Leeds Sellout?

[elhombrecito]

Only top tier Lansdown has any available tickets, and not many at that:

[sglosbcfc]

Great news, the support has been amazing this season and seems to continue to grow. Also the support away from home has been really good. COYR

[formerly known as ivan]

Slightly related… just reading about the lad who scored for Leeds yesterday had a message for his mum, who had passed away earlier in the week, under his shirt and was booked for showing it when celebrating.

Is there no room for compassion in the game???

[Calculus]

7 hours ago, sglosbcfc said:

Great news, the support has been amazing this season and seems to continue to grow. Also the support away from home has been really good. COYR

Very true. Bears also doing very well for crowds. 

Amazing to think that we could do with adding more capacity to the Gate as things are going.

What next - top tier on the South Stand, replace the Dolman or Atyeo stands?

[Andy082005]

7 hours ago, formerly known as ivan said:

Slightly related… just reading about the lad who scored for Leeds yesterday had a message for his mum, who had passed away earlier in the week, under his shirt and was booked for showing it when celebrating.

Is there no room for compassion in the game???

Absolutely ridiculous. That’s the problem with referees now - they are not trusted to use a bit of common sense. 
 

“rules are rules” - its absolute nonsense. Yes - rules are there for a reason, but there has to be the opportunity for referees to take a common sense approach 

Had he not booked him - no one would even have mentioned it 

Like the Liverpool / Spurs goal. Play should have been pulled back - but because it was “too late”. They didn’t 

 

[Fjmcity]

22 minutes ago, Calculus said:

Very true. Bears also doing very well for crowds. 

Amazing to think that we could do with adding more capacity to the Gate as things are going.

What next - top tier on the South Stand, replace the Dolman or Atyeo stands?

No room behind the SS unless you start bulldozing and tidying up the ayteo in unlikely to get your much more capacity unless you start bulldozing.

i don’t think there is too much in the footprint between the lansdown and the dolman to be honest - so a mirror image stand would look pretty good!

my ultimate dream would be to bulldoze behind the ayteo and build round the same size from the lansdown making a “park end” pedestrianise the road and just have a stand that feeds out onto the park, could have all your corporate stuff up the top - large amounts of glass looking back across the park and to the bridge 

[Welcome To The Jungle]

8 minutes ago, Fjmcity said:

No room behind the SS unless you start bulldozing and tidying up the ayteo in unlikely to get your much more capacity unless you start bulldozing.

i don’t think there is too much in the footprint between the lansdown and the dolman to be honest - so a mirror image stand would look pretty good!

my ultimate dream would be to bulldoze behind the ayteo and build round the same size from the lansdown making a “park end” pedestrianise the road and just have a stand that feeds out onto the park, could have all your corporate stuff up the top - large amounts of glass looking back across the park and to the bridge 

I'd always like the idea of encorperating the houses into the stand, with the front doors becoming turnstiles.

[Robbored]

51 minutes ago, Calculus said:

Very true. Bears also doing very well for crowds. 

Amazing to think that we could do with adding more capacity to the Gate as things are going.

What next - top tier on the South Stand, replace the Dolman or Atyeo stands?

The commentators said during the amazing Bears v Bath match on Saturday how much they enjoy coming to AG because of the crowds and atmosphere.

Bears must attract the best attendance in the PL.

Edited January 29 by Robbored

[beaverface]

1 hour ago, Fjmcity said:

No room behind the SS unless you start bulldozing and tidying up the ayteo in unlikely to get your much more capacity unless you start bulldozing.

i don’t think there is too much in the footprint between the lansdown and the dolman to be honest - so a mirror image stand would look pretty good!

my ultimate dream would be to bulldoze behind the ayteo and build round the same size from the lansdown making a “park end” pedestrianise the road and just have a stand that feeds out onto the park, could have all your corporate stuff up the top - large amounts of glass looking back across the park and to the bridge 

I was thinking exactly the same thing the other day, and then I got to thinking what if the upper Lansdown stand continued around until a third or halfway along the South Stand? It would increase the capacity to close to 30,000, but would just look s**t. However if you mirrored something similar at the Atyeo end, it may not look so bad, but TBH it would only be a temporary or half arsed solution IMO anyway - just a stop gap to get more seats.

