RumRed Posted October 31, 2017 Report Share Posted October 31, 2017 13 minutes ago, RedLionLad said: More fans watching the forum thread than actually watching the game I suspect. We've probably had more away at Fulham tonight. And good on them for that. However many were there it’s too many. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bar BS3 Posted October 31, 2017 Report Share Posted October 31, 2017 We actually did have more at Fulham tonight than they did for their home game! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddoh Posted October 31, 2017 Report Share Posted October 31, 2017 1 hour ago, bert tann said: I understand your logic Rich and of coursed I admit I am biased. The examples you give of single club cities are good ones and, Coventry aside, a common factor is that those clubs tend to hold their support at very respectable levels even through periods of under achievement on the pitch. If Rovers had a benefactor willing to risk a sizable amount of cash, albeit not on the Lansdown scale, then of course my viewpoint would be different. But we haven't and so we have to use some lateral thinking to get out of the situation we are in and try to preserve our football club. To ask (beg) Stephen for help would be ludicrous but i believe what I have proposed has some merit. The scenario you put forward of Rovers' elimination leading to greater opportunity for City is plausible on the face of it but in reality I think it is flawed for two reasons. Firstly, the vast majority of newcomers to the area or undecided football fans are clearly going to favour City anyway due to the standard of football and the facilities at Ashton Gate and I don't think this will change even with a fan owned club alive in North Bristol. Secondly if Rovers were to fail then I cannot see our hard core supporters switching sides to City but instead they would either follow a reconstituted club at a very low level or switch to another recreational activity. So the benefits to City of Rovers disappearing would, I believe, be minimal. But my point really was about Stephen Lansdown and his commitment to sport in Bristol and how a revitalized Rovers under a unique and dynamic fan ownership model could provide an extra dimension to his achievements on behalf of the community and to his his legacy. If he could be convinced that the presence of a "new model" Bristol Rovers would benefit sport in Bristol as a whole, do no harm to City and possibly even spur you on to greater things then maybe there is hope ? pole dancing may one day enter the Olympics, horse punching never will. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobBobSuperBob Posted October 31, 2017 Report Share Posted October 31, 2017 More reds at Fulham tonight than the Sag attendance at home 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted October 31, 2017 Report Share Posted October 31, 2017 The gas opponents tonight were. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steviestevieneville Posted October 31, 2017 Report Share Posted October 31, 2017 1 hour ago, bert tann said: I understand your logic Rich and of coursed I admit I am biased. The examples you give of single club cities are good ones and, Coventry aside, a common factor is that those clubs tend to hold their support at very respectable levels even through periods of under achievement on the pitch. If Rovers had a benefactor willing to risk a sizable amount of cash, albeit not on the Lansdown scale, then of course my viewpoint would be different. But we haven't and so we have to use some lateral thinking to get out of the situation we are in and try to preserve our football club. To ask (beg) Stephen for help would be ludicrous but i believe what I have proposed has some merit. The scenario you put forward of Rovers' elimination leading to greater opportunity for City is plausible on the face of it but in reality I think it is flawed for two reasons. Firstly, the vast majority of newcomers to the area or undecided football fans are clearly going to favour City anyway due to the standard of football and the facilities at Ashton Gate and I don't think this will change even with a fan owned club alive in North Bristol. Secondly if Rovers were to fail then I cannot see our hard core supporters switching sides to City but instead they would either follow a reconstituted club at a very low level or switch to another recreational activity. So the benefits to City of Rovers disappearing would, I believe, be minimal. But my point really was about Stephen Lansdown and his commitment to sport in Bristol and how a revitalized Rovers under a unique and dynamic fan ownership model could provide an extra dimension to his achievements on behalf of the community and to his his legacy. If he could be convinced that the presence of a "new model" Bristol Rovers would benefit sport in Bristol as a whole, do no harm to City and possibly even spur you on to greater things then maybe there is hope ? Since the Maxwell involvement in Derby and Oxford, wouldn't Lansdown owning the circus tent go against F.A rules. Not that it would ever happen anyway. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedLionLad Posted October 31, 2017 Report Share Posted October 31, 2017 3 minutes ago, Bar BS3 said: We actually did have more at Fulham tonight than they did for their home game! They're Coming For Us ! