QPR V Newcastle

[Huh?! 0]

[quote user="Gingerpele"]Lets all go support QPR then, they have room in their ground....

They are exactly whats wrong with football, buying success. I''m surprised Warnock is involved, i thought he was the type of person who would be against all that, but no he''s happy to spend millions on players who are better/were better than players QPR should be attracting, but money speaks.

I really don''t care if QPR finish in the top 10, and we finish bottom, I would rather we had an owner that actually cares about the team, a manager who wants to build up a team and a squad, and players who put in 100% effort and disruption is never going to happen within the squad. QPR cannot claim to have any of that, i''m happy to be a NCFC fan.[/quote]

Great post mate. I totally agree with you there...!

[paul moy 235]

[quote user="QPR1"]QPR have 25 men in there squad,is it different at Norwich ?[/quote]

Yes, but we have more quality in depth IMO, whereas QPR do not. Take SWP and Barton out and they will very likely struggle.  

 

[QPR1 0]

You guys still don''t get it. You guys have spent more then we have.Because we have spent wisely and got dood quality players on free transfers does not mean we are buying success.We could accuse NCFC of trying to buy success,but what QPR and NCFC have done is get in players that they think will keep them up this year.We will see at the end of the season who is right and who is wrong.

[QPR1 0]

[quote user="paul moy"]

[quote user="QPR1"]QPR have 25 men in there squad,is it different at Norwich ?[/quote]

Yes, but we have more quality in depth IMO, whereas QPR do not. Take SWP and Barton out and they will very likely struggle.  

 

[/quote]

We won the league last year ( incase you have forgot )and have added 11 quality players to the squad.Please explain how you have a better squad in depth then QPR.

[Rolf Harris 31]

QPR have a decent first 11 but a week bench...

[Rolf Harris 31]

weak ;) we need an edit button!

[LeJuge 0]

[quote user="paul moy"]

[quote user="Citizen Journalist Foghorn"]QPR seem to lack a decent striker. Even after spending big on transfer deadline day they have not resolved this problem.[/quote]

They have DJ Campbell who scored 13 in the Prem last season, which is better than any of our current lot will muster this season IMO. .

[/quote]That tally was a bit flattering though, he played as a lone striker in an attacking team and had 71 shots on goal. That''s 1 goal in 5.46 shots, not bad, but you would expect Grant Holt or Simeon Jackson to achieve a similar strike rate if they had that many chances.

[LeJuge 0]

[quote user="QPR1"]You guys still don''t get it. You guys have spent more then we have.Because we have spent wisely and got dood quality players on free transfers does not mean we are buying success.We could accuse NCFC of trying to buy success,but what QPR and NCFC have done is get in players that they think will keep them up this year.We will see at the end of the season who is right and who is wrong.[/quote]That''s a silly argument. Of course we understand what you are trying to say, but we don''t have players on £50k, £60k, per week. The difference in transfer fees won''t even cover Joey Bartons wages for the year. The worry for you has to be your wage bill, if you can''t stay up. Paying silly money to players didn''t work out in the long run for West Ham. Newcastle just about survived but they get four times more people in their ground.

[Jim Smith 2,314]

[quote user="QPR1"]You guys still don''t get it. You guys have spent more then we have.Because we have spent wisely and got dood quality players on free transfers does not mean we are buying success.We could accuse NCFC of trying to buy success,but what QPR and NCFC have done is get in players that they think will keep them up this year.We will see at the end of the season who is right and who is wrong.[/quote]

We will indeed but you also do not appear to get it. We may have spent more in TRANSFER FEES but in terms of signing on fees, agents fees and wages you will almost certainly have spent far, far more than us and many other prem clubs. Therefore to use the transfer fees quoted about is not really a true benchmark of what the clubs have spent.

[LeJuge 0]

[quote user="spencer 1970"]lets be realistic fellow yellas...we''d love to have Anton F (instead of de laet or barnett), SWP (instead of pilks or bennet), JB (instead of wilbo), and Barton (instead of Lappin or Korey) in our squad but the truth is we dont have one of the richest families backing 33% of every signing so that was never going to happen. What we have got in our favour is the fact that Colin is a great motivator but his tactical awareness is sometimes naive; Put this against our PL ("unproven but bright young thing") and our young and hungry squad and we''ll be there or there abouts...(17th)

something tells me Colin won''t be there come May and a few dodgy results for QPR will make their squad start to look over their shoulders. Our players have nothing to lose, QPR''s have.

