Jump to content

BRFCS

BY THE FANS, FOR THE FANS
SINCE 1996
Proudly partnered with TheTerraceStore.com

streakyb

Members
  • Posts

    206
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by streakyb

  1. What I want to know though is who the hell exactly are Chelsea to be putting another club's manager on their shortlist?

    Do thsi mean that when we do come to next look for a manager you believe we can only got for out of work managers? That we cant look at managers in the championship etc who may want to move their career on.

    And who the hell are we to be going round looking at players who are contracted to other clubs, how dare we.

  2. Blackburn (from): Friedel, Enckelman, Neill, Gray, Todd, Emerton, Thompson, Reid, Savage, Pedersen, Kuqi, Dickov, Bellamy, Nelsen, Mokoena, Khizanishvili, Tugay, Bentley.

    still no jansen?? mad.gif

    368167[/snapback]

    Or get the squad from the official site and get

    Rovers to select from: Friedel, Neill, Khizanishvili, Todd, Gray, Emerton, Tugay, Savage, Pedersen, Bentley, Dickov, Enckelman, Kuqi, Mokoena, Thompson, Reid, Bellamy, Nelsen, Matteo, Jansen, Taylor, Peter.

    http://www.rovers.premiumtv.co.uk/page/New...~757912,00.html

    Fancy beleiving the ultra un-reliable BBC for the squad.

  3. This messagebaord seems to be going downhill, FAST.

    Its amazing how many people are so eager to sell the name of the ground for a few quid, so that they have more money to spend on the new championship manager.

    The foreigners always seem so keen to get some money in, no matter what it involves!

    327998[/snapback]

    I am not eager to sell the naming rights to our ground. But if it was to supply us enough income to significantly improve our situation I would support it. Afterall, a name is a name. What is important is the club.

    Any why does people expressing their own opinions mean that the messageboard is going downhill, As long as they are relevant and senseible then if anything it is the message board going uphil. downhill is when people start moaning when people disagree with them.

    ON Topic,

    IF we could get significant revenue for selling our naming rights

    AND it was with a reputable and suitable company

    AND if the money would be spent on improving our league situation

    Then I would support it. I go to watch Rovers, not to sit in Ewood Park.

  4. I can see why the potential ISA want to ensure that they are not though of as being BRFCS. This topics has fast descended from a sensible dicussion to near insults of people for expressing their views, all within a page.

    Anyway, on topic.

    We all would like Ewood to remain known in all media etc as Ewood but I am sure the majority here would put the future of the club before something like a name.

    If we could get good amount (and not a pittance) for renaming the ground to re-invest into the club I would be for it (as long as the sponsor was a reputable and decent one).

    As much as we may not like it, money talks in football. A name such as Ewood park doesnt, except among the clubs own fans who wouldnt use the new name anyway. It will be allways Ewood Park to rovers fans.

  5. i applied for the fixtures by texting and they didint come because the people at rovers are ######

    326537[/snapback]

    I am glad to see that you can put your point across with no rudeness wink.gif

    Even if you have signed up correctly and the test were sent correctly that is not gaurantee that you will always get the text immediately/quickly. Due to how a GSM mobile network works messages may take, dependant on operator, days to arrive if an error occur during initial sending (the retry systems in a network are quite complicated).

    Finally, dont criticise the club for something just becuase you didnt get a service that requires

    a ) you to have signed up to it correctly

    b ) your netowkr to work correctly.

    There are plenty of other issues that could occur so perhaps next time so should not make comments as above but post something a little less accusatory (and rude).

  6. I would think that the BRISA having a messageboard on their website should be discussed at an eleceted comittee.

    As we have seen here their are already factions within this messageboard and some who will not use this mesageboard. It may be best for an ISA to be careful, at least at first with ideas such as this.

    Perhaps a messageboard purely on ISA news would be ok. But leave general rovers gossip etc on an place independant of the ISA.

