|
Post by oufcyellows on Sept 17, 2017 7:39:48 GMT
All 3 goals were shots outside the box. Hmmmm Sent from my SM-G930F using proboards Whereas Blackpool missed at least four great chances from inside the box in the first half. Clutching at straws is natural, but not realistic. This isn't about Eastwood. Even if the second was his fault, he still made several other good saves. We look like conceding goals against top-half sides. Not sure exactly why, but our defensive shape is not quite right. Nor is our attacking shape. Work in progress. Certainly not the best we've played for 30 years, but some good players who hopefully can be moulded into something practical in the next few weeks. Is it promotion or nothing, as some halfwit said? No. Staying in league 1 is much better than being in League 2 or the Conference. But the relatively exalted budget we have right now has been dependent on major sales. Not seeing that next summer just yet, but then Marvin hadn't made his mark this time last season so there is time. Hang on U ranted at me a few posts ago for saying that as long as we were playing nice football and stayed up I'd be happy. "The reason we've signed a truck load of ageing players and loanees is to achieve THIS season" you screeched like an angry alastair campbell threatening to end ur career. Now you say staying in l1 is much better than being in l2 or the conference ?? It's fine taking the moral high ground of super supporter who knows way more than us mere mortals, but u really should try to keep ur arguments to one side of the debate Charles.
|
|
|
Post by uptheus on Sept 17, 2017 7:48:47 GMT
Good to see things are back to normal! Really cheering me up on a Sunday morning after yesterday - some of the posts are just pure comedy gold. Talk about changing your tune - lol!!! Just gets better and better!!! Anyway, yesterday. Was poor, no doubt - but this is a new team, new manager and as people have said, there was always going to be a few shockers. The key will be how the team react to this. Hopefully, Rib's will be fight to slot into right wing-back and Obika will be fit to start up top next week. But this is supposed to be our promotion season e.g. Eales going for broke, and we don't seem to do well against teams near the top.
|
|
|
Post by grenobleroad on Sept 17, 2017 8:20:10 GMT
Good to see things are back to normal! Really cheering me up on a Sunday morning after yesterday - some of the posts are just pure comedy gold. Talk about changing your tune - lol!!! Just gets better and better!!! Anyway, yesterday. Was poor, no doubt - but this is a new team, new manager and as people have said, there was always going to be a few shockers. The key will be how the team react to this. Hopefully, Rib's will be fight to slot into right wing-back and Obika will be fit to start up top next week. But this is supposed to be our promotion season e.g. Eales going for broke, and we don't seem to do well against teams near the top. Since when has this ever been a shit or bust season?
|
|
|
Post by 06russ on Sept 17, 2017 9:32:36 GMT
Good to see things are back to normal! Really cheering me up on a Sunday morning after yesterday - some of the posts are just pure comedy gold. Talk about changing your tune - lol!!! Just gets better and better!!! Anyway, yesterday. Was poor, no doubt - but this is a new team, new manager and as people have said, there was always going to be a few shockers. The key will be how the team react to this. Hopefully, Rib's will be fight to slot into right wing-back and Obika will be fit to start up top next week. But this is supposed to be our promotion season e.g. Eales going for broke, and we don't seem to do well against teams near the top. I think that would have been the plan with Appleton but with him gone Pep is going to build his own team which will see ups and downs. The first 6 months under Appleton wasn't great, being outplayed by bottom of the league Hartlepool at home for example but it worked out ok the second season.
