headhunter

4 minutes ago, Midlands Robin said:

Can't help notice the number of empty seats tonight. Probably the jammed fixture list hitting people's pockets 

11 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Haven’t listened yet.

Was there talk of the lost revenues from less games, and changes to player wage / contract expectations as a result?

I’d remove extra-time in replays.

I would think about the calendar and whether you could make each month(ish) contain similar amounts of midweek games, so you don’t get heavy blocks of Sat / Tues.

 

re. lost revenues, didn't comment too much on that. Back in the day, what is now the Championship was a 22 team division which if ever replicated would see the loss of 2 home games compared to now. Recently we've been getting c6000 pay on the day so all other things being equal you are losing 12k home fans and, say, 5k away followers which I calculate as c£350k loss revenue. As far as Season Tickets are concerned to charge the same for less games would be a likely and unpopular move by the club and equivalent to a 8.7% increase - shrinkflation I think they call it and I drew the parallel by being charged the same for a smaller digestive biscuit.!! 

To go from Championship to Prem and "lose" 4 home games is more than mitigated by being able to charge substantially more.

We agreed removing extra time and even replays would be beneficial if the view is that the players are being worked too hard.

16 hours ago, frenchred said:

In support of your pod it's still the best one around even though it's lost a bit of snap and gusto against those in power

Why you've joined up with TalkSport I'll never know or understand, I thought your selling point was your independence!

The 2 new recruits are excellent and render the little obnoxious one irrelevant and not needed, get rid of him now and you'd be better off (and I've supported him up to now). Perhaps use Dave Fevs in his place

Revert back to your punchy, relevant selves instead of the continual sucking up to Manning and you'd be back to being even better!

Even I've detected a little too much "support" for the regime coming out of Ian's mouth!

Being part of Talksport Fan Network has absolutely no impact on our independence.

15 hours ago, Engvall’s Splinter said:

As much as Ian comes across as a right nause, I actually love how cringey some of his suggestions/responses are despite finding them infuriating. Makes for a good pod however has done nothing for my frown lines. 

This is the thing with Ian - he courts as much loathing as he does acceptance that he has some decent stuff to say.

It is not what he says but how he says it - rudeness / belligerent delivery. I am committed to calling him out more rather than appease his excesses - I'm prepared for a Piers Morgan type storm off!! 

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

The one thing for me that is a bare minimum is for the players to put a shift in. I'm quite picky about this because as a Bristol City fan I've watched hundreds of our players not put shifts in over the years.

Performances will always go up and down for a variety of reasons but putting a shift in and working hard should always be basic. That's what I was disappointed with against Leeds. 

 

 

 

Wholeheartedly agree with this.

Leeds clearly had more skill than us but we lacked any intensity to our game to knock them off their stride

Last season and before I would argue that what Luton lack in skill they more than make up for in energy, intensity, commitment and a game plan

4 hours ago, bearded_red said:

I’m about as unimpressed with the club at the moment as it’s possible to be, but we really don’t need to worry about relegation.

The only way we get relegated is if everyone gets so bored that we actually fail to turn up for any of the rest of our games this season and keep forfeiting.

Not a good look though to finish 17th-19th though is it and unless there's a marked improvement in form that's where we could finish?

57 minutes ago, frenchred said:

Thanks, now run along and support your relative 

Uncalled for comment 

11 minutes ago, Tim Monaghan said:

Mate, why don’t you go on? I’d genuinely like to hear your thoughts against Ian’s. Ask @headhunter would you have @W-S-M Seagull on the pod? 

Of course I would. DM me.

15 hours ago, GrahamC said:

So you reckon QPR, 6 wins from 29 games are going to make up a 13 point gap & vastly inferior goal difference in their last 17 games?

Or Sheffield Wednesday? 15 points behind & an even worse goal difference?

Rotherham? 19 points behind & a worse goal difference still?

Want a £100 bet on it? Huddersfield (11 points behind, also a worse goal difference than us) won’t catch us, either.

Behave.

That's fair enough Graham but on current form, unless there's an improvement, we're on course for a 16th-19th finish which is below the majority (?) view of 10th-12th reflecting a modicum of success this campaign. 

Will the owner, JL & BT fess up to perhaps getting it wrong in their assessment of NP not getting the most out of a "top 6" squad? I think not!

35 minutes ago, Leabrook said:

Disagree with Ian that the Boro game is more important than Forest. We can’t go up or down so let’s try to beat Forest and play Man United at home. More cash in the coffers and a potential giant killing.  We aren’t going to get the two points per game needed to finish in the play offs and it’s impossible to get down so how is the Boro game more important? It’s one league game 

We need to get in the habit of winning league games.