I have to add, I don''t mind the R''s...I hope they stay up along with us.[/quote]"we''d love to have Anton F (instead of de laet or barnett)"What about Whitbread, Ward? I don''t think that Ferdinand is any better than those players when fully fit."SWP (instead of pilks or bennet)"I''d love to have SWP here, but Bennett is a class player and will show that this year."JB (instead of wilbo)"Bothroyd is a decent player, but so is James Vaughan."Barton (instead of Lappin or Korey)"A stupid example, Lappin and Korey haven''t featured all season and probably won''t get half a dozen appearances between them this season. I''m sure that QPR would swap Hoolahan for some fringe player in their squad. Worry about the XI. I think that Barton is top draw, and better than any of our other tough tackling midfielders, but he is also a nutter and could lose the plot at any moment..... so no, I don''t want him here. "Our players have nothing to lose, QPR''s have."What do the big name QPR players have to lose? They have big contracts and wouldn''t hesistate to move on again in summer if relegation happened. Norwich players have more to lose, they might not get the chance again. "I don''t mind the R''s...I hope they stay up along with us."I didn''t mind them until they all came on here three weeks ago throwing tantrums and boasting about their signings, now I''d love to see them relegated.

[Boris 56]

[quote user="QPR1"]You guys still don''t get it. You guys have spent more then we have.Because we have spent wisely and got dood quality players on free transfers does not mean we are buying success.We could accuse NCFC of trying to buy success,but what QPR and NCFC have done is get in players that they think will keep them up this year.We will see at the end of the season who is right and who is wrong.[/quote]

 

Ok u simply skip all this "undisclosed" fees and ofcourse at this we see spend more and I belive all this last signings qpr is on at least 40k per week ...

[Boris 56]

Also watching close last night game good performence at all QPR but if you see more close what happen all first half chanses who make game qpr domianant was taarabt to swp on the right against taylor who is not naturaly left back and was shocking this first half.

Secund half after god know why coach send SWP play left side qpr look a bit without idea against very boring newcastle site who if keep play this ugly style very soon will start drop in the table.

[meh 0]

QPR have not spent big and never have. Yes we may have spent more in wages, signing on fee''s and agent fees but, what - do you think that Norwich or anyone else suddenly pay significantly less agent fee''s or wages because you spent more on the transfer fee? In reality, QPR''s net spend is probably very similar amount to Norwich.We have a great team spirit - we certainly haven''t done a Man City playing with a team of mercenaries. Anton Ferdinand may very well be an "average" player - but the difference is, he is an average *Premier League* player, which is still of a far higher quality then top Championship standard players. Warnock tactically naive? We won the Championship last season. I didn''t realise you could be tactically naive for 46 games and still finish 1st. Strange one that.Our owner. He''s come in and delivered. Backed the manager. X amount of new players in just a few weeks. New sponsorship and an immediate aim to globalise the QPR brand. Very open and honest. Reduced ticket prices. Communicates with fans. Invites fan''s to games! What more can you ask for?Poor attendace: Well thats what 15 years in the wilderness does to you. Unfortunately, we missed out on many Premier League years and our fanbase diminished. But then, our stadium capacity is only around 18k. Last night vs Newcastle, it was restricted to about 17k and Newcastle didn''t sell out. Attendance was just over 16k. It doesn''t matter. If we start being more successful on and off the pitch, our fan base grows. So pretty much a full capacity for a Monday night game live in Sky. Thing''s aren''t so bad.

[meh 0]

Oh and one more thing. Yes you are playing well and were unlucky against Chelsea. No shame in coming away with 0 points. But its when you start struggling against the lower sides - theBlackburns of this world - where you suddenly realise that passion and commitment will only get you so far. I can see heads dropping if you struggle to take points against the teams around you. Best of luck for the rest of the season.

[QPR67 0]

Meh.... regarding our attendance, fans of other clubs seem to forget we have not one but two Premiership clubs down the road. Fulham is 3 miles away and Chelsea (one of the top clubs in the country... spit spit) is 3.5miles.

Add to that Arsenal & Spurs less than 10 miles plus the Championship & lower divison clubs too and that''s a dozen clubs in London plus Watford & Reading close by.

