Bristol R*vers dustbin thread

[Bar BS3]

42 minutes ago, Laner said:

Christ... you'd think they'd have had a bit of a tidy before making the video. 

They had..!

[Gazred]

9 hours ago, Ian M said:

Jesus! They’re coming for us

Look at that gutter pipe ffs! Watch your step eh.

[TheReds]

10 hours ago, Mattyisared said:

It'll be interesting to see; the Burnley lad seems to be pretty well rated, and the Fulham lad is described as "quick," whether that's just quick or quick and terrible it's hard to know. It's a chance for those players to prove themselves; Anderson for instance had zero league experience, whilst Connor Taylor's only league experience before Rovers was 1 game on loan in the Northern Premier League Premier Division and 3 games on loan at Chester in the National League North, now he's a first team regular. That's the point with these kinda players, hard to know how it'll turn out. Boro lad could end up being the worst or the best of the three. Injury seems a troublesome sign but then again from their perspective their guy Collins I think is one of the top goalscorers in League 1, then there's Marquis who although has fallen off on his day seems a good player, from their perspective I reckon they expect to hold out decently. I think they seem to lack a proper left-back and a player that drives forward, hard to know really where they'll finish largely because League One looks really tough this season, there's 8-10 really good teams for that standard and a big gap between them and the rest. 

Back on to give them some deserved credit....

Even knows what the Sags are lacking in their team. 

Well done fellow red....

[TheReds]

1 hour ago, Laner said:

Christ... you'd think they'd have had a bit of a tidy before making the video. 

Is that a BBQ by the entrance - or their catering dept? Bought as a job lot with their tents perhaps?

Straight out of the cryotherapy portacabin (probably an ice bath), and then warm yourself up with the burning pallets in the barbecue.

This stuff is all there for a reason - this is football training at the very highest level, no wonder why they are the envy of the footballing World.

[beaverface]

13 minutes ago, Gazred said:

Look at that gutter pipe ffs! Watch your step eh.

Why is it that everything they own has to have blue and white stripes or quarters on it?

Compare the HPC, and it's not decked out in red and white bold colours, it's all subtle and professional looking.

[Mike Hunt-Hertz]

9 hours ago, Ian M said:

Jesus! They’re coming for us

"Cryotherapy"...can't afford the heating bill.

[phantom]

11 hours ago, Mattyisared said:

It'll be interesting to see; the Burnley lad seems to be pretty well rated, and the Fulham lad is described as "quick," whether that's just quick or quick and terrible it's hard to know. It's a chance for those players to prove themselves; Anderson for instance had zero league experience, whilst Connor Taylor's only league experience before Rovers was 1 game on loan in the Northern Premier League Premier Division and 3 games on loan at Chester in the National League North, now he's a first team regular. That's the point with these kinda players, hard to know how it'll turn out. Boro lad could end up being the worst or the best of the three. Injury seems a troublesome sign but then again from their perspective their guy Collins I think is one of the top goalscorers in League 1, then there's Marquis who although has fallen off on his day seems a good player, from their perspective I reckon they expect to hold out decently. I think they seem to lack a proper left-back and a player that drives forward, hard to know really where they'll finish largely because League One looks really tough this season, there's 8-10 really good teams for that standard and a big gap between them and the rest. 

No it won't, does anyone really give a flying fuck if they were the best or the worst players in the third tier

I am intrigued how you have so much knowledge on the tent dwellers

[NcnsBcfc]

McCormick's desire, Al-Qadi's intervention and the story of Bristol Rovers' transfer window - Bristol Live (bristolpost.co.uk)

It's articles like this that really wind me up.

Sam Perry, the Gas lead writer at Bristol Live is so far up the arse of the club that any objectivity is out the window.

Rather than saying, the club doesn't have any  decent amount of money for permanent signings/a new ground (not built by anyone else)/an Academy with Category status/or a training ground that doesn't resemble a building site. He keeps propagating this "Everything is awesome, with our fabulously wealthy owner" mantra.

Cue comments like " Wael used his contacts at Stamford Bridge to waive the sell on fees". What? Does anyone believe for one moment that Wael has "Contacts" at Chelsea.

Then there was the earlier article that I posted the other day about Barton reining in Wael from over spending on transfers.

