Joey and poor old Rovers - always the victims.
 

37 minutes ago, cidercity1987 said:

Bunch of sadacts. The point of the video doesn't work when you're going down the ladder 

You need to be going up the ladder for that to work:

 

Well worth a listen. Cheers

22 minutes ago, Port Said Red said:

@Hot Airprobably thinks that makes him a "vulture capitalist" too. He seems to equate the term to anyone who makes money.

Wasn't his mob circling around Ashton Gate like "vultures" back in 82 hoping nobody would help us out, so they could steal another ground?

3 minutes ago, Hot Air said:

That's a very polite way of saying that you agree that BROS were sh*te. I like it - unusually classy for a City fan.

I expect millions will think they were sh*te, simply because it just wasn't their type of music. Being a City fan or a Rovers fan thinking the same thing about a band an ex Chairman played the drums for really means the square route of eff all. 

Do you like every single singer, band who has sold millions of records. CDs, downloads etc?

Nice of you to admit we WERE a bit "tinpot" in your eyes 30 years ago, whereas your own poor old Rovers have never got away from that tag, and now hated by even more people across the Country due to your clubs morals and values.

Anyway, how is the planning going for the new megastand (with a concourse), maybe you can setup your promotional exhibition stand in there too and add your excellent flag, you must be so prowed.

 

10 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

Happens everywhere.

I remember when Wolves scored a late winner at AG in a top table game and their manager had been sent off (Portugeezer, can't remember his name) and went nuts in the directors area. He got a lot of stick and told to tone it down. It was a top of the table game and he was entitled to "explode" - and he did. 

Nuno Santo.

Funny you mention that on here, my Rovers mate thought it was absolutely superb and couldn't have liked it any more, yet he was virtually crying that the Plymouth manager made a gesture towards his lot and he was fuelled with rage about it.  

7 minutes ago, Top Robin said:

he has been met with a tirade of criticism and abuse from some

Seriously? 

The bar must have seriously been moved down if this thread is classed as a "tirade of criticism and abuse". Abuse ffs.

30 minutes ago, Magger1 said:

Again REDS I’m not privy to the sort of information that points me in the direction of players available or a what price but that’s the sort of reply I’d expect from a doughnut on here 

Ah resort to the old insults. You haven't made a good point yet, and have even been disingenuous with the stats of one shot against Millwall, I'm sure it was an honest mistake.

You are the one asking Lansdown to loosen the purse strings not me. I am sure you have some sort idea who you want and at what cost, and what they would bring to the team, or you are just asking a stupid question in the first place. You don't need to be privy to any information.

I guess you'd be happy with a 50k purchase from non league as long as it's a big man? If not, then who would you go after? It really is just a straightforward question.
 

5 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Yep, opposition style comes into too…Millwall had the 5th best defence (goals conceded) last season.  They are a tough nut to crack.

It seems to be a pointless task on here sometimes pointing out reality and facts..

Again @Magger1 who should we go for and how much should we spend?

15 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

And this is the point some posters refuse to acknowledge,

Selling players for offers too good to turn down will always happen, the key is sucession planning

And that's what I see the club putting in place, hence the production line from the academy in recent years

This. 10000%

8 hours ago, Magger1 said:

Anyway what ever I’m sure players chosen will give us 100%  commitment and let’s look forward to more shots than we’ve had in our first 2 games in league (3) and a bit more of that pace and skill that Pearson loves to see ( and us )

We had 14 shots on Saturday? Millwall setup very defensively so we done more than ok against them imo, Preston done a good job on us and to me it wasn't the strikers fault we didn't have more shots. 

So who do you want us to go for, and how much should we spend?

32 minutes ago, Magger1 said:

Mr lansdown it’s time you loosened the purse strings and allowed for a major signing up front,a forward who can hold the ball up and bring players in , a strong mobile forward who is a threat to other teams , we are one injury or suspension away from playing with a makeshift front line , poor Sam bell isn’t strong enough for the front line , Nahki wells get withdrawn after 60 minutes whatever he does ? We haven’t had a striker since big Dave so come on speculate to accumulate,Luton town did ok with a big man up top 

Who do you want him to go and get?

32 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

…Cornick is the only player who has been on the pitch for both goals and not on the pitch when we’ve conceded!

So an early contender for player of the season then.