Ultimately, we all know the solution is that the houses in Ashton Road and Raines road would need buying up, and only someone with a "can do" attitude and finances to match would pursue that route - I don't think we have that kind of board at the moment, unless everything is very secret and clock & daggers!

Similarly, the first block of flats closest to the Dolman would need to be purchased also. Which reminds me, how safe are those flats these days? Especially given the situation with what's happened to Barton House in Lawrence Hill recently?

[chucky]

1 hour ago, Andy082005 said:

Absolutely ridiculous. That’s the problem with referees now - they are not trusted to use a bit of common sense. 
 

“rules are rules” - its absolute nonsense. Yes - rules are there for a reason, but there has to be the opportunity for referees to take a common sense approach 

Had he not booked him - no one would even have mentioned it 

Like the Liverpool / Spurs goal. Play should have been pulled back - but because it was “too late”. They didn’t 

 

Absolutely.  Rules and laws are there to be interpreted.  A player will get booked for lifting shirt because of spectator incitement.  But when you take the facts into account, that this was a personal message from the lad in regards to his passed mother, the referee is in the position to interpret if the rule is in place for this situation.  He could have come to the conclusion that that is not what the rules intend it to be for, and thus, not book the player. 

[Shauntaylor85]

So frustrating we cannot get near the 27K. Ashton Gate is too small, it needs additional seating badly, how much can we extend by with the corners as Lansdown suggested? May need to consider a second tier on South Stand. 

[1960maaan]

9 hours ago, formerly known as ivan said:

Slightly related… just reading about the lad who scored for Leeds yesterday had a message for his mum, who had passed away earlier in the week, under his shirt and was booked for showing it when celebrating.

Is there no room for compassion in the game???

The problem is they are told to book players for it, there is no caveat saying , unless you think it's unfair. 
If the Ref doesn't book him he's likely to get in trouble. It is easier for the Refs to be told "book everyone" rather than "at your discretion" . As soon as I saw it I said booking, I get why he wanted to do it but thems the rules and there are ways around it . Have a shirt on the bench, hook the front over your head or just lift the front. He knew he would get booked , sadly there it is.

[Curr Avon]

Sorry, I misread the title and expected Leeds to have announced a change of home strip to all-pink, and a sponsorship by a disposable vaping company - backed by Putin.

Edited January 29 by Curr Avon

[1960maaan]

16 minutes ago, Shauntaylor85 said:

So frustrating we cannot get near the 27K. Ashton Gate is too small, it needs additional seating badly, how much can we extend by with the corners as Lansdown suggested? May need to consider a second tier on South Stand. 

I think we would need to buy about 6 houses on Raynes road to build on the SS.
Any chance of that Concrete problem in the nearest block of flats( Southbow ?) ? That would allow the Dolman to be developed .  
Not sure filling in the corners would be cost affective . 
I think we are stuck without a hell of a lot of money being spent and a lot of luck with locals. 
That or the Council do compulsory purchase orders on everything within 500 yards of the Gate.

[Fjmcity]

50 minutes ago, beaverface said:

I was thinking exactly the same thing the other day, and then I got to thinking what if the upper Lansdown stand continued around until a third or halfway along the South Stand? It would increase the capacity to close to 30,000, but would just look s**t. However if you mirrored something similar at the Atyeo end, it may not look so bad, but TBH it would only be a temporary or half arsed solution IMO anyway - just a stop gap to get more seats.

Ultimately, we all know the solution is that the houses in Ashton Road and Raines road would need buying up, and only someone with a "can do" attitude and finances to match would pursue that route - I don't think we have that kind of board at the moment, unless everything is very secret and clock & daggers!