If that was the case, why did he need Chelsea to waive the "Insignificant sum" of a sell on for it to allow it to go through? What would Chelsea have sell on wise 15% on profit of a fee of around 200k. I have no idea what Wimbledon paid for him. But the sell on, must only be say 20k. If Rovers needed Chelsea to waive that in order for the transfer to go through, it goes completely against the message previously spouted by Barton.

Whereas under RG, and NP there seems to be a truthfulness about our current financial situation, however difficult it is to deal with sometimes. Rovers just keep going on and on about their potential, and financial backing. It's complete nonsense of course, but aided by the pravdaesque writing from Bristol Live.

Edited September 2, 2022 by NcnsBcfc

[redkev]

3 minutes ago, NcnsBcfc said:

McCormick's desire, Al-Qadi's intervention and the story of Bristol Rovers' transfer window - Bristol Live (bristolpost.co.uk)

It's articles like this that really wind me up.

Sam Perry, the Gas lead writer at Bristol Live is so far up the arse of the club that any objectivity is out the window.

Rather than saying, the club doesn't have any  decent amount of money for permanent signings/a new ground (not built by anyone else)/an Academy with Category status/or a training ground that doesn't resemble a building site. He keeps propagating this "Everything is awesome, with our fabulously wealthy owner" mantra.

Cue comments like " Wael used his contacts at Stamford Bridge to waive the sell on fees". What? Does anyone believe for one moment that Wael has "Contacts" at Chelsea.

Then there was the earlier article that I posted the other day about Barton reining in Wael from over spending on transfers.

If that was the case, why did he need Chelsea to waive the "Insignificant sum" of a sell on for it to allow it to go through? What would Chelsea have sell on wise 15% on profit of a fee of around 200k. I have no idea what Wimbledon paid for him. But the sell on, must only be say 20k. If Rovers needed Chelsea to waive that in order for the transfer to go through, it goes completely against the message previously spouted by Barton.

Whereas under RG, and NP there seems to be a truthfulness about our current financial situation, however difficult it is to deal with sometimes. Rovers just keep going on and on about their potential, and financial backing. It's complete nonsense of course, but aided by the pravdaesque writing from Bristol Live.

We are a million miles ahead of them in everything we do from sponsorship , corporate functions the stadium the academy ,training facilities ,fan base need I go on , unfortunately we are only 1 league above them , if we do ever get to the promised land (which is a tough ask for any club ) that would be the final nail in the coffin for them I think . 

 

[In the Net]

12 hours ago, GrahamC said:

I thought he wanted 6 signings?

I had to look up the 3 they’ve borrowed, the Burnley defender’s only league experience is with Barrow, the Fulham player has had loans at Colchester & Hibs & never seems to have established a settled place in the side at either, the Boro lad has a decent record but they announced yesterday he’s out injured for the next 5 weeks, which means he’s going to play mid October at the very earliest?

Had you heard of Elliot Anderson this time last year? (I hadn't)

[Rudolf Hucker]

43 minutes ago, redkev said:

We are a million miles ahead of them in everything we do from sponsorship , corporate functions the stadium the academy ,training facilities ,fan base need I go on , unfortunately we are only 1 league above them , if we do ever get to the promised land (which is a tough ask for any club ) that would be the final nail in the coffin for them I think . 

 

The gents toilets in the Atyeo at AG, after being wrecked by the Cardiff fans last season, were still likely cleaner, tidier and more hygienic than the portaloos provided for visiting fans at the Mem. In every sense, they truly are a shitbag outfit. 

Edited September 2, 2022 by Rudolf Hucker

[TheReds]

23 minutes ago, NcnsBcfc said:

McCormick's desire, Al-Qadi's intervention and the story of Bristol Rovers' transfer window - Bristol Live (bristolpost.co.uk)

It's articles like this that really wind me up.

Sam Perry, the Gas lead writer at Bristol Live is so far up the arse of the club that any objectivity is out the window.

Rather than saying, the club doesn't have any  decent amount of money for permanent signings/a new ground (not built by anyone else)/an Academy with Category status/or a training ground that doesn't resemble a building site. He keeps propagating this "Everything is awesome, with our fabulously wealthy owner" mantra.

