|
Post by Big Dave on Jun 11, 2014 17:01:01 GMT
Now the first rounds entries are in, time to mock or applaud your fellow forum members and competitors...
...who's played it safe, who's clearly living on another planet, and who should have put money on at the bookies rather than predicting on here...
...I will give some thoughts once I've collated the predictions later tonight...
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on Jun 11, 2014 16:53:43 GMT
Could not get on the computer before 9.00am. Just ignore the above Dave. All the best. I think there will be no problem letting your predictions stand...I only set the early deadline as I didn't know if I'd be online between then and the first KO...since I will be, I can capture your predictions ![;)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/wink.png)
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on Jun 11, 2014 7:53:52 GMT
Hi Chaps, think I've made the deadline with 9 hrs to spare??? You did! Thanks to everyone who has entered, Round One is now officially closed! Round Two is now up and running, but you have a few days until that deadline in case you want to study the form from the opening games... When I get a chance (hopefully tonight) I will tabulate people's predictions so we can have a laugh at what weird results people have predicted!
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on Jun 10, 2014 17:47:19 GMT
Brazil v Croatia 3-2
Mexico v Cameroon 1-1
Spain v Netherlands 3-1
Chile v Australia 2-0
Colombia v Greece 1-1
Ivory Coast v Japan 3-1
Uruguay v Costa Rica 3-0
England v Italy 1-3
Switzerland v Ecuador 0-0
France v Honduras 3-0
Argentina v Bos-Herce 2-0
Iran v Nigeria 0-1
Germany v Portugal 1-1
Ghana v USA 1-1
Belgium v Algeria 1-0
Russia v South Korea 1-0
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on Jun 10, 2014 13:33:36 GMT
Agreed, I don't see it making any difference whatsoever. The board ignored 10,000 of us on the OF and 600+ on the IF, so will 10,600 of us in one place make any difference? Of course not. What seperate forums do offer however are a different "vibe" - which allows people the choice between finding somewhere that suits them best. Personally I think this can only be a good thing. If however the argument is that we should have one central repository for ideas then that might not be such a bad idea; but that doesn't need to be a generalised forum (like this and the IF). Instead it just needs to be a central site where users can post about improving Bristol Rovers and that alone. If that's the argument then I'm all for that. However, Gaschat and the IF/gasheads.org would still need to exist so that others can talk about other Rovers related news. Good We got there in the end. I agree with Hugo almost entirely, I also agree that it may well make no difference at all, but what I do believe is it has never been tried. The board have always hidden behind the façade of the SC as the only "official" supporters voice, then justified their position when citing the differences in opinion between the old OF and the AF/IF. On the latter I think it was Bradshaw who coined the phrase "50 Internet Warriors" I agree with Rovers Drive about each to their own in terms of "Vibe", and his last paragraph sums up the need well, in my opinion.
These are tough times and more of the same will not do, especially as I believe there is a strong possibility that Sainsbury's have invoked an opt out clause on buying the mem. If that becomes fact the new stadium is dead, we are £5M in debt and playing in the conference.....if so it will only be us fans that can keep this club afloat.
Where did we get to? All the recent evidence suggests that if there was one 'united Rovers forum' then it would simply mean it was easier for the board to read and then ignore the views that were posted on it...? I agree more of the same will not do, but I really hope you turn your attention towards the club and it's shortcomings. The biggest problem with multiple forums is that it means us idiots who still support and finance the club at home games have more places to vent our frustration. The least of the problems is that four-five groups of 30-50 people on 4-5 different forums have noticed the same problem either on or off the pitch... [[Citation required]] on the Sainsbury's opt-out clause, and yes the fans are the biggest asset the club has...so why try and constrain/constrict them/us?
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on Jun 10, 2014 12:24:41 GMT
Goose
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on Jun 10, 2014 12:21:02 GMT
It is a debate worth having but its essentially a non issue because no one is listening!! Pardon?