Similarly, the first block of flats closest to the Dolman would need to be purchased also. Which reminds me, how safe are those flats these days? Especially given the situation with what's happened to Barton House in Lawrence Hill recently?

Would be only fair to pay more to demolish the Colin Daniel’s stand though..

[Numero Uno]

22 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

The problem is they are told to book players for it, there is no caveat saying , unless you think it's unfair. 
If the Ref doesn't book him he's likely to get in trouble. It is easier for the Refs to be told "book everyone" rather than "at your discretion" . As soon as I saw it I said booking, I get why he wanted to do it but thems the rules and there are ways around it . Have a shirt on the bench, hook the front over your head or just lift the front. He knew he would get booked , sadly there it is.

Given the young kid has literally LOST HIS MOTHER this week I highly doubt he has been spending a great deal of time thinking about ways he could avoid a booking. Just call it out for what it is.......an appalling example of rules being applied just for the sake of rules being applied. Anyone with a modicum of common sense would apply common sense and be more than happy to explain why if they got hauled over the coals for it.

Edited January 29 by Numero Uno

[Big C]

44 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

Given the young kid has literally LOST HIS MOTHER this week I highly doubt he has been spending a great deal of time thinking about ways he could avoid a booking. Just call it out for what it is.......an appalling example of rules being applied just for the sake of rules being applied. Anyone with a modicum of common sense would apply common sense and be more than happy to explain why if they got hauled over the coals for it.

Dominic Solanke was booked on Thursday for the same message 

[1960maaan]

1 hour ago, Numero Uno said:

Given the young kid has literally LOST HIS MOTHER this week I highly doubt he has been spending a great deal of time thinking about ways he could avoid a booking. Just call it out for what it is.......an appalling example of rules being applied just for the sake of rules being applied. Anyone with a modicum of common sense would apply common sense and be more than happy to explain why if they got hauled over the coals for it.

Heart breaking and I feel for the lad, but the Ref may not even have seen or taken notice on the message. 
He had plenty of time to make the shirt, Solanke did a tribute Thursday , and I guarantee he would have known he would get booked. He would have spoken to team mates and discussed it.
Like I said , the Refs have to book anyone who removes their shirt , they don't get the option. It's why players runs to the technical area to hold up a spare shirt , this feels worse because it's a death as close to him as it could be, but Ref's don't have discretion .

[REDOXO]

6 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

Heart breaking and I feel for the lad, but the Ref may not even have seen or taken notice on the message. 
He had plenty of time to make the shirt, Solanke did a tribute Thursday , and I guarantee he would have known he would get booked. He would have spoken to team mates and discussed it.
Like I said , the Refs have to book anyone who removes their shirt , they don't get the option. It's why players runs to the technical area to hold up a spare shirt , this feels worse because it's a death as close to him as it could be, but Ref's don't have discretion .

I agree completely. The bloke broke the rules, but the ref is at fault, because the poor old ref didn’t take the time to read the message and ignore the rules he is paid to enforce and is criticized for not doing properly after every game 
 

I suspect if the fella had gone to those lengths he knew there was a booking coming if he took his shirt off, but really didn’t care. Good for him!
 

The FA may show some leniency if he Or Leeds appealed but I would not bank on it. If I remember correctly England and Scotland were fined for wearing a Poppy not that long ago. 

[1960maaan]

1 minute ago, REDOXO said:

I suspect if the fella had gone to those lengths he knew there was a booking coming if he took his shirt off, but really didn’t care. Good for him!

That's how I see it, and fair play to him . 

[Dredd]

Wasn't there a stipulation that if 3 of 5

attendances at AG were over 25k the club were obliged to do something with parking?

Forest 

Watford

Bears v Bath

City Women v West Ham

Leeds 

Is this going to make that applicable?

 

 

[One Team]

Have Leeds sold their allocation?