Cue comments like " Wael used his contacts at Stamford Bridge to waive the sell on fees". What? Does anyone believe for one moment that Wael has "Contacts" at Chelsea.

Then there was the earlier article that I posted the other day about Barton reining in Wael from over spending on transfers.

If that was the case, why did he need Chelsea to waive the "Insignificant sum" of a sell on for it to allow it to go through? What would Chelsea have sell on wise 15% on profit of a fee of around 200k. I have no idea what Wimbledon paid for him. But the sell on, must only be say 20k. If Rovers needed Chelsea to waive that in order for the transfer to go through, it goes completely against the message previously spouted by Barton.

Whereas under RG, and NP there seems to be a truthfulness about our current financial situation, however difficult it is to deal with sometimes. Rovers just keep going on and on about their potential, and financial backing. It's complete nonsense of course, but aided by the pravdaesque writing from Bristol Live.

He's surely having a laugh here.

McCormick himself was desperate to return to Rovers and be reunited with Barton. He was entitled to a cut of the transfer fee, but he chose to waive that option to increase the amount paid to his now former club.

Rovers owner Wael Al-Qadi was also pivotal in getting the deal over the line, too. Chelsea were set to profit from a sell-on clause from the transfer that took McCormick to Plough Lane last summer. Al-Qadi's contacts at Stamford Bridge proved valuable to the Gas once again, with Chelsea also waiving their cut of the fee.

[GrahamC]

8 minutes ago, In the Net said:

Had you heard of Elliot Anderson this time last year? (I hadn't)

No, I hadn’t.

That was his first loan, I believe.

So he hadn’t struggled to start games for Colchester or Hibs or played in L2 for Barrow, had he?

Don’t fret the guy reporting on you for the Post, will make out they are the next John Stones & Raheem Sterling anyway.

7 minutes ago, TheReds said:

He's surely having a laugh here.

McCormick himself was desperate to return to Rovers and be reunited with Barton. He was entitled to a cut of the transfer fee, but he chose to waive that option to increase the amount paid to his now former club.

Rovers owner Wael Al-Qadi was also pivotal in getting the deal over the line, too. Chelsea were set to profit from a sell-on clause from the transfer that took McCormick to Plough Lane last summer. Al-Qadi's contacts at Stamford Bridge proved valuable to the Gas once again, with Chelsea also waiving their cut of the fee.

North Korean reporting once again, no one at Chelsea now will have the slightest idea who Wael is, let alone give a shit about a sell on clause of less than £50k.

[luke_bristol]

Why would Chelsea waive the fee? To be nice? It’s absolute nonsense

[GrahamC]

8 minutes ago, luke_bristol said:

Why would Chelsea waive the fee? To be nice? It’s absolute nonsense

Didn’t you read it? Down to “lifelong Chelsea fan” Wael’s influence, apparently.

What.A.Man.

[NcnsBcfc]

3 minutes ago, luke_bristol said:

Why would Chelsea waive the fee? To be nice? It’s absolute nonsense

I can only presume that it was because it was so "insignificant", ie £3.47.

Bizarre that everyone including the player needed to waive their fees to make the transfer go through though. 

Strange misleading times at Rovers. Still don't have an answer really as to why they can't just develop MG themselves, and then use the money to build their own ground?

They would rather hand over everything to someone else to do it (at a massive potential loss to themselves); and then rent their own stadium from another developer?

Akin to, giving a 500k fully paid off house; free of charge to a developer. Then that developer builds another house for you for 250k, that you then rent from them. It makes absolutely no financial sense??????? Look at what SL was trying to do at Ashton Vale as an example of how it should be done from a funding perspective.

Unless of course your fabulously wealthy chairman doesn't have the financial means to redevelop MG himself; and needs a partner to do everything for him

[Kodjias Wrist]

53 minutes ago, NcnsBcfc said:

McCormick's desire, Al-Qadi's intervention and the story of Bristol Rovers' transfer window - Bristol Live (bristolpost.co.uk)

It's articles like this that really wind me up.

Sam Perry, the Gas lead writer at Bristol Live is so far up the arse of the club that any objectivity is out the window.

Rather than saying, the club doesn't have any  decent amount of money for permanent signings/a new ground (not built by anyone else)/an Academy with Category status/or a training ground that doesn't resemble a building site. He keeps propagating this "Everything is awesome, with our fabulously wealthy owner" mantra.