At current PPG we'll struggle to reach last season's points tally which points towards a 14th - 17th final placing 

26 minutes ago, Engvall’s Splinter said:

Whilst I haven’t listened to the POD I can actually understand this. 
 

I don’t believe Conway will fulfill his potential here. We currently are not playing to his strengths; both style and set up. As and when he departs, hopefully he selects the right club that will suit him, and it’ll see him go up a number of levels. Fingers crossed we get top dollar though. 

What is top dollar in your view come summer when he has just 12 months left on his contract?

BTW, @frenchred & @REDOXO , "critical" for you enough this episode??

DaveP, Mark, Ian & The Suttons debate a disappointing night at Ashton Gate.

One can't ignore the fact that Leeds were technically far superior to us but the crowd had the right to expect more than the leaden-footed showing dished up by the players who looked a pale shadow of the side that competed against West Ham & Forest. That being said, Leeds looked better all round than both of them.

This is a link to a live podcast recording at 09.00 Saturday and viewable thereafter as well as being on Spotify etc.

@cidercity1987 "Dave , great host and a laugh a minute on the football knowledge"  - never professed to be all knowing on football knowledge! I have a life outside of FBC

@frenchred " it's just another 3piap now, and they used to ridicule that one! - I hope not and don't believe we have.

@REDOXO "FBC is as edgy as a Tesco add"  [I think you mean ad !] - ouch, that hurts!

I see it like this, when we win yet attempt to be objectively critical we are accused by some of being moaners and when we lose or like Tuesday take a seemingly balanced view we're deemed as being "soft" - can never please all of the people all of the time.

I know most seem to view Ian Gay as a complete cockwomble but he stuck to his guns on transfer activity and would appear to be vindicated.

Surprised we haven't got any stick yet for being part of the TalkSport fan network which for some seems as popular as The Sun is on Merseyside; we have a national ad break at the start and in the middle as you may have noticed if you're a listener; have noticed a fair number now seem to have started watching the recording on You Tube

Ian, Mark, Neil & DaveP debate a game which was a case of  "after the Lord Mayor's show" in comparison with the sparkling FA Cup win over West Ham.

There was to be no repeat of the 4-1 hammering of the Hornets on Boxing Day. They were a lot more enterprising than some sides seen at home this season but for all their neat play MOL in goal was rarely threatened.

Nice for Twine to score on his debut but we still have a problem at that end of the pitch

Ian, Mark, Neil & DaveP debate a game which was a case of  "after the Lord Mayor's show" in comparison with the sparkling FA Cup win over West Ham.

There was to be no repeat of the 4-1 hammering of the Hornets on Boxing Day. They were a lot more enterprising than some sides seen at home this season but for all their neat play MOL in goal was rarely threatened.

Nice for Twine to score on his debut but we still have a problem at that end of the pitch

2 hours ago, Bar BS3 said:

If we match last seasons totals without Alex Scott at our disposal, that wouldn't be the worst thing in the world, in an arguably tougher division than last seasons was.

It took NP 2.5 years to get to where we were - it may be harsh to expect overnight improvement on his record without a summer window or pre-season to work on things.

I think with how we are trying to play now, Skyes & Naismith are being sorely missed.

I like the addition of Twine & hope that Sykes' running will compliment him - Likewise, having Atkinson available for Twines set pieces would be a huge boost aswell.

I

 

Sykes is a starter for me but where does Naismith now fit in a first X1?

If you are labelling Atkinson as a starter when fit then what is your best picks line up and in what formation [accepting that the matchday squad is 20 which offers plenty of scope for change]?

3 minutes ago, cidercity1987 said:

Hey, how do you choose your guests? It's your POD (without be the same without you) and Ian/Mark etc are lucky to be on it. Be nice to have other contributors from time to time? Like Jerseybean lets say with his history

This is an open invitation from me now right here for anyone who'd like to be a contributor to just DM me.

Regarding Ian and related comments from @2015 , @frenchred , @Bernard Lerring , @TomThumb84 , @luke_bristol , @The turtle , YES Ian did cross the line in his rudeness towards Mark in the latter stages of the podcast and I will have a quiet word.

As you know, we do a pod after every game and I've never had a late withdrawal from Ian in the 200+ episodes we've done so on that basis he's become a permanent fixture. It is  often not what Ian says but how he says it. His delivery, I acknowledge, often comes over as superior, belligerent, arrogant, aggressive or similar adjectives you might choose to describe him but for all his detractors there are many who comment that he doesn't talk *hit all the time!

He is like Piers Morgan in that he generates reaction and personally I wouldn't want to lose him to a podcast equivalent of GB News 

14 minutes ago, johnbytheriver said:

great show as usual guys but sorry Dave you can't do it like Talksport(your boys took one hell of a beating)anyone remember how long ago the original commentary  was?  

