View Full Version : Lowest first team crowd since August 2007
The Lone Gunman
03-01-15, 08:56
Last night's attendance of 4,194 was Cardiff City's lowest ever for a competitive first team fixture at the Cardiff City Stadium and the smallest home crowd in all competitions for more than seven years.
The previous low was 3,726 for a midweek League Cup tie against Brighton & Hove Albion at Ninian Park in August 2007. City won the game 1-0 in extra time with a goal from Roger Johnson.
The last time Cardiff had a lower crowd for a home FA Cup tie was back in November 1999 when 3,095 turned up to watch the Bluebirds beat Leyton Orient 3-1 in a first round replay at Ninian Park. Matt Brazier, Russell Perrett and Kevin Nugent scored the goals. The club was is in the equivalent of League One at the time and were eventually relegated to the basement at the end of the 1999/2000 season.
Last night's attendance was the club's lowest ever for an FA Cup tie at the third round stage or beyond.
The crowd last night was nearer 2500!
From what little I saw of the game on TV I can only conclude that included in the 4k were the players, officials, stewards, bbc crew, catering staff and the OB.
The Lone Gunman
03-01-15, 09:06
The crowd last night was nearer 2500!It did look extraordinarily small on TV. I can only assume there were about 2,500 or more in the Grandstand.
From what little I saw of the game on TV I can only conclude that included in the 4k were the players, officials, stewards, bbc crew, catering staff and the OB. I mentioned this in a different thread last night but I assume that all Premier club members get counted as their season ticket includes cup games, doesn't it?
The crowd last night was nearer 2500!
It did look extraordinarily small on TV. I can only assume there were about 2,500 or more in the Grandstand.And the gold members in the premier lounge were counted as their season tickets include cup games http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/sherlock.gif
I was in the 4th. tier and there were only around 200 maybe less, someone said the other parts of the grandstand were sparse so where they got the 4000 odd figure from, who knows.
Not since they put the prices up, there are two types of tickets up there, one includes the cup games, the other does not loads of people opted for the cheaper ticket http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/thumbup.gif
EdinburghBlue
03-01-15, 09:48
Last night's attendance of 4,194 was Cardiff City's lowest ever for a competitive first team fixture at the Cardiff City Stadium and the smallest home crowd in all competitions for more than seven years.What time of the evening did you cream your pants?
The Lone Gunman
03-01-15, 11:05
What time of the evening did you cream your pants? http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/thumbup.gif
splott parker
03-01-15, 11:12
Last night's attendance of 4,194 was Cardiff City's lowest ever for a competitive first team fixture at the Cardiff City Stadium and the smallest home crowd in all competitions for more than seven years.We seem to do well in front of empty terraces going on those results, may be worth backing us to win division one next season http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif
What time of the evening did you cream your pants?
That's a very juvenile question from someone who increasingly seems to have lost the plot.Looking forward to the remaining matches, Taylor has looked distinctly average, yet somehow still manages to get the job done. Like doing a cardiff in reverse.
EdinburghBlue
03-01-15, 11:20
What time of the evening did you cream your pants?
That's a very juvenile question from someone who increasingly seems to have lost the plot. http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif That's one of the poorest respones you've come back with. You're standards are slipping. Ps. Did you look up all those stats while watching the darts, or did you get up early to do it?
gandalf1927
03-01-15, 11:21
What time of the evening did you cream your pants?
That's a very juvenile question from someone who increasingly seems to have lost the plot.
At no stage last night did I cream my pants. I did, however, very much enjoy watching the darts. I watched the first fifteen minutes or so of the Cardiff v Colchester FA Cup game on BBC Wales but it was tedious beyond belief and the standard of football was desperately poor, so I returned to the Taylor v van der Voort match. That was a fine contest, as was the fourth quarter final between Bunting and van Barneveld.Vincent had his chance to go 4-2 up when the sex pest missed several doubles , after that you just knew Taylor would win.
The Lone Gunman
03-01-15, 11:38
Looking forward to the remaining matches, Taylor has looked distinctly average, yet somehow still manages to get the job done. Like doing a cardiff in reverse.Taylor has an excellent chance. I backed van Gerwen after the third round, so he's doomed. My punting form is dismal at the moment. I can get anyone beat.
The Lone Gunman
03-01-15, 11:40
Did you look up all those stats while watching the darts, or did you get up early to do it?Neither. These things take a matter of minutes provided you have the necessary resources and a brain bigger than a weasel's wedding tackle. I'm guessing you're ruled out on both counts.
Looking forward to the remaining matches, Taylor has looked distinctly average, yet somehow still manages to get the job done. Like doing a cardiff in reverse.
Taylor has an excellent chance. I backed van Gerwen after the third round, so he's doomed. My punting form is dismal at the moment. I can get anyone beat.Do us a favour and back cardiff to get relegated then, there's a good chap http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/thumbup.gif
EdinburghBlue
03-01-15, 11:49
Did you look up all those stats while watching the darts, or did you get up early to do it?
Neither. These things take a matter of minutes provided you have the necessary resources and a brain bigger than a weasel's wedding tackle. I'm guessing you're ruled out on both counts.2/10 for effort. Your best retort was when you told a poster to "take a flying fu*k at a rolling doughnut" http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif i'ts all downhill since. Must try harder http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/thumbup.gif Ps. I do like most of your posts, but like everyone else you need to be kept on your toes. Pps. Watch Neil Alexander in action today in the Edinburgh derby. Glory glory to the Hearts!!
Eric the Half a Bee
03-01-15, 15:12
Looking forward to the remaining matches, Taylor has looked distinctly average, yet somehow still manages to get the job done. Like doing a cardiff in reverse.
Taylor has an excellent chance. I backed van Gerwen after the third round, so he's doomed. My punting form is dismal at the moment. I can get anyone beat.As has been said so many times this week it's all about timing - winning the important legs. Taylor is the master at it.
saganspirit
03-01-15, 15:14
Last night's attendance of 4,194 was Cardiff City's lowest ever for a competitive first team fixture at the Cardiff City Stadium and the smallest home crowd in all competitions for more than seven years.Perrett left foot curler http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif
What time of the evening did you cream your pants?