[supercidered]

1 hour ago, REDOXO said:

I agree completely. The bloke broke the rules, but the ref is at fault, because the poor old ref didn’t take the time to read the message and ignore the rules he is paid to enforce and is criticized for not doing properly after every game 
 

I suspect if the fella had gone to those lengths he knew there was a booking coming if he took his shirt off, but really didn’t care. Good for him!
 

The FA may show some leniency if he Or Leeds appealed but I would not bank on it. If I remember correctly England and Scotland were fined for wearing a Poppy not that long ago. 

Unfortunately, I believe that there is no right to appeal a Booking for any reason.

[Son of Fred]

6 hours ago, Calculus said:

Very true. Bears also doing very well for crowds. 

Amazing to think that we could do with adding more capacity to the Gate as things are going.

What next - top tier on the South Stand, replace the Dolman or Atyeo stands?

That trick may well have been missed with the refurb imo....

We are all aware that the Atyeo has it's limitations due to housing at the rear - although I'm unsure if going bigger with either(or both South & Dolman) stands would have been absolutely impossible??

My creaking memory banks say I read on here at some point that to do so may have required re- alignment of the pitch???.....

 

 

Edited January 29 by Son of Fred

[Mr Popodopolous]

I can't see feasibility for expansion any time soon personally.

Not in terms of the demand but in terms of the practicality. Filling in corners a possible exception?

[Portland Bill]

6 hours ago, Andy082005 said:

Absolutely ridiculous. That’s the problem with referees now - they are not trusted to use a bit of common sense. 
 

“rules are rules” - its absolute nonsense. Yes - rules are there for a reason, but there has to be the opportunity for referees to take a common sense approach 

Had he not booked him - no one would even have mentioned it 

Like the Liverpool / Spurs goal. Play should have been pulled back - but because it was “too late”. They didn’t 

 

Don’t blame the referee, blame the law makers. If the Referee doesn’t follow the laws of the game, he will get marked down by the assessor. You could clearly see he didn’t want to book him, but had too. 
The player took his shirt off, he would have 100% known he would get booked. 

[Portland Bill]

3 hours ago, Numero Uno said:

Given the young kid has literally LOST HIS MOTHER this week I highly doubt he has been spending a great deal of time thinking about ways he could avoid a booking. Just call it out for what it is.......an appalling example of rules being applied just for the sake of rules being applied. Anyone with a modicum of common sense would apply common sense and be more than happy to explain why if they got hauled over the coals for it.

Referees are not allowed to use common sense, they HAVE to adhere to the laws of the game, that’s it.

If a player does the same next week and doesn’t get booked, I’ve no doubt you will be complaining about inconsistency. 

[Homer Simpson]

1 hour ago, Dredd said:

Wasn't there a stipulation that if 3 of 5

attendances at AG were over 25k the club were obliged to do something with parking?

Forest 

Watford

Bears v Bath

City Women v West Ham

Leeds 

Is this going to make that applicable?

 

 

Bears matches don't count towards this, see quote below. Also city have used the excuse of actual attendance in the past, as in bums on seats. Which is fine for the cup matches but we fall short because of all the no shows for league matches.

 

That condition would be triggered if three out of five consecutive Bristol City home games saw an attendance of more than 25,000. There was no provision for Bristol Bears matches written into the planning consent, because at the time the rugby hadn’t switched to Ashton Gate.

[Bristol Rob]

16 minutes ago, Portland Bill said:

Referees are not allowed to use common sense, they HAVE to adhere to the laws of the game, that’s it.

If a player does the same next week and doesn’t get booked, I’ve no doubt you will be complaining about inconsistency. 

I think it was Billy Sharp who was at Sheff Utd at the time who played the day after his son had died - Billy scored a goal and lifted his shirt to reveal a message dedicating the goal to his lad.

If memory serves, both the opposition manager and the ref were aware of his loss and his intention that if he did score, he'd be making a tribute statement. Neither the ref nor the manager wanted to see the player punished if that happened. He never got booked.

Common sense. 

