BlyBlyBabes

[quote user="lappinitup"][quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]As seen on TV there was a significant patch of such seats available in the main (?) stand at the Peterborough match.[/quote] Those seats were clearly a division between home and away fans Bly as is normal. Did you stand throughout the match whilst watching on TV, or did you just jump to your feet when we scored? [^o)] [/quote]   I doubt that a square patch of  seats say 15 x 15 at the front of the stand and very sparsely populated was a security division. If so their CEO must be even more inept than their football manager.   Sat the whole time except to brew a mug of fine coffee at half time -  it was a calmly pleasing victory rather than an emotional epic!!   Sorry to disappoint you...............but that fresh start you know...............   One love.   OTBC        

[quote user="PurpleCanary"] [quote user="lappinitup"][quote user="Surfbird"]It should also be said the Geoffrey Watling intitially saved the club from collapse buy buying Chase''s shares before selling them on to Delia and Michael Wynne-Jones.[/quote] To be fair Surfbird, that is common knowledge. What isn''t so clear is just how much money they paid Watling for those shares. If you have proof of that we can finally put it to bed. [/quote]   I must be missing something,[*-)] because I have never understood why that question was important. If they paid the going rate (whatever that was) or more than the going rate then there is no issue at all. I can only imagine that the subtext is that they got the club on the cheap, but that is based on a fallacy. For starters, the money and time and effort they have put in since have more than made up for any supposed shortfall. But if there was a shortfall it wasn''t with the club anyway. The money went into Watling''s famous wallet rather than the club''s coffers, whereas that is exactly where Smith and Jones post-purchase money has gone. In practice they have paid for the club twice over. [/quote]   Done with pleasure no doubt and some relief that they didn''t end up chucking good money after bad ........... but I bet they wish they hadn''t had to!   OTBC

Somebody mentioned prawn sandwiches.   Now, the obvious way to avoid having to stand at away games is simply to purchase a somewhat better class of ticket (and hope that one will have space for the picnic baskett!   As seen on TV there was a significant patch of such seats available in the main (?) stand at the Peterborough match.   [um]   OTBC        

[quote user="jed exodous"] Is Luis as good as his brother, Lucas? [/quote]   [:$]   OTBC   P.S. In the spirit of SDPs fresh start initiative for 2013 I have deprived myself of making an appropriately feisty retort!!  [:''(]

Appaently he is awaiting suitors.   http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/arsenal-consider-approaches-for-lucas-biglia-1523387   OTBC

[quote user="Webbo118"] [quote user="Mungo Bumpkin"]Quite the contrary. Tanked-up embarrassing wurzells were to blame. The choice bunch behind me spent most of the game with their backs to the pitch looking at their phones. Hardly a crime but when it transpired they didn''t have a clue who most of our players were I felt rather sorry for the genuine supporters who missed out on tickets.[/quote]   If they spent "most of the game with their backs to the pitch looking at their phones", you must have spent most of the game with your back to the pitch looking at them looking at their phones otherwise you wouldn''t have known this. [/quote]   Don''t you know that he carries a mirror?   OTBC

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Webbo118"][quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="Webbo118"][quote user="nutty nigel"] Well your experience is different to mine Webbo. But at the end of the day if you are standing in a seated area you are in the wrong. Regardless of what you may or may not have asked for. So it''s in the interests of those who want to stand to try and look after those who don''t.         [/quote]   So are you saying then that with everyone else standing, I should sit? [/quote]   LOL!   Who am I to say what you should do Webbo. I''m just saying that if you want to stand in a seated area you are the one in the wrong so it would be in your interests to try and look after those who want to sit. Disregarding the needs of others by doing something that''s against stadium regulations can ultimately only go one way.   Webbo getting a football ASBO???? Never say never[:O]   I think you have totally misunderstood what I am saying. I bought a seat by choice because I wanted to sit. But more than that, I wanted to see the match so I was forced to stand. I had no desire to stand. IT WAS NOT MY WISH. Now if I was in the wrong by standing because I wanted to see the game and that was the only way to do so because everyone else was standing, I am guilty as charged. I imagine that your worthiness, finding yourself in the same situation, would have sat for 90 minutes and not seen a thing except the backside of the person in front of you. Your choice but it would never be mine.       [/quote][/quote]   I rather suspected this was the case Webbo. So basically we''re singing off the same hymn sheet and it''s unlikely, but not impossible, that you''d get an ASBO. Here''s your get out clause : -   If there was a young child or an old werthers sucker behind you would you stand there happy in the knowledge that it wasn''t your fault all they could see was the back of your crombie? Or would you attempt to do something about such a ridiculous state of affairs?   [/quote]   You mean like toddle off to trading standards on Monday morning with ticket stub in hand and camera phone in pocket to lay an evidence based complaint against the home club under the Fair Trade Act or whatever it''s correct name is?   OTBC