That's a very juvenile question from someone who increasingly seems to have lost the plot. http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif
Watamistakatomaka
03-01-15, 15:28
Last night's attendance of 4,194 was Cardiff City's lowest ever for a competitive first team fixture at the Cardiff City Stadium and the smallest home crowd in all competitions for more than seven years.None of those matches were live on BBC which would have made a difference.
Watamistakatomaka
03-01-15, 15:32
The crowd last night was nearer 2500!Why would Cardiff give an attendance higher than is actual, we have to give half the receipts to Colchester after the FA's cut. City would try and get away with a lower quote if anything!!
Lawley Kazoo
03-01-15, 15:41
The crowd last night was nearer 2500!
Why would Cardiff give an attendance higher than is actual, we have to give half the receipts to Colchester after the FA's cut. City would try and get away with a lower quote if anything!!Of course they would only have to tell the FA the actual attendance when it came to coughing up.
Watamistakatomaka
03-01-15, 15:49
The crowd last night was nearer 2500!
Why would Cardiff give an attendance higher than is actual, we have to give half the receipts to Colchester after the FA's cut. City would try and get away with a lower quote if anything!!
It was pretty clear to anyone with functioning eyes that there were no more than 2-2500 in CCS last night. It would have been embarrassing to give the real attendance figure and there is no way such a low figure could be blamed simply on TV and the unattractive opposition. I can only assume they counted premier seats etc to avoid the shame.So you think they can give 4194 as the official attendance then tell the FA it was only 2000 when they have to pay.....you talk nonsense 😄
the other bob wilson
03-01-15, 16:17
The crowd last night was nearer 2500!
Why would Cardiff give an attendance higher than is actual, we have to give half the receipts to Colchester after the FA's cut. City would try and get away with a lower quote if anything!!
It was pretty clear to anyone with functioning eyes that there were no more than 2-2500 in CCS last night. It would have been embarrassing to give the real attendance figure and there is no way such a low figure could be blamed simply on TV and the unattractive opposition. I can only assume they counted premier seats etc to avoid the shame.Everyone knows the announced figure for league matches this season has been a joke, but everyone had to buy a ticket for last night's match, so I think the announced crowd was an accurate figure mainly because I don't see what the club would gain by announcing there was, say, a thousand more there than there actually was.
JumpersforGoalposts
03-01-15, 16:58
My "season ticket" in the Premier Lounge includes cup matches. I wasn't there so certainly no more than 4193 last night.
Mario Miethig
03-01-15, 17:24
Surely it must have been the correct attendance, as Colchester get the same cut of the gate receipts as the City do. If the actual crowd was a thousand less than the announced crowd, then City would have to still give Colchester the gate money for the missing 1000.
Surely it must have been the correct attendance, as Colchester get the same cut of the gate receipts as the City do. If the actual crowd was a thousand less than the announced crowd, then City would have to still give Colchester the gate money for the missing 1000.Will there be anything left from the gate receipts for the two clubs after expenses? Doubtful.
Michael Morris
03-01-15, 17:53
Last night's attendance of 4,194 was Cardiff City's lowest ever for a competitive first team fixture at the Cardiff City Stadium and the smallest home crowd in all competitions for more than seven years.i'm going to use this post as an article if you don't mind. i'll credit it to tlg
EdinburghBlue
03-01-15, 18:01
What time of the evening did you cream your pants?
That's a very juvenile question from someone who increasingly seems to have lost the plot.
http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif Lets be fair, we've all lost the plot. All staying away and wanting the team to fail. TLG walked away and didn't want to breath the same air as fans who disagreed with him, yet he's on here posting the ins and outs of a rats arse, after every game. Tan has ****ed the club and ****ed the fans and what ever way anyone wants to wrap it up this club will never be the same. We may as well all laugh at ourselves. It's the only thing left
Mario Miethig
03-01-15, 18:31
Lowest gate in the Cup, so far this weekend.
Last night's attendance of 4,194 was Cardiff City's lowest ever for a competitive first team fixture at the Cardiff City Stadium and the smallest home crowd in all competitions for more than seven years.
The previous low was 3,726 for a midweek League Cup tie against Brighton & Hove Albion at Ninian Park in August 2007. City won the game 1-0 in extra time with a goal from Roger Johnson.Lets hope when things pick up, we get to read and use positive posts.
The crowd last night was nearer 2500!More lies eh? No way was there over 4000 there
The crowd last night was nearer 2500!
More lies eh? No way was there over 4000 thereI don't know because I didn't even bother watching it on TV but, as stated above, it would surely lead to all sorts of complications to lie about the gate.
crazyhorse
03-01-15, 19:59
The crowd last night was nearer 2500!
More lies eh? No way was there over 4000 there
I don't know because I didn't even bother watching it on TV but, as stated above, it would surely lead to all sorts of complications to lie about the gate.What sort of "complications"?
Bluemellons
03-01-15, 19:59
Last night's attendance of 4,194 was Cardiff City's lowest ever for a competitive first team fixture at the Cardiff City Stadium and the smallest home crowd in all competitions for more than seven years.Its a sad state of affairs but it has to be done.
The crowd last night was nearer 2500!
More lies eh? No way was there over 4000 there
I don't know because I didn't even bother watching it on TV but, as stated above, it would surely lead to all sorts of complications to lie about the gate.
What sort of "complications"?The ones stated above regarding the share of the payout to Colchester and the FA. If you make an official declaration of an attendance of 4000 but then later tell the FA and the taxman that you were lying, so you're not going to give them the cut they expected, then I imagine that raises a lot of legal and ethical complications. Can you see a fault in my argument? If so, please put me straight. Thanks.
Last night's attendance of 4,194 was Cardiff City's lowest ever for a competitive first team fixture at the Cardiff City Stadium and the smallest home crowd in all competitions for more than seven years.
The previous low was 3,726 for a midweek League Cup tie against Brighton & Hove Albion at Ninian Park in August 2007. City won the game 1-0 in extra time with a goal from Roger Johnson.I agree with this. I didn't renew this season and haven't even watched a game on the TV.
The crowd last night was nearer 2500!