|
|
|
Post by eighteen93 on Sept 17, 2017 10:04:06 GMT
|
|
|
Post by fishpaste on Sept 17, 2017 10:13:44 GMT
Any figure given on how many U's fans were there yesterday? 1632
|
|
|
Post by charliesghost on Sept 17, 2017 12:04:32 GMT
Whereas Blackpool missed at least four great chances from inside the box in the first half. Clutching at straws is natural, but not realistic. This isn't about Eastwood. Even if the second was his fault, he still made several other good saves. We look like conceding goals against top-half sides. Not sure exactly why, but our defensive shape is not quite right. Nor is our attacking shape. Work in progress. Certainly not the best we've played for 30 years, but some good players who hopefully can be moulded into something practical in the next few weeks. Is it promotion or nothing, as some halfwit said? No. Staying in league 1 is much better than being in League 2 or the Conference. But the relatively exalted budget we have right now has been dependent on major sales. Not seeing that next summer just yet, but then Marvin hadn't made his mark this time last season so there is time. Hang on U ranted at me a few posts ago for saying that as long as we were playing nice football and stayed up I'd be happy. "The reason we've signed a truck load of ageing players and loanees is to achieve THIS season" you screeched like an angry alastair campbell threatening to end ur career. Now you say staying in l1 is much better than being in l2 or the conference ?? It's fine taking the moral high ground of super supporter who knows way more than us mere mortals, but u really should try to keep ur arguments to one side of the debate Charles. Oh dear. English dialectic lesson required again. Here goes. It is possible - indeed, it is generally held to be a good thing - to both hold a view of what the future needs to be whilst accepting realities of the past. Thus, it would be possible to hold the two following simultaneous points of view. 1. The next few years will be difficult for the UK, as it establishes itself outside the European Union, and it needs to get its policy decision-making right. 2. The UK will, either way, be in a better position than it was when it had to go to the IMF for a US-funded bail-out in 1976, shortly after joining the EEC. The one does not contradict the other, you see. It gives context, and demonstrates an understanding of relevant history, preventing extreme statements. So, if you're still following me, let's move back to the current situation. We are in a far better position than we have been since Kassam asset-stripped the club, because of good decisions and investment made by Ian Lenagan and Darryl Eales over a period, between them, of eight years. At the same time, if OUFC is to progress further, a new set of challenges need to be overcome, as we now have to compete against clubs with similar support bases but with more optimal stadium situations. Two statements; semi-related, same subject matter, not identical but not contradictory. Do I need to make it simpler for you? Perhaps not use football or politics to illustrate, but grocery shopping or something else easier to comprehend? Look, for whatever reason you have decided to react childishly and violently to whatever post I make. If I am reasonably positive, you slate me for not having been as positive as you in the past. If I say something mildly critical you react like a paedophile is trying to say hello to your niece. Why don't you just ignore what I have to say, as it clearly makes you very angry and ends up in an otherwise reasonably intelligent man making a fool of himself (as your idiotic post above demonstrates).
|
|
|
Post by finlandia on Sept 17, 2017 12:11:09 GMT
Hang on U ranted at me a few posts ago for saying that as long as we were playing nice football and stayed up I'd be happy. "The reason we've signed a truck load of ageing players and loanees is to achieve THIS season" you screeched like an angry alastair campbell threatening to end ur career. Now you say staying in l1 is much better than being in l2 or the conference ?? It's fine taking the moral high ground of super supporter who knows way more than us mere mortals, but u really should try to keep ur arguments to one side of the debate Charles. Oh dear. English dialectic lesson required again. Here goes. It is possible - indeed, it is generally held to be a good thing - to both hold a view of what the future needs to be whilst accepting realities of the past. Thus, it would be possible to hold the two following simultaneous points of view. 1. The next few years will be difficult for the UK, as it establishes itself outside the European Union, and it needs to get its policy decision-making right. 2. The UK will, either way, be in a better position than it was when it had to go to the IMF for a US-funded bail-out in 1976, shortly after joining the EEC. The one does not contradict the other, you see. It gives context, and demonstrates an understanding of relevant history, preventing extreme statements. So, if you're still following me, let's move back to the current situation. We are in a far better position than we have been since Kassam asset-stripped the club, because of good decisions and investment made by Ian Lenagan and Darryl Eales over a period, between them, of eight years. At the same time, if OUFC is to progress further, a new set of challenges need to be overcome, as we now have to compete against clubs with similar support bases but with more optimal stadium situations. Two statements; semi-related, same subject matter, not identical but not contradictory. Do I need to make it simpler for you? Perhaps not use football or politics to illustrate, but grocery shopping or something else easier to comprehend? Look, for whatever reason you have decided to react childishly and violently to whatever post I make. If I am reasonably positive, you slate me for not having been as positive as you in the past. If I say something mildly critical you react like a paedophile is trying to say hello to your niece. Why don't you just ignore what I have to say, as it clearly makes you very angry and ends up in an otherwise reasonably intelligent man making a fool of himself (as your idiotic post above demonstrates). There are lines you don't cross Charlie - comparing a fellow fan to a paedophile is quite frankly appalling. You should be utterly ashamed.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Sept 17, 2017 12:47:52 GMT