 

 

You have to go back to 1981 for the "original" when Norway beat England 2-1. Hardly a "helluva beating" but part of commentator folklore!!

Here's the original: 

A night to remember at Ashton Gate!

Match review episode also on Spotify etc.

DaveP, Mark & Ian try to take some positives from a performance that was in stark contrast to that which City produced at the London Stadium last weekend.

Once again missed chances early on proved to be City's undoing with under pressure Ryan Lowe pulling a rabbit out the hat and probably saved his job with a triple half time substitution which caught City out big time. Will Keane grabbed two goals, the first after a rare MOL error.

For the final 20 minutes one could only describe City's performance as ragged and they will have to do a lot better on Tuesday if that game isn't to end in disappointment against David Moyes depleted side.

We also talk transfers - the window is half complete, will there be a flurry of activity in the next two weeks? 

7 hours ago, Fuber said:

 

you don't tend to sack a well-liked manager in the middle of an injury crisis due to a difference of opinion in a professional setting and replace him with a novice coach with 24 months managerial experience for a large compensation package, with further spending to sack incumbent coaches spending more to replace them.... when the formers contract ended in 8 months anyway.

This is only going to all get worse due to the way in which NP was sacked. Its lose lose for the board as, if they back Manning now, others such as myself will question as to why the predecessor didn't get backed. The fact they also feel the need to back him rubbishes 'the squad is good enough' argument.

It's just flagrant egotism, cronysim, and incompetence. Utter delusion.

A bit of context here - people were calling for Nige's head 8 months before he left; the pro-Nige feeling is driven by deep rooted antipathy towards the owners for not spending, say, no more than another £5-£7 million of the Scott fee.

In my day job over the years I've seen several "family" companies bring in outsiders to turn their business around and in the majority of cases it ends in tears. They [SL/JL] simply didn't like Nige as he told them a few home truths!!

8 hours ago, maxjak said:

I honestly have not heard the Joe interview....I will seek it out, is that The Forever podcast?  I was there when JR scored all 4 against M'boro, always loved the guy.

Here is a link to the Joe Royle interview that @Davefevs referred to: https://foreverbristolcity.podbean.com/e/in-conversation-with-joe-royle/ 

We [FBC] have done quite a few one-to-one interviews including Alan Dicks & Gary Shelton to name just two. Here are links to their interviews:

https://foreverbristolcity.podbean.com/e/in-conversation-with-former-city-manager-alan-dicks/

https://foreverbristolcity.podbean.com/e/in-conversation-with-gary-shelton-89-94-150-apps-24-goals/

1 hour ago, Milton Red said:

Match originally scheduled for 4th January 1969 but was postponed and played on 30th January 1969.

Match result: West Ham United 3 - 2 Bristol City

Martin Peters (2) and Geoff Hurst scored for the Hammers. 

Assuming these guys had the fitness levels of the players today, which they didn't, then based on ability and watching every week at that time then Merrick would be a starter in defence, Kellard in midfield and a Galley / Garland partnership up front.

38 minutes ago, spudski said:

I could see Bell in a 433. 

Bell, Conway, Wells/Sykes

TGH James Knight

Pring Naismith Vyner Tanner

No place for Dickie, shame on you

On the basis of starting your best X1 when all fit means a back three of Vyner, Dickie, Atkinson.

Wing backs Sykes & Pring.

Knight,TGH, McCrorie in middle

Conway & Wells up top.

Naismith does not make my starting line up.

Re. signings, if the Irish lad Murphy is one for the future, any additions have to be better than what we have which means Knight level fees, i.e. £1.5-£2M 

9 hours ago, One Team said:

Some challenging questions rather than blowing smoke would be good.

Of course, never confuse us with somebody else!

19 hours ago, George Rs said:

Does that suggest we got the 9.5m upfront? 
 

Would make a lot of sense as I thought he’d go a for a couple million more but if it was paid largely upfront that would’ve changed things.

The full value of the sale, like for any business, is taken credit for in the year the transaction takes place. If the fee is paid in instalments each one is offset against the balance owing at the end of each financial period.

The full Scott fee of £25M will be in the accounts for 23/24. It is irrelevant that they may be paying in instalments of £6.25M over four years. That said the £25M could be a "total" sum with elements triggered by certain events, for example, let's say the base fee was £18M but £4M on achieving 40 appearances and £3M when he reaches 80 appearances then in those circumstances £4M would be triggered some time in 24/25 and therefore in that years accounts and similarly £3M in 25/26.

Highly likely if Scott performs he won't be at Bournemouth in 25/26 so highly likely that years accounts would have the balance of the original fee [assuming he hadn't got to 80 appearances] plus any sell-on clause.

@Davefevs will correct me if any of these assumptions are incorrect