Norwich''s, for example, closest is Spurs, over 100 miles away. Ipswich, Peterborough, Colchester & Southend all a significant distance away not to have an effect.

Same with Swansea, apart from Cardiff, no other major club for miles.

Phil Beard is certainly going to earn his keep if our attendances are to grow to the point where not only do we need to move, but we can then sustain that. It''ll be hard work but they seem up for it.

[LeJuge 0]

[quote user="meh"]QPR have not spent big and never have. Yes we may have spent more in wages, signing on fee''s and agent fees but, what - do you think that Norwich or anyone else suddenly pay significantly less agent fee''s or wages because you spent more on the transfer fee? In reality, QPR''s net spend is probably very similar amount to Norwich.We have a great team spirit - we certainly haven''t done a Man City playing with a team of mercenaries. Anton Ferdinand may very well be an "average" player - but the difference is, he is an average *Premier League* player, which is still of a far higher quality then top Championship standard players. Warnock tactically naive? We won the Championship last season. I didn''t realise you could be tactically naive for 46 games and still finish 1st. Strange one that.Our owner. He''s come in and delivered. Backed the manager. X amount of new players in just a few weeks. New sponsorship and an immediate aim to globalise the QPR brand. Very open and honest. Reduced ticket prices. Communicates with fans. Invites fan''s to games! What more can you ask for?Poor attendace: Well thats what 15 years in the wilderness does to you. Unfortunately, we missed out on many Premier League years and our fanbase diminished. But then, our stadium capacity is only around 18k. Last night vs Newcastle, it was restricted to about 17k and Newcastle didn''t sell out. Attendance was just over 16k. It doesn''t matter. If we start being more successful on and off the pitch, our fan base grows. So pretty much a full capacity for a Monday night game live in Sky. Thing''s aren''t so bad.[/quote]I''ve never had any opinion on QPR fans before recently, but the more I encounter them the thicker they sound. "QPR have not spent big and never have. Yes we may have spent more in

wages, signing on fee''s and agent fees but, what - do you think that

Norwich or anyone else suddenly pay significantly less agent fee''s or

wages because you spent more on the transfer fee? In reality, QPR''s net

spend is probably very similar amount to Norwich."Barton was on £60k per week at Newcastle, you are rumoured to have matched his wages, he is on a four year deal. He is going to cost you £3m in wages per year, equivalent to £12m. You are also rumoured to have given Wright-Phillips £3m a year too for 3 years, that''s £9m in three years. Our highest earner is probably not on any more than £10k - £12k per week, and if I were to make an educated guess I would have a stab in the dark at James Vaughan. Every club sets their playing budget, that playing budget includes transfer fees and player wages, we simply don''t have people on that sort of money at the club."We have a great team spirit - we certainly haven''t done a Man City playing with a team of mercenaries." How you can make this call after one half decent game with your new players is beyond me. The idea that Man City are signing mercenaries and QPR aren''t is beyond me, money talks with big players, Barton and SWP wouldn''t have joined you for a pay cut, they joined you because you were the club willing to match their wages. They are on Arsenal money at little old QPR, they ARE mercenaries."Our owner. He''s come in and delivered. Backed the manager. X amount of

new players in just a few weeks. New sponsorship and an immediate aim to

globalise the QPR brand. Very open and honest. Reduced ticket prices.