[quote user="Surfbird"]I can tell you that they rescued the club from impending disaster with no thought of making money from the deal. I have the docs to prove it.[/quote]   Why don''t you scan them and show us them all?   Or should we just believe you?   OTBC

[quote user="TIL 1010"][quote user="BlyBlyBabes"] A start may be to have targetted cctv cameras in the stands operated by an agreed third party [/quote] Would this be in addition to the CCTV systems that football clubs already have which are operated by club staff and or Police officers ? The third party operatives that you suggest would be agreed by who exactly ? If your ''targetted cctv cameras'' are to be an entirely seperate system who foots the bill for it''s installation Bly ? Blimey that is 3 questions in one post so as you ignored the previous one earlier on this thread about who sues who i shall not hold my breath in my quest for answers. [/quote]   It seems as if you''re happily heading in the direction of  the ''why it can''t be done camp'' rather than the ''how it can be done camp''.   You may also find it instructive to read all my posts on the thread rather than some. That''s how defence counsel win all the time. Investigators not covering all the bases. [;)]   OTBC

[quote user="crabbycanary"]This was a very similar conversation I had with someone at work after the Man City game. We have been banging on, for weeks, about getting another big CF, yet Man City have played very effectively at times without a big unit up front, in a very fluid ''smaller man'' system. We talked about where we are at, as a Club at the mo, and felt we do not have the overall quality to play the Man City ''way'', but why shouldn''t we aim for that at times? I understand what Bethnal said about Silva (for me the best performance I saw from a visiting player last season) and that we do not possess anyone like him, but who does in this League? The sort of player we are missing, is a shorter , very strong on their feet, close control type player, a bit like Aguero, Suarez or Tevez. Now they don''t come around very often, and certainly out of our reach, but why not have a ''poor mans'' version?[/quote]   Well put crabby.   I think that perhaps opponents have stared to suss us out more recently.   Thus we need to be able to mix up formations, tactics and strategies rather more - like we did last season. Get that element of surprise back which can throw opponents off for 5, 10, 15 mins.   OTBC

Suarez is 5'' 11" apparently, although he doesn''t look it to me.   OTBC

Did anyone notice the sizeable patch of empty seats behind the dugouts in what appeared to be the main stand.   I wonder what they cost? Bet nobody stands there!   OTBC

[quote user="lappinitup"][quote user="BlyBlyBabes"]Simeon Jackson as the point man with Elliot Bennett tucked in behind? ManCity do it with Aguero and Tevez sometimes - for example.[/quote] Wow! Comparing Jackson and Bennett with Aguero and Tevez.....That''s some good ganga you''ve got today Bly. [:D] [/quote]   Yawn   Aguero, Tevez, Jackson all 5'' 8" Bennett 5'' 9"   OTBC

I wonder if Hughton would dare to start with two shorter, swifter mobile forwards who have earned a chance?   Simeon Jackson as the point man with Elliot Bennett tucked in behind? Or as the 2 in a 422 if he wanted to be even more daring.   ManCity do it with Aguero and Tevez sometimes - for example.   OTBC                

