Rich

If I'm not mistaken, people are calling for Pearson to be sacked because this is "his team" and he assembled the squad, even to the point where they're saying Weiman and Baker are his players, they were available and cheaper so re-signed once fitness was proven. Today we played with only "one" of Pearson's players in the team that represented BCFC, that was Tanner. His other players, James, King and Atkinson were unavailable, Simpson is there for cover and possible behind the scenes influence, as is King. So how the hell is this Pearson's team? We have a gutless collection of overpaid underachievers, left over from the previous two administrations making up the nucleus of this squad, starting from the pussy in goal and right through the team. They've proven to be failures before and are still failing now. I don't think any one of Pearson's signings, even the ones re-signed, could be described as such, as for the majority of them, spineless, molly cuddled poor footballers that I can't wait to see the back of.

Definite downturn after his replacement. Though his performances and effectiveness have been diminishing over recent games. Makes me wonder if he's been carrying an injury and we had nobody available to replace him, we certainly are thin on the ground regarding options for selection. That is, unless you select O'Dowda and Palmer as the stalwarts of the team, along with a few more inexperienced players from the development squad.

I think the O P is correct, our strength in depth is too reliant on young inexperienced players. To go with a smaller squad is proving at this moment to be costing us dearly. We really could do with a fit Joe Williams and Semenyo. Just having those two would make a massive difference, if only they could get fit. Our defence is made up of players making the step up to this level, which generally they are doing ok but, the occasional lapses are costing us possession, goals, points and ultimately putting pressure on the other team members. We have a totally ineffective strike force, with one immobile old head, one ballet dancer and one eager to impress but, less effective due to exertions around the pitch that his partners could do with a little of. We are effectively using every available player in attack. Short of using an untried player like Palmer or yet another youngster, there is no other choice. Our midfield is decimated and easily bullied, we are in desperate need of some old fashioned grit and determination, which we seemed to have early in the season. As the season has progressed, this has proven to be just not enough and our fitter faster squad is still not big enough to compete with virtually every team in this division physically. In terms of the players fitness, this is purely down to the clubs recruitment policy. On the whole, we bring in decent footballers but it seems, they are frequently recovering from or have had, long term injuries in their past or, have a deficiency in their size. This results in us constantly rotating a mediocre squad or, being without this or that player for a good part of the season. It's because we're always going for the cheaper option, due to financial restraints, even when there was no FFP. I remember GT asking SL if we could have matched the wages offered for Gray, when he opted to join Burnley instead of us. SL insisted we could have matched their offer. GT never asked if we did, I suspect we never. It was plainly obvious tonight that although we had lots of possession and moved the ball quite well without being much of a goal threat, in the important areas, Birmingham had the benefit of strong mobile players who basically brushed our attempts to attack and defend, to one side, as if they weren't there.

Glad you both had a day to remember. It's something you'll both cherish forever.

Ok, I'll bite. Hampshire Red. You have no conception of what has gone on and is still going on at BCFC. This experienced manager has been brought into the club to oversee and change what has been going wrong for years. He inherited a squad of players that seemed to be underachieving, for whatever reason. Be that attitude, overpaid and overvalued, injury prone and with a mentality of not too worried if we get beaten. For the first part of his tenure he presided over a squad of walking wounded or, players that didn't want to get injured, for fear of ruining their chance of earning a contract elsewhere. Then we had the close season, where he had to sort the wheat from the chaff as best he could while reducing the wage bill at the same time, by getting rid of some players he just maybe might have wanted to keep. He brought in tried and trusted players with the likes of James King and Simpson, some for their playing ability and some for their influence in the dressing room and on the training ground. He re signed two existing previously injured players, hoping that his new medical man would improve their ability to contribute more regularly, I believe this has worked so far. The aforementioned medical/fitness man has I believe improved the overall fitness of the squad. Though we are still suffering at this moment with various problems which must give selection and continuity of performance problems for the manager. He also brought in Two young inexperienced players at this level and utilised several other players who were previously performing at 3rd and 4th tier football, all have made serious advances within and to the team. I refer to Atkinson, Tanner, Pring and to a lesser degree Bakinson. Add to that the use of other young inexperienced players this and last term and anyone bar the blind or those with an agenda against Pearson would have to agree that this has been and will continue to be a very difficult job, that only an experienced person could undertake. I have to say Hampshire Red that, you must rank as one of the most uneducated outspoken follower of a football club that I have ever experienced. Until you know anything about the game and it's management, I'd suggest you keep your mean minded, ill informed opinions to yourself. And let the rest of us idiots have a rest from the Pearson out posts. On a side note, it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if SL decided after a couple of years of sorting the basics of the club out, that he'd ditch Pearson and employ yet another "young hungry" coach, that he believes will offer his best chance of success, for fear of being shown up by the experienced football man.