Why would Cardiff give an attendance higher than is actual, we have to give half the receipts to Colchester after the FA's cut. City would try and get away with a lower quote if anything!!Do you think the empower cares? He is losing the all important nt face so he'd rather call it higher, pay col Utd more and more tax, at least he thinks he still wins, if your insane this makes sense.
crazyhorse
03-01-15, 20:25
The crowd last night was nearer 2500!
More lies eh? No way was there over 4000 there
I don't know because I didn't even bother watching it on TV but, as stated above, it would surely lead to all sorts of complications to lie about the gate.
What sort of "complications"?
The ones stated above regarding the share of the payout to Colchester and the FA. If you make an official declaration of an attendance of 4000 but then later tell the FA and the taxman that you were lying, so you're not going to give them the cut they expected, then I imagine that raises a lot of legal and ethical complications. Can you see a fault in my argument? If so, please put me straight. Thanks.The Gate money was £40,000 which is hardly going to start them fighting over the "cut". http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif
The crowd last night was nearer 2500!
More lies eh? No way was there over 4000 there
I don't know because I didn't even bother watching it on TV but, as stated above, it would surely lead to all sorts of complications to lie about the gate.
What sort of "complications"?
The ones stated above regarding the share of the payout to Colchester and the FA. If you make an official declaration of an attendance of 4000 but then later tell the FA and the taxman that you were lying, so you're not going to give them the cut they expected, then I imagine that raises a lot of legal and ethical complications. Can you see a fault in my argument? If so, please put me straight. Thanks.
The Gate money was £40,000 which is hardly going to start them fighting over the "cut". http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif So you think that nobody will bother mentioning the discrepancy just because it's only £40K? Is that how you think financial law works in this country?
crazyhorse
03-01-15, 20:34
The crowd last night was nearer 2500!
More lies eh? No way was there over 4000 there
I don't know because I didn't even bother watching it on TV but, as stated above, it would surely lead to all sorts of complications to lie about the gate.
What sort of "complications"?
The ones stated above regarding the share of the payout to Colchester and the FA. If you make an official declaration of an attendance of 4000 but then later tell the FA and the taxman that you were lying, so you're not going to give them the cut they expected, then I imagine that raises a lot of legal and ethical complications. Can you see a fault in my argument? If so, please put me straight. Thanks.
The Gate money was £40,000 which is hardly going to start them fighting over the "cut". http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif
So you think that nobody will bother mentioning the discrepancy just because it's only £40K? Is that how you think financial law works in this country?What discrepancy? Any proof?
The crowd last night was nearer 2500!
More lies eh? No way was there over 4000 there
I don't know because I didn't even bother watching it on TV but, as stated above, it would surely lead to all sorts of complications to lie about the gate.
What sort of "complications"?
The ones stated above regarding the share of the payout to Colchester and the FA. If you make an official declaration of an attendance of 4000 but then later tell the FA and the taxman that you were lying, so you're not going to give them the cut they expected, then I imagine that raises a lot of legal and ethical complications. Can you see a fault in my argument? If so, please put me straight. Thanks.
The Gate money was £40,000 which is hardly going to start them fighting over the "cut". http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif
So you think that nobody will bother mentioning the discrepancy just because it's only £40K? Is that how you think financial law works in this country?
What discrepancy? Any proof?The discrepancy between the revenue which comes from a gate of 2,500 and one which comes from 4,000. The proof is called mathematics. Are you really this stupid or are you just a parody of yourself?
Bluemellons
03-01-15, 20:38
If it was 4000 odd, our stadium must have 40000 seats. http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif
crazyhorse
03-01-15, 20:39
The crowd last night was nearer 2500!
More lies eh? No way was there over 4000 there
I don't know because I didn't even bother watching it on TV but, as stated above, it would surely lead to all sorts of complications to lie about the gate.
What sort of "complications"?
The ones stated above regarding the share of the payout to Colchester and the FA. If you make an official declaration of an attendance of 4000 but then later tell the FA and the taxman that you were lying, so you're not going to give them the cut they expected, then I imagine that raises a lot of legal and ethical complications. Can you see a fault in my argument? If so, please put me straight. Thanks.
The Gate money was £40,000 which is hardly going to start them fighting over the "cut". http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif
So you think that nobody will bother mentioning the discrepancy just because it's only £40K? Is that how you think financial law works in this country?
What discrepancy? Any proof?
The discrepancy between the revenue which comes from a gate of 2,500 and one which comes from 4,000. The proof is called mathematics. Are you really this stupid or are you just a parody of yourself?Have you any proof on the actual attendance? Simple question even for someone as dull as you.
The crowd last night was nearer 2500!
More lies eh? No way was there over 4000 there
I don't know because I didn't even bother watching it on TV but, as stated above, it would surely lead to all sorts of complications to lie about the gate.
What sort of "complications"?
The ones stated above regarding the share of the payout to Colchester and the FA. If you make an official declaration of an attendance of 4000 but then later tell the FA and the taxman that you were lying, so you're not going to give them the cut they expected, then I imagine that raises a lot of legal and ethical complications. Can you see a fault in my argument? If so, please put me straight. Thanks.
The Gate money was £40,000 which is hardly going to start them fighting over the "cut". http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif
So you think that nobody will bother mentioning the discrepancy just because it's only £40K? Is that how you think financial law works in this country?
What discrepancy? Any proof?
The discrepancy between the revenue which comes from a gate of 2,500 and one which comes from 4,000. The proof is called mathematics. Are you really this stupid or are you just a parody of yourself?
Have you any proof on the actual attendance? Simple question even for someone as dull as you. You do realise that you are engaging with a cabbage don't you?
The crowd last night was nearer 2500!
More lies eh? No way was there over 4000 there
I don't know because I didn't even bother watching it on TV but, as stated above, it would surely lead to all sorts of complications to lie about the gate.
What sort of "complications"?
The ones stated above regarding the share of the payout to Colchester and the FA. If you make an official declaration of an attendance of 4000 but then later tell the FA and the taxman that you were lying, so you're not going to give them the cut they expected, then I imagine that raises a lot of legal and ethical complications. Can you see a fault in my argument? If so, please put me straight. Thanks.