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on Jun 10, 2014 12:19:42 GMT
If we fined all our young players who have been out on the sauce over the last 10-15 years..... we'd have enough cash to build two UWE's. ![](http://www.sherv.net/cm/emoticons/drink/smiley-face-making-cocktail.gif) And I don't get why we don't. If I need to I can do my current job with a hangover, and I could do my previous job (which was in the nightclub industry) whilst a bit drunk... ...if I needed to be a professional athlete, either for training or for regular matches, firstly I'd be screwed, and secondly I'd be sacked shortly after. Why (allegedly) does the club employ people who (allegedly) aren't looking after their bodies? Why doesn't employment law for once help the employer?
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on Jun 10, 2014 12:05:11 GMT
If you want to post on Gaschat, go ahead. If you want to post on gasheads.org, go ahead. If you want to post on both, go ahead. Where's the issue? That was never the issue. There was a question on how best fans get their views listened to and the relationship to that ambition with multiple forums Very confused now...what is your actual point? The board (allegedly read but) don't pay attention to any or all fan's views on any or all forums...how do you suggest we get them to listen?
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on Jun 10, 2014 11:20:52 GMT
Medallion man (Cotterill) made a good point about signing younger players in a big city like Bristol.......... It's a point, but not a good one...these are young professionals being paid a lot of money. If you can't do your job the next day because you've been 'enjoying' yourself the previous night, you should be reprimanded/fined and warned about your future conduct.
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on Jun 10, 2014 9:21:40 GMT
I agree - the only downside is that they'll have a fair wedge to spend which can be used to strengthen their team in a number of areas Will they get to spend it though? Whenever we have lost a player for big money, we have never replaced them adequately accept when Agogo was replaced by Lambert You're getting tripped up there between being able to spend the money on a replacement player, or replacing the player we've lost - there is a massive difference.
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on Jun 10, 2014 8:51:39 GMT
Statement from the Chairman Last week I confirmed that it was extremely unlikely that we would be able to complete the build of the UWE Stadium before the start of the 2015/16 season. This means we will probably not be able to occupy the stadium until the start of the 2016/17 season, as the Football Authorities prevent clubs from moving grounds during a season.However, this does not mean the build will be delayed by 12 months; we still intend to get onsite and start building later this year. The delay to the project to date has come from the Judicial Review hearing the subsequent appeal and the English Heritage application, and has cost the club a lot of time and money. It is extremely frustrating that these small minority groups have been able to have such a massive impact on this project and associated projects that will bring so many benefits to the local area. Outstanding contractual agreements between all parties have been on hold since the JR proceedings got underway last autumn, but we are now in the process of addressing these agreements. Read more at www.bristolrovers.co.uk/news/article/stadium-delay-clarification-1627270.aspx#qUiHkOVbxDCFliQd.99Where in the League or Conference rules does it say this? I don't have the link to hand (it's been covered before on several Rovers forums), but both have a rule saying that no club can change home grounds mid-season if it would give an 'unfair advantage' to 'some' of their opponents...the rule is there so that if a club needs to groundshare in an emergency to complete the season they *might* be allowed to move mid-season, but you can't move into a shiny new stadium after already having fulfilled half your fixtures in a crappy one...
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on Jun 10, 2014 7:57:01 GMT
Ding ding ding - seconds out, round two! We may still be a few days from the tournament*/it all* kicking off in Brazil (* delete as applicable), but it's time to get a head-start on round two of the predictions game. There are seven rounds: the first is over here, and the second is this thread. As before, I'll give you the list of matches (in this case, the second group games for every team). You predict the scores. There will be 1 point awarded for a correct result, and 4 awarded for a correct score-line. Results will be tallied as and when I can be bothered. Entries for each round will close at 9am the day BEFORE that round starts and the next round will be launched either as soon as the fixtures are ready or I can get around to it...play as many rounds as you like - and even if you missed the first round you can still join in and try to catch up!You can edit your predictions up until the deadline (see below). Obviously the board will tell us all you've edited your post which is fine. I will be working out the scores from my records of your predictions, not what the board says, so probably better to PM me if you're wanting to change what you've already guessed based on injuries, form, local weather and/or the threat of riots etc etc... Round Two: Please copy and paste this part as your entry, include your predicted scoreline and if I've screwed anything up let me know - oh and they're in group order not chronological order... Entries for this round close at midnight Mon 16th JuneBrazil v Mexico Cameroon v Croatia Australia v Netherlands Spain v Chile Colombia v Ivory Coast Japan v Greece Uruguay v England Italy v Costa Rica Switzerland v France Honduras v Ecuador Argentina v Iran Nigeria v Bos-Herce Germany v Ghana USA v Portuga Belgium v Russia South Korea v Algeria
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on Jun 10, 2014 0:19:24 GMT
Either getting old and doddery or showing his true 'colours'...