[quote user="BlyBlyBabes"] They are evidently the descendants of yesterdays hooligans.   A special strategy will have to be worked out as it was for their predecessors.e.g.   A start may be to have targetted cctv cameras in the stands operated by an agreed third party - with the club being required to refund the ticket cost of anyone whose view is demonstrably blocked by someone standing.The club offers a ''service'' for a price to the consumer. The ticket is evidence of payment. People persistently standing should be identified and banned via an ASBO or something after counselling and a second chnce............      OTBC [/quote]   Few on this thread are interested in solutions; they prefer to just vent.   The bottom line is that it is the responsibility of the clubs to provide what they sold to the customers.   If they are knowingly selling seat tickets when they clearly have no effective strategy to ensure that the customer can see from a seated position then they are quite likely in breach of the trade descriptions laws, and a fair bit more. I wonder what a trip to the local trading standards office wouls result in..........?   But as I said before - find a way to serve ASBOs and lenthy bans on persistent offenders. Bingo! But of course the authorities are in 2 minds because guess what - the more standing the greater the atmosphere for the tv companies and their international audiences. Now the clubs wouldn''t wanrt to lose tv revenue fro a tamer product would they.   So you seein the end  it''s all a ......circle !!!!!!!! [;)]   OTBC    

They are evidently the descendants of yesterdays hooligans.   A special strategy will have to be worked out as it was for their predecessors.e.g.   A start may be to have targetted cctv cameras in the stands operated by an agreed third party - with the club being required to refund the ticket cost of anyone whose view is demonstrably blocked by someone standing.The club offers a ''service'' for a price to the consumer. The ticket is evidence of payment. People persistently standing should be identified and banned via an ASBO or something after counselling and a second chnce............      OTBC

Somebody will sue one of these day - people learn through their wallets..   I''d be tempted.   OTBC

Have we looked at the United States women''s team?   They''ve got some strikers in there.   OTBC        

[quote user="ricardo"]The South Stand faces East, not South. It was originally just part of the ground and you could walk all the way round from the River End when I was a boy. It was named after Sir Arthur South in recognition for his leadership in the 1956 Crisis. It was originally open to the elements and a large part of the terracing was made of old railway sleepers when I first attended in the mid 1950''s. The stand was partially covered in 1960 and eventually this covering was extended right round to the Barclay in 1962. At about this time the railway sleepers were all replaced by proper concrete terraces. [/quote]   If that were the case Ricardo it would surely be searhable and hence verifiable in the Archant archives?   Lappy you seem to have time on your hand''s whadya say...............................?      [:D]   OTBC    

[quote user="lappinitup"]"The Jarrold Stand is on the former site of the South Stand, which was named in honour of Sir Arthur South." As far as I can remember, it''s always been called "The South Stand" simply because it faces south. If Wiki is correct and it was commemorated to Sir Arthur for his sevices to the club and Geofrey Watling has a stand named after him too, how come we haven''t got a stand named after Robert Chase who brought us the most successful period in the club''s history? [/quote]   Of course, if the club were to be so motivated they could approach the current name-holders and seek to commemorate as follows;   The [new sponsor] ''Geoffrey Watling'' Stand   The Barclay ''Robert Chase'' Stand   The Jarrold ''Arthur South'' stand   The N & P ''Delia Smith'' Stand   And then of course we could have rotating names (up to 52 say) for the infills, such as Huckerby''s Den , Bly''s Corner etc  [:D]   OTBC    

To my certain knowledge  it was always just called the South Stand - nothing to do with Sir Arthur.   OTBC  

http://www.gazetteandherald.co.uk/sport/10140146._/   OTBC

sold[quote user="lappinitup"]MEGALOL!! [:D] [:D] [:D] [/quote]   No, simply MEGABITTER one-sided emotive tosh from a ManU convert. [+o(][:$][+o(][:$][+o(][:$]   True supporters balance the achievements of our almost decade-long golden era under the chairmanship of Robert Chase with the mess he made of it at the end. He bought and sold to generate the money to develop and run the club - just like South and Watling before him.   Now we are excited - and nervous - as the possibility of a new golden era reaches consolidation stage as BowkettMcNallyHughton strive to maintain momentum with the benevolent and emotional support of Delia and Hubby.   Mentioning Robert Chase in a balanced way seems to arouse in some people the same hate-filled instincts as calling the name of Ipswich Town. And that is really SAD.   But still. One love.   OTBC        

Why are the usual suspects on here being allowed to get away with calling Robert Chase, NCFC chairman during our golden era, Big Fat Bob or BFB?   I wonder if anyone will answer............   OTBC      

[quote user="Duncan Edwards"]Why have you omitted the years before 05 and after 09 Tangible?[/quote]   Because those years are clearly not relevant to his factual critique of the accurateness of  the posters particular claim.   OTBC