[View from the Dolman]

20 minutes ago, Portland Bill said:

Referees are not allowed to use common sense, they HAVE to adhere to the laws of the game, that’s it.

If a player does the same next week and doesn’t get booked, I’ve no doubt you will be complaining about inconsistency. 

If they HAVE to adhere to the laws of the game, why are goalkeepers not routinely penalised for committing the offence of "controls the ball with the hand/arm for more than six seconds before releasing it"?

[1960maaan]

41 minutes ago, Bristol Rob said:

I think it was Billy Sharp who was at Sheff Utd at the time who played the day after his son had died - Billy scored a goal and lifted his shirt to reveal a message dedicating the goal to his lad.

If memory serves, both the opposition manager and the ref were aware of his loss and his intention that if he did score, he'd be making a tribute statement. Neither the ref nor the manager wanted to see the player punished if that happened. He never got booked.

Common sense. 

If he never took his shirt off it shouldn't be a booking.

The Law states.

A player removing his shirt to reveal slogans or advertising will be sanctioned by the competition organiser. The team of a player whose basic compulsory equipment has political, religious or personal slogans or statements will be sanctioned by the competition organiser or by FIFA.

[supercidered]

52 minutes ago, View from the Dolman said:

If they HAVE to adhere to the laws of the game, why are goalkeepers not routinely penalised for committing the offence of "controls the ball with the hand/arm for more than six seconds before releasing it"?

The 6 second rule is a bit wooly in that it is more of a guide than a strict 6 seconds. In essence, it is up to the Referee to take a view on whether or not the Keeper is routinely taking the p!ss (technical term).

I'm only speaking as a Manager at a decent level for many years and that is what I've been told by Refs when I've asked the question. They have added that they would normally warn a Keeper that if they do it again then they will apply the necessary punishment. Hope that helps answer the above but probably not. 

[View from the Dolman]

26 minutes ago, supercidered said:

The 6 second rule is a bit wooly in that it is more of a guide than a strict 6 seconds. In essence, it is up to the Referee to take a view on whether or not the Keeper is routinely taking the p!ss (technical term).

I'm only speaking as a Manager at a decent level for many years and that is what I've been told by Refs when I've asked the question. They have added that they would normally warn a Keeper that if they do it again then they will apply the necessary punishment. Hope that helps answer the above but probably not. 

Always good to get answers from actual lived experiences!

That said, I don't see anything wooly in the Laws of the Game wording yet it feels like there's more chance of seeing Pele riding a unicorn during an EFL match than a goalkeeper being penalised for it.

[supercidered]

1 minute ago, View from the Dolman said:

Always good to get answers from actual lived experiences!

That said, I don't see anything wooly in the Laws of the Game wording yet it feels like there's more chance of seeing Pele riding a unicorn during an EFL match than a goalkeeper being penalised for it.

I absolutely agree with you.

I've not seen it enforced at any level so I can only assume that the Refs are briefed by the FA and or Ref's Association. Pre-season every year we get a briefing from the FA about changes to existing laws and also what Refs are being assessed on during matches. I can't remember the 6 second rule ever being mentioned.

[elhombrecito]

8 minutes ago, supercidered said:

I absolutely agree with you.

I've not seen it enforced at any level so I can only assume that the Refs are briefed by the FA and or Ref's Association. Pre-season every year we get a briefing from the FA about changes to existing laws and also what Refs are being assessed on during matches. I can't remember the 6 second rule ever being mentioned.

Many years ago they announced a clamp down on it, and were very strict at the start of the season. As with most of these instructions, it was quietly forgotten about half way through the season.

(I remember this because, along with foul throws not being punished, it's a pet peeve of mine)

[Portland Bill]

1 hour ago, View from the Dolman said:

If they HAVE to adhere to the laws of the game, why are goalkeepers not routinely penalised for committing the offence of "controls the ball with the hand/arm for more than six seconds before releasing it"?

Referees ‘manage’ those situations, you will find a referee will shout to the keeper “play it” when he deems the keeper should. Everyone involved in the game seems to have accepted this as the norm now. 
 

