Bristol R*vers dustbin thread

[1960maaan]

28 minutes ago, Cotham Brow Red said:

Cotham / Kingsdown (where I live. I don't actually live on Cotham Brow itself) is very much neutral to both Bristol clubs. Neither red or blue. Purple if you like. In fact your more likely to see students supporting Barca and RealM around here. Another fallacy contrived by our blue neighbours is all of Bristol north of the cut is somehow Gas. And to be balanced not the entirety of south of the river is necessarily city. It's mainly fishponds and east of that plus kingswood, Cadbury heath, etc that is Rovers territory if you like. Just walk around Glossy Rd south of the Anchor when there at home and your more likely to spot way support than that of the blue / white.

I'd dispute that 

[weepywall]

To be fair there away support is not bad considering how many they get at home. The home crowds are abysmal and have always been the same, I can remember them harping on about Don Megsons loyal 6,000 many years ago at Eastville, mind you if you had to watch football at that dump of a ground that they play at now you probably would be keener to go away my subbutteo stadium when I was young was better and probably had bigger crowds. Also you have to take into account that they have only been a league club since last May !!!!

[Donkeeebles]

I can't believe they aren't in the Premier League yet 

[Jack Dawe]

My take on our respective crowds is that there wasn't much in it prior to us getting back into the top flight in 1976, with us always having a few more. You can see this where the Bristol derby was always a few more at our place, or, to put it another way, a few less at their place. Then, we had loads more for a couple of years, not surprisingly, as we entertained Liverpool, Man Utd etc.

Then things returned to normal, and when we were both relegated in 1981, we had a few more loyal fans (9,765) every week than Rovers (5,929).

Then in 82, we were relegated again and Rovers weren't but we had a few more every week (6,511) to their (5,402).

But then, in 83, when Rovers finished 7th in Div 3, and we finished 14th in Div 4, after 3 successive relegations, the most unusual thing happened: more people watched Rovers than us!

Then it was back to normal the following year, with fewer people watching Rovers than us. And it's been like that every year since, with few exceptions. Or, to be more precise, with no exceptions. A few more at our place than their's is how it has been (although they have to go back to the 1960s to see figures like ours over the last 15 years).

Our highest ever average (26,575) is a few more than theirs (24,662). In the 80s, we used to sell out 6000 tickets on the Muller Road (plus a few dotted around other parts of Eastville), they used to be 3500 to 4000 in the Park End (often just the one pen, not both). In the 90s, we both played at Anfield in the cup, and we took a few more than Rovers. And they lost, and we won. Not by much, just a few. And Rovers even had a player called Mephew. But that's another story.

Broadly speaking, there are about as many Rovers diehards as City, with City having a few more, but we have always been able to pull a bigger home crowd. And we can call on a bigger following to Wembley, and a bigger away crowd. By a few. 

That isn't to say that on some days, occasionally, there are a few more Rovers than us. But generally, overall, looking at the bigger picture, there's a few more of us than them. Over a season. On average. That's how averages work!

There's just a few more of us (City) than them (Rovers). Or, to put it another way, there's a few less blue than red. Ho hum. How exciting.

So, to finish, bearing in mind all of the above, the fact that Rovers, in a promotion chasing season, with twice as many wins, and following a home win, took a few more than us, in a relegation fighting season, with half the wins, and following a home thrashing, to Nottingham, bearing all this in mind, it is no wonder, and I don't blame them, for getting all excited and taking the trouble to point out to us, that they took a few more than us. We'd be all excited and pointing this out to them if it was the other way round.

So let us let them have their moment. They are, for them, few and far between.

That's why we call them The Few. The Blue Few. Cos there's a few more of us than them. Or, to put it another way, a few less of them than us. 

I just hope this clears this all up. It might all be about to change, things might be different from now on, but that's how it's been in Bristol up til now. Who knows, perhaps today's news that Rovers took a few more than us to Nottm is an indication that the tide is turning, and things will never be the same around here. But we'll need a few more examples before we can see clear signs of a sea change in support in Bristol, where traditionally, apart from about two seasons in the 50s, and 1982/83, there's always been a few more City than Rovers.