Communicates with fans. Invites fan''s to games! What more can you ask

for?"I genuinely hope it works out for you, but recent history dictates that it doesn''t always happen. When the owners lose interest and get fed up with feeding a club money it can all go wrong. If in doubt look at West Ham with their Icelandic consortium, if in doubt look at Ipswich with Marcus Evans and his £40m, if in doubt look at Aston Villa who were a top six team and have been asset stripped. If in doubt look at Newcastle after Ashley poured money into the club, thankfully he stuck around for a year. Look at Portsmouth who can only put 2 subs on the bench on a good week. If you want to look in Scotland then look at Gretna. If the current owners lose interest or stop the flow of money it will not be them suffering the consequences. If Fernandes jumps ship in two years and you have players like Barton on the books at £60k a week, then you are well and truly f*cked. That is football economics. Look at Hull City, they are absolutely broke, mainly because they went down with Jimmy Bullard on £50k a week. Goodness knows what would happen if you went down with five or six Jimmy Bullards. Nobody is saying that it IS going to happen, but your money brings great risk. Your owners are under no obligation to put money into your club contractually, they can sign players like Barton and then decide not to meet the wage costs. If they walk in two years, it is the club which pays the price, not the current owners. They will have limited liability, effectively no liability. I wouldn''t want it to happen to any club, not even Ipswich, but it can happen and does happen a lot. Every club has an overwhelming sense of optimism when they get a new owner with promises. It can go wrong though, QPR fans don''t seem to be able to see through that right now. Norwich are sustainable on their income, we have reduced our debt for two consecutive seasons with no sugar daddy, we don''t get drip fed by Delia. Our squad looks to be one which is sustainable on parachute payments.There are clear differences between the two business models. I assume that Fernandes and Co want to achieve sustainability, like Abramovich has failed to do at Chelsea, and he will have a target to achieve it within X amount of years. He isn''t going to put his own financial health on the line should you fail to achieve sustainability, you had better hope that his plans work. "Poor attendace: Well thats what 15 years in the wilderness does to you." Funny how 15 years in the wilderness didn''t do that to us. Our attendances have increased by 8000 a week since losing our Premiership status, and we sold 20000 season tickets in the third tier of English football. We all know that your argument is a rubbish one anyway. Average QPR attendances:2010   133492009   140902008   139532007   129362006   134412005   160562004   147852003   132062002   117492001   120132000   125911999   117991998   130831997   125541996   156721995   14621   (15 years ago)1994   141161993   15002 (you finished 5th in the Prem this year)1992   135971991   135241990   130871989   123551988   132681987   117541986   126651985   1400I''ve gone back 25 years and your 15 years in the wilderness explanation doesn''t hold, how far in history would you like to go exactly? Tinpoint team who could never be self-sufficient at this level and need to be REALLY careful with this ownership situation. Your ground only holds 18000 people, but in reality it has only needed to hold 15000 for the past 30 years hasn''t it? Your grounds too big for you. You attendances were low last season because they have ALWAYS been low. "Unfortunately, we missed out on many Premier League years and our fanbase diminished."No it didn''t, it is precisely the same, just as small as it was. "If we start being more successful on and off the pitch, our fan base grows."Does it? You finished 5th in 92/93, 9th in 93/94, 10th in 94/95, in the Premier League. If QPR fans are expecting to achieve a 5th place finish at any stage in the next 15 years then you are all raving loonies. Premiership attendances have been falling for a few years by the way.

[LeJuge 0]

[quote user="QPR67"]Meh.... regarding our attendance, fans of other clubs seem to forget we have not one but two Premiership clubs down the road. Fulham is 3 miles away and Chelsea (one of the top clubs in the country... spit spit) is 3.5miles.

Add to that Arsenal & Spurs less than 10 miles plus the Championship & lower divison clubs too and that''s a dozen clubs in London plus Watford & Reading close by.

Norwich''s, for example, closest is Spurs, over 100 miles away. Ipswich, Peterborough, Colchester & Southend all a significant distance away not to have an effect.

Same with Swansea, apart from Cardiff, no other major club for miles.

Phil Beard is certainly going to earn his keep if our attendances are to grow to the point where not only do we need to move, but we can then sustain that. It''ll be hard work but they seem up for it.[/quote]We are the only club in Norfolk, population 850,000 and were getting 25000 people week in week out in League one. We have 21833 season ticket holders and nearly 2000 people on the waiting list for a season ticket. Ipswich are the only club in Suffolk, population 715,000 and had an average attendance of 18809 and have sold 13000 season tickets, with nobody on the waiting list. Gillingham are the only club in Kent, population 1,600,000 and had an average attendance of 6335 in League One in 2009/10.Brighton are the only club in Sussex, population 930,000. In their big new stadium this year, their first year in it. They haven''t had a sell out yet (22000), first game in the stadium 20000. We have sold more season tickets than that. It''s about time people stopped playing the one county club game and simply acknowledged that City have fantastic fans. The people of Norfolk wholeheartedly reject the idea of supporting the likes of Manchester United and instead turn up to support the best team in East Anglia. People from Norwich and Norfolk are incredibly proud people you know. If you are going to play the one county club game then please explain why no other one club county is seeing gates like ours.