Yes, thanks, I should have read further into the report. So the figure for those having to pay for prescriptions in England at 60%, is even higher and, more waited in favour of the Welsh population, not that I begrudge them it . Just wish we had the same spending on us this side of the bridge.

When I googled "South Bristol Pool" the information giving the size was listed. Unfortunately, that information referred to the Jubilee pool, not the One at the Hengrove Sports centre, which I thought was called the South Bristol Pool, as that is what it was called initially. Jubilee has always been known as that.

Sorry, I'm not understanding your reference to the Tropicana.

You're correct. I looked up South Bristol pool and it gave the figures as 30 Metres long. That was the council site and if I was being cynical, I'd say it's a way of not referring to it's proper name of, Jubilee Swimming pool.

Sorry, I thought that went without saying, as London and the south east produces something like 75% of the country's income.

The quote was: "Every man woman and child in Wales receives an additional £5,200 per annum under the Barnett Formula which they can splurge on whatever they want, not necessarily anything they need. Scots receive about twice that" That someone earlier was BTRFTG, who you directed the question to. It actually states "under the Barnett Formula". This means that the extra £5200 per person is paid to the Welsh government and not to Joe public, they then use it so say, for the benefit of Joe public. I've done a little looking into this and found that the benefits Welsh Joe public receive are, free prescriptions for anyone. In England, although 90% get this free, the other 10% have to pay, even if they have a chronic illness and struggle to keep a roof over their head and feed and clothe their children. Free bus travel for over 60's. In England we currently have to wait seven years longer. A subsidised council owned bus service. The infrastructure invested in, to provide facilities for Joe public to use, such as the existing Arena, plus the New arena being built. The electrification of the valley rail network, with new lines being built across Cardiff and to the Cardiff Bay, the money for this upgrading and new lines, is coming from the Welsh budget and the UK government £125m. Link: South Wales Metro, United Kingdom (railway-technology.com). They've had massive investment compared to this region. In reality, I think it's more to do with what we don't get, or haven't got. There is also a disparity within England, due to that same Barnet formula, felt more probably in this region, due to our proximity to Wales. Other cities close to both Wales and Scotland also receive healthy subsidies due to that same formula, so maybe don't suffer the same inequalities as Bristol does. Bristol is I believe, the only core city with a net contribution towards the UK economy. All other core cities receive more than they pay in from central government grants. Perhaps this is part of the reason they all have decent arenas', good transport systems, good sporting facilities. The less well off within our area, who maybe can't afford to travel around various other parts of the country, are denied access to top quality performing artists, as a result, and those that can afford to travel, have to pay more and are inconvenienced.

Confident in that are you? At least they have an arena. Their new arena is planned for Cardiff Bay, within 1000 metres of the central train station, hardly nowhere near. Our planned arena, that hasn't had a stitch of work carried out on it, is about 6 miles from the centre of Bristol. Likewise the one planned as a dual use tiny in comparison arena at AG, is two miles away from central Bristol. And I'd only bet on the AG one actually happening.

Sadly, that makes it a more expensive place to live, for our poorer residents.

I agree that we are successful but, we still have no Arena, we still have no transport system, we still have no athletics stadium, we still have no Olympic sized pool. I doubt any cities we currently compete with for events suffer with this lack of infrastructure funding. When I say compete, I meant to say, we think about it, then don't bother, as we can't compete. Thank goodness for the entrepreneurs' of Bristol, the likes of Steve Lansdown and Wael Al Qadi, who've put their money where their mouth is to provide great facilities/tents for the city's football clubs.