Cue comments like " Wael used his contacts at Stamford Bridge to waive the sell on fees". What? Does anyone believe for one moment that Wael has "Contacts" at Chelsea.

Then there was the earlier article that I posted the other day about Barton reining in Wael from over spending on transfers.

If that was the case, why did he need Chelsea to waive the "Insignificant sum" of a sell on for it to allow it to go through? What would Chelsea have sell on wise 15% on profit of a fee of around 200k. I have no idea what Wimbledon paid for him. But the sell on, must only be say 20k. If Rovers needed Chelsea to waive that in order for the transfer to go through, it goes completely against the message previously spouted by Barton.

Whereas under RG, and NP there seems to be a truthfulness about our current financial situation, however difficult it is to deal with sometimes. Rovers just keep going on and on about their potential, and financial backing. It's complete nonsense of course, but aided by the pravdaesque writing from Bristol Live.

I prefer it when they blow smoke up their ass because as the last 20 years show they end up on their ass.

[Lanterne Rouge]

47 minutes ago, In the Net said:

Had you heard of Elliot Anderson this time last year? (I hadn't)

I get your point but loans that do so well normally only come along once in a very long time - for us it was Tammy Abraham.

[glynriley]

1 hour ago, phantom said:

No it won't, does anyone really give a flying **** if they were the best or the worst players in the third tier

I am intrigued how you have so much knowledge on the tent dwellers

I don't think you need to be Sherlock Holmes to work that out...

[In the Net]

10 minutes ago, Lanterne Rouge said:

I get your point but loans that do so well normally only come along once in a very long time - for us it was Tammy Abraham.

Agreed - I don't think we'll get another of quite that calibre. 

[NcnsBcfc]

21 minutes ago, In the Net said:

Agreed - I don't think we'll get another of quite that calibre. 

Yep, from a L2 loan, straight into a PL team for a cup game, then coming off the bench for their last two PL games.

A clear indication that he was far far too good to be in L2 last year in the first place.

[petehinton]

2 hours ago, TheReds said:

He's surely having a laugh here.

McCormick himself was desperate to return to Rovers and be reunited with Barton. He was entitled to a cut of the transfer fee, but he chose to waive that option to increase the amount paid to his now former club.

Rovers owner Wael Al-Qadi was also pivotal in getting the deal over the line, too. Chelsea were set to profit from a sell-on clause from the transfer that took McCormick to Plough Lane last summer. Al-Qadi's contacts at Stamford Bridge proved valuable to the Gas once again, with Chelsea also waiving their cut of the fee.

HAHAHAHAHAHA

[Super]

Live on Sky

Wednesday 26 October - Sheffield Wednesday v Bristol Rovers - 8.00pm

 

Edited September 2, 2022 by Super

[BCFC11]

13 minutes ago, Super said:

Live on Sky

Wednesday 26 October - Sheffield Wednesday v Bristol Rovers - 8.00pm

 

How nice for them, great chance for them to show the whole world how great their away followings are....

[elhombrecito]

6 minutes ago, BCFC11 said:

How nice for them, great chance for them to show the whole world how great their away followings are....

Don't be silly, everybody already knows. They are the world's second team.

[Gazred]

He's still banging on about the Shrews...

Barton made clear his displeasure with the flow of the game against Shrewsbury, who were effective in breaking the game up and nullifying the atmosphere at the Mem. He expects a similar approach from Morecambe on Saturday.

"I'm looking forward to it," Barton added. "Hopefully we don't get another 5-4-1 but it looks like it based on watching them play. I was a bit ill this week and I don't know if that was (from) watching Shrewsbury play on Saturday or not. It gave me a bit of a tummy ache.

"We've got to remember we're in the entertainment business and if we allow teams who have no intention of playing football to come and spoil games of football, attendances are going to dwindle and, rightly so, people will vote with their wallet and they won't come and attend football matches.

"People have got choices to make with their money and they want to be entertained, they want to watch a really good game of football, end-to-end and teams competing and goals scored. You don't want to watch players rolling around on the floor."

[CiderCraig]

6 minutes ago, Gazred said:

He's still banging on about the Shrews...