Hang on U ranted at me a few posts ago for saying that as long as we were playing nice football and stayed up I'd be happy. "The reason we've signed a truck load of ageing players and loanees is to achieve THIS season" you screeched like an angry alastair campbell threatening to end ur career. Now you say staying in l1 is much better than being in l2 or the conference ?? It's fine taking the moral high ground of super supporter who knows way more than us mere mortals, but u really should try to keep ur arguments to one side of the debate Charles. Oh dear. English dialectic lesson required again. Here goes. It is possible - indeed, it is generally held to be a good thing - to both hold a view of what the future needs to be whilst accepting realities of the past. Thus, it would be possible to hold the two following simultaneous points of view. 1. The next few years will be difficult for the UK, as it establishes itself outside the European Union, and it needs to get its policy decision-making right. 2. The UK will, either way, be in a better position than it was when it had to go to the IMF for a US-funded bail-out in 1976, shortly after joining the EEC. The one does not contradict the other, you see. It gives context, and demonstrates an understanding of relevant history, preventing extreme statements. So, if you're still following me, let's move back to the current situation. We are in a far better position than we have been since Kassam asset-stripped the club, because of good decisions and investment made by Ian Lenagan and Darryl Eales over a period, between them, of eight years. At the same time, if OUFC is to progress further, a new set of challenges need to be overcome, as we now have to compete against clubs with similar support bases but with more optimal stadium situations. Two statements; semi-related, same subject matter, not identical but not contradictory. Do I need to make it simpler for you? Perhaps not use football or politics to illustrate, but grocery shopping or something else easier to comprehend? Look, for whatever reason you have decided to react childishly and violently to whatever post I make. If I am reasonably positive, you slate me for not having been as positive as you in the past. If I say something mildly critical you react like a paedophile is trying to say hello to your niece. Why don't you just ignore what I have to say, as it clearly makes you very angry and ends up in an otherwise reasonably intelligent man making a fool of himself (as your idiotic post above demonstrates). Good one Charles, always playing the ball not the man. Check out the likes under the conversation, it appears far more people tend to agree with me than u! I don't have a problem with people having a different view to me. I do have a problem when people try and claim they are superior to every other fan and the only voice that should be listened to. See u don't have to simplify it, were all there watching the exact same game as you, we all are perfectly capable of making our own opinions on what's needed, without having some self made footballing guru tellings us we're all wrong and can't see what's happening. I think the past has proved u know as little as the rest of us, about what it will take to get out of a league, or how we should play. But for someone in pr, u might wanna brush up on ur debating skills a little. Not once have I attacked u personally, yet you revert to attacking someones dialect or spelling and then likening the situation to one involving a peado. Lucky u have skin like a rhino and this sort of thing never bothers u in the slightest ! I won't drop to ur level in a counter attack, nor will I, as I told in reply to your private message,like to hear what's really going on with Darryl in the vague hope that I'd post it for you.
|
|
|
Post by Gary Baldi on Sept 17, 2017 12:48:01 GMT
Oh dear. English dialectic lesson required again. Here goes. It is possible - indeed, it is generally held to be a good thing - to both hold a view of what the future needs to be whilst accepting realities of the past. Thus, it would be possible to hold the two following simultaneous points of view. 1. The next few years will be difficult for the UK, as it establishes itself outside the European Union, and it needs to get its policy decision-making right. 2. The UK will, either way, be in a better position than it was when it had to go to the IMF for a US-funded bail-out in 1976, shortly after joining the EEC. The one does not contradict the other, you see. It gives context, and demonstrates an understanding of relevant history, preventing extreme statements. So, if you're still following me, let's move back to the current situation. We are in a far better position than we have been since Kassam asset-stripped the club, because of good decisions and investment made by Ian Lenagan and Darryl Eales over a period, between them, of eight years. At the same time, if OUFC is to progress further, a new set of challenges need to be overcome, as we now have to compete against clubs with similar support bases but with more optimal stadium situations. Two statements; semi-related, same subject matter, not identical but not contradictory. Do I need to make it simpler for you? Perhaps not use football or politics to illustrate, but grocery shopping or something else easier to comprehend? Look, for whatever reason you have decided to react childishly and violently to whatever post I make. If I am reasonably positive, you slate me for not having been as positive as you in the past. If I say something mildly critical you react like a paedophile is trying to say hello to your niece. Why don't you just ignore what I have to say, as it clearly makes you very angry and ends up in an otherwise reasonably intelligent man making a fool of himself (as your idiotic post above demonstrates). There are lines you don't cross Charlie - comparing a fellow fan to a paedophile is quite frankly appalling. You should be utterly ashamed. You know he's annoyed when the abuse starts. You know he's really annoyed when it intensifies. A shame as I've seen Charlie out and about he comes across as a really good person in real life. So strange.
|
|
|
Post by Denissmithswig on Sept 17, 2017 13:13:31 GMT
Charlie, it is starting to come across that you don't want the club to do well this season by keep banging on about being a mid table team who don't have the squad to challenge which so far hasn't been the case. So far we have improved on last season with regards to results. That is a fact. Yesterday was a bad day at the office but Pep will learn more about his side in defeat than when we win or play well.