[Portland Bill]

1 hour ago, 1960maaan said:

If he never took his shirt off it shouldn't be a booking.

The Law states.

A player removing his shirt to reveal slogans or advertising will be sanctioned by the competition organiser. The team of a player whose basic compulsory equipment has political, religious or personal slogans or statements will be sanctioned by the competition organiser or by FIFA.

He took his shirt off. 

[View from the Dolman]

18 minutes ago, Portland Bill said:

Referees ‘manage’ those situations, you will find a referee will shout to the keeper “play it” when he deems the keeper should. Everyone involved in the game seems to have accepted this as the norm now. 

But how does something become "accepted" as "the norm" when it isn't absolute adherence to the laws to which they have to adhere?

Not that my opinion counts for much (I doubt the EFL, PGMOL, IFAB et al could care for it at all) but it all sounds a bit perverse to me. If the authorities don't believe in the wording of the Laws, why don't they rewrite them rather than change them via some backroom nudge and a wink agreement?

[Robin101]

8 hours ago, Robbored said:

The commentators said during the amazing Bears v Bath match on Saturday how much they enjoy coming to AG because of the crowds and atmosphere.

Bears must attract the best attendance in the PL.

This comment prompted me to read the BBC match report for that game. One thing stood out for me:

Bristol boss Pat Lam told BBC Radio Bristol:

"[Owner] Steve Lansdown had a quiet word to me about playing the Bears way, he wanted to be excited about the way we play and I said I'd see what we can do. I think he will have been excited by that performance.

Not sure if this was picked up elsewhere on OTIB? I wonder whether Lansdown has ever had a 'quiet word' with Bristol City managers about wanting them to play a certain way...?

[The Bard]

8 hours ago, Robbored said:

The commentators said during the amazing Bears v Bath match on Saturday how much they enjoy coming to AG because of the crowds and atmosphere.

Bears must attract the best attendance in the PL.

2nd highest behind Leicester 

[The Bard]

5 minutes ago, Robin101 said:

This comment prompted me to read the BBC match report for that game. One thing stood out for me:

Bristol boss Pat Lam told BBC Radio Bristol:

"[Owner] Steve Lansdown had a quiet word to me about playing the Bears way, he wanted to be excited about the way we play and I said I'd see what we can do. I think he will have been excited by that performance.

Not sure if this was picked up elsewhere on OTIB? I wonder whether Lansdown has ever had a 'quiet word' with Bristol City managers about wanting them to play a certain way...?

Of course he has. He thinks he knows an awful lot more about football than rugby.

[1960maaan]

34 minutes ago, Portland Bill said:

He took his shirt off. 

It's a minor difference , but Sharp pulled it over his head, never took it off completely .

[Robbored]

7 minutes ago, Robin101 said:

This comment prompted me to read the BBC match report for that game. One thing stood out for me:

Bristol boss Pat Lam told BBC Radio Bristol:

"[Owner] Steve Lansdown had a quiet word to me about playing the Bears way, he wanted to be excited about the way we play and I said I'd see what we can do. I think he will have been excited by that performance.

Not sure if this was picked up elsewhere on OTIB? I wonder whether Lansdown has ever had a 'quiet word' with Bristol City managers about wanting them to play a certain way...?

I heard that from Lam and I Immediately thought that SL was ‘encouraging’ him to get away from the dreary kicking for position team that the Bears had become and were consequently losing too many matches.

When Lam was appoint he’d been playing attacking rugby at Connacht and that’s why SL wanted him. My buddy who’s a Bears SC holder reckoned that Lam had lost his way particularly this season.

SL gave him a wake up call - fair play to him.

[Numero Uno]

3 hours ago, Portland Bill said:

Referees are not allowed to use common sense, they HAVE to adhere to the laws of the game, that’s it.

If a player does the same next week and doesn’t get booked, I’ve no doubt you will be complaining about inconsistency. 