3 minutes ago, Super said:

Maybe because he was dreadful last week in fairness. I still don't see him as a right sided player. Just my opinion

My sarcastic point was to point out how many who said he was awful last week (despite his throw in leading to our goal) have said he was decent today? It's like a deep routed implanted thought for some posters that simply cannot change no matter what, he has to be terrible every week, if he is decent it's a one off etc etc. Wait until he has a poor game or make some poor decisions and they will be back on like a shot slating the bloke.

One poster who is always negative put a "sigh" next to Cornicks name when he came on, then called one of his plays "comical". I am sure he has gave his in depth analysis post match regarding Cornick.... No, not a peep.

TBF - I don't know how Cornick will turn out long term for us, but he is our player, deserves our support and at least given a fair chance. Some people just don't seem to want to give him that, or quite simply are unable to. They always need someone who they can pick out to slate, probably to try and make themselves feel better.

Anyway, a great 3 points and Cornick done a good job today.

21 minutes ago, Northern Red said:

It's almost as if he's a decent player at this level...

It's almost as if he played in the Championship for a number of years and maybe trying to get used to what Pearson wants from him. 

He was written off after 25 minutes last week. But I am sure the same posters are on praising him today for a bit of balance.

23 minutes ago, Redrascal2 said:

I said use some of the funds to strengthen the team due to the selling of Scott. I never said we can spend what we want . Also I thought that we did not have to sell Scott due to FFP and we could have kept him and still be on the right side.

You did say only this club would not use any of its star players money to strengthen, so my question was how long are you giving this exactly, seeing as he has literally only been gone a few days, and how do you know we won't spend any of it? Does January count if we don't spend in this window? The Scott money will be part of any spend in the next few years I expect as it was that significant.

So in your opinion how much should we spend, on how many players and what positions, what would happily be spent on wages seeing as we have a cap in place and how would it affect FFP in future years?

I never said we had to sell Scott due to FFP, but do you think it is sensible to keep every player under contract who wants to play Prem football and turn down a club record fee? I'd have loved him to stay but surely you just cannot keep players in that situation.

Sorry, the spend what we want comment wasn't specifically aimed at you even if it seemed that way, it was meant just as a general point.

3 minutes ago, Red white and red said:

I forgot everything was bright, shiny and wonderful for city with Lansdown at the helm. 

When you look at a lot of other clubs it is quite wonderful at the moment with our club (of course it could be better), but NP has done an excellent job getting rid of players on high wages and replacing them at a fraction of the cost, along with an academy producing some extremely good talent, then add in the future developments. It actually feels like a club with people in it together

Anyway let's say SL sells in the next month, what exactly are you proposing a new owner does so differently that will get up Prem football and be financially stable? 

 

16 minutes ago, Redrascal2 said:

It is hard to think of a club that would lose it's star player for £25 million and not use some of the funds to strengthen the squad. Only at Bristol City under SL.

When you say we won't use any of the Scott money to strengthen how long are you giving this exactly, because at the moment it's been about 3 days and not 3 years.

Out of interest, how much should he/we spend out of that, on how many players/positions and what are the wages? Who do we get rid of and at what cost? How does it affect FFP in years to come?

Getting 20 million in doesn't simply mean we can just go and spend what we want. I also would be a bit baffled if our owner and manager went out in the press to tell them we have money to spend.

21 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

There is something special about goals that hit the underside of the bar and go in.  Dunno why, but they always seem better to me.

Close but no cigar...

8 minutes ago, glynriley said:

Definitely I can remember a game from that era, where a crowd was met with howls of derision, only for the club to report a larger crowd a few days later, saying there was a “technical issue “ with some of the turnstiles

I honestly think someone, or a few people must have made a fortune out of the club back then. Doubt it was too hard to cover up either.

12 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Yes and no IMO. For part of the 1980s football attendances absolutely plummeted nationwide and it took some while to recover into the 1990s again across the board. I did wonder about it about 20 years ago for some League One games.

Depending on when exactly you're talking about of course.

Late 80s, early 90s at a guess. I will say I may well be wrong on the "nearly full" part as it was that long ago, but you certainly knew when there more or less people in there, and some weeks would give out a lower amount than the game before when there were clearly more people in there.

Attendances were given out that were no way true, as said above by another poster loads of people used to laugh when they were given out (it maybe my mind playing tricks on me but I am sure it used to get a huge laugh). Used to be a bit of a joke of "guess the attendance" behind the dugout with my dad and his mates.