That's my take on it, anyway. Well done Rovers for today, you had the fourth biggest away following in L2 (with just a few fewer than Oxford, Luton and Pompey. But a few more than us last week)! I hope that's fair.

I'm off for a lie down.

Phew!

 

 

 

[Miah Dennehy]

26 minutes ago, Jack Dawe said:

My take on our respective crowds is that there wasn't much in it prior to us getting back into the top flight in 1976, with us always having a few more. You can see this where the Bristol derby was always a few more at our place, or, to put it another way, a few less at their place. Then, we had loads more for a couple of years, not surprisingly, as we entertained Liverpool, Man Utd etc.

Then things returned to normal, and when we were both relegated in 1981, we had a few more loyal fans (9,765) every week than Rovers (5,929).

Then in 82, we were relegated again and Rovers weren't but we had a few more every week (6,511) to their (5,402).

But then, in 83, when Rovers finished 7th in Div 3, and we finished 14th in Div 4, after 3 successive relegations, the most unusual thing happened: more people watched Rovers than us!

Then it was back to normal the following year, with fewer people watching Rovers than us. And it's been like that every year since, with few exceptions. Or, to be more precise, with no exceptions. A few more at our place than their's is how it has been (although they have to go back to the 1960s to see figures like ours over the last 15 years).

Our highest ever average (26,575) is a few more than theirs (24,662). In the 80s, we used to sell out 6000 tickets on the Muller Road (plus a few dotted around other parts of Eastville), they used to be 3500 to 4000 in the Park End (often just the one pen, not both). In the 90s, we both played at Anfield in the cup, and we took a few more than Rovers. And they lost, and we won. Not by much, just a few. And Rovers even had a player called Mephew. But that's another story.

Broadly speaking, there are about as many Rovers diehards as City, with City having a few more, but we have always been able to pull a bigger home crowd. And we can call on a bigger following to Wembley, and a bigger away crowd. By a few. 

That isn't to say that on some days, occasionally, there are a few more Rovers than us. But generally, overall, looking at the bigger picture, there's a few more of us than them. Over a season. On average. That's how averages work!

There's just a few more of us (City) than them (Rovers). Or, to put it another way, there's a few less blue than red. Ho hum. How exciting.

So, to finish, bearing in mind all of the above, the fact that Rovers, in a promotion chasing season, with twice as many wins, and following a home win, took a few more than us, in a relegation fighting season, with half the wins, and following a home thrashing, to Nottingham, bearing all this in mind, it is no wonder, and I don't blame them, for getting all excited and taking the trouble to point out to us, that they took a few more than us. We'd be all excited and pointing this out to them if it was the other way round.

So let us let them have their moment. They are, for them, few and far between.

That's why we call them The Few. The Blue Few. Cos there's a few more of us than them. Or, to put it another way, a few less of them than us. 

I just hope this clears this all up. It might all be about to change, things might be different from now on, but that's how it's been in Bristol up til now. Who knows, perhaps today's news that Rovers took a few more than us to Nottm is an indication that the tide is turning, and things will never be the same around here. But we'll need a few more examples before we can see clear signs of a sea change in support in Bristol, where traditionally, apart from about two seasons in the 50s, and 1982/83, there's always been a few more City than Rovers.

That's my take on it, anyway. Well done Rovers for today, you had the fourth biggest away following in L2 (with just a few fewer than Oxford, Luton and Pompey. But a few more than us last week)! I hope that's fair.

I'm off for a lie down.

Phew!

 

 

 

That's pretty much how I remember things back then. One thing I can't remember is what capacity was at Ashton back then,e.g. I remember there being 26,000 at Eastville for a 0-0 against you on Good Friday in the mid 70's, and I would have been at the Ashton game as well, but would there have been much more than 26,000 there? I'm sure there is a website where you could look it up, but I can't find one. I can't ever remember us getting better crowds on a regular basis, in fact I'm not sure I can ever remember us getting a better crowd as a one off (as in getter a bigger gate than your previous home game if you see what I mean). I have said it before here, but I do think both teams are very well supported for their respective positions , and both teams are capable of taking a large travelling support on certain occasions.

[Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan]

49 minutes ago, Miahdennehy said:

That's pretty much how I remember things back then. One thing I can't remember is what capacity was at Ashton back then,e.g. I remember there being 26,000 at Eastville for a 0-0 against you on Good Friday in the mid 70's, and I would have been at the Ashton game as well, but would there have been much more than 26,000 there? I'm sure there is a website where you could look it up, but I can't find one. I can't ever remember us getting better crowds on a regular basis, in fact I'm not sure I can ever remember us getting a better crowd as a one off (as in getter a bigger gate than your previous home game if you see what I mean). I have said it before here, but I do think both teams are very well supported for their respective positions , and both teams are capable of taking a large travelling support on certain occasions.

I'm sure Ive read somewhere that your crowds were better than ours for most of the 50s. I don't think there's a huge amount in it to be fair. 

I'm never sure if I think that City/Rovers attendances (home and away) are generally good considering the lack of success in Bristol football or both are a bit shit when taking into account to the population of Bristol and surrounding area. Both teams would undoubtedly need 20k+ stadiums in the Premiership. 

The big questions for me are, why are you not in town blowing your winnings on beer and birds?, and does Wael know how loaded you are? I'm thinking about the building costs for the UWE.....won't pay for itself.

Edited March 5, 2016 by Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan

[Smaller than a flea]

I don't think there's much doubt that Rovers attract away attendances on a par with City.  The question is why their home crowds are so much lower.

Clearly being in the Championship City attract more fans.  Rovers average about 7,000 recently.  City about 15,000, but constrained by the rebuild.  I would guess if the ground was complete, and for sake of fairness, City were doing pretty well in the Championship, there would be about 22,000 there. 

If Rovers are in League 1 next season, the crowd would increase to about 8,500 - 9,000, and if (bear with me) they get to the Championship, maybe 11,000, or nearly a sell-out every week at the Mem.  I base my opinion on recent attendances, not those from decades ago.

If the UWE actually gets built (and there's no evidence yet that it will), I would expect Rovers in the Championship to up their crowds from my 11,000 projection to 18,000 or so, which is modest compared with how Brighton did.

There is a gap, but place both teams in the same league with modern stadiums and it's not much.

[Andy082005]

41 minutes ago, Smaller than a flea said:

I don't think there's much doubt that Rovers attract away attendances on a par with City.  The question is why their home crowds are so much lower.

Clearly being in the Championship City attract more fans.  Rovers average about 7,000 recently.  City about 15,000, but constrained by the rebuild.  I would guess if the ground was complete, and for sake of fairness, City were doing pretty well in the Championship, there would be about 22,000 there. 

If Rovers are in League 1 next season, the crowd would increase to about 8,500 - 9,000, and if (bear with me) they get to the Championship, maybe 11,000, or nearly a sell-out every week at the Mem.  I base my opinion on recent attendances, not those from decades ago.

If the UWE actually gets built (and there's no evidence yet that it will), I would expect Rovers in the Championship to up their crowds from my 11,000 projection to 18,000 or so, which is modest compared with how Brighton did.

There is a gap, but place both teams in the same league with modern stadiums and it's not much.

On what basis do you think you will get 8,500-9,000?? 18,000 in the Championship?!?! Haha...

You didn't get close to 8k or 9k that last time you were in League One a few years back

Your clutching at straws at just guessing.  

Yes there is a gap. Take away the two divisions, take away the fact we have a better stadium, better training facilities, more fans, and more money....then yeah...take away all that, and that gaps not that much . 

You plonker 

 

[Guest]

Just to help out with some of the stat arguments:

http://www.footballwebpages.co.uk

Only does 'attendances' but might help remind SGR of their own attendances (both sets of fans I might add).

[Guest]

As to the records at the Mem:

http://www.11v11.com/teams/bristol-rovers/tab/stats/option/attendances/

For the life of me, I can't think what was so significant about the time Mansfield visited 3rd May 2014?

Seventeen, considering that you've stepped forward as the SGR statmeister, can you help?

I'm sure it was something rather major.

[BcfcDuncs]

Who gives a s**t , sad enough wasting your fingers typing a response to all this attendence bull 

[Wanderingred]

5 hours ago, Smaller than a flea said:

5 hours ago, Smaller than a flea said:

 

There is a gap, but place both teams in the same league with modern stadiums and it's not much.

3 hours ago, bcfcfinker said:

 

Well, the statistics would suggest otherwise.