I've no doubt you are completely wrong...........because I'm not the type that completely fails to see the human side of things. But hey, as long as those ******* rules are applied bang on, word for word, we can all have a good tug.

[Numero Uno]

52 minutes ago, View from the Dolman said:

But how does something become "accepted" as "the norm" when it isn't absolute adherence to the laws to which they have to adhere?

Not that my opinion counts for much (I doubt the EFL, PGMOL, IFAB et al could care for it at all) but it all sounds a bit perverse to me. If the authorities don't believe in the wording of the Laws, why don't they rewrite them rather than change them via some backroom nudge and a wink agreement?

Exactly. Either laws is laws or common sense can be applied. Not laws is laws for pulling your shirt over your head but laws ain't laws if Max O'Leary hangs onto the ball for 12 seconds when we are 1-0 up.

Edited January 29 by Numero Uno

[Natchfever]

21 minutes ago, Robin101 said:

This comment prompted me to read the BBC match report for that game. One thing stood out for me:

Bristol boss Pat Lam told BBC Radio Bristol:

"[Owner] Steve Lansdown had a quiet word to me about playing the Bears way, he wanted to be excited about the way we play and I said I'd see what we can do. I think he will have been excited by that performance.

Not sure if this was picked up elsewhere on OTIB? I wonder whether Lansdown has ever had a 'quiet word' with Bristol City managers about wanting them to play a certain way...?

I saw that interview.

He knows even less about rugby than he does about football. If he knew anything about the game he should tell Lam to stop acquiring mobile lightweight forwards, and bring in more Saffers because we are going backwards despite the win saturday.

[The Bard]

48 minutes ago, Robbored said:

I heard that from Lam and I Immediately thought that SL was ‘encouraging’ him to get away from the dreary kicking for position team that the Bears had become and were consequently losing too many matches.

When Lam was appoint he’d been playing attacking rugby at Connacht and that’s why SL wanted him. My buddy who’s a Bears SC holder reckoned that Lam had lost his way particularly this season.

SL gave him a wake up call - fair play to him.

He lost his way after that Quins game as did half the squad.  We've been  better this season. Have a 50/50 record in the league.  We need our best players back for the end of the season.  Genge, Thacker, Sinkler, Vui, Malins.  Only Genge involved in 6 Nations but he's had 8 weeks off.  If we start with a win v Northampton we have a chance for top 4. Lose and it's gone

[MelksRed]

11 hours ago, Andy082005 said:

Had he not booked him - no one would even have mentioned it 

Sadly, in the world we live in, someone would still have had beef with it.

[Not Banksy]

Sorry coming in a little late to this..  but surely expansion would only be necessary if we were selling out every week.. I’d imagine we would in the premier league quite comfortably.

 

but

 

we are in the championship and still around mid table. Normally half the Lansdown

[elhombrecito]

Just 19 tickets left... 

[Red Army 79]

Five out of the Six stands with availability are in the Family Stands where an Adult can’t buy a ticket without a child and vice versa. With all these being singular seats not sure how these will get sold without a child being separated from an Adult so it’s as close to a sell out as possible. 

[Portland Bill]

15 hours ago, Numero Uno said:

I've no doubt you are completely wrong...........because I'm not the type that completely fails to see the human side of things. But hey, as long as those ******* rules are applied bang on, word for word, we can all have a good tug.

Go and have a lie down, you sound really angry. 

[Port Said Red]

23 hours ago, 1960maaan said:

I think we would need to buy about 6 houses on Raynes road to build on the SS.
Any chance of that Concrete problem in the nearest block of flats( Southbow ?) ? That would allow the Dolman to be developed .  
Not sure filling in the corners would be cost affective . 
I think we are stuck without a hell of a lot of money being spent and a lot of luck with locals. 
That or the Council do compulsory purchase orders on everything within 500 yards of the Gate.

If and when the indoor arena is built, we could have an overflow watching the game on a big screen?