[crabbycanary 2]

I think that just about covers it Le Juge :))))

[meh 0]

I love a good debate!"Barton was on £60k per week at Newcastle, you are rumoured to have

matched his wages, he is on a four year deal. He is going to cost you

£3m in wages per year, equivalent to £12m. You are also rumoured to

have given Wright-Phillips £3m a year too for 3 years, that''s £9m in

three years. Our highest earner is probably not on any more than £10k -

£12k per week, and if I were to make an educated guess I would have a

stab in the dark at James Vaughan. Every club sets their playing

budget, that playing budget includes transfer fees and player wages, we

simply don''t have people on that sort of money at the club."Whilst I''m sure you''re not far wrong I''ve highlighted the words in your sentence which make your argument redundant. JB and SWP are probably on higher wages, thats pretty much it. Outside of our new players, the top earner is Tarrabt (c20k). Hardly breaking the bank. These figures that I quote, are again, hearsay - rumours from newspapers, forums etc. How you can make this call after one half decent game with your new

players is beyond me. The idea that Man City are signing mercenaries

and QPR aren''t is beyond me, money talks with big players, Barton and

SWP wouldn''t have joined you for a pay cut, they joined you because you

were the club willing to match their wages. They are on Arsenal money

at little old QPR, they ARE mercenaries.Barton and SWP joined because they want to play. JB was being forced out - he could have refused and sat in the reserves. Poor old SWP was already rotting in the reserves - again, he could have stayed. I dont know if anyone came in for Barton, but SWP had at least 3 other offers. He joined predominantly because he wanted to return to London. Traore - could have sat in the reserves at Arsenal. Likewise Ferdinand at Sunderland. Soton demanded a loan fee for Jason Puncheon. QPR refused. Puncheon paid this himself. Does this sound like a team of mercernaries to you? In terms of team spirit, I''m basing this on the jovial mood the players seem to be on twitter (players joking around with the owners and each other), what I''m hearing from friends who work at the club, interviews with the players (e.g. Shaun Derry saying how Warnock told him after we got promoted that he would be buying better players but he was happy with this - happy that it would improve the team etc. Clint Hill sitting with away fans at Everton. And most of all, Taarabt being stripped of the captaincy yet coming out and playing a blinder. Re our owner: Fernandes owns 51% but you mustn''t forget that the other 49% is owned by Lakshi Mittal. He''s a bit rich too. These 2 are proper businessmen - they don''t invest to fail. They would completely lose face in Asia if this venture flopped. Whilst I appreciate your concerns, we are certainly not another Portsmouth or Gretna. His plan is to exploit the Asian market and increase revenue that way. He''s been on board for 4 weeks and delivered everything he''s said he would. Can''t fault the guy at the moment and feel very positive for the future.Funny how 15 years in the wilderness didn''t do that to us. Our

attendances have increased by 8000 a week since losing our Premiership

status, and we sold 20000 season tickets in the third tier of English

football. We all know that your argument is a rubbish one anyway.

15 years in the wilderness for QPR is hugely different from 15 years for Nowich. For one, you''ve been back in the Premiership. We also went down to League 1. As the poster above mentioned, we compete with the Chelseas of this world for fans. Not sure who you compete against. Your area has 1 team to choose from. We had 5, all playing in the Premier (minus Wet Spam this season).  You think our average attendance would have stayed so similar for 15 years had we remained in the Prem all this time? Don''t be silly! Look at how much the game has exploded globally. We''ve missed out on that completely and the new fans that would have brought. I don''t think theres any shame in that. I don''t know where you got your stats from, but I''d be interested to compare Fulhams over the past few years. I always have said that Fulham are the QPR of this generation. Small team in a small ground, punching above their weight. Any new fans that have got into Fulham in the last 10 years are the sort of fan we would have attracted had we stayed up.Yes we are a small team, but then we never said we weren''t. I''m just a bit annoyed by reading comments from other fans - the same, factless comments, with many assumptions which are just incorrect. As I said, I wish you guys well - I think we''ll be in the mix with you at the end of the season but I''m 100 times more confident then I was a few weeks back. All the best.

[PurpleCanary 5,553]

[quote user="meh"]


Re our owner: Fernandes owns 51% but you mustn''t forget that the other 49% is owned by Lakshi Mittal. He''s a bit rich too. These 2 are proper businessmen - they don''t invest to fail. They would completely lose face in Asia if this venture flopped. Whilst I appreciate your concerns, we are certainly not another Portsmouth or Gretna. His plan is to exploit the Asian market and increase revenue that way. He''s been on board for 4 weeks and delivered everything he''s said he would. Can''t fault the guy at the moment and feel very positive for the future.