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 31, 2017 Report Share Posted October 31, 2017 The Chelsea fan won't like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redtucks Posted October 31, 2017 Report Share Posted October 31, 2017 5 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said: More reds at Fulham tonight than the Sag attendance at home 1,508 in the tent tonight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RumRed Posted October 31, 2017 Report Share Posted October 31, 2017 (edited) 11 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said: More reds at Fulham tonight than the Sag attendance at home I don’t get it bob, you seem to be a ‘mature’ fan, can you not see why people would want a crowd of zero at that match? I’d bloody hope we would do if we were in the same position. edit: With our history of travelling up and down the leagues they may actually be doing us a favour if they can get shot of the ‘premier b’ side bollocks in the lower leagues. I’ll laugh as long and hard as the next City fan but this is not where to do it if you value football imo. Edited October 31, 2017 by RumRed 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bar BS3 Posted October 31, 2017 Report Share Posted October 31, 2017 1 minute ago, RumRed said: I don’t get it bob, you seem to be a ‘mature’ fan, can you not see why people would want a crowd of zero at that match? I’d bloody hope we would do if we were in the same position. Why does it bother you so much?! I can see the reason that all clubs aren’t supporting the competition, but come on. Us having more away than they had at a home match IS amusing! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DANWRENBCFC4LIFE Posted October 31, 2017 Report Share Posted October 31, 2017 7 minutes ago, Redtucks said: 1,508 in the tent tonight. That actually sounds like a fire hazard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobBobSuperBob Posted October 31, 2017 Report Share Posted October 31, 2017 4 minutes ago, RumRed said: I don’t get it bob, you seem to be a ‘mature’ fan, can you not see why people would want a crowd of zero at that match? I’d bloody hope we would do if we were in the same position. Just a shameless opportunity to take the p out of ‘them’ I make no apologies Sags Pffffffff 4 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RumRed Posted October 31, 2017 Report Share Posted October 31, 2017 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Bar BS3 said: Why does it bother you so much?! I can see the reason that all clubs aren’t supporting the competition, but come on. Us having more away than they had at a home match IS amusing! Because it makes you look like a partisan imbecile that doesn’t understand the historical structure of the football league, that’s why. Think MK Dons. Edited October 31, 2017 by RumRed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bert tann Posted October 31, 2017 Report Share Posted October 31, 2017 3 minutes ago, steviestevieneville said: Since the Maxwell involvement in Derby and Oxford, wouldn't Lansdown owning the circus tent go against F.A rules. Not that it would ever happen anyway. I think under the assets of community value scheme the ownership of the Mem would be through a trust but the question is whether Stephen Lansdown would consider funding such a trust. Dwane Sports would not be obliged to sell the ground to that trust but considerable pressure could and should be exerted on them to do so and also to hand the shares over to a fans grouping. No one is seriously accusing the Al-Qadi family of deliberately causing the situation to happen but they need to be part of a solution and what I am proposing would not leave them out of pocket financially. The Mem would become a community asset with Rovers paying a realistic rent and financing it's upkeep and improvement. The Bundesliga model allows for some investment from outside sources as long as the 51% limit is not breached and if properly managed I am sure we could do more than just survive. It may soon be time for the Bristol Sporting community to come together. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bar BS3 Posted October 31, 2017 Report Share Posted October 31, 2017 2 minutes ago, RumRed said: Because it makes you look like a partisan imbecile that doesn’t understand the historical structure of the football league, that’s why. Think MK Dons. Charm will get you everywhere..! If clubs were really wanting to protest then they wouldn’t be putting their first team out for the fixture. I fully understand and appreciate why supporters would boycott. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RumRed Posted October 31, 2017 Report Share Posted October 31, 2017 (edited) 1 minute ago, Bar BS3 said: Charm will get you everywhere..! If clubs were really wanting to protest then they wouldn’t be putting their first team out for the fixture. I fully understand and appreciate why supporters would boycott. They didn’t as far as I can see, about 6-7 changes. There is plenty to take the piss out of without having to resort to a cup competition that all supporters think has been hideously devalued by the inclusion of ‘b teams’. Keep your powder dry, they’ll screw up something important soon enough. Edited October 31, 2017 by RumRed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bar BS3 Posted October 31, 2017 Report Share Posted October 31, 2017 Just now, RumRed said: They didn’t as far as I can see, about 6-7 changes. Maybe. Still a relatively strong team for a game that even acknowledging makes you an imbecile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RumRed Posted October 31, 2017 Report Share Posted October 31, 2017 1 minute ago, Bar BS3 said: Maybe. Still a relatively strong team for a game that even acknowledging makes you an imbecile. Sorry your quote came before my edit! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cityironman Posted October 31, 2017 Report Share Posted October 31, 2017 5 minutes ago, bert tann said: I think under the assets of community value scheme the ownership of the Mem would be through a trust but the question is whether Stephen Lansdown would consider funding such a trust. Dwane Sports would not be obliged to sell the ground to that trust but considerable pressure could and should be exerted on them to do so and also to hand the shares over to a fans grouping. No one is seriously accusing the Al-Qadi family of deliberately causing the situation to happen but they need to be part of a solution and what I am proposing would not leave them out of pocket financially. The Mem would become a community asset with Rovers paying a realistic rent and financing it's upkeep and improvement. The Bundesliga model allows for some investment from outside sources as long as the 51% limit is not breached and if properly managed I am sure we could do more than just survive. It may soon be time for the Bristol Sporting community to come together. I believe you may know more than you are letting on bert especially concerning your last sentence!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bar BS3 Posted October 31, 2017 Report Share Posted October 31, 2017 1 minute ago, RumRed said: Sorry your quote came before my edit! I was only noting it, not mocking it. I find the result more amusing and listening to Marcus Stewart clearly very embarrassed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fiale Posted October 31, 2017 Report Share Posted October 31, 2017 I would not be happy if we did anything that allowed Rovers to stay at the Mem. If SL purchased it and Rovers built something small and sustainable elsewhere maybe, but I just don't think we should assist them in anyway to stay there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coombsy Posted October 31, 2017 Report Share Posted October 31, 2017 7 minutes ago, cityironman said: I believe you may know more than you are letting on bert especially concerning your last sentence!! Why pay them out when sl can get for on the cheap when they go in receivership 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RumRed Posted October 31, 2017 Report Share Posted October 31, 2017 Just now, Bar BS3 said: I was only noting it, not mocking it. I find the result more amusing and listening to Marcus Stewart clearly very embarrassed. I realise my opinion maybe ‘odd’ but I look back at our record in that cup whilst in the lower leagues and I enjoyed the runs and Wembley, both the old and the new, I honestly couldn’t with the new format. I’m also still concerned it’s the start towards B teams in the lower leagues which I’d hate. Rovers much as I like to take the piss deserve an honest run at a cup that although, pisspot as we called it, led to some great memories for us. We’ll also end up back there again at some point no doubt and therefore it is up to the supporters to make their point now. I really don’t want prem b teams at the expense of other clubs in the cup or the league so, for once, I am not laughing at the crowd or the result, and anyone that does is shortsighted in the extreme. 11 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bar BS3 Posted October 31, 2017 Report Share Posted October 31, 2017 1 minute ago, RumRed said: I realise my opinion maybe ‘odd’ but I look back at our record in that cup whilst in the lower leagues and I enjoyed the runs and Wembley, both the old and the new, I honestly couldn’t with the new format. I’m also still concerned it’s the start towards B teams in the lower leagues which I’d hate. Rovers much as I like to take the piss deserve an honest run at a cup that although, pisspot as we called it, led to some great memories for us. We’ll also end up back there again at some point no doubt and therefore it is up to the supporters to make their point now. I really don’t want prem b teams at the expense of other clubs in the cup or the league so, for once, I am not laughing at the crowd or the result, and anyone that does is shortsighted in the extreme. I understand your views and generally agree, but I reserve the right to be amused at them being stuffed by a bunch of juveniles. I won’t mention the crowd though. Deal..?! 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RumRed Posted October 31, 2017 Report Share Posted October 31, 2017 1 minute ago, Bar BS3 said: I understand your views and generally agree, but I reserve the right to be amused at them being stuffed by a bunch of juveniles. I won’t mention the crowd though. Deal..?! Done! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted October 31, 2017 Report Share Posted October 31, 2017 1 hour ago, bert tann said: I understand your logic Rich and of coursed I admit I am biased. The examples you give of single club cities are good ones and, Coventry aside, a common factor is that those clubs tend to hold their support at very respectable levels even through periods of under achievement on the pitch. If Rovers had a benefactor willing to risk a sizable amount of cash, albeit not on the Lansdown scale, then of course my viewpoint would be different. But we haven't and so we have to use some lateral thinking to get out of the situation we are in and try to preserve our football club. To ask (beg) Stephen for help would be ludicrous but i believe what I have proposed has some merit. The scenario you put forward of Rovers' elimination leading to greater opportunity for City is plausible on the face of it but in reality I think