The Gate money was £40,000 which is hardly going to start them fighting over the "cut". http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif
So you think that nobody will bother mentioning the discrepancy just because it's only £40K? Is that how you think financial law works in this country?
What discrepancy? Any proof?
The discrepancy between the revenue which comes from a gate of 2,500 and one which comes from 4,000. The proof is called mathematics. Are you really this stupid or are you just a parody of yourself?
Have you any proof on the actual attendance? Simple question even for someone as dull as you. No, I've no proof of the attendance which has nothing to do with what I was talking about. I said that I think that there would be many legal ramifications if the club released an official attendance figure which differed significantly from the one they submitted to the FA. Do you think I'm wrong? If so, please tell me why and I'll be happy to stand corrected.
crazyhorse
03-01-15, 20:52
The crowd last night was nearer 2500!
More lies eh? No way was there over 4000 there
I don't know because I didn't even bother watching it on TV but, as stated above, it would surely lead to all sorts of complications to lie about the gate.
What sort of "complications"?
The ones stated above regarding the share of the payout to Colchester and the FA. If you make an official declaration of an attendance of 4000 but then later tell the FA and the taxman that you were lying, so you're not going to give them the cut they expected, then I imagine that raises a lot of legal and ethical complications. Can you see a fault in my argument? If so, please put me straight. Thanks.
The Gate money was £40,000 which is hardly going to start them fighting over the "cut". http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif
So you think that nobody will bother mentioning the discrepancy just because it's only £40K? Is that how you think financial law works in this country?
What discrepancy? Any proof?
The discrepancy between the revenue which comes from a gate of 2,500 and one which comes from 4,000. The proof is called mathematics. Are you really this stupid or are you just a parody of yourself?
Have you any proof on the actual attendance? Simple question even for someone as dull as you.
No, I've no proof of the attendance which has nothing to do with what I was talking about. I said that I think that there would be many legal ramifications if the club released an official attendance figure which differed significantly from the one they submitted to the FA. Do you think I'm wrong? If so, please tell me why and I'll be happy to stand corrected.You seem to think there is discrepancy between the actual attendance and what the club stated. Am I right in saying that?
The crowd last night was nearer 2500!
More lies eh? No way was there over 4000 there
I don't know because I didn't even bother watching it on TV but, as stated above, it would surely lead to all sorts of complications to lie about the gate.
What sort of "complications"?
The ones stated above regarding the share of the payout to Colchester and the FA. If you make an official declaration of an attendance of 4000 but then later tell the FA and the taxman that you were lying, so you're not going to give them the cut they expected, then I imagine that raises a lot of legal and ethical complications. Can you see a fault in my argument? If so, please put me straight. Thanks.
The Gate money was £40,000 which is hardly going to start them fighting over the "cut". http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif
So you think that nobody will bother mentioning the discrepancy just because it's only £40K? Is that how you think financial law works in this country?
What discrepancy? Any proof?
The discrepancy between the revenue which comes from a gate of 2,500 and one which comes from 4,000. The proof is called mathematics. Are you really this stupid or are you just a parody of yourself?
Have you any proof on the actual attendance? Simple question even for someone as dull as you.
No, I've no proof of the attendance which has nothing to do with what I was talking about. I said that I think that there would be many legal ramifications if the club released an official attendance figure which differed significantly from the one they submitted to the FA. Do you think I'm wrong? If so, please tell me why and I'll be happy to stand corrected.
You seem to think there is discrepancy between the actual attendance and what the club stated. Am I right in saying that?No. I didn't say that. I said the opposite. I said that I think there would be many legal ramifications/complications if they did that, as my previous posts state very clearly. Does anyone else reading this thread think I am being unclear?
saganspirit
03-01-15, 20:59
The crowd last night was nearer 2500!
More lies eh? No way was there over 4000 there
I don't know because I didn't even bother watching it on TV but, as stated above, it would surely lead to all sorts of complications to lie about the gate.
What sort of "complications"?
The ones stated above regarding the share of the payout to Colchester and the FA. If you make an official declaration of an attendance of 4000 but then later tell the FA and the taxman that you were lying, so you're not going to give them the cut they expected, then I imagine that raises a lot of legal and ethical complications. Can you see a fault in my argument? If so, please put me straight. Thanks.
The Gate money was £40,000 which is hardly going to start them fighting over the "cut". http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif
So you think that nobody will bother mentioning the discrepancy just because it's only £40K? Is that how you think financial law works in this country?
What discrepancy? Any proof?
The discrepancy between the revenue which comes from a gate of 2,500 and one which comes from 4,000. The proof is called mathematics. Are you really this stupid or are you just a parody of yourself?
Have you any proof on the actual attendance? Simple question even for someone as dull as you.
No, I've no proof of the attendance which has nothing to do with what I was talking about. I said that I think that there would be many legal ramifications if the club released an official attendance figure which differed significantly from the one they submitted to the FA. Do you think I'm wrong? If so, please tell me why and I'll be happy to stand corrected.
You seem to think there is discrepancy between the actual attendance and what the club stated. Am I right in saying that?
No. I didn't say that. I said the opposite. I said that I think there would be many legal ramifications/complications if they did that, as my previous posts state very clearly. Does anyone else reading this thread think I am being unclear?No, you're being clear. However, you're arguing with the biggest troll on here.
crazyhorse
03-01-15, 21:01
The crowd last night was nearer 2500!
More lies eh? No way was there over 4000 there
I don't know because I didn't even bother watching it on TV but, as stated above, it would surely lead to all sorts of complications to lie about the gate.
What sort of "complications"?
The ones stated above regarding the share of the payout to Colchester and the FA. If you make an official declaration of an attendance of 4000 but then later tell the FA and the taxman that you were lying, so you're not going to give them the cut they expected, then I imagine that raises a lot of legal and ethical complications. Can you see a fault in my argument? If so, please put me straight. Thanks.
The Gate money was £40,000 which is hardly going to start them fighting over the "cut". http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif
So you think that nobody will bother mentioning the discrepancy just because it's only £40K? Is that how you think financial law works in this country?
What discrepancy? Any proof?
The discrepancy between the revenue which comes from a gate of 2,500 and one which comes from 4,000. The proof is called mathematics. Are you really this stupid or are you just a parody of yourself?