I'm not sure what has got under your skin so much but to compare a well respected poster or any poster for that matter as a peadophile is crossing the lines be and bang out of order. It is borderline slander and I'd hope you were man enough to apologise. Will you? I doubt it because you are too stubborn to ever admit when you are in the wrong. This has been proved on the many occasions you choose to ignore many posts that pull up on your fictional facts.
|
|
|
Post by gingerox on Sept 17, 2017 13:16:37 GMT
Oh dear. English dialectic lesson required again. Here goes. It is possible - indeed, it is generally held to be a good thing - to both hold a view of what the future needs to be whilst accepting realities of the past. Thus, it would be possible to hold the two following simultaneous points of view. 1. The next few years will be difficult for the UK, as it establishes itself outside the European Union, and it needs to get its policy decision-making right. 2. The UK will, either way, be in a better position than it was when it had to go to the IMF for a US-funded bail-out in 1976, shortly after joining the EEC. The one does not contradict the other, you see. It gives context, and demonstrates an understanding of relevant history, preventing extreme statements. So, if you're still following me, let's move back to the current situation. We are in a far better position than we have been since Kassam asset-stripped the club, because of good decisions and investment made by Ian Lenagan and Darryl Eales over a period, between them, of eight years. At the same time, if OUFC is to progress further, a new set of challenges need to be overcome, as we now have to compete against clubs with similar support bases but with more optimal stadium situations. Two statements; semi-related, same subject matter, not identical but not contradictory. Do I need to make it simpler for you? Perhaps not use football or politics to illustrate, but grocery shopping or something else easier to comprehend? Look, for whatever reason you have decided to react childishly and violently to whatever post I make. If I am reasonably positive, you slate me for not having been as positive as you in the past. If I say something mildly critical you react like a paedophile is trying to say hello to your niece. Why don't you just ignore what I have to say, as it clearly makes you very angry and ends up in an otherwise reasonably intelligent man making a fool of himself (as your idiotic post above demonstrates). There are lines you don't cross Charlie - comparing a fellow fan to a paedophile is quite frankly appalling. You should be utterly ashamed. I don't really want to get involved but he wasn't calling/comparing him to a paedophile if you read carefully. Agree it's a poor choice of simile but he wasn't calling him anything to do with *that*
|
|
|
Post by ryaniobirdio on Sept 17, 2017 13:32:14 GMT
Nobody called anybody else a paedophile. For some bizarre reason a peadophile was brought into a metaphor, which is quite frankly bizarre and absurd when there were so many other options available, but nobody accused anybody else of being one. There was no reason for the word to even come up but it wasn't levelled at anybody, which is something I suppose. We're not there quite yet.
But there was still a brilliantly pompous reference to people being stupid and quite frankly, peasants in comparison to those who understand the way the world works, in the comment about shopping. Bloody poor people, getting in the way. Off to bingo with you, or whatever it is your kind does!
|
|
|
Post by Denissmithswig on Sept 17, 2017 13:44:08 GMT
Nobody called anybody else a paedophile. For some bizarre reason a peadophile was brought into a metaphor, which is quite frankly bizarre and absurd when there were so many other options available, but nobody accused anybody else of being one. There was no reason for the word to even come up but it wasn't levelled at anybody, which is something I suppose. We're not there quite yet. But there was still a brilliantly pompous reference to people being stupid and quite frankly, peasants in comparison to those who understand the way the world works, in the comment about shopping. Bloody poor people, getting in the way. Off to bingo with you, or whatever it is your kind does! He compared OUFCYellows to a peadophile in how he reacts to Charles being negative. Why he ever thought that was a good phrase to use I'm not too sure especially coming from such a great PR guru. Maybe OUFCYellows needs to recruit someone to post on this forum to defend his integrity... On a side note this match thread certainly took an unexpected turn but at least we aren't talking about smoke bombs. Next on the agenda is the inflatable penis (no I don't mean Charlie's ego).