Barton made clear his displeasure with the flow of the game against Shrewsbury, who were effective in breaking the game up and nullifying the atmosphere at the Mem. He expects a similar approach from Morecambe on Saturday.

"I'm looking forward to it," Barton added. "Hopefully we don't get another 5-4-1 but it looks like it based on watching them play. I was a bit ill this week and I don't know if that was (from) watching Shrewsbury play on Saturday or not. It gave me a bit of a tummy ache.

"We've got to remember we're in the entertainment business and if we allow teams who have no intention of playing football to come and spoil games of football, attendances are going to dwindle and, rightly so, people will vote with their wallet and they won't come and attend football matches.

"People have got choices to make with their money and they want to be entertained, they want to watch a really good game of football, end-to-end and teams competing and goals scored. You don't want to watch players rolling around on the floor."

The Gas have been spoiling league football since 2015... shut up Barton!

[In the Net]

10 minutes ago, Gazred said:

He's still banging on about the Shrews...

Barton made clear his displeasure with the flow of the game against Shrewsbury, who were effective in breaking the game up and nullifying the atmosphere at the Mem. He expects a similar approach from Morecambe on Saturday.

"I'm looking forward to it," Barton added. "Hopefully we don't get another 5-4-1 but it looks like it based on watching them play. I was a bit ill this week and I don't know if that was (from) watching Shrewsbury play on Saturday or not. It gave me a bit of a tummy ache.

"We've got to remember we're in the entertainment business and if we allow teams who have no intention of playing football to come and spoil games of football, attendances are going to dwindle and, rightly so, people will vote with their wallet and they won't come and attend football matches.

"People have got choices to make with their money and they want to be entertained, they want to watch a really good game of football, end-to-end and teams competing and goals scored. You don't want to watch players rolling around on the floor."

The stupid thing is, they probably could have won the game if their players hadn't kept getting picked out by the sniper in the stands.  We were poor, expecially the defence, they should have just kept coming at us.  First 12 minutes of the match, the ball was out of play for 6 minutes.

[pommers65]

13 minutes ago, Gazred said:

He's still banging on about the Shrews...

Barton made clear his displeasure with the flow of the game against Shrewsbury, who were effective in breaking the game up and nullifying the atmosphere at the Mem. He expects a similar approach from Morecambe on Saturday.

"I'm looking forward to it," Barton added. "Hopefully we don't get another 5-4-1 but it looks like it based on watching them play. I was a bit ill this week and I don't know if that was (from) watching Shrewsbury play on Saturday or not. It gave me a bit of a tummy ache.

"We've got to remember we're in the entertainment business and if we allow teams who have no intention of playing football to come and spoil games of football, attendances are going to dwindle and, rightly so, people will vote with their wallet and they won't come and attend football matches.

"People have got choices to make with their money and they want to be entertained, they want to watch a really good game of football, end-to-end and teams competing and goals scored. You don't want to watch players rolling around on the floor."

He is right...But still a scouse ****

[chinapig]

6 minutes ago, Gazred said:

He's still banging on about the Shrews...

Barton made clear his displeasure with the flow of the game against Shrewsbury, who were effective in breaking the game up and nullifying the atmosphere at the Mem. He expects a similar approach from Morecambe on Saturday.

"I'm looking forward to it," Barton added. "Hopefully we don't get another 5-4-1 but it looks like it based on watching them play. I was a bit ill this week and I don't know if that was (from) watching Shrewsbury play on Saturday or not. It gave me a bit of a tummy ache.

"We've got to remember we're in the entertainment business and if we allow teams who have no intention of playing football to come and spoil games of football, attendances are going to dwindle and, rightly so, people will vote with their wallet and they won't come and attend football matches.

"People have got choices to make with their money and they want to be entertained, they want to watch a really good game of football, end-to-end and teams competing and goals scored. You don't want to watch players rolling around on the floor."

Has he not noticed how dwindled his own club's attendances already are? Despite the thrilling football they apparently play they couldn't fill the ground when the capacity was reduced despite once taking 40,000 to Wembley.*

Has it also occurred to him that fans also want modern stadiums with quality facilities so might be deterred from watching football in the worst stadium in the EFL?

All Shrewsbury's fault though.

*may not be accurate.