Have you any proof on the actual attendance? Simple question even for someone as dull as you.
No, I've no proof of the attendance which has nothing to do with what I was talking about. I said that I think that there would be many legal ramifications if the club released an official attendance figure which differed significantly from the one they submitted to the FA. Do you think I'm wrong? If so, please tell me why and I'll be happy to stand corrected.
You seem to think there is discrepancy between the actual attendance and what the club stated. Am I right in saying that?
No. I didn't say that. I said the opposite. I said that I think there would be many legal ramifications/complications if they did that, as my previous posts state very clearly. Does anyone else reading this thread think I am being unclear?So basically what you're saying is that there would be if it was . http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif Give up FFS
The crowd last night was nearer 2500!
More lies eh? No way was there over 4000 there
I don't know because I didn't even bother watching it on TV but, as stated above, it would surely lead to all sorts of complications to lie about the gate.
What sort of "complications"?
The ones stated above regarding the share of the payout to Colchester and the FA. If you make an official declaration of an attendance of 4000 but then later tell the FA and the taxman that you were lying, so you're not going to give them the cut they expected, then I imagine that raises a lot of legal and ethical complications. Can you see a fault in my argument? If so, please put me straight. Thanks.
The Gate money was £40,000 which is hardly going to start them fighting over the "cut". http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif
So you think that nobody will bother mentioning the discrepancy just because it's only £40K? Is that how you think financial law works in this country?
What discrepancy? Any proof?
The discrepancy between the revenue which comes from a gate of 2,500 and one which comes from 4,000. The proof is called mathematics. Are you really this stupid or are you just a parody of yourself?
Have you any proof on the actual attendance? Simple question even for someone as dull as you.
No, I've no proof of the attendance which has nothing to do with what I was talking about. I said that I think that there would be many legal ramifications if the club released an official attendance figure which differed significantly from the one they submitted to the FA. Do you think I'm wrong? If so, please tell me why and I'll be happy to stand corrected.
You seem to think there is discrepancy between the actual attendance and what the club stated. Am I right in saying that?
No. I didn't say that. I said the opposite. I said that I think there would be many legal ramifications/complications if they did that, as my previous posts state very clearly. Does anyone else reading this thread think I am being unclear?
So basically what you're saying is that there would be if it was . http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif Give up FFSYes. It's called stating a hypothesis. It's what people do when they're having a debate. What is your opinion? Where are the flaws in my argument?
crazyhorse
03-01-15, 21:04
The crowd last night was nearer 2500!
More lies eh? No way was there over 4000 there
I don't know because I didn't even bother watching it on TV but, as stated above, it would surely lead to all sorts of complications to lie about the gate.
What sort of "complications"?
The ones stated above regarding the share of the payout to Colchester and the FA. If you make an official declaration of an attendance of 4000 but then later tell the FA and the taxman that you were lying, so you're not going to give them the cut they expected, then I imagine that raises a lot of legal and ethical complications. Can you see a fault in my argument? If so, please put me straight. Thanks.
The Gate money was £40,000 which is hardly going to start them fighting over the "cut". http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif
So you think that nobody will bother mentioning the discrepancy just because it's only £40K? Is that how you think financial law works in this country?
What discrepancy? Any proof?
The discrepancy between the revenue which comes from a gate of 2,500 and one which comes from 4,000. The proof is called mathematics. Are you really this stupid or are you just a parody of yourself?
Have you any proof on the actual attendance? Simple question even for someone as dull as you.
No, I've no proof of the attendance which has nothing to do with what I was talking about. I said that I think that there would be many legal ramifications if the club released an official attendance figure which differed significantly from the one they submitted to the FA. Do you think I'm wrong? If so, please tell me why and I'll be happy to stand corrected.
You seem to think there is discrepancy between the actual attendance and what the club stated. Am I right in saying that?
No. I didn't say that. I said the opposite. I said that I think there would be many legal ramifications/complications if they did that, as my previous posts state very clearly. Does anyone else reading this thread think I am being unclear?
No, you're being unclear. However, you're arguing with the best poster on here. http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif
The crowd last night was nearer 2500!
More lies eh? No way was there over 4000 there
I don't know because I didn't even bother watching it on TV but, as stated above, it would surely lead to all sorts of complications to lie about the gate.
What sort of "complications"?
The ones stated above regarding the share of the payout to Colchester and the FA. If you make an official declaration of an attendance of 4000 but then later tell the FA and the taxman that you were lying, so you're not going to give them the cut they expected, then I imagine that raises a lot of legal and ethical complications. Can you see a fault in my argument? If so, please put me straight. Thanks.
The Gate money was £40,000 which is hardly going to start them fighting over the "cut". http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif
So you think that nobody will bother mentioning the discrepancy just because it's only £40K? Is that how you think financial law works in this country?
What discrepancy? Any proof?
The discrepancy between the revenue which comes from a gate of 2,500 and one which comes from 4,000. The proof is called mathematics. Are you really this stupid or are you just a parody of yourself?
Have you any proof on the actual attendance? Simple question even for someone as dull as you.
No, I've no proof of the attendance which has nothing to do with what I was talking about. I said that I think that there would be many legal ramifications if the club released an official attendance figure which differed significantly from the one they submitted to the FA. Do you think I'm wrong? If so, please tell me why and I'll be happy to stand corrected.
You seem to think there is discrepancy between the actual attendance and what the club stated. Am I right in saying that?
No. I didn't say that. I said the opposite. I said that I think there would be many legal ramifications/complications if they did that, as my previous posts state very clearly. Does anyone else reading this thread think I am being unclear?
No, you're being clear. However, you're arguing with the biggest troll on here.I don't think of Croesy as a troll. Trolls are usually relatively intelligent. At least intelligent enough to follow the argument that they are trying to troll. Croesy's intellectually marooned after the fifth post on any thread he (inexplicably) starts.
The crowd last night was nearer 2500!
More lies eh? No way was there over 4000 there
I don't know because I didn't even bother watching it on TV but, as stated above, it would surely lead to all sorts of complications to lie about the gate.
What sort of "complications"?