This smacks of delay followed by cancellation. The government are in dire need of funding for various projects and just to keep the country running. No doubt there will be some sort of announcement referring to the environmental impact against the possible advantages of the reopening. They'll site projected lower use due to the effects of the pandemic, against increased traffic flow to the P&R aspects of the new line, after asking for another feasibility study. This has been happening to the greater Bristol area for as long as I can remember. It matters not which political party is in power. They know we'll just put up and, shut up. The funding was withdrawn for our metro by Dawn Primarolo in the nineties, after Bristol's Labour council argued the toss with the Lib Dem South Glos council over the termination of the line. Anything that has been built in Bristol has nearly always been from private funding, or by the council and the ratepayers themselves. Bristol had to fund the Royal Portbury dock with no government aid. Nissan wanted to build their car plant at Royal Portbury, the then Labour government refused to licence it, instead offering financial inducements to locate it in Sunderland. We've had to compete with decades of financial bribery offered to firms to locate/relocate to south Wales, with quite a few leaving Bristol to subsidize their profits. Our centre for the performing arts on the Harbourside was granted funding of £100m, only for it to be taken away and given to the Covent Garden Opera house. The very successful Commonwealth Museum was taken from Bristol at TM and taken to London. We receieve far less funding than any core city and most other Cities and towns in the UK, due to the "Barnet formula". Quite frankly, after spending a day in Cardiff recently, which the BBC chose to relocate the long standing successful TV programme "casualty", from Bristol and learning that they're planning "another" Arena on top of the one they've already got, I can honestly say I'm totally pissed off with it. If we have a Labour council, we get a Conservative government and vice versa, who then tend to irritate central government, so we tend to never get the rewards that other cities do. And I really believe it's because we don't fight hard enough or, shout loud enough, similar traits could be aimed at the supporters of football in the city.

Given that we have a relatively small squad, with some players injured or out of favour, what team could Pearson have selected that would have enabled us to compete with Bournemouth yesterday? We have a squad of 26, take off the keeper, the injured in Semenyo, Cundy, Atkinson, Massengo. Then there's the 2 fullbacks that are keeping Dasilva and Simpson out. Then players that are really too young and inexperienced to face that sort of opposition, the likes of Janneh, Bell, Scott. Add in those currently out of favour, like Wells, Bakinson, Vyner and Palmer, because they've really not provided enough to be selected consistently and what are we left with? The answer, the team selected yesterday, with the out of favour players making the subs bench along with the keeper. The only difference for me yesterday, would have been to have Dasilva wide left instead of O'Dowda but, that's based on hindsight. I think Pearson's hands are tied to a certain extent at the moment and, he had little choice except to go with his tried and tested players and formation. It just happened that Bournemouth were mobile and slick, as well as tenacious in winning the ball back when we did eventually get it. Especially compared to our ageing midfield, that also experienced bad luck, with the out of position Williams being forced off. Our full backs have been playing 3rd/4th tier football and are still coming to terms with the pace and movement, they got hammered yesterday with little protection from those in front and those inside of them. I'm sure some would argue that Palmer, Scott and Wells should start, though I think we'd have been even more poorly organised and focused had that happened. Bournemouth were just too quick of mind and foot for our lads yesterday and our manager is trying to hold the club together with what he has available, cut him some slack and get behind the team. We must be patient and support the club during this tough time, I know it's frustrating but, get on the managers and players backs and, you will knock the major thing going for us, which has been sadly missing for five years. That's team spirit and, the desire to succeed while helping each other, let's nurture it and help the younger players get better, knocking them won't help in the slightest.

Of course, if someone were to go into the site, they'd find the email addresses. They could then tell him what they thought of his plan for Sainsbury's

Not Mr Bean. Not Mr Bean. He is the meanest centre half you've ever seen. Not Mr Bean. Not Mr Bean. Rob Atkinson, is not Mr Bean. Sung to the tune of Shaun the Sheep.

I thought this was interesting in the statement made. To the best of my knowledge none of the current Board, apart from the President and his brother, own any shares and none of them live in the Bristol area Does the brother still have shares? If not in the football club, perhaps Dwayne Sports or the company owning the Colony. Thought I read somewhere he still had a part involvement.