|
|
|
Post by ryaniobirdio on Sept 17, 2017 15:08:22 GMT
Nobody called anybody else a paedophile. For some bizarre reason a peadophile was brought into a metaphor, which is quite frankly bizarre and absurd when there were so many other options available, but nobody accused anybody else of being one. There was no reason for the word to even come up but it wasn't levelled at anybody, which is something I suppose. We're not there quite yet. But there was still a brilliantly pompous reference to people being stupid and quite frankly, peasants in comparison to those who understand the way the world works, in the comment about shopping. Bloody poor people, getting in the way. Off to bingo with you, or whatever it is your kind does! He compared OUFCYellows to a peadophile in how he reacts to Charles being negative. Why he ever thought that was a good phrase to use I'm not too sure especially coming from such a great PR guru. Maybe OUFCYellows needs to recruit someone to post on this forum to defend his integrity... On a side note this match thread certainly took an unexpected turn but at least we aren't talking about smoke bombs. Next on the agenda is the inflatable penis (no I don't mean Charlie's ego). He said he had reacted as though a paedophile had tried to speak to his niece. That is not calling anybody a paedophile - he's not saying "you reacted like a paedophile." That did not happen at all if you read the complete sentence in full. I don't have much time for Charlie and am never one to shy away from saying what I think about some of his claims and opinions, but on this occasion, because of the severity of what people are accusing him of, I have to say my piece. Read what he says. He does not compare anybody to being a paedophile what so ever. However, this all could have been avoided by not using a clunky metaphor that for some god awful reason involves using the word. That is madness, but he hasn't called anybody a paedophile. He just hasn't. To get back on track - yesterday's game was f**king terrible and I wish I hadn't said we'd win 4-0 like a moron.
|
|
|
Post by oufcyellows on Sept 17, 2017 15:20:18 GMT
For what it's worth without wishing to defend him. I didn't take it as him calling me one. As I said before I didn't see the need to liken the situation to it. More a boris foot in mouth moment.
|
|
|
Post by finlandia on Sept 17, 2017 15:25:38 GMT
He compared OUFCYellows to a peadophile in how he reacts to Charles being negative. Why he ever thought that was a good phrase to use I'm not too sure especially coming from such a great PR guru. Maybe OUFCYellows needs to recruit someone to post on this forum to defend his integrity... On a side note this match thread certainly took an unexpected turn but at least we aren't talking about smoke bombs. Next on the agenda is the inflatable penis (no I don't mean Charlie's ego). He said he had reacted as though a paedophile had tried to speak to his niece. That is not calling anybody a paedophile - he's not saying "you reacted like a paedophile." That did not happen at all if you read the complete sentence in full. I don't have much time for Charlie and am never one to shy away from saying what I think about some of his claims and opinions, but on this occasion, because of the severity of what people are accusing him of, I have to say my piece. Read what he says. He does not compare anybody to being a paedophile what so ever. However, this all could have been avoided by not using a clunky metaphor that for some god awful reason involves using the word. That is madness, but he hasn't called anybody a paedophile. He just hasn't. To get back on track - yesterday's game was f**king terrible and I wish I hadn't said we'd win 4-0 like a moron. Fair point - but to even put this in a post is pure stupidity.
|
|
|
Post by mariokempes on Sept 17, 2017 15:27:21 GMT
TBH I didn't go yesterday and had to watch on the Radio and it sounded like an awful display. By the way IMO we are extremely lucky to have the coverage Radio Oxford give us.
|
|
|
Post by nottsyellow on Sept 17, 2017 15:36:38 GMT
The official crowd figure was 5,200. We took 1,600. The home crowd looked like about 1,500, certainly no more than 2,000. I can't imagine, in the circumstances, protest against Oyston etc, many people bought a season ticket and don't go. So somewhere there is a missing 2,000.
|
|
|
Post by Toeby on Sept 17, 2017 15:56:36 GMT
Just briefly want to take this thread back to the football. Having only just got back home, I haven't read much elsewhere so others may have gone over this already, but I thought I'd chuck in my 2 pennies worth about the game.
That game was lost in the first 15 minutes, and on balance of the whole game, we were lucky to come away having only lost 3-1. It could've been 5 at half time.