I reckon the Sunday Times are confident enough in their investigative reporting to welcome a lawsuit against their 'campaign'. The press helped sort out the mess that was the IOC 15-odd years ago, time for FIFA to see if they are in the same boat or are in fact whiter-than-white...?
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on Jun 9, 2014 23:51:24 GMT
I think the responses here are defensive and missing the point. The question of the absolute number of forums is hardly relevant in normal circumstances.
But, in this time of the club being at its lowest ebb, at a time when there has been wholesale criticism of the BoD (although the degree varies) this was an opportunity for the fans to present their case in a united front. Here the issue of forums comes into play as those that would resist change and seek to divert criticism as they will, as they always have done, claim that the majority of fans do not agree or support any proposition put forward.
To the responses...
You miss the point entirely I am afraid
I've been trying to not reply to this for hours now, but I just can't stop myself any more...what point am I missing? Without wishing to put words into your mouth, it must be that the BoD will only listen to a united fanbase? Well, the OF had 10,000 members, which is 4000 more than the average home attendance. They shut it down and dismissed it out-of-hand, either not knowing or not caring about how many Bristol Rovers fans used it daily, weekly or monthly, from those who are 5 minutes down the road to those who are on the other side of the world...and that matters to me as I hope soon to leave my home 20 minutes from my beloved Rovers and be following them from Australia instead.... As far as I can tell, your 'proposition' is that the fans speak as one. This is 2014 though, and the fans have many, many avenues to speak through. The number of forums is insignificant....add in Facebook, Twitter, and the old-fashioned ones like the local pubs and even different areas of the ground and you have tens (or probably hundreds) of groups of fans who have a different opinion on what is wrong with the club. For example, a bloke 5 yards to the right of me always blames the linesman in front of us when we lose/are caught offside/the opposition steal a few yards on a throw-in, and congratulates him when we're leading/catch them offside/one of our players trips himself up and yet we win a free-kick...do I agree with him? No, he's an idiot that knows nothing about the game of football. Do I respect his view, yes, because he pays his money to watch his team, has probably done so for longer than me, and also is a fellow Rovers fan. Back to my original question. What point have I missed? One forum, two forums, ten forums...if it's a good or a bad idea from a fan, you can post it on one or ten forums and the BoD and/or management team will agree or ignore regardless...if it's a good or bad idea from the BoD and/or management team, one or ten forums can praise or slate it and it won't matter as it will still have happened...so what point did I miss?
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on Jun 9, 2014 23:13:14 GMT
Jeremy Clarkson. I ***g hate Jeremy Clarkson. In my head, you and him would be best mates... ![O_o](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/browraise.png)
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on Jun 9, 2014 23:00:04 GMT
Bit of a weird one. Not sure if I'd be optimistic or nervous if I was a Salisbury fan. Probably nervous...
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on Jun 9, 2014 7:59:45 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on Jun 9, 2014 7:51:43 GMT
This is old news repackaged. All it is saying is what Higgs has already said we cant build it in time for 15/16. Will be better to move in after a good promotion or two :-) not too downbeat just a bit annoyed he is so vague about when we will start. The trouble is it's not old news....well, not officially. The whole '62-week build time' has left everyone doing maths in their head and for most of the last 4-6 weeks wondering why there was a big old silence from the club regarding the UWE and the last mentioned opening date (ie the start of 2015/16). Did I miss the (official) announcement before now that the opening for 15/16 was delayed?
|
|
|
Post by Big Dave on Jun 9, 2014 7:47:11 GMT
Since the board so easily dismissed the OF (claiming it only had 1,000 users overall when in fact it had 1,000 users online during the Mansfield game and 10,000 users overall), why does anyone think 'a united forum' will influence their decisions one little bit?
|
|