it is flawed for two reasons. Firstly, the vast majority of newcomers to the area or undecided football fans are clearly going to favour City anyway due to the standard of football and the facilities at Ashton Gate and I don't think this will change even with a fan owned club alive in North Bristol. Secondly if Rovers were to fail then I cannot see our hard core supporters switching sides to City but instead they would either follow a reconstituted club at a very low level or switch to another recreational activity. So the benefits to City of Rovers disappearing would, I believe, be minimal. But my point really was about Stephen Lansdown and his commitment to sport in Bristol and how a revitalized Rovers under a unique and dynamic fan ownership model could provide an extra dimension to his achievements on behalf of the community and to his his legacy. If he could be convinced that the presence of a "new model" Bristol Rovers would benefit sport in Bristol as a whole, do no harm to City and possibly even spur you on to greater things then maybe there is hope ? You do realise that I said "over a period of time" when referring to increased support with only one club. I know hard core support would not swap sides but, floating support and as you say, new support, which you again say we are picking up, would over time create a bigger fan base, even if they were minimal initially. As for SL bringing Rovers under the BS umbrella, he already has two football teams, one rugby team, a basketball team, would like a cricket team, has various individual sports persons, I think, and, could possibly be involved with a rugby league team shortly, and, he's putting in even greater foundations for those teams. Why would he want another football team? I could only think of it being used as a feeder club, that would please the Blue supporters Eh? This might be controversial and ruffle a few feathers but, I can see a time when we are so used to "Bristol Sport" we will refer less to "CITY" and become Bristol and represent all of Bristol. Are you involved with EW and just testing the water Bert? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted October 31, 2017 Report Share Posted October 31, 2017 1 minute ago, RumRed said: I realise my opinion maybe ‘odd’ but I look back at our record in that cup whilst in the lower leagues and I enjoyed the runs and Wembley, both the old and the new, I honestly couldn’t with the new format. I’m also still concerned it’s the start towards B teams in the lower leagues which I’d hate. Rovers much as I like to take the piss deserve an honest run at a cup that although, pisspot as we called it, led to some great memories for us. We’ll also end up back there again at some point no doubt and therefore it is up to the supporters to make their point now. I really don’t want prem b teams at the expense of other clubs in the cup or the league so, for once, I am not laughing at the crowd or the result, and anyone that does is shortsighted in the extreme. Wait till Friday night then and hopefully join in then perhaps. The shortsightedness is not the fault of us fans it's the fault of the powers that be and the fault of being at the level that they are at, I for one might have some sympathy for your view if gas fans actually woke up and smelt the camel shit but far too many of them actually believe that they are/were a big club and they are not, they are almost certainly at their level and even possibly over achieving. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudolf Hucker Posted October 31, 2017 Report Share Posted October 31, 2017 @bert tann how would such a philanthropic gesture by the "tax dodger, Mr Pantsdown" as your supporters refer to him, be viewed by them? As their white knight? Their hero? Can't see that myself? To them, he'll always be a gurt Ted. How would it be viewed by us? Generally, I'd have thought we'd be disappointed, angry and incredulous. There is zero benefit to us in Rovers staying alive, perhaps even thriving. How would we feel if one day, following such a gesture, the 'gap' were to be eradicated? Very not happy, I'd suggest. The overriding problem, Bert is that Rovers are always there with their hand out. "Give us a stadium, a training ground, an academy, a transfer pot, some flushing toilets" ... the list just goes on. Your lot don't want to earn their dues; they just want things handed to them on a plate. It's always been that way and always will be. The only way I'd support your 'bundesliga' suggestion is if the Rovers applied to.play in it. I suspect that I won't be alone in my views. 10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RumRed Posted October 31, 2017 Report Share Posted October 31, 2017 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Esmond Million's Bung said: Wait till Friday night then and hopefully join in then perhaps. The shortsightedness is not the fault of us fans it's the fault of the powers that be and the fault of being at the level that they are at, I for one might have some sympathy for your view if gas fans actually woke up and smelt the camel shit but far too many of them actually believe that they are/were a big club and they are not, they are almost certainly at their level and even possibly over achieving. My comments are aimed at this particular competition not the gas. The competition is now a joke, the gas made loads of changes and only 1500 turned up, they’ve done their job. Remember it wasn’t long ago you were probably stood at Wembley in the same competition. Edited October 31, 2017 by RumRed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.