We'd gone for our standard 4-2-3-1, where as Blackpool looked like they were set up with a 3-4-3 which caused us no end of problems in the first half. Their front 3 all had pace and stretched our back 4 by making runs into the channels. They'd done their homework too, and even though Vassell got the better of Nelson (who had a mare first half) for the first, he had most his joy running off Williamson, who he would've known he had the legs on.
It looked like their 3 across the front were backed up by a 4 man midfield, and where Ledson and Rothwell were so occupied helping out the back 4, every time there was a loose ball it was easy for Blackpool to find a spare man. Their man on the ball had so many options, and because of the movement of their front 3, they could easily find a diagonal pass forward.
Where we were under so much pressure, we were desperate for the ball to stick when it did go up front and this is where we massively missed Obika. Oh what a difference he could've made. Thomas is no target man, he doesn't win enough and he can't hold the ball up well enough. Gino isn't much better, both he and Thomas are better going in behind. But it could've made a difference, especially first half, but there was no doubt Blackpool were the better side.
I was pleased to see Pep changed it at half time and on the plus side, the second half was much improved, but the damage was done by then. I was particularly impressed with Henry second half, who showed some very good touches down the right where he had a lot more room thanks to the change in formation.
I don't think Blackpool had a particularly talented team, they definitely had some good players, but not outstanding. What they were though was very organised with a well executed game plan, and credit has to go to Bowyer for that. He is doing a great job in difficult circumstances. It's a bit of a shame for their fans that they are missing that football. If they play like that at every home game then a season ticket would be great value, though I do understand their boycott, the Oystons seem like total bellends.
What I like about Pep is that he seems like he's very focused on the big picture and is quick to learn. I reckon we'll be in for a stronger second half of the season. I've got no problems with the result yesterday, we were well beaten by a better team, who showed the whole is better than the sum of all parts.
My Oxford man of the match was Mousinho. Always composed, a great athlete and a very tidy footballer.
|
|
|
Post by bazzer9461 on Sept 17, 2017 16:03:55 GMT
There are lines you don't cross Charlie - comparing a fellow fan to a paedophile is quite frankly appalling. You should be utterly ashamed. I don't really want to get involved but he wasn't calling/comparing him to a paedophile if you read carefully. Agree it's a poor choice of simile but he wasn't calling him anything to do with *that* He shouldn't of used the phrase
|
|
|
Post by gingerox on Sept 17, 2017 16:23:42 GMT
I don't really want to get involved but he wasn't calling/comparing him to a paedophile if you read carefully. Agree it's a poor choice of simile but he wasn't calling him anything to do with *that* He shouldn't of used the phrase As I said, let's all move on.
|
|
|
Post by Pete Burrett on Sept 17, 2017 16:40:08 GMT
The official crowd figure was 5,200. We took 1,600. The home crowd looked like about 1,500, certainly no more than 2,000. I can't imagine, in the circumstances, protest against Oyston etc, many people bought a season ticket and don't go. So somewhere there is a missing 2,000. At risk of repeating what (I thought) everyone already understood, and at risk of being whooshed , quoted attendances always relate to tickets sold rather than bums on seats. The crowd quoted at Blackpool yesterday would include all home season ticket holders, whether they were there or not. MK Dons got slammed on here for falsifying their crowd against us. They did no such thing. The crowd (i.e. tickets sold) quoted was 10,000+. There were 3,000 Oxford fans, so 7,000+ home fans had bought tickets. Many of them would have been cheap season tickets which Dons offer every season but few of which are used by the holders on a regular basis. EDIT - Personally, I think it would be interesting to see two sets of attendance figures quoted: one for tickets sold, the other for bodies clicked through the turnstiles.
|
|
|
Post by concretebob on Sept 17, 2017 17:07:51 GMT
There are lines you don't cross Charlie - comparing a fellow fan to a paedophile is quite frankly appalling. You should be utterly ashamed. You know he's annoyed when the abuse starts. You know he's really annoyed when it intensifies. A shame as I've seen Charlie out and about he comes across as a really good person in real life. So strange. I've met Charlie and he's a nice guy in real life. But that comment is beyond the pale. Hang your head in shame, Charles. For those who went - is Vassell really as good as radio Oxford made out?
|
|
|
Post by toucan on Sept 17, 2017 17:38:32 GMT
TBH I didn't go yesterday and had to watch on the Radio and it sounded like an awful display. By the way IMO we are extremely lucky to have the coverage Radio Oxford give us. On a much lighter note everyone - How on earth do you manage to watch the game on the radio? That is some radio you have got!