Are you a school teacher? I feel like my post has been dissected and marked accordingly. Your first response questions whether the football has been turgid. This is obviously a matter of opinion, I believe that for the majority of Lee Johnson reign, he set up to still be in the game for 60 minutes and then try and affect it with an inspired substitution. If it worked great and we only remember the last period of the game, walking away happy. There were exceptions, WBA springs to mind but generally it was dull as dishwater, in mine and I believe the majority of peoples opinion. It's taking a long time to correct that situation Second response, seems to be slightly grey, as in, I don't know what your "possibly" refers to. Third response about the noise travelling from the E E. Without meaning to be patronising, sound travels in waves, like water. If there is an object in it's way, it will bounce off of it. The E E roof is somewhat like an umbrella, as such, the noise will hit the roof and bounce back down with obviously some noise travelling directly out from under the roof, it has to escape somewhere. With a flat upwards sloping roof, the noise (sound waves) will hit it and travel further. I remember going in the E E as a youth in the late 60's and through the 70's, it always sounded loud and, I'm certain the players within the box were suitably intimidated by it at corners and free kicks. From other parts of the ground, much less so. I remember looking from the uncovered end and seeing hands clapping in unison (obviously chanting) but very little if any noise. I hate saying this but, The old Tote end with about 300 gasheads in it, was always audible from the uncovered end, due to the way the sound bounced off the roof. The same is said about the Atyeo, as in your reference to Brentford. If the fans and yourself are making noise, you're less likely to hear others, especially those projecting sound in the same direction as you, when adjacent. Believe me, there is no acoustic problem from the Atyeo stand. As for not comparing like for like "either" in the 80s, what's the either for? I didn't realise I had to compare like for like when I posted. I was referring to a sustained period of success and the atmosphere being good during that period, a period we've never experienced before, in the way of two promotions, two Wembley finals and a league cup semi final , within a six year period. We've had similar periods of poor atmosphere coinciding with poor results on many occasions, regardless of the level we were playing at. I also didn't realise I had to mention about enforcing all seater stadia with S C holders. I was referring initially to when the Atyeo was first opened and the club decided to have allocated seating, I don't think it was compulsory, not sure it is now, though I might be wrong. I was merely suggesting a way, that in my opinion would improve the atmosphere, by allowing the more fervent supporters to gather centrally and, help our team, by creating a better vibe. Currently, the singing section is located in a corner of the ground, separated by a wall between supporters in the Dolman, a gangway adjacent to the SS, a gangway and vomitories within the section and a large structure meaning supporters stand either side of it. In fact, there could not be a more divisive position for the singing section, in my opinion, most probably deliberate. Fair play to them though, as they still make themselves heard, despite the obstacles. Better more exciting football, will improve the atmosphere, failing that, better results.

Shame you can't go back to 1998 when company was formed. The then chairman definitely said, something along the lines of, this is a great deal for Bristol Rovers. We've bought a 50% share in £6m worth of real estate. The deal was £2m for that share, surely under valued within the books. Closely followed by the other 50% for £10k when the other party surprisingly filed for bankruptcy within five months of that deal taking place and the ink still wet.

In my experience they sing songs at rugger about dicky dido's and fairy lights. I was more referring to behavioral patterns. Where the robust working class singers would also be a bit less well behaved and possibly as a result, putting off people that will pay a little more for a nicer environment to bring their wives, sisters, daughters and grandchildren.

There are so many reasons for the supposed lack of atmosphere especially since the redevelopment. 1. The turgid football we've had to endure for home games since promotion back. three sided ground in the first season back followed by safety first and try to snatch it up until this season, playing like an away team and constantly under threat of conceding. Very few games have been inspirational to lift the atmosphere, with a few exceptions. 2. The hirarchy at this club don't really want a singing section, they want middle income earners that pay top dollar and behave themselves. That's why the singing were shunted from pillar to post, with no area in the new Atyeo, then to one side, then the EE then to the other side, then one end of the Williams and so on, ending up slotted into the corner where they can be policed/viewed, however you want it. The noise won't naturally make others join in to the Dolman side because it's separated by a wall and there's a gap with gangway at the other side. 3. The people of Bristol are reactive, as opposed to proactive due to their more reserved nature. We've always been the same, outsung by more fervent supporters from anywhere North and East of Gloucester, as well as Wales and Portsmouth. There have been notable exceptions but generally we're more reserved. 4. Many won't like this next one but, the best noise is created when there is a flat sloping upwards roof. Unlike the old East End, which had a roof which made any noise stay mostly within the area of the East End. Very loud when you're in it but, hardly audible from half way up the pitch. 5. Away fans make more noise because they're the more fanatical supporters that can be bothered to follow their team around the country. The same applies to our fans at away grounds. 6. The argument for the Atyeo being poor acoustics has been blown out of the water by the away support proving it can be noisy. The problem we had was because of No;2, we had allocated seating in the Atyeo and as such a dispersed group of singers, much like our trip to Wembley against Hull, when everyone was dispersed and Hull decided to group their singers in the centre section. Our admin decided to let ticket master decide who sat where. Decisions are taken purely on finance and not what helps the team. 7. In my opinion, we need to have the whole of the South Stand allocated for singers, or at least the centre sections, allowing and encouraging those adjacent to join in when suitably aroused, as used to happen occasionally in the East End. What a sight and noise that was when it sometimes spread around the corner and into the enclosure. 8. So in short, remove allocated seating in the South Stand, improve the football and take off the reserved shackles around our throats. It really would help if we had a little sustained success, like that in the 80's after 1982. Something to make us really proud and be able to pump our chests up.

How long has this young lady been Ranking the league two fan?

"IF" There's a difference to "Did", as in repeat offence.