    Also, it has been previously stated that the ISA will be independant of BRFCS. If they launched their own messageboard it may draw a lot of BRFCS members onto it and the ISA may then been seen as being to closely linked to what was BRFCS.

  7. Those complaining about the make up of the founding group have no reason to complain or not join.

    They were a group who were actually arse*d to get of their backside and set in motion the creation of a Rovers ISA.

    They have stated that they are willing not to force themselves onto the comitte as it will be a democratically elected comittee voted for by the ISA members. An ISA gives all fans a voice and all have a chance for their say. The groundwork has been put in place and I cannot believe people are already trying to complain about it.

    Don' complain, ask to join, become part of it and have a say. Find someone to put you up for comittee if you feel none on it share your vision.

  8. Is there any reason that this is the only rovers forum that this has been mentioned on? Surely for best penetration and initial succes of the ISA you would want to esnure the widest spread of fans.

    If you are not careful, some Rovers fans who use other forums and have "issues" with brfcs.co.uk may see the ISA as being a brfcs lead organisation and therofore will not want to get inlvolved.

    Hopefully you will soon have your own site and will search the web for all rovers relateed forums and post on them and perhaps asks fusers here to email you the details of other forums etc they use so you can spread the word as wide as you can before a clique is formed.

  9. Might be worth the Rovers/Todd taking a well-recognised litigation lawyer to the hearing who sits there taking copious notes.

    That would concentrate the FA minds on hearing the case on its merits.

    We wont have the chance as we have no representation at the hearing.

    Under the FA’s fast-track system, a disciplinary commission panel will sit in judgment on Todd, remarkably without hearing from the player or from anybody connected with Rovers in person.

    That has angered and astounded Hughes who said: “We are desperately disappointed he is going to have to go through this FA hearing which we feel is very unfair.

    http://www.breakingnews.ie/2005/04/21/story199059.html

  10. After all, he was bought as a centre half and wasn't quite good enough there. He was moved to his present position partly as a result of us not being able to field two effective strikers.

    Was he bought as a centre half or is this were Hughes saw him playing. Yes he may have been a centre half at previous clubs but perhaps Hughes bought him to play in the holding role.

  11. And yet a few months ago when I suggested that Reid had the makings of a decent central midfielder, I was laughed at! laugh.gif

    Only just started here so never noticed that yet. Mentioned on other forums and to friends that Reid is more suitable for the central roles. My reasoning

    He is tireless, runs back and forth all day,

    He can tackle well, hold his own.

    he likes to get into the box

    Has good height and presence in the air,

    Can run ok with the ball,

    Good passer

    Allways drifted in far to much when he was playing on the wings

    Not good enough crosser to play out wide

    Allways drifted in so narrowed our attack.

  12. and it would create a real selection headache.

    Exactlt the situation we want to be in. We want to have a selection headache over having many good players for a position.

    As for Reid on the right. I and many other other have been crying out for him to played in the sentre, He has allways looked to me to be far more suited to that position. It is no surprise his form has dramtically improved since we started playing him there. I feel he would dip in form out on the right. He is not a natural wide player in my eyes.

    It would make more sense to buy a new RM than buy Parker and move Reid out to the right. Personally I want a creative central midfielder but I dont think Reid on the right is a good idea.

  13. steaky, I hear your point but on this occasion there is NOT one season ticket holder who is not guaranteed a ticket for the semi final.

    My point is not that they couldnt get a seat but might not get a seat in the area they want, for example top tier, front few rows, behind goal, becuase they have been taken by "special cases".

    What you are actually saying is that there shouldnt be special cases but that season ticket holders should be able to buy as many tickets as they want from day one and not wait till sale till they go on sale to ppl with ticket histories..

  14. Its the same old story of a little rule being bended. AFTER ALL we will never be shifting more than 25k of the ticket allocation.

    The problem with bending rules is that once you start who decides where to stop. How many of those 7000 people waiting for tickets would want rules bended for them and therfore perhaps prevent season ticket holders from getting the seat where they want them.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.