|
|
|
Post by mariokempes on Sept 17, 2017 17:44:34 GMT
TBH I didn't go yesterday and had to watch on the Radio and it sounded like an awful display. By the way IMO we are extremely lucky to have the coverage Radio Oxford give us. On a much lighter note everyone - How on earth do you manage to watch the game on the radio? That is some radio you have got! It's a long story going back many years where one of my managers said he didn't go to the match ( he was a Reading supporter ) so had to watch on the radio The phrase has stuck with me ever since. Though radio commentary is generally far better than the TV One, espescially when it's Cricket
|
|
|
Post by osleroad on Sept 17, 2017 17:57:17 GMT
The official crowd figure was 5,200. We took 1,600. The home crowd looked like about 1,500, certainly no more than 2,000. I can't imagine, in the circumstances, protest against Oyston etc, many people bought a season ticket and don't go. So somewhere there is a missing 2,000. At risk of repeating what (I thought) everyone already understood, and at risk of being whooshed , quoted attendances always relate to tickets sold rather than bums on seats. The crowd quoted at Blackpool yesterday would include all home season ticket holders, whether they were there or not. MK Dons got slammed on here for falsifying their crowd against us. They did no such thing. The crowd (i.e. tickets sold) quoted was 10,000+. There were 3,000 Oxford fans, so 7,000+ home fans had bought tickets. Many of them would have been cheap season tickets which Dons offer every season but few of which are used by the holders on a regular basis. EDIT - Personally, I think it would be interesting to see two sets of attendance figures quoted: one for tickets sold, the other for bodies clicked through the turnstiles. That doesn't seem so good if you were trying to evacuate after a major fire or something..oh everyone is safe ..oh no we reckon another 2,000 inside..there must be a turnstile number generated!
|
|
|
Post by Pete Burrett on Sept 17, 2017 18:26:58 GMT
At risk of repeating what (I thought) everyone already understood, and at risk of being whooshed , quoted attendances always relate to tickets sold rather than bums on seats. The crowd quoted at Blackpool yesterday would include all home season ticket holders, whether they were there or not. MK Dons got slammed on here for falsifying their crowd against us. They did no such thing. The crowd (i.e. tickets sold) quoted was 10,000+. There were 3,000 Oxford fans, so 7,000+ home fans had bought tickets. Many of them would have been cheap season tickets which Dons offer every season but few of which are used by the holders on a regular basis. EDIT - Personally, I think it would be interesting to see two sets of attendance figures quoted: one for tickets sold, the other for bodies clicked through the turnstiles. That doesn't seem so good if you were trying to evacuate after a major fire or something..oh everyone is safe ..oh no we reckon another 2,000 inside..there must be a turnstile number generated! Maybe the home club does keep a 'bodies' figure as well, I don't know. But the attendance figures you see in the papers and on social media are for tickets sold, hence the apparent disconnect between official attendance and what you often see with your own eyes, including at Oxford! In reality, knowing how many bodies are in a ground wouldn't really help in an evacuation scenario. Who's going to count supporters as they leave? There certainly wouldn't be an accurate count, so the club wouldn't know if everyone was out or not anyway.
|
|
|
Post by mariokempes on Sept 17, 2017 18:34:58 GMT
That doesn't seem so good if you were trying to evacuate after a major fire or something..oh everyone is safe ..oh no we reckon another 2,000 inside..there must be a turnstile number generated! Maybe the home club does keep a 'bodies' figure as well, I don't know. But the attendance figures you see in the papers and on social media are for tickets sold, hence the apparent disconnect between official attendance and what you often see with your own eyes, including at Oxford! In reality, knowing how many bodies are in a ground wouldn't really help in an evacuation scenario. Who's going to count supporters as they leave? There certainly wouldn't be an accurate count, so the club wouldn't know if everyone was out or not anyway. But they don't know for definite that everyone is out.
|
|
|
Post by brassmonkey on Sept 17, 2017 19:05:51 GMT
Watching the highlights back. Nelson at fault for their 1st goal, may even have been a foul on him bit great strike. Second Eastwood to blame, looked an easy save that. 3rd Williamson messed up and then gave away the foul. Not sure Eastwood should have let that it with free kick going the side he is standing.
Sent from my SM-G930F using proboards
|
|