We were in the same division during these years.. You even finished above us on some of these occasions.

2000-01  City: 10,369  Rovers: 7,275
1999-00  City: 9,803    Rovers: 8,402
1997-98  City: 11,846  Rovers: 6,413
1996-97  City: 10,802  Rovers: 5,630
1995-96  City: 7,017    Rovers: 5,279
1992-93  City: 11,004  Rovers: 5,745
1991-92  City: 11,479  Rovers: 5,850
1990-91  City: 13,495  Rovers: 5,929
1989-90  City: 11,544  Rovers: 6,202

Cant be bothered to do any further back (you can see for yourself on http://www.european-football-statistics.co.uk/england.htm) but you can certainly see that the difference is significant.

Interesting that you've compared yourself to Brighton. They had massive crowds in the 70s and 80s, and the attendance boom they've seen recently is a due to a lot of those fans coming back after years of homelessness. You never had those crowds.

Additionally, look at Coventry as an example. They were in exile in Northampton for a year... The attendance for their first game back in the city was over 27,000. Rovers were absent from Bristol for over 10 years. Coming back barely improved their gates.

With Rovers, the support simply isn't there. The facts prove it.

[fanjita]

6 hours ago, bcfcfinker said:

As to the records at the Mem:

http://www.11v11.com/teams/bristol-rovers/tab/stats/option/attendances/

For the life of me, I can't think what was so significant about the time Mansfield visited 3rd May 2014?

Seventeen, considering that you've stepped forward as the SGR statmeister, can you help?

I'm sure it was something rather major.

And call it the correct name, it's not the Mem, it's the Memorial Ground

[HoldenBall]

9 hours ago, Smaller than a flea said:

I don't think there's much doubt that Rovers attract away attendances on a par with City.  The question is why their home crowds are so much lower.

Clearly being in the Championship City attract more fans.  Rovers average about 7,000 recently.  City about 15,000, but constrained by the rebuild.  I would guess if the ground was complete, and for sake of fairness, City were doing pretty well in the Championship, there would be about 22,000 there. 

If Rovers are in League 1 next season, the crowd would increase to about 8,500 - 9,000, and if (bear with me) they get to the Championship, maybe 11,000, or nearly a sell-out every week at the Mem.  I base my opinion on recent attendances, not those from decades ago.

If the UWE actually gets built (and there's no evidence yet that it will), I would expect Rovers in the Championship to up their crowds from my 11,000 projection to 18,000 or so, which is modest compared with how Brighton did.

There is a gap, but place both teams in the same league with modern stadiums and it's not much.

 I suggest you have a look at this http://www.european-football-statistics.co.uk/attnclub/brir.htm, These are only facts though, I don't want that to get in the way of a good fairy-tale.

I assume now you're the 10th, nope 6th, nope 5th, nope most richest club in the world Wael will be buying a whole new fanbase?

 

[redcityman]

The most loyal of fan bases our deranged neighbours would have us believe, then answer this, where were your so called loyal fan base the day you played your last match at Eastville?

[italian dave]

12 hours ago, Jack Dawe said:

My take on our respective crowds is that there wasn't much in it prior to us getting back into the top flight in 1976, with us always having a few more. You can see this where the Bristol derby was always a few more at our place, or, to put it another way, a few less at their place. Then, we had loads more for a couple of years, not surprisingly, as we entertained Liverpool, Man Utd etc.

Then things returned to normal, and when we were both relegated in 1981, we had a few more loyal fans (9,765) every week than Rovers (5,929).

Then in 82, we were relegated again and Rovers weren't but we had a few more every week (6,511) to their (5,402).

But then, in 83, when Rovers finished 7th in Div 3, and we finished 14th in Div 4, after 3 successive relegations, the most unusual thing happened: more people watched Rovers than us!

Then it was back to normal the following year, with fewer people watching Rovers than us. And it's been like that every year since, with few exceptions. Or, to be more precise, with no exceptions. A few more at our place than their's is how it has been (although they have to go back to the 1960s to see figures like ours over the last 15 years).