[/quote]

 

Fernandes has made a decent start but effectively all he has done is tick the various obvious boxes in the "How a new owner can instantly make fans feel happy" manual. The question is how he will perform in the longer term, and how much time he can devote to the club. I have mentioned this before, but a few weeks ago some of his senior AirAsia staff were complaining (off the record) to the FT that he was getting involved in too many businesses and spreading himself too thinly. And that was before he bought QPR!

 

The key, when Fernandes is concentrating on all his other enterprises, will be the quality of the executive management that runs the club from day to day and from week to week. We have a newish (a bit over two years now) regime, with a mixed but generally creditable track record. It was greeted with almost universal euphoria; now there is a much more balanced view. That, I suspect, will happen with QPR.

 

I know it would be hard not to improve on Briatore and Paladini (who did his amateurish best to get you thrown out of the Championship and down at least to League One) but even so you need Beard to be on top of his game.

[Lucien 0]

QPR fan in peace - and I mean it: I spent a fair bit of my childhood in N.Norfolk, always looked for the NC result. I''m here because someone suggested that the QPR presence here was down to Rs fans bigging up the side recently. Not true.

I think quite a few Rs fans took note of the ranting on here when so many people were pre-judging the Faurlin issue without regard to the complex facts of that case. And then we were apparently doomed pre season in these parts, when in reality a take over had been in the offing for months.

There is still a lot of misrepresentation about the club which you wont see re NC on QPR report etc. Attendances: QPR are just around the corner from two other prem clubs as you know. That is the context in which figures must be placed. We''ve always been a small club, and sometimes out performed our neighbours given fan base, more so in the glory days of the late 60s and 70s. Being pipped to the title by Liverpool on the last day is QPR''s biggest acheivement IMO.

We''ve always had eccentric owners and a few really special players - again, as older NC fans will know. It''s always been a circus. That''s who we are. The financial base is actually pretty solid at the moment but no one counts chickens down the bush. Someone else on here wrote they would rather finish bottom with the Norwich set up than 10th with ours. Well, I''d beg to differ, and I''m sure at heart quite a few canaries would agree. To an extent, you do need to spend money to stay up, that may be good or it may not, but it is the way of the world .Remember, we''ve been near oblivion recently, and the glory days were history.

Nope, we dont have the strongest strke force right now, but I can imagine the flak we''ll get in some quarters when that is remedied. Feels like we''re damned if we do and damned if we don''t, in some quarters, but we''ll survive.

It is a bit strange to me that people here don''t begrudge Man C or Chelsea their activities but get het up when Colin has to sort a few things at the 11th hour, things which needed doing. We''re just trying to survive, good times and bad. Just like you, in fact. At least the Chelsea fans are glad to have a proper local derby in the diary again... Norwich and QPR have bigger fish to fry than each other. Good luck with it. And avoid orange Italians...

[alysha 0]

Thought this might interest people posting on this thread. - http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/14092011/58/premier-league-paper-round-barton-deal-free.html  Make of it what you will.

[QPR67 0]

LeJuge, I never said Norwich don''t have ''fantastic fans''.  I get frustrated  that people criticise QPR''s attendances but without looking at the bigger picture.  QPR fans have never maintained we''re a big club.  Our average attendances have only fluctuated by a few thousand over the last 15 years despite playing in the top three tiers in that time so at least we can''t be called disloyal.  Look at the so-called North East giants.... their attendances drop massivley upon relegation from the Prem. Sunderland at the weekend must have had a fire drill the way their fans were streaming out before the game ended.

Yes, QPR is in a hugely densley populated city but has competition from many other football clubs, rugby clubs and other forms of entertainment.  The population is hugely non-indigenous too (somethingh like 52% of people living in London are not from London... I I include other parts of the UK as well as from abroad) and they either have no interest in football or are only in London for a short space of time (18 months?) they''d rather watch a Chelsea, a Arsenal etc.

We have the fans, they are out there (55,000 at Wembley in 1986, a post war record that not even the ''big four'' matched... though of course they could if they had the allocation we had! ;o) ), it''s a matter of getting them back whilst also courting the next generation of youngsters plus the floating fan.