The ones stated above regarding the share of the payout to Colchester and the FA. If you make an official declaration of an attendance of 4000 but then later tell the FA and the taxman that you were lying, so you're not going to give them the cut they expected, then I imagine that raises a lot of legal and ethical complications. Can you see a fault in my argument? If so, please put me straight. Thanks.
The Gate money was £40,000 which is hardly going to start them fighting over the "cut". http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif
So you think that nobody will bother mentioning the discrepancy just because it's only £40K? Is that how you think financial law works in this country?
What discrepancy? Any proof?
The discrepancy between the revenue which comes from a gate of 2,500 and one which comes from 4,000. The proof is called mathematics. Are you really this stupid or are you just a parody of yourself?
Have you any proof on the actual attendance? Simple question even for someone as dull as you.
No, I've no proof of the attendance which has nothing to do with what I was talking about. I said that I think that there would be many legal ramifications if the club released an official attendance figure which differed significantly from the one they submitted to the FA. Do you think I'm wrong? If so, please tell me why and I'll be happy to stand corrected.
You seem to think there is discrepancy between the actual attendance and what the club stated. Am I right in saying that?
No. I didn't say that. I said the opposite. I said that I think there would be many legal ramifications/complications if they did that, as my previous posts state very clearly. Does anyone else reading this thread think I am being unclear?
No, you're being unclear. However, you're arguing with the best poster on here.
http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif You've actually shown a degree of creativity there. There may be hope.
Bluemellons
03-01-15, 21:09
Stop copying the entire message when replying ffs!!! Its doin my ead in!!!! http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif
Stop copying the entire message when replying ffs!!! Its doin my ead in!!!! http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif Sorry. It does get a bit out of hand, doesn't it. I'm just being lazy.
The crowd last night was nearer 2500!Really thanks for that
saganspirit
03-01-15, 21:19
The crowd last night was nearer 2500!
More lies eh? No way was there over 4000 there
I don't know because I didn't even bother watching it on TV but, as stated above, it would surely lead to all sorts of complications to lie about the gate.
What sort of "complications"?
The ones stated above regarding the share of the payout to Colchester and the FA. If you make an official declaration of an attendance of 4000 but then later tell the FA and the taxman that you were lying, so you're not going to give them the cut they expected, then I imagine that raises a lot of legal and ethical complications. Can you see a fault in my argument? If so, please put me straight. Thanks.
The Gate money was £40,000 which is hardly going to start them fighting over the "cut". http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif
So you think that nobody will bother mentioning the discrepancy just because it's only £40K? Is that how you think financial law works in this country?
What discrepancy? Any proof?
The discrepancy between the revenue which comes from a gate of 2,500 and one which comes from 4,000. The proof is called mathematics. Are you really this stupid or are you just a parody of yourself?
Have you any proof on the actual attendance? Simple question even for someone as dull as you.
No, I've no proof of the attendance which has nothing to do with what I was talking about. I said that I think that there would be many legal ramifications if the club released an official attendance figure which differed significantly from the one they submitted to the FA. Do you think I'm wrong? If so, please tell me why and I'll be happy to stand corrected.
You seem to think there is discrepancy between the actual attendance and what the club stated. Am I right in saying that?
No. I didn't say that. I said the opposite. I said that I think there would be many legal ramifications/complications if they did that, as my previous posts state very clearly. Does anyone else reading this thread think I am being unclear?
No, you're being unclear. However, you're arguing with the best poster on here.
http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif apart from the double negative - http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif
crazyhorse
03-01-15, 21:22
The crowd last night was nearer 2500!
More lies eh? No way was there over 4000 there
I don't know because I didn't even bother watching it on TV but, as stated above, it would surely lead to all sorts of complications to lie about the gate.
What sort of "complications"?
The ones stated above regarding the share of the payout to Colchester and the FA. If you make an official declaration of an attendance of 4000 but then later tell the FA and the taxman that you were lying, so you're not going to give them the cut they expected, then I imagine that raises a lot of legal and ethical complications. Can you see a fault in my argument? If so, please put me straight. Thanks.
The Gate money was £40,000 which is hardly going to start them fighting over the "cut". http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif
So you think that nobody will bother mentioning the discrepancy just because it's only £40K? Is that how you think financial law works in this country?
What discrepancy? Any proof?
The discrepancy between the revenue which comes from a gate of 2,500 and one which comes from 4,000. The proof is called mathematics. Are you really this stupid or are you just a parody of yourself?
Have you any proof on the actual attendance? Simple question even for someone as dull as you.
No, I've no proof of the attendance which has nothing to do with what I was talking about. I said that I think that there would be many legal ramifications if the club released an official attendance figure which differed significantly from the one they submitted to the FA. Do you think I'm wrong? If so, please tell me why and I'll be happy to stand corrected.
You seem to think there is discrepancy between the actual attendance and what the club stated. Am I right in saying that?
No. I didn't say that. I said the opposite. I said that I think there would be many legal ramifications/complications if they did that, as my previous posts state very clearly. Does anyone else reading this thread think I am being unclear?
No, you're being unclear. However, you're arguing with the best poster on here.
http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif
apart from me being an utter knob - http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif
saganspirit
03-01-15, 21:26
The crowd last night was nearer 2500!
More lies eh? No way was there over 4000 there
I don't know because I didn't even bother watching it on TV but, as stated above, it would surely lead to all sorts of complications to lie about the gate.
What sort of "complications"?
The ones stated above regarding the share of the payout to Colchester and the FA. If you make an official declaration of an attendance of 4000 but then later tell the FA and the taxman that you were lying, so you're not going to give them the cut they expected, then I imagine that raises a lot of legal and ethical complications. Can you see a fault in my argument? If so, please put me straight. Thanks.
The Gate money was £40,000 which is hardly going to start them fighting over the "cut". http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif
So you think that nobody will bother mentioning the discrepancy just because it's only £40K? Is that how you think financial law works in this country?
What discrepancy? Any proof?
The discrepancy between the revenue which comes from a gate of 2,500 and one which comes from 4,000. The proof is called mathematics. Are you really this stupid or are you just a parody of yourself?
Have you any proof on the actual attendance? Simple question even for someone as dull as you.