Our highest ever average (26,575) is a few more than theirs (24,662). In the 80s, we used to sell out 6000 tickets on the Muller Road (plus a few dotted around other parts of Eastville), they used to be 3500 to 4000 in the Park End (often just the one pen, not both). In the 90s, we both played at Anfield in the cup, and we took a few more than Rovers. And they lost, and we won. Not by much, just a few. And Rovers even had a player called Mephew. But that's another story.

Broadly speaking, there are about as many Rovers diehards as City, with City having a few more, but we have always been able to pull a bigger home crowd. And we can call on a bigger following to Wembley, and a bigger away crowd. By a few. 

That isn't to say that on some days, occasionally, there are a few more Rovers than us. But generally, overall, looking at the bigger picture, there's a few more of us than them. Over a season. On average. That's how averages work!

There's just a few more of us (City) than them (Rovers). Or, to put it another way, there's a few less blue than red. Ho hum. How exciting.

So, to finish, bearing in mind all of the above, the fact that Rovers, in a promotion chasing season, with twice as many wins, and following a home win, took a few more than us, in a relegation fighting season, with half the wins, and following a home thrashing, to Nottingham, bearing all this in mind, it is no wonder, and I don't blame them, for getting all excited and taking the trouble to point out to us, that they took a few more than us. We'd be all excited and pointing this out to them if it was the other way round.

So let us let them have their moment. They are, for them, few and far between.

That's why we call them The Few. The Blue Few. Cos there's a few more of us than them. Or, to put it another way, a few less of them than us. 

I just hope this clears this all up. It might all be about to change, things might be different from now on, but that's how it's been in Bristol up til now. Who knows, perhaps today's news that Rovers took a few more than us to Nottm is an indication that the tide is turning, and things will never be the same around here. But we'll need a few more examples before we can see clear signs of a sea change in support in Bristol, where traditionally, apart from about two seasons in the 50s, and 1982/83, there's always been a few more City than Rovers.

That's my take on it, anyway. Well done Rovers for today, you had the fourth biggest away following in L2 (with just a few fewer than Oxford, Luton and Pompey. But a few more than us last week)! I hope that's fair.

I'm off for a lie down.

Phew!

 

 

 

Or, put another way, the higher up the league the better the attendances, for both clubs, and we are normally higher up the league.....

[Major Isewater]

On 4 mars 2016 at 21:43, Tomarse said:

Because I'm fed up of having to merge the thread. How more obvious can I make it now? 

Is this where i post my thoughts on the Gas or should i start a new thread ?  

Edited March 6, 2016 by Major Isewater

[Lanterne Rouge]

13 minutes ago, Major Isewater said:

Is this where i post my thoughts on the Gas or should i start a new thread ?  

I`m not sure. What`s everyone else doing?

[Eddie Hitler]

37 minutes ago, Major Isewater said:

Is this where i post my thoughts on the Gas or should i start a new thread ?  

 

24 minutes ago, Red Right Hand said:

I`m not sure. What`s everyone else doing?

The accepted rule is that if in any doubt at all whether your post deserves a new thread to be started then you should always start a new one to be on the safe side.  You otherwise run the risk of hijacking the existing thread for which no-one will thank you and may actually risk your being banned from the forum.

[pongo88]

9 minutes ago, Eddie Hitler said:

 

The accepted rule is that if in any doubt at all whether your post deserves a new thread to be started then you should always start a new one to be on the safe side.  You otherwise run the risk of hijacking the existing thread for which no-one will thank you and may actually risk your being banned from the forum.

I prefer reading the "go off at a tangent" option. Quite often a load of rubbish, but interesting rubbish. When a thread gets a bit stale just throw in a bit about Radio Bristol / Geoff Twentyman etc and it will be revived for another 10 pages.  

[BS4 on Tour...]

20 hours ago, Seventeen said:

Sorry, probably couldn't get over the fact that our hugely supported neighbours yet again failed to take less than us to a similar distanced game.

 

Nope. Just another game where we take 4 digits. How many times you done that this season?

Eh?! If someone 'fails to take less' then they took more?

So we took more than you to a similar distanced game?

[BS4 on Tour...]

20 hours ago, Seventeen said:

Sorry, probably couldn't get over the fact that our hugely supported neighbours yet again failed to take less than us to a similar distanced game.

 

Nope. Just another game where we take 4 digits. How many times you done that this season?