[Claverham_Red]

Now officially sold out. Wonder if spares will pop up around the ground every so often before Friday like the Cup games recently.

[The Bard]

1 minute ago, Claverham_Red said:

Now officially sold out. Wonder if spares will pop up around the ground every so often before Friday like the Cup games recently.

That also happened with the rugby last Saturday 

[bcfc01]

1 minute ago, Claverham_Red said:

Now officially sold out. Wonder if spares will pop up around the ground every so often before Friday like the Cup games recently.

Hospitality sold out as well, so no spare seats there.

But there's usually a few others that randomly crop up.

[Claverham_Red]

1 minute ago, The Bard said:

That also happened with the rugby last Saturday 

Yeah saw a few empty seats on the Bears v Bath match highlights. But I guess they don't have the segregation lost in the Atyeo.

[The Bard]

5 minutes ago, Claverham_Red said:

Yeah saw a few empty seats on the Bears v Bath match highlights. But I guess they don't have the segregation lost in the Atyeo.

Probably people queuing for a pint...

[petehinton]

Am I missing something….in the nicest way possible, why has it sold out?! Cheap tickets again?

[cidercity1987]

1 minute ago, petehinton said:

Am I missing something….in the nicest way possible, why has it sold out?! Cheap tickets again?

Leeds fans, obvs

[bcfc01]

1 minute ago, petehinton said:

Am I missing something….in the nicest way possible, why has it sold out?! Cheap tickets again?

Because we has the bestest support in the country, unlucky da.....sorry....wrong forum.

[McNasty Filth]

SOLD OUT...............game starts and half the seats in the South stand are empty due to people not bothering to turn up!

[Numero Uno]

7 minutes ago, McNasty Filth said:

SOLD OUT...............game starts and half the seats in the South stand are empty due to people not bothering to turn up!

It’s hardly surprising when you hear of absolute selfish tossers buying a cheap kids ticket in addition to their own so they don’t have to sit next to someone.

[hollydog]

1 minute ago, Numero Uno said:

It’s hardly surprising when you hear of absolute selfish tossers buying a cheap kids ticket in addition to their own so they don’t have to sit next to someone.

really?

[Numero Uno]

Just now, hollydog said:

really?

Yep, someone confirmed it on here the other week.

[McNasty Filth]

2 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

It’s hardly surprising when you hear of absolute selfish tossers buying a cheap kids ticket in addition to their own so they don’t have to sit next to someone.

Really, I've never heard that one before, ******* mental mate if true. BTW no one sits next to me, in the words of Shaggy 'wasn't me'!

[A Horse With No Name]

25 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

It’s hardly surprising when you hear of absolute selfish tossers buying a cheap kids ticket in addition to their own so they don’t have to sit next to someone.

Don't you think the hundreds stood at the back of the Dolman could be from the SS as there sure as hell ain't any empty seats in the Dolman. 

.

[Back of the Dolman]

2 hours ago, A Horse With No Name said:

Don't you think the hundreds stood at the back of the Dolman could be from the SS as there sure as hell ain't any empty seats in the Dolman. 

.

Yep haven’t seen that many at the back of the Dolman for a while and a lot of faces I didn’t recognise.

Would loved to of known where they were meant to be 

[Betty Swallocks]

9 hours ago, A Horse With No Name said:

Don't you think the hundreds stood at the back of the Dolman could be from the SS as there sure as hell ain't any empty seats in the Dolman. 

.

There and section 82. There’s definitely a lot in there who have season tickets in other parts of the South Stand. 

[A Horse With No Name]

1 hour ago, Betty Swallocks said:

There and section 82. There’s definitely a lot in there who have season tickets in other parts of the South Stand. 

At the Forest game there were dozens stood in the aisle between S23 and 24 at the back meaning people sat there couldn't see. Got very heated until a row of stewards came up and simply stood with them, making the situation worse. I can't understand why they didn't demand to see their ticket, to determine where they should be sat, and then hoiked them out of S23. 

Edited January 31 by A Horse With No Name