No, I've no proof of the attendance which has nothing to do with what I was talking about. I said that I think that there would be many legal ramifications if the club released an official attendance figure which differed significantly from the one they submitted to the FA. Do you think I'm wrong? If so, please tell me why and I'll be happy to stand corrected.
You seem to think there is discrepancy between the actual attendance and what the club stated. Am I right in saying that?
No. I didn't say that. I said the opposite. I said that I think there would be many legal ramifications/complications if they did that, as my previous posts state very clearly. Does anyone else reading this thread think I am being unclear?
No, you're being unclear. However, you're arguing with the best poster on here.
http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif
apart from me being an utter knob - http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif
http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif erudite...
I presume, then, Croesy, that you're satisfied with my explanation.
EdinburghBlue
03-01-15, 22:58
Last night's attendance of 4,194 was Cardiff City's lowest ever for a competitive first team fixture at the Cardiff City Stadium and the smallest home crowd in all competitions for more than seven years.
The previous low was 3,726 for a midweek League Cup tie against Brighton & Hove Albion at Ninian Park in August 2007. City won the game 1-0 in extra time with a goal from Roger Johnson.Are you gonna send it to Tan?
Last night's attendance of 4,194 was Cardiff City's lowest ever for a competitive first team fixture at the Cardiff City Stadium and the smallest home crowd in all competitions for more than seven years. http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif
The previous low was 3,726 for a midweek League Cup tie against Brighton & Hove Albion at Ninian Park in August 2007. City won the game 1-0 in extra time with a goal from Roger Johnson.
The last time Cardiff had a lower crowd for a home FA Cup tie was back in November 1999 when 3,095 turned up to watch the Bluebirds beat Leyton Orient 3-1 in a first round replay at Ninian Park. Matt Brazier, Russell Perrett and Kevin Nugent scored the goals. The club was is in the equivalent of League One at the time and were eventually relegated to the basement at the end of the 1999/2000 season. http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif
I don't know because I didn't even bother watching it on TV but, as stated above, it would surely lead to all sorts of complications to lie about the gate.[/quote]
What sort of "complications"?[/quote]
The ones stated above regarding the share of the payout to Colchester and the FA. If you make an official declaration of an attendance of 4000 but then later tell the FA and the taxman that you were lying, so you're not going to give them the cut they expected, then I imagine that raises a lot of legal and ethical complications. Can you see a fault in my argument? If so, please put me straight. Thanks.[/quote]
Vt would pay the difference not to lose face, so if city say 4000 odd then that is what it is, although it was only 2562 http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/thumbup.gif
Jimmy the Jock
03-01-15, 23:11
there were 3,500 tickets sold. I am guessing the other 700 came from premier club members who have cup games with their package.
I watched the first fifteen minutes or so of the Cardiff v Colchester FA Cup game on BBC Wales but it was tedious beyond belief and the standard of football was desperately poor, so I returned to the Taylor v van der Voort match.
Would you have felt different if we were back in blue? To say you turned over due to the standard of football is astounding to me! Surely we were just as bad during the 80's and 90's
Taunton Blue Genie
04-01-15, 19:34
<b> I watched the first fifteen minutes or so of the Cardiff v Colchester FA Cup game on BBC Wales but it was tedious beyond belief and the standard of football was desperately poor, so I returned to the Taylor v van der Voort match. Why is it astounding? I did the same. There is a difference between tolerating an awful game when you feel a close affinity to a club and not tolerating it unduly because you don't feel that same affinity.
I watched the first fifteen minutes or so of the Cardiff v Colchester FA Cup game on BBC Wales but it was tedious beyond belief and the standard of football was desperately poor, so I returned to the Taylor v van der Voort match.
I found it a bit strange a life long supporter would turn over due to the standard of football considering the diet he was brought up on...that's all!
Taunton Blue Genie
04-01-15, 19:40
I watched the first fifteen minutes or so of the Cardiff v Colchester FA Cup game on BBC Wales but it was tedious beyond belief and the standard of football was desperately poor, so I returned to the Taylor v van der Voort match.
Would you have felt different if we were back in blue? To say you turned over due to the standard of football is astounding to me! Surely we were just as bad during the 80's and 90'sThat's because you weren't comparing like with like.
I watched the first fifteen minutes or so of the Cardiff v Colchester FA Cup game on BBC Wales but it was tedious beyond belief and the standard of football was desperately poor, so I returned to the Taylor v van der Voort match.
Would you have felt different if we were back in blue? To say you turned over due to the standard of football is astounding to me! Surely we were just as bad during the 80's and 90's
Why is it astounding? I did the same. There is a difference between tolerating an awful game when you feel a close affinity to a club and not tolerating it unduly because you don't feel that same affinity. Oh, l see. Silly me
I watched the first fifteen minutes or so of the Cardiff v Colchester FA Cup game on BBC Wales but it was tedious beyond belief and the standard of football was desperately poor, so I returned to the Taylor v van der Voort match.
As an aside, would you have carried on watching if we were playing champagne football?
Taunton Blue Genie
04-01-15, 20:08
I watched the first fifteen minutes or so of the Cardiff v Colchester FA Cup game on BBC Wales but it was tedious beyond belief and the standard of football was desperately poor, so I returned to the Taylor v van der Voort match.
Would you have felt different if we were back in blue? To say you turned over due to the standard of football is astounding to me! Surely we were just as bad during the 80's and 90'sTo be honest, I don't want City to be successful at the moment as it would be power to Tan's elbow, in my humble opinion.
I Agree with you on that front. What compelled you to watch the game in the first place?
Taunton Blue Genie
04-01-15, 20:13
I Agree with you on that front. What compelled you to watch the game in the first place? I didn't feel compelled to watch it. I watched a bit of it and then changed channel.
I watched the first fifteen minutes or so of the Cardiff v Colchester FA Cup game on BBC Wales but it was tedious beyond belief and the standard of football was desperately poor, so I returned to the Taylor v van der Voort match.
Would you have felt different if we were back in blue? To say you turned over due to the standard of football is astounding to me! Surely we were just as bad during the 80's and 90's
Why is it astounding? I did the same. There is a difference between tolerating an awful game when you feel a close affinity to a club and not tolerating it unduly because you don't feel that same affinity. Yet you attended Premier League games....