About eight times I believe including away followings of 2,200+ on more than one occasion, 2,500+ , 3,300+ and 5,200+ - but you still believe you are a hugely supported club and your  self-branded 'invasion' of Notts Co was a little embarrassing to be honest.....

[BS4 on Tour...]

1 minute ago, cynic said:

And somewhere around 5k for the upcoming Fulham game I believe ?

But you have to hand to it them, they have much greater support than us (that 26k at Wembley for one of the biggest games in their history and under 3k for their last game at Eastville were just blips, as is the fact they've not come close to 10k average attendance for over 40 years), and they have billionaire owners don't you know (despite the owner himself saying that is a falsehood) that makes them the 6th "richest" club (whatever that means) in the country.

A very unique club (in the sense that they are much more deluded than any other football club).

You would think that supporters of a club that disgraced the city of Bristol by dropping into non-league football with the scenes after the final game being beamed around the nation would have some sense of humility. But no, that has been conveniently forgotten by them, but we all remember the hilarity of listening to Radio Bristol that wonderful day, and seeing them at various non-league venues including Braintree where they were trying to punch the keeper. 

A very unique club indeed - there are not many that are as much of a tinpot, two bit, chicken shit outfit like them.

 

 

 

Nice! I loved their hilarious attempt at a 'victim mentality' back in the late eighties and early nineties. "We have to train at a chocolate factory, we are ragbag Rovers...." etc etc etc....

And I am also afforded huge amusement by their belief that the whole country loves them and hates the 'massive' club in Bristol.

I have NEVER heard a City fan describe us as massive, not even when we were in the top div stuffing Man U, Arsenal, Spurs, Liverpool etc.

"We are awesome fans cos we support the underdog..." Rubbish!

We plummeted to the basement after our brief sojourn at the top level....and we were the underdog then. But our support was superb...just superb. And we failed to beat the gas in ten league games from 1986 to 1991 - yet they clung onto their  'victim' status by the skin of their teeth!

 

[Weezord]

Why has this thread slipped from the first page?

[bend it like brian]

Cmon whos admitted that there away support is far superior to ours........ 

[Cider_boy]

Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe the gas have taken more away support to Ashton Gate than we have.

[Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan]

1 hour ago, Weezord said:

Why has this thread slipped from the first page?

Good point my Pompey supporting closet Gas idiot friend, even after a derby defeat against rivals who can actually compete in the same division as us we mustn't forget about the funny little club up the road...

Edited March 6, 2016 by Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan

[HoldenBall]

1 hour ago, bend it like brian said:

Cmon whos admitted that there away support is far superior to ours........ 

well it is.. if you ignore the facts.

[Miah Dennehy]

9 hours ago, cynic said:

And somewhere around 5k for the upcoming Fulham game I believe ?

But you have to hand to it them, they have much greater support than us (that 26k at Wembley for one of the biggest games in their history and under 3k for their last game at Eastville were just blips, as is the fact they've not come close to 10k average attendance for over 40 years), and they have billionaire owners don't you know (despite the owner himself saying that is a falsehood) that makes them the 6th "richest" club (whatever that means) in the country.

A very unique club (in the sense that they are much more deluded than any other football club).

You would think that supporters of a club that disgraced the city of Bristol by dropping into non-league football with the scenes after the final game being beamed around the nation would have some sense of humility. But no, that has been conveniently forgotten by them, but we all remember the hilarity of listening to Radio Bristol that wonderful day, and seeing them at various non-league venues including Braintree where they were trying to punch the keeper. 

A very unique club indeed - there are not many that are as much of a tinpot, two bit, chicken shit outfit like them.

 

 

 

Well, that isn't true, although it was a very low crowd. The context of that though, was that football really was in the doldrums at that time- I seem to remember City even slipping as 'low' as 6000. Shite crowd as it was, it wasn't unusual for the time, and when the game was played , I seem to remember it not being 100% that we were leaving.

[Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan]

1 hour ago, bend it like brian said:

Cmon whos admitted that there away support is far superior to ours........ 

Why would anyone "admit" something that's clearly incorrect? If they consistently take double the number of fans to away matches that would be far superior...if they regularly take a few more fans to away matches that would be superior.

They do neither.