I watched the first fifteen minutes or so of the Cardiff v Colchester FA Cup game on BBC Wales but it was tedious beyond belief and the standard of football was desperately poor, so I returned to the Taylor v van der Voort match.
Would you have felt different if we were back in blue? To say you turned over due to the standard of football is astounding to me! Surely we were just as bad during the 80's and 90's
Why is it astounding? I did the same. There is a difference between tolerating an awful game when you feel a close affinity to a club and not tolerating it unduly because you don't feel that same affinity.
As an aside, would you have carried on watching if we were playing champagne football?I'm not interested in slanging matches TBH, i'm just trying to see what our fans current outlook is...
I watched the first fifteen minutes or so of the Cardiff v Colchester FA Cup game on BBC Wales but it was tedious beyond belief and the standard of football was desperately poor, so I returned to the Taylor v van der Voort match.
Would you have felt different if we were back in blue? To say you turned over due to the standard of football is astounding to me! Surely we were just as bad during the 80's and 90's
Why is it astounding? I did the same. There is a difference between tolerating an awful game when you feel a close affinity to a club and not tolerating it unduly because you don't feel that same affinity.
As an aside, would you have carried on watching if we were playing champagne football?
To be honest, I don't want City to be successful at the moment as it would be power to Tan's elbow, in my humble opinion.Neither am I, but it's easy to not want success for the club after we've had it.
I watched the first fifteen minutes or so of the Cardiff v Colchester FA Cup game on BBC Wales but it was tedious beyond belief and the standard of football was desperately poor, so I returned to the Taylor v van der Voort match.
Would you have felt different if we were back in blue? To say you turned over due to the standard of football is astounding to me! Surely we were just as bad during the 80's and 90's
Why is it astounding? I did the same. There is a difference between tolerating an awful game when you feel a close affinity to a club and not tolerating it unduly because you don't feel that same affinity.
As an aside, would you have carried on watching if we were playing champagne football?Boom http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif
LoudounSquareLurker
04-01-15, 20:32
Looking forward to the remaining matches, Taylor has looked distinctly average, yet somehow still manages to get the job done. Like doing a cardiff in reverse.
Taylor has an excellent chance. I backed van Gerwen after the third round, so he's doomed. My punting form is dismal at the moment. I can get anyone beat.I'd rather watch City v Colchester in a tedious match than the best darts match that ever was! Just a pub pastime not a sport!
Taunton Blue Genie
04-01-15, 21:09
I watched the first fifteen minutes or so of the Cardiff v Colchester FA Cup game on BBC Wales but it was tedious beyond belief and the standard of football was desperately poor, so I returned to the Taylor v van der Voort match.
Would you have felt different if we were back in blue? To say you turned over due to the standard of football is astounding to me! Surely we were just as bad during the 80's and 90's
Why is it astounding? I did the same. There is a difference between tolerating an awful game when you feel a close affinity to a club and not tolerating it unduly because you don't feel that same affinity.
As an aside, would you have carried on watching if we were playing champagne football?
To be honest, I don't want City to be successful at the moment as it would be power to Tan's elbow, in my humble opinion.
Yet you attended Premier League games....For me, the old Cardiff City no longer existed and I acted purely in my own interests in this instance. I didn't celebrate City's goals and wasn't gutted when they conceded. I chose to use the rebranded club purely for my own purposes -as it is not an entity that I feel any allegiance to.
EdinburghBlue
05-01-15, 03:39
I watched the first fifteen minutes or so of the Cardiff v Colchester FA Cup game on BBC Wales but it was tedious beyond belief and the standard of football was desperately poor, so I returned to the Taylor v van der Voort match.
Would you have felt different if we were back in blue? To say you turned over due to the standard of football is astounding to me! Surely we were just as bad during the 80's and 90's
Why is it astounding? I did the same. There is a difference between tolerating an awful game when you feel a close affinity to a club and not tolerating it unduly because you don't feel that same affinity.
As an aside, would you have carried on watching if we were playing champagne football?
To be honest, I don't want City to be successful at the moment as it would be power to Tan's elbow, in my humble opinion.
Yet you attended Premier League games....
I'm not interested in slanging matches TBH, i'm just trying to see what our fans current outlook is...That's got to be up there with the biggest pile of pish i've ever read on here, and i'm a good judge because i write post most of it. http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif
I watched the first fifteen minutes or so of the Cardiff v Colchester FA Cup game on BBC Wales but it was tedious beyond belief and the standard of football was desperately poor, so I returned to the Taylor v van der Voort match.
Would you have felt different if we were back in blue? To say you turned over due to the standard of football is astounding to me! Surely we were just as bad during the 80's and 90's
Why is it astounding? I did the same. There is a difference between tolerating an awful game when you feel a close affinity to a club and not tolerating it unduly because you don't feel that same affinity.
As an aside, would you have carried on watching if we were playing champagne football?
To be honest, I don't want City to be successful at the moment as it would be power to Tan's elbow, in my humble opinion.
Yet you attended Premier League games....
I'm not interested in slanging matches TBH, i'm just trying to see what our fans current outlook is... http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/hehe.gif http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/shrug.gif
The Lone Gunman
05-01-15, 08:25
<b> I watched the first fifteen minutes or so of the Cardiff v Colchester FA Cup game on BBC Wales but it was tedious beyond belief and the standard of football was desperately poor, so I returned to the Taylor v van der Voort match. To be honest, I doubt I would have felt any different if the team was wearing blue. Things have changed. In the 80's and 90's I would have been there. Three seasons ago I would have been there. These days, watching the Emperor's Redbirds labouring away against a poor League One side doesn't appeal. I gave it a go but it was about as entertaining as watching wood warp, so I turned over.
crazyhorse
05-01-15, 08:31
I watched the first fifteen minutes or so of the Cardiff v Colchester FA Cup game on BBC Wales but it was tedious beyond belief and the standard of football was desperately poor, so I returned to the Taylor v van der Voort match.
You forgot to mention the money you saved. http://www.ccmb.co.uk/images/smiley_icons/thumbup.gif
The Lone Gunman
05-01-15, 09:15
You forgot to mention the money you saved.Sky Sports doesn't come cheap you know.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.